NRG Oncology Assessment of Artificial Intelligence Deep Learning-Based Auto-segmentation for Radiation Therapy: Current Developments, Clinical Considerations, and Future Directions.

Deep learning neural networks (DLNN) in Artificial intelligence (AI) have been extensively explored for automatic segmentation in radiotherapy (RT). In contrast to traditional model-based methods, data-driven AI-based models for auto-segmentation have shown high accuracy in early studies in research settings and controlled environment (single institution). Vendor-provided commercial AI models are made available as part of the integrated treatment planning system (TPS) or as a stand-alone tool that provides streamlined workflow interacting with the main TPS. These commercial tools have drawn clinics' attention thanks to their significant benefit in reducing the workload from manual contouring and shortening the duration of treatment planning. However, challenges occur when applying these commercial AI-based segmentation models to diverse clinical scenarios, particularly in uncontrolled environments. Contouring nomenclature and guideline standardization has been the main task undertaken by the NRG Oncology. AI auto-segmentation holds the potential clinical trial participants to reduce interobserver variations, nomenclature non-compliance, and contouring guideline deviations. Meanwhile, trial reviewers could use AI tools to verify contour accuracy and compliance of those submitted datasets. In recognizing the growing clinical utilization and potential of these commercial AI auto-segmentation tools, NRG Oncology has formed a working group to evaluate the clinical utilization and potential of commercial AI auto-segmentation tools. The group will assess in-house and commercially available AI models, evaluation metrics, clinical challenges, and limitations, as well as future developments in addressing these challenges. General recommendations are made in terms of the implementation of these commercial AI models, as well as precautions in recognizing the challenges and limitations.

Overview and Recommendations for Prospective Multi-institutional Spatially Fractionated Radiation Therapy Clinical Trials.

PURPOSE: The highly heterogeneous dose delivery of spatially fractionated radiation therapy (SFRT) is a profound departure from standard radiation planning and reporting approaches. Early SFRT studies have shown excellent clinical outcomes. However, prospective multi-institutional clinical trials of SFRT are still lacking. This NRG Oncology/American Association of Physicists in Medicine working group consensus aimed to develop recommendations on dosimetric planning, delivery, and SFRT dose reporting to address this current obstacle toward the design of SFRT clinical trials. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Working groups consisting of radiation oncologists, radiobiologists, and medical physicists with expertise in SFRT were formed in NRG Oncology and the American Association of Physicists in Medicine to investigate the needs and barriers in SFRT clinical trials. RESULTS: Upon reviewing the SFRT technologies and methods, this group identified challenges in several areas, including the availability of SFRT, the lack of treatment planning system support for SFRT, the lack of guidance in the physics and dosimetry of SFRT, the approximated radiobiological modeling of SFRT, and the prescription and combination of SFRT with conventional radiation therapy. CONCLUSIONS: Recognizing these challenges, the group further recommended several areas of improvement for the application of SFRT in cancer treatment, including the creation of clinical practice guidance documents, the improvement of treatment planning system support, the generation of treatment planning and dosimetric index reporting templates, and the development of better radiobiological models through preclinical studies and through conducting multi-institution clinical trials.

Multicenter Multivendor Evaluation of Dose Volume Histogram Creation Consistencies for 8 Commercial Radiation Therapy Dosimetric Systems.

PURPOSE: To evaluate dose volume histogram (DVH) construction differences across 8 major commercial treatment planning systems (TPS) and dose reporting systems for clinically treated plans of various anatomic sites and target sizes. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Dose files from 10 selected clinically treated plans with a hypofractionation, stereotactic radiation therapy prescription or sharp dose gradients such as head and neck plans ranging from prescription doses of 18 Gy in 1 fraction to 70 Gy in 35 fractions, each calculated at 0.25 and 0.125 cm grid size, were created and anonymized in Eclipse TPS, and exported to 7 other major TPS (Pinnacle, RayStation, and Elements) and dose reporting systems (MIM, Mobius, ProKnow, and Velocity) systems for comparison. Dose-volume constraint points of clinical importance for each plan were collected from each evaluated system (D0.03 cc [Gy], volume, and the mean dose were used for structures without specified constraints). Each reported constraint type and structure volume was normalized to the value from Eclipse for a pairwise comparison. A Wilcoxon rank-sum test was used for statistical significance and a multivariable regression model was evaluated adjusting for plan, grid size, and distance to target center. RESULTS: For all DVH points relative to Eclipse, all systems reported median values within 1.0% difference of each other; however, they were all different from Eclipse. Considering mean values, Pinnacle, RayStation, and Elements averaged at 1.038, 1.046, and 1.024, respectively, while MIM, Mobius, ProKnow, and Velocity reported 1.026, 1.050, 1.033, and 1.022, respectively relative to Eclipse. Smaller dose grid size improved agreement between the systems marginally without statistical significance. For structure volumes relative to Eclipse, larger differences are seen across all systems with a range in median values up to 3.0% difference and mean up to 10.1% difference. CONCLUSIONS: Large variations were observed between all systems. Eclipse generally reported, at statistically significant levels, lower values than all other evaluated systems. The nonsignificant change resulting from lowering the dose grid resolution indicates that this resolution may be less important than other aspects of calculating DVH curves, such as the 3-dimensional modeling of the structure.

Four-Dimensional Computed Tomography Ventilation Image-Guided Lung Functional Avoidance Radiation Therapy: A Single-Arm Prospective Pilot Clinical Trial.

PURPOSE: The primary objective of this prospective pilot trial was to assess the safety and feasibility of lung functional avoidance radiation therapy (RT) with 4-dimensional (4D) computed tomography (CT) ventilation imaging. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Patients with primary lung cancer or metastatic disease to the lungs to receive conventionally fractionated RT (CFRT) or stereotactic body RT (SBRT) were eligible. Standard-of-care 4D-CT scans were used to generate ventilation images through image processing/analysis. Each patient required a standard intensity modulated RT plan and ventilation image guided functional avoidance plan. The primary endpoint was the safety of functional avoidance RT, defined as the rate of grade ≥3 adverse events (AEs) that occurred ≤12 months after treatment. Protocol treatment was considered safe if the rates of grade ≥3 pneumonitis and esophagitis were <13% and <21%, respectively for CFRT, and if the rate of any grade ≥3 AEs was <28% for SBRT. Feasibility of functional avoidance RT was assessed by comparison of dose metrics between the 2 plans using the Wilcoxon signed-rank test. RESULTS: Between May 2015 and November 2019, 34 patients with non-small cell lung cancer were enrolled, and 33 patients were evaluable (n = 24 for CFRT; n = 9 for SBRT). Median follow-up was 14.7 months. For CFRT, the rates of grade ≥3 pneumonitis and esophagitis were 4.2% (95% confidence interval, 0.1%-21.1%) and 12.5% (2.7%-32.4%). For SBRT, no patients developed grade ≥3 AEs. Compared with the standard plans, the functional avoidance plans significantly (P < .01) reduced the lung dose-function metrics without compromising target coverage or adherence to standard organs at risk constraints. CONCLUSIONS: This study, representing one of the first prospective investigations on lung functional avoidance RT, demonstrated that the 4D-CT ventilation image guided functional avoidance RT that significantly reduced dose to ventilated lung regions could be safely administered, adding to the growing body of evidence for its clinical utility.

AAPM Task Group 241: A medical physicist's guide to MRI-guided focused ultrasound body systems.

Magnetic resonance-guided focused ultrasound (MRgFUS) is a completely non-invasive technology that has been approved by FDA to treat several diseases. This report, prepared by the American Association of Physicist in Medicine (AAPM) Task Group 241, provides background on MRgFUS technology with a focus on clinical body MRgFUS systems. The report addresses the issues of interest to the medical physics community, specific to the body MRgFUS system configuration, and provides recommendations on how to successfully implement and maintain a clinical MRgFUS program. The following sections describe the key features of typical MRgFUS systems and clinical workflow and provide key points and best practices for the medical physicist. Commonly used terms, metrics and physics are defined and sources of uncertainty that affect MRgFUS procedures are described. Finally, safety and quality assurance procedures are explained, the recommended role of the medical physicist in MRgFUS procedures is described, and regulatory requirements for planning clinical trials are detailed. Although this report is limited in scope to clinical body MRgFUS systems that are approved or currently undergoing clinical trials in the United States, much of the material presented is also applicable to systems designed for other applications.

Dose Summation Strategies for External Beam Radiation Therapy and Brachytherapy in Gynecologic Malignancy: A Review from the NRG Oncology and NCTN Medical Physics Subcommittees.

Definitive, nonsurgical management of gynecologic malignancies involves external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) and/or brachytherapy (BT). Summation of the cumulative dose is critical to assess the total biologic effective dose to targets and organs at risk. Cumulative dose calculation from EBRT and BT can be performed with or without image registration (IR) and biologic dose summation. Among these dose summation strategies, linear addition of dose-volume histogram (DVH) parameters without IR is the global standard for composite dose reporting. This approach stems from an era without image guidance and simple external beam and brachytherapy treatment approaches. With technological advances, EBRT and high-dose-rate BT have evolved to allow for volume-based treatment planning and delivery. Modern conformal therapeutic radiation involves volumetric or intensity modulated EBRT, capable of simultaneously treating multiple targets at different specified dose levels. Therefore, given the complexity of modern radiation treatment, the linear addition of DVH parameters from EBRT and high-dose-rate BT is challenging to represent the combined dose distribution. Deformable image registration (DIR) between EBRT and image guided brachytherapy (IGBT) data sets may provide a more nuanced calculation of multimodal dose accumulation. However, DIR is still nascent in this regard, and needs further development for accuracy and efficiency for clinical use. Biologic dose summation can combine physical dose maps from EBRT and each IGBT fraction, thereby generating a composite DVH from the biologic effective dose. However, accurate radiobiologic parameters are tissue-dependent and not well characterized. A combination of voxel-based DIR and biologic weighted dose maps may be the best approximation of dose accumulation but remains invalidated. The purpose of this report is to review dose summation strategies for EBRT and BT, including conventional equivalent dose in 2-Gy fractions dose summation without image registration, physical dose summation using 3-dimensional rigid IR and DIR, and biologic dose summation. We also provide general clinical workflows for IGBT with a focus on cervical cancer.

Rigid and Deformable Image Registration for Radiation Therapy: A Self-Study Evaluation Guide for NRG Oncology Clinical Trial Participation.

PURPOSE: The registration of multiple imaging studies to radiation therapy computed tomography simulation, including magnetic resonance imaging, positron emission tomography-computed tomography, etc. is a widely used strategy in radiation oncology treatment planning, and these registrations have valuable roles in image guidance, dose composition/accumulation, and treatment delivery adaptation. The NRG Oncology Medical Physics subcommittee formed a working group to investigate feasible workflows for a self-study credentialing process of image registration commissioning. METHODS AND MATERIALS: The American Association of Physicists in Medicine (AAPM) Task Group 132 (TG132) report on the use of image registration and fusion algorithms in radiation therapy provides basic guidelines for quality assurance and quality control of the image registration algorithms and the overall clinical process. The report recommends a series of tests and the corresponding metrics that should be evaluated and reported during commissioning and routine quality assurance, as well as a set of recommendations for vendors. The NRG Oncology medical physics subcommittee working group found incompatibility of some digital phantoms with commercial systems. Thus, there is still a need to provide further recommendations in terms of compatible digital phantoms, clinical feasible workflow, and achievable thresholds, especially for future clinical trials involving deformable image registration algorithms. Nine institutions participated and evaluated 4 commonly used commercial imaging registration software and various versions in the field of radiation oncology. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: The NRG Oncology Working Group on image registration commissioning herein provides recommendations on the use of digital phantom/data sets and analytical software access for institutions and clinics to perform their own self-study evaluation of commercial imaging systems that might be employed for coregistration in radiation therapy treatment planning and image guidance procedures. Evaluation metrics and their corresponding values were given as guidelines to establish practical tolerances. Vendor compliance for image registration commissioning was evaluated, and recommendations were given for future development.

Adaptive Radiation Therapy (ART) Strategies and Technical Considerations: A State of the ART Review From NRG Oncology.

The integration of adaptive radiation therapy (ART), or modifying the treatment plan during the treatment course, is becoming more widely available in clinical practice. ART offers strong potential for minimizing treatment-related toxicity while escalating or de-escalating target doses based on the dose to organs at risk. Yet, ART workflows add complexity into the radiation therapy planning and delivery process that may introduce additional uncertainties. This work sought to review presently available ART workflows and technological considerations such as image quality, deformable image registration, and dose accumulation. Quality assurance considerations for ART components and minimum recommendations are described. Personnel and workflow efficiency recommendations are provided, as is a summary of currently available clinical evidence supporting the implementation of ART. Finally, to guide future clinical trial protocols, an example ART physician directive and a physics template following standard NRG Oncology protocol is provided.

Tumor Control Probability of Radiosurgery and Fractionated Stereotactic Radiosurgery for Brain Metastases.

PURPOSE: As part of the American Association of Physicists in Medicine Working Group on Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy, tumor control probability (TCP) after stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) and fractionated stereotactic radiosurgery (fSRS) for brain metastases was modeled based on pooled dosimetric and clinical data from published English-language literature. METHODS AND MATERIALS: PubMed-indexed studies published between January 1995 and September 2017 were used to evaluate dosimetric and clinical predictors of TCP after SRS or fSRS for brain metastases. Eligible studies had ≥10 patients and included detailed dose-fractionation data with corresponding ≥1-year local control (LC) data, typically evaluated as a >20% increase in diameter of the targeted lesion using the pre-SRS diameter as a reference. RESULTS: Of 2951 potentially eligible manuscripts, 56 included sufficient dose-volume data for analyses. Accepting that necrosis and pseudoprogression can complicate the assessment of LC, for tumors ≤20 mm, single-fraction doses of 18 and 24 Gy corresponded with >85% and 95% 1-year LC rates, respectively. For tumors 21 to 30 mm, an 18 Gy single-fraction dose was associated with 75% LC. For tumors 31 to 40 mm, a 15 Gy single-fraction dose yielded ∼69% LC. For 3- to 5-fraction fSRS using doses in the range of 27 to 35 Gy, 80% 1-year LC has been achieved for tumors of 21 to 40 mm in diameter. CONCLUSIONS: TCP for SRS and fSRS are presented. For small lesions ≤20 mm, single doses of ≈18 Gy appear generally associated with excellent rates of LC; for melanoma, higher doses seem warranted. For larger lesions >20 mm, local control rates appear to be ≈ 70% to 75% with usual doses of 15 to 18 Gy, and in this setting, fSRS regimens should be considered. Greater consistency in reporting of dosimetric and LC data is needed to facilitate future pooled analyses. As systemic and biologic therapies evolve, updated analyses will be needed to further assess the necessity, efficacy, and toxicity of SRS and fSRS.

Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy for Spinal Metastases: Tumor Control Probability Analyses and Recommended Reporting Standards.

PURPOSE: We sought to investigate the tumor control probability (TCP) of spinal metastases treated with stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) in 1 to 5 fractions. METHODS AND MATERIALS: PubMed-indexed articles from 1995 to 2018 were eligible for data extraction if they contained SBRT dosimetric details correlated with actuarial 2-year local tumor control rates. Logistic dose-response models of collected data were compared in terms of physical dose and 3-fraction equivalent dose. RESULTS: Data were extracted from 24 articles with 2619 spinal metastases. Physical dose TCP modeling of 2-year local tumor control from the single-fraction data were compared with data from 2 to 5 fractions, resulting in an estimated α/ß = 6 Gy, and this was used to pool data. Acknowledging the uncertainty intrinsic to the data extraction and modeling process, the 90% TCP corresponded to 20 Gy in 1 fraction, 28 Gy in 2 fractions, 33 Gy in 3 fractions, and (with extrapolation) 40 Gy in 5 fractions. The estimated TCP for common fractionation schemes was 82% at 18 Gy, 90% for 20 Gy, and 96% for 24 Gy in a single fraction, 82% for 24 Gy in 2 fractions, and 78% for 27 Gy in 3 fractions. CONCLUSIONS: Spinal SBRT with the most common fractionation schemes yields 2-year estimates of local control of 82% to 96%. Given the heterogeneity in the tumor control estimates extracted from the literature, with variability in reporting of dosimetry data and the definition of and statistical methods of reporting tumor control, care should be taken interpreting the resultant model-based estimates. Depending on the clinical intent, the improved TCP with higher dose regimens should be weighed against the potential risks for greater toxicity. We encourage future reports to provide full dosimetric data correlated with tumor local control to allow future efforts of modeling pooled data.

Overview of the First NRG Oncology-National Cancer Institute Workshop on Dosimetry of Systemic Radiopharmaceutical Therapy.

In 2018, the National Cancer Institute and NRG Oncology partnered for the first time to host a joint workshop on systemic radiopharmaceutical therapy (RPT) to specifically address dosimetry issues and strategies for future clinical trials. The workshop focused on current dosimetric approaches for clinical trials, strategies under development that would optimize dose reporting, and future desired or optimized approaches for novel emerging radionuclides and carriers in development. In this article, we review the main approaches that are applied clinically to calculate the absorbed dose. These include absorbed doses calculated over a variety of spatial scales, including whole body, organ, suborgan, and voxel, the last 3 of which are achievable within the MIRD schema (S value) and can be calculated with analytic methods or Monte Carlo methods, the latter in most circumstances. This article will also contrast currently available methods and tools with those used in the past, to propose a pathway whereby dosimetry helps the field by optimizing the biologic effect of the treatment and trial design in the drug approval process to reduce financial and logistical costs. We also briefly discuss the dosimetric equivalent of biomarkers to help bring a precision medicine approach to RPT implementation when merited by evidence collected during early-phase trial investigations. Advances in the methodology and related tools have made dosimetry the optimum biomarker for RPT.

Overcoming Barriers to Radiopharmaceutical Therapy (RPT): An Overview From the NRG-NCI Working Group on Dosimetry of Radiopharmaceutical Therapy.

Radiopharmaceutical therapy (RPT) continues to demonstrate tremendous potential in improving the therapeutic gains in radiation therapy by specifically delivering radiation to tumors that can be well assessed in terms of dosimetry and imaging. Dosimetry in external beam radiation therapy is standard practice. This is not the case, however, in RPT. This NRG (acronym formed from the first letter of the 3 original groups: National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project, the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group, and the Gynecologic Oncology Group)-National Cancer Institute Working Group review describes some of the challenges to improving RPT. The main priorities for advancing the field include (1) developing and adopting best practice guidelines for incorporating patient-specific dosimetry for RPT that can be used at both large clinics with substantial resources and more modest clinics that have limited resources, (2) establishing and improving strategies for introducing new radiopharmaceuticals for clinical investigation, (3) developing approaches to address the radiophobia that is associated with the administration of radioactivity for cancer therapy, and (4) solving the financial and logistical issues of expertise and training in the developing field of RPT.

Current Status of Radiopharmaceutical Therapy.

In radiopharmaceutical therapy (RPT), a radionuclide is systemically or locally delivered with the goal of targeting and delivering radiation to cancer cells while minimizing radiation exposure to untargeted cells. Examples of current RPTs include thyroid ablation with the administration of 131I, treatment of liver cancer with 90Y microspheres, the treatment of bony metastases with 223Ra, and the treatment of neuroendocrine tumors with 177Lu-DOTATATE. New RPTs are being developed where radionuclides are incorporated into systemic targeted therapies. To assure that RPT is appropriately implemented, advances in targeting need to be matched with advances in quantitative imaging and dosimetry methods. Currently, radiopharmaceutical therapy is administered by intravenous or locoregional injection, and the treatment planning has typically been implemented like chemotherapy, where the activity administered is either fixed or based on a patient's body weight or body surface area. RPT pharmacokinetics are measurable by quantitative imaging and are known to vary across patients, both in tumors and normal tissues. Therefore, fixed or weight-based activity prescriptions are not currently optimized to deliver a cytotoxic dose to targets while remaining within the tolerance dose of organs at risk. Methods that provide dose estimates to individual patients rather than to reference geometries are needed to assess and adjust the injected RPT dose. Accurate doses to targets and organs at risk will benefit the individual patients and decrease uncertainties in clinical trials. Imaging can be used to measure activity distribution in vivo, and this information can be used to determine patient-specific treatment plans where the dose to the targets and organs at risk can be calculated. The development and adoption of imaging-based dosimetry methods is particularly beneficial in early clinical trials. In this work we discuss dosimetric accuracy needs in modern radiation oncology, uncertainties in the dosimetry in RPT, and best approaches for imaging and dosimetry of internal radionuclide therapy.

NRG Oncology Survey on Practice and Technology Use in SRT and SBRT Delivery.

PURPOSE: To assess stereotactic radiotherapy (SRT)/stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) practices by polling clinics participating in multi-institutional clinical trials. METHODS: The NRG Oncology Medical Physics Subcommittee distributed a survey consisting of 23 questions, which covered general technologies, policies, and procedures used in the Radiation Oncology field for the delivery of SRT/SBRT (9 questions), and site-specific questions for brain SRT, lung SBRT, and prostate SBRT (14 questions). Surveys were distributed to 1,996 radiotherapy institutions included on the membership rosters of the five National Clinical Trials Network (NCTN) groups. Patient setup, motion management, target localization, prescriptions, and treatment delivery technique data were reported back by 568 institutions (28%). RESULTS: 97.5% of respondents treat lung SBRT patients, 77.0% perform brain SRT, and 29.1% deliver prostate SBRT. 48.8% of clinics require a physicist present for every fraction of SBRT, 18.5% require a physicist present for the initial SBRT fraction only, and 14.9% require a physicist present for the entire first fraction, including set-up approval for all subsequent fractions. 55.3% require physician approval for all fractions, and 86.7% do not reposition without x-ray imaging. For brain SRT, most institutions (83.9%) use a planning target volume (PTV) margin of 2 mm or less. Lung SBRT PTV margins of 3 mm or more are used in 80.6% of clinics. Volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) is the dominant delivery method in 62.8% of SRT treatments, 70.9% of lung SBRT, and 68.3% of prostate SBRT. CONCLUSION: This report characterizes SRT/SBRT practices in radiotherapy clinics participating in clinical trials. Data made available here allows the radiotherapy community to compare their practice with that of other clinics, determine what is achievable, and assess areas for improvement.

Technical note: Atlas-based Auto-segmentation of masticatory muscles for head and neck cancer radiotherapy.

PURPOSE: The study aimed to use quantitative geometric and dosimetric metrics to assess the accuracy of atlas-based auto-segmentation of masticatory muscles (MMs) compared to manual drawn contours for head and neck cancer (HNC) radiotherapy (RT). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Fifty-eight patients with HNC treated with RT were analyzed. Paired MMs (masseter, temporalis, and medial and lateral pterygoids) were manually delineated on planning computed tomography (CT) images for all patients. Twenty-nine patients were used to generate the MM atlas. Using this atlas, automatic segmentation of the MMs was performed for the remaining 29 patients without manual correction. Auto-segmentation accuracy for MMs was compared using dice similarity coefficients (DSCs), Hausdorff distance (HD), HD95, and variation in the center of mass (∆COM). The dosimetric impact on MMs was calculated (∆dose) using dosimetric parameters (D99%, D95%, D50%, and D1%), and compared with the geometric indices to test correlation. RESULTS: DSCmean ranges from 0.79 ± 0.04 to 0.85 ± 0.04, HDmean from 0.43 ± 0.08 to 0.82 ± 0.26 cm, HD95mean from 0.32 ± 0.08 to 0.42 ± 0.16 cm, and ∆COMmean from 0.18 ± 0.11 to 0.33 ± 0.23 cm. The mean MM volume difference was < 15%. The correlation coefficient (r) of geometric and dosimetric indices for the four MMs ranges between -0.456 and 0.300. CONCLUSIONS: Atlas-based auto-segmentation for masticatory muscles provides geometrically accurate contours compared to manual drawn contours. Dose obtained from those auto-segmented contours is comparable to that from manual drawn contours. Atlas-based auto-segmentation strategy for MM in HN radiotherapy is readily availalbe for clinical implementation.

Deep learning vs. atlas-based models for fast auto-segmentation of the masticatory muscles on head and neck CT images.

BACKGROUND: Impaired function of masticatory muscles will lead to trismus. Routine delineation of these muscles during planning may improve dose tracking and facilitate dose reduction resulting in decreased radiation-related trismus. This study aimed to compare a deep learning model with a commercial atlas-based model for fast auto-segmentation of the masticatory muscles on head and neck computed tomography (CT) images. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Paired masseter (M), temporalis (T), medial and lateral pterygoid (MP, LP) muscles were manually segmented on 56 CT images. CT images were randomly divided into training (n = 27) and validation (n = 29) cohorts. Two methods were used for automatic delineation of masticatory muscles (MMs): Deep learning auto-segmentation (DLAS) and atlas-based auto-segmentation (ABAS). The automatic algorithms were evaluated using Dice similarity coefficient (DSC), recall, precision, Hausdorff distance (HD), HD95, and mean surface distance (MSD). A consolidated score was calculated by normalizing the metrics against interobserver variability and averaging over all patients. Differences in dose (∆Dose) to MMs for DLAS and ABAS segmentations were assessed. A paired t-test was used to compare the geometric and dosimetric difference between DLAS and ABAS methods. RESULTS: DLAS outperformed ABAS in delineating all MMs (p < 0.05). The DLAS mean DSC for M, T, MP, and LP ranged from 0.83 ± 0.03 to 0.89 ± 0.02, the ABAS mean DSC ranged from 0.79 ± 0.05 to 0.85 ± 0.04. The mean value for recall, HD, HD95, MSD also improved with DLAS for auto-segmentation. Interobserver variation revealed the highest variability in DSC and MSD for both T and MP, and the highest scores were achieved for T by both automatic algorithms. With few exceptions, the mean ∆D98%, ∆D95%, ∆D50%, and ∆D2% for all structures were below 10% for DLAS and ABAS and had no detectable statistical difference (P > 0.05). DLAS based contours had dose endpoints more closely matched with that of the manually segmented when compared with ABAS. CONCLUSIONS: DLAS auto-segmentation of masticatory muscles for the head and neck radiotherapy had improved segmentation accuracy compared with ABAS with no qualitative difference in dosimetric endpoints compared to manually segmented contours.

Clinical feasibility of MR-assisted CT-based cervical brachytherapy using MR-to-CT deformable image registration.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study is to evaluate the feasibility of using deformable image registration algorithms to improve high-dose-rate high-risk clinical target volume (HR-CTV) delineation between preapplicator implantation MRI (pre-MRI) and postapplicator implantation CT (post-CT) in the treatment of locally advanced cervical cancer (LACC). METHOD AND MATERIALS: Twenty-six patients were identified for the study. Regions of interest were segmented on MRI and CT. A HR-CTV was delineated on pre-MRI and compared with the previously contoured HR-CTV on the post-CT. Two commercially available algorithms, ANACONDA (anatomically constrained) and MORFEUS (biomechanical model based) with various controlling structure settings, including the cervix, uterus, etc., were used to deform pre-MRI to post-CT. MRI-to-CT deformed targets are denoted as HR-CTV'. Quantitative deformation metrics include Dice index, distance to agreement, and center of mass displacement. Qualitative clinical usefulness of deformations was scored based on HR-CTV identification on CT images. RESULTS: For ANACONDA and MORFEUS deformations, using a cervix controlling region of interest resulted in the highest Dice, lowest distance to agreement, and lowest center of mass displacement for HR-CTV'. With MORFEUS deformations, the deformed HR-CTV' proved clinically useful in 23 patients. CONCLUSIONS: Prebrachytherapy implantation MRI can aid target contours for CT-based brachytherapy through ANACONDA or MORFEUS algorithms with appropriate parameter selection for LACC patients.

Clinical Enhancement in AI-Based Post-processed Fast-Scan Low-Dose CBCT for Head and Neck Adaptive Radiotherapy.

Purpose: To assess image quality and uncertainty in organ-at-risk segmentation on cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) enhanced by deep-learning convolutional neural network (DCNN) for head and neck cancer. Methods: An in-house DCNN was trained using forty post-operative head and neck cancer patients with their planning CT and first-fraction CBCT images. Additional fifteen patients with repeat simulation CT (rCT) and CBCT scan taken on the same day (oCBCT) were used for validation and clinical utility assessment. Enhanced CBCT (eCBCT) images were generated from the oCBCT using the in-house DCNN. Quantitative imaging quality improvement was evaluated using HU accuracy, signal-to-noise-ratio (SNR), and structural similarity index measure (SSIM). Organs-at-risk (OARs) were delineated on o/eCBCT and compared with manual structures on the same day rCT. Contour accuracy was assessed using dice similarity coefficient (DSC), Hausdorff distance (HD), and center of mass (COM) displacement. Qualitative assessment of users' confidence in manual segmenting OARs was performed on both eCBCT and oCBCT by visual scoring. Results: eCBCT organs-at-risk had significant improvement on mean pixel values, SNR (p < 0.05), and SSIM (p < 0.05) compared to oCBCT images. Mean DSC of eCBCT-to-rCT (0.83 ± 0.06) was higher than oCBCT-to-rCT (0.70 ± 0.13). Improvement was observed for mean HD of eCBCT-to-rCT (0.42 ± 0.13 cm) vs. oCBCT-to-rCT (0.72 ± 0.25 cm). Mean COM was less for eCBCT-to-rCT (0.28 ± 0.19 cm) comparing to oCBCT-to-rCT (0.44 ± 0.22 cm). Visual scores showed OAR segmentation was more accessible on eCBCT than oCBCT images. Conclusion: DCNN improved fast-scan low-dose CBCT in terms of the HU accuracy, image contrast, and OAR delineation accuracy, presenting potential of eCBCT for adaptive radiotherapy.