Identifying radiotherapy target volumes in brain cancer by image analysis

Magnetic resonance spectroscopic imaging in gliomas: clinical diagnosis and radiotherapy planning

The reprogramming of cellular metabolism is a hallmark of cancer diagnosis and prognosis. Proton magnetic resonance spectroscopic imaging (MRSI) is a non-invasive diagnostic technique for investigating brain metabolism to establish cancer diagnosis and IDH gene mutation diagnosis as well as facilitate pre-operative planning and treatment response monitoring. By allowing tissue metabolism to be quantified, MRSI provides added value to conventional MRI. MRSI can generate metabolite maps from a single volume or multiple volume elements within the whole brain. Metabolites such as NAA, Cho and Cr, as well as their ratios Cho:NAA ratio and Cho:Cr ratio, have been used to provide tumor diagnosis and aid in radiation therapy planning as well as treatment assessment. In addition to these common metabolites, 2-hydroxygluterate (2HG) has also been quantified using MRSI following the recent discovery of IDH mutations in gliomas. This has opened up targeted drug development to inhibit the mutant IDH pathway. This review provides guidance on MRSI in brain gliomas, including its acquisition, analysis methods, and evolving clinical applications.

Fully automated brain resection cavity delineation for radiation target volume definition in glioblastoma patients using deep learning

Background

Automated brain tumor segmentation methods are computational algorithms that yield tumor delineation from, in this case, multimodal magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). We present an automated segmentation method and its results for resection cavity (RC) in glioblastoma multiforme (GBM) patients using deep learning (DL) technologies.

Methods

Post-operative, T1w with and without contrast, T2w and fluid attenuated inversion recovery MRI studies of 30 GBM patients were included. Three radiation oncologists manually delineated the RC to obtain a reference segmentation. We developed a DL cavity segmentation method, which utilizes all four MRI sequences and the reference segmentation to learn to perform RC delineations. We evaluated the segmentation method in terms of Dice coefficient (DC) and estimated volume measurements.

Results

Median DC of the three radiation oncologist were 0.85 (interquartile range [IQR]: 0.08), 0.84 (IQR: 0.07), and 0.86 (IQR: 0.07). The results of the automatic segmentation compared to the three different raters were 0.83 (IQR: 0.14), 0.81 (IQR: 0.12), and 0.81 (IQR: 0.13) which was significantly lower compared to the DC among raters (chi-square = 11.63, p = 0.04). We did not detect a statistically significant difference of the measured RC volumes for the different raters and the automated method (Kruskal-Wallis test: chi-square = 1.46, p = 0.69). The main sources of error were due to signal inhomogeneity and similar intensity patterns between cavity and brain tissues.

Conclusions

The proposed DL approach yields promising results for automated RC segmentation in this proof of concept study. Compared to human experts, the DC are still subpar.

Evaluation of Effective Parameters on Quality of Magnetic Resonance Imaging-computed Tomography Image Fusion in Head and Neck Tumors for Application in Treatment Planning

Background:

In radiation therapy, computed tomography (CT) simulation is used for treatment planning to define the location of tumor. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-CT image fusion leads to more efficient tumor contouring. This work tried to identify the practical issues for the combination of CT and MRI images in real clinical cases. The effect of various factors is evaluated on image fusion quality.

Materials and Methods:

In this study, the data of thirty patients with brain tumors were used for image fusion. The effect of several parameters on possibility and quality of image fusion was evaluated. These parameters include angles of the patient's head on the bed, slices thickness, slice gap, and height of the patient's head.

Results:

According to the results, the first dominating factor on quality of image fusion was the difference slice gap between CT and MRI images (cor = 0.86, P < 0.005) and second factor was the angle between CT and MRI slice in the sagittal plane (cor = 0.75, P < 0.005). In 20% of patients, this angle was more than 28° and image fusion was not efficient. In 17% of patients, difference slice gap in CT and MRI was >4 cm and image fusion quality was <25%.

Conclusion:

The most important problem in image fusion is that MRI images are taken without regard to their use in treatment planning. In general, parameters related to the patient position during MRI imaging should be chosen to be consistent with CT images of the patient in terms of location and angle.