A prerequisite for adaptive dose-tracking in radiotherapy is the assessment of the deformable image registration (DIR) quality. In this work, various metrics that quantify DIR uncertainties are investigated using realistic deformation fields of 26 head and neck and 12 lung cancer patients. Metrics related to the physiologically feasibility (the Jacobian determinant, harmonic energy (HE), and octahedral shear strain (OSS)) and numerically robustness of the deformation (the inverse consistency error (ICE), transitivity error (TE), and distance discordance metric (DDM)) were investigated. The deformable registrations were performed using a B-spline transformation model. The DIR error metrics were log-transformed and correlated (Pearson) against the log-transformed ground-truth error on a voxel level. Correlations of r  ⩾  0.5 were found for the DDM and HE. Given a DIR tolerance threshold of 2.0 mm and a negative predictive value of 0.90, the DDM and HE thresholds were 0.49 mm and 0.014, respectively. In conclusion, the log-transformed DDM and HE can be used to identify voxels at risk for large DIR errors with a large negative predictive value. The HE and/or DDM can therefore be used to perform automated quality assurance of each CT-based DIR for head and neck and lung cancer patients.

For locally advanced-stage non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), inter-fraction target motion variations during the whole time span of a fractionated treatment course are assessed in a large and representative patient cohort. The primary objective is to develop a suitable motion monitoring strategy for pencil beam scanning proton therapy (PBS-PT) treatments of NSCLC patients during free breathing. Methods: Weekly 4D computed tomography (4DCT; 41 patients) and daily 4D cone beam computed tomography (4DCBCT; 10 of 41 patients) scans were analyzed for a fully fractionated treatment course. Gross tumor volumes (GTVs) were contoured and the 3D displacement vectors of the centroid positions were compared for all scans. Furthermore, motion amplitude variations in different lung segments were statistically analyzed. The dosimetric impact of target motion variations and target motion assessment was investigated in exemplary patient cases. Results: The median observed centroid motion was 3.4 mm (range: 0.2-12.4 mm) with an average variation of 2.2 mm (range: 0.1-8.8 mm). Ten of 32 patients (31.3%) with an initial motion <5 mm increased beyond a 5-mm motion amplitude during the treatment course. Motion observed in the 4DCBCT scans deviated on average 1.5 mm (range: 0.0-6.0 mm) from the motion observed in the 4DCTs. Larger motion variations for one example patient compromised treatment plan robustness while no dosimetric influence was seen due to motion assessment biases in another example case. Conclusions: Target motion variations were investigated during the course of radiotherapy for NSCLC patients. Patients with initial GTV motion amplitudes of < 2 mm can be assumed to be stable in motion during the treatment course. For treatments of NSCLC patients who exhibit motion amplitudes of > 2 mm, 4DCBCT should be considered for motion monitoring due to substantial motion variations observed.

Ventilation-induced tumour motion remains a challenge for the accuracy of proton therapy treatments in lung patients. We investigated the feasibility of using a 4D virtual CT (4D-vCT) approach based on deformable image registration (DIR) and motion-aware 4D CBCT reconstruction (MA-ROOSTER) to enable accurate daily proton dose calculation using a gantry-mounted CBCT scanner tailored to proton therapy. Methods: Ventilation correlated data of 10 breathing phases were acquired from a porcine exvivo functional lung phantom using CT and CBCT. 4D-vCTs were generated by (1) DIR of the mid-position 4D-CT to the mid-position 4D-CBCT (reconstructed with the MA-ROOSTER) using a diffeomorphic Morphons algorithm and (2) subsequent propagation of the obtained mid-position vCT to the individual 4D-CBCT phases. Proton therapy treatment planning was performed to evaluate dose calculation accuracy of the 4D-vCTs. A robust treatment plan delivering a nominal dose of 60 Gy was generated on the average intensity image of the 4D-CT for an approximated internal target volume (ITV). Dose distributions were then recalculated on individual phases of the 4D-CT and the 4D-vCT based on the optimized plan. Dose accumulation was performed for 4D-vCT and 4D-CT using DIR of each phase to the mid position, which was chosen as reference. Dose based on the 4D-vCT was then evaluated against the dose calculated on 4D-CT both, phase-by-phase as well as accumulated, by comparing dose volume histogram (DVH) values (Dmean, D2%, D98%, D95%) for the ITV, and by a 3D-gamma index analysis (global, 3% / 3mm, 5 Gy, 20 Gy and 30 Gy dose thresholds). Results: Good agreement was found between the 4D-CT and 4D-vCT-based ITV-DVH curves. The relative differences ((CT-vCT)/CT) between accumulated values of ITV Dmean, D2%, D95% and D98% for the 4D-CT and 4D-vCT-based dose distributions were-0.2%, 0.0%,-0.1% and-0.1%, respectively. Phase specific values varied between-0.5%-0.2%,-0.2%-0.5%,-3.5%-1.5% and-5.7%-2.3%. The relative difference of accumulated Dmean over the lungs was 2.3% and Dmean for the phases varied between-5.4% and 5.8%. The gamma pass-rates with 5 Gy, 20 Gy and 30 Gy thresholds for the accumulated doses were 96.7.%, 99.6% and 99.9%, respectively. Phase-by-phase comparison yielded pass-rates between 86%-97%, 88%-98% and 94%-100%. 2 Conclusions: Feasibility of the suggested 4D-vCT workflow using proton therapy specific imaging equipment was shown. Results indicate the potential of the method to be applied for daily 4D proton dose estimation.