Search

PURPOSE: CT Hounsfield Units (HUs) are converted to electron density using a calibration curve obtained from physical measurements of an electron density phantom. HU values assigned to an MRI-derived synthetic computed tomography (sCT) may present a different relationship with electron density compared to CT HU. Correct assignment of sCT HU values is critical for accurate dose calculation and delivery. The goals of this work were to develop a sCT calibration curve using patient data acquired on a clinically commissioned CT scanner and assess for CyberKnife- and volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT)-based MR-only treatment planning of prostate SBRT. METHODS: Same-day CT and MRI simulation in the treatment position were performed on 10 patients treated with SBRT to the prostate. Dixon in-phase and out-of-phase MRIs were acquired on a 3T scanner using a 3D T1-weighted gradient-echo sequence to generate sCTs using a commercial sCT algorithm. CT and sCT datasets were co-registered and HU values compared using mean absolute error (MAE). An optimized HU-to-density calibration curve was created based on average HU values across an institutional patient database for each of the four sCT tissue types. Clinical CyberKnife and VMAT treatment plans were generated on each patient CT and recomputed onto corresponding sCTs. Dose distributions computed using CT and sCT were compared using gamma criteria and dose-volume-histograms. RESULTS: For the optimized calibration curve, HU values were -96, 37, 204, and 1170 and relative electron densities were 0.95, 1.04, 1.1, and 1.7 for adipose, soft tissue, inner bone, and outer bone, respectively. The proposed sCT protocol produced total MAE of 94 ± 20HU. Gamma values mean ± std (min-max) were 98.9% ± 0.9% (97.1%-100%) and 97.7% ± 1.3% (95.3%-99.3%) for VMAT and CyberKnife plans, respectively. CONCLUSION: MRI-derived sCT using the proposed approach shows excellent dosimetric agreement with conventional CT simulation, demonstrating the feasibility of MRI-derived sCT for prostate SBRT treatment planning.

BACKGROUND: Magnetic resonance image only (MRI-only) simulation for head and neck (H&N) radiotherapy (RT) could allow for single-image modality planning with excellent soft tissue contrast. In the MRI-only simulation workflow, synthetic computed tomography (sCT) is generated from MRI to provide electron density information for dose calculation. Bone/air regions produce little MRI signal which could lead to electron density misclassification in sCT. Establishing the dosimetric impact of this error could inform quality assurance (QA) procedures using MRI-only RT planning or compensatory methods for accurate dosimetric calculation. PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to investigate if Hounsfield unit (HU) voxel misassignments from sCT images result in dosimetric errors in clinical treatment plans. METHODS: Fourteen H&N cancer patients undergoing same-day CT and 3T MRI simulation were retrospectively identified. MRI was deformed to the CT using multimodal deformable image registration. sCTs were generated from T1w DIXON MRIs using a commercially available deep learning-based generator (MRIplanner, Spectronic Medical AB, Helsingborg, Sweden). Tissue voxel assignment was quantified by creating a CT-derived HU threshold contour. CT/sCT HU differences for anatomical/target contours and tissue classification regions including air (500 HU) were quantified. t-test was used to determine if sCT/CT HU differences were significant. The frequency of structures that had a HU difference > 80 HU (the CT window-width setting for intra-cranial structures) was computed to establish structure classification accuracy. Clinical intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) treatment plans created on CT were retrospectively recalculated on sCT images and compared using the gamma metric. RESULTS: The mean ratio of sCT HUs relative to CT for air, adipose tissue, soft tissue, spongy and cortical bone were 1.7 ± 0.3, 1.1 ± 0.1, 1.0 ± 0.1, 0.9 ± 0.1 and 0.8 ± 0.1 (value of 1 indicates perfect agreement). T-tests (significance set at t = 0.05) identified differences in HU values for air, spongy and cortical bone in sCT images compared to CT. The structures with sCT/CT HU differences > 80 HU of note were the left and right (L/R) cochlea and mandible (>79% of the tested cohort), the oral cavity (for 57% of the tested cohort), the epiglottis (for 43% of the tested cohort) and the L/R TM joints (occurring > 29% of the cohort). In the case of the cochlea and TM joints, these structures contain dense bone/air interfaces. In the case of the oral cavity and mandible, these structures suffer the additional challenge of being positionally altered in CT versus MRI simulation (due to a non-MR safe immobilizing bite block requiring absence of bite block in MR). Finally, the epiglottis HU assignment suffers from its small size and unstable positionality. Plans recalculated on sCT yielded global/local gamma pass rates of 95.5% ± 2% (3 mm, 3%) and 92.7% ± 2.1% (2 mm, 2%). The largest mean differences in D95, Dmean , D50 dose volume histogram (DVH) metrics for organ-at-risk (OAR) and planning tumor volumes (PTVs) were 2.3% ± 3.0% and 0.7% ± 1.9% respectively. CONCLUSIONS: In this cohort, HU differences of CT and sCT were observed but did not translate into a reduction in gamma pass rates or differences in average PTV/OAR dose metrics greater than 3%. For sites such as the H&N where there are many tissue interfaces we did not observe large scale dose deviations but further studies using larger retrospective cohorts are merited to establish the variation in sCT dosimetric accuracy which could help to inform QA limits on clinical sCT usage.