Martin J Menten1, Martin F Fast1, Simeon Nill1, Uwe Oelfke1. 1. Joint Department of Physics at The Institute of Cancer Research and The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London SM2 5NG, United Kingdom.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Real-time, markerless localization of lung tumors with kV imaging is often inhibited by ribs obscuring the tumor and poor soft-tissue contrast. This study investigates the use of dual-energy imaging, which can generate radiographs with reduced bone visibility, to enhance automated lung tumor tracking for real-time adaptive radiotherapy. METHODS: kV images of an anthropomorphic breathing chest phantom were experimentally acquired and radiographs of actual lung cancer patients were Monte-Carlo-simulated at three imaging settings: low-energy (70 kVp, 1.5 mAs), high-energy (140 kVp, 2.5 mAs, 1 mm additional tin filtration), and clinical (120 kVp, 0.25 mAs). Regular dual-energy images were calculated by weighted logarithmic subtraction of high- and low-energy images and filter-free dual-energy images were generated from clinical and low-energy radiographs. The weighting factor to calculate the dual-energy images was determined by means of a novel objective score. The usefulness of dual-energy imaging for real-time tracking with an automated template matching algorithm was investigated. RESULTS: Regular dual-energy imaging was able to increase tracking accuracy in left-right images of the anthropomorphic phantom as well as in 7 out of 24 investigated patient cases. Tracking accuracy remained comparable in three cases and decreased in five cases. Filter-free dual-energy imaging was only able to increase accuracy in 2 out of 24 cases. In four cases no change in accuracy was observed and tracking accuracy worsened in nine cases. In 9 out of 24 cases, it was not possible to define a tracking template due to poor soft-tissue contrast regardless of input images. The mean localization errors using clinical, regular dual-energy, and filter-free dual-energy radiographs were 3.85, 3.32, and 5.24 mm, respectively. Tracking success was dependent on tumor position, tumor size, imaging beam angle, and patient size. CONCLUSIONS: This study has highlighted the influence of patient anatomy on the success rate of real-time markerless tumor tracking using dual-energy imaging. Additionally, the importance of the spectral separation of the imaging beams used to generate the dual-energy images has been shown.
PURPOSE: Real-time, markerless localization of lung tumors with kV imaging is often inhibited by ribs obscuring the tumor and poor soft-tissue contrast. This study investigates the use of dual-energy imaging, which can generate radiographs with reduced bone visibility, to enhance automated lung tumor tracking for real-time adaptive radiotherapy. METHODS: kV images of an anthropomorphic breathing chest phantom were experimentally acquired and radiographs of actual lung cancerpatients were Monte-Carlo-simulated at three imaging settings: low-energy (70 kVp, 1.5 mAs), high-energy (140 kVp, 2.5 mAs, 1 mm additional tin filtration), and clinical (120 kVp, 0.25 mAs). Regular dual-energy images were calculated by weighted logarithmic subtraction of high- and low-energy images and filter-free dual-energy images were generated from clinical and low-energy radiographs. The weighting factor to calculate the dual-energy images was determined by means of a novel objective score. The usefulness of dual-energy imaging for real-time tracking with an automated template matching algorithm was investigated. RESULTS: Regular dual-energy imaging was able to increase tracking accuracy in left-right images of the anthropomorphic phantom as well as in 7 out of 24 investigated patient cases. Tracking accuracy remained comparable in three cases and decreased in five cases. Filter-free dual-energy imaging was only able to increase accuracy in 2 out of 24 cases. In four cases no change in accuracy was observed and tracking accuracy worsened in nine cases. In 9 out of 24 cases, it was not possible to define a tracking template due to poor soft-tissue contrast regardless of input images. The mean localization errors using clinical, regular dual-energy, and filter-free dual-energy radiographs were 3.85, 3.32, and 5.24 mm, respectively. Tracking success was dependent on tumor position, tumor size, imaging beam angle, and patient size. CONCLUSIONS: This study has highlighted the influence of patient anatomy on the success rate of real-time markerless tumor tracking using dual-energy imaging. Additionally, the importance of the spectral separation of the imaging beams used to generate the dual-energy images has been shown.
Authors: Linxi Shi; Minghui Lu; N Robert Bennett; Edward Shapiro; Jin Zhang; Richard Colbeth; Josh Star-Lack; Adam S Wang Journal: Med Phys Date: 2020-05-18 Impact factor: 4.071
Authors: Chun-Chien Shieh; Vincent Caillet; Michelle Dunbar; Paul J Keall; Jeremy T Booth; Nicholas Hardcastle; Carol Haddad; Thomas Eade; Ilana Feain Journal: Phys Med Biol Date: 2017-03-21 Impact factor: 3.609
Authors: Marco Mueller; Per Poulsen; Rune Hansen; Wilko Verbakel; Ross Berbeco; Dianne Ferguson; Shinichiro Mori; Lei Ren; John C Roeske; Lei Wang; Pengpeng Zhang; Paul Keall Journal: Med Phys Date: 2021-12-29 Impact factor: 4.071
Authors: Maksat Haytmyradov; Hassan Mostafavi; Roberto Cassetta; Rakesh Patel; Murat Surucu; Liangjia Zhu; John C Roeske Journal: Med Phys Date: 2020-01-10 Impact factor: 4.071
Authors: Ingo Gulyas; Petra Trnkova; Barbara Knäusl; Joachim Widder; Dietmar Georg; Andreas Renner Journal: Med Phys Date: 2022-06-06 Impact factor: 4.506
Authors: Martin F Fast; Björn Eiben; Martin J Menten; Andreas Wetscherek; David J Hawkes; Jamie R McClelland; Uwe Oelfke Journal: Radiother Oncol Date: 2017-10-10 Impact factor: 6.280