Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35982630›Full record

ArticleMedical physics2022

Deep learning-based 4D-synthetic CTs from sparse-view CBCTs for dose calculations in adaptive proton therapy.

Adrian Thummerer, Carmen Seller Oria, Paolo Zaffino, Sabine Visser, Arturs Meijers, Gabriel Guterres Marmitt, Robin Wijsman, Joao Seco, Johannes Albertus Langendijk, Antje Christin Knopf and 2 more

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Medical physics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
5.3field-weighted citation impact, top 4% 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

18 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 39 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Recent advances in applying machine learning to proton radiotherapy.Biomedical physics & engineering express · 2025
    Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Deep Learning for CT Synthesis in Radiotherapy.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025
    Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Artificial intelligence for treatment delivery: image-guided radiotherapy.Strahlentherapie und Onkologie : Organ der Deutschen Rontgengesellschaft ... [et al] · 2025
    Review
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Emerging technologies for cancer therapy using accelerated particles.Progress in particle and nuclear physics · 2023
    Article
  14. Improving CBCT image quality to the CT level using RegGAN in esophageal cancer adaptive radiotherapy.Strahlentherapie und Onkologie : Organ der Deutschen Rontgengesellschaft ... [et al] · 2023
    Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
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

12 authors at 3 institutions in 4 countries.

Adrian ThummererDepartment, of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1874-5030
Carmen Seller OriaDepartment, of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0785-2009
Paolo ZaffinoDepartment of Experimental and Clinical Medicine, Magna Graecia University, Catanzaro, Italy.
Sabine VisserDepartment, of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7660-0545
Arturs MeijersDepartment, of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
Gabriel Guterres MarmittDepartment, of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
Robin WijsmanDepartment, of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
Joao SecoDepartment of Biomedical Physics in Radiation Oncology, Deutsches Krebsforschungszentrum (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany.
Johannes Albertus LangendijkDepartment, of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
Antje Christin KnopfDepartment, of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
Maria Francesca SpadeaDepartment of Experimental and Clinical Medicine, Magna Graecia University, Catanzaro, Italy.
Stefan BothDepartment, of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
University Medical Center Groningen · NLMagna Graecia University · ITGerman Cancer Research Center · DE

Funding

Dutch Cancer Society (KWF research project 11518)
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTime-resolved 4D cone beam-computed tomography (4D-CBCT) allows a daily assessment of patient anatomy and respiratory motion. However, 4D-CBCTs suffer from imaging artifacts that affect the CT number accuracy and prevent accurate proton dose calculations. Deep learning can be used to correct CT numbers and generate synthetic CTs (sCTs) that can enable CBCT-based proton dose calculations. PURPOSE: In this work, sparse view 4D-CBCTs were converted into 4D-sCT utilizing a deep convolutional neural network (DCNN). 4D-sCTs were evaluated in terms of image quality and dosimetric accuracy to determine if accurate proton dose calculations for adaptive proton therapy workflows of lung cancer patients are feasible.

methodsA dataset of 45 thoracic cancer patients was utilized to train and evaluate a DCNN to generate 4D-sCTs, based on sparse view 4D-CBCTs reconstructed from projections acquired with a 3D acquisition protocol. Mean absolute error (MAE) and mean error were used as metrics to evaluate the image quality of single phases and average 4D-sCTs against 4D-CTs acquired on the same day. The dosimetric accuracy was checked globally (gamma analysis) and locally for target volumes and organs-at-risk (OARs) (lung, heart, and esophagus). Furthermore, 4D-sCTs were also compared to 3D-sCTs. To evaluate CT number accuracy, proton radiography simulations in 4D-sCT and 4D-CTs were compared in terms of range errors. The clinical suitability of 4D-sCTs was demonstrated by performing a 4D dose reconstruction using patient specific treatment delivery log files and breathing signals.

results4D-sCTs resulted in average MAEs of 48.1 ± 6.5 HU (single phase) and 37.7 ± 6.2 HU (average). The global dosimetric evaluation showed gamma pass ratios of 92.3% ± 3.2% (single phase) and 94.4% ± 2.1% (average). The clinical target volume showed high agreement in D

conclusionIn this study, we have investigated the accuracy of deep learning-based 4D-sCTs for daily dose calculations in adaptive proton therapy. Despite image quality differences between 4D-sCTs and 3D-sCTs, comparable dosimetric accuracy was observed globally and locally. Further improvement of 3D and 4D lung sCTs could be achieved by increasing CT number accuracy in lung tissues.

Indexed as

Deep LearningProton TherapyHeartHumansProtonsProtons4D imagingadaptive proton therapydeep learningsynthetic CT

Identifiers

PMID35982630
PMCPMC10087352
OpenAlexW4293809711

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.