Abstract: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 ( 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.

CT simulation in radiotherapy for esophageal carcinoma

Volumetric and Dosimetric Variations in Radiation Treatment Planning Using CT Images Based on Different Reconstructed Field-of-view

Research on CT Simulation Used in Radiation Treatment Planning

Investigation of the feasibility of using kilovoltage cone-beam CT for accuracy dose calculation in esophageal cancer radiotherapy

Evaluation of Respiration-Induced Dosimetric Variance in Three-Dimensional Conformal Radiotherapy (3DCRT) for Mid-Thoracic Esophageal Carcinoma

Accuracy study of using CT to delineate tumor target volume of thoracic esophageal carcinoma

Feasibility of dose calculation for treatment plans using electron density maps from a novel dual-layer detector spectral CT simulator

Dosimetric Comparison Between Conventional and Three Dimensional Conformal Radiation Therapy for Esophageal Carcinoma

Controlled Study of Three Postoperative Radiotherapies for Patients with Esophageal Carcinoma

Clinical Study of Late-Course Three-Dimensional Conformal Radiotherapy for Esophageal Carcinoma

Analysis of clinical target volume positioning errors using cone beam computed tomography for patients with liver tumors with postoperative simplefied intensity-modulated radiotherapy

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

Quantifying the Interfractional motion of Esophagus Using Daily Cone Beam Computed Tomography with Oral Contrast During Radiation Therapy for Locally Advanced Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer

Optimizing CT Acquisition for Prostate Cancer Radiation Treatment Planning and Delivery

A Clinical Evaluation of Setup Errors in IMRT Using Cone Beam CT for Head and Neck Cancer

Different functional lung-sparing strategies and radiotherapy techniques for patients with esophageal cancer

Comparison of conventional and conformal radiotherapy and different irradiation technique by 3D-TPS for esophageal carcinoma: a dosimetric study

Retrospective Comparative Study of Clinical Outcome of X ray Based Versus Computed Tomography Based Treatment Planning in Conventional Radiotherapy in Carcinoma Cervix

Computed Tomography-Based Evaluation of Volume and Position Changes of the Target Region and Organs at Risk During Radiotherapy for Esophageal Cancer: A Pilot Study

Development and Study of Radiotherapy for Esophageal Carcinoma

Modeling of automated planning for esophageal cancer under complex dose prescription and anatomical sections