Stapper C, Gerlach S, Hofmann T, Fürweger C, Schlaefer A. Automated isocenter optimization approach for treatment planning for gyroscopic radiosurgery.
Med Phys 2023;
50:5212-5221. [PMID:
37099483 DOI:
10.1002/mp.16436]
[Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/25/2022] [Revised: 03/13/2023] [Accepted: 04/12/2023] [Indexed: 04/27/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND
Radiosurgery is a well-established treatment for various intracranial tumors. In contrast to other established radiosurgery platforms, the new ZAP-X® allows for self-shielding gyroscopic radiosurgery. Here, treatment beams with variable beam-on times are targeted towards a small number of isocenters. The existing planning framework relies on a heuristic based on random selection or manual selection of isocenters, which often leads to a higher plan quality in clinical practice.
PURPOSE
The purpose of this work is to study an improved approach for radiosurgery treatment planning, which automatically selects the isocenter locations for the treatment of brain tumors and diseases in the head and neck area using the new system ZAP-X® .
METHODS
We propose a new method to automatically obtain the locations of the isocenters, which are essential in gyroscopic radiosurgery treatment planning. First, an optimal treatment plan is created based on a randomly selected nonisocentric candidate beam set. The intersections of the resulting subset of weighted beams are then clustered to find isocenters. This approach is compared to sphere-packing, random selection, and selection by an expert planner for generating isocenters. We retrospectively evaluate plan quality on 10 acoustic neuroma cases.
RESULTS
Isocenters acquired by the method of clustering result in clinically viable plans for all 10 test cases. When using the same number of isocenters, the clustering approach improves coverage on average by 31 percentage points compared to random selection, 15 percentage points compared to sphere packing and 2 percentage points compared to the coverage achieved with the expert selected isocenters. The automatic determination of location and number of isocenters leads, on average, to a coverage of 97 ± 3% with a conformity index of 1.22 ± 0.22, while using 2.46 ± 3.60 fewer isocenters than manually selected. In terms of algorithm performance, all plans were calculated in less than 2 min with an average runtime of 75 ± 25 s.
CONCLUSIONS
This study demonstrates the feasibility of an automatic isocenter selection by clustering in the treatment planning process with the ZAP-X® system. Even in complex cases where the existing approaches fail to produce feasible plans, the clustering method generates plans that are comparable to those produced by expert selected isocenters. Therefore, our approach can help reduce the effort and time required for treatment planning in gyroscopic radiosurgery.
Collapse