Dataset Information

Clinical validation of a commercially available deep learning software for synthetic CT generation for brain.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Most studies on synthetic computed tomography (sCT) generation for brain rely on in-house developed methods. They often focus on performance rather than clinical feasibility. Therefore, the aim of this work was to validate sCT images generated using a commercially available software, based on a convolutional neural network (CNN) algorithm, to enable MRI-only treatment planning for the brain in a clinical setting.

Methods

This prospective study included 20 patients with brain malignancies of which 14 had areas of resected skull bone due to surgery. A Dixon magnetic resonance (MR) acquisition sequence for sCT generation was added to the clinical brain MR-protocol. The corresponding sCT images were provided by the software MRI Planner (Spectronic Medical AB, Sweden). sCT images were rigidly registered and resampled to CT for each patient. Treatment plans were optimized on CT and recalculated on sCT images for evaluation of dosimetric and geometric endpoints. Further analysis was also performed for the post-surgical cases. Clinical robustness in patient setup verification was assessed by rigidly registering cone beam CT (CBCT) to sCT and CT images, respectively.

Results

All sCT images were successfully generated. Areas of bone resection due to surgery were accurately depicted. Mean absolute error of the sCT images within the body contour for all patients was 62.2 ± 4.1 HU. Average absorbed dose differences were below 0.2% for parameters evaluated for both targets and organs at risk. Mean pass rate of global gamma (1%/1 mm) for all patients was 100.0 ± 0.0% within PTV and 99.1 ± 0.6% for the full dose distribution. No clinically relevant deviations were found in the CBCT-sCT vs CBCT-CT image registrations. In addition, mean values of voxel-wise patient specific geometric distortion in the Dixon images for sCT generation were below 0.1 mm for soft tissue, and below 0.2 mm for air and bone.

Conclusions

This work successfully validated a commercially available CNN-based software for sCT generation. Results were comparable for sCT and CT images in both dosimetric and geometric evaluation, for both patients with and without anatomical anomalies. Thus, MRI Planner is feasible to use for radiotherapy treatment planning of brain tumours.

SUBMITTER: Lerner M

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8025544 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Deterrence of synthetic cathinone abuse is hampered by the lack of a high-throughput immunoassay screen. The Randox Drugs of Abuse V (DOA-V) Biochip Array Technology contains two synthetic cathinone antibodies: Bath Salt I (BSI) targets mephedrone/methcathinone and Bath Salt II (BSII) targets 3',4'-methylenedioxypyrovalerone (MDPV)/3',4'-methylenedioxy-?-pyrrolidinobutiophenone (MDPBP). We evaluated DOA-V synthetic cathinones performance and conducted a full validation on the original assay with calibrators reconstituted in water, and the new assay with calibrators prepared in lyophilized urine; both utilized the same antibodies and were run on the fully automated Evidence® Analyzer. We screened 20 017 authentic military urine specimens and confirmed positives by liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS) for 28 synthetic cathinones. Limits of detection (LOD) for the original and new assays were 0.35 and 0.18 (BSI), and 8.5 and 9.2 µg/L (BSII), respectively. Linearity was acceptable (R(2) ?>0.98); however, a large negative bias was observed with in-house prepared calibrators. Intra-assay imprecision was <20% BSI-II, while inter-assay imprecision was 18-42% BSI and <22% BSII. Precision was acceptable for Randox controls. Cross-reactivities of many additional synthetic cathinones were determined. Authentic drug-free negative urine pH <4 produced false positive results for BSI (6.3 µg/L) and BSII (473 µg/L). Oxidizing agents reduced BSI and increased BSII results. Sensitivity, specificity, and efficiency of 100%, 52.1%, and 53.0% were obtained at manufacturer's proposed cut-offs (BSI 5 µg/L, BSII 30 µg/L). Performance improved if cut-off concentrations increased (BSI 7.5 µg/L, BSII 40 µg/L); however, there were limited confirmed positive specimens. Currently, this is the first and only fully validated immunoassay for preliminary detection of synthetic cathinones in urine. Published 2014. This article is a U.S. Government work and is in the public domain in the USA.

Project description:IntroductionComputed tomography perfusion (CTP) imaging has become an important tool in evaluating acute recanalization treatment candidates. Large clinical trials have successfully used RAPID automated imaging analysis software for quantifying ischemic core and penumbra, yet other commercially available software vendors are also on the market. We evaluated the possible difference in ischemic core and perfusion lesion volumes and the agreement rate of target mismatch between OLEA, MIStar, and Syngo.Via versus RAPID software in acute recanalization treatment candidates.Patients and methodsAll consecutive stroke-code patients with baseline CTP RAPID imaging at Helsinki University Hospital during 8/2018-9/2021 were included. Ischemic core was defined as cerebral blood flow <30% than the contralateral hemisphere and within the area of delay time (DT) >3s with MIStar. Perfusion lesion volume was defined as DT > 3 s (MIStar) and Tmax > 6 s with all other software. A perfusion mismatch ratio of ⩾1.8, a perfusion lesion volume of ⩾15 mL, and ischemic core <70 mL was defined as target mismatch. The mean pairwise differences of the core and perfusion lesion volumes between software were calculated using the Bland-Altman method and the agreement of target mismatch between software using the Pearson correlation.ResultsA total of 1606 patients had RAPID perfusion maps, 1222 of which had MIStar, 596 patients had OLEA, and 349 patients had Syngo.Via perfusion maps available. Each software was compared with simultaneously analyzed RAPID software. MIStar showed the smallest core difference compared with RAPID (-2 mL, confidence interval (CI) from -26 to 22), followed by OLEA (2 mL, CI from -33 to 38). Perfusion lesion volume differed least with MIStar (4 mL, CI from -62 to 71) in comparison with RAPID, followed by Syngo.Via (6 mL, CI from -94 to 106). MIStar had the best agreement rate with target mismatch of RAPID followed by OLEA and Syngo.Via.Discussion and conclusionComparison of RAPID with three other automated imaging analysis software showed variance in ischemic core and perfusion lesion volumes and in target mismatch.