iCycle: Integrated, multicriterial beam angle, and profile optimization for generation of coplanar and noncoplanar IMRT plans

Optimization approaches to volumetric modulated arc therapy planning

Volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) has found widespread clinical application in recent years. A large number of treatment planning studies have evaluated the potential for VMAT for different disease sites based on the currently available commercial implementations of VMAT planning. In contrast, literature on the underlying mathematical optimization methods used in treatment planning is scarce. VMAT planning represents a challenging large scale optimization problem. In contrast to fluence map optimization in intensity-modulated radiotherapy planning for static beams, VMAT planning represents a nonconvex optimization problem. In this paper, the authors review the state-of-the-art in VMAT planning from an algorithmic perspective. Different approaches to VMAT optimization, including arc sequencing methods, extensions of direct aperture optimization, and direct optimization of leaf trajectories are reviewed. Their advantages and limitations are outlined and recommendations for improvements are discussed.

Comparison of VMAT and IMRT strategies for cervical cancer patients using automated planning

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

In a published study on cervical cancer, 5-beam IMRT was inferior to single arc VMAT. Here we compare 9, 12, and 20 beam IMRT with single and dual arc VMAT.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

For each of 10 patients, automated plan generation with the in-house Erasmus-iCycle optimizer was used to assist an expert planner in generating the five plans with the clinical TPS.

RESULTS

For each patient, all plans were clinically acceptable with a high and similar PTV coverage. OAR sparing increased when going from 9 to 12 to 20 IMRT beams, and from single to dual arc VMAT. For all patients, 12 and 20 beam IMRT were superior to single and dual arc VMAT, with substantial variations in gain among the study patients. As expected, delivery of VMAT plans was significantly faster than delivery of IMRT plans.

CONCLUSIONS

Often reported increased plan quality for VMAT compared to IMRT has not been observed for cervical cancer. Twenty and 12 beam IMRT plans had a higher quality than single and dual arc VMAT. For individual patients, the optimal delivery technique depends on a complex trade-off between plan quality and treatment time that may change with introduction of faster delivery systems.

Standardized beam bouquets for lung IMRT planning

The selection of the incident angles of the treatment beams is a critical component of intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) planning for lung cancer due to significant variations in tumor location, tumor size and patient anatomy. We investigate the feasibility of establishing a small set of standardized beam bouquets for planning. The set of beam bouquets were determined by learning the beam configuration features from 60 clinical lung IMRT plans designed by experienced planners. A k-medoids cluster analysis method was used to classify the beam configurations in the dataset. The appropriate number of clusters was determined by maximizing the value of average silhouette width of the classification. Once the number of clusters had been determined, the beam arrangements in each medoid of the clusters were designated as the standardized beam bouquet for the cluster. This standardized bouquet set was used to re-plan 20 cases randomly selected from the clinical database. The dosimetric quality of the plans using the beam bouquets was evaluated against the corresponding clinical plans by a paired t-test. The classification with six clusters has the largest average silhouette width value and hence would best represent the beam bouquet patterns in the dataset. The results shows that plans generated with a small number of standardized bouquets (e.g. 6) have comparable quality to that of clinical plans. These standardized beam configuration bouquets will potentially help improve plan efficiency and facilitate automated planning.

Evaluation of a knowledge-based planning solution for head and neck cancer

PURPOSE

Automated and knowledge-based planning techniques aim to reduce variations in plan quality. RapidPlan uses a library consisting of different patient plans to make a model that can predict achievable dose-volume histograms (DVHs) for new patients and uses those models for setting optimization objectives. We benchmarked RapidPlan versus clinical plans for 2 patient groups, using 3 different libraries.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Volumetric modulated arc therapy plans of 60 recent head and neck cancer patients that included sparing of the salivary glands, swallowing muscles, and oral cavity were evenly divided between 2 models, Model(30A) and Model(30B), and were combined in a third model, Model60. Knowledge-based plans were created for 2 evaluation groups: evaluation group 1 (EG1), consisting of 15 recent patients, and evaluation group 2 (EG2), consisting of 15 older patients in whom only the salivary glands were spared. RapidPlan results were compared with clinical plans (CP) for boost and/or elective planning target volume homogeneity index, using HI(B)/HI(E) = 100 × (D2% - D98%)/D50%, and mean dose to composite salivary glands, swallowing muscles, and oral cavity (D(sal), D(swal), and D(oc), respectively).

RESULTS

For EG1, RapidPlan improved HI(B) and HI(E) values compared with CP by 1.0% to 1.3% and 1.0% to 0.6%, respectively. Comparable D(sal) and D(swal) values were seen in Model(30A), Model(30B), and Model60, decreasing by an average of 0.1, 1.0, and 0.8 Gy and 4.8, 3.7, and 4.4 Gy, respectively. However, differences were noted between individual organs at risk (OARs), with Model(30B) increasing D(oc) by 0.1, 3.2, and 2.8 Gy compared with CP, Model(30A), and Model60. Plan quality was less consistent when the patient was flagged as an outlier. For EG2, RapidPlan decreased D(sal) by 4.1 to 4.9 Gy on average, whereas HI(B) and HI(E) decreased by 1.1% to 1.5% and 2.3% to 1.9%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

RapidPlan knowledge-based treatment plans were comparable to CP if the patient's OAR-planning target volume geometry was within the range of those included in the models. EG2 results showed that a model including swallowing-muscle and oral-cavity sparing can be applied to patients with only salivary gland sparing. This may allow model library sharing between institutes. Optimal detection of inadequate plans and population of model libraries requires further investigation.

A DVH-guided IMRT optimization algorithm for automatic treatment planning and adaptive radiotherapy replanning

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 previously 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.

Beam geometry selection using sequential beam addition

PURPOSE

The selection of optimal beam geometry has been of interest since the inception of conformal radiotherapy. The authors report on sequential beam addition, a simple beam geometry selection method, for intensity modulated radiation therapy.

METHODS

The sequential beam addition algorithm (SBA) requires definition of an objective function (score) and a set of candidate beam geometries (pool). In the first iteration, the optimal score is determined for each beam in the pool and the beam with the best score selected. In the next iteration, the optimal score is calculated for each beam remaining in the pool combined with the beam selected in the first iteration, and the best scoring beam is selected. The process is repeated until the desired number of beams is reached. The authors selected three treatment sites, breast, lung, and brain, and determined beam arrangements for up to 11 beams from a pool comprised of 25 equiangular transverse beams. For the brain, arrangements were additionally selected from a pool of 22 noncoplanar beams. Scores were determined for geometries comprised equiangular transverse beams (EQA), as well as two tangential beams for the breast case.

RESULTS

In all cases, SBA resulted in scores superior to EQA. The breast case had the strongest dependence on beam geometry, for which only the 7-beam EQA geometry had a score better than the two tangential beams, whereas all SBA geometries with more than two beams were superior. In the lung case, EQA and SBA scores monotonically improved with increasing number of beams; however, SBA required fewer beams to achieve scores equivalent to EQA. For the brain case, SBA with a coplanar pool was equivalent to EQA, while the noncoplanar pool resulted in slightly better scores; however, the dose-volume histograms demonstrated that the differences were not clinically significant.

CONCLUSIONS

For situations in which beam geometry has a significant effect on the objective function, SBA can identify arrangements equivalent to equiangular geometries but using fewer beams. Furthermore, SBA provides the value of the objective function as the number of beams is increased, allowing the planner to select the minimal beam number that achieves the clinical goals. The method is simple to implement and could readily be incorporated into an existing optimization system.

Shared data for intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) optimization research: the CORT dataset

BACKGROUND

We provide common datasets (which we call the CORT dataset: common optimization for radiation therapy) that researchers can use when developing and contrasting radiation treatment planning optimization algorithms. The datasets allow researchers to make one-to-one comparisons of algorithms in order to solve various instances of the radiation therapy treatment planning problem in intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT), including beam angle optimization, volumetric modulated arc therapy and direct aperture optimization.

RESULTS

We provide datasets for a prostate case, a liver case, a head and neck case, and a standard IMRT phantom. We provide the dose-influence matrix from a variety of beam/couch angle pairs for each dataset. The dose-influence matrix is the main entity needed to perform optimizations: it contains the dose to each patient voxel from each pencil beam. In addition, the original Digital Imaging and Communications in Medicine (DICOM) computed tomography (CT) scan, as well as the DICOM structure file, are provided for each case.

CONCLUSIONS

Here we present an open dataset - the first of its kind - to the radiation oncology community, which will allow researchers to compare methods for optimizing radiation dose delivery.

Toward optimal organ at risk sparing in complex volumetric modulated arc therapy: an exponential trade-off with target volume dose homogeneity

PURPOSE

Conventional radiotherapy typically aims for homogenous dose in the planning target volume (PTV) while sparing organs at risk (OAR). The authors quantified and characterized the trade-off between PTV dose inhomogeneity (IH) and OAR sparing in complex head and neck volumetric modulated arc therapy plans.

METHODS

Thirteen simultaneous integrated boost plans were created per patient, for ten patients. PTV boost(B)/elective(E) optimization priorities were systematically increased. IHB and IHE, defined as (100% - V95%) + V107%, were evaluated against the average of the mean dose to the combined composite swallowing and combined salivary organs (D-OAR(comp)). To investigate the influence of OAR size and position with respect to PTVB/E, OAR dose was evaluated against a modified Euclidean distance (DMB/DME) between OAR and PTV.

RESULTS

Although the achievable D-OAR(comp) for a given level of PTV IH differed between patients, excellent logarithmic fits described the D-OAR(comp)/IHB and IHE relationship in all patients (mean R(2) of 0.98 and 0.97, respectively). Allowing an increase in average IHB and IHE over a clinically acceptable range, e.g., from 0.4% ± 0.5% to 2.0% ± 2.0% and 6.9% ± 2.8% to 14.8% ± 2.7%, respectively, corresponded to a decrease in average dose to the composite salivary and swallowing structures from 30.3 ± 6.5 to 23.6 ± 4.7 Gy and 32.5 ± 8.3 to 26.8 ± 9.3 Gy. The increase in PTVE IH was mainly accounted for by an increase in V107, by on average 5.9%, rather than a reduction in V95, which was on average only 2%. A linear correlation was found between the OAR dose to composite swallowing structures and contralateral parotid and submandibular gland, with DME (R(2) = 0.83, 0.88, 0.95). Only mean ipsilateral parotid dose correlated with DMB (R(2) = 0.87).

CONCLUSIONS

OAR sparing is highly dependent on the permitted PTVB/E IH. PTVE IH substantially influences OAR doses. These results are relevant for clinical practice and for future automated treatment-planning strategies.

Clinical implementation of an online adaptive plan-of-the-day protocol for nonrigid motion management in locally advanced cervical cancer IMRT

PURPOSE

To evaluate the clinical implementation of an online adaptive plan-of-the-day protocol for nonrigid target motion management in locally advanced cervical cancer intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT).

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Each of the 64 patients had four markers implanted in the vaginal fornix to verify the position of the cervix during treatment. Full and empty bladder computed tomography (CT) scans were acquired prior to treatment to build a bladder volume-dependent cervix-uterus motion model for establishment of the plan library. In the first phase of clinical implementation, the library consisted of one IMRT plan based on a single model-predicted internal target volume (mpITV), covering the target for the whole pretreatment observed bladder volume range, and a 3D conformal radiation therapy (3DCRT) motion-robust backup plan based on the same mpITV. The planning target volume (PTV) combined the ITV and nodal clinical target volume (CTV), expanded with a 1-cm margin. In the second phase, for patients showing >2.5-cm bladder-induced cervix-uterus motion during planning, two IMRT plans were constructed, based on mpITVs for empty-to-half-full and half-full-to-full bladder. In both phases, a daily cone beam CT (CBCT) scan was acquired to first position the patient based on bony anatomy and nodal targets and then select the appropriate plan. Daily post-treatment CBCT was used to verify plan selection.

RESULTS

Twenty-four and 40 patients were included in the first and second phase, respectively. In the second phase, 11 patients had two IMRT plans. Overall, an IMRT plan was used in 82.4% of fractions. The main reasons for selecting the motion-robust backup plan were uterus outside the PTV (27.5%) and markers outside their margin (21.3%). In patients with two IMRT plans, the half-full-to-full bladder plan was selected on average in 45% of the first 12 fractions, which was reduced to 35% in the last treatment fractions.

CONCLUSIONS

The implemented online adaptive plan-of-the-day protocol for locally advanced cervical cancer enables (almost) daily tissue-sparing IMRT.

Intrafraction prostate translations and rotations during hypofractionated robotic radiation surgery: dosimetric impact of correction strategies and margins

PURPOSE

To investigate the dosimetric impact of intrafraction prostate motion and the effect of robot correction strategies for hypofractionated CyberKnife treatments with a simultaneously integrated boost.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

A total of 548 real-time prostate motion tracks from 17 patients were available for dosimetric simulations of CyberKnife treatments, in which various correction strategies were included. Fixed time intervals between imaging/correction (15, 60, 180, and 360 seconds) were simulated, as well as adaptive timing (ie, the time interval reduced from 60 to 15 seconds in case prostate motion exceeded 3 mm or 2° in consecutive images). The simulated extent of robot corrections was also varied: no corrections, translational corrections only, and translational corrections combined with rotational corrections up to 5°, 10°, and perfect rotational correction. The correction strategies were evaluated for treatment plans with a 0-mm or 3-mm margin around the clinical target volume (CTV). We recorded CTV coverage (V100%) and dose-volume parameters of the peripheral zone (boost), rectum, bladder, and urethra.

RESULTS

Planned dose parameters were increasingly preserved with larger extents of robot corrections. A time interval between corrections of 60 to 180 seconds provided optimal preservation of CTV coverage. To achieve 98% CTV coverage in 98% of the treatments, translational and rotational corrections up to 10° were required for the 0-mm margin plans, whereas translational and rotational corrections up to 5° were required for the 3-mm margin plans. Rectum and bladder were spared considerably better in the 0-mm margin plans. Adaptive timing did not improve delivered dose.

CONCLUSIONS

Intrafraction prostate motion substantially affected the delivered dose but was compensated for effectively by robot corrections using a time interval of 60 to 180 seconds. A 0-mm margin required larger extents of additional rotational corrections than a 3-mm margin but resulted in lower doses to rectum and bladder.

Automated generation of IMRT treatment plans for prostate cancer patients with metal hip prostheses: comparison of different planning strategies

PURPOSE

To compare IMRT planning strategies for prostate cancer patients with metal hip prostheses.

METHODS

All plans were generated fully automatically (i.e., no human trial-and-error interactions) using iCycle, the authors' in-house developed algorithm for multicriterial selection of beam angles and optimization of fluence profiles, allowing objective comparison of planning strategies. For 18 prostate cancer patients (eight with bilateral hip prostheses, ten with a right-sided unilateral prosthesis), two planning strategies were evaluated: (i) full exclusion of beams containing beamlets that would deliver dose to the target after passing a prosthesis (IMRT remove) and (ii) exclusion of those beamlets only (IMRT cut). Plans with optimized coplanar and noncoplanar beam arrangements were generated. Differences in PTV coverage and sparing of organs at risk (OARs) were quantified. The impact of beam number on plan quality was evaluated.

RESULTS

Especially for patients with bilateral hip prostheses, IMRT cut significantly improved rectum and bladder sparing compared to IMRT remove. For 9-beam coplanar plans, rectum V60 Gy reduced by 17.5% ± 15.0% (maximum 37.4%, p = 0.036) and rectum D mean by 9.4% ± 7.8% (maximum 19.8%, p = 0.036). Further improvements in OAR sparing were achievable by using noncoplanar beam setups, reducing rectum V 60Gy by another 4.6% ± 4.9% (p = 0.012) for noncoplanar 9-beam IMRT cut plans. Large reductions in rectum dose delivery were also observed when increasing the number of beam directions in the plans. For bilateral implants, the rectum V 60Gy was 37.3% ± 12.1% for coplanar 7-beam plans and reduced on average by 13.5% (maximum 30.1%, p = 0.012) for 15 directions.

CONCLUSIONS

iCycle was able to automatically generate high quality plans for prostate cancer patients with prostheses. Excluding only beamlets that passed through the prostheses (IMRTcut strategy) significantly improved OAR sparing. Noncoplanar beam arrangements and, to a larger extent, increasing the number of treatment beams further improved plan quality.

A bias-free, automated planning tool for technique comparison in radiotherapy - application to nasopharyngeal carcinoma treatments

In this study a novel, user‐independent automated planning technique was developed to objectively compare volumetric‐modulated arc therapy (VMAT) and intensity‐modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) for nasopharyngeal carcinoma planning, and to determine which technique offers a greater benefit for parotid‐sparing and dose escalation strategies. Ten patients were investigated, with a standard prescription of three dose levels to the target volumes (70, 63, and 56 Gy), using a simultaneous integrated boost in 33 fractions. The automated tool was used to investigate three planning strategies with both IMRT and VMAT: clinically acceptable plan creation, parotid dose sparing, and dose escalation. Clinically acceptable plans were achieved for all patients using both techniques. For parotid‐sparing, automated planning reduced the mean dose to a greater extent using VMAT rather than IMRT (17.0 Gy and 19.6 Gy, respectively, p<0.01). For dose escalation to the mean of the main clinical target volume, neither VMAT nor IMRT offered a significant benefit over the other. The OAR‐limiting prescriptions for VMAT ranged from 84‐98 Gy, compared to 76‐110 Gy for IMRT. Employing a user‐independent planning technique, it was possible to objectively compare VMAT and IMRT for nasopharyngeal carcinoma treatment strategies. VMAT offers a parotid‐sparing improvement, but no significant benefit was observed for dose escalation to the primary target.

PACS numbers: 87.55.D‐, 87.55.kd

Dose uncertainties in IMPT for oropharyngeal cancer in the presence of anatomical, range, and setup errors

PURPOSE

Setup, range, and anatomical uncertainties influence the dose delivered with intensity modulated proton therapy (IMPT), but clinical quantification of these errors for oropharyngeal cancer is lacking. We quantified these factors and investigated treatment fidelity, that is, robustness, as influenced by adaptive planning and by applying more beam directions.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

We used an in-house treatment planning system with multicriteria optimization of pencil beam energies, directions, and weights to create treatment plans for 3-, 5-, and 7-beam directions for 10 oropharyngeal cancer patients. The dose prescription was a simultaneously integrated boost scheme, prescribing 66 Gy to primary tumor and positive neck levels (clinical target volume-66 Gy; CTV-66 Gy) and 54 Gy to elective neck levels (CTV-54 Gy). Doses were recalculated in 3700 simulations of setup, range, and anatomical uncertainties. Repeat computed tomography (CT) scans were used to evaluate an adaptive planning strategy using nonrigid registration for dose accumulation.

RESULTS

For the recalculated 3-beam plans including all treatment uncertainty sources, only 69% (CTV-66 Gy) and 88% (CTV-54 Gy) of the simulations had a dose received by 98% of the target volume (D98%) >95% of the prescription dose. Doses to organs at risk (OARs) showed considerable spread around planned values. Causes for major deviations were mixed. Adaptive planning based on repeat imaging positively affected dose delivery accuracy: in the presence of the other errors, percentages of treatments with D98% >95% increased to 96% (CTV-66 Gy) and 100% (CTV-54 Gy). Plans with more beam directions were not more robust.

CONCLUSIONS

For oropharyngeal cancer patients, treatment uncertainties can result in significant differences between planned and delivered IMPT doses. Given the mixed causes for major deviations, we advise repeat diagnostic CT scans during treatment, recalculation of the dose, and if required, adaptive planning to improve adequate IMPT dose delivery.

A margin-of-the-day online adaptive intensity-modulated radiotherapy strategy for cervical cancer provides superior treatment accuracy compared to clinically recommended margins: a dosimetric evaluation

PURPOSE

To dosimetrically evaluate a margin-of-the-day (MoD) online adaptive intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) strategy for cervical cancer patients. The strategy is based on a single planning computed tomography (CT) scan and a pretreatment constructed IMRT plan library with incremental clinical target volumes (CTV)-to-planning target volumes (PTV) margins.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

For 14 patients, 9-10 variable bladder filling CT scans acquired at pretreatment and after 40 Gy were available. Bladder volume variability during the treatment course was recorded by twice-weekly US bladder-volume measurements. A MoD strategy that selects the best IMRT plan of the day from a library of plans with incremental margins in steps of 5 mm was compared with a clinically recommended population-based margin (15 mm). To compare the strategies, for each fraction that had a recorded US bladder-volume measurement, the CT scan with the nearest bladder volume was selected from the pretreatment CT series and from the CT series acquired after 40 Gy. A frequency-weighted average of the dose-volume histograms (DVH) parameters calculated for the two selected CT scans was used to estimate the DVH parameters of the fraction of interest.

RESULTS

The 15-mm recommended margin resulted in cervix-uterus underdosage in six of 14 patients. Compared with the 15-mm margin, the MoD strategy resulted in significantly better cervix-uterus coverage (p = 0.008) without a significant difference in the sparing of rectum, bladder, and small bowel. For each patient, 3-8 (median 5) plans were needed in the library of plans for the MoD strategy. The required range of the MoD was 5-45 mm (median 15 mm). Twenty-five percent of all fractions could be treated with a MoD of 5 mm and 81% of all fractions could be treated with a MoD up to 25 mm.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with a clinically recommended margin, a simple online adaptive strategy resulted in better cervix-uterus coverage without compromising organs at risk sparing.

Improved efficiency of multi-criteria IMPT treatment planning using iterative resampling of randomly placed pencil beams

This study investigates whether 'pencil beam resampling', i.e. iterative selection and weight optimization of randomly placed pencil beams (PBs), reduces optimization time and improves plan quality for multi-criteria optimization in intensity-modulated proton therapy, compared with traditional modes in which PBs are distributed over a regular grid. Resampling consisted of repeatedly performing: (1) random selection of candidate PBs from a very fine grid, (2) inverse multi-criteria optimization, and (3) exclusion of low-weight PBs. The newly selected candidate PBs were added to the PBs in the existing solution, causing the solution to improve with each iteration. Resampling and traditional regular grid planning were implemented into our in-house developed multi-criteria treatment planning system 'Erasmus iCycle'. The system optimizes objectives successively according to their priorities as defined in the so-called 'wish-list'. For five head-and-neck cancer patients and two PB widths (3 and 6 mm sigma at 230 MeV), treatment plans were generated using: (1) resampling, (2) anisotropic regular grids and (3) isotropic regular grids, while using varying sample sizes (resampling) or grid spacings (regular grid). We assessed differences in optimization time (for comparable plan quality) and in plan quality parameters (for comparable optimization time). Resampling reduced optimization time by a factor of 2.8 and 5.6 on average (7.8 and 17.0 at maximum) compared with the use of anisotropic and isotropic grids, respectively. Doses to organs-at-risk were generally reduced when using resampling, with median dose reductions ranging from 0.0 to 3.0 Gy (maximum: 14.3 Gy, relative: 0%-42%) compared with anisotropic grids and from -0.3 to 2.6 Gy (maximum: 11.4 Gy, relative: -4%-19%) compared with isotropic grids. Resampling was especially effective when using thin PBs (3 mm sigma). Resampling plans contained on average fewer PBs, energy layers and protons than anisotropic grid plans and more energy layers and protons than isotropic grid plans. In conclusion, resampling resulted in improved plan quality and in considerable optimization time reduction compared with traditional regular grid planning.

A surrogate-based metaheuristic global search method for beam angle selection in radiation treatment planning

An important element of radiation treatment planning for cancer therapy is the selection of beam angles (out of all possible coplanar and non-coplanar angles in relation to the patient) in order to maximize the delivery of radiation to the tumor site and minimize radiation damage to nearby organs-at-risk. This category of combinatorial optimization problem is particularly difficult because direct evaluation of the quality of treatment corresponding to any proposed selection of beams requires the solution of a large-scale dose optimization problem involving many thousands of variables that represent doses delivered to volume elements (voxels) in the patient. However, if the quality of angle sets can be accurately estimated without expensive computation, a large number of angle sets can be considered, increasing the likelihood of identifying a very high quality set. Using a computationally efficient surrogate beam set evaluation procedure based on single-beam data extracted from plans employing equallyspaced beams (eplans), we have developed a global search metaheuristic process based on the nested partitions framework for this combinatorial optimization problem. The surrogate scoring mechanism allows us to assess thousands of beam set samples within a clinically acceptable time frame. Tests on difficult clinical cases demonstrate that the beam sets obtained via our method are of superior quality.

A novel implementation of mARC treatment for non-dedicated planning systems using converted IMRT plans

BACKGROUND

The modulated arc (mARC) technique has recently been introduced by Siemens as an analogue to VMAT treatment. However, up to now only one certified treatment planning system supports mARC planning. We therefore present a conversion algorithm capable of converting IMRT plans created by any treatment planning system into mARC plans, with the hope of expanding the availability of mARC to a larger range of clinical users and researchers. As additional advantages, our implementation offers improved functionality for planning hybrid arcs and provides an equivalent step-and-shoot plan for each mARC plan, which can be used as a back-up concept in institutions where only one linac is equipped with mARC.

METHODS

We present a feasibility study to outline a practical implementation of mARC plan conversion using Philips Pinnacle and Prowess Panther. We present examples for three different kinds of prostate and head-and-neck plans, for 6 MV and flattening-filter-free (FFF) 7 MV photon energies, which are dosimetrically verified.

RESULTS

It is generally more difficult to create good quality IMRT plans in Pinnacle using a large number of beams and few segments. We present different ways of optimization as examples. By careful choosing the beam and segment arrangement and inversion objectives, we achieve plan qualities similar to our usual IMRT plans. The conversion of the plans to mARC format yields functional plans, which can be irradiated without incidences. Absolute dosimetric verification of both the step-and-shoot and mARC plans by point dose measurements showed deviations below 5% local dose, mARC plans deviated from step-and-shoot plans by no more than 1%. The agreement between GafChromic film measurements of planar dose before and after mARC conversion is excellent. The comparison of the 3D dose distribution measured by PTW Octavius 729 2D-Array with the step-and-shoot plans and with the TPS is well above the pass criteria of 90% of the points falling within 5% local dose and 3 mm distance to agreement. For all plans, the treatment time was noticeably reduced by conversion to mARC.

CONCLUSIONS

We present the feasibility test for converting IMRT step-and-shoot plans from the RTP-output of any treatment planning system (Philips Pinnacle and Prowess Panther, in our case) into mARC plans. The feasibility and dosimetric equivalence is demonstrated for the examples of a prostate and a head-and-neck patient.

Integrated multicriterial optimization of beam angles and intensity profiles for coplanar and noncoplanar head and neck IMRT and implications for VMAT

PURPOSE

To quantify improved salivary gland sparing for head and neck cancer patients using intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) plans based on integrated computerized optimization of beam orientations and intensity profiles. To assess if optimized nonzero couch angles also improve VMAT plans.

METHODS

Our in-house developed algorithm iCycle was used for automated generation of multicriterial optimized plans with optimized beam orientations and intensity profiles, and plans with optimized profiles for preselected beam arrangements. For 20 patients, five IMRT plans, based on one "wish-list," were compared: (i) and (ii) seven- and nine-beam equiangular coplanar plans (iCycle(7equi), iCycle(9equi)), (iii) and (iv) nine-beam plans with optimized coplanar and noncoplanar beam orientations (iCycle(copl), iCycle(noncopl)), and (v) a nine-beam coplanar plan with optimized gantry angles and one optimized couch rotation (iCycle(couch)). VMAT plans without and with this optimized couch rotation were evaluated.

RESULTS

iCycle(noncopl) resulted in the best salivary gland sparing, while iCycle(couch) yielded similar results for 18 patients. For iCycle(7equi), submandibular gland NTCP values were on average 5% higher. iCycle(9equi) performed better than iCycle(7equi). iCycle(copl) showed further improvement. Application of the optimized couch angle from iCycle(couch) also improved NTCP values in VMAT plans.

CONCLUSIONS

iCycle allows objective comparison of competing planning strategies. Integrated optimization of beam profiles and angles can significantly improve normal tissue sparing, yielding optimal results for iCycle(noncopl).

On the beam direction search space in computerized non-coplanar beam angle optimization for IMRT-prostate SBRT

In a recent paper, we have published a new algorithm, designated 'iCycle', for fully automated multi-criterial optimization of beam angles and intensity profiles. In this study, we have used this algorithm to investigate the relationship between plan quality and the extent of the beam direction search space, i.e. the set of candidate beam directions that may be selected for generating an optimal plan. For a group of ten prostate cancer patients, optimal IMRT plans were made for stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT), mimicking high dose rate brachytherapy dosimetry. Plans were generated for five different beam direction input sets: a coplanar (CP) set and four non-coplanar (NCP) sets. For CP treatments, the search space consisted of 72 orientations (5° separations). The NCP CyberKnife (CK) space contained all directions available in the robotic CK treatment unit. The fully non-coplanar (F-NCP) set facilitated the highest possible degree of freedom in selecting optimal directions. CK(+) and CK(++) were subsets of F-NCP to investigate some aspects of the CK space. For each input set, plans were generated with up to 30 selected beam directions. Generated plans were clinically acceptable, according to an assessment of our clinicians. Convergence in plan quality occurred only after around 20 included beams. For individual patients, variations in PTV dose delivery between the five generated plans were minimal, as aimed for (average spread in V(95): 0.4%). This allowed plan comparisons based on organ at risk (OAR) doses, with the rectum considered most important. Plans generated with the NCP search spaces had improved OAR sparing compared to the CP search space, especially for the rectum. OAR sparing was best with the F-NCP, with reductions in rectum D(Mean), V(40Gy), V(60Gy) and D(2%) compared to CP of 25%, 35%, 37% and 8%, respectively. Reduced rectum sparing with the CK search space compared to F-NCP could be largely compensated by expanding CK with beams with relatively large direction components along the superior-inferior axis (CK(++)). Addition of posterior beams (CK(++) → F-NCP) did not lead to further improvements in OAR sparing. Plans with 25 beams clearly performed better than 11-beam plans. For CP plans, an increase from 11 to 25 involved beams resulted in reductions in rectum D(Mean), V(40Gy), V(60Gy) and D(2%) of 39%, 57%, 64% and 13%, respectively.

Toward fully automated multicriterial plan generation: a prospective clinical study

PURPOSE

To prospectively compare plans generated with iCycle, an in-house-developed algorithm for fully automated multicriterial intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) beam profile and beam orientation optimization, with plans manually generated by dosimetrists using the clinical treatment planning system.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

For 20 randomly selected head-and-neck cancer patients with various tumor locations (of whom 13 received sequential boost treatments), we offered the treating physician the choice between an automatically generated iCycle plan and a manually optimized plan using standard clinical procedures. Although iCycle used a fixed "wish list" with hard constraints and prioritized objectives, the dosimetrists manually selected the beam configuration and fine tuned the constraints and objectives for each IMRT plan. Dosimetrists were not informed in advance whether a competing iCycle plan was made. The 2 plans were simultaneously presented to the physician, who then selected the plan to be used for treatment. For the patient group, differences in planning target volume coverage and sparing of critical tissues were quantified.

RESULTS

In 32 of 33 plan comparisons, the physician selected the iCycle plan for treatment. This highly consistent preference for the automatically generated plans was mainly caused by the improved sparing for the large majority of critical structures. With iCycle, the normal tissue complication probabilities for the parotid and submandibular glands were reduced by 2.4% ± 4.9% (maximum, 18.5%, P=.001) and 6.5% ± 8.3% (maximum, 27%, P=.005), respectively. The reduction in the mean oral cavity dose was 2.8 ± 2.8 Gy (maximum, 8.1 Gy, P=.005). For the swallowing muscles, the esophagus and larynx, the mean dose reduction was 3.3 ± 1.1 Gy (maximum, 9.2 Gy, P<.001). For 15 of the 20 patients, target coverage was also improved.

CONCLUSIONS

In 97% of cases, automatically generated plans were selected for treatment because of the superior quality. Apart from the improved plan quality, automatic plan generation is economically attractive because of the reduced workload.