Cargando…
Onboard cone‐beam CT‐based replan evaluation for head and neck proton therapy
PURPOSE: Quality assurance computed tomography (QACT) is the current clinical practice in proton therapy to evaluate the needs for replan. QACT could falsely indicate replan because of setup issues that would be solved on the treatment machine. Deforming the treatment planning CT (TPCT) to the pretr...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
John Wiley and Sons Inc.
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9121026/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35128788 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/acm2.13550 |
_version_ | 1784711066249330688 |
---|---|
author | Stanforth, Alexander Lin, Liyong Beitler, Jonathan J. Janopaul‐Naylor, James R. Chang, Chih‐Wei Press, Robert H. Patel, Sagar A. Zhao, Jennifer Eaton, Bree Schreibmann, Eduard E. Jung, James Bohannon, Duncan Liu, Tian Yang, Xiaofeng McDonald, Mark W. Zhou, Jun |
author_facet | Stanforth, Alexander Lin, Liyong Beitler, Jonathan J. Janopaul‐Naylor, James R. Chang, Chih‐Wei Press, Robert H. Patel, Sagar A. Zhao, Jennifer Eaton, Bree Schreibmann, Eduard E. Jung, James Bohannon, Duncan Liu, Tian Yang, Xiaofeng McDonald, Mark W. Zhou, Jun |
author_sort | Stanforth, Alexander |
collection | PubMed |
description | PURPOSE: Quality assurance computed tomography (QACT) is the current clinical practice in proton therapy to evaluate the needs for replan. QACT could falsely indicate replan because of setup issues that would be solved on the treatment machine. Deforming the treatment planning CT (TPCT) to the pretreatment CBCT may eliminate this issue. We investigated the performance of replan evaluation based on deformed TPCT (TPCTdir) for proton head and neck (H&N) therapy. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Twenty‐eight H&N datasets along with pretreatment CBCT and QACT were used to validate the method. The changes in body volume were analyzed between the no‐replan and replan groups. The dose on the TPCTdir, the deformed QACT (QACTdir), and the QACT were calculated by applying the clinical plans to these image sets. Dosimetric parameters’ changes, including ΔD95, ΔDmean, and ΔD1 for the clinical target volumes (CTVs) were calculated. Receiver operating characteristic curves for replan evaluation based on ΔD95 on QACT and TPCTdir were calculated, using ΔD95 on QACTdir as the reference. A threshold for replan based on ΔD95 on TPCTdir is proposed. The specificities for the proposed method were calculated. RESULTS: The changes in the body contour were 95.8 ± 83.8 cc versus 305.0 ± 235.0 cc (p < 0.01) for the no‐replan and replan groups, respectively. The ΔD95, ΔDmean, and ΔD1 are all comparable for all the evaluations. The differences between TPCTdir and QACTdir evaluations were 0.30% ± 0.86%, 0.00 ± 0.22 Gy, and −0.17 ± 0.61 Gy for CTV ΔD95, ΔDmean, and ΔD1, respectively. The corresponding differences between the QACT and QACTdir were 0.12% ± 1.1%, 0.02 ± 0.32 Gy, and −0.01 ± 0.71 Gy. CTV ΔD95 > 2.6% in TPCTdir was chosen as the threshold to trigger QACT/replan. The corresponding specificity was 94% and 98% for the clinical practice and the proposed method, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The replan evaluation based on TPCTdir provides better specificity than that based on the QACT. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9121026 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | John Wiley and Sons Inc. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-91210262022-05-21 Onboard cone‐beam CT‐based replan evaluation for head and neck proton therapy Stanforth, Alexander Lin, Liyong Beitler, Jonathan J. Janopaul‐Naylor, James R. Chang, Chih‐Wei Press, Robert H. Patel, Sagar A. Zhao, Jennifer Eaton, Bree Schreibmann, Eduard E. Jung, James Bohannon, Duncan Liu, Tian Yang, Xiaofeng McDonald, Mark W. Zhou, Jun J Appl Clin Med Phys Radiation Oncology Physics PURPOSE: Quality assurance computed tomography (QACT) is the current clinical practice in proton therapy to evaluate the needs for replan. QACT could falsely indicate replan because of setup issues that would be solved on the treatment machine. Deforming the treatment planning CT (TPCT) to the pretreatment CBCT may eliminate this issue. We investigated the performance of replan evaluation based on deformed TPCT (TPCTdir) for proton head and neck (H&N) therapy. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Twenty‐eight H&N datasets along with pretreatment CBCT and QACT were used to validate the method. The changes in body volume were analyzed between the no‐replan and replan groups. The dose on the TPCTdir, the deformed QACT (QACTdir), and the QACT were calculated by applying the clinical plans to these image sets. Dosimetric parameters’ changes, including ΔD95, ΔDmean, and ΔD1 for the clinical target volumes (CTVs) were calculated. Receiver operating characteristic curves for replan evaluation based on ΔD95 on QACT and TPCTdir were calculated, using ΔD95 on QACTdir as the reference. A threshold for replan based on ΔD95 on TPCTdir is proposed. The specificities for the proposed method were calculated. RESULTS: The changes in the body contour were 95.8 ± 83.8 cc versus 305.0 ± 235.0 cc (p < 0.01) for the no‐replan and replan groups, respectively. The ΔD95, ΔDmean, and ΔD1 are all comparable for all the evaluations. The differences between TPCTdir and QACTdir evaluations were 0.30% ± 0.86%, 0.00 ± 0.22 Gy, and −0.17 ± 0.61 Gy for CTV ΔD95, ΔDmean, and ΔD1, respectively. The corresponding differences between the QACT and QACTdir were 0.12% ± 1.1%, 0.02 ± 0.32 Gy, and −0.01 ± 0.71 Gy. CTV ΔD95 > 2.6% in TPCTdir was chosen as the threshold to trigger QACT/replan. The corresponding specificity was 94% and 98% for the clinical practice and the proposed method, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The replan evaluation based on TPCTdir provides better specificity than that based on the QACT. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2022-02-07 /pmc/articles/PMC9121026/ /pubmed/35128788 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/acm2.13550 Text en © 2022 The Authors. Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics published by Wiley Periodicals, LLC on behalf of The American Association of Physicists in Medicine. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Radiation Oncology Physics Stanforth, Alexander Lin, Liyong Beitler, Jonathan J. Janopaul‐Naylor, James R. Chang, Chih‐Wei Press, Robert H. Patel, Sagar A. Zhao, Jennifer Eaton, Bree Schreibmann, Eduard E. Jung, James Bohannon, Duncan Liu, Tian Yang, Xiaofeng McDonald, Mark W. Zhou, Jun Onboard cone‐beam CT‐based replan evaluation for head and neck proton therapy |
title | Onboard cone‐beam CT‐based replan evaluation for head and neck proton therapy |
title_full | Onboard cone‐beam CT‐based replan evaluation for head and neck proton therapy |
title_fullStr | Onboard cone‐beam CT‐based replan evaluation for head and neck proton therapy |
title_full_unstemmed | Onboard cone‐beam CT‐based replan evaluation for head and neck proton therapy |
title_short | Onboard cone‐beam CT‐based replan evaluation for head and neck proton therapy |
title_sort | onboard cone‐beam ct‐based replan evaluation for head and neck proton therapy |
topic | Radiation Oncology Physics |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9121026/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35128788 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/acm2.13550 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT stanforthalexander onboardconebeamctbasedreplanevaluationforheadandneckprotontherapy AT linliyong onboardconebeamctbasedreplanevaluationforheadandneckprotontherapy AT beitlerjonathanj onboardconebeamctbasedreplanevaluationforheadandneckprotontherapy AT janopaulnaylorjamesr onboardconebeamctbasedreplanevaluationforheadandneckprotontherapy AT changchihwei onboardconebeamctbasedreplanevaluationforheadandneckprotontherapy AT pressroberth onboardconebeamctbasedreplanevaluationforheadandneckprotontherapy AT patelsagara onboardconebeamctbasedreplanevaluationforheadandneckprotontherapy AT zhaojennifer onboardconebeamctbasedreplanevaluationforheadandneckprotontherapy AT eatonbree onboardconebeamctbasedreplanevaluationforheadandneckprotontherapy AT schreibmanneduarde onboardconebeamctbasedreplanevaluationforheadandneckprotontherapy AT jungjames onboardconebeamctbasedreplanevaluationforheadandneckprotontherapy AT bohannonduncan onboardconebeamctbasedreplanevaluationforheadandneckprotontherapy AT liutian onboardconebeamctbasedreplanevaluationforheadandneckprotontherapy AT yangxiaofeng onboardconebeamctbasedreplanevaluationforheadandneckprotontherapy AT mcdonaldmarkw onboardconebeamctbasedreplanevaluationforheadandneckprotontherapy AT zhoujun onboardconebeamctbasedreplanevaluationforheadandneckprotontherapy |