Evaluation of Deformable Image Registration Algorithm for Determination of Accumulated Dose for Brachytherapy of Cervical Cancer Patients

Overview

Journal J Contemp Brachytherapy

Date 2019 Nov 22

PMID 31749857

Citations 11

Authors

Reza Mohammadi

Seied Rabi Mahdavi

Ramin Jaberi

Zahra Siavashpour

Leila Janani

Ali Soleimani Meigooni

Reza Reiazi

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Purpose: This study was designed to assess the dose accumulation (DA) of bladder and rectum between brachytherapy fractions using hybrid-based deformable image registration (DIR) and compare it with the simple summation (SS) approach of GEC-ESTRO in cervical cancer patients.

Material And Methods: Patients ( = 137) with cervical cancer treated with 3D conformal radiotherapy and three fractions of high-dose-rate brachytherapy were selected. CT images were acquired to delineate organs at risk and targets according to GEC-ESTRO recommendations. In order to determine the DA for the bladder and rectum, hybrid-based DIR was done for three different fractions of brachytherapy and the results were compared with the standard GEC-ESTRO method. Also, we performed a phantom study to calculate the uncertainty of the hybrid-based DIR algorithm for contour matching and dose mapping.

Results: The mean ± standard deviation (SD) of the Dice similarity coefficient (DICE), Jaccard, Hausdorff distance (HD) and mean distance to agreement (MDA) in the DIR process were 0.94 ±0.02, 0.89 ±0.03, 8.44 ±3.56 and 0.72 ±0.22 for bladder and 0.89 ±0.05, 0.80 ±0.07, 15.46 ±10.14 and 1.19 ±0.59 for rectum, respectively. The median (Q1, Q3; maximum) Gy differences of total D between DIR-based and SS methods for the bladder and rectum were reduced by -1.53 (-0.86, -2.98; -9.17) and -1.38 (-0.80, -2.14; -7.11), respectively. The mean ± SD of DICE, Jaccard, HD, and MDA for contour matching were 0.98 ±0.008, 0.97 ±0.01, 2.00 ±0.70 and 0.20 ±0.04, respectively for large deformation. Maximum uncertainty of dose mapping was about 3.58%.

Conclusions: The hybrid-based DIR algorithm demonstrated low registration uncertainty for both contour matching and dose mapping. The DA difference between DIR-based and SS approaches was statistically significant for both bladder and rectum and hybrid-based DIR showed potential to assess DA between brachytherapy fractions.

Citing Articles

Development and validation of a deep reinforcement learning algorithm for auto-delineation of organs at risk in cervical cancer radiotherapy.

Yucheng L, Lingyun Q, Kainan S, Yongshi J, Wenming Z, Jieni D Sci Rep. 2025; 15(1):6800.

PMID: 40000766 PMC: 11861648. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-025-91362-9.

Comparison of image registration methods in patients with non-melanoma skin cancer treated with superficial brachytherapy.

Szlag M, Stankiewicz M, Kellas-Sleczka S, Stapor-Fudzinska M, Cholewka A, Pruefer A Phys Imaging Radiat Oncol. 2024; 31:100631.

PMID: 39262679 PMC: 11387206. DOI: 10.1016/j.phro.2024.100631.

Self-configuring nnU-Net for automatic delineation of the organs at risk and target in high-dose rate cervical brachytherapy, a low/middle-income country's experience.

Duprez D, Trauernicht C, Simonds H, Williams O J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2023; 24(8):e13988.

PMID: 37042449 PMC: 10402684. DOI: 10.1002/acm2.13988.

Applying Multi-Metric Deformable Image Registration for Dose Accumulation in Combined Cervical Cancer Radiotherapy.

Fu Q, Xie X, Xu Y, Zuo J, Yang X, Xia W J Pers Med. 2023; 13(2).

PMID: 36836556 PMC: 9963278. DOI: 10.3390/jpm13020323.

Dose accumulation for MR-guided adaptive radiotherapy: From practical considerations to state-of-the-art clinical implementation.

McDonald B, Zachiu C, Christodouleas J, Naser M, Ruschin M, Sonke J Front Oncol. 2023; 12:1086258.

PMID: 36776378 PMC: 9909539. DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2022.1086258.

References

Viswanathan A, Beriwal S, De Los Santos J, Demanes D, Gaffney D, Hansen J . American Brachytherapy Society consensus guidelines for locally advanced carcinoma of the cervix. Part II: high-dose-rate brachytherapy. Brachytherapy. 2012; 11(1):47-52. PMC: 3489267. DOI: 10.1016/j.brachy.2011.07.002. View

Kobayashi K, Murakami N, Wakita A, Nakamura S, Okamoto H, Umezawa R . Dosimetric variations due to interfraction organ deformation in cervical cancer brachytherapy. Radiother Oncol. 2015; 117(3):555-8. DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2015.08.017. View

Jamema S, Mahantshetty U, Andersen E, Noe K, Sorensen T, Kallehauge J . Uncertainties of deformable image registration for dose accumulation of high-dose regions in bladder and rectum in locally advanced cervical cancer. Brachytherapy. 2015; 14(6):953-62. DOI: 10.1016/j.brachy.2015.08.011. View

Kadoya N, Miyasaka Y, Yamamoto T, Kuroda Y, Ito K, Chiba M . Evaluation of rectum and bladder dose accumulation from external beam radiotherapy and brachytherapy for cervical cancer using two different deformable image registration techniques. J Radiat Res. 2017; 58(5):720-728. PMC: 5737357. DOI: 10.1093/jrr/rrx028. View

Siavashpour Z, Aghamiri M, Jaberi R, Dehghan-Manshadi H, Sedaghat M, Kirisits C . Evaluating the utility of "3D Slicer" as a fast and independent tool to assess intrafractional organ dose variations in gynecological brachytherapy. Brachytherapy. 2016; 15(4):514-523. DOI: 10.1016/j.brachy.2016.03.009. View

Potter R, Haie-Meder C, Van Limbergen E, Barillot I, De Brabandere M, Dimopoulos J . Recommendations from gynaecological (GYN) GEC ESTRO working group (II): concepts and terms in 3D image-based treatment planning in cervix cancer brachytherapy-3D dose volume parameters and aspects of 3D image-based anatomy, radiation physics,.... Radiother Oncol. 2006; 78(1):67-77. DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2005.11.014. View

van Heerden L, van Wieringen N, Koedooder K, Rasch C, Pieters B, Bel A . Dose warping uncertainties for the accumulated rectal wall dose in cervical cancer brachytherapy. Brachytherapy. 2017; 17(2):449-455. DOI: 10.1016/j.brachy.2017.10.002. View

Hellebust T, Kirisits C, Berger D, Perez-Calatayud J, De Brabandere M, De Leeuw A . Recommendations from Gynaecological (GYN) GEC-ESTRO Working Group: considerations and pitfalls in commissioning and applicator reconstruction in 3D image-based treatment planning of cervix cancer brachytherapy. Radiother Oncol. 2010; 96(2):153-60. DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2010.06.004. View

Sabater S, Andres I, Sevillano M, Berenguer R, Machin-Hamalainen S, Arenas M . Dose accumulation during vaginal cuff brachytherapy based on rigid/deformable registration vs. single plan addition. Brachytherapy. 2014; 13(4):343-51. DOI: 10.1016/j.brachy.2013.11.006. View

10.

Viswanathan A, Thomadsen B . American Brachytherapy Society consensus guidelines for locally advanced carcinoma of the cervix. Part I: general principles. Brachytherapy. 2012; 11(1):33-46. DOI: 10.1016/j.brachy.2011.07.003. View

11.

Kirisits C, Rivard M, Baltas D, Ballester F, De Brabandere M, van der Laarse R . Review of clinical brachytherapy uncertainties: analysis guidelines of GEC-ESTRO and the AAPM. Radiother Oncol. 2013; 110(1):199-212. PMC: 3969715. DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2013.11.002. View

12.

Hayashi K, Isohashi F, Akino Y, Wakai N, Mabuchi S, Suzuki O . Estimation of the total rectal dose of radical external beam and intracavitary radiotherapy for uterine cervical cancer using the deformable image registration method. J Radiat Res. 2015; 56(3):546-52. PMC: 4426921. DOI: 10.1093/jrr/rru127. View

13.

Nesvacil N, Tanderup K, Lindegaard J, Potter R, Kirisits C . Can reduction of uncertainties in cervix cancer brachytherapy potentially improve clinical outcome?. Radiother Oncol. 2016; 120(3):390-396. DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2016.06.008. View

14.

Hunter Chapman C, Polan D, Vineberg K, Jolly S, Maturen K, Brock K . Deformable image registration-based contour propagation yields clinically acceptable plans for MRI-based cervical cancer brachytherapy planning. Brachytherapy. 2018; 17(2):360-367. DOI: 10.1016/j.brachy.2017.11.019. View

15.

Olteanu L, Madani I, De Neve W, Vercauteren T, De Gersem W . Evaluation of deformable image coregistration in adaptive dose painting by numbers for head-and-neck cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2011; 83(2):696-703. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2011.07.037. View

16.

Andersen E, Noe K, Sorensen T, Nielsen S, Fokdal L, Paludan M . Simple DVH parameter addition as compared to deformable registration for bladder dose accumulation in cervix cancer brachytherapy. Radiother Oncol. 2013; 107(1):52-7. DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2013.01.013. View

17.

Siavashpour Z, Aghamiri M, Jaberi R, Dehghan Manshadi H, Ghaderi R, Kirisits C . Optimum organ volume ranges for organs at risk dose in cervical cancer intracavitary brachytherapy. J Contemp Brachytherapy. 2016; 8(2):135-42. PMC: 4873556. DOI: 10.5114/jcb.2016.59687. View

18.

Dimopoulos J, Petrow P, Tanderup K, Petric P, Berger D, Kirisits C . Recommendations from Gynaecological (GYN) GEC-ESTRO Working Group (IV): Basic principles and parameters for MR imaging within the frame of image based adaptive cervix cancer brachytherapy. Radiother Oncol. 2012; 103(1):113-22. PMC: 3336085. DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2011.12.024. View

19.

Saarnak A, Boersma M, van Bunningen B, Wolterink R, Steggerda M . Inter-observer variation in delineation of bladder and rectum contours for brachytherapy of cervical cancer. Radiother Oncol. 2000; 56(1):37-42. DOI: 10.1016/s0167-8140(00)00185-7. View

20.

Haie-Meder C, Potter R, Van Limbergen E, Briot E, De Brabandere M, Dimopoulos J . Recommendations from Gynaecological (GYN) GEC-ESTRO Working Group (I): concepts and terms in 3D image based 3D treatment planning in cervix cancer brachytherapy with emphasis on MRI assessment of GTV and CTV. Radiother Oncol. 2005; 74(3):235-45. DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2004.12.015. View