A multi-institutional comparison of retrospective deformable dose accumulation for online adaptive magnetic resonance-guided radiotherapy.
Deformable dose accumulation (DDA)
Deformable image registration (DIR)
Multi-institutional analysis
Online MR-guided radiotherapy (MRgRT)
Journal
Physics and imaging in radiation oncology
ISSN: 2405-6316
Titre abrégé: Phys Imaging Radiat Oncol
Pays: Netherlands
ID NLM: 101704276
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Apr 2024
Apr 2024
Historique:
received:
16
01
2024
revised:
07
05
2024
accepted:
08
05
2024
medline:
17
6
2024
pubmed:
17
6
2024
entrez:
17
6
2024
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Application of different deformable dose accumulation (DDA) solutions makes institutional comparisons after online-adaptive magnetic resonance-guided radiotherapy (OA-MRgRT) challenging. The aim of this multi-institutional study was to analyze accuracy and agreement of DDA-implementations in OA-MRgRT. One gold standard (GS) case deformed with a biomechanical-model and five clinical cases consisting of prostate (2x), cervix, liver, and lymph node cancer, treated with OA-MRgRT, were analyzed. Six centers conducted DDA using institutional implementations. Deformable image registration (DIR) and DDA results were compared using the contour metrics Dice Similarity Coefficient (DSC), surface-DSC, Hausdorff-distance (HD95%), and accumulated dose-volume histograms (DVHs) analyzed via intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and clinical dosimetric criteria (CDC). For the GS, median DDA errors ranged from 0.0 to 2.8 Gy across contours and implementations. DIR of clinical cases resulted in DSC > 0.8 for up to 81.3% of contours and a variability of surface-DSC values depending on the implementation. Maximum HD95%=73.3 mm was found for duodenum in the liver case. Although DVH ICC > 0.90 was found after DDA for all but two contours, relevant absolute CDC differences were observed in clinical cases: Prostate I/II showed maximum differences in bladder V28Gy (10.2/7.6%), while for cervix, liver, and lymph node the highest differences were found for rectum D2cm Overall, high agreement was found between the different DIR and DDA implementations. Case- and algorithm-dependent differences were observed, leading to potentially clinically relevant results. Larger studies are needed to define future DDA-guidelines.
Sections du résumé
Background and Purpose
UNASSIGNED
Application of different deformable dose accumulation (DDA) solutions makes institutional comparisons after online-adaptive magnetic resonance-guided radiotherapy (OA-MRgRT) challenging. The aim of this multi-institutional study was to analyze accuracy and agreement of DDA-implementations in OA-MRgRT.
Material and Methods
UNASSIGNED
One gold standard (GS) case deformed with a biomechanical-model and five clinical cases consisting of prostate (2x), cervix, liver, and lymph node cancer, treated with OA-MRgRT, were analyzed. Six centers conducted DDA using institutional implementations. Deformable image registration (DIR) and DDA results were compared using the contour metrics Dice Similarity Coefficient (DSC), surface-DSC, Hausdorff-distance (HD95%), and accumulated dose-volume histograms (DVHs) analyzed via intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and clinical dosimetric criteria (CDC).
Results
UNASSIGNED
For the GS, median DDA errors ranged from 0.0 to 2.8 Gy across contours and implementations. DIR of clinical cases resulted in DSC > 0.8 for up to 81.3% of contours and a variability of surface-DSC values depending on the implementation. Maximum HD95%=73.3 mm was found for duodenum in the liver case. Although DVH ICC > 0.90 was found after DDA for all but two contours, relevant absolute CDC differences were observed in clinical cases: Prostate I/II showed maximum differences in bladder V28Gy (10.2/7.6%), while for cervix, liver, and lymph node the highest differences were found for rectum D2cm
Conclusion
UNASSIGNED
Overall, high agreement was found between the different DIR and DDA implementations. Case- and algorithm-dependent differences were observed, leading to potentially clinically relevant results. Larger studies are needed to define future DDA-guidelines.
Identifiants
pubmed: 38883145
doi: 10.1016/j.phro.2024.100588
pii: S2405-6316(24)00058-7
pmc: PMC11176923
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
100588Informations de copyright
© 2024 The Author(s).
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
MM and DT report institutional collaborations including financial and non-financial support by Elekta AB, Philips, TheraPanacea, Dr. Sennewald, Brainlab and PTW Freiburg. MM acknowledges funding through the German Research Council (DFG), grants no. MU 4603/1-1 (PAK997/1) and ZI 736/2-1. HZ is partly supported by the grant R01-EB028324 from National Institute of Biomedical Imaging andBioengineering, NIH. All other authors do not declare financial interests/personal relationships.