Yashayaeva Abby, MacDonald R Lee, Cherpak Amanda
Department of Physics and Atmospheric Sciences, Dalhousie University, Halifax, Canada.
Department of Radiation Oncology, Dalhousie University, Halifax, Canada.
J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2025 Apr;26(4):e14587. doi: 10.1002/acm2.14587. Epub 2024 Dec 20.
In radiotherapy, body contour inaccuracies may compromise the delineation of adjacent structures and affect calculated dose. Here, we evaluate the un-editable body contours auto-generated by Ethos versions 1.0 (v1) and 2.0 (v2) treatment planning softwares for two simulated cases: weight-loss and bolus application, particularly important for head and neck radiotherapy patients.
A 3D-printed target structure was secured to the neck of an anthropomorphic phantom and sequentially covered with silicone boluses of uniform thickness, providing cases for bolus application (0.5 and 1 cm) and weight-loss (2.0, 1.5, 1.0, 0.5, and 0 cm). HyperSight CBCT images of the phantom were acquired to simulate the online adaptation process. Baseline body contours were manually produced and compared to those auto-generated in Ethos v1 (synthetic CTs) and Ethos v2 (synthetic CTs and direct calculation on HyperSight CBCTs). Additionally, the target volume D95% dose metric for weight-loss adapted plans generated by the Ethos v2 were analyzed as a function of surface layer thickness.
The Ethos v1 body contour did not adapt adequately for the weight-loss image set [mean absolute volume deviation from baseline (MAD) = 205 cm]. The weight-loss synthetic CT and HyperSight CBCT volumes in Ethos v2 were comparable to manually generated contours (MAD = 34 and 46 cm respectively); however, the bolus Hypersight CBCT body contour intersected the outer edge of the phantom (MAD = 157 cm). The D95% deviation from the planned dose decreased by up to 10% when using the Ethos v2 adapted plan for the weight-loss scenario.
Contours in Ethos v1 rely on reference contours and deformable registration algorithms, whereas Ethos v2 does not. Hence, Ethos v2 is preferred for cases involving weight change. A tight-fitted air gap-free bolus is critical for achieving accurate body contours for Ethos v2 Hypersight CBCTs.
在放射治疗中,身体轮廓不准确可能会影响相邻结构的勾画,并影响计算剂量。在此,我们针对两种模拟情况评估了Ethos版本1.0(v1)和2.0(v2)治疗计划软件自动生成的不可编辑身体轮廓:体重减轻和使用 bolus,这对头颈放疗患者尤为重要。
将一个3D打印的靶结构固定在拟人化体模的颈部,并依次覆盖均匀厚度的硅胶 bolus,提供使用bolus(0.5和1厘米)和体重减轻(2.0、1.5、1.0、0.5和0厘米)的情况。采集体模的HyperSight CBCT图像以模拟在线适配过程。手动生成基线身体轮廓,并与Ethos v1(合成CT)和Ethos v2(合成CT以及在HyperSight CBCT上直接计算)自动生成的轮廓进行比较。此外,分析了Ethos v2生成的体重减轻适配计划的靶体积D95%剂量指标与表层厚度的关系。
Ethos v1身体轮廓对体重减轻图像集的适配不足[与基线的平均绝对体积偏差(MAD)=205立方厘米]。Ethos v2中的体重减轻合成CT和HyperSight CBCT体积与手动生成的轮廓相当(分别为MAD = 34和46立方厘米);然而,bolus的HyperSight CBCT身体轮廓与体模的外边缘相交(MAD = 157立方厘米)。在体重减轻情况下使用Ethos v2适配计划时,与计划剂量的D95%偏差最多降低了10%。
Ethos v1中的轮廓依赖于参考轮廓和可变形配准算法,而Ethos v2则不然。因此,对于涉及体重变化的情况,Ethos v2更受青睐。紧密贴合且无气隙的bolus对于为Ethos v2 HyperSight CBCT获得准确的身体轮廓至关重要。