skip to main content
OSTI.GOV title logo U.S. Department of Energy
Office of Scientific and Technical Information

Title: SU-F-J-156: The Feasibility of MR-Only IMRT Planning for Prostate Anatomy

Abstract

Purpose: For prostate anatomy, previous investigations have shown that simulated CT (sCT) generated from MR images can be used for accurate dose computation. In this study, we demonstrate the feasibility of MR-only IMRT planning for prostate case. Methods: Regular CT (rCT) and MR images of the same patient were acquired for prostate anatomy. Regions-of-interest (ROIs) i.e. target and risk structures are delineated on the rCT. A simulated CT (sCT) is generated from the MR image using the method described by Schadewaldt N et al. Their work establishes the clinical acceptability of dose calculation results on the sCT when compared to rCT. rCT and sCT are rigidly registered to ensure proper alignment between the two images. rCT and sCT are overlaid on each other and slice-wise visual inspection confirms excellent agreement between the two images. ROIs on the rCT are copied over to sCT. Philips AutoPlanning solution is used for generating treatment plans. The same treatment technique protocol (plan parameters and clinical goals) is used to generate AutoPlan-rCT and AutoPlan-sCT respectively for rCT and and sCT. DVH comparison on ROIs and slice-wise evaluation of dose is performed between AutoPlan-rCT and AutoPlan-sCT. Delivery parameters i.e. beam and corresponding segments from the AutoPlan-sCTmore » are copied over to rCT and dose is computed to get AutoPlan-sCT-on-rCT. Results: Plan evaluation is done based on Dose Volume Histogram (DVH) of ROIs and manual slice-wise inspection of dose distribution. Both AutoPlan-rCT and AutoPlan-sCT provide a clinically acceptable plan. Also, AutoPlan-sCT-on-rCT shows excellent agreement with AutoPlan-sCT. Conclusion: The study demonstrates that it is feasible to do IMRT planning on the simulated CT image obtained from MR image for prostate anatomy. The research is supported by Philips India Ltd.« less

Authors:
; ; ; ;  [1]
  1. Philips India Limited, Bangalore, Karnataka (India)
Publication Date:
OSTI Identifier:
22634757
Resource Type:
Journal Article
Resource Relation:
Journal Name: Medical Physics; Journal Volume: 43; Journal Issue: 6; Other Information: (c) 2016 American Association of Physicists in Medicine; Country of input: International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA)
Country of Publication:
United States
Language:
English
Subject:
60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES; 61 RADIATION PROTECTION AND DOSIMETRY; ANATOMY; CASE METHOD; COMPUTERIZED TOMOGRAPHY; ELECTRON BEAMS; IMAGE PROCESSING; IMAGES; INSPECTION; PROSTATE; RADIATION DOSE DISTRIBUTIONS; RADIATION DOSES; RADIOTHERAPY; SIMULATION

Citation Formats

Vaitheeswaran, R, Sivaramakrishnan, KR, Kumar, Prashant, Gattamaneni, Raja, and Kumar, Girish. SU-F-J-156: The Feasibility of MR-Only IMRT Planning for Prostate Anatomy. United States: N. p., 2016. Web. doi:10.1118/1.4956064.
Vaitheeswaran, R, Sivaramakrishnan, KR, Kumar, Prashant, Gattamaneni, Raja, & Kumar, Girish. SU-F-J-156: The Feasibility of MR-Only IMRT Planning for Prostate Anatomy. United States. doi:10.1118/1.4956064.
Vaitheeswaran, R, Sivaramakrishnan, KR, Kumar, Prashant, Gattamaneni, Raja, and Kumar, Girish. 2016. "SU-F-J-156: The Feasibility of MR-Only IMRT Planning for Prostate Anatomy". United States. doi:10.1118/1.4956064.
@article{osti_22634757,
title = {SU-F-J-156: The Feasibility of MR-Only IMRT Planning for Prostate Anatomy},
author = {Vaitheeswaran, R and Sivaramakrishnan, KR and Kumar, Prashant and Gattamaneni, Raja and Kumar, Girish},
abstractNote = {Purpose: For prostate anatomy, previous investigations have shown that simulated CT (sCT) generated from MR images can be used for accurate dose computation. In this study, we demonstrate the feasibility of MR-only IMRT planning for prostate case. Methods: Regular CT (rCT) and MR images of the same patient were acquired for prostate anatomy. Regions-of-interest (ROIs) i.e. target and risk structures are delineated on the rCT. A simulated CT (sCT) is generated from the MR image using the method described by Schadewaldt N et al. Their work establishes the clinical acceptability of dose calculation results on the sCT when compared to rCT. rCT and sCT are rigidly registered to ensure proper alignment between the two images. rCT and sCT are overlaid on each other and slice-wise visual inspection confirms excellent agreement between the two images. ROIs on the rCT are copied over to sCT. Philips AutoPlanning solution is used for generating treatment plans. The same treatment technique protocol (plan parameters and clinical goals) is used to generate AutoPlan-rCT and AutoPlan-sCT respectively for rCT and and sCT. DVH comparison on ROIs and slice-wise evaluation of dose is performed between AutoPlan-rCT and AutoPlan-sCT. Delivery parameters i.e. beam and corresponding segments from the AutoPlan-sCT are copied over to rCT and dose is computed to get AutoPlan-sCT-on-rCT. Results: Plan evaluation is done based on Dose Volume Histogram (DVH) of ROIs and manual slice-wise inspection of dose distribution. Both AutoPlan-rCT and AutoPlan-sCT provide a clinically acceptable plan. Also, AutoPlan-sCT-on-rCT shows excellent agreement with AutoPlan-sCT. Conclusion: The study demonstrates that it is feasible to do IMRT planning on the simulated CT image obtained from MR image for prostate anatomy. The research is supported by Philips India Ltd.},
doi = {10.1118/1.4956064},
journal = {Medical Physics},
number = 6,
volume = 43,
place = {United States},
year = 2016,
month = 6
}
  • Purpose: Intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) treatment planning typically combines multiple criteria into a single objective function by taking a weighted sum. The authors propose a statistical model that predicts objective function weights from patient anatomy for prostate IMRT treatment planning. This study provides a proof of concept for geometry-driven weight determination. Methods: A previously developed inverse optimization method (IOM) was used to generate optimal objective function weights for 24 patients using their historical treatment plans (i.e., dose distributions). These IOM weights were around 1% for each of the femoral heads, while bladder and rectum weights varied greatly between patients. Amore » regression model was developed to predict a patient's rectum weight using the ratio of the overlap volume of the rectum and bladder with the planning target volume at a 1 cm expansion as the independent variable. The femoral head weights were fixed to 1% each and the bladder weight was calculated as one minus the rectum and femoral head weights. The model was validated using leave-one-out cross validation. Objective values and dose distributions generated through inverse planning using the predicted weights were compared to those generated using the original IOM weights, as well as an average of the IOM weights across all patients. Results: The IOM weight vectors were on average six times closer to the predicted weight vectors than to the average weight vector, usingl{sub 2} distance. Likewise, the bladder and rectum objective values achieved by the predicted weights were more similar to the objective values achieved by the IOM weights. The difference in objective value performance between the predicted and average weights was statistically significant according to a one-sided sign test. For all patients, the difference in rectum V54.3 Gy, rectum V70.0 Gy, bladder V54.3 Gy, and bladder V70.0 Gy values between the dose distributions generated by the predicted weights and IOM weights was less than 5 percentage points. Similarly, the difference in femoral head V54.3 Gy values between the two dose distributions was less than 5 percentage points for all but one patient. Conclusions: This study demonstrates a proof of concept that patient anatomy can be used to predict appropriate objective function weights for treatment planning. In the long term, such geometry-driven weights may serve as a starting point for iterative treatment plan design or may provide information about the most clinically relevant region of the Pareto surface to explore.« less
  • Purpose: Intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) treatment planning typically combines multiple criteria into a single objective function by taking a weighted sum. The authors propose a statistical model that predicts objective function weights from patient anatomy for prostate IMRT treatment planning. This study provides a proof of concept for geometry-driven weight determination. Methods: A previously developed inverse optimization method (IOM) was used to generate optimal objective function weights for 24 patients using their historical treatment plans (i.e., dose distributions). These IOM weights were around 1% for each of the femoral heads, while bladder and rectum weights varied greatly between patients. Amore » regression model was developed to predict a patient's rectum weight using the ratio of the overlap volume of the rectum and bladder with the planning target volume at a 1 cm expansion as the independent variable. The femoral head weights were fixed to 1% each and the bladder weight was calculated as one minus the rectum and femoral head weights. The model was validated using leave-one-out cross validation. Objective values and dose distributions generated through inverse planning using the predicted weights were compared to those generated using the original IOM weights, as well as an average of the IOM weights across all patients. Results: The IOM weight vectors were on average six times closer to the predicted weight vectors than to the average weight vector, usingl{sub 2} distance. Likewise, the bladder and rectum objective values achieved by the predicted weights were more similar to the objective values achieved by the IOM weights. The difference in objective value performance between the predicted and average weights was statistically significant according to a one-sided sign test. For all patients, the difference in rectum V54.3 Gy, rectum V70.0 Gy, bladder V54.3 Gy, and bladder V70.0 Gy values between the dose distributions generated by the predicted weights and IOM weights was less than 5 percentage points. Similarly, the difference in femoral head V54.3 Gy values between the two dose distributions was less than 5 percentage points for all but one patient. Conclusions: This study demonstrates a proof of concept that patient anatomy can be used to predict appropriate objective function weights for treatment planning. In the long term, such geometry-driven weights may serve as a starting point for iterative treatment plan design or may provide information about the most clinically relevant region of the Pareto surface to explore.« less
  • Purpose: : To investigate dosimetric differences between MRI- and CT-based IMRT planning for prostate cancer, the impact of a magnetic field in a MRI-Linac, and to explore the feasibility of IMRT planning based on MRI alone. Methods: IMRT plans were generated based on CT and MRI images acquired on two representative prostate-cancer patients using clinical dose volume constraints. A research planning system (Monaco, Elekta), which employs a Monte Carlo dose engine and includes a perpendicular magnetic field of 1.5T from an MRI-Linac, was used. Bulk electron density assignments based on organ-specific values from ICRU 46 were used to convert MRImore » (T2) to pseudo CT. With the same beam configuration as in the original CT plan, 5 additional plans were generated based on CT or MRI, with or without optimization (i.e., just recalculation) and with or without the magnetic field. The plan quality in terms of commonly used dose volume (DV) parameters for all plans was compared. The statistical uncertainty on dose was < 1%. Results: For plans with the same contour set but without re-optimization, the DV parameters were different from those for the original CT plan, mostly less than 5% with a few exceptions. These differences were reduced to mostly less than 3% when the plans were re-optimized. For plans with contours from MRI, the differences in the DV parameters varied depending on the difference in the contours as compared to CT. For the optimized plans with contours from MR, the differences for PTV were less than 3%. Conclusion: The prostate IMRT plans based on MRI-only for a MR-Linac were practically similar as compared to the CT plan under the same beam and optimization configuration if the difference on the structure delineation is excluded, indicating the feasibility of using MRI-only for prostate IMRT.« less
  • Purpose: With the increasing use of MRI simulation and the advent of MRI-guided delivery, it is desirable to use MRI only for treatment planning. In this study, we assess the dosimetric difference between MRI- and CTbased IMRT planning for pancreatic cancer. Methods: Planning CTs and MRIs acquired for a representative pancreatic cancer patient were used. MRI-based planning utilized forced relative electron density (rED) assignment of organ specific values from IRCU report 46, where rED = 1.029 for PTV and a rED = 1.036 for non-specified tissue (NST). Six IMRT plans were generated with clinical dose-volume (DV) constraints using a researchmore » Monaco planning system employing Monte Carlo dose calculation with optional perpendicular magnetic field (MF) of 1.5T. The following five plans were generated and compared with the planning CT: 1.) CT plan with MF and dose recalculation without optimization; 2.) MRI (T2) plan with target and OARs redrawn based on MRI, forced rED, no MF, and recalculation without optimization; 3.) Similar as in 2 but with MF; 4.) MRI plan with MF but without optimization; and 5.) Similar as in 4 but with optimization. Results: Generally, noticeable differences in PTV point doses and DV parameters (DVPs) between the CT-and MRI-based plans with and without the MF were observed. These differences between the optimized plans were generally small, mostly within 2%. Larger differences were observed in point doses and mean doses for certain OARs between the CT and MRI plan, mostly due to differences between image acquisition times. Conclusion: MRI only based IMRT planning for pancreatic cancer is feasible. The differences observed between the optimized CT and MRI plans with or without the MF were practically negligible if excluding the differences between MRI and CT defined structures.« less
  • Purpose: To quantify the three-dimensional variations of pelvic anatomy after a single treatment fraction. Methods and Materials: Forty-six prostate cancer patients underwent computed tomography (CT) scanning with an in-room CT-on-rail system, before and immediately after one intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) session. To study the soft-tissue anatomy changes, the pre- and post-treatment CT images were registered using the bony structure with an in-house image registration software system. The center of volume for both the prostate and seminal vesicles was used to assess the relative displacement of the same structure after the treatment fraction. Results: During one treatment fraction (21 {+-} 4 min),more » both the prostate and seminal vesicles showed statistically significant systematic trends in the superior and anterior directions of the patient's anatomy. The net increase in bladder volume was huge (127 {+-} 79 cm{sup 3}), yet this change did not translate into large target displacements. Although the population mean displacements in either direction were 1.3 {+-} 2.9 mm for the prostate and 1.2 {+-} 4.1 mm for the seminal vesicles in the anterior direction, a few patients had displacements as large as 8.4 mm and 15.6 mm, respectively. These large displacements correlated strongly (p < 0.001) with large rectal volume increases caused by gaseous build-up in the rectum. Conclusion: The observed intrafraction variations in anatomy during prostate IMRT sessions suggest that, for any given fraction, the organ motion and volume changes can potentially lead to compromised target coverage in about 15% of patients in whom the prostate position shifted >4 mm.« less