Institut für Medizintechnik und Medizininformatik
Dauerhafte URI für die Sammlunghttps://irf.fhnw.ch/handle/11654/23
Listen
3 Ergebnisse
Ergebnisse nach Hochschule und Institut
Publikation Deep learning–based 4D‐synthetic CTs from sparse‐view CBCTs for dose calculations in adaptive proton therapy(Wiley, 27.08.2022) Thummerer, Adrian; Seller Oria, Carmen; Zaffino, Paolo; Visser, Sabine; Meijers, Arturs; Guterres Marmitt, Gabriel; Wijsman, Robin; Seco, Joao; Langendijk, Johannes Albertus; Spadea, Maria Francesca; Both, Stefan; Knopf, AntjeBackground Time-resolved 4D cone beam–computed tomography (4D-CBCT) allows a daily assessment of patient anatomy and respiratory motion. However, 4D-CBCTs suffer from imaging artifacts that affect the CT number accuracy and prevent accurate proton dose calculations. Deep learning can be used to correct CT numbers and generate synthetic CTs (sCTs) that can enable CBCT-based proton dose calculations. Purpose In this work, sparse view 4D-CBCTs were converted into 4D-sCT utilizing a deep convolutional neural network (DCNN). 4D-sCTs were evaluated in terms of image quality and dosimetric accuracy to determine if accurate proton dose calculations for adaptive proton therapy workflows of lung cancer patients are feasible. Methods A dataset of 45 thoracic cancer patients was utilized to train and evaluate a DCNN to generate 4D-sCTs, based on sparse view 4D-CBCTs reconstructed from projections acquired with a 3D acquisition protocol. Mean absolute error (MAE) and mean error were used as metrics to evaluate the image quality of single phases and average 4D-sCTs against 4D-CTs acquired on the same day. The dosimetric accuracy was checked globally (gamma analysis) and locally for target volumes and organs-at-risk (OARs) (lung, heart, and esophagus). Furthermore, 4D-sCTs were also compared to 3D-sCTs. To evaluate CT number accuracy, proton radiography simulations in 4D-sCT and 4D-CTs were compared in terms of range errors. The clinical suitability of 4D-sCTs was demonstrated by performing a 4D dose reconstruction using patient specific treatment delivery log files and breathing signals. Results 4D-sCTs resulted in average MAEs of 48.1 ± 6.5 HU (single phase) and 37.7 ± 6.2 HU (average). The global dosimetric evaluation showed gamma pass ratios of 92.3% ± 3.2% (single phase) and 94.4% ± 2.1% (average). The clinical target volume showed high agreement in D98 between 4D-CT and 4D-sCT, with differences below 2.4% for all patients. Larger dose differences were observed in mean doses of OARs (up to 8.4%). The comparison with 3D-sCTs showed no substantial image quality and dosimetric differences for the 4D-sCT average. Individual 4D-sCT phases showed slightly lower dosimetric accuracy. The range error evaluation revealed that lung tissues cause range errors about three times higher than the other tissues. Conclusion In this study, we have investigated the accuracy of deep learning–based 4D-sCTs for daily dose calculations in adaptive proton therapy. Despite image quality differences between 4D-sCTs and 3D-sCTs, comparable dosimetric accuracy was observed globally and locally. Further improvement of 3D and 4D lung sCTs could be achieved by increasing CT number accuracy in lung tissues.01A - Beitrag in wissenschaftlicher ZeitschriftPublikation Anthropomorphic lung phantom based validation of in-room proton therapy 4D-CBCT image correction for dose calculation(Elsevier, 02/2022) Bondesson, David; Meijers, Arturs; Janssens, Guillaume; Rit, Simon; Rabe, Moritz; Kamp, Florian; Niepel, Katharina; Otter, Lydia A. den; Both, Stefan; Brousmiche, Sebastien; Dinkel, Julien; Belka, Claus; Parodi, Katia; Kurz, Christopher; Landry, Guillaume; Knopf, AntjePurpose Ventilation-induced tumour motion remains a challenge for the accuracy of proton therapy treatments in lung patients. We investigated the feasibility of using a 4D virtual CT (4D-vCT) approach based on deformable image registration (DIR) and motion-aware 4D CBCT reconstruction (MA-ROOSTER) to enable accurate daily proton dose calculation using a gantry-mounted CBCT scanner tailored to proton therapy. Methods Ventilation correlated data of 10 breathing phases were acquired from a porcine ex-vivo functional lung phantom using CT and CBCT. 4D-vCTs were generated by (1) DIR of the mid-position 4D-CT to the mid-position 4D-CBCT (reconstructed with the MA-ROOSTER) using a diffeomorphic Morphons algorithm and (2) subsequent propagation of the obtained mid-position vCT to the individual 4D-CBCT phases. Proton therapy treatment planning was performed to evaluate dose calculation accuracy of the 4D-vCTs. A robust treatment plan delivering a nominal dose of 60 Gy was generated on the average intensity image of the 4D-CT for an approximated internal target volume (ITV). Dose distributions were then recalculated on individual phases of the 4D-CT and the 4D-vCT based on the optimized plan. Dose accumulation was performed for 4D-vCT and 4D-CT using DIR of each phase to the mid position, which was chosen as reference. Dose based on the 4D-vCT was then evaluated against the dose calculated on 4D-CT both, phase-by-phase as well as accumulated, by comparing dose volume histogram (DVH) values (Dmean, D2%, D98%, D95%) for the ITV, and by a 3D-gamma index analysis (global, 3%/3 mm, 5 Gy, 20 Gy and 30 Gy dose thresholds). Results Good agreement was found between the 4D-CT and 4D-vCT-based ITV-DVH curves. The relative differences ((CT-vCT)/CT) between accumulated values of ITV Dmean, D2%, D95% and D98% for the 4D-CT and 4D-vCT-based dose distributions were −0.2%, 0.0%, −0.1% and −0.1%, respectively. Phase specific values varied between −0.5% and 0.2%, −0.2% and 0.5%, −3.5% and 1.5%, and −5.7% and 2.3%. The relative difference of accumulated Dmean over the lungs was 2.3% and Dmean for the phases varied between −5.4% and 5.8%. The gamma pass-rates with 5 Gy, 20 Gy and 30 Gy thresholds for the accumulated doses were 96.7%, 99.6% and 99.9%, respectively. Phase-by-phase comparison yielded pass-rates between 86% and 97%, 88% and 98%, and 94% and 100%. Conclusions Feasibility of the suggested 4D-vCT workflow using proton therapy specific imaging equipment was shown. Results indicate the potential of the method to be applied for daily 4D proton dose estimation.01A - Beitrag in wissenschaftlicher ZeitschriftPublikation Robustness assessment of clinical adaptive proton and photon radiotherapy for oesophageal cancer in the model-based approach(Elsevier, 12/2022) Visser, Sabine; O. Ribeiro, Cássia; Dieters, Margriet; Mul, Veronique E.; Niezink, Anne G.H.; van der Schaaf, Arjen; Langendijk, Johannes A.; Korevaar, Erik W.; Both, Stefan; Muijs, Christina T.; Knopf, AntjePurpose In the Netherlands, oesophageal cancer (EC) patients are selected for intensity modulated proton therapy (IMPT) using the expected normal tissue complication probability reduction (ΔNTCP) when treating with IMPT compared to volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT). In this study, we evaluate the robustness of the first EC patients treated with IMPT in our clinic in terms of target and organs-at-risk (OAR) dose with corresponding NTCP, as compared to VMAT. Materials and Methods For 20 consecutive EC patients, clinical IMPT and VMAT plans were created on the average planning 4DCT. Both plans were robustly evaluated on weekly repeated 4DCTs and if target coverage degraded, replanning was performed. Target coverage was evaluated for complete treatment trajectories with and without replanning. The planned and accumulated mean lung dose (MLD) and mean heart dose (MHD) were additionally evaluated and translated into NTCP. Results Replanning in the clinic was performed more often for IMPT (15x) than would have been needed for VMAT (8x) (p = 0.11). Both adaptive treatments would have resulted in adequate accumulated target dose coverage. Replanning in the first week of treatment had most clinical impact, as anatomical changes resulting in insufficient accumulated target coverage were already observed at this stage. No differences were found in MLD between the planned dose and the accumulated dose. Accumulated MHD differed from the planned dose (p < 0.001), but since these differences were similar for VMAT and IMPT (1.0 and 1.5 Gy, respectively), the ΔNTCP remained unchanged. Conclusion Following an adaptive clinical workflow, adequate target dose coverage and stable OAR doses with corresponding NTCPs was assured for both IMPT and VMAT.01A - Beitrag in wissenschaftlicher Zeitschrift