1
|
Schmitz H, Thummerer A, Kawula M, Lombardo E, Parodi K, Belka C, Kamp F, Kurz C, Landry G. ScatterNet for projection-based 4D cone-beam computed tomography intensity correction of lung cancer patients. Phys Imaging Radiat Oncol 2023; 27:100482. [PMID: 37680905 PMCID: PMC10480315 DOI: 10.1016/j.phro.2023.100482] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/05/2023] [Revised: 08/04/2023] [Accepted: 08/11/2023] [Indexed: 09/09/2023] Open
Abstract
Background and purpose: In radiotherapy, dose calculations based on 4D cone beam CTs (4DCBCTs) require image intensity corrections. This retrospective study compared the dose calculation accuracy of a deep learning, projection-based scatter correction workflow (ScatterNet), to slower workflows: conventional 4D projection-based scatter correction (CBCTcor) and a deformable image registration (DIR)-based method (4DvCT). Materials and methods: For 26 lung cancer patients, planning CTs (pCTs), 4DCTs and CBCT projections were available. ScatterNet was trained with pairs of raw and corrected CBCT projections. Corrected projections from ScatterNet and the conventional workflow were reconstructed using MA-ROOSTER, yielding 4DCBCTSN and 4DCBCTcor. The 4DvCT was generated by 4DCT to 4DCBCT DIR, as part of the 4DCBCTcor workflow. Robust intensity modulated proton therapy treatment plans were created on free-breathing pCTs. 4DCBCTSN was compared to 4DCBCTcor and the 4DvCT in terms of image quality and dose calculation accuracy (dose-volume-histogram parameters and 3 % /3 mm gamma analysis). Results: 4DCBCTSN resulted in an average mean absolute error of 87 HU and 102 HU when compared to 4DCBCTcor and 4DvCT respectively. High agreement was observed in targets with median dose differences of 0.4 Gy (4DCBCTSN-4DCBCTcor) and 0.3 Gy (4DCBCTSN-4DvCT). The gamma analysis showed high average 3 % /3 mm pass rates of 96 % for both 4DCBCTSN vs. 4DCBCTcor and 4DCBCTSN vs. 4DvCT. Conclusions: Accurate 4D dose calculations are feasible for lung cancer patients using ScatterNet for 4DCBCT correction. Average scatter correction times could be reduced from 10 min (4DCBCTcor) to 3.9 s , showing the clinical suitability of the proposed deep learning-based method.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Henning Schmitz
- Department of Radiation Oncology, LMU University Hospital, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - Adrian Thummerer
- Department of Radiation Oncology, LMU University Hospital, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - Maria Kawula
- Department of Radiation Oncology, LMU University Hospital, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - Elia Lombardo
- Department of Radiation Oncology, LMU University Hospital, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - Katia Parodi
- Department of Medical Physics, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München (LMU Munich), Garching (Munich), Germany
| | - Claus Belka
- Department of Radiation Oncology, LMU University Hospital, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany
- German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Partner Site Munich, Munich, Germany
- Bavarian Cancer Research Center (BZKF), Munich, Germany
| | - Florian Kamp
- Department of Radiation Oncology, LMU University Hospital, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Cologne, Cologne, Germany
| | - Christopher Kurz
- Department of Radiation Oncology, LMU University Hospital, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - Guillaume Landry
- Department of Radiation Oncology, LMU University Hospital, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany
| |
Collapse
|