Literature DB >> 27209500

Image Guided Radiation Therapy Using Synthetic Computed Tomography Images in Brain Cancer.

Ryan G Price1, Joshua P Kim2, Weili Zheng2, Indrin J Chetty1, Carri Glide-Hurst3.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: The development of synthetic computed tomography (CT) (synCT) derived from magnetic resonance (MR) images supports MR-only treatment planning. We evaluated the accuracy of synCT and synCT-generated digitally reconstructed radiographs (DRRs) relative to CT and determined their performance for image guided radiation therapy (IGRT). METHODS AND MATERIALS: Magnetic resonance simulation (MR-SIM) and CT simulation (CT-SIM) images were acquired of an anthropomorphic skull phantom and 12 patient brain cancer cases. SynCTs were generated using fluid attenuation inversion recovery, ultrashort echo time, and Dixon data sets through a voxel-based weighted summation of 5 tissue classifications. The DRRs were generated from the phantom synCT, and geometric fidelity was assessed relative to CT-generated DRRs through bounding box and landmark analysis. An offline retrospective analysis was conducted to register cone beam CTs (n=34) to synCTs and CTs using automated rigid registration in the treatment planning system. Planar MV and KV images (n=37) were rigidly registered to synCT and CT DRRs using an in-house script. Planar and volumetric registration reproducibility was assessed and margin differences were characterized by the van Herk formalism.
RESULTS: Bounding box and landmark analysis of phantom synCT DRRs were within 1 mm of CT DRRs. Absolute planar registration shift differences ranged from 0.0 to 0.7 mm for phantom DRRs on all treatment platforms and from 0.0 to 0.4 mm for volumetric registrations. For patient planar registrations, the mean shift differences were 0.4 ± 0.5 mm (range, -0.6 to 1.6 mm), 0.0 ± 0.5 mm (range, -0.9 to 1.2 mm), and 0.1 ± 0.3 mm (range, -0.7 to 0.6 mm) for the superior-inferior (S-I), left-right (L-R), and anterior-posterior (A-P) axes, respectively. The mean shift differences in volumetric registrations were 0.6 ± 0.4 mm (range, -0.2 to 1.6 mm), 0.2 ± 0.4 mm (range, -0.3 to 1.2 mm), and 0.2 ± 0.3 mm (range, -0.2 to 1.2 mm) for the S-I, L-R, and A-P axes, respectively. The CT-SIM and synCT derived margins were <0.3 mm different.
CONCLUSION: DRRs generated by synCT were in close agreement with CT-SIM. Planar and volumetric image registrations to synCT-derived targets were comparable with CT for phantom and patients. This validation is the next step toward MR-only planning for the brain.
Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27209500      PMCID: PMC5450663          DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2016.03.002

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys        ISSN: 0360-3016            Impact factor:   7.038


  34 in total

1.  Inclusion of geometric uncertainties in treatment plan evaluation.

Authors:  Marcel van Herk; Peter Remeijer; Joos V Lebesque
Journal:  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys       Date:  2002-04-01       Impact factor: 7.038

2.  Magnetic Resonance-Based Automatic Air Segmentation for Generation of Synthetic Computed Tomography Scans in the Head Region.

Authors:  Weili Zheng; Joshua P Kim; Mo Kadbi; Benjamin Movsas; Indrin J Chetty; Carri K Glide-Hurst
Journal:  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys       Date:  2015-07-09       Impact factor: 7.038

Review 3.  Advances in functional and structural MR image analysis and implementation as FSL.

Authors:  Stephen M Smith; Mark Jenkinson; Mark W Woolrich; Christian F Beckmann; Timothy E J Behrens; Heidi Johansen-Berg; Peter R Bannister; Marilena De Luca; Ivana Drobnjak; David E Flitney; Rami K Niazy; James Saunders; John Vickers; Yongyue Zhang; Nicola De Stefano; J Michael Brady; Paul M Matthews
Journal:  Neuroimage       Date:  2004       Impact factor: 6.556

4.  Characterization, prediction, and correction of geometric distortion in 3 T MR images.

Authors:  Lesley N Baldwin; Keith Wachowicz; Steven D Thomas; Ryan Rivest; B Gino Fallone
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2007-02       Impact factor: 4.071

5.  Bayesian analysis of neuroimaging data in FSL.

Authors:  Mark W Woolrich; Saad Jbabdi; Brian Patenaude; Michael Chappell; Salima Makni; Timothy Behrens; Christian Beckmann; Mark Jenkinson; Stephen M Smith
Journal:  Neuroimage       Date:  2008-11-13       Impact factor: 6.556

6.  An accuracy assessment of different rigid body image registration methods and robotic couch positional corrections using a novel phantom.

Authors:  Sankar Arumugam; Michael G Jameson; Aitang Xing; Lois Holloway
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2013-03       Impact factor: 4.071

7.  A dual model HU conversion from MRI intensity values within and outside of bone segment for MRI-based radiotherapy treatment planning of prostate cancer.

Authors:  Juha Korhonen; Mika Kapanen; Jani Keyriläinen; Tiina Seppälä; Mikko Tenhunen
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2014-01       Impact factor: 4.071

8.  Technical Note: Characterization and correction of gradient nonlinearity induced distortion on a 1.0 T open bore MR-SIM.

Authors:  Ryan G Price; Mo Kadbi; Joshua Kim; James Balter; Indrin J Chetty; Carri K Glide-Hurst
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2015-10       Impact factor: 4.071

9.  T1 independent, T2* corrected MRI with accurate spectral modeling for quantification of fat: validation in a fat-water-SPIO phantom.

Authors:  Catherine D G Hines; Huanzhou Yu; Ann Shimakawa; Charles A McKenzie; Jean H Brittain; Scott B Reeder
Journal:  J Magn Reson Imaging       Date:  2009-11       Impact factor: 4.813

10.  Patient-induced susceptibility effect on geometric distortion of clinical brain MRI for radiation treatment planning on a 3T scanner.

Authors:  H Wang; J Balter; Y Cao
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2013-01-10       Impact factor: 3.609

View more
  13 in total

Review 1.  MR-guided radiation therapy: transformative technology and its role in the central nervous system.

Authors:  Yue Cao; Chia-Lin Tseng; James M Balter; Feifei Teng; Hemant A Parmar; Arjun Sahgal
Journal:  Neuro Oncol       Date:  2017-04-01       Impact factor: 12.300

2.  Robust Estimation of Electron Density From Anatomic Magnetic Resonance Imaging of the Brain Using a Unifying Multi-Atlas Approach.

Authors:  Shangjie Ren; Wendy Hara; Lei Wang; Mark K Buyyounouski; Quynh-Thu Le; Lei Xing; Ruijiang Li
Journal:  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys       Date:  2016-12-14       Impact factor: 7.038

3.  Artificial Intelligence in Radiation Therapy.

Authors:  Yabo Fu; Hao Zhang; Eric D Morris; Carri K Glide-Hurst; Suraj Pai; Alberto Traverso; Leonard Wee; Ibrahim Hadzic; Per-Ivar Lønne; Chenyang Shen; Tian Liu; Xiaofeng Yang
Journal:  IEEE Trans Radiat Plasma Med Sci       Date:  2021-08-24

Review 4.  MRI-only treatment planning: benefits and challenges.

Authors:  Amir M Owrangi; Peter B Greer; Carri K Glide-Hurst
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2018-02-26       Impact factor: 3.609

5.  Generating synthetic CTs from magnetic resonance images using generative adversarial networks.

Authors:  Hajar Emami; Ming Dong; Siamak P Nejad-Davarani; Carri K Glide-Hurst
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2018-06-14       Impact factor: 4.071

6.  Feasibility of generating synthetic CT from T1-weighted MRI using a linear mixed-effects regression model.

Authors:  Anant Pandey; Yoganathan Sa; Beibei Guo; Rui Zhang
Journal:  Biomed Phys Eng Express       Date:  2019-06-24

7.  MR-CBCT image-guided system for radiotherapy of orthotopic rat prostate tumors.

Authors:  Tsuicheng D Chiu; Tatsuya J Arai; James Campbell Iii; Steve B Jiang; Ralph P Mason; Strahinja Stojadinovic
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2018-05-30       Impact factor: 3.240

8.  Do we need a new CT scan for retreatment of intracranial SRS patients?

Authors:  David Wiant; Matthew Manning; Kyle Koch; Jacqueline Maurer; Lane Hayes; Han Liu; Qingyang Shang; Benjamin Sintay
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2017-08-03       Impact factor: 2.102

9.  Assessment of MRI-Based Attenuation Correction for MRI-Only Radiotherapy Treatment Planning of the Brain.

Authors:  Iiro Ranta; Jarmo Teuho; Jani Linden; Riku Klén; Mika Teräs; Mika Kapanen; Jani Keyriläinen
Journal:  Diagnostics (Basel)       Date:  2020-05-14

10.  FMEA of MR-Only Treatment Planning in the Pelvis.

Authors:  Joshua Kim; Brett Miller; M Salim Siddiqui; Benjamin Movsas; Carri Glide-Hurst
Journal:  Adv Radiat Oncol       Date:  2018-09-07
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.