Literature DB >> 25477277

Improved human observer performance in digital reconstructed radiograph verification in head and neck cancer radiotherapy.

Jared D Sturgeon1,2, John A Cox2,3, Lauren L Mayo2, G Brandon Gunn1, Lifei Zhang1, Peter A Balter1,4, Lei Dong5, Musaddiq Awan1, Esengul Kocak-Uzel1,6, Abdallah Sherif Radwan Mohamed1,7, David I Rosenthal1, Clifton David Fuller8,9.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Digitally reconstructed radiographs (DRRs) are routinely used as an a priori reference for setup correction in radiotherapy. The spatial resolution of DRRs may be improved to reduce setup error in fractionated radiotherapy treatment protocols. The influence of finer CT slice thickness reconstruction (STR) and resultant increased resolution DRRs on physician setup accuracy was prospectively evaluated.
METHODS: Four head and neck patient CT-simulation images were acquired and used to create DRR cohorts by varying STRs at 0.5, 1, 2, 2.5, and 3 mm. DRRs were displaced relative to a fixed isocenter using 0-5 mm random shifts in the three cardinal axes. Physician observers reviewed DRRs of varying STRs and displacements and then aligned reference and test DRRs replicating daily KV imaging workflow. A total of 1,064 images were reviewed by four blinded physicians. Observer errors were analyzed using nonparametric statistics (Friedman's test) to determine whether STR cohorts had detectably different displacement profiles. Post hoc bootstrap resampling was applied to evaluate potential generalizability.
RESULTS: The observer-based trial revealed a statistically significant difference between cohort means for observer displacement vector error ([Formula: see text]) and for [Formula: see text]-axis [Formula: see text]. Bootstrap analysis suggests a 15% gain in isocenter translational setup error with reduction of STR from 3 mm to [Formula: see text]2 mm, though interobserver variance was a larger feature than STR-associated measurement variance.
CONCLUSIONS: Higher resolution DRRs generated using finer CT scan STR resulted in improved observer performance at shift detection and could decrease operator-dependent geometric error. Ideally, CT STRs [Formula: see text]2 mm should be utilized for DRR generation in the head and neck.

Entities:  

Keywords:  IGRT; Image informatics; Image-guided radiotherapy; Quality assurance; Setup error

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25477277      PMCID: PMC4801514          DOI: 10.1007/s11548-014-1127-4

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg        ISSN: 1861-6410            Impact factor:   2.924


  15 in total

Review 1.  Errors and margins in radiotherapy.

Authors:  Marcel van Herk
Journal:  Semin Radiat Oncol       Date:  2004-01       Impact factor: 5.934

2.  Evaluation of the planning target volume in the treatment of head and neck cancer with intensity-modulated radiotherapy: what is the appropriate expansion margin in the setting of daily image guidance?

Authors:  Allen M Chen; D Gregory Farwell; Quang Luu; Paul J Donald; Julian Perks; James A Purdy
Journal:  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys       Date:  2010-10-06       Impact factor: 7.038

3.  G*Power 3: a flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences.

Authors:  Franz Faul; Edgar Erdfelder; Albert-Georg Lang; Axel Buchner
Journal:  Behav Res Methods       Date:  2007-05

4.  Evaluation of automated image registration algorithm for image-guided radiotherapy (IGRT).

Authors:  Shamurailatpam Dayananda Sharma; Prabhakar Dongre; Vaibhav Mhatre; Malhotra Heigrujam
Journal:  Australas Phys Eng Sci Med       Date:  2012-09-05       Impact factor: 1.430

5.  The use of digitally reconstructed radiographs for three-dimensional treatment planning and CT-simulation.

Authors:  J M Galvin; C Sims; G Dominiak; J S Cooper
Journal:  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys       Date:  1995-02-15       Impact factor: 7.038

6.  A survey of image-guided radiation therapy use in the United States.

Authors:  Daniel R Simpson; Joshua D Lawson; Sameer K Nath; Brent S Rose; Arno J Mundt; Loren K Mell
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2010-08-15       Impact factor: 6.860

7.  Accurate positioning for head and neck cancer patients using 2D and 3D image guidance.

Authors:  Hyejoo Kang; Dale M Lovelock; Ellen D Yorke; Sergey Kriminski; Nancy Lee; Howard I Amols
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2010-10-27       Impact factor: 2.102

8.  Method comparison of automated matching software-assisted cone-beam CT and stereoscopic kilovoltage x-ray positional verification image-guided radiation therapy for head and neck cancer: a prospective analysis.

Authors:  Clifton D Fuller; Todd J Scarbrough; Jan-Jakob Sonke; Coen R N Rasch; Mehee Choi; Joe Y Ting; Samuel J Wang; Niko Papanikolaou; David I Rosenthal
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2009-11-24       Impact factor: 3.609

9.  Setup uncertainties of anatomical sub-regions in head-and-neck cancer patients after offline CBCT guidance.

Authors:  Simon van Kranen; Suzanne van Beek; Coen Rasch; Marcel van Herk; Jan-Jakob Sonke
Journal:  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys       Date:  2009-04-01       Impact factor: 7.038

10.  A simple method to test the geometrical reliability of digital reconstructed radiograph (DRR).

Authors:  Stefania Pallotta; Marta Bucciolini
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2010-01-29       Impact factor: 2.102

View more
  4 in total

1.  Three-dimensional imaging assessment of anatomic invasion and volumetric considerations for chemo/radiotherapy-based laryngeal preservation in T3 larynx cancer.

Authors:  Mona Kamal; Sweet Ping Ng; Salman A Eraj; Crosby D Rock; Brian Pham; Jay A Messer; Adam S Garden; William H Morrison; Jack Phan; Steven J Frank; Adel K El-Naggar; Jason M Johnson; Lawrence E Ginsberg; Renata Ferrarotto; Jan S Lewin; Katherine A Hutcheson; Carlos E Cardenas; Mark E Zafereo; Stephen Y Lai; Amy C Hessel; Randal S Weber; G Brandon Gunn; Clifton D Fuller; Abdallah S R Mohamed; David I Rosenthal
Journal:  Oral Oncol       Date:  2018-02-10       Impact factor: 5.337

2.  Setup uncertainties and PTV margins at different anatomical levels in intensity modulated radiotherapy for nasopharyngeal cancer.

Authors:  Milan Anjanappa; Malu Rafi; Saju Bhasi; Rejnish Kumar; Kainickal Cessal Thommachan; Tapesh Bhattacharya; Kunnambath Ramadas
Journal:  Rep Pract Oncol Radiother       Date:  2017-08-08

3.  Evaluation of errors in measurements of infantile hip radiograph using digitally reconstructed radiograph from three-dimensional MRI.

Authors:  Daisuke Hamano; Kiyoshi Yoshida; Chikahisa Higuchi; Dai Otsuki; Hideki Yoshikawa; Kazuomi Sugamoto
Journal:  J Orthop       Date:  2019-05-09

4.  A prospective in silico analysis of interdisciplinary and interobserver spatial variability in post-operative target delineation of high-risk oral cavity cancers: Does physician specialty matter?

Authors:  Sweet Ping Ng; Brandon A Dyer; Jayashree Kalpathy-Cramer; Abdallah Sherif Radwan Mohamed; Musaddiq J Awan; G Brandon Gunn; Jack Phan; Mark Zafereo; J Matthew Debnam; Carol M Lewis; Rivka R Colen; Michael E Kupferman; Nandita Guha-Thakurta; Guadalupe Canahuate; G Elisabeta Marai; David Vock; Bronwyn Hamilton; John Holland; Carlos E Cardenas; Stephen Lai; David Rosenthal; Clifton David Fuller
Journal:  Clin Transl Radiat Oncol       Date:  2018-08-02
  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.