Evaluation of an Open Source Registration Package for Automatic Contour Propagation in Online Adaptive Intensity-Modulated Proton Therapy of Prostate Cancer

Review and recommendations on deformable image registration uncertainties for radiotherapy applications

Deformable image registration (DIR) is a versatile tool used in many applications in radiotherapy (RT). DIR algorithms have been implemented in many commercial treatment planning systems providing accessible and easy-to-use solutions. However, the geometric uncertainty of DIR can be large and difficult to quantify, resulting in barriers to clinical practice. Currently, there is no agreement in the RT community on how to quantify these uncertainties and determine thresholds that distinguish a good DIR result from a poor one. This review summarises the current literature on sources of DIR uncertainties and their impact on RT applications. Recommendations are provided on how to handle these uncertainties for patient-specific use, commissioning, and research. Recommendations are also provided for developers and vendors to help users to understand DIR uncertainties and make the application of DIR in RT safer and more reliable.

Evaluation of DIR algorithm performance in real patients for radiotherapy treatments: A systematic review of operator-dependent strategies

PURPOSE

The performance of deformable medical image registration (DIR) algorithms has become a major concern.

METHODS

We aimed to obtain updated information on DIR algorithm performance quantification through a literature review of articles published between 2010 and 2022. We focused only on studies using operator-based methods to treat real patients. The PubMed, Google Scholar and Embase databases were searched following PRISMA guidelines.

RESULTS

One hundred and seven articles were identified. The mean number of patients and registrations per publication was 20 and 63, respectively. We found 23 different geometric metrics appearing at least twice, and the dosimetric impact of DIR was quantified in 32 articles. Forty-eight different at-risk organs were described, and target volumes were studied in 43 publications. Prostate, head-and-neck and thoracic locations represented more than ¾ of the studied locations. We summarized the type of DIR and the images used, and other key elements. Intra/interobserver variability, threshold values and the correlation between metrics were also discussed.

CONCLUSIONS

This literature review covers the past decade and should facilitate the implementation of DIR algorithms in clinical practice by providing practical and pertinent information to quantify their performance on real patients.

Integrating Structure Propagation Uncertainties in the Optimization of Online Adaptive Proton Therapy Plans

Currently, adaptive strategies require time- and resource-intensive manual structure corrections. This study compares different strategies: optimization without manual structure correction, adaptation with physician-drawn structures, and no adaptation. Strategies were compared for 16 patients with pancreas, liver, and head and neck (HN) cancer with 1-5 repeated images during treatment: 'reference adaptation', with structures drawn by a physician; 'single-DIR adaptation', using a single set of deformably propagated structures; 'multi-DIR adaptation', using robust planning with multiple deformed structure sets; 'conservative adaptation', using the intersection and union of all deformed structures; 'probabilistic adaptation', using the probability of a voxel belonging to the structure in the optimization weight; and 'no adaptation'. Plans were evaluated using reference structures and compared using a scoring system. The reference adaptation with physician-drawn structures performed best, and no adaptation performed the worst. For pancreas and liver patients, adaptation with a single DIR improved the plan quality over no adaptation. For HN patients, integrating structure uncertainties brought an additional benefit. If resources for manual structure corrections would prevent online adaptation, manual correction could be replaced by a fast 'plausibility check', and plans could be adapted with correction-free adaptation strategies. Including structure uncertainties in the optimization has the potential to make online adaptation more automatable.

Evaluation of performance of pelvic CT-MR deformable image registration using two software programs

We assessed the accuracy of deformable image registration (DIR) accuracy between CT and MR images using an open-source software (Elastix, from Utrecht Medical Center) and a commercial software (Velocity AI Ver. 3.2.0 from Varian Medical Systems, Palo Alto, CA, USA) software. Five male patients' pelvic regions were studied using publicly available CT, T1-weighted (T1w) MR, and T2-weighted (T2w) MR images. In the cost function of the Elastix, we used six DIR parameter settings with different regularization weights (Elastix0, Elastix0.01, Elastix0.1, Elastix1, Elastix10, and Elastix100). We used MR Corrected Deformable algorithm for Velocity AI. The Dice similarity coefficient (DSC) and mean distance to agreement (MDA) for the prostate, bladder, rectum and left and right femoral heads were used to evaluate DIR accuracy. Except for the bladder, most algorithms produced good DSC and MDA results for all organs. In our study, the mean DSCs for the bladder ranged from 0.75 to 0.88 (CT-T1w) and from 0.72 to 0.76 (CT-T2w). Similarly, the mean MDA ranges were 2.4 to 4.9 mm (CT-T1w), 4.6 to 5.3 mm (CT-T2w). For the Elastix, CT-T1w was outperformed CT-T2w for both DSCs and MDAs at Elastix0, Elastix0.01, and Elastix0.1. In the case of Velocity AI, no significant differences in DSC and MDA of all organs were observed. This implied that the DIR accuracy of CT and MR images might differ depending on the sequence used.

Dosimetric influence of deformable image registration uncertainties on propagated structures for online daily adaptive proton therapy of lung cancer patients

PURPOSE

A major burden of introducing an online daily adaptive proton therapy (DAPT) workflow is the time and resources needed to correct the daily propagated contours. In this study, we evaluated the dosimetric impact of neglecting the online correction of the propagated contours in a DAPT workflow.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

For five NSCLC patients with nine repeated deep-inspiration breath-hold CTs, proton therapy plans were optimised on the planning CT to deliver 60 Gy-RBE in 30 fractions. All repeated CTs were registered with six different clinically used deformable image registration (DIR) algorithms to the corresponding planning CT. Structures were propagated rigidly and with each DIR algorithm and reference structures were contoured on each repeated CT. DAPT plans were optimised with the uncorrected, propagated structures (propagated DAPT doses) and on the reference structures (ideal DAPT doses), non-adapted doses were recalculated on all repeated CTs.

RESULTS

Due to anatomical changes occurring during the therapy, the clinical target volume (CTV) coverage of the non-adapted doses reduces on average by 9.7% (V95) compared to an ideal DAPT doses. For the propagated DAPT doses, the CTV coverage was always restored (average differences in the CTV V95 < 1% compared to the ideal DAPT doses). Hotspots were always reduced with any DAPT approach.

CONCLUSION

For the patients presented here, a benefit of online DAPT was shown, even if the daily optimisation is based on propagated structures with some residual uncertainties. However, a careful (offline) structure review is necessary and corrections can be included in an offline adaption.