Tokihiro Yamamoto1, Sven Kabus2, Matthieu Bal3, Karl Bzdusek4, Paul J Keall5, Cari Wright6, Stanley H Benedict6, Megan E Daly6. 1. Department of Radiation Oncology, University of California Davis, Sacramento, California. Electronic address: toyamamoto@ucdavis.edu. 2. Department of Digital Imaging, Philips Research, Hamburg, Germany. 3. Philips Healthcare, Best, The Netherlands. 4. Philips Healthcare, Fitchburg, Wisconsin. 5. Radiation Physics Laboratory, Sydney Medical School, University of Sydney, New South Wales, Australia. 6. Department of Radiation Oncology, University of California Davis, Sacramento, California.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Lung functional image guided radiation therapy (RT) that avoids irradiating highly functional regions has potential to reduce pulmonary toxicity following RT. Tumor regression during RT is common, leading to recovery of lung function. We hypothesized that computed tomography (CT) ventilation image-guided treatment planning reduces the functional lung dose compared to standard anatomic image-guided planning in 2 different scenarios with or without plan adaptation. METHODS AND MATERIALS: CT scans were acquired before RT and during RT at 2 time points (16-20 Gy and 30-34 Gy) for 14 patients with locally advanced lung cancer. Ventilation images were calculated by deformable image registration of four-dimensional CT image data sets and image analysis. We created 4 treatment plans at each time point for each patient: functional adapted, anatomic adapted, functional unadapted, and anatomic unadapted plans. Adaptation was performed at 2 time points. Deformable image registration was used for accumulating dose and calculating a composite of dose-weighted ventilation used to quantify the lung accumulated dose-function metrics. The functional plans were compared with the anatomic plans for each scenario separately to investigate the hypothesis at a significance level of 0.05. RESULTS: Tumor volume was significantly reduced by 20% after 16 to 20 Gy (P = .02) and by 32% after 30 to 34 Gy (P < .01) on average. In both scenarios, the lung accumulated dose-function metrics were significantly lower in the functional plans than in the anatomic plans without compromising target volume coverage and adherence to constraints to critical structures. For example, functional planning significantly reduced the functional mean lung dose by 5.0% (P < .01) compared to anatomic planning in the adapted scenario and by 3.6% (P = .03) in the unadapted scenario. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrated significant reductions in the accumulated dose to the functional lung with CT ventilation image-guided planning compared to anatomic image-guided planning for patients showing tumor regression and changes in regional ventilation during RT.
PURPOSE: Lung functional image guided radiation therapy (RT) that avoids irradiating highly functional regions has potential to reduce pulmonary toxicity following RT. Tumor regression during RT is common, leading to recovery of lung function. We hypothesized that computed tomography (CT) ventilation image-guided treatment planning reduces the functional lung dose compared to standard anatomic image-guided planning in 2 different scenarios with or without plan adaptation. METHODS AND MATERIALS: CT scans were acquired before RT and during RT at 2 time points (16-20 Gy and 30-34 Gy) for 14 patients with locally advanced lung cancer. Ventilation images were calculated by deformable image registration of four-dimensional CT image data sets and image analysis. We created 4 treatment plans at each time point for each patient: functional adapted, anatomic adapted, functional unadapted, and anatomic unadapted plans. Adaptation was performed at 2 time points. Deformable image registration was used for accumulating dose and calculating a composite of dose-weighted ventilation used to quantify the lung accumulated dose-function metrics. The functional plans were compared with the anatomic plans for each scenario separately to investigate the hypothesis at a significance level of 0.05. RESULTS:Tumor volume was significantly reduced by 20% after 16 to 20 Gy (P = .02) and by 32% after 30 to 34 Gy (P < .01) on average. In both scenarios, the lung accumulated dose-function metrics were significantly lower in the functional plans than in the anatomic plans without compromising target volume coverage and adherence to constraints to critical structures. For example, functional planning significantly reduced the functional mean lung dose by 5.0% (P < .01) compared to anatomic planning in the adapted scenario and by 3.6% (P = .03) in the unadapted scenario. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrated significant reductions in the accumulated dose to the functional lung with CT ventilation image-guided planning compared to anatomic image-guided planning for patients showing tumor regression and changes in regional ventilation during RT.
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: Keelin Murphy; Bram van Ginneken; Joseph M Reinhardt; Sven Kabus; Kai Ding; Xiang Deng; Kunlin Cao; Kaifang Du; Gary E Christensen; Vincent Garcia; Tom Vercauteren; Nicholas Ayache; Olivier Commowick; Grégoire Malandain; Ben Glocker; Nikos Paragios; Nassir Navab; Vladlena Gorbunova; Jon Sporring; Marleen de Bruijne; Xiao Han; Mattias P Heinrich; Julia A Schnabel; Mark Jenkinson; Cristian Lorenz; Marc Modat; Jamie R McClelland; Sébastien Ourselin; Sascha E A Muenzing; Max A Viergever; Dante De Nigris; D Louis Collins; Tal Arbel; Marta Peroni; Rui Li; Gregory C Sharp; Alexander Schmidt-Richberg; Jan Ehrhardt; René Werner; Dirk Smeets; Dirk Loeckx; Gang Song; Nicholas Tustison; Brian Avants; James C Gee; Marius Staring; Stefan Klein; Berend C Stoel; Martin Urschler; Manuel Werlberger; Jef Vandemeulebroucke; Simon Rit; David Sarrut; Josien P W Pluim Journal: IEEE Trans Med Imaging Date: 2011-05-31 Impact factor: 10.048
Authors: Douglas Brennan; Leah Schubert; Quentin Diot; Richard Castillo; Edward Castillo; Thomas Guerrero; Mary K Martel; Derek Linderman; Laurie E Gaspar; Moyed Miften; Brian D Kavanagh; Yevgeniy Vinogradskiy Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2015-03-25 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Lindsay Mathew; Andrew Wheatley; Richard Castillo; Edward Castillo; George Rodrigues; Thomas Guerrero; Grace Parraga Journal: Acad Radiol Date: 2012-09-19 Impact factor: 3.173
Authors: Katherina P Farr; Jesper F Kallehauge; Ditte S Møller; Azza A Khalil; Stine Kramer; Henrik Bluhme; Anni Morsing; Cai Grau Journal: Radiother Oncol Date: 2015-08-21 Impact factor: 6.280
Authors: Matthew K Fuld; R Blaine Easley; Osama I Saba; Deokiee Chon; Joseph M Reinhardt; Eric A Hoffman; Brett A Simon Journal: J Appl Physiol (1985) Date: 2008-02-07
Authors: Wei Shao; Taylor J Patton; Sarah E Gerard; Yue Pan; Joseph M Reinhardt; Oguz C Durumeric; John E Bayouth; Gary E Christensen Journal: IEEE Trans Med Imaging Date: 2019-12-30 Impact factor: 10.048
Authors: Eric M Wallat; Mattison J Flakus; Antonia E Wuschner; Wei Shao; Gary E Christensen; Joseph M Reinhardt; Andrew M Baschnagel; John E Bayouth Journal: Med Phys Date: 2020-04-13 Impact factor: 4.506