English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Purpose  The purpose of this study was to assess the dosimetric equivalence of magnetic resonance (MR)-generated synthetic CT (synCT) and simulation CT for treatment planning in radiotherapy of rectal cancer.    Methods  This study was conducted on eleven patients who underwent whole-body PET/MR and PET/CT examination in a prospective IRB-approved study. For each patient synCT was generated from Dixon MR using a model-based method. Standard treatment planning directives were used to create a four-field box (4F), an oblique four-field (O4F) and a volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) plan on synCT for treatment of rectal cancer. The plans were recalculated on CT with the same monitor units (MUs) as that of synCT. Dose-volume metrics of planning target volume (PTV) and organs at risk (OARs) as well as gamma analysis of dose distributions were evaluated to quantify the difference between synCT and CT plans. All plans were calculated using the analytical anisotropic algorithm (AAA). The VMAT plans on synCT and CT were also calculated using the Acuros XB algorithm for comparison with the AAA calculation.    Results  Medians of absolute differences in PTV metrics between synCT and CT plans were 0.2%, 0.2% and 0.3% for 4F, O4F and VMAT respectively. No significant differences were observed in OAR dose metrics including bladder V40Gy, mean dose in bladder, bowel V45Gy and femoral head V30Gy in any techniques. Gamma analysis with 2%/2mm dose difference/distance to agreement criteria showed median passing rates of 99.8% (range: 98.5 to 100%), 99.9% (97.2 to 100%), and 99.9% (99.4 to 100%) for 4F, O4F and VMAT, respectively. Using Acuros XB dose calculation, 2%/2mm gamma analysis generated a passing rate of 99.2% (97.7 to 99.9%) for VMAT plans.    Conclusion  SynCT enabled dose calculation equivalent to conventional CT for treatment planning of 3D conformal treatment as well as VMAT of rectal cancer. The dosimetric agreement between synCT and CT calculated doses demonstrated the potential of MR-only treatment planning for rectal cancer using MR generated synCT.

Dosimetric evaluation of magnetic resonance-generated synthetic CT for radiation treatment of rectal cancer