Feasibility of artificial-intelligence-based synthetic computed tomography in a magnetic resonance-only radiotherapy workflow for brain radiotherapy: Two-way dose validation and 2D/2D kV-image-based positioning. (October 2022)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Masitho, Siti; Szkitsak, Juliane; Grigo, Johanna; Fietkau, Rainer; Putz, Florian; Bert, Christoph
• Is Part Of: Physics and imaging in radiation oncology. Volume 24(2022)
• Page Start: 111
• Page End: 117
• Publication Date: 2022-10
• Subjects: Brain radiotherapy -- Synthetic CT -- MRI-only workflow -- Artificial intelligence -- kV-image-based positioning; Radiotherapy -- Periodicals; Radiation dosimetry -- Periodicals; Cancer -- Imaging -- Periodicals; Oncology -- Periodicals; 615.842
• DOI: 10.1016/j.phro.2022.10.002
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 2405-6316

Abstract

Abstract: Background and purpose: Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI)-only workflow eliminates the MRI-computed tomography (CT) registration inaccuracy, which degrades radiotherapy (RT) treatment accuracy. For an MRI-only workflow MRI sequences need to be converted to synthetic-CT (sCT). The purpose of this study was to evaluate a commercially available artificial intelligence (AI)-based sCT generation for dose calculation and 2D/2D kV-image daily positioning for brain RT workflow. Materials and methods: T1-VIBE DIXON was acquired at the 1.5 T MRI for 26 patients in RT setup for sCTs generation. For each patient, a volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) plan was optimized on the CT, then recalculated on the sCT; and vice versa. sCT-based digitally reconstructed radiographs (DRRs) were fused with stereoscopic X-ray images recorded as image guidance for clinical treatments. Dosimetric differences between planned/recalculated doses and the differences between the calculated and recorded clinical couch shift/rotation were evaluated. Results: Mean ΔD50 between planned/recalculated doses for target volumes ranged between −0.2 % and 0.2 %; mean ΔD50 and ΔD0.01ccm were −0.6 % and 1.6 % and −1.4 % and 1.0 % for organ-at-risks, respectively. Differences were tested for clinical equivalence using intervals ±2 % (dose), ±1mm (translation), and ±1° (rotation). Dose equivalence was found using ±2 % interval ( p < 0.001). The median differences between lat./long./vert. couch shift between CT-based/sCT-based DRRs were 0.3 mm/0.2 mm/0.3 mm ( p < 0.05); median differences between lat./long./vert. couch rotation were −1.5°/0.1°/0.1° (after improvement of RT setup: −0.4°/−0.1°/−0.4°, p < 0.05). Conclusions: This in-silico study showed that the AI-based sCT provided equivalent results to the CT for dose calculation and daily stereoscopic X-ray positioning when using an optimal RT setup during MRI acquisition.