Knowledge-based adaptive planning quality assurance using dosimetric indicators for stereotactic adaptive radiotherapy for pancreatic cancer.

INTRODUCTION: We aimed to develop knowledge-based tools for robust adaptive radiotherapy (ART) planning to determine on-table adaptive DVH metric variations or planning process errors for stereotactic pancreatic ART. We developed volume-based dosimetric identifiers to identify deviations of ART plans from simulation plans. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Two patient cohorts who were treated on MR-Linac for pancreas cancer were included in this retrospective study; a training cohort and a validation cohort. All patients received 50 Gy in 5 fractions. PTV-OPT was generated by subtracting the critical organs plus a 5 mm-margin from PTV. Several metrics that potentially can identify failure-modes were calculated including PTV & PTV_OPT V95% and PTV & PTV_OPT D95%/D5%. The difference between each DVH metric in each adaptive plan with the DVH metric in simulation plan was calculated. The 95% confidence interval (CI) of the variations in each DVH metric was calculated for the patient training cohort. Variations in DVH metrics that exceeded the 95% CI for all fractions in training and validation cohort were flagged for retrospective investigation for root-cause analysis to determine their predictive power for identifying failure-modes. RESULTS: The CIs for the PTV & PTV_OPT V95% and PTV & PTV_OPT D95%/D5% were ± 13%, ± 5%, ± 0.1, ± 0.03, respectively. We estimated the positive predictive value and negative predictive value of our method to be 77% and 89%, respectively, for the training cohort, and 80% for both in the validation cohort. DISCUSSION: We developed dosimetric indicators for ART planning QA to identify population-based deviations or planning errors during online adaptive process for stereotactic pancreatic ART. This technology may be useful as an ART clinical trial QA tool and improve overall ART quality at an institution.

Is individual perfusion dose-response different than ventilation dose-response for lung cancer patients treated with radiotherapy?

OBJECTIVE: Current ventilation and perfusion dose-response studies focus on single-modalities (ventilation or perfusion) and perform pulmonary-toxicity assessment related to radiotherapy on a population-based basis. This study aims at quantitative and clinical evaluation of intrapatient differences between ventilation and perfusion dose-responses among lung cancer patients treated with radiotherapy. METHODS: 20 patients enrolled on a prospective functional avoidance protocol underwent single photon emission computed tomography-CT ventilation and perfusion scans pre- and post-radiotherapy. Relative changes in pre- to post-treatment ventilation and perfusion in lung regions receiving ≥20 Gy were calculated. In addition, the slopes of the linear fit to the relative ventilation and perfusion changes in regions receiving 0-60 Gy were calculated. A radiologist read and assigned a functional defect score to pre- and post-treatment ventilation/perfusion scans. RESULTS: 25% of patients had a difference >35% between ventilation and perfusion pre- to post-treatment changes and 20-30% of patients had opposite directions for ventilation and perfusion pre- to post-treatment changes. Using a semi-quantitative scale, radiologist assessment showed that 20% of patients had different pre- to post-treatment ventilation changes when compared to pre- to post-treatment perfusion changes. CONCLUSION: Our data showed that ventilation dose-response can differ from perfusion dose-response for 20-30% of patients. Therefore, when performing thoracic dose-response in cancer patients, it is insufficient to look at ventilation or perfusion alone; but rather both modes of functional imaging may be needed when predicting for clinical outcomes. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE: The significance of this study can be highlighted by the differences between the intrapatient dose-response assessments of this analysis compared to existing population-based dose-response analyses. Elucidating intrapatient ventilation and perfusion dose-response differences may be valuable in predicting pulmonary toxicity in lung cancer patients post-radiotherapy.

Characterizing spatial differences between SPECT-ventilation and SPECT-perfusion in patients with lung cancer undergoing radiotherapy.

This study investigates agreement between ventilation and perfusion for lung cancer patients undergoing radiotherapy. Ventilation-perfusion scans of nineteen patients with stage III lung cancer from a prospective protocol were compared using voxel-wise Spearman correlation-coefficients. The presented results show in about 25% of patients, ventilation and perfusion exhibit lower agreement.

Simulation of x-ray-induced acoustic imaging for absolute dosimetry: Accuracy of image reconstruction methods.

PURPOSE: Three-dimensional in-vivo dose verification is one of the standing challenges in radiation therapy. X-ray-induced acoustic tomography has recently been proposed as an imaging method for use in in-vivo dosimetry. The aim of this study was to investigate the accuracy of reconstructing three-dimensional (3D) absolute dose using x-ray-induced acoustic tomography. We performed this investigation using two different tomographic dose reconstruction techniques. METHODS: Two examples of 3D dose reconstruction techniques for x-ray acoustic imaging are investigated. Dose distributions are calculated for varying field sizes using a clinical treatment planning system. The induced acoustic pressure waves which are generated by the increase in temperature due to the absorption of pulsed MV x-rays are simulated using an advanced numerical modeling package for acoustic wave propagation in the time domain. Two imaging techniques, back projection and iterative time reversal, are used to reconstruct the 3D dose distribution in a water phantom with open fields. Image analysis is performed and reconstructed depth dose curves from x-ray acoustic imaging are compared to the depth dose curves calculated from the treatment planning system. Calculated field sizes from the reconstructed dose profiles by back projection and time reversal are compared to the planned field size to determine their accuracy. The iterative time reversal imaging technique is also used to reconstruct dose in an example clinical dose distribution. Image analysis of this clinical test case is performed using the gamma passing rate. In addition, gamma passing rates are used to validate the stopping criteria in the iterative time reversal method. RESULTS: Water phantom simulations showed that back projection does not adequately reconstruct the shape and intensity of the depth dose. When compared to the depth of maximum dose calculated by a treatment planning system, the maximum dose depth by back projection is shifted deeper by 55 and 75 mm for 4 × 4 cm and 10 × 10 cm field sizes, respectively. The reconstructed depth dose by iterative time reversal accurately agrees with the planned depth dose for a 4 × 4 cm field size and is shifted deeper by 12 mm for the 10 × 10 cm field size. When reconstructing field sizes, the back projection method leads to 18% and 35% larger sizes for the 4 × 4 cm and 10 × 10 cm fields, respectively, whereas the iterative time reversal method reconstructs both field sizes with < 2% error. For the clinical dose distribution, we were able to reconstruct the dose delivered by a 1 degree sub-arc with a good accuracy. The reconstructed and planned doses were compared using gamma analysis, with> 96% gamma passing rate at 3%/2 mm. CONCLUSIONS: Our results show that the 3D x-ray acoustic reconstructed dose by iterative time reversal is considerably more accurate than the dose reconstructed by back projection. Iterative time reversal imaging has a potential for use in 3D absolute dosimetry.