Organ-contour-driven auto-matching algorithm in image-guided radiotherapy.
inter-observer variability
organ-contour-driven auto-matching
soft-tissue
Journal
Journal of applied clinical medical physics
ISSN: 1526-9914
Titre abrégé: J Appl Clin Med Phys
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101089176
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
23 Nov 2023
23 Nov 2023
Historique:
revised:
02
11
2023
received:
02
08
2023
accepted:
09
11
2023
medline:
23
11
2023
pubmed:
23
11
2023
entrez:
23
11
2023
Statut:
aheadofprint
Résumé
This study aimed to demonstrate the potential clinical applicability of an organ-contour-driven auto-matching algorithm in image-guided radiotherapy. This study included eleven consecutive patients with cervical cancer who underwent radiotherapy in 23 or 25 fractions. Daily and reference magnetic resonance images were converted into mesh models. A weight-based algorithm was implemented to optimize the distance between the mesh model vertices and surface of the reference model during the positioning process. Within the cost function, weight parameters were employed to prioritize specific organs for positioning. In this study, three scenarios with different weight parameters were prepared. The optimal translation and rotation values for the cervix and uterus were determined based on the calculated translations alone or in combination with rotations, with a rotation limit of ±3°. Subsequently, the coverage probabilities of the following two planning target volumes (PTV), an isotropic 5 mm and anisotropic margins derived from a previous study, were evaluated. The percentage of translations exceeding 10 mm varied from 9% to 18% depending on the scenario. For small PTV sizes, more than 80% of all fractions had a coverage of 80% or higher. In contrast, for large PTV sizes, more than 90% of all fractions had a coverage of 95% or higher. The difference between the median coverage with translational positioning alone and that with both translational and rotational positioning was 1% or less. This algorithm facilitates quantitative positioning by utilizing a cost function that prioritizes organs for positioning. Consequently, consistent displacement values were algorithmically generated. This study also revealed that the impact of rotational corrections, limited to ±3°, on PTV coverage was minimal.
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
e14220Subventions
Organisme : JSPS KAKENHI
ID : 22H03021
Informations de copyright
© 2023 The Authors. Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics published by Wiley Periodicals, LLC on behalf of The American Association of Physicists in Medicine.
Références
Tsai JS, Micaily B, Miyamoto C. Optimization and quality assurance of an image-guided radiation therapy system for intensity-modulated radiation therapy radiotherapy. Med Dosim. 2012;37:321-333. 10.1016/j.meddos.2011.11.006
Tejpal G, Jaiprakash A, Susovan B, et al. IMRT and IGRT in head and neck cancer: have we delivered what we promised? Indian J Surg Oncol. 2010;1:166-185. 10.1007/s13193-010-0030-x
Hirose T, Arimura H, Fukunaga J, et al. Observer uncertainties of soft tissue-based patient positioning in IGRT. J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2020;21:79-81. 10.1002/acm2.12817
Sritharan K, Tree A. MR-guided radiotherapy for prostate cancer: state of the art and future perspectives. Br J Radiol. 2022;95:20210800. 10.1259/bjr.20210800
Boda-Heggemann J, Lohr F, Wenz F, et al. kV cone-beam CT-based IGRT: a clinical review. Strahlenther Onkol. 2011;187:284-291. 10.1007/s00066-011-2236-4
Rossi M, Boman E, Skyttä T, et al. Dosimetric effects of anatomical deformations and positioning errors in VMAT breast radiotherapy. J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2018;19:506-516. 10.1002/acm2.12409
Foroudi F, Pham D, Bressel M, et al. Bladder cancer radiotherapy margins: a comparison of daily alignment using skin, bone or soft tissue. Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol). 2012;24:673-681. 10.1016/j.clon.2012.06.012
Sasaki M, Nakamura M, Ashida R, et al. Assessing target localization accuracy across different soft-tissue matching protocols using end-exhalation breath-hold cone-beam computed tomography in patients with pancreatic cancer. J Radiat Res. 2023;64(4):711-719. 10.1093/jrr/rrad048
Zhang X, Wang X, Li X, et al. Evaluating the impact of possible interobserver variability in CBCT-based soft-tissue matching using TCP/NTCP models for prostate cancer radiotherapy. Radiat Oncol. 2022;17:62. 10.1186/s13014-022-02034-1
Wang Z, Chang Y, Peng Z, et al. Evaluation of deep learning-based auto-segmentation algorithms for delineating clinical target volume and organs at risk involving data for 125 cervical cancer patients. J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2020;21:272-279. 10.1002/acm2.13097
Cardenas CE, Yang J, Anderson BM, et al. Advances in Auto-Segmentation. Semin Radiat Oncol. 2019;29:185-197. 10.1016/j.semradonc.2019.02.001
Hirashima H, Nakamura M, Imanishi K, et al. Evaluation of generalization ability for deep learning-based auto-segmentation accuracy in limited field of view CBCT of male pelvic region. J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2023;24:13912. 10.1002/acm2.13912
Harrison K, Pullen H, Welsh C, et al. Machine learning for auto-segmentation in radiotherapy planning. Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol). 2022;34:74-88. 10.1016/j.clon.2021.12.003
Haie-Meder C, Pötter R, Van Limbergen E, et al. Recommendations from Gynaecological (GYN) GEC-ESTRO Working Group (I): concepts and terms in 3D image based 3D treatment planning in cervix cancer brachytherapy with emphasis on MRI assessment of GTV and CTV. Radiother Oncol. 2005;74:235-245. 10.1016/j.radonc.2004.12.015
Klein EE, Hanley J, Bayouth J, et al. Task Group 142 report: quality assurance of medical accelerators. Med Phys. 2009;36:4197-4212. 10.1118/1.3190392
Khan A, Jensen LG, Sun S, et al. Optimized planning target volume for intact cervical cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2012;83:1500-1505. 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2011.10.027
Hughes GN, Gateño J, English JD, et al. There is variability in our perception of the standard head orientation. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2017;45:1512-1516. 10.1016/j.ijom.2017.04.023
Oechsner M, Chizzali B, Devecka M, et al. Interobserver variability of patient positioning using four different CT datasets for image registration in lung stereotactic body adiotherapy. Srahlenther Onkol. 2017;193:831-839. 10.1007/s00066-017-1184-z
Levegrün S, Pöttgen C, Jawad JA, et al. Megavoltage computed tomography image guidance with helical tomotherapy in patients with vertebral tumors: analysis of factors influencing interobserver variability. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2013;85:561-569. 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2012.04.010
Wang Q, Lang J, Song Y, et al. Evaluation of intra- and interfraction movement of the cervix and the uterine body during intensity modulated radiation therapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2012;84:S446. 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2012.07.1181
Bondar L, Hoogeman M, Mens JW, et al. Toward an individualized target motion management for IMRT of cervical cancer based on model-predicted cervix-uterus shape and position. Radiother Oncol. 2011;99:240-245. 10.1016/j.radonc.2011.03.013
Lim K, Stewart J, Kelly V, et al. Dosimetrically triggered adaptive intensity modulated radiation therapy for Cervical Cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2014;90:147-154. 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2014.05.039
Chopra S, Patidar A, Dora T, et al. Vaginal displacement during course of adjuvant radiation for cervical cancer: results from a prospective IG-IMRT study. Br J Radiol. 2014;87:20140428. 10.1259/bjr.20140428
Mahantshetty U, Naga P, Nachankar A, et al. Set-up errors, organ motion, tumour regression and its implications on internal target volume-planning target volume during cervical cancer radiotherapy: results from a prospective study. Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol). 2022;34:189-197. 10.1016/j.clon.2021.10.010