Potential of a Second-Generation Dual-Layer Spectral CT for Dose Calculation in Particle Therapy Treatment Planning.
Spectral CT 7500
dual-layer spectral CT
particle therapy
range uncertainty
stopping power ratio
treatment planning
Journal
Frontiers in oncology
ISSN: 2234-943X
Titre abrégé: Front Oncol
Pays: Switzerland
ID NLM: 101568867
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2022
2022
Historique:
received:
12
01
2022
accepted:
14
03
2022
entrez:
9
5
2022
pubmed:
10
5
2022
medline:
10
5
2022
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
In particle therapy treatment planning, dose calculation is conducted using patient-specific maps of tissue ion stopping power ratio (SPR) to predict beam ranges. Improving patient-specific SPR prediction is therefore essential for accurate dose calculation. In this study, we investigated the use of the Spectral CT 7500, a second-generation dual-layer spectral computed tomography (DLCT) system, as an alternative to conventional single-energy CT (SECT) for patient-specific SPR prediction. This dual-energy CT (DECT)-based method allows for the direct prediction of SPR from quantitative measurements of relative electron density and effective atomic number using the Bethe equation, whereas the conventional SECT-based method consists of indirect image data-based prediction through the conversion of calibrated CT numbers to SPR. The performance of the Spectral CT 7500 in particle therapy treatment planning was characterized by conducting a thorough analysis of its SPR prediction accuracy for both tissue-equivalent materials and common non-tissue implant materials. In both instances, DLCT was found to reduce uncertainty in SPR predictions compared to SECT. Mean deviations of 0.7% and 1.6% from measured SPR values were found for DLCT- and SECT-based predictions, respectively, in tissue-equivalent materials. Furthermore, end-to-end analyses of DLCT-based treatment planning were performed for proton, helium, and carbon ion therapies with anthropomorphic head and pelvic phantoms. 3D gamma analysis was performed with ionization chamber array measurements as the reference. DLCT-predicted dose distributions revealed higher passing rates compared to SECT-predicted dose distributions. In the DLCT-based treatment plans, measured distal-edge evaluation layers were within 1 mm of their predicted positions, demonstrating the accuracy of DLCT-based particle range prediction. This study demonstrated that the use of the Spectral CT 7500 in particle therapy treatment planning may lead to better agreement between planned and delivered dose compared to current clinical SECT systems.
Identifiants
pubmed: 35530308
doi: 10.3389/fonc.2022.853495
pmc: PMC9069208
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
853495Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2022 Longarino, Kowalewski, Tessonnier, Mein, Ackermann, Debus, Mairani and Stiller.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
WS is a member of the CT Advisory Board of Philips Medical Systems. The remaining authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
Références
Br J Radiol. 2021 Feb 01;94(1118):20200170
pubmed: 33201728
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2018 Jan 1;100(1):244-253
pubmed: 29079119
Phys Med Biol. 1996 Jan;41(1):111-24
pubmed: 8685250
J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2022 Jan;23(1):e13468
pubmed: 34743405
Phys Med Biol. 2018 Jan 09;63(2):025001
pubmed: 29239855
Phys Med Biol. 2019 Aug 14;64(16):165002
pubmed: 31220814
Eur Radiol. 2015 Aug;25(8):2493-501
pubmed: 25680727
Phys Med Biol. 2012 Jul 7;57(13):4095-115
pubmed: 22678123
Med Phys. 2019 Apr;46(4):1821-1828
pubmed: 30695108
Phys Med Biol. 2016 Oct 03;61(20):N542-N550
pubmed: 27694719
Med Phys. 2018 Jun;45(6):2486-2497
pubmed: 29624708
Invest Radiol. 2014 Nov;49(11):735-41
pubmed: 24872006
Oral Oncol. 2014 Mar;50(3):221-7
pubmed: 24373911
Phys Med. 2018 Dec;56:34-40
pubmed: 30527087
Diagn Interv Radiol. 2020 Jan;26(1):68-71
pubmed: 31904573
Med Phys. 2017 Aug;44(8):4179-4187
pubmed: 28556239
Phys Med Biol. 2014 Jan 6;59(1):83-96
pubmed: 24334601
Med Phys. 2020 Jul;47(7):e881-e912
pubmed: 32215937
Nat Rev Clin Oncol. 2017 Aug;14(8):483-495
pubmed: 28290489
Med Phys. 1998 May;25(5):656-61
pubmed: 9608475
Eur Radiol. 2006 Feb;16(2):256-68
pubmed: 16341833
Eur Radiol. 2018 Jul;28(7):2745-2755
pubmed: 29404773
Med Phys. 2021 Jun;48(6):3065-3073
pubmed: 33905548
Med Phys. 2016 Jun;43(6):2845-2854
pubmed: 27277033
Med Phys. 2021 Sep;48(9):5356-5366
pubmed: 34260085
Med Phys. 2021 Sep;48(9):5202-5218
pubmed: 34174092
Phys Med Biol. 2018 Nov 26;63(23):235011
pubmed: 30474618
Radiology. 2015 Sep;276(3):637-53
pubmed: 26302388
Br J Radiol. 2020 Mar;93(1107):20190590
pubmed: 31642709
Phys Med. 2019 Aug;64:123-131
pubmed: 31515011
Med Phys. 2016 Jan;43(1):495
pubmed: 26745942
J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2022 Jan;23(1):e13465
pubmed: 34724327
Acta Oncol. 2015;54(9):1638-42
pubmed: 26219959
Radiother Oncol. 2021 Oct;163:7-13
pubmed: 34329653
Phys Med Biol. 2000 Feb;45(2):459-78
pubmed: 10701515
Phys Med Biol. 2017 Dec 14;63(1):015012
pubmed: 29057753
Radiother Oncol. 2016 Apr;119(1):137-44
pubmed: 26975241
Med Phys. 2018 Jan;45(1):48-59
pubmed: 29134674
Phys Med Biol. 2016 Jun 7;61(11):N268-75
pubmed: 27182757
Med Phys. 2009 Aug;36(8):3818-29
pubmed: 19746815
Med Phys. 2017 Jun;44(6):2332-2344
pubmed: 28295434
Phys Med Biol. 2014 Jul 21;59(14):3737-47
pubmed: 24936855
Radiother Oncol. 2017 Dec;125(3):526-533
pubmed: 29050953
Phys Med Biol. 2018 Aug 10;63(16):165007
pubmed: 29999493
Phys Med Biol. 2012 Jun 7;57(11):R99-117
pubmed: 22571913
Phys Med Biol. 2010 Mar 7;55(5):1343-62
pubmed: 20145291
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2019 Nov 1;105(3):504-513
pubmed: 31271828
Med Phys. 2022 Jan;49(1):474-487
pubmed: 34709667
Phys Med Biol. 2020 Apr 24;65(9):095007
pubmed: 32028273
Phys Med Biol. 2018 Mar 07;63(5):055016
pubmed: 29513647
Radiat Oncol J. 2011 Sep;29(3):135-46
pubmed: 22984664