Dataset Information

Daily online contouring and re-planning versus translation-only correction in neurovascular-sparing magnetic resonance-guided radiotherapy for localized prostate cancer.

ABSTRACT: Neurovascular bundle (NVB) and internal pudendal artery (IPA) sparing during magnetic resonance-guided radiotherapy (MRgRT) for prostate cancer aims for preservation of erectile function. Our present workflow involves daily online contouring and re-planning on a 1.5 T MR-linac, as alternative to conventional (rigid) translation-only corrections of the prostate. We compared planned dose for the NVB and IPA between strategies. Total planned dose was significantly lower with daily online contouring and re-planning for the NVB, but not for the IPA. For the NVB and IPA, the intrapatient difference between highest and lowest fraction dose was significantly smaller for the contouring and re-planning plans.

SUBMITTER: Teunissen FR

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9485897 | biostudies-literature | 2022 Oct

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Daily online contouring and re-planning versus translation-only correction in neurovascular-sparing magnetic resonance-guided radiotherapy for localized prostate cancer.

Teunissen Frederik R FR van der Voort van Zyp Jochem R N JRN de Groot-van Breugel Eline N EN Verkooijen Helena M HM Wortel Ruud C RC de Boer Johannes C J JCJ

Physics and imaging in radiation oncology 20220913

Neurovascular bundle (NVB) and internal pudendal artery (IPA) sparing during magnetic resonance-guided radiotherapy (MRgRT) for prostate cancer aims for preservation of erectile function. Our present workflow involves daily online contouring and re-planning on a 1.5 T MR-linac, as alternative to conventional (rigid) translation-only corrections of the prostate. We compared planned dose for the NVB and IPA between strategies. Total planned dose was significantly lower with daily online contouring ...[more]

PMID: 36148156

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundNavigated transcranial magnetic stimulation (nTMS) of the motor cortex has been successfully implemented into radiotherapy planning by a number of studies. Furthermore, the hippocampus has been identified as a radiation-sensitive structure meriting particular sparing in radiotherapy. This study assesses the joint protection of these two eloquent brain regions for the treatment of glioblastoma (GBM), with particular emphasis on the use of automatic planning.Patients and methodsPatients with motor-eloquent brain glioblastoma who underwent surgical resection after nTMS mapping of the motor cortex and adjuvant radiotherapy were retrospectively evaluated. The radiotherapy treatment plans were retrieved, and the nTMS-defined motor cortex and hippocampus contours were added. Four additional treatment plans were created for each patient: two manual plans aimed to reduce the dose to the motor cortex and hippocampus by manual inverse planning. The second pair of re-optimized plans was created by the Auto-Planning algorithm. The optimized plans were compared with the "Original" plan regarding plan quality, planning target volume (PTV) coverage, and sparing of organs at risk (OAR).ResultsA total of 50 plans were analyzed. All plans were clinically acceptable with no differences in the PTV coverage and plan quality metrics. The OARs were preserved in all plans; however, overall the sparing was significantly improved by Auto-Planning. Motor cortex protection was feasible and significant, amounting to a reduction in the mean dose by >6 Gy. The dose to the motor cortex outside the PTV was reduced by >12 Gy (mean dose) and >5 Gy (maximum dose). The hippocampi were significantly improved (reduction in mean dose: ipsilateral >6 Gy, contralateral >4.6 Gy; reduction in maximum dose: ipsilateral >5 Gy, contralateral >5 Gy). While the dose reduction using Auto-Planning was generally better than by manual optimization, the radiated total monitor units were significantly increased.ConclusionConsiderable dose sparing of the nTMS-motor cortex and hippocampus could be achieved with no disadvantages in plan quality. Auto-Planning could further contribute to better protection of OAR. Whether the improved dosimetric protection of functional areas can translate into improved quality of life and motor or cognitive performance of the patients can only be decided by future studies.

Project description:Background and purposeArtificial Intelligence (AI)-based auto-contouring for treatment planning in radiotherapy needs extensive clinical validation, including the impact of editing after automatic segmentation. The aims of this study were to assess the performance of a commercial system for Clinical Target Volumes (CTVs) (prostate/seminal vesicles) and selected Organs at Risk (OARs) (rectum/bladder/femoral heads + femurs), evaluating also inter-observer variability (manual vs automatic + editing) and the reduction of contouring time.Materials and methodsTwo expert observers contoured CTVs/OARs of 20 patients in our Treatment Planning System (TPS). Computed Tomography (CT) images were sent to the automatic contouring workstation: automatic contours were generated and sent back to TPS, where observers could edit them if necessary. Inter- and intra-observer consistency was estimated using Dice Similarity Coefficients (DSC). Radiation oncologists were also asked to score the quality of automatic contours, ranging from 1 (complete re-contouring) to 5 (no editing). Contouring times (manual vs automatic + edit) were compared.ResultsDSCs (manual vs automatic only) were consistent with inter-observer variability (between 0.65 for seminal vesicles and 0.94 for bladder); editing further improved performances (range: 0.76-0.94). The median clinical score was 4 (little editing) and it was <4 in 3/2 patients for the two observers respectively. Inter-observer variability of automatic + editing contours improved significantly, being lower than manual contouring (e.g.: seminal vesicles: 0.83vs0.73; prostate: 0.86vs0.83; rectum: 0.96vs0.81). Oncologist contouring time reduced from 17 to 24 min of manual contouring time to 3-7 min of editing time for the two observers (p < 0.01).ConclusionAutomatic contouring with a commercial AI-based system followed by editing can replace manual contouring, resulting in significantly reduced time for segmentation and better consistency between operators.

Dataset Information

Daily online contouring and re-planning versus translation-only correction in neurovascular-sparing magnetic resonance-guided radiotherapy for localized prostate cancer.

Publications

Daily online contouring and re-planning versus translation-only correction in neurovascular-sparing magnetic resonance-guided radiotherapy for localized prostate cancer.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets