Literature DB >> 32143207

Comparison of CBCT based synthetic CT methods suitable for proton dose calculations in adaptive proton therapy.

Adrian Thummerer1, Paolo Zaffino, Arturs Meijers, Gabriel Guterres Marmitt, Joao Seco, Roel J H M Steenbakkers, Johannes A Langendijk, Stefan Both, Maria F Spadea, Antje C Knopf.   

Abstract

In-room imaging is a prerequisite for adaptive proton therapy. The use of onboard cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) imaging, which is routinely acquired for patient position verification, can enable daily dose reconstructions and plan adaptation decisions. Image quality deficiencies though, hamper dose calculation accuracy and make corrections of CBCTs a necessity. This study compared three methods to correct CBCTs and create synthetic CTs that are suitable for proton dose calculations. CBCTs, planning CTs and repeated CTs (rCT) from 33 H&N cancer patients were used to compare a deep convolutional neural network (DCNN), deformable image registration (DIR) and an analytical image-based correction method (AIC) for synthetic CT (sCT) generation. Image quality of sCTs was evaluated by comparison with a same-day rCT, using mean absolute error (MAE), mean error (ME), Dice similarity coefficient (DSC), structural non-uniformity (SNU) and signal/contrast-to-noise ratios (SNR/CNR) as metrics. Dosimetric accuracy was investigated in an intracranial setting by performing gamma analysis and calculating range shifts. Neural network-based sCTs resulted in the lowest MAE and ME (37/2 HU) and the highest DSC (0.96). While DIR and AIC generated images with a MAE of 44/77 HU, a ME of -8/1 HU and a DSC of 0.94/0.90. Gamma and range shift analysis showed almost no dosimetric difference between DCNN and DIR based sCTs. The lower image quality of AIC based sCTs affected dosimetric accuracy and resulted in lower pass ratios and higher range shifts. Patient-specific differences highlighted the advantages and disadvantages of each method. For the set of patients, the DCNN created synthetic CTs with the highest image quality. Accurate proton dose calculations were achieved by both DCNN and DIR based sCTs. The AIC method resulted in lower image quality and dose calculation accuracy was reduced compared to the other methods.

Entities:  

Year:  2020        PMID: 32143207     DOI: 10.1088/1361-6560/ab7d54

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Phys Med Biol        ISSN: 0031-9155            Impact factor:   3.609


  14 in total

Review 1.  Adaptive proton therapy.

Authors:  Harald Paganetti; Pablo Botas; Gregory C Sharp; Brian Winey
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2021-11-15       Impact factor: 3.609

2.  Deep learning-based thoracic CBCT correction with histogram matching.

Authors:  Richard L J Qiu; Yang Lei; Joseph Shelton; Kristin Higgins; Jeffrey D Bradley; Walter J Curran; Tian Liu; Aparna H Kesarwala; Xiaofeng Yang
Journal:  Biomed Phys Eng Express       Date:  2021-10-29

3.  Evaluation of CBCT scatter correction using deep convolutional neural networks for head and neck adaptive proton therapy.

Authors:  Arthur Lalonde; Brian Winey; Joost Verburg; Harald Paganetti; Gregory C Sharp
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2020-12-04       Impact factor: 3.609

4.  Onboard cone-beam CT-based replan evaluation for head and neck proton therapy.

Authors:  Alexander Stanforth; Liyong Lin; Jonathan J Beitler; James R Janopaul-Naylor; Chih-Wei Chang; Robert H Press; Sagar A Patel; Jennifer Zhao; Bree Eaton; Eduard E Schreibmann; James Jung; Duncan Bohannon; Tian Liu; Xiaofeng Yang; Mark W McDonald; Jun Zhou
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2022-02-07       Impact factor: 2.243

5.  Online adaptive dose restoration in intensity modulated proton therapy of lung cancer to account for inter-fractional density changes.

Authors:  Elena Borderías Villarroel; Xavier Geets; Edmond Sterpin
Journal:  Phys Imaging Radiat Oncol       Date:  2020-07-13

Review 6.  A review on medical imaging synthesis using deep learning and its clinical applications.

Authors:  Tonghe Wang; Yang Lei; Yabo Fu; Jacob F Wynne; Walter J Curran; Tian Liu; Xiaofeng Yang
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2020-12-11       Impact factor: 2.102

Review 7.  Proton Therapy for Prostate Cancer: Challenges and Opportunities.

Authors:  Darren M C Poon; Stephen Wu; Leon Ho; Kin Yin Cheung; Ben Yu
Journal:  Cancers (Basel)       Date:  2022-02-13       Impact factor: 6.639

8.  Proton therapy needs further technological development to fulfill the promise of becoming a superior treatment modality (compared to photon therapy).

Authors:  Daniel E Hyer; Xuanfeng Ding; Yi Rong
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2021-11-03       Impact factor: 2.102

9.  Generating synthetic CT from low-dose cone-beam CT by using generative adversarial networks for adaptive radiotherapy.

Authors:  Liugang Gao; Kai Xie; Xiaojin Wu; Zhengda Lu; Chunying Li; Jiawei Sun; Tao Lin; Jianfeng Sui; Xinye Ni
Journal:  Radiat Oncol       Date:  2021-10-14       Impact factor: 3.481

10.  Please Place Your Seat in the Full Upright Position: A Technical Framework for Landing Upright Radiation Therapy in the 21st Century.

Authors:  Sarah Hegarty; Nicholas Hardcastle; James Korte; Tomas Kron; Sarah Everitt; Sulman Rahim; Fiona Hegi-Johnson; Rick Franich
Journal:  Front Oncol       Date:  2022-03-03       Impact factor: 6.244

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.