Analysis of dose using CBCT and synthetic CT during head and neck radiotherapy: A single centre feasibility study.
ART, adaptive radiotherapy
CBCT, Cone Beam Computed Tomography
CTV, Clinical Target Volume
Cone-beam CT
DIR, deformable image registration
DVH, dose volume histogram
Deformable
Dose
GTV, Gross Tumour Volume
Head and neck cancer
IGRT, Image Guided Radiotherapy
OAR, Organs at Risk
OPSCC, oropharyngeal squamous cell cancer
PRV, planning organ at risk volume
PTV, Planning Target Volume
RT, radiotherapy
Radiotherapy
SCC, Squamous Cell Carcinoma
Synthetic CT
TPS, treatment planning system
VMAT, volumetric arc therapy
pCT, planning Computed Tomography
sCT, synthetic Computed Tomography
Journal
Technical innovations & patient support in radiation oncology
ISSN: 2405-6324
Titre abrégé: Tech Innov Patient Support Radiat Oncol
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101762366
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Jun 2020
Jun 2020
Historique:
received:
22
11
2019
revised:
31
01
2020
accepted:
25
02
2020
entrez:
1
4
2020
pubmed:
1
4
2020
medline:
1
4
2020
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
The study aimed to assess the suitability of deformable image registration (DIR) software to generate synthetic CT (sCT) scans for dose verification during radiotherapy to the head and neck. Planning and synthetic CT dose volume histograms were compared to evaluate dosimetric changes during the treatment course. Eligible patients had locally advanced (stage III, IVa and IVb) oropharyngeal cancer treated with primary radiotherapy. Weekly CBCT images were acquired post treatment at fractions 1, 6, 11, 16, 21 and 26 over a 30 fraction treatment course. Each CBCT was deformed with the planning CT to generate a sCT which was used to calculate the dose at that point in the treatment. A repeat planning CT2 was acquired at fraction 16 and deformed with the fraction 16 CBCT to compare differences between the calculations mid-treatment. 20 patients were evaluated generating 138 synthetic CT sets. The single fraction mean dose to PTV_HR between the synthetic and planning CT did not vary, although dose to 95% of PTV_HR was smaller at week 6 compared to planning (difference 2.0%, 95% CI (0.8 to 3.1), p = 0.0). There was no statistically significant difference in PRV_brainstem or PRV_spinal cord maximum dose, although greater variation using the sCT calculations was reported. The mean dose to structures based on the fraction 16 sCT and CT2 scans were similar. Synthetic CT provides comparable dose calculations to those of a repeat planning CT; however the limitations of DIR must be understood before it is applied within the clinical setting.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32226833
doi: 10.1016/j.tipsro.2020.02.004
pii: S2405-6324(20)30007-X
pmc: PMC7093804
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
21-29Informations de copyright
© 2020 The Authors.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.
Références
Acta Oncol. 2010 Oct;49(7):1101-8
pubmed: 20831502
Med Phys. 2014 Dec;41(12):121712
pubmed: 25471959
Oral Oncol. 2018 Dec;87:131-137
pubmed: 30527228
Lancet Oncol. 2011 Feb;12(2):127-36
pubmed: 21236730
Clin Transl Radiat Oncol. 2016 Sep 19;1:2-8
pubmed: 29657987
Med Phys. 2015 Feb;42(2):760-9
pubmed: 25652490
Radiother Oncol. 2017 Feb;122(2):229-235
pubmed: 27497803
Acta Oncol. 2015;54(9):1483-9
pubmed: 26219958
Acta Oncol. 2018 Apr;57(4):552-556
pubmed: 29125035
Radiother Oncol. 2014 Jan;110(1):172-81
pubmed: 24183870
Radiother Oncol. 2010 Jul;96(1):100-3
pubmed: 20430462
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2016 Nov 1;96(3):653-60
pubmed: 27681762
Br J Radiol. 2017 Jan;90(1069):20160420
pubmed: 27781491
Tech Innov Patient Support Radiat Oncol. 2019 Dec 16;12:34-40
pubmed: 32095553
Technol Cancer Res Treat. 2017 Apr;16(2):218-223
pubmed: 27502958
Br J Radiol. 2015 May;88(1049):20140691
pubmed: 25791569
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2014 Nov 1;90(3):680-7
pubmed: 25151537
Phys Med. 2015 May;31(3):266-72
pubmed: 25724350
Lancet Oncol. 2012 Jul;13(7):e292-300
pubmed: 22748268
Radiother Oncol. 2012 Apr;103(1):69-75
pubmed: 22398313
Radiother Oncol. 2015 Jul;116(1):57-63
pubmed: 26142268
J Med Phys. 2014 Jul;39(3):164-8
pubmed: 25190995
Tech Innov Patient Support Radiat Oncol. 2017 Jan 05;1:1-7
pubmed: 32095536
J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2018 Nov;19(6):26-34
pubmed: 30160025
Radiother Oncol. 2015 Jun;115(3):285-94
pubmed: 26094076
Acta Oncol. 2016 Nov;55(11):1324-1330
pubmed: 27556786
J Radiat Res. 2014 Sep;55(5):1002-8
pubmed: 24907340
Radiother Oncol. 2019 Jan;130:32-38
pubmed: 30049455
Radiat Oncol. 2018 Oct 1;13(1):190
pubmed: 30285806