Chen, Quan

Abstract Purpose Lattice radiation therapy (LRT) is a form of spatially fractionated radiation therapy that allows increased total dose delivery aiming for improved treatment response without an increase in toxicities, commonly utilized for palliation of bulky tumors. The LRT treatment planning process is complex, while eligible patients often have an urgent need for expedited treatment start. In this study, we aimed to develop a simulation‐free workflow for volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT)‐based LRT planning via deep learning‐predicted synthetic CT (sCT) to expedite treatment initiation. Methods Two deep learning models were initially trained using 3D U‐Net architecture to generate sCT from diagnostic CTs (dCT) of the thoracic and abdomen regions using a training dataset of 50 patients. The models were then tested on an independent dataset of 15 patients using image similarity analysis assessing mean absolute error (MAE) and structural similarity index measure (SSIM) as metrics. VMAT‐based LRT plans were generated based on sCT and recalculated on the planning CT (pCT) for dosimetric accuracy comparison. Differences in dose volume histogram (DVH) metrics between pCT and sCT plans were assessed using the Wilcoxon signed‐rank test. Results The final sCT prediction model demonstrated high image similarity to pCT, with a MAE and SSIM of 38.93 ± 14.79 Hounsfield Units (HU) and 0.92 ± 0.05 for the thoracic region, and 73.60 ± 22.90 HU and 0.90 ± 0.03 for the abdominal region, respectively. There were no statistically significant differences between sCT and pCT plans in terms of organ‐at‐risk and target volume DVH parameters, including maximum dose (Dmax), mean dose (Dmean), dose delivered to 90% (D90%) and 50% (D50%) of target volume, except for minimum dose (Dmin) and (D10%). Conclusion With demonstrated high image similarity and adequate dose agreement between sCT and pCT, our study is a proof‐of‐concept for using deep learning predicted sCT for a simulation‐free treatment planning workflow for VMAT‐based LRT.

Objectives: Identifying patients’ advantageous radiotherapy modalities prior to CT simulation is challenging. This study aimed to develop a workflow using deep learning (DL)-predicted synthetic CT (sCT) for treatment modality comparison based solely on a diagnostic CT (dCT). Methods: A DL network, U-Net, was trained utilizing 46 thoracic cases from a public database to generate sCT images predicting planning CT (pCT) scans based on the latest dCT, and tested on 15 institutional patients. The sCT accuracy was evaluated against the corresponding pCT and a commercial algorithm deformed CT (MdCT) based on Mean Absolute Error (MAE) and Universal Quality Index (UQI). To determine advantageous treatment modality, clinical dose-volume histogram (DVH) metrics and Normal Tissue Complication Probability (NTCP) differences between proton and photon treatment plans were analyzed on the sCTs via concordance correlation coefficient (CCC). Results: The AI-generated sCTs closely resembled those of the commercial deformation algorithm in the tested cases. The differences in MAE and UQI values between the sCT-vs-pCT and MdCT-vs-pCT were 19.38 HU and 0.06, respectively. The mean absolute NTCP deviation between sCT and pCT was 1.54%, 0.21%, and 2.36% for esophagus perforation, lung pneumonitis, and heart pericarditis, respectively. The CCC between sCT and pCT was 0.90 for DVH metrics and 0.97 for NTCP, indicating moderate agreement for DVH metrics and substantial agreement. Conclusions: Radiation oncologists can potentially utilize this personalized sCT based approach as a clinical support tool to rapidly compare the treatment modality benefit during patient consultation and facilitate in-depth discussion on potential toxicities at a patient-specific level.

Abstract Background Inter‐fractional and intra‐fractional positioning and motion monitoring based on implanted fiducials through kilovoltage (kV) imaging is a cost‐effective approach to enhance intact prostate radiotherapy treatment accuracy. However, comprehensive studies for three‐dimensional (3D) position extraction and the corrective action threshold are lacking. Purpose To develop and verify a fiducial motion monitoring system with 3D position information based on triggered kV images taken during treatment delivery, and to comprehensively evaluate the recommended thresholds for corrective action during treatment. Methods An in‐house fiducial triangulation algorithm was developed to monitor fiducial positions using subsequent kV triggered images. The precision of fiducial triangulation and motion detection was validated on a pelvis phantom with four fiducial inserts. A retrospective study was conducted on prostate cancer patients who received either moderately hypofractionated radiotherapy (MHRT, n = 16) or stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT, n = 12), categorized by endo‐rectal balloon (ERB) use. Intra‐fractional positions relative to isocenter were computed, and these positions were analyzed in comparison to the original marker locations of the patient's treatment plan. A linear regression fit was used per fraction to determine correlation coefficients between motions in the left–right (LR), superior–inferior (SI), and anterior–posterior (AP) directions. Average fraction time (AFT) of treatment was reported based on the observed average time spent on steps in the workflow and the percentage of fiducials caught outside of the current two‐dimensional (2D) tolerance threshold of 5 mm. The observed 3D offsets were used to estimate AFT for various 3D tolerance thresholds. Results Overall, our triangulation method proved to be very precise for static cases, where phantom measurements revealed a fiducial position triangulation precision of mm for stationary targets, but had a spread of mm for targets with 1 mm of motion. Employing triangulation, true motion exceeding 5 mm was detected above 4.0 mm in magnitude 90.9% of the time, a noticeable improvement in comparison to the 28%–65% successful detection rate reported by 2D projection methods. Most detection errors were attributed to depth disparity. Similar to other reports, correlation coefficients for intra‐fractional motion generally indicated no LR/SI, no LR/AP, and weak positive SI/AP correlations for MHRT and SBRT patients. Offsets beyond a 3D tolerance threshold of 5 mm were observed at a rate of 4.25%–5.25%, while the 5 mm 2D out‐of‐tolerance catch‐rate was 1.6%. The AFT was 8.1–8.2 min using the 2D tolerance threshold of 5 mm. In comparison, the estimated AFT for the proposed 3D tolerance monitoring of offsets beyond 2–5 mm was slightly higher at 8.2–10.9 min due to the higher amount of out‐of‐tolerance instances for the higher precision intra‐fractional motion management. Conclusions Our study showcases a promising subsequent kV‐based triangulation method for intra‐fractional prostate motion monitoring. Acquiring 3D motion information results in higher out‐of‐tolerance catch‐rates particularly in the depth dimension of the kV images, which is perpendicular to the treatment beam. Failure to properly observe and catch these offsets would result in sub‐optimal conformality and accuracy of the dose delivery.

AbstractBackgroundConventional approaches for emergent or expedited palliative radiotherapy (RT) involve the application of cumbersome vendor‐provided solutions and/or multiple patient appointments to complete the RT workflow within a compressed timeframe.PurposeThis report delineates the clinical development of an in‐house, semi‐automated Cone‐beam computed tomography (CBCT)‐based simulation‐free platform for expedited palliative RT on conventional linacs, intended to supplant existing techniques employed at this institution.MethodsThe internal software, termed SimFree Wizard (SFW), was engineered utilizing a C#‐based application programming interface integrated within the treatment planning system (TPS). Generated scripts were compiled as stand‐alone executables, with a graphical user interface (GUI) customized via an integrated development environment. The platform was conceived as a framework for accelerated CBCT‐based RT, bypassing the requirement for standard simulation imaging. SFW employs full automation where feasible to minimize user intervention, supplemented by graphical instructions for tasks requiring manual execution. During development, relevant temporal metrics from 10 end‐to‐end tests for palliative spine RT were quantified. User feedback was solicited via a simple questionnaire assessing the overall platform usability. Automated in‐house secondary verification software was developed for validation of the TPS‐calculated monitor units (MUs).ResultsThe mean duration for workflow execution was 41:42 ± 3:18 [mm:ss] (range ∼37–46 min). SFW satisfactorily generated simple, multi‐field CBCT‐based 3D treatment plans within seconds following delineation of the desired treatment area. User feedback indicated enhanced usability compared to previously employed solutions. Validation of the secondary verification software demonstrated accurate results for palliative spine RT and other simple cases wherein the dose calculation point resides in a predominantly homogenous medium.ConclusionA novel in‐house solution for expedited CBCT‐based RT was successfully developed, facilitating completion of the entire workflow within approximately 1‐hour or less for simple palliative/emergent scenarios. Overall, this application is expected to improve the quality and safety of palliative RT while greatly reducing workflow duration, thereby improving access to palliative care.