Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33616303›Full record

ArticleJournal of applied clinical medical physics2021

A multi-institutional analysis of a general pelvis continuous Hounsfield unit synthetic CT software for radiotherapy.

Victoria Y Yu, Jani Keyrilainen, Sami Suilamo, Ilyes Beslimane, Alex Dresner, Aleksi Halkola, Uulke A Van der Heide, Neelam Tyagi

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of applied clinical medical physics, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
2.7field-weighted citation impact, top 10% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.

Victoria Y YuMemorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4559-9670
Jani KeyrilainenDepartment of Oncology and Radiotherapy & Department of Medical Physics, Turku University Hospital, Turku, Finland.
Sami SuilamoDepartment of Oncology and Radiotherapy & Department of Medical Physics, Turku University Hospital, Turku, Finland.
Ilyes BeslimaneMemorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA.
Alex DresnerPhilips Healthcare, Eindhoven, The Netherlands.
Aleksi HalkolaPhilips Healthcare, Eindhoven, The Netherlands.
Uulke A Van der HeideDepartment of Radiation Oncology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Neelam TyagiMemorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA.
Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center · USPhilips (Finland) · FITurku University Hospital · FIThe Netherlands Cancer Institute · NL

Funding

X-RAY CRYSTALLOGRAPHYP30CA008748 · NCI · SLOAN-KETTERING INSTITUTE FOR CANCER RES · PI Hongbiao Carl Lekaye · 1985 to 2026
$347.4M
NCI NIH HHS P30 CA008748Philips Healthcare
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo validate a synthetic computed tomography (sCT) software with continuous HUs and large field-of-view (FOV) coverage for magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-only workflow of general pelvis anatomy in radiotherapy (RT).

methodsAn sCT software for general pelvis anatomy (prostate, rectum, and female pelvis) has been developed by Philips Healthcare and includes continuous HUs assignment along with large FOV coverage. General pelvis sCTs were generated using a two-stack T1-weighted mDixon fast-field echo (FFE) sequence with a superior-inferior coverage of 36 cm. Seventy-seven prostate, 43 rectum, and 27 gynecological cases were scanned by three different institutions. mDixon image quality and sCTs were evaluated for soft tissue contrast by using a confidence level scale from 1 to 5 for bladder, prostate/rectum interface, mesorectum, and fiducial maker visibility. Dosimetric comparison was performed by recalculating the RT plans on the sCT after rigid registration. For 12 randomly selected cases, the mean absolute error (MAE) between sCT and CT was calculated to evaluate HU similarity, and the Pearson correlation coefficients (PCC) between the CT- and sCT-generated digitally reconstructed radiographs (DRRs) were obtained for quantitative comparison. To examine geometric accuracy of sCT as a reference for cone beam CT (CBCT), the difference between bone-based alignment of CBCT to CT and CBCT to sCT was obtained for 19 online-acquired CBCTs from three patients.

resultsTwo-stack mDixon scans with large FOV did not show any image inhomogeneity or fat-water swap artifact. Fiducials, Foley catheter, and even rectal spacer were visible as dark signal on the sCT. Average visibility confidence level (average ± standard deviation) on the sCT was 5.0 ± 0.0, 4.6 ± 0.5, 3.8 ± 0.4, and 4.0 ± 1.1 for bladder, prostate/rectum interface, mesorectum and fiducial markers. Dosimetric accuracy showed on average < 1% difference with the CT-based plans for target and normal structures. The MAE of bone and soft tissue between the sCT and CT are 120.9 ± 15.4 HU, 33.4 ± 4.1 HU, respectively. Average PCC of all evaluated DRR pairs was 0.975. The average offset between CT and sCT as reference was (LR, AP, SI) = (0.19 ± 0.35, 0.14 ± 0.60, 0.44 ± 0.54) mm.

conclusionsThe continuous HU sCT software-generated realistic sCTs and DRRs to enable MRI-only planning for general pelvis anatomy.

Indexed as

Prostatic NeoplasmsRadiotherapy, Image-GuidedHumansMagnetic Resonance ImagingMalePelvisRadiotherapy DosageRadiotherapy Planning, Computer-AssistedSoftwareTomography, X-Ray ComputedmDixonMR-onlymulti-institutionalpelvisradiotherapysynthetic CT

Identifiers

PMID33616303
PMCPMC7984497
OpenAlexW3131901164

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.