先进多参数磁共振成像在放疗治疗计划中的广泛应用，导致对量化成像分析准确性进行测试和提高的必要性。标准化扩散加权成像（DWI）和扩散张量成像（DTI）的分析，以生成有意义且可重复的表观扩散系数（ADC）和分数各向异性（FA）是进行临床整合的必要条件。本研究的目的是通过使用商业治疗计划系统中集成的工具，对ADC和FA参数图分析的生成进行基准测试，并与当前使用的方法进行比较。本研究使用了三个软件包来生成35名受试者的ADC和FA图。其中一个工具是在商业治疗计划系统中开发的，另一个工具是由Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging of the Brain (FMRIB) Software Library FSL（Analysis Group, FMRIB, Oxford, United Kingdom）开发的，还有一个是在M.D. Anderson Cancer Center开发的本地工具。将由三个软件包生成的ADC和FA图相互相减，并使用图像差异的标准差进行可重复性比较。将ADC图的可重复性与Quantitative Imaging Biomarkers Alliance（QIBA）协议进行比较，将FA图的可重复性与已发表文献中的数据进行比较。结果显示，使用三种不同软件算法计算每名患者的ADC图的差异小于2%，符合推荐的QIBA要求3.6%。除了少数个别点，由三种方法产生的每名患者的FA图之间的大部分差异均未超过0.02，比在健康的灰白质中观察到的差异低10倍。还将结果与现有的MR成像设备生成的图进行了比较，结果显示，设备生成的ADC和FA图的鲁棒性在很大程度上取决于正确应用缩放因子，只有当正确放置时，三种测试方法与设备生成值之间的差异才在推荐的QIBA准则范围内。交叉比较差异图表明，使用我们测试的商业治疗计划系统生成的ADC和FA指标的定量可重复性与内部和已建立的工具作为基准相当。这种综合方法促进了扩散成像在放射治疗计划工作流程中的临床应用。© 2023 The Authors. Medical Physics published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American Association of Physicists in Medicine.

The rising promise in the utility of advanced multi-parametric magnetic resonance (MR) imaging in radiotherapy (RT) treatment planning creates a necessity for testing and enhancing the accuracy of quantitative imaging analysis. Standardizing the analysis of diffusion weighted imaging (DWI) and diffusion tensor imaging (DTI) to generate meaningful and reproducible apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) and fractional anisotropy (FA) lays the requisite needed for clinical integration. The aim of the demonstrated work is to benchmark the generation of the ADC and FA parametric map analyses using integrated tools in a commercial treatment planning system against the currently used ones.Three software packages were used for generating ADC and FA maps in this study; one tool was developed within a commercial treatment planning system, another by the Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging of the Brain (FMRIB) Software Library FSL (Analysis Group, FMRIB, Oxford, United Kingdom), and an in-house tool developed at the M.D. Anderson Cancer Center. The ADC and FA maps generated by all three packages for 35 subjects were subtracted from one another, and the standard deviation of the images' differences was used to compare the reproducibility. The reproducibility of the ADC maps was compared with the Quantitative Imaging Biomarkers Alliance (QIBA) protocol, while that of the FA maps was compared to data in published literature.Results show that the discrepancies between the ADC maps calculated for each patient using the three different software algorithms are less than 2% which meets the 3.6% recommended QIBA requirement. Except for a small number of isolated points, the majority of differences in FA maps for each patient produced by the three methods did not exceed 0.02 which is 10 times lower than the differences seen in healthy gray and white matter. The results were also compared to the maps generated by existing MR Imaging consoles and showed that the robustness of console generated ADC and FA maps is largely dependent on the correct application of scaling factors, that only if correctly placed; the differences between the three tested methods and the console generated values were within the recommended QIBA guidelines.Cross-comparison difference maps demonstrated that quantitative reproducibility of ADC and FA metrics generated using our tested commercial treatment planning system were comparable to in-house and established tools as benchmarks. This integrated approach facilitates the clinical utility of diffusion imaging in radiation treatment planning workflow.© 2023 The Authors. Medical Physics published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American Association of Physicists in Medicine.