Evaluating the Hounsfield unit assignment and dose differences between CT-based standard and deep learning-based synthetic CT images for MRI-only radiation therapy of the head and neck.

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 (<250 HU), adipose tissue (-250 HU to -51 HU), soft tissue (-50 HU to 199 HU), spongy (200 HU to 499 HU) and cortical bone (>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.

Incidental findings and safety events from magnetic resonance imaging simulation for head and neck radiation treatment planning: A single institution experience.

Purpose: Having dedicated MRI scanners within radiation oncology departments may present unexpected challenges since radiation oncologists and radiation therapists are generally not trained in this modality and there are potential patient safety concerns. This study retrospectively reviews the incidental findings and safety events that were observed at a single institution during introduction of MRI sim for head and neck radiotherapy planning. Methods: Consecutive patients from March 1, 2020, to May 31, 2022, who were scheduled for MRI sim after having completed CT simulation for head and neck radiotherapy were included for analysis. Patients first underwent a CT simulation with a thermoplastic mask and in most cases with an intraoral stent. The same setup was then reproduced in the MRI simulator. Safety events were instances where scheduled MRI sims were not completed due to the MRI technologist identifying MRI-incompatible devices or objects at the time of sim. Incidental findings were identified during weekly quality assurance rounds as a joint enterprise of head and neck radiation oncology and neuroradiology. Categorical variables between completed and not completed MRI sims were compared using the Chi-Square test and continuous variables were compared using the Mann-Whitney U test with a p-value of < 0.05 considered to be statistically significant. Results: 148 of 169 MRI sims (88 %) were completed as scheduled and 21 (12 %) were not completed (Table 1). Among the 21 aborted MRI sims, the most common reason was due to safety events flagged by the MRI technologist (n = 8, 38 %) because of the presence of metal or a medical device that was not noted at the time of initial screening by the administrative coordinator. Patients who did not complete MRI sim were more likely to be treated for non-squamous head and neck primary tumor (p = 0.016) and were being treated post-operatively (p < 0.001). CT and MRI sim scans each had 17 incidental findings. CT simulation detected 3 cases of new metastases in lungs, which were outside the scan parameters of MRI sim. MRI sim detected one case of dural venous thrombosis and one case of cervical spine epidural abscess, which were not detected by CT simulation. Conclusions: Radiation oncology departments with dedicated MRI simulation scanners would benefit from diagnostic radiology review for incidental findings and having therapists with MRI safety credentialing to catch near-miss events.

Contrast-enhanced 4D-MRI for internal target volume generation in treatment planning for liver tumors.

BACKGROUND: Liver tumors are often invisible on four-dimensional commuted tomography (4D-CT). Imperfect imaging surrogates are used to estimate the tumor motion. Here, we assessed multiple 4D magnetic resonance (MR) binning algorithms for directly visualizing liver tumor motion for radiotherapy planning. METHODS: Patients were simulated using a 3 Tesla MR and CT scanner. Three prototype binning algorithms (phase, amplitude, and two-directional) were applied to the 4D-MRIs, and the image quality was assessed using a qualitative clarity score and quantitative sharpness score. Radiation plans were generated for internal target volumes (ITVs) derived using 4D-MRI and 4D-CT, and the dosimetry of targets were compared. Paired t-tests were used to compare sharpness scores and dosimetric data. RESULTS: Twelve patients with 17 liver tumors were scanned between May and November 2021. Compared to phase binning, two-directional demonstrated equal or better clarity and sharpness scores (end-expiration: 0.33 vs 0.38, p = 0.018, end-inspiration: 0.28 vs 0.31, p = 0.010). Compared to amplitude binning, two-directional binning captured hysteresis of ≥ 3 mm in 35 % of patients. Evaluation of dosimetry CT-optimized plans revealed that PTV coverage of MR-derived targets were significantly lower than CT-derived targets (PTV receiving 90 % of prescription: 75.56 % vs 89.38 %, p = 0.002). CONCLUSION: Using contrast-enhanced 4D-MRI is feasible for directly delineating liver tumors throughout the respiratory cycle. The current standard of using radiation plans optimized for 4D-CT-derived targets achieved lower coverage of directly visualized MRI targets, suggesting that adopting MRI for motion management may improve radiation treatment of liver lesions and reduce the risk of marginal misses.