John Kipritidis, Alexandra Quinn, Tomasz Morgas, Sven Kuckertz, Nils Papenberg, Stefan Heldmann, Nasim Givehchi, Thomas Coradi, Jeremy T. Booth
{"title":"可变形剂量累积不确定性建模工具的最终用户验证方法","authors":"John Kipritidis, Alexandra Quinn, Tomasz Morgas, Sven Kuckertz, Nils Papenberg, Stefan Heldmann, Nasim Givehchi, Thomas Coradi, Jeremy T. Booth","doi":"10.1002/mp.18094","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Background</h3>\n \n <p>Deformable dose accumulation (DDA) uncertainty models can inform treatment decisions by communicating the dosimetric impact of deformable image registration (DIR) errors over multiple fractions. Currently there is limited guidance on how end-users can validate such models in the clinic.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Purpose</h3>\n \n <p>We propose an end-user validation sequence for DDA uncertainty modelling tools, akin to an acceptance test, using existing patient data and a clinical treatment planning system (TPS) as the evaluation platform.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>The proposed test sequence begins with a single “fixed” image (planning CT with associated contours and treatment plan) and a “moving” image (e.g., fractional synthetic CT with calculated dose) and uses the TPS to simulate multiple fractional DIRs as input to a DDA uncertainty model. Outputs of the uncertainty tool—including volumetric images of DIR spatial uncertainties, and associated uncertainties on propagated dose—are imported back to the TPS and a series of visual and semi-quantitative (point-based and DVH-based) cross-checks are carried out. Emphasis is placed on the use of standard dose and distance measurement tools, in conjunction with vendor-provided equations, to evaluate correctness of the uncertainty tool outputs at contour boundaries and in bulk tissue, considering variable DIR quality for both targets and organs at risk.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>The test sequence is demonstrated for a non-clinical uncertainty tool using a clinical bladder case. Agreement within 2 voxels (for spatial uncertainties) and up to 5% of the prescribed dose (for dose uncertainties) is shown to be achievable for regions of plausible deformation and stable dose gradient (e.g., < 5%/voxel).</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\n \n <p>As the use of DDA in adaptive treatment becomes more commonplace, use of DDA uncertainty tools will become increasingly important to inform adaptive treatment decisions. This work represents an important effort to formalize an end-user validation process using standardly available clinical tools.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":18384,"journal":{"name":"Medical physics","volume":"52 10","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Method for end-user validation of deformable dose accumulation uncertainty modelling tools\",\"authors\":\"John Kipritidis, Alexandra Quinn, Tomasz Morgas, Sven Kuckertz, Nils Papenberg, Stefan Heldmann, Nasim Givehchi, Thomas Coradi, Jeremy T. Booth\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/mp.18094\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div>\\n \\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Background</h3>\\n \\n <p>Deformable dose accumulation (DDA) uncertainty models can inform treatment decisions by communicating the dosimetric impact of deformable image registration (DIR) errors over multiple fractions. Currently there is limited guidance on how end-users can validate such models in the clinic.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Purpose</h3>\\n \\n <p>We propose an end-user validation sequence for DDA uncertainty modelling tools, akin to an acceptance test, using existing patient data and a clinical treatment planning system (TPS) as the evaluation platform.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Methods</h3>\\n \\n <p>The proposed test sequence begins with a single “fixed” image (planning CT with associated contours and treatment plan) and a “moving” image (e.g., fractional synthetic CT with calculated dose) and uses the TPS to simulate multiple fractional DIRs as input to a DDA uncertainty model. Outputs of the uncertainty tool—including volumetric images of DIR spatial uncertainties, and associated uncertainties on propagated dose—are imported back to the TPS and a series of visual and semi-quantitative (point-based and DVH-based) cross-checks are carried out. Emphasis is placed on the use of standard dose and distance measurement tools, in conjunction with vendor-provided equations, to evaluate correctness of the uncertainty tool outputs at contour boundaries and in bulk tissue, considering variable DIR quality for both targets and organs at risk.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Results</h3>\\n \\n <p>The test sequence is demonstrated for a non-clinical uncertainty tool using a clinical bladder case. Agreement within 2 voxels (for spatial uncertainties) and up to 5% of the prescribed dose (for dose uncertainties) is shown to be achievable for regions of plausible deformation and stable dose gradient (e.g., < 5%/voxel).</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\\n \\n <p>As the use of DDA in adaptive treatment becomes more commonplace, use of DDA uncertainty tools will become increasingly important to inform adaptive treatment decisions. This work represents an important effort to formalize an end-user validation process using standardly available clinical tools.</p>\\n </section>\\n </div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":18384,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Medical physics\",\"volume\":\"52 10\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-09-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Medical physics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://aapm.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/mp.18094\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Medical physics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://aapm.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/mp.18094","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING","Score":null,"Total":0}
Method for end-user validation of deformable dose accumulation uncertainty modelling tools
Background
Deformable dose accumulation (DDA) uncertainty models can inform treatment decisions by communicating the dosimetric impact of deformable image registration (DIR) errors over multiple fractions. Currently there is limited guidance on how end-users can validate such models in the clinic.
Purpose
We propose an end-user validation sequence for DDA uncertainty modelling tools, akin to an acceptance test, using existing patient data and a clinical treatment planning system (TPS) as the evaluation platform.
Methods
The proposed test sequence begins with a single “fixed” image (planning CT with associated contours and treatment plan) and a “moving” image (e.g., fractional synthetic CT with calculated dose) and uses the TPS to simulate multiple fractional DIRs as input to a DDA uncertainty model. Outputs of the uncertainty tool—including volumetric images of DIR spatial uncertainties, and associated uncertainties on propagated dose—are imported back to the TPS and a series of visual and semi-quantitative (point-based and DVH-based) cross-checks are carried out. Emphasis is placed on the use of standard dose and distance measurement tools, in conjunction with vendor-provided equations, to evaluate correctness of the uncertainty tool outputs at contour boundaries and in bulk tissue, considering variable DIR quality for both targets and organs at risk.
Results
The test sequence is demonstrated for a non-clinical uncertainty tool using a clinical bladder case. Agreement within 2 voxels (for spatial uncertainties) and up to 5% of the prescribed dose (for dose uncertainties) is shown to be achievable for regions of plausible deformation and stable dose gradient (e.g., < 5%/voxel).
Conclusions
As the use of DDA in adaptive treatment becomes more commonplace, use of DDA uncertainty tools will become increasingly important to inform adaptive treatment decisions. This work represents an important effort to formalize an end-user validation process using standardly available clinical tools.
期刊介绍:
Medical Physics publishes original, high impact physics, imaging science, and engineering research that advances patient diagnosis and therapy through contributions in 1) Basic science developments with high potential for clinical translation 2) Clinical applications of cutting edge engineering and physics innovations 3) Broadly applicable and innovative clinical physics developments
Medical Physics is a journal of global scope and reach. By publishing in Medical Physics your research will reach an international, multidisciplinary audience including practicing medical physicists as well as physics- and engineering based translational scientists. We work closely with authors of promising articles to improve their quality.