Predictive Models to Determine Clinically Relevant Deviations in Delivered Dose for Head and Neck Cancer

Optimal timing of re-planning for head and neck adaptive radiotherapy

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Adaptive radiotherapy (ART) relies on re-planning to correct treatment variations, but the optimal timing of re-planning to account for dose changes in head and neck organs at risk (OARs) is still under investigation. We aimed to find out the optimal timing of re-planning in head and neck ART.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A total of 110 head and neck cancer patients were retrospectively enrolled. A semi auto-segmentation method was applied to obtain the weekly mean dose (Dmean) to OARs. The K-nearest-neighbour method was used for missing data imputation of weekly Dmean. A dose deviation map was built using the planning Dmean and weekly Dmean values and then used to simulate different ART scenarios consisting of 1 to 6 re-plannings. The difference between accumulated Dmean and planning Dmean before re-planning (ΔDmean_acc_noART) and after re-planning (ΔDmean_acc_ART) were evaluated and compared.

RESULTS

Among all the OARs, supraglottic showed the largest ΔDmean_acc_noART (1.23 ± 3.13 Gy) and most cases of ΔDmean_acc_noART > 3 Gy (26 patients). The 3rd week is suggested in the optimal timing of re-planning for 10 OARs. For all the organs except arytenoid, 2 re-plannings were able to guarantee the ΔDmean_acc_ART below 3 Gy while the average |ΔDmean_acc_ART| was below 1 Gy. ART scenarios of 2_4, 3_4, 3_5 (week of re-planning separated with "_") were able to guarantee ΔDmean_acc_ART of 99 % of patients below 3 Gy simultaneously for 19 OARs.

CONCLUSIONS

The optimal timing of re-planning was suggested for different organs at risk in head and neck adaptive radiotherapy. Generic scenarios of timing and frequency for re-planning can be applied to guarantee the increase of accumulated mean dose within 3 Gy simultaneously for multiple organs.

Prospects for online adaptive radiation therapy (ART) for head and neck cancer

BACKGROUND

The aim of the present study is to examine the impact of kV-CBCT-based online adaptive radiation therapy (ART) on dosimetric parameters in comparison to image-guided-radiotherapy (IGRT) in consecutive patients with tumors in the head and neck region from a prospective registry.

METHODS

The study comprises all consecutive patients with tumors in the head and neck area who were treated with kV-CBCT-based online ART or IGRT-modus at the linear-accelerator ETHOS™. As a measure of effectiveness, the equivalent-uniform-dose was calculated for the CTV (EUDCTV) and organs-at-risk (EUDOAR) and normalized to the prescribed dose. As an important determinant for the need of ART the interfractional shifts of anatomic landmarks related to the tongue were analyzed and compared to the intrafractional shifts. The latter determine the performance of the adapted dose distribution on the verification CBCT2 postadaptation.

RESULTS

Altogether 59 consecutive patients with tumors in the head-and-neck-area were treated from 01.12.2021 to 31.01.2023. Ten of all 59 patients (10/59; 16.9%) received at least one phase within a treatment course with ART. Of 46 fractions in the adaptive mode, irradiation was conducted in 65.2% of fractions with the adaptive-plan, the scheduled-plan in the remaining. The dispersion of the distributions of EUDCTV-values from the 46 dose fractions differed significantly between the scheduled and adaptive plans (Ansari-Bradley-Test, p = 0.0158). Thus, the 2.5th percentile of the EUDCTV-values by the adaptive plans amounted 97.1% (95% CI 96.6-99.5%) and by the scheduled plans 78.1% (95% CI 61.8-88.7%). While the EUDCTV for the accumulated dose distributions stayed above 95% at PTV-margins of ≥ 3 mm for all 8 analyzed treatment phases the scheduled plans did for margins ≥ 5 mm. The intrafractional anatomic shifts of all 8 measured anatomic landmarks were smaller than the interfractional with overall median values of 8.5 mm and 5.5 mm (p < 0.0001 for five and p < 0.05 for all parameters, pairwise comparisons, signed-rank-test). The EUDOAR-values for the larynx and the parotid gland were significantly lower for the adaptive compared with the scheduled plans (Wilcoxon-test, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

The mobile tongue and tongue base showed considerable interfractional variations. While PTV-margins of 5 mm were sufficient for IGRT, ART showed the potential of decreasing PTV-margins and spare dose to the organs-at-risk.

Investigation of autosegmentation techniques on T2-weighted MRI for off-line dose reconstruction in MR-linac workflow for head and neck cancers

BACKGROUND

In order to accurately accumulate delivered dose for head and neck cancer patients treated with the Adapt to Position workflow on the 1.5T magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-linear accelerator (MR-linac), the low-resolution T2-weighted MRIs used for daily setup must be segmented to enable reconstruction of the delivered dose at each fraction.

PURPOSE

In this pilot study, we evaluate various autosegmentation methods for head and neck organs at risk (OARs) on on-board setup MRIs from the MR-linac for off-line reconstruction of delivered dose.

METHODS

Seven OARs (parotid glands, submandibular glands, mandible, spinal cord, and brainstem) were contoured on 43 images by seven observers each. Ground truth contours were generated using a simultaneous truth and performance level estimation (STAPLE) algorithm. Twenty total autosegmentation methods were evaluated in ADMIRE: 1-9) atlas-based autosegmentation using a population atlas library (PAL) of 5/10/15 patients with STAPLE, patch fusion (PF), random forest (RF) for label fusion; 10-19) autosegmentation using images from a patient's 1-4 prior fractions (individualized patient prior [IPP]) using STAPLE/PF/RF; 20) deep learning (DL) (3D ResUNet trained on 43 ground truth structure sets plus 45 contoured by one observer). Execution time was measured for each method. Autosegmented structures were compared to ground truth structures using the Dice similarity coefficient, mean surface distance (MSD), Hausdorff distance (HD), and Jaccard index (JI). For each metric and OAR, performance was compared to the inter-observer variability using Dunn's test with control. Methods were compared pairwise using the Steel-Dwass test for each metric pooled across all OARs. Further dosimetric analysis was performed on three high-performing autosegmentation methods (DL, IPP with RF and 4 fractions [IPP_RF_4], IPP with 1 fraction [IPP_1]), and one low-performing (PAL with STAPLE and 5 atlases [PAL_ST_5]). For five patients, delivered doses from clinical plans were recalculated on setup images with ground truth and autosegmented structure sets. Differences in maximum and mean dose to each structure between the ground truth and autosegmented structures were calculated and correlated with geometric metrics.

RESULTS

DL and IPP methods performed best overall, all significantly outperforming inter-observer variability and with no significant difference between methods in pairwise comparison. PAL methods performed worst overall; most were not significantly different from the inter-observer variability or from each other. DL was the fastest method (33 s per case) and PAL methods the slowest (3.7-13.8 min per case). Execution time increased with a number of prior fractions/atlases for IPP and PAL. For DL, IPP_1, and IPP_RF_4, the majority (95%) of dose differences were within ± 250 cGy from ground truth, but outlier differences up to 785 cGy occurred. Dose differences were much higher for PAL_ST_5, with outlier differences up to 1920 cGy. Dose differences showed weak but significant correlations with all geometric metrics (R2 between 0.030 and 0.314).

CONCLUSIONS

The autosegmentation methods offering the best combination of performance and execution time are DL and IPP_1. Dose reconstruction on on-board T2-weighted MRIs is feasible with autosegmented structures with minimal dosimetric variation from ground truth, but contours should be visually inspected prior to dose reconstruction in an end-to-end dose accumulation workflow.

Triggering daily online adaptive radiotherapy in the pelvis: Dosimetric effects and procedural implications of trigger parameter-value selection

BACKGROUND

Online adaptive radiotherapy (ART) can address dosimetric consequences of variations in anatomy by creating a new plan during treatment. However, ART is time- and labor-intensive and should be implemented in a resource-conscious way. Adaptive triggers composed of parameter-value pairs may direct the judicious use of online ART.

PURPOSE

This work analyzed our clinical experience using CBCT-based daily online ART to demonstrate how a conceptual framework based on adaptive triggers affects the dosimetric and procedural impact of ART.

METHODS

Sixteen patients across several pelvic sites were treated with CBCT-based daily online ART. Differences in standardized dose metrics were compared between the original plan, the original plan recalculated on the daily anatomy, and an adaptive plan. For each metric, trigger values were analyzed in terms of the proportion of treatments adapted and the distribution of metric values.

RESULTS

Target coverage metrics were compromised due to anatomic variation with the average change per treatment ranging from -0.90 to -0.05 Gy, -0.47 to -0.02 Gy, -0.31 to -0.01 Gy, and -12.45% to -2.65% for PTV D99%, PTV D95%, CTV D99%, and CTV V100%, respectively. These were improved using the adaptive plan (-0.03 to 0.01 Gy, -0.02 to 0.00 Gy, -0.03 to 0.00 Gy, and -4.70% to 0.00%, respectively). Increasingly strict triggers resulted in a non-linear increase in the proportion of treatments adapted and improved the distribution of metric values with diminishing returns. Some organ-at-risk (OAR) metrics were compromised by anatomic variation and improved using the adaptive plan, but changes in most OAR metrics were randomly distributed.

CONCLUSIONS

Daily online ART improved target coverage across multiple pelvic treatment sites and techniques. These effects were larger than those for OAR metrics, suggesting that maintaining target coverage was our primary benefit of CBCT-based daily online ART. Analyses like these can determine online ART triggers from a cost-benefit perspective.

An efficient strategy to select head and neck cancer patients for adaptive radiotherapy

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Adaptive radiotherapy (ART) is workload intensive but only benefits a subgroup of patients. We aimed to develop an efficient strategy to select candidates for ART in the first two weeks of head and neck cancer (HNC) radiotherapy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This study retrospectively enrolled 110 HNC patients who underwent modern photon radiotherapy with at least 5 weekly in-treatment re-scan CTs. A semi auto-segmentation method was applied to obtain the weekly mean dose (Dmean) to OARs. A comprehensive NTCP-profile was applied to obtain NTCP's. The difference between planning and actual values of Dmean (ΔDmean) and dichotomized difference of clinical relevance (BIOΔNTCP) were used for modelling to determine the cut-off maximum ΔDmean of OARs in week 1 and 2 (maxΔDmean_1 and maxΔDmean_2). Four strategies to select candidates for ART, using cut-off maxΔDmean were compared.

RESULTS

The Spearman's rank correlation test showed significant positive correlation between maxΔDmean and BIOΔNTCP (p-value <0.001). For major BIOΔNTCP (>5%) of acute and late toxicity, 10.9% and 4.5% of the patients were true candidates for ART. Strategy C using both cut-off maxΔDmean_1 (3.01 and 5.14 Gy) and cut-off maxΔDmean_2 (3.41 and 5.30 Gy) showed the best sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values (0.92, 0.82, 0.38, 0.99 for acute toxicity and 1.00, 0.92, 0.38, 1.00 for late toxicity, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

We propose an efficient selection strategy for ART that is able to classify the subgroup of patients with >5% BIOΔNTCP for late toxicity using imaging in the first two treatment weeks.

Evaluation of dose accumulation methods and workflows utilising cone beam computed tomography images

INTRODUCTION

Various adaptive radiation therapy (ART) methods have emerged, with little consensus amongst the literature as to which is most appropriate. This study aimed to compare dose mapping (DM) versus Monte Carlo recalculation (MCR), using cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) images when utilised in automated ART dose accumulation workflows in the MIM Maestro software package.

METHODS

The treatment plans for 38 cancer patients (19 prostate and 19 head and neck cases) were used to perform DM or MCR retrospectively upon CBCTs acquired during treatment, which were then deformably registered to the planning CT (DR-pCT) to facilitate dose accumulation. Dose-volume and region-of-interest data were extracted for the planning target volumes and organs at risk. Intraclass correlation (ICC) values and Bland-Altman plots were utilised to compare DM versus MCR doses on the CBCT images as well as CBCT versus DR-pCT doses.

RESULTS

When comparing DM and MCR on CBCTs, the differences across dose level mean dose differences were mostly within a ±5% level of agreement based on the Bland-Altman plots, with over 67% of ICC values over 0.9 and indicative of good correlation. When these distributions were deformed back to the planning CT, the agreement was reduced considerably, with larger differences (exceeding ±5%) resulting from workflow-related issues.

CONCLUSION

The results emphasise the need to consider and make adaptations to minimise the effect of workflows on algorithm performance. Manual user intervention, refined departmental protocols and further developments to the MIM Maestro software will enhance the use of this tool.

Retrospective Clinical Evaluation of a Decision-Support Software for Adaptive Radiotherapy of Head and Neck Cancer Patients

Purpose

This study aimed to evaluate the clinical need for an automated decision-support software platform for adaptive radiation therapy (ART) of head and neck cancer (HNC) patients.

Methods

We tested RTapp (SegAna), a new ART software platform for deciding when a treatment replan is needed, to investigate a set of 27 HNC patients’ data retrospectively. For each fraction, the software estimated key components of ART such as daily dose distribution and cumulative doses received by targets and organs at risk (OARs) from daily 3D imaging in real-time. RTapp also included a prediction algorithm that analyzed dosimetric parameter (DP) trends against user-specified thresholds to proactively trigger adaptive re-planning up to four fractions ahead. The DPs evaluated for ART were based on treatment planning dose constraints. Warning (V₉₅<95%) and adaptation (V₉₅<93%) thresholds were set for PTVs, while OAR adaptation dosimetric endpoints of +10% (DE₁₀) were set for all D_max and D_mean DPs. Any threshold violation at end of treatment (EOT) triggered a review of the DP trends to determine the threshold-crossing fraction Fx when the violations occurred. The prediction model accuracy was determined as the difference between calculated and predicted DP values with 95% confidence intervals (CI₉₅).

Results

RTapp was able to address the needs of treatment adaptation. Specifically, we identified 18/27 studies (67%) for violating PTV coverage or parotid D_mean at EOT. Twelve PTVs had V₉₅<95% (mean coverage decrease of −6.8 ± 2.9%) including six flagged for adaptation at median Fx= 6 (range, 1–16). Seventeen parotids were flagged for exceeding D_mean dose constraints with a median increase of +2.60 Gy (range, 0.99–6.31 Gy) at EOT, including nine with DP>DE₁₀. The differences between predicted and calculated PTV V₉₅ and parotid D_mean was up to 7.6% (mean ± CI₉₅, −2.7 ± 4.1%) and 5 Gy (mean ± CI₉₅, 0.3 ± 1.6 Gy), respectively. The most accurate predictions were obtained closest to the threshold-crossing fraction. For parotids, the results showed that Fx ranged between fractions 1 and 23, with a lack of specific trend demonstrating that the need for treatment adaptation may be verified for every fraction.

Conclusion

Integrated in an ART clinical workflow, RTapp aids in predicting whether specific treatment would require adaptation up to four fractions ahead of time.

Evaluation and risk factors of volume and dose differences of selected structures in patients with head and neck cancer treated on Helical TomoTherapy by using Deformable Image Registration tool

Introduction: The aim of this study was the evaluation of volume and dose differences in selected structures in patients with head and neck cancer during treatment on Helical TomoTherapy (HT) using a commercially available deformable image registration (DIR) tool. We attempted to identify anatomical and clinical predictive factors for significant volume changes probability.

Material and methods: According to our institutional protocol, we retrospectively evaluated the group of 20 H&N cancer patients treated with HT who received Adaptive Radiotherapy (ART) due to soft tissue alterations spotted on daily MVCT. We compared volumes on initial computed tomography (iCT) and replanning computed tomography (rCT) for clinical target volumes (CTV) – CTV1 (the primary tumor) and CTV2 (metastatic lymph nodes), parotid glands (PG) and body contour (B-body). To estimate the planned and delivered dose discrepancy, the dose from the original plan was registered and deformed to create a simulation of dose distribution on rCT (DIR-rCT).

Results: The decision to replan was made at the 4th week of RT (N = 6; 30%). The average volume reduction in parotid right PG[R] and left PG[L] was 4.37 cc (18.9%) (p < 0.001) and 3.77 cc (16.8%) (p = 0.004), respectively. In N = 13/20 cases, the delivered dose was greater than the planned dose for PG[R] of mean 3 Gy (p < 0.001), and in N = 6/20 patients for PG[L] the mean of 3.6 Gy (p = 0.031). Multivariate regression analysis showed a very strong predictor explaining 88% (R2 = 0.88) and 83% (R2 = 0.83) of the variance based on the mean dose of iPG[R] and iPG[L] (p < 0.001), respectively. No statistically significant correlation between volume changes and risk factors was found.

Conclusions: Dosimetric changes to the target demonstrated the validity of replanning. A DIR tool can be successfully used for dose deformation and ART qualification, significantly reducing the workload of radiotherapy centers. In addition, the mean dose for PG was a significant predictor that may indicate the need for a replan.

Criteria for Verification and Replanning Based on the Adaptive Radiotherapy Protocol "Best for Adaptive Radiotherapy" in Head and Neck Cancer

No clear criteria have yet been established to guide decision-making for patient selection and the optimal timing of adaptive radiotherapy (ART) based on image-guided radiotherapy (IGRT). We have developed a novel protocol—the Best for Adaptive Radiotherapy (B-ART) protocol—to guide patient selection for ART. The aim of the present study is to describe this protocol, to evaluate its validity in patients with head and neck (HN) cancer, and to identify the anatomical and clinical predictors of the need for replanning. We retrospectively evaluated 82 patients with HN cancer who underwent helical tomotherapy (HT) and subsequently required replanning due to soft tissue changes upon daily MVCT. Under the proposed criteria, patients with anatomical changes >3 mm on three to four consecutive scans are candidates for ART. We compared the volumes on the initial CT scan (iCT) and the replanning CT (rCT) scan for the clinical target volumes (CTV1, referring to primary tumor or tumor bed and CTV2, metastatic lymph nodes) and for the parotid glands (PG) and body contour (B-body). The patients were stratified by primary tumor localization, clinical stage, and treatment scheme. The main reasons for replanning were: (1) a planning target volume (PTV) outside the body contour (n = 70; 85.4%), (2) PG shrinkage (n = 69; 84.1%), (3) B-body deviations (n = 69; 84.1%), and (4) setup deviations (n = 40; 48.8%). The replanning decision was made, on average, during the fourth week of treatment (n = 47; 57.3%). The mean reductions in the size of the right and left PG volumes were 6.31 cc (20.9%) and 5.98 cc (20.5%), respectively (p < 0.001). The reduction in PG volume was ≥30% in 30 patients (36.6%). The volume reduction in all of the anatomical structures was statistically significant. Four variables—advanced stage disease (T3−T4), chemoradiation, increased weight loss, and oropharyngeal localization—were significantly associated with the need for ART. The B-ART protocol provides clear criteria to eliminate random errors, and to allow for an early response to relevant changes in target volumes.

What information can we gain from performing adaptive radiotherapy of head and neck cancer patients from the past 10 years?

The aim of the review was to present the current literature status about replanning regarding anatomical and dosimetric changes in the target and OARs in the head and neck region during radiotherapy, to discuss and to analyze factors influencing the decision for adaptive radiotherapy of head and neck cancer patients. Significant progress has been made in head and neck patients' evaluation and qualification for adapted radiotherapy over the past ten years. Many factors leading to anatomical and dosimetric changes during treatment have been identified. Based on the literature, the most common factors triggering re-plan are weight loss, tumor and nodal changes, and parotid glands shrinkage. The fluctuations in dose distribution in the clinical area are significant predictive factors for patients' quality of life and the possibility of recovery. It has been shown that re-planning influence clinical outcomes: local control, disease free survival and overall survival. Regarding literature studies, it seems that adaptive radiotherapy would be the most beneficial for tumors of immense volume or those in the nearest proximity of the OARs. All researchers agree that the timing of re-planning is a crucial challenge, and there are still no clear consensus guidelines for time or criteria of re-planning. Nowadays, thanks to significant technological progress, the decision is mostly made based on observation and supported with IGRT verification. Although further research is still needed, adaptive strategies are evolving and now became the state of the art of modern radiotherapy.

Dynamic stochastic deep learning approaches for predicting geometric changes in head and neck cancer

Objective.Modern radiotherapy stands to benefit from the ability to efficiently adapt plans during treatment in response to setup and geometric variations such as those caused by internal organ deformation or tumor shrinkage. A promising strategy is to develop a framework, which given an initial state defined by patient-attributes, can predict future states based on pre-learned patterns from a well-defined patient population.Approach.Here, we investigate the feasibility of predicting patient anatomical changes, defined as a joint state of volume and daily setup changes, across a fractionated treatment schedule using two approaches. The first is based on a new joint framework employing quantum mechanics in combination with deep recurrent neural networks, denoted QRNN. The second approach is developed based on a classical framework, which models patient changes as a Markov process, denoted MRNN. We evaluated the performance characteristics of these two approaches on a dataset of 125 head and neck cancer patients, which was supplemented by synthetic data generated using a generative adversarial network. Model performance was evaluated using area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) scores.Main results.The MRNN framework had slightly better performance than the QRNN framework, with MRNN (QRNN) validation AUC scores of 0.742±0.021 (0.675±0.036), 0.709±0.026 (0.656±0.021), 0.724±0.036 (0.652±0.044), and 0.698±0.016 (0.605±0.035) for system state vector sizes of 4, 6, 8, and 10, respectively. Of these, only the results from the two higher order states had statistically significant differences(p<0.05).A similar trend was also observed when the models were applied to an external testing dataset of 20 patients, yielding MRNN (QRNN) AUC scores of 0.707 (0.623), 0.687 (0.608), 0.723 (0.669), and 0.697 (0.609) for states vectors sizes of 4, 6, 8, and 10, respectively.Significance.These results suggest that both stochastic models have potential value in predicting patient changes during the course of adaptive radiotherapy.

Rigid and Deformable Image Registration for Radiation Therapy: A Self-Study Evaluation Guide for NRG Oncology Clinical Trial Participation

PURPOSE

The registration of multiple imaging studies to radiation therapy computed tomography simulation, including magnetic resonance imaging, positron emission tomography-computed tomography, etc. is a widely used strategy in radiation oncology treatment planning, and these registrations have valuable roles in image guidance, dose composition/accumulation, and treatment delivery adaptation. The NRG Oncology Medical Physics subcommittee formed a working group to investigate feasible workflows for a self-study credentialing process of image registration commissioning.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

The American Association of Physicists in Medicine (AAPM) Task Group 132 (TG132) report on the use of image registration and fusion algorithms in radiation therapy provides basic guidelines for quality assurance and quality control of the image registration algorithms and the overall clinical process. The report recommends a series of tests and the corresponding metrics that should be evaluated and reported during commissioning and routine quality assurance, as well as a set of recommendations for vendors. The NRG Oncology medical physics subcommittee working group found incompatibility of some digital phantoms with commercial systems. Thus, there is still a need to provide further recommendations in terms of compatible digital phantoms, clinical feasible workflow, and achievable thresholds, especially for future clinical trials involving deformable image registration algorithms. Nine institutions participated and evaluated 4 commonly used commercial imaging registration software and various versions in the field of radiation oncology.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS

The NRG Oncology Working Group on image registration commissioning herein provides recommendations on the use of digital phantom/data sets and analytical software access for institutions and clinics to perform their own self-study evaluation of commercial imaging systems that might be employed for coregistration in radiation therapy treatment planning and image guidance procedures. Evaluation metrics and their corresponding values were given as guidelines to establish practical tolerances. Vendor compliance for image registration commissioning was evaluated, and recommendations were given for future development.

Initial Feasibility and Clinical Implementation of Daily MR-Guided Adaptive Head and Neck Cancer Radiation Therapy on a 1.5T MR-Linac System: Prospective R-IDEAL 2a/2b Systematic Clinical Evaluation of Technical Innovation

PURPOSE

This prospective study is, to our knowledge, the first report of daily adaptive radiation therapy (ART) for head and neck cancer (HNC) using a 1.5T magnetic resonance imaging-linear accelerator (MR-linac) with particular focus on safety and feasibility and dosimetric results of an online rigid registration-based adapt to position (ATP) workflow.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Ten patients with HNC received daily ART on a 1.5T/7MV MR-linac, 6 using ATP only and 4 using ATP with 1 offline adapt-to-shape replan. Setup variability with custom immobilization masks was assessed by calculating the mean systematic error (M), standard deviation of the systematic error (Σ), and standard deviation of the random error (σ) of the isocenter shifts. Quality assurance was performed with a cylindrical diode array using 3%/3 mm γ criteria. Adaptive treatment plans were summed for each patient to compare the delivered dose with the planned dose from the reference plan. The impact of dosimetric variability between adaptive fractions on the summation plan doses was assessed by tracking the number of optimization constraint violations at each individual fraction.

RESULTS

The random errors (mm) for the x, y, and z isocenter shifts, respectively, were M = -0.3, 0.7, 0.1; Σ = 3.3, 2.6, 1.4; and σ = 1.7, 2.9, 1.0. The median (range) γ pass rate was 99.9% (90.9%-100%). The differences between the reference and summation plan doses were -0.61% to 1.78% for the clinical target volume and -11.74% to 8.11% for organs at risk (OARs), although an increase greater than 2% in OAR dose only occurred in 3 cases, each for a single OAR. All cases had at least 2 fractions with 1 or more constraint violations. However, in nearly all instances, constraints were still met in the summation plan despite multiple single-fraction violations.

CONCLUSIONS

Daily ART on a 1.5T MR-linac using an online ATP workflow is safe and clinically feasible for HNC and results in delivered doses consistent with planned doses.

Predictive dose accumulation for HN adaptive radiotherapy

During radiation therapy (RT) of head and neck (HN) cancer, the shape and volume of the parotid glands (PG) may change significantly, resulting in clinically relevant deviations of delivered dose from the planning dose. Early and accurate longitudinal prediction of PG anatomical changes during the RT can be valuable to inform decisions on plan adaptation. We developed a deep neural network for longitudinal predictions using the displacement fields (DFs) between the planning computed tomography (pCT) and weekly cone beam computed tomography (CBCT). Sixty-three HN patients treated with volumetric modulated arc were retrospectively studied. We calculated DFs between pCT and week 1-3 CBCT by B-spline and Demon deformable image registration (DIR). The resultant DFs were subsequently used as input to our novel network to predict the week 4 to 6 DFs for generating predicted weekly PG contours and weekly dose distributions. For evaluation, we measured dice similarity (DICE), and the uncertainty of accumulated dose. Moreover, we compared the detection accuracies of candidates for adaptive radiotherapy (ART) when the trigger criteria were mean dose difference more than 10%, 7.5%, and 5%, respectively. The DICE of ipsilateral/contralateral PG at week 4 to 6 using the prediction model trained with B-spline were 0.81 [Formula: see text] 0.07/0.81 [Formula: see text] 0.04 (week 4), 0.79 [Formula: see text] 0.06/0.81 [Formula: see text] 0.05 (week 5) and 0.78 [Formula: see text] 0.06/0.82 [Formula: see text] (week 6). The DICE with the Demons model were 0.78 [Formula: see text] 0.08/0.82 [Formula: see text] 0.03 (week 4), 0.77 [Formula: see text] 0.07/0.82 [Formula: see text] 0.04 (week 5) and 0.75 [Formula: see text] 0.07/0.82 [Formula: see text] 0.02 (week 6). The dose volume histogram (DVH) analysis with the predicted accumulated dose showed the feasibility of predicting dose uncertainty due to the PG anatomical changes. The AUC of ART candidate detection with our predictive model was over 0.90. In conclusion, the proposed network was able to predict future anatomical changes and dose uncertainty of PGs with clinically acceptable accuracy, and hence can be readily integrated into the ART workflow.