title: Multi-system verification of registrations for image-guided radiotherapy in clinical trials.
abstract: OBJECTIVE
  To provide quantitative information on the image registration differences from multiple systems for image-guided radiotherapy (IGRT) credentialing and margin reduction in clinical trials.
  
  
  METHODS
  Images and IGRT shift results from three different treatment systems (Tomotherapy Hi-Art, Elekta Synergy, Varian Trilogy) have been sent from various institutions to the Image-Guided Therapy QA Center (ITC) for evaluation for the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) trials. Nine patient datasets (five head-and-neck and four prostate) were included in the comparison, with each patient having 1-4 daily individual IGRT studies. In all cases, daily shifts were re-calculated by re-registration of the planning CT with the daily IGRT data using three independent software systems (MIMvista, FocalSim, VelocityAI). Automatic fusion was used in all calculations. The results were compared with those submitted from institutions. Similar regions of interest (ROIs) and same initial positions were used in registrations for inter-system comparison. Different slice spacings for CBCT sampling and different ROIs for registration were used in some cases to observe the variation of registration due to these factors.
  
  
  RESULTS
  For the 54 comparisons with head-and-neck datasets, the absolute values of differences of the registration results between different systems were 2.6±2.1 mm (mean±SD; range 0.1-8.6 mm, left-right [LR]), 1.7±1.3 mm (0.0-4.9 mm, superior-inferior [SI]), and 1.8±1.1 mm (0.1-4.0 mm, anterior-posterior [AP]). For the 66 comparisons in prostate cases, the differences were 1.1±1.0 mm (0.0-4.6 mm, LR), 2.1±1.7 mm (0.0-6.6 mm, SI), and 2.0±1.8 mm (0.1-6.9 mm, AP). The differences caused by the slice spacing variation were relatively small, and the different ROI selections in FocalSim and MIMvista also had limited impact.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  The extent of differences was reported when different systems were used for image registration. Careful examination and quality assurance of the image registration process are crucial before considering margin reduction using IGRT in clinical trials.
authors.affiliation: Radiation Oncology Department, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, PA 19107, USA.
authors.forename: Yunfeng
authors.initials: Y
authors.lastname: Cui
authors.forename: James M
authors.initials: JM
authors.lastname: Galvin
authors.forename: William L
authors.initials: WL
authors.lastname: Straube
authors.forename: Walter R
authors.initials: WR
authors.lastname: Bosch
authors.forename: James A
authors.initials: JA
authors.lastname: Purdy
authors.forename: X Allen
authors.initials: XA
authors.lastname: Li
authors.forename: Ying
authors.initials: Y
authors.lastname: Xiao
mesh_terms: D000465:Algorithms; D002986:Clinical Trials as Topic / Q000592:standards*; D006258:Head and Neck Neoplasms / Q000000981:diagnostic imaging / Q000532:radiotherapy*; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D056888:Patient Positioning / Q000592:standards; D011471:Prostatic Neoplasms / Q000000981:diagnostic imaging / Q000532:radiotherapy*; D011880:Radiotherapy Planning, Computer-Assisted / Q000379:methods / Q000592:standards*; D011881:Radiotherapy, Computer-Assisted / Q000592:standards*; D012984:Software; D014057:Tomography, X-Ray Computed / Q000379:methods / Q000592:standards