Toggle Main Menu Toggle Search

Open Access padlockePrints

The Newcastle University research output collection, currently available on ePrints, will shortly be moving to a new open repository platform, Figshare. To prepare for the data migration we have paused adding new content to ePrints, and will resume once the new repository is launched. During this time you will continue to have access to ePrints (but no new content will appear). We will share updates here when available.

Applying a commercial atlas-based synthetic Computed Tomography algorithm to patients with hip prostheses for prostate Magnetic Resonance-only radiotherapy

Lookup NU author(s): JJ Wyatt, Dr Hazel McCallum

Downloads

Full text for this publication is not currently held within this repository. Alternative links are provided below where available.


Abstract

© 2019 Elsevier B.V. Background and purpose: Magnetic Resonance (MR)-only prostate radiotherapy has recently been clinically implemented using commercial synthetic Computed Tomography (sCT) algorithms. However patients with hip prostheses have been excluded from all MR-only research to date and assumed to require dedicated sCT algorithms. This study aimed to investigate the dosimetric accuracy of applying a commercial sCT algorithm, based on an atlas of patients without hip prostheses, to patients with prostheses. Materials and methods: 18 patients with unilateral hip prostheses received MR and CT scans in the radiotherapy position. sCTs were generated from the MR using a commercial algorithm. The clinical Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy (VMAT) plan, consisting of partial arcs which avoided the prosthesis, was recalculated using the sCT and the dose distribution compared. Results: The mean isocentre dose difference was ΔD = (−0.4 ± 0.2)% (mean ± standard error of the mean (sem), range – 1.9%, 1.1%) and the mean differences in Planning Target Volume, bladder and rectum mean doses were ≤0.3%. The 3D global gamma pass rate with dose difference 1% and distance to agreement 1 mm within the body was ΓBody 1/1 = (95.0 ± 0.5)% (sem) and within the 50% isodose volume, which excluded the prosthesis, was Γ50% 1/1 = (98.5 ± 0.4)% (sem). The pass rate within the PTV was ΓPTV 2/2 ≥ 99.7% for all patients, although for PTVs close (≤3.5 cm) to the prosthesis ΓPTV 1/1 < 85% for three patients. The sCT did not accurately represent the prosthesis with a mean difference in radiological isocentre depth near the prosthesis of ΔdOutside Rad = (15.8 ± 2.6) mm (sem). However inside the treatment plan arc the difference was ΔdInside Rad = (−1.8 ± 0.5) mm (sem). Conclusions: Using a commercial prostate sCT algorithm for patients with unilateral hip prostheses is dosimetrically accurate (<0.5%) as long as the routine prosthesis-avoidance treatment planning approach is used and the PTV is >3.5 cm from the prosthesis. This suggests MR-only prostate radiotherapy can be extended to patients with hip prostheses without requiring a specific sCT algorithm.


Publication metadata

Author(s): Wyatt J, McCallum H

Publication type: Article

Publication status: Published

Journal: Radiotherapy and Oncology

Year: 2019

Volume: 133

Pages: 100-105

Print publication date: 01/04/2019

Online publication date: 22/01/2019

Acceptance date: 30/12/2018

ISSN (print): 0167-8140

ISSN (electronic): 1879-0887

Publisher: Elsevier Ireland Ltd

URL: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.radonc.2018.12.029

DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2018.12.029


Altmetrics

Altmetrics provided by Altmetric


Share