Synthetic CT in assessment of anatomical and dosimetric variations in radiotherapy - procedure validation

Grządziel, Aleksandra; Gądek, Adam; Bekman, Barbara; Wendykier, Jacek; Ślosarek, Krzysztof

doi:10.2478/pjmpe-2020-0022

Abstract

Introduction: One of many procedures to control the quality of radiotherapy is daily imaging of the patient’s anatomy. The CBCT (Cone Beam Computed Tomography) plays an important role in patient positioning, and dose delivery monitoring. Nowadays, CBCT is a baseline for the calculation of fraction and total dose. Thus, it provides the potential for more comprehensive monitoring of the delivered dose and adaptive radiotherapy. However, due to the poor quality and the presence of numerous artifacts, the replacement of the CBCT image with the corrected one is desired for dose calculation. The aim of the study was to validate a method for generating a synthetic CT image based on deformable image registration.

Material and methods: A Head & Torso Freepoint phantom, model 002H9K (Computerized Imaging Reference Systems, Norfolk, USA) with inserts was imaged with CT (Computed Tomography). Then, contouring and treatment plan were created in Eclipse (Varian Medical Systems, Palo Alto, CA, USA) treatment planning system. The phantom was scanned again with the CBCT. The planning CT was registered and deformed to the CBCT, resulting in a synthetic CT in Velocity software (Varian Medical Systems, Palo Alto, CA, USA). The dose distribution was recalculated based on the created CT image.

Results: Differences in structure volumes and dose statistics calculated both on CT and synthetic CT were evaluated. Discrepancies between the original and delivered plan from 0.0 to 2.5% were obtained. Dose comparison was performed on the DVH (Dose-Volume Histogram) for all delineated inserts.

Conclusions: Our findings suggest the potential utility of deformable registration and synthetic CT for providing dose reconstruction. This study reports on the limitation of the procedure related to the limited length of the CBCT volume and deformable fusion inaccuracies.

References

1. Wyman DR, Ostapiak OZ, Gamble LM. Analysis of mechanical sources of patient alignment errors in radiation therapy. Med Phys 2002;29(11). https://doi.org/10.1118/1.151704710.1118/1.151704712462738
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
2. Ezzell G, Chera B, Dicker A et al. Common error pathways seen in the RO-ILS data that demonstrate opportunities for improving treatment safety. Pract Radiat Oncol 2018;8(2):123-13210.1016/j.prro.2017.10.00729329998
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
3. Goff PH, Harrison LB, Furhang E et al. 2D kV orthogonal imaging with fiducial markers is more precise for daily image guided alignments than soft-tissue cone beam computed tomography for prostate radiation therapy. Adv Radiat Oncol 2017;2(3):420-42810.1016/j.adro.2017.05.001560531529114611
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
4. Goyal S, Kataria T, Image Guidance in Radiation Therapy: Techniques and Applications. Radiol Res Prac 2014;Article ID 705604, https://doi.org/10.1155/2014/70560410.1155/2014/705604428140325587445
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
5. Li G, Yang TJ, Furtado H et al. Clinical Assessment of 2D/3D Registration Accuracy in 4 Major Anatomic Sites Using On-Board 2D Kilovoltage Images for 6D Patient Setup. Technol Cancer Res Treat 2015;14(3):305-32410.1177/1533034614547454454486825223323
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
6. Lecchi M, Fossati P, Elisei F et al. Current concepts on imaging in radiotherapy. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2008;35(4):821-83710.1007/s00259-007-0631-y17972074
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
7. Lindfors N, Lund H, Johansson H et al. Influence of patient position and other inherent factors on image quality in two different cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) devices. Eur J Radiol Open 2017:132-13710.1016/j.ejro.2017.10.001567589329159206
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
8. Keall PJ, Hsu A, Xing L. Image-Guided Adaptive Radiotherapy, Leibel and Phillips Textbook of Radiation Oncology, wyd. Third Edition 2010.10.1016/B978-1-4160-5897-7.00012-3
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
9. Li X. A., Adaptive Radiation Therapy in: Hendee W., Imaging in medical diagnosis and therapy, CRC Press Taylor and Francis Group 2011.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
10. Sonke JJ, Aznar M, Rasch C. Adaptive Radiotherapy for Anatomical Changes. Semin Radiat Oncol 2019;29(3):245-25710.1016/j.semradonc.2019.02.00731027642
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
11. Feldkamp L, Davis L, Kress J. Practical cone-beam algorithm. J Opt Soc Am A 1984;1(6):612-61910.1364/JOSAA.1.000612
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
12. Srinivasan K, Mohammadi M, Shepherd J. Applications of linac-mounted kilovoltage Cone-beam Computed Tomography on modern radiation therapy: A Review. Pol J Radiol 2014:79:181-9310.12659/PJR.890745408511725006356
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
13. Mao W, Liu C, Gardner SJ et al. Evaluation and Clinical Application of a Commercially Available Iterative Reconstruction Algorithm for CBCT-Based IGRT. Technol Cancer Res Treat 2019:18: 153303381882305410.1177/1533033818823054637399430803367
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
14. Stock M, Pasler M, Birkfellner W et al. Image quality and stability of image-guided radiotherapy (IGRT) devices: A comparative study. Radiother Oncol 2009;93(1)10.1016/j.radonc.2009.07.012286703219695725
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
15. Moteabbed M, Sharp G, Wang Y et al. Validation of a deformable image registration technique for cone beam CT-based dose verification. Med Phys 2015;42(1):195-205
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
16. Zoellner C, Rit S, Kurz C et al. Decomposing a prior-CT-based cone-beam CT projection correction algorithm into scatter and beam hardening components. Phys Imag Radiat Oncol 2017;3:49-5210.1016/j.phro.2017.09.002
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
17. Schulze R, Heil U, Gross D et al. Artefacts in CBCT: a review. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2011;40(5):265-27310.1259/dmfr/30642039352026221697151
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
18. Kalender WA, Kyriakou Y. Flat-detector Computed Tomography (FD-CT). Eur Radiol 2007;17(11):2767-277910.1007/s00330-007-0651-917587058
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
19. Marchant T, Joshi K, Moore C. Accuracy of radiotherapy dose calculations based on cone-beam CT: comparison of deformable registration and image correction based methods. Phys Med Biol 2018;63(6)10.1088/1361-6560/aab0f029461255
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
20. Yuan Z, Rong Y, Benedict SH et al. “Dose of the day” based on cone beam computed tomography and deformable image registration for lung cancer radiotherapy. J Appl Clin Med Phys 2020;21(1):88-9410.1002/acm2.12793696475031816170
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
21. Veiga C, McClelland J, Moinuddin S et al. Toward adaptive radiotherapy for head and neck patients: Feasibility study on using CT-to-CBCT deformable registration for “dose of the day” calculations. Med Phys 2014;41(3)10.1118/1.486424024593707
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
22. Oh S, Kim S. Deformable image registration in radiation therapy. Radiat Oncol J 2017;35(2):101-11110.3857/roj.2017.00325551845328712282
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
23. Rigaud B, Simon A, Castelli J et al. Deformable image registration for radiation therapy: principle, methods, applications and evaluation. Acta Oncol 2019;58(9):1225-123710.1080/0284186X.2019.1620331
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
24. Weistrand O, Svensson S. The ANACONDA algorithm for deformable image registration in radiotherapy. Med Phys 2015;42(1):40-5310.1118/1.4894702
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
25. Brock KK, Mutic S, McNutt TR et al. Use of image registration and fusion algorithms and techniques in radiotherapy: Report of the AAPM Radiation Therapy Committee Task Group No. 132. Med Phys 2017;44(7)10.1002/mp.12256
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
26. Brock K. K., Hawkins M. A., Eccles C. L. et al., Improving image-guided target localization through deformable registration. Acta Oncol 2008;47(7):1279-128510.1080/02841860802256491
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
27. Thirion J. Image matching as a diffusion process: an analogy with Maxwell’s demons. Medical Image Analysis 1998;2(3):243-26010.1016/S1361-8415(98)80022-4
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
28. Wang H, Dong L, O’Daniel J et al. Validation of an accelerated ‘demons’ algorithm for deformable image registration in radiation therapy. Phys Med Biol;50(12):2887-290510.1088/0031-9155/50/12/01115930609
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
29. Lawson JD, Schreibmann E, Jani AB et al. Quantitative evaluation of a cone-beam computed tomography–planning computed tomography deformable image registration method for adaptive radiation therapy. Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics 2007;8(4):96-11310.1120/jacmp.v8i4.2432572262118449149
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
30. Velocity 4.0 Instructions for use. Varian Medical Systems 2018
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
31. Niu T, Sun M, Star-Lack J et al. Shading correction for on-board cone-beam CT in radiation therapy using planning MDCT images. Med Phys 2010;37(10):5395-540610.1118/1.348326021089775
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
32. Kurz C, Dedes G, Resch A et al. Comparing cone-beam CT intensity correction methods for dose recalculation in adaptive intensity-modulated photon and proton therapy for head and neck cancer. Acta Oncol 2015;54(9):1651-165710.3109/0284186X.2015.106120626198654
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
33. Laundry G, Dedes G, Zoellner C et al. Phantom Based Evaluation of CT to CBCT Image Registration for Proton Therapy Dose Recalculation. Phys Med Biol 2014;60(2):595-61310.1088/0031-9155/60/2/59525548912
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
34. Kurz C, Kamp F, Park Y-K et al. Investigating deformable image registration and scatter correction for CBCT-based dose calculation in adaptive IMPT. Med Phys 2016;43(10):5635-564610.1118/1.496293327782706
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
35. Thing RS, Bernchou U, Mainegra-Hing E et al. Hounsfield unit recovery in clinical cone beam CT images of the thorax acquired for image guided radiation therapy. Phys Med Biol 2016;61(15):5781-580210.1088/0031-9155/61/15/578127405692
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
36. Thummerer A, Zaffino P, Meijers A et al. Comparison of CBCT based synthetic CT methods suitable for proton dose calculations in adaptive proton therapy. Phys Med Biol 2020;65(9)10.1088/1361-6560/ab7d5432143207
Search in Google Scholar Back to article

Synthetic CT in assessment of anatomical and dosimetric variations in radiotherapy - procedure validation

Abstract

Paradigm

My account