skip to main content
OSTI.GOV title logo U.S. Department of Energy
Office of Scientific and Technical Information

Title: SU-F-T-342: Dosimetric Constraint Prediction Guided Automatic Mulit-Objective Optimization for Intensity Modulated Radiotherapy

Abstract

Purpose: For intensity modulated radiotherapy, the plan optimization is time consuming with difficulties of selecting objectives and constraints, and their relative weights. A fast and automatic multi-objective optimization algorithm with abilities to predict optimal constraints and manager their trade-offs can help to solve this problem. Our purpose is to develop such a framework and algorithm for a general inverse planning. Methods: There are three main components contained in this proposed multi-objective optimization framework: prediction of initial dosimetric constraints, further adjustment of constraints and plan optimization. We firstly use our previously developed in-house geometry-dosimetry correlation model to predict the optimal patient-specific dosimetric endpoints, and treat them as initial dosimetric constraints. Secondly, we build an endpoint(organ) priority list and a constraint adjustment rule to repeatedly tune these constraints from their initial values, until every single endpoint has no room for further improvement. Lastly, we implement a voxel-independent based FMO algorithm for optimization. During the optimization, a model for tuning these voxel weighting factors respecting to constraints is created. For framework and algorithm evaluation, we randomly selected 20 IMRT prostate cases from the clinic and compared them with our automatic generated plans, in both the efficiency and plan quality. Results: For each evaluatedmore » plan, the proposed multi-objective framework could run fluently and automatically. The voxel weighting factor iteration time varied from 10 to 30 under an updated constraint, and the constraint tuning time varied from 20 to 30 for every case until no more stricter constraint is allowed. The average total costing time for the whole optimization procedure is ∼30mins. By comparing the DVHs, better OAR dose sparing could be observed in automatic generated plan, for 13 out of the 20 cases, while others are with competitive results. Conclusion: We have successfully developed a fast and automatic multi-objective optimization for intensity modulated radiotherapy. This work is supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (No: 81571771)« less

Authors:
;  [1];  [2]
  1. Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, Guangdong (China)
  2. Beihang University, Beijing, Beijing (China)
Publication Date:
OSTI Identifier:
22648944
Resource Type:
Journal Article
Resource Relation:
Journal Name: Medical Physics; Journal Volume: 43; Journal Issue: 6; Other Information: (c) 2016 American Association of Physicists in Medicine; Country of input: International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA)
Country of Publication:
United States
Language:
English
Subject:
60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES; 61 RADIATION PROTECTION AND DOSIMETRY; ALGORITHMS; DOSIMETRY; FORECASTING; LIMITING VALUES; OPTIMIZATION; PLANNING; RADIOTHERAPY

Citation Formats

Song, T, Zhou, L, and Li, Y. SU-F-T-342: Dosimetric Constraint Prediction Guided Automatic Mulit-Objective Optimization for Intensity Modulated Radiotherapy. United States: N. p., 2016. Web. doi:10.1118/1.4956527.
Song, T, Zhou, L, & Li, Y. SU-F-T-342: Dosimetric Constraint Prediction Guided Automatic Mulit-Objective Optimization for Intensity Modulated Radiotherapy. United States. doi:10.1118/1.4956527.
Song, T, Zhou, L, and Li, Y. Wed . "SU-F-T-342: Dosimetric Constraint Prediction Guided Automatic Mulit-Objective Optimization for Intensity Modulated Radiotherapy". United States. doi:10.1118/1.4956527.
@article{osti_22648944,
title = {SU-F-T-342: Dosimetric Constraint Prediction Guided Automatic Mulit-Objective Optimization for Intensity Modulated Radiotherapy},
author = {Song, T and Zhou, L and Li, Y},
abstractNote = {Purpose: For intensity modulated radiotherapy, the plan optimization is time consuming with difficulties of selecting objectives and constraints, and their relative weights. A fast and automatic multi-objective optimization algorithm with abilities to predict optimal constraints and manager their trade-offs can help to solve this problem. Our purpose is to develop such a framework and algorithm for a general inverse planning. Methods: There are three main components contained in this proposed multi-objective optimization framework: prediction of initial dosimetric constraints, further adjustment of constraints and plan optimization. We firstly use our previously developed in-house geometry-dosimetry correlation model to predict the optimal patient-specific dosimetric endpoints, and treat them as initial dosimetric constraints. Secondly, we build an endpoint(organ) priority list and a constraint adjustment rule to repeatedly tune these constraints from their initial values, until every single endpoint has no room for further improvement. Lastly, we implement a voxel-independent based FMO algorithm for optimization. During the optimization, a model for tuning these voxel weighting factors respecting to constraints is created. For framework and algorithm evaluation, we randomly selected 20 IMRT prostate cases from the clinic and compared them with our automatic generated plans, in both the efficiency and plan quality. Results: For each evaluated plan, the proposed multi-objective framework could run fluently and automatically. The voxel weighting factor iteration time varied from 10 to 30 under an updated constraint, and the constraint tuning time varied from 20 to 30 for every case until no more stricter constraint is allowed. The average total costing time for the whole optimization procedure is ∼30mins. By comparing the DVHs, better OAR dose sparing could be observed in automatic generated plan, for 13 out of the 20 cases, while others are with competitive results. Conclusion: We have successfully developed a fast and automatic multi-objective optimization for intensity modulated radiotherapy. This work is supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (No: 81571771)},
doi = {10.1118/1.4956527},
journal = {Medical Physics},
number = 6,
volume = 43,
place = {United States},
year = {Wed Jun 15 00:00:00 EDT 2016},
month = {Wed Jun 15 00:00:00 EDT 2016}
}
  • Purpose: To study the dosimetric impact of intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT), hybrid intensity-modulated radiotherapy (h-IMRT) and volumetric modulated arc therapy(VMAT) for whole-brain radiotherapy (WBRT) with simultaneous integrated boost in patients with multiple brain metastases. Methods: Ten patients with multiple brain metastases were included in this analysis. The prescribed dose was 45 Gy to the whole brain (PTVWBRT) and 55 Gy to individual brain metastases (PTVboost) delivered simultaneously in 25 fractions. Three treatment techniques were designed: the 7 equal spaced fields IMRT plan, hybrid IMRT plan and VMAT with two 358°arcs. In hybrid IMRT plan, two fields(90°and 270°) were planned to themore » whole brain. This was used as a base dose plan. Then 5 fields IMRT plan was optimized based on the two fields plan. The dose distribution in the target, the dose to the organs at risk and total MU in three techniques were compared. Results: For the target dose, conformity and homogeneity in PTV, no statistically differences were observed in the three techniques. For the maximum dose in bilateral lens and the mean dose in bilateral eyes, IMRT and h-IMRT plans showed the highest and lowest value respectively. No statistically significant differences were observed in the dose of optic nerve and brainstem. For the monitor units, IMRT and VMAT plans showed the highest and lowest value respectively. Conclusion: For WBRT with simultaneous integrated boost in patients with multiple brain metastases, hybrid IMRT could reduce the doses to lens and eyes. It is feasible for patients with brain metastases.« less
  • Purpose: There have been several publications focusing on dose calculation in lung for a new dose calculation algorithm of Acuros XB (AXB). AXB could contribute to dose calculation for high-density media for bone and dental prosthesis rather than in lung. We compared the dosimetric performance of AXB, Adaptive Convolve (AC) in head and neck IMRT plans. Methods: In a phantom study, the difference in depth profile between AXB and AC was evaluated using Kodak EDR2 film sandwiched with tough water phantoms. 6 MV x-ray using the TrueBeam was irradiated. In a patient study, 20 head and neck IMRT plans hadmore » been clinically approved in Pinnacle3 and were transferred to Eclipse. Dose distribution was recalculated using AXB in Eclipse while maintaining AC-calculated monitor units and MLC sequence planned in Pinnacle. Subsequently, both the dose-volumetric data obtained using the two different calculation algorithms were compared. Results: The results in the phantom evaluation for the shallow area ahead of the build-up region shows over-dose for AXB and under-dose for AC, respectively. In the patient plans, AXB shows more hot spots especially around the high-density media than AC in terms of PTV (Max difference: 4.0%) and OAR (Max. difference: 1.9%). Compared to AC, there were larger dose deviations in steep dose gradient region and higher skin-dose. Conclusion: In head and neck IMRT plans, AXB and AC show different dosimetric performance for the regions inside the target volume around high-density media, steep dose gradient regions and skin-surface. There are limitations in skin-dose and complex anatomic condition using even inhomogeneous anthropomorphic phantom Thus, there is the potential for an increase of hot-spot in AXB, and an underestimation of dose in substance boundaries and skin regions in AC.« less
  • Purpose: To compare volumetric modulated arc radiotherapy (VMAT) technique with fixed-gantry intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) technique for locally recurrent nasopharyngeal carcinoma. Methods: CT datasets of eleven nasopharyngeal-carcinoma patients were included. Dual-arc VMAT and seven-field IMRT plans were created for each case, and were then compared in terms of conformity index (CI), homogeneity index (HI) of the planning target volume (PTV), organ-at-risk (OAR) sparing, monitor unit (MU) and delivery time. Results: The D98% (near-minimal dose) of PTV in the VMAT plans was slightly lower than that of the IMRT plans (P < 0.05), while the CI was higher than that of themore » IMRT plans (P < 0.05). No significant difference was found in the HI between the two plans (P > 0.05). Compared with the IMRT plans, the VMAT plans demonstrated lower Dmean (mean dose) of the bilateral temporal lobes and the whole surrounding normal tissue (P < 0.05), but slightly higher Dmean of brainstem (P < 0.05). In terms of the other OARs, no significant differences were found (P > 0.05). The MUs of the VMAT plans (672 ± 112) was significantly lower than that of the IMRT plans (917 ± 206), by 25 ± 13% (P < 0.05). The average delivery time of the VMAT plans (2.3 ± 0.1 min) was less than that of the IMRT plans (5.1 ± 0.4 min), by 54 ± 3%. Conclusion: For locally recurrent nasopharyngeal carcinoma, the VMAT technique could achieve equivalent or superior dose distribution of the target and better protect the bilateral temporal lobes, compared with the IMRT technique. Moreover, it could reduce the MU and delivery time effectively.« less
  • Purpose: To compare volumetric modulated arc radiotherapy (VMAT) technique with fixed-gantry intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) technique for early-stage nasopharyngeal carcinoma. Methods: CT datasets of ten patients with early-stage nasopharyngeal carcinoma were included. Dual-arc VMAT and nine-field IMRT plans were generated for each case, and were then compared in terms of planning-target-volume (PTV) coverage, conformity index (CI) and homogeneity index (HI), as well as organ-at-risk (OAR) sparing, planning time, monitor units (MUs) and delivery time. Results: Compared with the IMRT plans, the VMAT plans provided comparable HI and CI of PTVnx (PTV of primary tumor of nasopharynx), superior CI and inferior HImore » of PTVnd (PTV of lymph nodes), as well as superior CI and comparable HI of PTV60 (high-risk PTV). The VMAT plans provided better sparing of the spinal cord, oral cavity and normal tissue, but inferior sparing of the brainstem planning OAR volume (PRV), larynx and parotids, as well as comparable sparing of the spinal cord PRV, brainstem, lenses, optic nerves, optic chiasm. Moreover, the average planning time (181.6 ± 36.0 min) for the VMAT plans was 171% more than that of the IMRT plans (68.1 ± 7.6 min). The MUs of the VMAT plans (609 ± 43) were 70% lower than those of the IMRT plans (2071 ± 262), while the average delivery time (2.2 ± 0.1 min) was 66% less than that of the IMRT plans (6.6 ± 0.4 min). Conclusion: Compared with the IMRT technique, the VMAT technique can achieve similar or slightly superior target dose distribution, with no significant advantages on OAR sparing, and it can achieve significant reductions of MUs and delivery time.« less
  • Purpose: To compare volumetric modulated arc radiotherapy (VMAT) technique with fixed-gantry intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) technique for locally advanced laryngeal carcinoma. Methods: CT datasets of eleven patients were included. Dual-arc VMAT and 7-field IMRT plans, which were created based on the Eclipse treatment planning system, were compared in terms of dose-volume parameters, conformity index (CI) and homogeneity index (HI) of planning target volume (PTV), as well as organ-at-risk (OAR) sparing, planning time, monitor units (MUs) and delivery time. Results: Compared with the IMRT plans, the VMAT plans provided lower D2% and better CI/HI for the high-risk PTV (PTV1), and provided bettermore » CI and comparable HI for the low-risk PTV (PTV2). Concerning the OAR sparing, the VMAT plans demonstrated significantly lower Dmax of the spinal cord (planning OAR volume, PRV) and brainstem (PRV), as well as lower Dmean and V30Gy of the right parotid. No significant differences were observed between the two plans concerning the doses delivered to the thyroid, carotid, oral cavity and left parotid. Moreover, the VMAT planning (147 ± 18 min) consumed 213% more time than the IMRT planning (48 ± 10 min). The MUs of the VMAT plans (556 ± 52) were 64% less than those of the IMRT plans (1684 ± 409), and the average delivery time (2.1 ± 0.1 min) was 66% less than that of the IMRT plans (6.3 ± 0.7 min). Conclusion: Compared with the IMRT technique, the VMAT technique can achieve superior target dose distribution and better sparing of the spinal cord, brainstem and right parotid, with less MUs and less delivery time. It is recommended for the radiotherapy of locally advanced laryngeal carcinoma.« less