对用于质子治疗的商用合成计算机断层扫描解决方案进行治疗场所特定评估

Ping Lin Yeap , Yun Ming Wong , Kang Hao Lee , Calvin Wei Yang Koh , Kah Seng Lew , Clifford Ghee Ann Chua , Andrew Wibawa , Zubin Master , James Cheow Lei Lee , Sung Yong Park , Hong Qi Tan
{"title":"对用于质子治疗的商用合成计算机断层扫描解决方案进行治疗场所特定评估","authors":"Ping Lin Yeap ,&nbsp;Yun Ming Wong ,&nbsp;Kang Hao Lee ,&nbsp;Calvin Wei Yang Koh ,&nbsp;Kah Seng Lew ,&nbsp;Clifford Ghee Ann Chua ,&nbsp;Andrew Wibawa ,&nbsp;Zubin Master ,&nbsp;James Cheow Lei Lee ,&nbsp;Sung Yong Park ,&nbsp;Hong Qi Tan","doi":"10.1016/j.phro.2024.100639","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background and purpose</h3><p>Despite the superior dose conformity of proton therapy, the dose distribution is sensitive to daily anatomical changes, which can affect treatment accuracy. This study evaluated the dose recalculation accuracy of two synthetic computed tomography (sCT) generation algorithms in a commercial treatment planning system.</p></div><div><h3>Materials and methods</h3><p>The evaluation was conducted for head-and-neck, thorax-and-abdomen, and pelvis sites treated with proton therapy. Thirty patients with two cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) scans each were selected. The sCT images were generated from CBCT scans using two algorithms, Corrected CBCT (corrCBCT) and Virtual CT (vCT). Dose recalculations were performed based on these images for comparison with “ground truth” deformed CTs.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>The choice of algorithm influenced dose recalculation accuracy, particularly in high dose regions. For head-and-neck cases, the corrCBCT method showed closer agreement with the “ground truth”, while for thorax-and-abdomen and pelvis cases, the vCT algorithm yielded better results (mean percentage dose discrepancy of 0.6 %, 1.3 % and 0.5 % for the three sites, respectively, in the high dose region). Head-and-neck and pelvis cases exhibited excellent agreement in high dose regions (2 %/2 mm gamma passing rate &gt;98 %), while thorax-and-abdomen cases exhibited the largest differences, suggesting caution in sCT algorithm usage for this site. Significant systematic differences were observed in the clinical target volume and organ-at-risk doses in head-and-neck and pelvis cases, highlighting the importance of using the correct algorithm.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>This study provided treatment site-specific recommendations for sCT algorithm selection in proton therapy. The findings offered insights for proton beam centers implementing adaptive radiotherapy workflows.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":36850,"journal":{"name":"Physics and Imaging in Radiation Oncology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S240563162400109X/pdfft?md5=ba78c750d5b28de5c476ae16c45a73a8&pid=1-s2.0-S240563162400109X-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A treatment-site-specific evaluation of commercial synthetic computed tomography solutions for proton therapy\",\"authors\":\"Ping Lin Yeap ,&nbsp;Yun Ming Wong ,&nbsp;Kang Hao Lee ,&nbsp;Calvin Wei Yang Koh ,&nbsp;Kah Seng Lew ,&nbsp;Clifford Ghee Ann Chua ,&nbsp;Andrew Wibawa ,&nbsp;Zubin Master ,&nbsp;James Cheow Lei Lee ,&nbsp;Sung Yong Park ,&nbsp;Hong Qi Tan\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.phro.2024.100639\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Background and purpose</h3><p>Despite the superior dose conformity of proton therapy, the dose distribution is sensitive to daily anatomical changes, which can affect treatment accuracy. This study evaluated the dose recalculation accuracy of two synthetic computed tomography (sCT) generation algorithms in a commercial treatment planning system.</p></div><div><h3>Materials and methods</h3><p>The evaluation was conducted for head-and-neck, thorax-and-abdomen, and pelvis sites treated with proton therapy. Thirty patients with two cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) scans each were selected. The sCT images were generated from CBCT scans using two algorithms, Corrected CBCT (corrCBCT) and Virtual CT (vCT). Dose recalculations were performed based on these images for comparison with “ground truth” deformed CTs.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>The choice of algorithm influenced dose recalculation accuracy, particularly in high dose regions. For head-and-neck cases, the corrCBCT method showed closer agreement with the “ground truth”, while for thorax-and-abdomen and pelvis cases, the vCT algorithm yielded better results (mean percentage dose discrepancy of 0.6 %, 1.3 % and 0.5 % for the three sites, respectively, in the high dose region). Head-and-neck and pelvis cases exhibited excellent agreement in high dose regions (2 %/2 mm gamma passing rate &gt;98 %), while thorax-and-abdomen cases exhibited the largest differences, suggesting caution in sCT algorithm usage for this site. Significant systematic differences were observed in the clinical target volume and organ-at-risk doses in head-and-neck and pelvis cases, highlighting the importance of using the correct algorithm.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>This study provided treatment site-specific recommendations for sCT algorithm selection in proton therapy. The findings offered insights for proton beam centers implementing adaptive radiotherapy workflows.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":36850,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Physics and Imaging in Radiation Oncology\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S240563162400109X/pdfft?md5=ba78c750d5b28de5c476ae16c45a73a8&pid=1-s2.0-S240563162400109X-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Physics and Imaging in Radiation Oncology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S240563162400109X\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ONCOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Physics and Imaging in Radiation Oncology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S240563162400109X","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景和目的尽管质子治疗具有优异的剂量一致性,但其剂量分布对日常解剖变化非常敏感,这会影响治疗的准确性。本研究评估了商用治疗计划系统中两种合成计算机断层扫描(sCT)生成算法的剂量重新计算精度。共选择了 30 名患者,每名患者均接受过两次锥束计算机断层扫描(CBCT)。sCT 图像由 CBCT 扫描图像通过校正 CBCT (corrCBCT) 和虚拟 CT (vCT) 两种算法生成。结果算法的选择会影响剂量重新计算的准确性,尤其是在高剂量区域。对于头颈部病例,corrCBCT 方法与 "地面实况 "更接近,而对于胸腹部和骨盆病例,vCT 算法的结果更好(在高剂量区,三个部位的平均剂量差异百分比分别为 0.6%、1.3% 和 0.5%)。头颈部和骨盆病例在高剂量区表现出极好的一致性(2%/2 毫米伽马通过率为 98%),而胸部和腹部病例的差异最大,这表明该部位应谨慎使用 sCT 算法。在头颈部和骨盆病例中,临床靶体积和风险器官剂量存在显著的系统性差异,这凸显了使用正确算法的重要性。研究结果为质子束中心实施自适应放疗工作流程提供了启示。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
A treatment-site-specific evaluation of commercial synthetic computed tomography solutions for proton therapy

Background and purpose

Despite the superior dose conformity of proton therapy, the dose distribution is sensitive to daily anatomical changes, which can affect treatment accuracy. This study evaluated the dose recalculation accuracy of two synthetic computed tomography (sCT) generation algorithms in a commercial treatment planning system.

Materials and methods

The evaluation was conducted for head-and-neck, thorax-and-abdomen, and pelvis sites treated with proton therapy. Thirty patients with two cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) scans each were selected. The sCT images were generated from CBCT scans using two algorithms, Corrected CBCT (corrCBCT) and Virtual CT (vCT). Dose recalculations were performed based on these images for comparison with “ground truth” deformed CTs.

Results

The choice of algorithm influenced dose recalculation accuracy, particularly in high dose regions. For head-and-neck cases, the corrCBCT method showed closer agreement with the “ground truth”, while for thorax-and-abdomen and pelvis cases, the vCT algorithm yielded better results (mean percentage dose discrepancy of 0.6 %, 1.3 % and 0.5 % for the three sites, respectively, in the high dose region). Head-and-neck and pelvis cases exhibited excellent agreement in high dose regions (2 %/2 mm gamma passing rate >98 %), while thorax-and-abdomen cases exhibited the largest differences, suggesting caution in sCT algorithm usage for this site. Significant systematic differences were observed in the clinical target volume and organ-at-risk doses in head-and-neck and pelvis cases, highlighting the importance of using the correct algorithm.

Conclusions

This study provided treatment site-specific recommendations for sCT algorithm selection in proton therapy. The findings offered insights for proton beam centers implementing adaptive radiotherapy workflows.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Physics and Imaging in Radiation Oncology
Physics and Imaging in Radiation Oncology Physics and Astronomy-Radiation
CiteScore
5.30
自引率
18.90%
发文量
93
审稿时长
6 weeks
期刊最新文献
Results of 2023 survey on the use of synthetic computed tomography for magnetic resonance Imaging-only radiotherapy: Current status and future steps Head and neck automatic multi-organ segmentation on Dual-Energy Computed Tomography Automatic segmentation for magnetic resonance imaging guided individual elective lymph node irradiation in head and neck cancer patients Development of a novel 3D-printed dynamic anthropomorphic thorax phantom for evaluation of four-dimensional computed tomography Technical feasibility of delivering a simultaneous integrated boost in partial breast irradiation
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1