Search

Abstract Background This study was designed to establish radiation pneumonitis (RP) prediction models using dosiomics and/or deep learning-based radiomics (DLR) features based on 3D dose distribution. Methods A total of 140 patients with non-small cell lung cancer who received stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) were retrospectively included in this study. These patients were randomly divided into the training (n = 112) and test (n = 28) sets. Besides, 107 dosiomics features were extracted by Pyradiomics, and 1316 DLR features were extracted by ResNet50. Feature visualization was performed based on Spearman’s correlation coefficients, and feature selection was performed based on the least absolute shrinkage and selection operator. Three different models were constructed based on random forest, including (1) a dosiomics model (a model constructed based on dosiomics features), (2) a DLR model (a model constructed based on DLR features), and (3) a hybrid model (a model constructed based on dosiomics and DLR features). Subsequently, the performance of these three models was compared with receiver operating characteristic curves. Finally, these dosiomics and DLR features were analyzed with Spearman’s correlation coefficients. Results In the training set, the area under the curve (AUC) of the dosiomics, DLR, and hybrid models was 0.9986, 0.9992, and 0.9993, respectively; the accuracy of these three models was 0.9643, 0.9464, and 0.9642, respectively. In the test set, the AUC of these three models was 0.8462, 0.8750, and 0.9000, respectively; the accuracy of these three models was 0.8214, 0.7857, and 0.8571, respectively. The hybrid model based on dosiomics and DLR features outperformed other two models. Correlation analysis between dosiomics features and DLR features showed weak correlations. The dosiomics features that correlated DLR features with the Spearman’s rho |ρ| ≥ 0.8 were all first-order features. Conclusion The hybrid features based on dosiomics and DLR features from 3D dose distribution could improve the performance of RP prediction after SBRT.

Abstract Background To evaluate the dosimetric and biological benefits of the fixed-jaw (FJ) intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) technique for patients with T-shaped esophageal cancer. Methods FJ IMRT plans were generated for thirty-five patients and compared with jaw tracking (JT) IMRT, static jaw (SJ) IMRT and JT volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT). Dosimetric parameters, tumor control probability (TCP) and normal tissue complication probability (NTCP), monitor units (MUs), delivery time and gamma passing rate, as a measure of dosimetric verification, were compared. The correlation between the length of PTV-C below the upper boundary of lung tissue (PTV-Cinferior) and dosimetric parameters and NTCP of the lung tissue were analyzed. Results The homogeneity and conformity of the target in the four plans were basically equivalent. When compared to the JT IMRT and SJ IMRT plans, FJ IMRT plan led to a statistically significant improvement in the NTCP and low-middle dosimetric parameters of the lung, and the improvement had a moderately positive correlation with the length of PTV-Cinferior, with a correlation coefficient ranging from 0.523 to 0.797; the FJ IMRT plan exhibited better lung sparing in low-dose volumes than the JT VMAT plan. The FJ IMRT plan had similar MUs (888 ± 99) and delivery times (516.1 ± 54.7 s) as the JT IMRT plan (937 ± 194, 522 ± 5.6 s) but higher than SJ IMRT (713 ± 137, 488.8 ± 45.2 s) and JT VMAT plan (517 ± 59, 263.7 ± 43.3 s). Conclusions The FJ IMRT technique is superior in reducing the low-dose volumes of lung tissues for patients with T-shaped esophageal cancer.

Abstract Background/purpose To establish regression models of physical and equivalent dose in 2 Gy per fraction (EQD2) plan parameters of two kinds of hybrid planning for stage III NSCLC. Methods Two kinds of hybrid plans named conventional fraction radiotherapy & stereotactic body radiotherapy (C&S) and conventional fraction radiotherapy & simultaneous integrated boost (C&SIB) were retrospectively made for 20 patients with stage III NSCLC. Prescription dose of C&S plans was 2 Gy × 30f for planning target volume of lymph node (PTVLN) and 12.5 Gy × 4f for planning target volume of primary tumor (PTVPT), while prescription dose of C&SIB plans was 2 Gy × 26f for PTVLN and sequential 2 Gy × 4f for PTVLN combined with 12.5 Gy × 4f for PTVPT. Regression models of physical and EQD2 plan parameters were established based on anatomical geometry features for two kinds of hybrid plans. The features were mainly characterized by volume ratio, min distance and overlapping slices thickness of two structures. The possibilities of regression models of EQD2 plan parameters were verified by spearman’s correlation coefficients between physical and EQD2 plan parameters, and the influence on the consistence of fitting goodness between physical and EQD2 models was investigated by the correlations between physical and EQD2 plan parameters. Finally, physical and EQD2 models predictions were compared with plan parameters for two new patients. Results Physical and EQD2 plan parameters of PTVLN CI60Gy have shown strong positive correlations with PTVLN volume and min distance(PT to LN), and strong negative correlations with PTVPT volume for two kinds of hybrid plans. PTV(PT+LN) CI60Gy is not only correlated with above three geometry features, but also negatively correlated with overlapping slices thickness(PT and LN). When neck lymph node metastasis was excluded from PTVLN volume, physical and EQD2 total lung V20 showed a high linear correlation with corrected volume ratio(LN to total lung). Meanwhile, physical total lung mean dose (MLD) had a high linear correlation with corrected volume ratio(LN to total lung), while EQD2 total lung MLD was not only affected by corrected volume ratio(LN to total lung) but also volume ratio(PT to total lung). Heart D5, D30 and mean dose (MHD) would be more susceptible to overlapping structure(heart and LN). Min distance(PT to ESO) may be an important feature for predicting EQD2 esophageal max dose for hybrid plans. It’s feasible for regression models of EQD2 plan parameters, and the consistence of the fitting goodness of physical and EQD2 models had a positive correlation with spearman’s correlation coefficients between physical and EQD2 plan parameters. For total lung V20, ipsilateral lung V20, and ipsilateral lung MLD, the models could predict that C&SIB plans were higher than C&S plans for two new patients. Conclusion The regression models of physical and EQD2 plan parameters were established with at least moderate fitting goodness in this work, and the models have a potential to predict physical and EQD2 plan parameters for two kinds of hybrid planning.