1
|
Rudat V, Shi Y, Zhao R, Yu W. Setup margins based on the inter- and intrafractional setup error of left-sided breast cancer radiotherapy using deep inspiration breath-hold technique (DIBH) and surface guided radiotherapy (SGRT). J Appl Clin Med Phys 2024; 25:e14271. [PMID: 38273673 PMCID: PMC11163505 DOI: 10.1002/acm2.14271] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/23/2023] [Revised: 10/27/2023] [Accepted: 12/29/2023] [Indexed: 01/27/2024] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE The use of volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT), simultaneous integrated boost (SIB), and hypofractionated regimen requires adequate patient setup accuracy to achieve an optimal outcome. The purpose of this study was to assess the setup accuracy of patients receiving left-sided breast cancer radiotherapy using deep inspiration breath-hold technique (DIBH) and surface guided radiotherapy (SGRT) and to calculate the corresponding setup margins. METHODS The patient setup accuracy between and within radiotherapy fractions was measured by comparing the 6DOF shifts made by the SGRT system AlignRT with the shifts made by kV-CBCT. Three hundred and three radiotherapy fractions of 23 left-sided breast cancer patients using DIBH and SGRT were used for the analysis. All patients received pre-treatment DIBH training and visual feedback during DIBH. An analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used to test patient setup differences for statistical significance. The corresponding setup margins were calculated using the van Herk's formula. RESULTS The intrafractional patient setup accuracy was significantly better than the interfractional setup accuracy (p < 0.001). The setup margin for the combined inter- and intrafractional setup error was 4, 6, and 4 mm in the lateral, longitudinal, and vertical directions if based on SGRT alone. The intrafractional error contributed ≤1 mm to the calculated setup margins. CONCLUSION With SGRT, excellent intrafractional and acceptable interfractional patient setup accuracy can be achieved for the radiotherapy of left-sided breast cancer using DIBH and modern radiation techniques. This allows for reducing the frequency of kV-CBCTs, thereby saving treatment time and radiation exposure.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Volker Rudat
- Department of Radiation OncologyJiahui International Cancer Center Shanghai, Jiahui HealthShanghaiChina
| | - Yanyan Shi
- Department of Radiation OncologyJiahui International Cancer Center Shanghai, Jiahui HealthShanghaiChina
| | - Ruping Zhao
- Department of Radiation OncologyJiahui International Cancer Center Shanghai, Jiahui HealthShanghaiChina
| | - Wei Yu
- Department of Radiation OncologyJiahui International Cancer Center Shanghai, Jiahui HealthShanghaiChina
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Finnegan RN, Quinn A, Booth J, Belous G, Hardcastle N, Stewart M, Griffiths B, Carroll S, Thwaites DI. Cardiac substructure delineation in radiation therapy - A state-of-the-art review. J Med Imaging Radiat Oncol 2024. [PMID: 38757728 DOI: 10.1111/1754-9485.13668] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/24/2024] [Accepted: 04/29/2024] [Indexed: 05/18/2024]
Abstract
Delineation of cardiac substructures is crucial for a better understanding of radiation-related cardiotoxicities and to facilitate accurate and precise cardiac dose calculation for developing and applying risk models. This review examines recent advancements in cardiac substructure delineation in the radiation therapy (RT) context, aiming to provide a comprehensive overview of the current level of knowledge, challenges and future directions in this evolving field. Imaging used for RT planning presents challenges in reliably visualising cardiac anatomy. Although cardiac atlases and contouring guidelines aid in standardisation and reduction of variability, significant uncertainties remain in defining cardiac anatomy. Coupled with the inherent complexity of the heart, this necessitates auto-contouring for consistent large-scale data analysis and improved efficiency in prospective applications. Auto-contouring models, developed primarily for breast and lung cancer RT, have demonstrated performance comparable to manual contouring, marking a significant milestone in the evolution of cardiac delineation practices. Nevertheless, several key concerns require further investigation. There is an unmet need for expanding cardiac auto-contouring models to encompass a broader range of cancer sites. A shift in focus is needed from ensuring accuracy to enhancing the robustness and accessibility of auto-contouring models. Addressing these challenges is paramount for the integration of cardiac substructure delineation and associated risk models into routine clinical practice, thereby improving the safety of RT for future cancer patients.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Robert N Finnegan
- Northern Sydney Cancer Centre, Royal North Shore Hospital, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
- Institute of Medical Physics, School of Physics, University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Alexandra Quinn
- Northern Sydney Cancer Centre, Royal North Shore Hospital, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Jeremy Booth
- Northern Sydney Cancer Centre, Royal North Shore Hospital, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
- Institute of Medical Physics, School of Physics, University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Gregg Belous
- Australian e-Health Research Centre, Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia
| | - Nicholas Hardcastle
- Department of Physical Sciences, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
- Sir Peter MacCallum Department of Oncology, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
| | - Maegan Stewart
- Northern Sydney Cancer Centre, Royal North Shore Hospital, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
- School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Medicine and Health, University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Brooke Griffiths
- Northern Sydney Cancer Centre, Royal North Shore Hospital, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Susan Carroll
- Northern Sydney Cancer Centre, Royal North Shore Hospital, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
- School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Medicine and Health, University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
| | - David I Thwaites
- Institute of Medical Physics, School of Physics, University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
- Radiotherapy Research Group, Leeds Institute of Medical Research, St James's Hospital and University of Leeds, Leeds, UK
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Lee SH, Geng H, Arnold J, Caruana R, Fan Y, Rosen MA, Apte AP, Deasy JO, Bradley JD, Xiao Y. Interpretable Machine Learning for Choosing Radiation Dose-volume Constraints on Cardio-pulmonary Substructures Associated with Overall Survival in NRG Oncology RTOG 0617. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2023; 117:1270-1286. [PMID: 37343707 PMCID: PMC10728350 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2023.06.009] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/28/2022] [Revised: 05/08/2023] [Accepted: 06/11/2023] [Indexed: 06/23/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE Our objective was to use interpretable machine learning for choosing dose-volume constraints on cardiopulmonary substructures (CPSs) associated with overall survival (OS) in radiation therapy for locally advanced non-small cell lung cancer. METHODS AND MATERIALS A total of 428 patients with non-small cell lung cancer were randomly divided into training/validation/test subsets (n = 230/149/49) in Radiation Therapy Oncology Group 0617. Manual or automated contouring was performed to segment CPSs, including heart, atria, ventricles, aorta, left/right ventricle/atrium (LV+RV+LA+RA), inferior/superior vena cava, pulmonary artery, and pericardium. Peri (pericardium-heart), rest (heart-[LV+RV+LA+RA]), clinical target volume (CTV), and lungs-CTV contours were also obtained. Dose-volume histogram features were extracted, including minimum/mean dose to the hottest x% volume (Dx%[Gy]/MOHx%[Gy]), minimum/mean/maximum dose, percent volume receiving at least xGy (VxGy[%]), and overlapping volume of each CPS with planning target volume (PTV_Voverlap[%]). Clinical parameters were collected from the National Clinical Trials Network/Community oncology research program data archive. Feature selection was performed using a series of multiblock sparse partial least squares regression, stability selection supervised principal component analysis, and Boruta. Explainable boosting machine (EBM) was trained using a conditional survival distribution-based approach for imputing censored data, treating survival analysis as a regression problem. Harrell's C-index was used to evaluate OS discrimination performance of EBM, Cox proportional hazards (CPH), random survival forest, extreme gradient boosting survival embeddings, and CPH deep neural network (DeepSurv) models in the test set. Dose-volume constraints were selected using the binary change point detection algorithm in Shapley additive explanations-based partial dependence functions. RESULTS Selected features included LA_V60Gy(%), pericardium_D30%(Gy), lungs-CTV_PTV_Voverlap(%), RA_V55Gy(%), and received_cons_chemo. All models ranked LA_V60Gy(%) as the most important feature. EBM achieved the best performance for predicting OS, followed by extreme gradient boosting survival embeddings, random survival forest, DeepSurv, and CPH (C-index = 0.653, 0.646, 0.642, 0.638, and 0.632). EBM global explanations suggested that LA_V60Gy(%) < 25.6, lungs-CTV_PTV_Voverlap(%) < 1.1, pericardium_D30%(Gy) < 18.9, RA_V55Gy(%) < 19.5, and received_cons_chemo = 'Yes' for improved OS. CONCLUSIONS EBM can be used to discriminate OS while also guiding dose-volume constraint selection for optimal management of cardiac toxicity in lung cancer radiation therapy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sang Ho Lee
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
| | - Huaizhi Geng
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
| | - Jacinta Arnold
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
| | | | - Yong Fan
- Department of Radiology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
| | - Mark A Rosen
- Department of Radiology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
| | - Aditya P Apte
- Department of Medical Physics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - Joseph O Deasy
- Department of Medical Physics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - Jeffrey D Bradley
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
| | - Ying Xiao
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Baroudi H, Huy Minh Nguyen CI, Maroongroge S, Smith BD, Niedzielski JS, Shaitelman SF, Melancon A, Shete S, Whitaker TJ, Mitchell MP, Yvonne Arzu I, Duryea J, Hernandez S, El Basha D, Mumme R, Netherton T, Hoffman K, Court L. Automated contouring and statistical process control for plan quality in a breast clinical trial. Phys Imaging Radiat Oncol 2023; 28:100486. [PMID: 37712064 PMCID: PMC10498301 DOI: 10.1016/j.phro.2023.100486] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/04/2023] [Revised: 08/21/2023] [Accepted: 08/21/2023] [Indexed: 09/16/2023] Open
Abstract
Background and purpose Automatic review of breast plan quality for clinical trials is time-consuming and has some unique challenges due to the lack of target contours for some planning techniques. We propose using an auto-contouring model and statistical process control to independently assess planning consistency in retrospective data from a breast radiotherapy clinical trial. Materials and methods A deep learning auto-contouring model was created and tested quantitatively and qualitatively on 104 post-lumpectomy patients' computed tomography images (nnUNet; train/test: 80/20). The auto-contouring model was then applied to 127 patients enrolled in a clinical trial. Statistical process control was used to assess the consistency of the mean dose to auto-contours between plans and treatment modalities by setting control limits within three standard deviations of the data's mean. Two physicians reviewed plans outside the limits for possible planning inconsistencies. Results Mean Dice similarity coefficients comparing manual and auto-contours was above 0.7 for breast clinical target volume, supraclavicular and internal mammary nodes. Two radiation oncologists scored 95% of contours as clinically acceptable. The mean dose in the clinical trial plans was more variable for lymph node auto-contours than for breast, with a narrower distribution for volumetric modulated arc therapy than for 3D conformal treatment, requiring distinct control limits. Five plans (5%) were flagged and reviewed by physicians: one required editing, two had clinically acceptable variations in planning, and two had poor auto-contouring. Conclusions An automated contouring model in a statistical process control framework was appropriate for assessing planning consistency in a breast radiotherapy clinical trial.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Hana Baroudi
- The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center UTHealth Houston Graduate School of Biomedical Sciences, Houston, TX, USA
- Department of Radiation Physics, Division of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Callistus I. Huy Minh Nguyen
- Department of Radiation Physics, Division of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Sean Maroongroge
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Division of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Benjamin D. Smith
- Department of Breast Radiation Oncology, Division of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Joshua S. Niedzielski
- Department of Radiation Physics, Division of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Simona F. Shaitelman
- Department of Breast Radiation Oncology, Division of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Adam Melancon
- Department of Radiation Physics, Division of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Sanjay Shete
- The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center UTHealth Houston Graduate School of Biomedical Sciences, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Thomas J. Whitaker
- Department of Radiation Physics, Division of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Melissa P. Mitchell
- Department of Breast Radiation Oncology, Division of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Isidora Yvonne Arzu
- Department of Breast Radiation Oncology, Division of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Jack Duryea
- Department of Radiation Physics, Division of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Soleil Hernandez
- The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center UTHealth Houston Graduate School of Biomedical Sciences, Houston, TX, USA
- Department of Radiation Physics, Division of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Daniel El Basha
- The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center UTHealth Houston Graduate School of Biomedical Sciences, Houston, TX, USA
- Department of Radiation Physics, Division of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Raymond Mumme
- Department of Radiation Physics, Division of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Tucker Netherton
- Department of Radiation Physics, Division of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Karen Hoffman
- Department of Breast Radiation Oncology, Division of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Laurence Court
- The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center UTHealth Houston Graduate School of Biomedical Sciences, Houston, TX, USA
- Department of Radiation Physics, Division of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Shen J, Gu P, Wang Y, Wang Z. Advances in automatic delineation of target volume and cardiac substructure in breast cancer radiotherapy (Review). Oncol Lett 2023; 25:110. [PMID: 36817059 PMCID: PMC9932716 DOI: 10.3892/ol.2023.13697] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/14/2022] [Accepted: 01/06/2023] [Indexed: 02/05/2023] Open
Abstract
Postoperative adjuvant radiotherapy plays an important role in the treatment of patients with breast cancer. With the continuous development of radiotherapeutic technologies, the requirements for radiotherapeutic accuracy are increasingly high. The accuracy of target volume and organ at risk delineation significantly affects the effect of radiotherapy. Automatic delineation software has been continuously developed for the automatic delineation of target areas and organs at risk. Automatic segmentation based on an atlas and deep learning is a hot topic in current clinical research. Automatic delineation can not only reduce the workload and delineation times, but also establish a uniform delineation standard and reduce inter-observer and intra-observer differences. In patients with breast cancer, especially in patients who undergo left breast radiotherapy, the protection of the heart is particularly important. Treating the whole heart as an organ at risk cannot meet the clinical needs, and it is necessary to limit the dose to specific cardiac substructures. The present review discusses the importance of automatic delineation of target volume and cardiac substructure in radiotherapy for patients with breast cancer.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jingjing Shen
- School of Health Science and Engineering, University of Shanghai for Science and Technology, Shanghai 200438, P.R. China
| | - Peihua Gu
- Department of Oncology and Radiotherapy, Shidong Hospital Affiliated to University of Shanghai for Science and Technology, Shanghai 200438, P.R. China
| | - Yun Wang
- Department of Oncology and Radiotherapy, Shidong Hospital Affiliated to University of Shanghai for Science and Technology, Shanghai 200438, P.R. China
| | - Zhongming Wang
- Department of Oncology and Radiotherapy, Shidong Hospital Affiliated to University of Shanghai for Science and Technology, Shanghai 200438, P.R. China,Correspondence to: Dr Zhongming Wang, Department of Oncology and Radiotherapy, Shidong Hospital Affiliated to University of Shanghai for Science and Technology, 999 Shiguang Road, Shanghai 200438, P.R. China, E-mail:
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Mackay K, Bernstein D, Glocker B, Kamnitsas K, Taylor A. A Review of the Metrics Used to Assess Auto-Contouring Systems in Radiotherapy. Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol) 2023; 35:354-369. [PMID: 36803407 DOI: 10.1016/j.clon.2023.01.016] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/25/2022] [Revised: 12/05/2022] [Accepted: 01/23/2023] [Indexed: 02/01/2023]
Abstract
Auto-contouring could revolutionise future planning of radiotherapy treatment. The lack of consensus on how to assess and validate auto-contouring systems currently limits clinical use. This review formally quantifies the assessment metrics used in studies published during one calendar year and assesses the need for standardised practice. A PubMed literature search was undertaken for papers evaluating radiotherapy auto-contouring published during 2021. Papers were assessed for types of metric and the methodology used to generate ground-truth comparators. Our PubMed search identified 212 studies, of which 117 met the criteria for clinical review. Geometric assessment metrics were used in 116 of 117 studies (99.1%). This includes the Dice Similarity Coefficient used in 113 (96.6%) studies. Clinically relevant metrics, such as qualitative, dosimetric and time-saving metrics, were less frequently used in 22 (18.8%), 27 (23.1%) and 18 (15.4%) of 117 studies, respectively. There was heterogeneity within each category of metric. Over 90 different names for geometric measures were used. Methods for qualitative assessment were different in all but two papers. Variation existed in the methods used to generate radiotherapy plans for dosimetric assessment. Consideration of editing time was only given in 11 (9.4%) papers. A single manual contour as a ground-truth comparator was used in 65 (55.6%) studies. Only 31 (26.5%) studies compared auto-contours to usual inter- and/or intra-observer variation. In conclusion, significant variation exists in how research papers currently assess the accuracy of automatically generated contours. Geometric measures are the most popular, however their clinical utility is unknown. There is heterogeneity in the methods used to perform clinical assessment. Considering the different stages of system implementation may provide a framework to decide the most appropriate metrics. This analysis supports the need for a consensus on the clinical implementation of auto-contouring.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- K Mackay
- The Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK; The Royal Marsden Hospital, London, UK.
| | - D Bernstein
- The Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK; The Royal Marsden Hospital, London, UK
| | - B Glocker
- Department of Computing, Imperial College London, South Kensington Campus, London, UK
| | - K Kamnitsas
- Department of Computing, Imperial College London, South Kensington Campus, London, UK; Department of Engineering Science, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - A Taylor
- The Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK; The Royal Marsden Hospital, London, UK
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Haseltine JM, Apte A, Jackson A, Yorke E, Yu AF, Plodkowski A, Wu A, Peleg A, Al-Sadawi M, Iocolano M, Gelblum D, Shaverdian N, Simone CB, Rimner A, Gomez DR, Shepherd AF, Thor M. Association of cardiac calcium burden with overall survival after radiotherapy for non-small cell lung cancer. Phys Imaging Radiat Oncol 2023; 25:100410. [PMID: 36687507 PMCID: PMC9852638 DOI: 10.1016/j.phro.2023.01.001] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/17/2022] [Revised: 12/05/2022] [Accepted: 01/03/2023] [Indexed: 01/07/2023] Open
Abstract
Background and purpose Coronary calcifications are associated with coronary artery disease in patients undergoing radiotherapy (RT) for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). We quantified calcifications in the coronary arteries and aorta and investigated their relationship with overall survival (OS) in patients treated with definitive RT (Def-RT) or post-operative RT (PORT). Materials and methods We analyzed 263 NSCLC patients treated from 2004 to 2017. Calcium burden was ascertained with a Hounsfield unit (HU) cutoff of > 130 in addition to a deep learning (DL) plaque estimator. The HU cutoff volumes were defined for coronary arteries (PlaqueCoro) and coronary arteries and aorta combined (PlaqueCoro+Ao), while the DL estimator ranged from 0 (no plaque) to 3 (high plaque). Patient and treatment characteristics were explored for association with OS. Results The median PlaqueCoro and PlaqueCoro+Ao was 0.75 cm3 and 0.87 cm3 in the Def-RT group and 0.03 cm3 and 0.52 cm3 in the PORT group. The median DL estimator was 2 in both cohorts. In Def-RT, large PlaqueCoro (HR:1.11 (95%CI:1.04-1.19); p = 0.008), and PlaqueCoro+Ao (HR:1.06 (95%CI:1.02-1.11); p = 0.03), and poor Karnofsky Performance Status (HR: 0.97 (95%CI: 0.94-0.99); p = 0.03) were associated with worse OS. No relationship was identified between the plaque volumes and OS in PORT, or between the DL plaque estimator and OS in either Def-RT or PORT. Conclusions Coronary artery calcification assessed from RT planning CT scans was significantly associated with OS in patients who underwent Def-RT for NSCLC. This HU thresholding method can be straightforwardly implemented such that the role of calcifications can be further explored.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Justin M. Haseltine
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY 10065, USA
| | - Aditya Apte
- Department of Medical Physics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY 10065, USA
| | - Andrew Jackson
- Department of Medical Physics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY 10065, USA
| | - Ellen Yorke
- Department of Medical Physics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY 10065, USA
| | - Anthony F. Yu
- Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY 10065, USA
| | - Andrew Plodkowski
- Department of Radiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY 10065, USA
| | - Abraham Wu
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY 10065, USA
| | - Ariel Peleg
- Department of Medicine, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY 10029, USA
| | - Mohammed Al-Sadawi
- Department of Medicine, Stony Brook University Hospital, Stony Brook, NY 11794, USA
| | - Michelle Iocolano
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104, USA
| | - Daphna Gelblum
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY 10065, USA
| | - Narek Shaverdian
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY 10065, USA
| | - Charles B. Simone
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY 10065, USA
| | - Andreas Rimner
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY 10065, USA
| | - Daniel R. Gomez
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY 10065, USA
| | - Annemarie F. Shepherd
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY 10065, USA
- Corresponding authors.
| | - Maria Thor
- Department of Medical Physics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY 10065, USA
- Corresponding authors.
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Chun J, Chang JS, Oh C, Park I, Choi MS, Hong CS, Kim H, Yang G, Moon JY, Chung SY, Suh YJ, Kim JS. Synthetic contrast-enhanced computed tomography generation using a deep convolutional neural network for cardiac substructure delineation in breast cancer radiation therapy: a feasibility study. Radiat Oncol 2022; 17:83. [PMID: 35459221 PMCID: PMC9034542 DOI: 10.1186/s13014-022-02051-0] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/27/2021] [Accepted: 04/11/2022] [Indexed: 12/25/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Adjuvant radiation therapy improves the overall survival and loco-regional control in patients with breast cancer. However, radiation-induced heart disease, which occurs after treatment from incidental radiation exposure to the cardiac organ, is an emerging challenge. This study aimed to generate synthetic contrast-enhanced computed tomography (SCECT) from non-contrast CT (NCT) using deep learning (DL) and investigate its role in contouring cardiac substructures. We also aimed to determine its applicability for a retrospective study on the substructure volume-dose relationship for predicting radiation-induced heart disease. METHODS We prepared NCT-CECT cardiac scan pairs of 59 patients. Of these, 35, 4, and 20 pairs were used for training, validation, and testing, respectively. We adopted conditional generative adversarial network as a framework to generate SCECT. SCECT was validated in the following three stages: (1) The similarity between SCECT and CECT was evaluated; (2) Manual contouring was performed on SCECT and CECT with sufficient intervals and based on this, the geometric similarity of cardiac substructures was measured between them; (3) The treatment plan was quantitatively analyzed based on the contours of SCECT and CECT. RESULTS While the mean values (± standard deviation) of the mean absolute error, peak signal-to-noise ratio, and structural similarity index measure between SCECT and CECT were 20.66 ± 5.29, 21.57 ± 1.85, and 0.77 ± 0.06, those were 23.95 ± 6.98, 20.67 ± 2.34, and 0.76 ± 0.07 between NCT and CECT, respectively. The Dice similarity coefficients and mean surface distance between the contours of SCECT and CECT were 0.81 ± 0.06 and 2.44 ± 0.72, respectively. The dosimetry analysis displayed error rates of 0.13 ± 0.27 Gy and 0.71 ± 1.34% for the mean heart dose and V5Gy, respectively. CONCLUSION Our findings displayed the feasibility of SCECT generation from NCT and its potential for cardiac substructure delineation in patients who underwent breast radiation therapy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jaehee Chun
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Yonsei Cancer Center, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, South Korea.,Medical Physics and Biomedical Engineering Lab (MPBEL), Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, South Korea.,Oncosoft Inc, Seoul, South Korea
| | - Jee Suk Chang
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Yonsei Cancer Center, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, South Korea.,Medical Physics and Biomedical Engineering Lab (MPBEL), Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, South Korea.,Oncosoft Inc, Seoul, South Korea
| | - Caleb Oh
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Yonsei Cancer Center, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, South Korea.,Medical Physics and Biomedical Engineering Lab (MPBEL), Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, South Korea
| | - InKyung Park
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Yonsei Cancer Center, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, South Korea.,Medical Physics and Biomedical Engineering Lab (MPBEL), Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, South Korea
| | - Min Seo Choi
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Yonsei Cancer Center, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, South Korea.,Medical Physics and Biomedical Engineering Lab (MPBEL), Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, South Korea
| | - Chae-Seon Hong
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Yonsei Cancer Center, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, South Korea.,Medical Physics and Biomedical Engineering Lab (MPBEL), Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, South Korea
| | - Hojin Kim
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Yonsei Cancer Center, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, South Korea.,Medical Physics and Biomedical Engineering Lab (MPBEL), Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, South Korea
| | - Gowoon Yang
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Yonsei Cancer Center, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, South Korea
| | - Jin Young Moon
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Yonsei Cancer Center, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, South Korea
| | - Seung Yeun Chung
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Yonsei Cancer Center, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, South Korea
| | - Young Joo Suh
- Department of Radiology, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, South Korea
| | - Jin Sung Kim
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Yonsei Cancer Center, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, South Korea. .,Medical Physics and Biomedical Engineering Lab (MPBEL), Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, South Korea. .,Oncosoft Inc, Seoul, South Korea.
| |
Collapse
|