In-room imaging is a prerequisite for adaptive proton therapy. The use of onboard cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) imaging, which is routinely acquired for patient position verification, can enable daily dose reconstructions and plan adaptation decisions. Image quality deficiencies though, hamper dose calculation accuracy and make corrections of CBCTs a necessity. This study compared three methods to correct CBCTs and create synthetic CTs that are suitable for proton dose calculations. CBCTs, planning CTs and repeated CTs (rCT) from 33 H&N cancer patients were used to compare a deep convolutional neural network (DCNN), deformable image registration (DIR) and an analytical image-based correction method (AIC) for synthetic CT (sCT) generation. Image quality of sCTs was evaluated by comparison with a same-day rCT, using mean absolute error (MAE), mean error (ME), Dice similarity coefficient (DSC), structural non-uniformity (SNU) and signal/contrast-to-noise ratios (SNR/CNR) as metrics. Dosimetric accuracy was investigated in an intracranial setting by performing gamma analysis and calculating range shifts. Neural network-based sCTs resulted in the lowest MAE and ME (37/2 HU) and the highest DSC (0.96). While DIR and AIC generated images with a MAE of 44/77 HU, a ME of −8/1 HU and a DSC of 0.94/0.90. Gamma and range shift analysis showed almost no dosimetric difference between DCNN and DIR based sCTs. The lower image quality of AIC based sCTs affected dosimetric accuracy and resulted in lower pass ratios and higher range shifts. Patient-specific differences highlighted the advantages and disadvantages of each method. For the set of patients, the DCNN created synthetic CTs with the highest image quality. Accurate proton dose calculations were achieved by both DCNN and DIR based sCTs. The AIC method resulted in lower image quality and dose calculation accuracy was reduced compared to the other methods.
Background and purpose Motion‐induced uncertainties hamper the clinical implementation of pencil beam scanning proton therapy (PBS‐PT). Prospective pretreatment evaluations only provide multiscenario predictions without giving a clear conclusion for the actual treatment. Therefore, in this proof‐of‐concept study we present a methodology for a fraction‐wise retrospective four‐dimensional (4D) dose reconstruction and accumulation aiming at the evaluation of treatment quality during and after treatment. Material and methods We implemented an easy‐to‐use, script‐based 4D dose assessment of PBS‐PT for patients with moving tumors in a commercially available treatment planning system. This 4D dose accumulation uses treatment delivery log files and breathing pattern records of each fraction as well as weekly repeated 4D‐CT scans acquired during the treatment course. The approach was validated experimentally and was executed for an exemplary dataset of a lung cancer patient. Results The script‐based 4D dose reconstruction and accumulation was implemented successfully, requiring minimal user input and a reasonable processing time (around 10 min for a fraction dose assessment). An experimental validation using a dynamic CIRS thorax phantom confirmed the precision of the 4D dose reconstruction methodology. In a proof‐of‐concept study, the accumulation of 33 reconstructed fraction doses showed a linear increase of D98 values. Projected treatment course D98 values revealed a CTV underdosage after fraction 25. This loss of target coverage was confirmed in a dose volume histogram comparison of the nominal, the projected (after 16 fractions) and the accumulated (after 33 fractions) dose distribution. Conclusions The presented method allows for the assessment of the conformity between planned and delivered dose as the treatment course progresses. The implemented approach considers the influence of changing patient anatomy and variations in the breathing pattern. This facilitates treatment quality evaluation and supports decisions regarding plan adaptation. In a next step, this approach will be applied to a larger patient cohort to investigate its capability as 4D quality control and decision support tool for treatment adaptation.
Cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT)- and magnetic resonance (MR)-images allow a daily observation of patient anatomy but are not directly suited for accurate proton dose calculations. This can be overcome by creating synthetic CTs (sCT) using deep convolutional neural networks. In this study, we compared sCTs based on CBCTs and MRs for head and neck (H&N) cancer patients in terms of image quality and proton dose calculation accuracy. A dataset of 27 H&N-patients, treated with proton therapy (PT), containing planning CTs (pCTs), repeat CTs, CBCTs and MRs were used to train two neural networks to convert either CBCTs or MRs into sCTs. Image quality was quantified by calculating mean absolute error (MAE), mean error (ME) and Dice similarity coefficient (DSC) for bones. The dose evaluation consisted of a systematic non-clinical analysis and a clinical recalculation of actually used proton treatment plans. Gamma analysis was performed for non-clinical and clinical treatment plans. For clinical treatment plans also dose to targets and organs at risk (OARs) and normal tissue complication probabilities (NTCP) were compared. CBCT-based sCTs resulted in higher image quality with an average MAE of 40 ± 4 HU and a DSC of 0.95, while for MR-based sCTs a MAE of 65 ± 4 HU and a DSC of 0.89 was observed. Also in clinical proton dose calculations, sCTCBCT achieved higher average gamma pass ratios (2%/2 mm criteria) than sCTMR (96.1% vs. 93.3%). Dose-volume histograms for selected OARs and NTCP-values showed a very small difference between sCTCBCT and sCTMR and a high agreement with the reference pCT. CBCT- and MR-based sCTs have the potential to enable accurate proton dose calculations valuable for daily adaptive PT. Significant image quality differences were observed but did not affect proton dose calculation accuracy in a similar manner. Especially the recalculation of clinical treatment plans showed high agreement with the pCT for both sCTCBCT and sCTMR.
The relative biological effectiveness (RBE) of protons is highly variable and difficult to quantify. However, RBE is related to the local ionization density, which can be related to the physical measurable dose weighted linear energy transfer (LET D ). The aim of this study was to validate the LET D calculations for proton therapy beams implemented in a commercially available treatment planning system (TPS) using microdosimetry measurements and independent LET D calculations (Open-MCsquare (MCS)).The TPS (RayStation v6R) was used to generate treatment plans on the CIRS-731-HN anthropomorphic phantom for three anatomical sites (brain, nasopharynx, neck) for a spherical target (Ø = 5 cm) with uniform target dose to calculate the LET D distribution. Measurements were performed at the University Medical Center Groningen proton therapy center (Proteus Plus, IBA) using a µ + -probe utilizing silicon on insulator microdosimeters capable of detecting lineal energies as low as 0.15 keV µm −1 in tissue. Dose averaged mean lineal energy γ D depth-profiles were measured for 70 and 130 MeV spots in water and for the three treatment plans in water and an anthropomorphic phantom. The γ D measurements were compared to the LET D calculated in the TPS and MCS independent dose calculation engine. D • γ D was compared to D • LET D in terms of a gamma-index with a distance-to-agreement criteria of 2 mm and increasing dose difference criteria to determine the criteria for which a 90% pass rate was accomplished.Measurements of D • γ D were in good agreement with the D • LET D calculated in the TPS and MCS. The 90% passing rate threshold was reached at different D • LET D difference criteria for single spots (TPS: 1% MCS: 1%), treatment plans in water (TPS: 3% MCS: 6%) and treatment plans in an anthropomorphic phantom (TPS: 6% MCS: 1%).We conclude that D • LET D calculations accuracy in the RayStation TPS and open MCSquare are within 6%, and sufficient for clinical D • LET D evaluation and optimization. These findings remove an important obstacle in the road towards clinical implementation of D • LET D evaluation and optimization of proton therapy treatment plans. Novelty and significanceThe dose weighed linear energy transfer (LET D ) distribution can be calculated for proton therapy treatment plans by Monte Carlo dose engines. The relative biological effectiveness (RBE) of protons is known to vary with the LET D distribution. Therefore, there exists a need for accurate calculation of PAPER RECEIVED
Purpose Adaptive proton therapy (APT) of lung cancer patients requires frequent volumetric imaging of diagnostic quality. Cone‐beam CT (CBCT) can provide these daily images, but x‐ray scattering limits CBCT‐image quality and hampers dose calculation accuracy. The purpose of this study was to generate CBCT‐based synthetic CTs using a deep convolutional neural network (DCNN) and investigate image quality and clinical suitability for proton dose calculations in lung cancer patients. Methods A dataset of 33 thoracic cancer patients, containing CBCTs, same‐day repeat CTs (rCT), planning‐CTs (pCTs), and clinical proton treatment plans, was used to train and evaluate a DCNN with and without a pCT‐based correction method. Mean absolute error (MAE), mean error (ME), peak signal‐to‐noise ratio, and structural similarity were used to quantify image quality. The evaluation of clinical suitability was based on recalculation of clinical proton treatment plans. Gamma pass ratios, mean dose to target volumes and organs at risk, and normal tissue complication probabilities (NTCP) were calculated. Furthermore, proton radiography simulations were performed to assess the HU‐accuracy of sCTs in terms of range errors. Results On average, sCTs without correction resulted in a MAE of 34 ± 6 HU and ME of 4 ± 8 HU. The correction reduced the MAE to 31 ± 4HU (ME to 2 ± 4HU). Average 3%/3 mm gamma pass ratios increased from 93.7% to 96.8%, when the correction was applied. The patient specific correction reduced mean proton range errors from 1.5 to 1.1 mm. Relative mean target dose differences between sCTs and rCT were below ± 0.5% for all patients and both synthetic CTs (with/without correction). NTCP values showed high agreement between sCTs and rCT (<2%). Conclusion CBCT‐based sCTs can enable accurate proton dose calculations for APT of lung cancer patients. The patient specific correction method increased the image quality and dosimetric accuracy but had only a limited influence on clinically relevant parameters.
Background: 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 D 98 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.
For radiation therapy, it is crucial to ensure that the delivered dose matches the planned dose. Errors in the dose calculations done in the treatment planning system (TPS), treatment delivery errors, other software bugs or data corruption during transfer might lead to significant differences between predicted and delivered doses. As such, patient specific quality assurance (QA) of dose distributions, through experimental validation of individual fields, is necessary. These measurement based approaches, however, are performed with 2D detectors, with limited resolution and in a water phantom. Moreover, they are work intensive and often impose a bottleneck to treatment efficiency. In this work, we investigated the potential to replace measurement-based approach with a simulation-based patient specific QA using a Monte Carlo (MC) code as independent dose calculation engine in combination with treatment log files. Our developed QA platform is composed of a web interface, servers and computation scripts, and is capable to autonomously launch simulations, identify and report dosimetric inconsistencies. To validate the beam model of independent MC engine, in-water simulations of mono-energetic layers and 30 SOBP-type dose distributions were performed. Average Gamma passing ratio 99 ± 0.5% for criteria 2%/2 mm was observed. To demonstrate feasibility of the proposed approach, 10 clinical cases such as head and neck, intracranial indications and craniospinal axis, were retrospectively evaluated via the QA platform. The results obtained via QA platform were compared to QA results obtained by measurement-based approach. This comparison demonstrated consistency between the methods, while the proposed approach significantly reduced in-room time required for QA procedures.
Reflection electron energy loss spectra from some insulating materials (CaCO3, Li2CO3, and SiO2) taken at relatively high incoming electron energies (5-40 keV) are analyzed. Here, one is bulk sensitive and a well-defined onset of inelastic excitations is observed from which one can infer the value of the band gap. An estimate of the band gap was obtained by fitting the spectra with a procedure that includes the recoil shift and recoil broadening affecting these measurements. The width of the elastic peak is directly connected to the mean kinetic energy of the atom in the material (Doppler broadening). The experimentally obtained mean kinetic energies of the O, C, Li, Ca, and Si atoms are compared with the calculated ones, and good agreement is found, especially if the effect of multiple scattering is taken into account. It is demonstrated experimentally that the onset of the inelastic excitation is also affected by Doppler broadening. Aided by this understanding, we can obtain a good fit of the elastic peak and the onset of inelastic excitations. For SiO2, good agreement is obtained with the well-established value of the band gap (8.9 eV) only if it is assumed that the intensity near the edge scales as (E - Egap)(1.5). For CaCO3, the band gap obtained here (7 eV) is about 1 eV larger than the previous experimental value, whereas the value for Li2CO3 (7.5 eV) is the first experimental estimate.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.