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

Title: SU-F-T-352: Development of a Knowledge Based Automatic Lung IMRT Planning Algorithm with Non-Coplanar Beams

Abstract

Purpose: To improve the robustness of a knowledge based automatic lung IMRT planning method and to further validate the reliability of this algorithm by utilizing for the planning of clinical cases with non-coplanar beams. Methods: A lung IMRT planning method which automatically determines both plan optimization objectives and beam configurations with non-coplanar beams has been reported previously. A beam efficiency index map is constructed to guide beam angle selection in this algorithm. This index takes into account both the dose contributions from individual beams and the combined effect of multiple beams which is represented by a beam separation score. We studied the effect of this beam separation score on plan quality and determined the optimal weight for this score.14 clinical plans were re-planned with the knowledge-based algorithm. Significant dosimetric metrics for the PTV and OARs in the automatic plans are compared with those in the clinical plans by the two-sample t-test. In addition, a composite dosimetric quality index was defined to obtain the relationship between the plan quality and the beam separation score. Results: On average, we observed more than 15% reduction on conformity index and homogeneity index for PTV and V{sub 40}, V{sub 60} for heart while an 8%more » and 3% increase on V{sub 5}, V{sub 20} for lungs, respectively. The variation curve of the composite index as a function of angle spread score shows that 0.6 is the best value for the weight of the beam separation score. Conclusion: Optimal value for beam angle spread score in automatic lung IMRT planning is obtained. With this value, model can result in statistically the “best” achievable plans. This method can potentially improve the quality and planning efficiency for IMRT plans with no-coplanar angles.« less

Authors:
 [1]; ;  [2]
  1. Duke Kunshan University/Duke University, Kunshan, Jiangsu (China)
  2. Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC (United States)
Publication Date:
OSTI Identifier:
22648954
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; BEAMS; LUNGS; OPTIMIZATION; PLANNING; RADIOTHERAPY

Citation Formats

Zhu, W, Wu, Q, and Yuan, L. SU-F-T-352: Development of a Knowledge Based Automatic Lung IMRT Planning Algorithm with Non-Coplanar Beams. United States: N. p., 2016. Web. doi:10.1118/1.4956537.
Zhu, W, Wu, Q, & Yuan, L. SU-F-T-352: Development of a Knowledge Based Automatic Lung IMRT Planning Algorithm with Non-Coplanar Beams. United States. doi:10.1118/1.4956537.
Zhu, W, Wu, Q, and Yuan, L. 2016. "SU-F-T-352: Development of a Knowledge Based Automatic Lung IMRT Planning Algorithm with Non-Coplanar Beams". United States. doi:10.1118/1.4956537.
@article{osti_22648954,
title = {SU-F-T-352: Development of a Knowledge Based Automatic Lung IMRT Planning Algorithm with Non-Coplanar Beams},
author = {Zhu, W and Wu, Q and Yuan, L},
abstractNote = {Purpose: To improve the robustness of a knowledge based automatic lung IMRT planning method and to further validate the reliability of this algorithm by utilizing for the planning of clinical cases with non-coplanar beams. Methods: A lung IMRT planning method which automatically determines both plan optimization objectives and beam configurations with non-coplanar beams has been reported previously. A beam efficiency index map is constructed to guide beam angle selection in this algorithm. This index takes into account both the dose contributions from individual beams and the combined effect of multiple beams which is represented by a beam separation score. We studied the effect of this beam separation score on plan quality and determined the optimal weight for this score.14 clinical plans were re-planned with the knowledge-based algorithm. Significant dosimetric metrics for the PTV and OARs in the automatic plans are compared with those in the clinical plans by the two-sample t-test. In addition, a composite dosimetric quality index was defined to obtain the relationship between the plan quality and the beam separation score. Results: On average, we observed more than 15% reduction on conformity index and homogeneity index for PTV and V{sub 40}, V{sub 60} for heart while an 8% and 3% increase on V{sub 5}, V{sub 20} for lungs, respectively. The variation curve of the composite index as a function of angle spread score shows that 0.6 is the best value for the weight of the beam separation score. Conclusion: Optimal value for beam angle spread score in automatic lung IMRT planning is obtained. With this value, model can result in statistically the “best” achievable plans. This method can potentially improve the quality and planning efficiency for IMRT plans with no-coplanar angles.},
doi = {10.1118/1.4956537},
journal = {Medical Physics},
number = 6,
volume = 43,
place = {United States},
year = 2016,
month = 6
}
  • Purpose: The study aims to develop and validate a knowledge based planning (KBP) model for external beam radiation therapy of locally advanced non-small cell lung cancer (LA-NSCLC). Methods: RapidPlan™ technology was used to develop a lung KBP model. Plans from 65 patients with LA-NSCLC were used to train the model. 25 patients were treated with VMAT, and the other patients were treated with IMRT. Organs-at-risk (OARs) included right lung, left lung, heart, esophagus, and spinal cord. DVH and geometric distribution DVH were extracted from the treated plans. The model was trained using principal component analysis and step-wise multiple regression. Boxmore » plot and regression plot tools were used to identify geometric outliers and dosimetry outliers and help fine-tune the model. The validation was performed by (a) comparing predicted DVH boundaries to actual DVHs of 63 patients and (b) using an independent set of treatment planning data. Results: 63 out of 65 plans were included in the final KBP model with PTV volume ranging from 102.5cc to 1450.2cc. Total treatment dose prescription varied from 50Gy to 70Gy based on institutional guidelines. One patient was excluded due to geometric outlier where 2.18cc of spinal cord was included in PTV. The other patient was excluded due to dosimetric outlier where the dose sparing to spinal cord was heavily enforced in the clinical plan. Target volume, OAR volume, OAR overlap volume percentage to target, and OAR out-of-field volume were included in the trained model. Lungs and heart had two principal component scores of GEDVH, whereas spinal cord and esophagus had three in the final model. Predicted DVH band (mean ±1 standard deviation) represented 66.2±3.6% of all DVHs. Conclusion: A KBP model was developed and validated for radiotherapy of LA-NSCLC in a commercial treatment planning system. The clinical implementation may improve the consistency of IMRT/VMAT planning.« less
  • Purpose: To describe the development of a knowledge-based treatment planning model for lung cancer patients treated with SBRT, and to evaluate the model performance and applicability to different planning techniques and tumor locations. Methods: 105 lung SBRT plans previously treated at our institution were included in the development of the model using Varian’s RapidPlan DVH estimation algorithm. The model was trained with a combination of IMRT, VMAT, and 3D–CRT techniques. Tumor locations encompassed lesions located centrally vs peripherally (43:62), upper vs lower (62:43), and anterior vs posterior lobes (60:45). The model performance was validated with 25 cases independent of themore » training set, for both IMRT and VMAT. Model generated plans were created with only one optimization and no planner intervention. The original, general model was also divided into four separate models according to tumor location. The model was also applied using different beam templates to further improve workflow. Dose differences to targets and organs-at-risk were evaluated. Results: IMRT and VMAT RapidPlan generated plans were comparable to clinical plans with respect to target coverage and several OARs. Spinal cord dose was lowered in the model-based plans by 1Gy compared to the clinical plans, p=0.008. Splitting the model according to tumor location resulted in insignificant differences in DVH estimation. The peripheral model decreased esophagus dose to the central lesions by 0.5Gy compared to the original model, p=0.025, and the posterior model increased dose to the spinal cord by 1Gy compared to the anterior model, p=0.001. All template beam plans met OAR criteria, with 1Gy increases noted in maximum heart dose for the 9-field plans, p=0.04. Conclusion: A RapidPlan knowledge-based model for lung SBRT produces comparable results to clinical plans, with increased consistency and greater efficiency. The model encompasses both IMRT and VMAT techniques, differing tumor locations, and beam arrangements. Research supported in part by a grant from Varian Medical Systems, Palo Alto CA.« less
  • Purpose: Knowledge-based Planning (KBP) founded on prior planning experience and Auto-Planning Engine (APE; commercialized in Pinnacle v9.10 TPS) based on progressive optimization algorithm both aim to eliminate the trial-and-error process in radiotherapy inverse planning. This study investigates the performance of the approaches in a multi-institutional setting to evaluate their functionalities in oropharyngeal cancer and offers suggestions how they can be implemented in the clinic. Methods: Radboud University Medical Center (RUMC) provided 35 oropharyngeal cancer patients (SIB-IMRT with two-dose-level prescription: 68 Gy to PTV68 and 50.3 Gy to PTV50.3) with corresponding comparative APE plans. Johns Hopkins University (JHU) contributed to amore » three-dose-level (70 Gy 63 Gy and 58.1 Gy) plan library for RUMC’s patient KBP generation. MedStar Georgetown University Hospital (MGUH) contributed to a KBP approach employing overlap-volume histogram (OVH-KBP) for generating RUMC’s patient KBP plans using JHU’s plan library. Since both approaches need their own user-defined parameters as initial inputs the first 10 patients were set aside as training set to finalize them. Meanwhile cross-institutional comparisons and adjustments were implemented for investigating institutions’ protocol discrepancies and the approaches’ user-defined parameters were updated accordingly. The finalized parameters were then applied to the remaining 25 patients for OVH-KBP and APE generation. A Wilcoxon rank-sum test was used for statistical comparison with significance level of p<0.05. Results: On average PTV68’s V95 was 96.5% in APE plans vs. 97% in OVH-KBP plans (p=0.36); PTV50.3’s V95 in APE plans was 97.8% vs.97.6% in OVH-KBP plans (p=0.6); cord’s D0.1 cc was 38.6 Gy in OVH-KBP plans vs. 43.7 Gy in APE plans (p=0.0001); mean doses to larynxes oral cavities parotids and submandibular glands were similar with p>0.2. Conclusions: The study demonstrates that KBP and APE can generate plans of comparable quality in a multi-institutional setting. Variations in clinical protocols can be effectively addressed for cross-institutional adaptations. Binbin Wu and Todd McNutt are the co-inventors of a patent associated with the proposed knowledge-based planning system which was licensed to Varian Medical Systems in 2015; This research was in part supported by Philips Radiation Oncology Systems.« less
  • Purpose: To develop a novel algorithm that incorporates prior treatment knowledge into intensity modulated radiation therapy optimization to facilitate automatic treatment planning and adaptive radiotherapy (ART) replanning. Methods: The algorithm automatically creates a treatment plan guided by the DVH curves of a reference plan that contains information on the clinician-approved dose-volume trade-offs among different targets/organs and among different portions of a DVH curve for an organ. In ART, the reference plan is the initial plan for the same patient, while for automatic treatment planning the reference plan is selected from a library of clinically approved and delivered plans of previouslymore » treated patients with similar medical conditions and geometry. The proposed algorithm employs a voxel-based optimization model and navigates the large voxel-based Pareto surface. The voxel weights are iteratively adjusted to approach a plan that is similar to the reference plan in terms of the DVHs. If the reference plan is feasible but not Pareto optimal, the algorithm generates a Pareto optimal plan with the DVHs better than the reference ones. If the reference plan is too restricting for the new geometry, the algorithm generates a Pareto plan with DVHs close to the reference ones. In both cases, the new plans have similar DVH trade-offs as the reference plans. Results: The algorithm was tested using three patient cases and found to be able to automatically adjust the voxel-weighting factors in order to generate a Pareto plan with similar DVH trade-offs as the reference plan. The algorithm has also been implemented on a GPU for high efficiency. Conclusions: A novel prior-knowledge-based optimization algorithm has been developed that automatically adjust the voxel weights and generate a clinical optimal plan at high efficiency. It is found that the new algorithm can significantly improve the plan quality and planning efficiency in ART replanning and automatic treatment planning.« less
  • Purpose: To present a technique to automatically determine beam angle configurations for lung IMRT planning based on the patient-specific anatomy and tumor geometry. Methods: The relationship between individual patient anatomy and proper beam configurations was learned from high quality clinical plans in three steps. First, a beam configuration atlas was obtained by classifying 60 lung IMRT plans into 6 beam configuration clusters based on a dissimilarity measure defined between different beam configurations. A beam configuration template was extracted from each cluster to form an atlas. Second, a beam efficiency index map (EI map) was constructed to characterize the geometry ofmore » the tumor relative to the lungs, the body and other OARs along each candidate beam direction. Finally, the EI maps of the clinical cases and the cluster assignments of their beam configurations were paired to train a Bayesian classification model. This technique was validated by leave-one-out cross validation with 16 cases randomly selected from the original dataset. An IMRT plan (autobeam plan) for each test case was generated using the beam configuration template according to the cluster assignment given by the model and was compared with the corresponding clinical plan. Results: The dosimetric parameters (mean±S.D. in percentage of prescription dose) in the auto-beam plans and in the clinical plans, respectively, and the p-values by a paired ttest (in parenthesis) are: lung Dmean: 16.3±9.3, 18.6±7.4 (0.48), esophagus Dmean: 28.4±18, 30.7±19.3 (0.02), Heart Dmean: 21.5±17.5,21.1±17.2 (0.76), Spinal Cord D2%: 48±23, 51.2±21.8 (0.01), PTV dose homogeneity (D2%–D99%): 22±27.4, 20.4±12.8 (0.10).The dose reductions by the autobeam plans in esophagus Dmean and cord D02 are statistically significant but the differences (<4%) may not be clinically significant. The other dosimetric parameters are not statistically different. Conclusion: Plans generated by the automatic beam angle determination method can achieve dosimetric quality equivalent to that of clinical plans. Partially supported by NIH/NCI under grant #R21CA161389 and a master research grant by Varian Medical System.« less