Pseudo-CT Generation for MRI-Only Radiation Therapy Treatment Planning: Comparison Among Patch-Based, Atlas-Based,...

Methods have been recently developed to generate pseudo-computed tomography (pCT) for dose calculation in magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-only radiation therapy. This study aimed to propose an original nonlocal mean patch-based method (PBM) and to compare this PBM to an atlas-based method (ABM) and to a bulk density method (BDM) for prostate MRI-only radiation therapy.

Thirty-nine patients received a volumetric modulated arc therapy for prostate cancer. In addition to the planning computed tomography (CT) scans, T2-weighted MRI scans were acquired. pCTs were generated from MRIs using 3 methods: an original nonlocal mean PBM, ABM, and BDM. The PBM was performed using feature extraction and approximate nearest neighbor search in a training cohort. The PBM accuracy was evaluated in a validation cohort by using imaging and dosimetric endpoints. Imaging endpoints included mean absolute error and mean error between Hounsfield units of the pCT and the reference CT (CT_ref). Dosimetric endpoints were based on dose-volume histograms calculated from the CT_ref and the pCTs for various volumes of interest and on 3-dimensional gamma analyses. The PBM uncertainties were compared with those of the ABM and BDM.

The mean absolute error and mean error obtained from the PBM were 41.1 and -1.1 Hounsfield units. The PBM dose-volume histogram differences were 0.7% for prostate planning target volume V_95%, 0.5% for rectum V_70Gy, and 0.2% for bladder V_50Gy. Compared with ABM and BDM, PBM provided significantly lower dose uncertainties for the prostate planning target volume (70-78 Gy), the rectum (8.5-29 Gy, 40-48 Gy, and 61-73 Gy), and the bladder (12-78 Gy). The PBM mean gamma pass rate (99.5%) was significantly higher than that of ABM (94.9%) or BDM (96.1%).

The proposed PBM provides low uncertainties with dose planned on CT_ref. These uncertainties were smaller than those of ABM and BDM and are unlikely to be clinically significant.