Margin verification for hypofractionated prostate radiotherapy using a novel dose accumulation workflow and iterative CBCT

Rapid in vivo EPID image prediction using a combination of analytically calculated attenuation and AI predicted scatter

BACKGROUND

The electronic portal imaging device (EPID) can be used in vivo, to detect on-treatment errors by evaluating radiation exiting a patient. To detect deviations from the planning intent, image predictions need to be modeled based on the patient's anatomy and plan information. To date in vivo transit images have been predicted using Monte Carlo (MC) algorithms. A deep learning approach can make predictions faster than MC and only requires patient information for training.

PURPOSE

To test the feasibility and reliability of creating a deep-learning model with patient data for predicting in vivo EPID images for IMRT treatments.

METHODS

In our approach, the in vivo EPID image was separated into contributions from primary and scattered photons. A primary photon attenuation function was determined by measuring attenuation factors for various thicknesses of solid water. The scatter component of in vivo EPID images was estimated using a convolutional neural network (CNN). The CNN input was a 3-channel image comprised of the non-transit EPID image and ray tracing projections through a pretreatment CBCT. The predicted scatter component was added to the primary attenuation component to give the full predicted in vivo EPID image. We acquired 193 IMRT fields/images from 93 patients treated on the Varian Halcyon. Model training:validation:test dataset ratios were 133:20:40 images. Additional patient plans were delivered to anthropomorphic phantoms, yielding 75 images for further validation. We assessed model accuracy by comparing model-calculated and measured in vivo images with a gamma comparison.

RESULTS

Comparing the model-calculated and measured in vivo images gives a mean gamma pass rate for the training:validation:test datasets of 95.4%:94.1%:92.9% for 3%/3 mm and 98.4%:98.4%:96.8% for 5%/3 mm. For images delivered to phantom data sets the average gamma pass rate was 96.4% (3%/3 mm criteria). In all data sets, the lower passing rates of some images were due to CBCT artifacts and patient motion that occurred between the time of CBCT and treatment.  CONCLUSIONS: The developed deep-learning-based model can generate in vivo EPID images with a mean gamma pass rate greater than 92% (3%/3 mm criteria). This approach provides an alternative to MC prediction algorithms. Image predictions can be made in 30 ms on a standard GPU. In future work, image predictions from this model can be used to detect in vivo treatment errors and on-treatment changes in patient anatomy, providing an additional layer of patient-specific quality assurance.

The use of dose surface maps as a tool to investigate spatial dose delivery accuracy for the rectum during prostate radiotherapy

PURPOSE

This study aims to address the lack of spatial dose comparisons of planned and delivered rectal doses during prostate radiotherapy by using dose-surface maps (DSMs) to analyze dose delivery accuracy and comparing these results to those derived using DVHs.

METHODS

Two independent cohorts were used in this study: twenty patients treated with 36.25 Gy in five fractions (SBRT) and 20 treated with 60 Gy in 20 fractions (IMRT). Daily delivered rectum doses for each patient were retrospectively calculated using daily CBCT images. For each cohort, planned and average-delivered DVHs were generated and compared, as were planned and accumulated DSMs. Permutation testing was used to identify DVH metrics and DSM regions where significant dose differences occurred. Changes in rectal volume and position between planning and delivery were also evaluated to determine possible correlation to dosimetric changes.

RESULTS

For both cohorts, DVHs and DSMs reported conflicting findings on how planned and delivered rectum doses differed from each other. DVH analysis determined average-delivered DVHs were on average 7.1% ± 7.6% (p ≤ 0.002) and 5.0 ± 7.4% (p ≤ 0.021) higher than planned for the IMRT and SBRT cohorts, respectively. Meanwhile, DSM analysis found average delivered posterior rectal wall dose was 3.8 ± 0.6 Gy (p = 0.014) lower than planned in the IMRT cohort and no significant dose differences in the SBRT cohort. Observed dose differences were moderately correlated with anterior-posterior rectal wall motion, as well as PTV superior-inferior motion in the IMRT cohort. Evidence of both these relationships were discernable in DSMs.

CONCLUSION

DSMs enabled spatial investigations of planned and delivered doses can uncover associations with interfraction motion that are otherwise masked in DVHs. Investigations of dose delivery accuracy in radiotherapy may benefit from using DSMs over DVHs for certain organs such as the rectum.

Relationship between hydrogel spacer distribution and dosimetric parameters in linear-accelerator-based stereotactic body radiotherapy for prostate cancer

PURPOSE

To explore the potential of quantitative parameters of the hydrogel spacer distribution as predictors for separating the rectum from the planning target volume (PTV) in linear-accelerator-based stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) for prostate cancer.

METHODS

Fifty-five patients underwent insertion of a hydrogel spacer and were divided into groups 1 and 2 of the PTV separated from and overlapping with the rectum, respectively. Prescribed doses of 36.25-45 Gy in five fractions were delivered to the PTV. The spacer cover ratio (SCR) and hydrogel-implant quality score (HIQS) were calculated.

RESULTS

Dosimetric and quantitative parameters of the hydrogel spacer distribution were compared between the two groups. For PTV, D99% in group 1 (n = 29) was significantly higher than that in group 2 (n = 26), and Dmax, D0.03cc, D1cc, and D10% for the rectum were significantly lower in group 1 than in group 2. The SCR for prostate (89.5 ± 12.2%) in group 1 was significantly higher (p < 0.05) than that in group 2 (74.7 ± 10.3%). In contrast, the HIQS values did not show a significant difference between the groups. An area under the curve of 0.822 (95% confidence interval, 0.708-0.936) for the SCR was obtained with a cutoff of 93.6%, sensitivity of 62.1%, and specificity of 100%.

CONCLUSIONS

The SCR seems promising to predict the separation of the rectum from the PTV in linear-accelerator-based SBRT for prostate cancer.

Evaluation of the trend of set-up errors during the treatment period using set-up margin in prostate radiotherapy

Accurate information on set-up error during radiotherapy is essential for determining the optimal number of treatments in hypofractionated radiotherapy for prostate cancer. This necessitates careful control by the radiotherapy staff to assess the patient's condition. This study aimed to develop an evaluation method of the temporal trends in a patient's specific prostate movement during treatment using image matching and margin values. This study included 65 patients who underwent prostate volumetric modulated arc therapy (mean treatment time, 87.2 s). Set-up errors were assessed using bone, inter-, and intra-fraction marker matching across 39 fractions. The set-up margin was determined by dividing the four periods into 39 fractions using Stroom's formula and correlation coefficient. The intra-fraction set-up error was biased in the anterior-superior (AS) direction during treatment. The temporal trend of set-up errors during radiotherapy slightly increased based on bone matching and inter-fraction marker matching, with a 1.6-mm difference in the set-up margin fractions 11 to 20. The correlation coefficient of the mean prostate movement during treatment significantly decreased in the superior-inferior direction, while remaining high in the left-right and anterior-posterior directions. Image matching contributed significantly to the improvement of set-up errors; however, careful attention is needed for prostate movement in the AS direction, particularly during short treatment times. Understanding the trend of set-up errors during the treatment period is essential in numerical information sharing on patient condition and evaluating the margins for tailored hypo-fractionated radiotherapy, considering the facility's image-guided radiation therapy technology.

Ultra-hypofractionated prostate cancer radiotherapy: Dosimetric impact of real-time intrafraction prostate motion and daily anatomical changes

PURPOSE

To retrospectively assess the differences between planned and delivered dose during ultra-hypofractionated (UHF) prostate cancer treatments, by evaluating the dosimetric impact of daily anatomical variations alone, and in combination with prostate intrafraction motion.

METHODS

Prostate intrafraction motion was recorded with a transperineal ultrasound probe in 15 patients treated by UHF radiotherapy (36.25 Gy/5 fractions). The dosimetric objective was to cover 99 % of the clinical target volume with the 100 % prescription isodose line. After treatment, planning CT (pCT) images were deformably registered onto daily Cone Beam CT to generate pseudo-CT for dose accumulation (accumulated CT, aCT). The interplay effect was accounted by synchronizing prostatic shifts and beam geometry. Finally, the shifted dose maps were accumulated (moved-accumulated CT, maCT).

RESULTS

No significant change in daily CTV volumes was observed. Conversely, CTV V100% was 98.2 ± 0.8 % and 94.7 ± 2.6 % on aCT and maCT, respectively, compared with 99.5 ± 0.2 % on pCT (p < 0.0001). Bladder volume was smaller than planned in 76 % of fractions and D5cc was 33.8 ± 3.2 Gy and 34.4 ± 3.4 Gy on aCT (p = 0.02) and maCT (p = 0.01) compared with the pCT (36.0 ± 1.1 Gy). The rectum was smaller than planned in 50.3 % of fractions, but the dosimetric differences were not statistically significant, except for D1cc, found smaller on the maCT (33.2 ± 3.2 Gy, p = 0.02) compared with the pCT (35.3 ± 0.7 Gy).

CONCLUSIONS

Anatomical variations and prostate movements had more important dosimetric impact than anatomical variations alone, although, in some cases, the two phenomena compensated. Therefore, an efficient IGRT protocol is required for treatment implementation to reduce setup errors and control intrafraction motion.

Impact of technological advances in treatment planning, image guidance, and treatment delivery on target margin design for prostate cancer radiotherapy: an updated review

Recent innovations in image guidance, treatment delivery, and adaptive radiotherapy (RT) have created a new paradigm for planning target volume (PTV) margin design for patients with prostate cancer. We performed a review of the recent literature on PTV margin selection and design for intact prostate RT, excluding post-operative RT, brachytherapy, and proton therapy. Our review describes the increased focus on prostate and seminal vesicles as heterogenous deforming structures with further emergence of intra-prostatic GTV boost and concurrent pelvic lymph node treatment. To capture recent innovations, we highlight the evolution in cone beam CT guidance, and increasing use of MRI for improved target delineation and image registration and supporting online adaptive RT. Moreover, we summarize new and evolving image-guidance treatment platforms as well as recent reports of novel immobilization strategies and motion tracking. Our report also captures recent implementations of artificial intelligence to support image guidance and adaptive RT. To characterize the clinical impact of PTV margin changes via model-based risk estimates and clinical trials, we highlight recent high impact reports. Our report focusses on topics in the context of PTV margins but also showcase studies attempting to move beyond the PTV margin recipes with robust optimization and probabilistic planning approaches. Although guidelines exist for target margins conventional using CT-based image guidance, further validation is required to understand the optimal margins for online adaptation either alone or combined with real-time motion compensation to minimize systematic and random uncertainties in the treatment of patients with prostate cancer.

Adaptive Radiation Therapy: A Review of CT-based Techniques

Adaptive radiation therapy is a feedback process by which imaging information acquired over the course of treatment, such as changes in patient anatomy, can be used to reoptimize the treatment plan, with the end goal of improving target coverage and reducing treatment toxicity. This review describes different types of adaptive radiation therapy and their clinical implementation with a focus on CT-guided online adaptive radiation therapy. Depending on local anatomic changes and clinical context, different anatomic sites and/or disease stages and presentations benefit from different adaptation strategies. Online adaptive radiation therapy, where images acquired in-room before each fraction are used to adjust the treatment plan while the patient remains on the treatment table, has emerged to address unpredictable anatomic changes between treatment fractions. Online treatment adaptation places unique pressures on the radiation therapy workflow, requiring high-quality daily imaging and rapid recontouring, replanning, plan review, and quality assurance. Generating a new plan with every fraction is resource intensive and time sensitive, emphasizing the need for workflow efficiency and clinical resource allocation. Cone-beam CT is widely used for image-guided radiation therapy, so implementing cone-beam CT-guided online adaptive radiation therapy can be easily integrated into the radiation therapy workflow and potentially allow for rapid imaging and replanning. The major challenge of this approach is the reduced image quality due to poor resolution, scatter, and artifacts. Keywords: Adaptive Radiation Therapy, Cone-Beam CT, Organs at Risk, Oncology © RSNA, 2023.

Adaptive replanning using cone beam CT for deformation of original CT simulation

BACKGROUND

During a course of radiation therapy, anatomical changes such as a decrease in tumour size or weight loss can trigger the need for repeating a computed tomography (CT) simulation scan in order to generate a new treatment plan. This adaptive approach requires a separate appointment for an additional CT scan which generates additional burden, cost, and radiation exposure for patients.

CASE PRESENTATION

Here, we present a case of a head and neck cancer patient who required palliative radiation for a large neck mass. During treatment, he had a remarkable response which required a replan due to rapid tumour downsizing. In this case, we used a novel technique to avoid repeating the planning CT simulation by using a mid-treatment high-quality cone beam CT (CBCT) to deform the secondary image (plan CT) of the original planning CT and generate a new adapted treatment plan.

CONCLUSION

This is the first report to our knowledge using a Halcyon CBCT to deform the original planning CT in order to generate a new radiation treatment plan, and this novel technique represents a new potential method of adaptive replanning for select patients.

Assessment of CT to CBCT contour mapping for radiomic feature analysis in prostate cancer

This study provides a quantitative assessment of the accuracy of a commercially available deformable image registration (DIR) algorithm to automatically generate prostate contours and additionally investigates the robustness of radiomic features to differing contours. Twenty-eight prostate cancer patients enrolled on an institutional review board (IRB) approved protocol were selected. Planning CTs (pCTs) were deformably registered to daily cone-beam CTs (CBCTs) to generate prostate contours (auto contours). The prostate contours were also manually drawn by a physician. Quantitative assessment of deformed versus manually drawn prostate contours on daily CBCT images was performed using Dice similarity coefficient (DSC), mean distance-to-agreement (MDA), difference in center-of-mass position (ΔCM) and difference in volume (ΔVol). Radiomic features from 6 classes were extracted from each contour. Lin’s concordance correlation coefficient (CCC) and mean absolute percent difference in radiomic feature-derived data (mean |%Δ|RF) between auto and manual contours were calculated. The mean (± SD) DSC, MDA, ΔCM and ΔVol between the auto and manual prostate contours were 0.90 ± 0.04, 1.81 ± 0.47 mm, 2.17 ± 1.26 mm and 5.1 ± 4.1% respectively. Of the 1,010 fractions under consideration, 94.8% of DIRs were within TG-132 recommended tolerance. 30 radiomic features had a CCC > 0.90 and 21 had a mean |%∆|RF < 5%. Auto-propagation of prostate contours resulted in nearly 95% of DIRs within tolerance recommendations of TG-132, leading to the majority of features being regarded as acceptably robust. The use of auto contours for radiomic feature analysis is promising but must be done with caution.

Incorporation of tumor motion directionality in margin recipe: The directional MidP strategy

PURPOSE

Planning target volume (PTV) definition based on Mid-Position (Mid-P) strategy typically integrates breathing motion from tumor positions variances along the conventional axes of the DICOM coordinate system. Tumor motion directionality is thus neglected even though it is one of its stable characteristics in time. We therefore propose the directional MidP approach (MidP dir), which allows motion directionality to be incorporated into PTV margins. A second objective consists in assessing the ability of the proposed method to better take care of respiratory motion uncertainty.

METHODS

11 lung tumors from 10 patients with supra-centimetric motion were included. PTV were generated according to the MidP and MidP dir strategies starting from planning 4D CT.

RESULTS

PTV_{MidP dir} volume didn't differ from the PTV_MidP volume: 31351 mm³ IC95% [17242-45459] vs. 31003 mm³ IC95% [ 17347-44659], p = 0.477 respectively. PTV_{MidP dir} morphology was different and appeared more oblong along the main motion axis. The relative difference between 3D and 4D doses was on average 1.09%, p = 0.011 and 0.74%, p = 0.032 improved with directional MidP for D_99% and D_95%. D_2% was not significantly different between both approaches. The improvement in dosimetric coverage fluctuated substantially from one lesion to another and was all the more important as motion showed a large amplitude, some obliquity with respect to conventional axes and small hysteresis.

CONCLUSIONS

Directional MidP method allows tumor motion to be taken into account more tightly as a geometrical uncertainty without increasing the irradiation volume.

Direct visualization and correlation of liver stereotactic body radiation therapy treatment delivery accuracy with interfractional motion

This study used the visualization of hypo‐intense regions on liver‐specific MRI to directly quantify stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) spatial delivery accuracy. Additionally, the interfractional motion of the liver region was determined and compared with the MRI‐based evaluation of liver SBRT spatial treatment delivery accuracy. Primovist^®‐enhanced MRI scans were acquired from 17 patients, 8–12 weeks following the completion of liver SBRT treatment. Direct visualization of radiation‐induced focal liver reaction in the form of hypo‐intensity was determined. The auto‐delineation approach was used to localize these regions, and center‐of‐mass (COM) discrepancy was quantified between the MRI hypo‐intensity and the CT‐based treatment plan. To assess the interfractional motion of the liver region, a planning CT was registered to a Cone Beam CT obtained before each treatment fraction. The interfractional motion assessed from this approach was then compared against the localized hypo‐intense MRI regions. The mean ± SD COM discrepancy was 1.4 ± 1.3 mm in the left‐right direction, 2.6 ± 1.8 mm in an anteroposterior direction, and 1.9 ± 2.6 mm in the craniocaudal direction. A high correlation was observed between interfractional motion of visualized hypo‐intensity and interfractional motion of planning treatment volume (PTV); the quantified Pearson correlation coefficient was 0.96. The lack of correlation was observed between Primovist^® MRI‐based spatial accuracy and interfractional motion of the liver, where Pearson correlation coefficients ranged from −0.01 to −0.26. The highest random and systematic errors quantified from interfractional motion were in the craniocaudal direction. This work demonstrates a novel framework for the direct evaluation of liver SBRT spatial delivery accuracy.