The aim of this work is to generate synthetic computed tomography (sCT) images from multi-sequence magnetic resonance (MR) images using an adversarial network and to assess the feasibility of sCT-based treatment planning for brain radiotherapy. Datasets for 15 patients with glioblastoma were selected and 580 pairs of CT and MR images were used. T1-weighted, T2-weighted and fluid-attenuated inversion recovery MR sequences were combined to create a three-channel image as input data. A conditional generative adversarial network (cGAN) was trained using image patches. The image quality was evaluated using voxel-wise mean absolute errors (MAEs) of the CT number. For the dosimetric evaluation, 3D conformal radiotherapy (3D-CRT) and volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) plans were generated using the original CT set and recalculated using the sCT images. The isocenter dose and dose–volume parameters were compared for 3D-CRT and VMAT plans, respectively. The equivalent path length was also compared. The mean MAEs for the whole body, soft tissue and bone region were 108.1 ± 24.0, 38.9 ± 10.7 and 366.2 ± 62.0 hounsfield unit, respectively. The dosimetric evaluation revealed no significant difference in the isocenter dose for 3D-CRT plans. The differences in the dose received by 2% of the volume (D2%), D50% and D98% relative to the prescribed dose were <1.0%. The overall equivalent path length was shorter than that for real CT by 0.6 ± 1.9 mm. A treatment planning study using generated sCT detected only small, clinically negligible differences. These findings demonstrated the feasibility of generating sCT images for MR-only radiotherapy from multi-sequence MR images using cGAN.

No abstract

No abstract

For CyberKnife-mediated prostate cancer treatment, a tumour-tracking approach is applied to correct the target location by acquiring X-ray images of implanted fiducial markers intermittently. This study investigated the dosimetric impact of intra-fraction prostate motion during CyberKnife treatment. We retrospectively analyzed 16 patients treated using the CyberKnife (35 Gy delivered in five fractions). Using log files of recorded prostate motion, the intra-fraction prostate motion was simulated. We defined the worst-case intra-fraction prostate motion as the difference between pre- and post-deviation on log files and shifted structure sets according to the corresponding offsets for each beam. The dose–volume indices were calculated and compared with the original plan in terms of clinical target volume (CTV), planning target volume (CTV plus a 2-mm margin), rectum, bladder, and urethra. Prostate motions of >3, >5, and >10 mm were observed for 31.3, 9.1, and 0.5% of the 1929 timestamps, respectively. Relative differences between the simulated and original plans were mostly less than 1%. Although significant decreases were observed in D50% and D98% of the target, absolute dose differences were <0.1 Gy compared with the planned dose. The dosimetric impact of intra-fraction prostate motion may be small even with longer treatment durations, indicating that the tumour tracking using the CyberKnife could be a robust system for examining prostate motion.

Purpose The aim of this study was to develop a deep learning (DL) method for generating virtual noncontrast (VNC) computed tomography (CT) images from contrast‐enhanced (CE) CT images (VNCDL) and to evaluate its performance in dose calculations for head and neck radiotherapy in comparison with VNC images derived from a dual‐energy CT (DECT) scanner (VNCDECT). Methods This retrospective study included data for 61 patients who underwent head and neck radiotherapy. All planning CT images were obtained with a single‐source DECT scanner (80 and 140 kVp) with rapid kVp switching. The DL‐based method used a pair of virtual monochromatic images (VMIs) at 70 keV with and without contrast materials. VMIs without contrast materials were used as reference true noncontrast (TNC) images. Deformable image registration was used between the TNC and CE images. We used the data of 45 patients, chosen randomly, for training (7922 paired images), and data from the other 16 patients as test data. We generated the VNCDL images with a densely connected convolutional network. As the VNCDECT images, we used VMIs with the iodine signal suppressed, reconstructed from the CE images of the 16 test patients. The CT numbers of the tumor, common carotid artery, internal jugular vein, muscle, fat, bone marrow, cortical bone, and mandible of each VNC image were compared with those of the TNC image. The dose of the reference TNC plan was recalculated using the CE, VNCDL, and VNCDECT images. Difference maps of the dose distributions and dose–volume histograms were evaluated. Results The mean prediction time for the VNCDL images was 3.4 s per patient, and the mean number of slices was 204. The absolute differences in CT numbers of the VNCDL images were significantly smaller than those of the VNCDECT images for the bone marrow (8.0 ± 6.5 vs 175.1 ± 40.9 HU; P < 0.001) and mandible (20.3 ± 19.3 vs 106.2 ± 80.5 HU; P = 0.002). The DL‐based model provided the dose distribution most similar to that of the TNC plan. With the VNCDECT plans, dose errors >1.0% were observed in bone regions. The dose–volume histogram analysis showed that the VNCDL plans yielded the smallest errors for the primary target, although dose differences were <1.0% for all the approaches. For the maximum dose to the mandible, the mean ± SD errors for the CE, VNCDL, and VNCDECT plans were –0.13% ± 0.23% (range: −0.46% to 0.31%; P = 0.037), –0.01% ± 0.22% (range: −0.40% to 0.36%; P = 1.0), and 0.53% ± 0.47% (range: −0.21% to 1.41%; P < 0.001), respectively. Conclusions In this study, we developed a method based on DL that can rapidly generate VNC images from CE images without a DECT scanner. Compared with the DECT approach, the DL‐based method improved the prediction accuracy of CT numbers in bone regions. Consequently, there was greater agreement between the VNCDL and TNC plan dose distributions than with the CE and VNCDECT plans, achieved by suppressing the contrast material signals while retaining the CT numbers of bone structures.