Yevgeniy Vinogradskiy1, Phillip J Koo2, Richard Castillo3, Edward Castillo4, Thomas Guerrero4, Laurie E Gaspar5, Moyed Miften5, Brian D Kavanagh5. 1. Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora, Colorado. Electronic address: yevgeniy.vinogradskiy@ucdenver.edu. 2. Department of Radiology, University of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora, Colorado. 3. Department of Radiation Physics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas. 4. Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas; Department of Computational and Applied Mathematics, Rice University, Houston, Texas. 5. Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora, Colorado.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Four-dimensional computed tomography (4DCT) ventilation imaging provides lung function information for lung cancer patients undergoing radiation therapy. Before 4DCT-ventilation can be implemented clinically it needs to be validated against an established imaging modality. The purpose of this work was to compare 4DCT-ventilation to nuclear medicine ventilation, using clinically relevant global metrics and radiologist observations. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Fifteen lung cancer patients with 16 sets of 4DCT and nuclear medicine ventilation-perfusion (VQ) images were used for the study. The VQ-ventilation images were acquired in planar mode using Tc-99m-labeled diethylenetriamine-pentaacetic acid aerosol inhalation. 4DCT data, spatial registration, and a density-change-based model were used to compute a 4DCT-based ventilation map for each patient. The percent ventilation was calculated in each lung and each lung third for both the 4DCT and VQ-ventilation scans. A nuclear medicine radiologist assessed the VQ and 4DCT scans for the presence of ventilation defects. The VQ and 4DCT-based images were compared using regional percent ventilation and radiologist clinical observations. RESULTS: Individual patient examples demonstrate good qualitative agreement between the 4DCT and VQ-ventilation scans. The correlation coefficients were 0.68 and 0.45, using the percent ventilation in each individual lung and lung third, respectively. Using radiologist-noted presence of ventilation defects and receiver operating characteristic analysis, the sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of the 4DCT-ventilation were 90%, 64%, and 81%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The current work compared 4DCT with VQ-based ventilation using clinically relevant global metrics and radiologist observations. We found good agreement between the radiologist's assessment of the 4DCT and VQ-ventilation images as well as the percent ventilation in each lung. The agreement lessened when the data were analyzed on a regional level. Our study presents an important step for the integration of 4DCT-ventilation into thoracic clinical practice.
PURPOSE: Four-dimensional computed tomography (4DCT) ventilation imaging provides lung function information for lung cancerpatients undergoing radiation therapy. Before 4DCT-ventilation can be implemented clinically it needs to be validated against an established imaging modality. The purpose of this work was to compare 4DCT-ventilation to nuclear medicine ventilation, using clinically relevant global metrics and radiologist observations. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Fifteen lung cancerpatients with 16 sets of 4DCT and nuclear medicine ventilation-perfusion (VQ) images were used for the study. The VQ-ventilation images were acquired in planar mode using Tc-99m-labeled diethylenetriamine-pentaacetic acid aerosol inhalation. 4DCT data, spatial registration, and a density-change-based model were used to compute a 4DCT-based ventilation map for each patient. The percent ventilation was calculated in each lung and each lung third for both the 4DCT and VQ-ventilation scans. A nuclear medicine radiologist assessed the VQ and 4DCT scans for the presence of ventilation defects. The VQ and 4DCT-based images were compared using regional percent ventilation and radiologist clinical observations. RESULTS: Individual patient examples demonstrate good qualitative agreement between the 4DCT and VQ-ventilation scans. The correlation coefficients were 0.68 and 0.45, using the percent ventilation in each individual lung and lung third, respectively. Using radiologist-noted presence of ventilation defects and receiver operating characteristic analysis, the sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of the 4DCT-ventilation were 90%, 64%, and 81%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The current work compared 4DCT with VQ-based ventilation using clinically relevant global metrics and radiologist observations. We found good agreement between the radiologist's assessment of the 4DCT and VQ-ventilation images as well as the percent ventilation in each lung. The agreement lessened when the data were analyzed on a regional level. Our study presents an important step for the integration of 4DCT-ventilation into thoracic clinical practice.
Authors: Joseph M Reinhardt; Kai Ding; Kunlin Cao; Gary E Christensen; Eric A Hoffman; Shalmali V Bodas Journal: Med Image Anal Date: 2008-04-12 Impact factor: 8.545
Authors: Iram Munawar; Brian P Yaremko; Jeff Craig; Michael Oliver; Stewart Gaede; George Rodrigues; Edward Yu; Robert Henderson Reid; Eugene Leung; Jean-Luc Urbain; Jeff Chen; Eugene Wong Journal: Med Phys Date: 2010-04 Impact factor: 4.071
Authors: Tokihiro Yamamoto; Sven Kabus; Tobias Klinder; Cristian Lorenz; Jens von Berg; Thomas Blaffert; Billy W Loo; Paul J Keall Journal: Phys Med Biol Date: 2011-03-16 Impact factor: 3.609
Authors: Brian P Yaremko; Thomas M Guerrero; Josue Noyola-Martinez; Rudy Guerra; David G Lege; Linda T Nguyen; Peter A Balter; James D Cox; Ritsuko Komaki Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2007-03-29 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: John Kipritidis; Bilal A Tahir; Guillaume Cazoulat; Michael S Hofman; Shankar Siva; Jason Callahan; Nicholas Hardcastle; Tokihiro Yamamoto; Gary E Christensen; Joseph M Reinhardt; Noriyuki Kadoya; Taylor J Patton; Sarah E Gerard; Isabella Duarte; Ben Archibald-Heeren; Mikel Byrne; Rick Sims; Scott Ramsay; Jeremy T Booth; Enid Eslick; Fiona Hegi-Johnson; Henry C Woodruff; Rob H Ireland; Jim M Wild; Jing Cai; John E Bayouth; Kristy Brock; Paul J Keall Journal: Med Phys Date: 2019-02-01 Impact factor: 4.071
Authors: Yuncheng Zhong; Yevgeniy Vinogradskiy; Liyuan Chen; Nick Myziuk; Richard Castillo; Edward Castillo; Thomas Guerrero; Steve Jiang; Jing Wang Journal: Med Phys Date: 2019-03-12 Impact factor: 4.071
Authors: Elizabeth M Jaffee; Chi Van Dang; David B Agus; Brian M Alexander; Kenneth C Anderson; Alan Ashworth; Anna D Barker; Roshan Bastani; Sangeeta Bhatia; Jeffrey A Bluestone; Otis Brawley; Atul J Butte; Daniel G Coit; Nancy E Davidson; Mark Davis; Ronald A DePinho; Robert B Diasio; Giulio Draetta; A Lindsay Frazier; Andrew Futreal; Sam S Gambhir; Patricia A Ganz; Levi Garraway; Stanton Gerson; Sumit Gupta; James Heath; Ruth I Hoffman; Cliff Hudis; Chanita Hughes-Halbert; Ramy Ibrahim; Hossein Jadvar; Brian Kavanagh; Rick Kittles; Quynh-Thu Le; Scott M Lippman; David Mankoff; Elaine R Mardis; Deborah K Mayer; Kelly McMasters; Neal J Meropol; Beverly Mitchell; Peter Naredi; Dean Ornish; Timothy M Pawlik; Jeffrey Peppercorn; Martin G Pomper; Derek Raghavan; Christine Ritchie; Sally W Schwarz; Richard Sullivan; Richard Wahl; Jedd D Wolchok; Sandra L Wong; Alfred Yung Journal: Lancet Oncol Date: 2017-10-31 Impact factor: 41.316
Authors: Yevgeniy Vinogradskiy; Richard Castillo; Edward Castillo; Leah Schubert; Bernard L Jones; Austin Faught; Laurie E Gaspar; Jennifer Kwak; Daniel W Bowles; Timothy Waxweiler; Jingjing M Dougherty; Dexiang Gao; Craig Stevens; Moyed Miften; Brian Kavanagh; Inga Grills; Chad G Rusthoven; Thomas Guerrero Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2021-11-09 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Yevgeniy Vinogradskiy; Chad G Rusthoven; Leah Schubert; Bernard Jones; Austin Faught; Richard Castillo; Edward Castillo; Laurie E Gaspar; Jennifer Kwak; Timothy Waxweiler; Michele Dougherty; Dexiang Gao; Craig Stevens; Moyed Miften; Brian Kavanagh; Thomas Guerrero; Inga Grills Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2018-10-18 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Tokihiro Yamamoto; Sven Kabus; Matthieu Bal; Karl Bzdusek; Paul J Keall; Cari Wright; Stanley H Benedict; Megan E Daly Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2018-05-04 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Farnoush Forghani; Taylor Patton; Jennifer Kwak; David Thomas; Quentin Diot; Chad Rusthoven; Richard Castillo; Edward Castillo; Inga Grills; Thomas Guerrero; Moyed Miften; Yevgeniy Vinogradskiy Journal: Radiother Oncol Date: 2021-05-06 Impact factor: 6.901