Results
The Fast sequence scan was able to be completed on all patients with no modifications required by the system. This sequence was able to be converted to sCT as per Dowling et al. [
An example of the (a) standard MRI and (b) S-sCT and the (c) fast MRI and (d) F-sCT for the same corresponding slice for one patient. The body and bone masks are also displayed on the sCT slices in (b) and (d)The mean absolute error (MAE) in HU over the ten patients for the F-sCT compared to the S-sCT with the body and bone masks from the S-sCT, in addition to tissue only, is shown in Fig. 
Mean Absolute Error (MAE) of HU for the generated sCT from the fast MRI sequence compared to the sCT generated from the standard MRI sequence for all patients for the within-the-body contour, the automatic bone contour, and for tissue only
Volume percentage difference, mean Hausdorff distance and DSC results for automatic body and bone contours for the generated sCT for the fast MRI sequence compared to the standard sequence generated sCT for all patientsThe volume percentage difference, mean Hausdorff distance and DSC results for both the body and bone contour comparison can be seen in Table 
Dosimetric Results for all patient plan comparisons. The isocentre point dose was compared, as well as 1%/1 mm Global Gamma analysis for the clinical plan from the S-sCT recalculated on the F-sCTTable 
DVH comparison of PTV parameters and the rectum and bladder D50 for the recalculated treatment plans on the F-sCT compared to calculated on the S-sCT. This figure shows the percentage difference for each parameter for all patients