PURPOSE: While MR-only treatment planning using synthetic CTs (synCTs) offers potential for streamlining clinical workflow, a need exists for an efficient and automated synCT generation in the brain to facilitate near real-time MR-only planning. This work describes a novel method for generating brain synCTs based on generative adversarial networks (GANs), a deep learning model that trains two competing networks simultaneously, and compares it to a deep convolutional neural network (CNN). METHODS: Post-Gadolinium T1-Weighted and CT-SIM images from fifteen brain cancer patients were retrospectively analyzed. The GAN model was developed to generate synCTs using T1-weighted MRI images as the input using a residual network (ResNet) as the generator. The discriminator is a CNN with five convolutional layers that classified the input image as real or synthetic. Fivefold cross-validation was performed to validate our model. GAN performance was compared to CNN based on mean absolute error (MAE), structural similarity index (SSIM), and peak signal-to-noise ratio (PSNR) metrics between the synCT and CT images. RESULTS: GAN training took ~11 h with a new case testing time of 5.7 ± 0.6 s. For GAN, MAEs between synCT and CT-SIM were 89.3 ± 10.3 Hounsfield units (HU) and 41.9 ± 8.6 HU across the entire FOV and tissues, respectively. However, MAE in the bone and air was, on average, ~240-255 HU. By comparison, the CNN model had an average full FOV MAE of 102.4 ± 11.1 HU. For GAN, the mean PSNR was 26.6 ± 1.2 and SSIM was 0.83 ± 0.03. GAN synCTs preserved details better than CNN, and regions of abnormal anatomy were well represented on GAN synCTs. CONCLUSIONS: We developed and validated a GAN model using a single T1-weighted MR image as the input that generates robust, high quality synCTs in seconds. Our method offers strong potential for supporting near real-time MR-only treatment planning in the brain.
PURPOSE: While MR-only treatment planning using synthetic CTs (synCTs) offers potential for streamlining clinical workflow, a need exists for an efficient and automated synCT generation in the brain to facilitate near real-time MR-only planning. This work describes a novel method for generating brain synCTs based on generative adversarial networks (GANs), a deep learning model that trains two competing networks simultaneously, and compares it to a deep convolutional neural network (CNN). METHODS: Post-Gadolinium T1-Weighted and CT-SIM images from fifteen brain cancerpatients were retrospectively analyzed. The GAN model was developed to generate synCTs using T1-weighted MRI images as the input using a residual network (ResNet) as the generator. The discriminator is a CNN with five convolutional layers that classified the input image as real or synthetic. Fivefold cross-validation was performed to validate our model. GAN performance was compared to CNN based on mean absolute error (MAE), structural similarity index (SSIM), and peak signal-to-noise ratio (PSNR) metrics between the synCT and CT images. RESULTS:GAN training took ~11 h with a new case testing time of 5.7 ± 0.6 s. For GAN, MAEs between synCT and CT-SIM were 89.3 ± 10.3 Hounsfield units (HU) and 41.9 ± 8.6 HU across the entire FOV and tissues, respectively. However, MAE in the bone and air was, on average, ~240-255 HU. By comparison, the CNN model had an average full FOV MAE of 102.4 ± 11.1 HU. For GAN, the mean PSNR was 26.6 ± 1.2 and SSIM was 0.83 ± 0.03. GAN synCTs preserved details better than CNN, and regions of abnormal anatomy were well represented on GAN synCTs. CONCLUSIONS: We developed and validated a GAN model using a single T1-weighted MR image as the input that generates robust, high quality synCTs in seconds. Our method offers strong potential for supporting near real-time MR-only treatment planning in the brain.
Authors: Gabor Opposits; Sándor A Kis; Lajos Trón; Ervin Berényi; Endre Takács; József G Dobai; László Bognár; Bernadett Szűcs; Miklós Emri Journal: Z Med Phys Date: 2015-08-14 Impact factor: 4.820
Authors: Joakim H Jonsson; Mohammad M Akhtari; Magnus G Karlsson; Adam Johansson; Thomas Asklund; Tufve Nyholm Journal: Radiat Oncol Date: 2015-01-10 Impact factor: 3.481
Authors: Yang Lei; Joseph Harms; Tonghe Wang; Sibo Tian; Jun Zhou; Hui-Kuo Shu; Jim Zhong; Hui Mao; Walter J Curran; Tian Liu; Xiaofeng Yang Journal: Phys Med Biol Date: 2019-04-05 Impact factor: 3.609
Authors: Eric D Morris; Ahmed I Ghanem; Ming Dong; Milan V Pantelic; Eleanor M Walker; Carri K Glide-Hurst Journal: Med Phys Date: 2019-12-29 Impact factor: 4.071
Authors: Lianli Liu; Adam Johansson; Yue Cao; Janell Dow; Theodore S Lawrence; James M Balter Journal: Phys Med Biol Date: 2020-06-15 Impact factor: 3.609
Authors: Samaneh Kazemifar; Ana M Barragán Montero; Kevin Souris; Sara T Rivas; Robert Timmerman; Yang K Park; Steve Jiang; Xavier Geets; Edmond Sterpin; Amir Owrangi Journal: J Appl Clin Med Phys Date: 2020-03-26 Impact factor: 2.102