Cargando…

Assessment of CBCT–based synthetic CT generation accuracy for adaptive radiotherapy planning

PURPOSE: Cone‐beam CT (CBCT)–based synthetic CT (sCT) dose calculation has the potential to make the adaptive radiotherapy (ART) pathway more efficient while removing subjectivity. This study assessed four sCT generation methods using 15 head‐and‐neck rescanned ART patients. Each patient's plan...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: O'Hara, Christopher J., Bird, David, Al‐Qaisieh, Bashar, Speight, Richard
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/PMC9680578/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36200179
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/acm2.13737
_version_ 1784834451144966144
author O'Hara, Christopher J.
Bird, David
Al‐Qaisieh, Bashar
Speight, Richard
author_facet O'Hara, Christopher J.
Bird, David
Al‐Qaisieh, Bashar
Speight, Richard
author_sort O'Hara, Christopher J.
collection PubMed
description PURPOSE: Cone‐beam CT (CBCT)–based synthetic CT (sCT) dose calculation has the potential to make the adaptive radiotherapy (ART) pathway more efficient while removing subjectivity. This study assessed four sCT generation methods using 15 head‐and‐neck rescanned ART patients. Each patient's planning CT (pCT), rescan CT (rCT), and CBCT post‐rCT was acquired with the CBCT deformably registered to the rCT (dCBCT). METHODS: The four methods investigated were as follows: method 1—deformably registering the pCT to the dCBCT. Method 2—assigning six mass density values to the dCBCT. Method 3—iteratively removing artifacts and correcting the dCBCT Hounsfield units (HU). Method 4—using a cycle general adversarial network machine learning model (trained with 45 paired pCT and CBCT). Treatment plans were created on the rCT and recalculated on each sCT. Planning target volume (PTV) and organ‐at‐risk (OAR) structures were contoured by clinicians on the rCT (high‐dose PTV, low‐dose PTV, spinal canal, larynx, brainstem, and parotids) to allow the assessment of dose–volume histogram statistics at clinically relevant points. RESULTS: The HU mean absolute error (MAE) and minimum dose gamma index pass rate (2%/2 mm) were calculated, and the generation time was measured for 15 patients using the rCT as the comparator. For methods 1–4 the MAE, gamma index analysis, and generation time were as follows: 59.7 HU, 100.0%, and 143 s; 164.2 HU, 95.2%, and 232 s; 75.7 HU, 99.9%, and 153 s; and 79.4 HU, 99.8%, and 112 s, respectively. Dose differences for PTVs and OARs were all <0.3 Gy except for method 2 (<0.5 Gy). CONCLUSION: All methods were considered clinically viable. The machine learning method was found to be most suitable for clinical implementation due to its high dosimetric accuracy and short generation time. Further investigation is required for larger anatomical changes between the CBCT and pCT and for other anatomical sites.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9680578
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-96805782022-11-23 Assessment of CBCT–based synthetic CT generation accuracy for adaptive radiotherapy planning O'Hara, Christopher J. Bird, David Al‐Qaisieh, Bashar Speight, Richard J Appl Clin Med Phys Radiation Oncology Physics PURPOSE: Cone‐beam CT (CBCT)–based synthetic CT (sCT) dose calculation has the potential to make the adaptive radiotherapy (ART) pathway more efficient while removing subjectivity. This study assessed four sCT generation methods using 15 head‐and‐neck rescanned ART patients. Each patient's planning CT (pCT), rescan CT (rCT), and CBCT post‐rCT was acquired with the CBCT deformably registered to the rCT (dCBCT). METHODS: The four methods investigated were as follows: method 1—deformably registering the pCT to the dCBCT. Method 2—assigning six mass density values to the dCBCT. Method 3—iteratively removing artifacts and correcting the dCBCT Hounsfield units (HU). Method 4—using a cycle general adversarial network machine learning model (trained with 45 paired pCT and CBCT). Treatment plans were created on the rCT and recalculated on each sCT. Planning target volume (PTV) and organ‐at‐risk (OAR) structures were contoured by clinicians on the rCT (high‐dose PTV, low‐dose PTV, spinal canal, larynx, brainstem, and parotids) to allow the assessment of dose–volume histogram statistics at clinically relevant points. RESULTS: The HU mean absolute error (MAE) and minimum dose gamma index pass rate (2%/2 mm) were calculated, and the generation time was measured for 15 patients using the rCT as the comparator. For methods 1–4 the MAE, gamma index analysis, and generation time were as follows: 59.7 HU, 100.0%, and 143 s; 164.2 HU, 95.2%, and 232 s; 75.7 HU, 99.9%, and 153 s; and 79.4 HU, 99.8%, and 112 s, respectively. Dose differences for PTVs and OARs were all <0.3 Gy except for method 2 (<0.5 Gy). CONCLUSION: All methods were considered clinically viable. The machine learning method was found to be most suitable for clinical implementation due to its high dosimetric accuracy and short generation time. Further investigation is required for larger anatomical changes between the CBCT and pCT and for other anatomical sites. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2022-10-05 /pmc/articles/PMC9680578/ /pubmed/36200179 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/acm2.13737 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
O'Hara, Christopher J.
Bird, David
Al‐Qaisieh, Bashar
Speight, Richard
Assessment of CBCT–based synthetic CT generation accuracy for adaptive radiotherapy planning
title Assessment of CBCT–based synthetic CT generation accuracy for adaptive radiotherapy planning
title_full Assessment of CBCT–based synthetic CT generation accuracy for adaptive radiotherapy planning
title_fullStr Assessment of CBCT–based synthetic CT generation accuracy for adaptive radiotherapy planning
title_full_unstemmed Assessment of CBCT–based synthetic CT generation accuracy for adaptive radiotherapy planning
title_short Assessment of CBCT–based synthetic CT generation accuracy for adaptive radiotherapy planning
title_sort assessment of cbct–based synthetic ct generation accuracy for adaptive radiotherapy planning
topic Radiation Oncology Physics
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9680578/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36200179
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/acm2.13737
work_keys_str_mv AT oharachristopherj assessmentofcbctbasedsyntheticctgenerationaccuracyforadaptiveradiotherapyplanning
AT birddavid assessmentofcbctbasedsyntheticctgenerationaccuracyforadaptiveradiotherapyplanning
AT alqaisiehbashar assessmentofcbctbasedsyntheticctgenerationaccuracyforadaptiveradiotherapyplanning
AT speightrichard assessmentofcbctbasedsyntheticctgenerationaccuracyforadaptiveradiotherapyplanning