Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 257

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 26 of the 26 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Paired cycle‐GAN‐based image correction for quantitative cone‐beam computed tomography

Open access
Harms, Joseph, Lei, Yang, Wang, Tonghe, Zhang, Rongxiao, Zhou, Jun, Tang, Xiangyang, Curran, Walter J., Liu, Tian, Yang, Xiaofeng·2019·Medical Physics

Abstract

Purpose: The incorporation of cone‐beam computed tomography (CBCT) has allowed for enhanced image‐guided radiation therapy. While CBCT allows for daily 3D imaging, images suffer from severe artifacts, limiting the clinical potential of CBCT. In this work, a deep learning‐based method for generating high quality corrected CBCT (CCBCT) images is proposed. Methods: The proposed method integrates a residual block concept into a cycle‐consistent adversarial network (cycle‐GAN) framework, called res‐cycle GAN, to learn a mapping between CBCT images and paired planning CT images. Compared with a GAN, a cycle‐GAN includes an inverse transformation from CBCT to CT images, which constrains the model by forcing calculation of both a CCBCT and a synthetic CBCT. A fully convolution neural network with residual blocks is used in the generator to enable end‐to‐end CBCT‐to‐CT transformations. The proposed algorithm was evaluated using 24 sets of patient data in the brain and 20 sets of patient data in the pelvis. The mean absolute error (MAE), peak signal‐to‐noise ratio (PSNR), normalized cross‐correlation (NCC) indices, and spatial non‐uniformity (SNU) were used to quantify the correction accuracy of the proposed algorithm. The proposed method is compared to both a conventional scatter correction and another machine learning‐based CBCT correction method. Results: Overall, the MAE, PSNR, NCC, and SNU were 13.0 HU, 37.5 dB, 0.99, and 0.05 in the brain, 16.1 HU, 30.7 dB, 0.98, and 0.09 in the pelvis for the proposed method, improvements of 45%, 16%, 1%, and 93% in the brain, and 71%, 38%, 2%, and 65% in the pelvis, over the CBCT image. The proposed method showed superior image quality as compared to the scatter correction method, reducing noise and artifact severity. The proposed method produced images with less noise and artifacts than the comparison machine learning‐based method. Conclusions: The authors have developed a novel deep learning‐based method to generate high‐quality corrected CBCT images. The proposed method increases onboard CBCT image quality, making it comparable to that of the planning CT. With further evaluation and clinical implementation, this method could lead to quantitative adaptive radiation therapy.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/mp.13656

Cites

26 of 26 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 26 references

Cited by

See all 257

Metadata

Authors
Harms, J., Lei, Y., Wang, T., Zhang, R., Zhou, J., Tang, X., Curran, W. J., Liu, T., & Yang, X.
Venue
Medical Physics
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2019-07-17
Volume
46
Issue
9
Pages
3998-4009
ISSN
  • 0094-2405 (ISSN-L)
  • 2473-4209
OpenAlex
W2952935478
Cited by
257
References
26
FWCI
24.70
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Paired cycle‐GAN‐based image correction for quantitative cone‐beam computed tomography. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/mp.13656
The paper
Harms, J., Lei, Y., Wang, T., Zhang, R., Zhou, J., Tang, X., Curran, W. J., Liu, T., & Yang, X. (2019). Paired cycle‐GAN‐based image correction for quantitative cone‐beam computed tomography. Medical Physics. https://doi.org/10.1002/mp.13656

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.