Multicriteria optimization in intensity-modulated radiation therapy treatment planning for locally advanced cancer of the pancreatic head. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2008;72:1208-1214. [PMID: 18954714 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2008.07.015]

Deep reinforcement learning in radiation therapy planning optimization: A comprehensive review

PURPOSE

The formulation and optimization of radiation therapy plans are complex and time-consuming processes that heavily rely on the expertise of medical physicists. Consequently, there is an urgent need for automated optimization methods. Recent advancements in reinforcement learning, particularly deep reinforcement learning (DRL), show great promise for automating radiotherapy planning. This review summarizes the current state of DRL applications in this field, evaluates their effectiveness, and identifies challenges and future directions.

METHODS

A systematic search was conducted in Google Scholar, PubMed, IEEE Xplore, and Scopus using keywords such as "deep reinforcement learning", "radiation therapy", and "treatment planning". The extracted data were synthesized for an overview and critical analysis.

RESULTS

The application of deep reinforcement learning in radiation therapy plan optimization can generally be divided into three categories: optimizing treatment planning parameters, directly optimizing machine parameters, and adaptive radiotherapy. From the perspective of disease sites, DRL has been applied to cervical cancer, prostate cancer, vestibular schwannoma, and lung cancer. Regarding types of radiation therapy, it has been used in HDRBT, IMRT, SBRT, VMAT, GK, and Cyberknife.

CONCLUSIONS

Deep reinforcement learning technology has played a significant role in advancing the automated optimization of radiation therapy plans. However, there is still a considerable gap before it can be widely applied in clinical settings due to three main reasons: inefficiency, limited methods for quality assessment, and poor interpretability. To address these challenges, significant research opportunities exist in the future, such as constructing evaluators, parallelized training, and exploring continuous action spaces.

Deep learning-based voxel sampling for particle therapy treatment planning

Objective.Scanned particle therapy often requires complex treatment plans, robust optimization, as well as treatment adaptation. Plan optimization is especially complicated for heavy ions due to the variable relative biological effectiveness. We present a novel deep-learning model to select a subset of voxels in the planning process thus reducing the planning problem size for improved computational efficiency.Approach.Using only a subset of the voxels in target and organs at risk (OARs) we produced high-quality treatment plans, but heuristic selection strategies require manual input. We designed a deep-learning model based onP-Net to obtain an optimal voxel sampling without relying on patient-specific user input. A cohort of 70 head and neck patients that received carbon ion therapy was used for model training (50), validation (10) and testing (10). For training, a total of 12 500 carbon ion plans were optimized, using a highly efficient artificial intelligence (AI) infrastructure implemented into a research treatment planning platform. A custom loss function increased sampling density in underdosed regions, while aiming to reduce the total number of voxels.Main results.On the test dataset, the number of voxels in the optimization could be reduced by 84.8% (median) at <1% median loss in plan quality. When the model was trained to reduce sampling in the target only while keeping all voxels in OARs, a median reduction up to 71.6% was achieved, with 0.5% loss in the plan quality. The optimization time was reduced by a factor of 7.5 for the total AI selection model and a factor of 3.7 for the model with only target selection.Significance.The novel deep-learning voxel sampling technique achieves a significant reduction in computational time with a negligible loss in the plan quality. The reduction in optimization time can be especially useful for future real-time adaptation strategies.

Spectral-like conjugate gradient methods with sufficient descent property for vector optimization

Several conjugate gradient (CG) parameters resulted in promising methods for optimization problems. However, it turns out that some of these parameters, for example, 'PRP,' 'HS,' and 'DL,' do not guarantee sufficient descent of the search direction. In this work, we introduce new spectral-like CG methods that achieve sufficient descent property independently of any line search (LSE) and for arbitrary nonnegative CG parameters. We establish the global convergence of these methods for four different parameters using Wolfe LSE. Our algorithm achieves this without regular restart and assumption of convexity regarding the objective functions. The sequences generated by our algorithm identify points that satisfy the first-order necessary condition for Pareto optimality. We conduct computational experiments to showcase the implementation and effectiveness of the proposed methods. The proposed spectral-like methods, namely nonnegative SPRP, SHZ, SDL, and SHS, exhibit superior performance based on their arrangement, outperforming HZ and SP methods in terms of the number of iterations, function evaluations, and gradient evaluations.

Implementation and evaluation of an intelligent automatic treatment planning robot for prostate cancer stereotactic body radiation therapy

PURPOSE

We previously developed a virtual treatment planner (VTP), an artificial intelligence robot, operating a treatment planning system (TPS). Using deep reinforcement learning guided by human knowledge, we trained the VTP to autonomously adjust relevant parameters in treatment plan optimization, similar to a human planner, to generate high-quality plans for prostate cancer stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT). This study describes the clinical implementation and evaluation of VTP.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We integrate VTP with Eclipse TPS using scripting Application Programming Interface. VTP observes dose-volume histograms of relevant structures, decides how to adjust dosimetric constraints, including doses, volumes, and weighting factors, and applies the adjustments to the TPS interface to launch the optimization engine. This process continues until a high-quality plan is achieved. We evaluated VTP's performance using the prostate SBRT case from the 2016 American Association of Medical Dosimetrist/Radiosurgery Society plan study with its plan scoring system, and compared to human-generated plans submitted to the challenge. Using the same scoring system, we also compared the plan quality of 36 prostate SBRT cases (20 planned with IMRT and 16 planned with VMAT) treated at our institution for both VTP and human-generated plans.

RESULTS

In the plan study case, VTP achieved a score of 142.1/150.0, ranking the third in the competition (median 134.6). For the clinical cases, VTP achieved 110.6 ± 6.5 for 20 IMRT plans and 126.2 ± 4.7 for 16 VMAT plans, similar to scores of human-generated plans with 110.4 ± 7.0 for IMRT plans and 125.4 ± 4.4 for VMAT plans. The workflow, plan quality and planning time of VTP were reviewed to be satisfactory by experienced physicists.

CONCLUSION

We successfully implemented VTP to operate a TPS for autonomous human-like treatment planning for prostate SBRT.

Online adaptive planning methods for intensity-modulated radiotherapy

Online adaptive radiation therapy aims at adapting a patient's treatment plan to their current anatomy to account for inter-fraction variations before daily treatment delivery. As this process needs to be accomplished while the patient is immobilized on the treatment couch, it requires time-efficient adaptive planning methods to generate a quality daily treatment plan rapidly. The conventional planning methods do not meet the time requirement of online adaptive radiation therapy because they often involve excessive human intervention, significantly prolonging the planning phase. This article reviews the planning strategies employed by current commercial online adaptive radiation therapy systems, research on online adaptive planning, and artificial intelligence's potential application to online adaptive planning.

Superior dimethyl disulfide degradation in a microbial fuel cell: Extracellular electron transfer and hybrid metabolism pathways

To enhance the biological degradation of volatile organic sulfur compounds, a microbial fuel cell (MFC) system with superior activity is developed for dimethyl disulfide (DMDS) degradation. The MFC achieves a removal efficiency near 100% within 6 h (initial concentration: 90 mg L^-1) and a maximum biodegradation rate constant of 0.743 mM h^-1. The DMDS removal load attains 2.684 mmol h^-1 L^-1, which is 6.18-2440 times the loads of conventional biodegradation processes reported. Meanwhile, the maximum power density output and corresponding current density output are 5.40 W m^-3 and 40.6 A m^-3, respectively. The main mechanism of extracellular electron transfer is classified as mediated electron transfer, supplemented by direct transfer. Furthermore, the mass balance analysis indicates that methanethiol, S⁰, S^2-, SO₄^2-, HCHO, and CO₂ are the main intermediate and end products involved in the hybrid metabolism pathway of DMDS. Overall, these findings may offer basic information for bioelectrochemical degradation of DMDS and facilitate the application of MFC in waste gas treatment. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPLICATION: Dimethyl disulfide (DMDS), which features poor solubility, odorous smell, and refractory property, is a typical pollutant emitted from the petrochemical industry. For the first time, we develop an MFC system for DMDS degradation. The superior DMDS removal load per unit reactor volume is 6.18-2440 times those of conventional biodegradation processes in literature. Both the electron transfer route and the hybrid metabolism pathway of DMDS are cleared in this work. Overall, these findings give an in-depth understanding of the bioelectrochemical DMDS degradation mechanism and provide an efficient alternative for DMDS removal.

Tree-based exploration of the optimization objectives for automatic cervical cancer IMRT treatment planning

OBJECTIVE

To develop and evaluate a practical automatic treatment planning method for intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) in cervical cancer cases.

METHODS

A novel algorithm named as Optimization Objectives Tree Search Algorithm (OOTSA) was proposed to emulate the planning optimization process and achieve a progressively improving IMRT plan, based on the Eclipse Scripting Application Programming Interface (ESAPI). 30 previously treated cervical cancer cases were selected from the clinical database and comparison was made between the OOTSA-generated plans and clinical treated plans and RapidPlan-based (RP) plans.

RESULTS

In clinical evaluation, compared with plan scores of the clinical plans and the RP plans, 22 and 26 of the OOTSA plans were considered as clinically improved in terms of plan quality, respectively. The average conformity index (CI) for the PTV in the OOTSA plans was 0.86 ± 0.01 (mean ± 1 standard deviation), better than those in the RP plans (0.83 ± 0.02) and the clinical plans (0.71 ± 0.11). Compared with the clinical plans, the mean doses of femoral head, rectum, spinal cord and right kidney in the OOTSA plans were reduced by 2.34 ± 2.87 Gy, 1.67 ± 2.10 Gy, 4.12 ± 6.44 Gy and 1.15 ± 2.67 Gy. Compared with the RP plans, the mean doses of femoral head, spinal cord, right kidney and small intestine in the OOTSA plans were reduced by 3.31 ± 1.55 Gy, 4.25 ± 3.69 Gy, 1.54 ± 2.23 Gy and 3.33 ± 1.91 Gy, respectively. In the OOTSA plans, the mean dose of bladder was slightly increased, with 2.33 ± 2.55 Gy (versus clinical plans) and 1.37 ± 1.74 Gy (vs RP plans). The average elapsed time of OOTSA and clinical planning were 59.2 ± 3.47 min and 76.53 ± 5.19 min.

CONCLUSION

The plans created by OOTSA have been shown marginally better than the manual plans, especially in preserving OARs. In addition, the time of automatic treatment planning has shown a reduction compared to a manual planning process, and the variation of plan quality was greatly reduced. Although improvement on the algorithm is warranted, this proof-of-concept study has demonstrated that the proposed approach can be a practical solution for automatic planning.

ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE

The proposed method is novel in the emulation strategy of the physicists' iterative operation during the planning process. Based on the existing optimizers, this method can be a simple yet effective solution for automated IMRT treatment planning.

Dosimetric Evaluation of Fractionated Stereotactic Radiation Therapy for Skull Base Meningiomas Using HyperArc and Multicriteria Optimization

Purpose

Treatment planning of skull based meningiomas can be difficult due to the irregular shaped target volumes and proximity to critical optic structures. This study evaluated the use of HyperArc (HA) radiosurgery optimization and delivery in conjunction with multicriteria optimization (MCO) to create conformal and efficient treatment plans for conventionally fractionated radiation therapy to difficult base-of-skull (BOS) lesions.

Methods and Materials

Twelve patients with BOS meningioma were retrospectively planned with HA-specific optimization algorithm, stereotactic normal tissue objective (SRS-NTO), and conventional automatic normal tissue objective to evaluate normal brain sparing (mean dose and V20 Gy). MCO was used on both SRS-NTO and automatic normal tissue objective plans to further decrease organ-at-risk doses and target dose maximum to within clinically acceptable constraints. Delivery efficiency was evaluated based on planned monitor units.

Results

The SRS-NTO in HA can be used to improve the mid- and low-dose spread to normal brain tissue in the irradiation of BOS meningiomas. Improvement in normal brain sparing can be seen in larger, more irregular shaped lesions and less so in smaller spherical targets. MCO can be used in conjunction with the SRS-NTO to reduce target dose maximum and dose to organ at risk without sacrificing the gain in normal brain sparing.

Conclusions

HA can be beneficial both in treatment planning by using the SRS-NTO and in delivery efficiency through the decrease in monitor units and automated delivery.

Offline Quality Assurance for Intensity Modulated Radiation Therapy Treatment Plans for NRG-HN001 Head and Neck Clinical Trial Using Knowledge-Based Planning

PURPOSE

This study aimed to investigate whether a disease site-specific, multi-institutional knowledge based-planning (KBP) model can improve the quality of intensity modulated radiation therapy treatment planning for patients enrolled in the head and neck NRG-HN001clinical trial and to establish a threshold of improvements of treatment plans submitted to the clinical trial.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Fifty treatment plans for patients enrolled in the NRG-HN001 clinical trial were used to build a KBP model; the model was then used to reoptimize 50 other plans. We compared the dosimetric parameters of the submitted and KBP reoptimized plans. We compared differences between KBP and submitted plans for single- and multi-institutional treatment plans.

RESULTS

Mean values for the dose received by 95% of the planning target volume (PTV_6996) and for the maximum dose (D0.03cc) of PTV_6996 were 0.5 Gy and 2.1 Gy higher in KBP plans than in the submitted plans, respectively. Mean values for D0.03cc to the brain stem, spinal cord, optic nerve_R, optic nerve_L, and chiasm were 2.5 Gy, 1.9 Gy, 6.4 Gy, 6.6 Gy, and 5.7 Gy lower in the KBP plans than in the submitted plans. Mean values for Dmean to parotid_R and parotid_L glands were 2.2 Gy and 3.8 Gy lower in KBP plans, respectively. In 33 out of 50 KBP plans, we observed improvements in sparing of at least 7 organs at risk (OARs) (brain stem, spinal cord, optic nerves (R & L), chiasm, and parotid glands [R & L]). A threshold of improvement of OARs sparing of 5% of the prescription dose was established for providing the quality assurance results back to the treating institution.

CONCLUSIONS

A disease site-specific, multi-institutional, clinical trial-based KBP model improved sparing of OARs in a large number of reoptimized plans submitted to the NRG-HN001 clinical trial, and the model is being used as an offline quality assurance tool.

Exploration of clinical preferences in treatment planning of radiotherapy for prostate cancer using Pareto fronts and clinical grading analysis

INTRODUCTION

Radiotherapy treatment planning is a multi-criteria problem. Any optimization of the process produces a set of mathematically optimal solutions. These optimal plans are considered mathematically equal, but they differ in terms of the trade-offs involved. Since the various objectives are conflicting, the choice of the best plan for treatment is dependent on the preferences of the radiation oncologists or the medical physicists (decision makers).We defined a clinically relevant area on a prostate Pareto front which better represented clinical preferences and determined if there were differences among radiation oncologists and medical physicists.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Pareto fronts of five localized prostate cancer patients were used to analyze and visualize the trade-off between the rectum sparing and the PTV under-dosage. Clinical preferences were evaluated with Clinical Grading Analysis by asking nine radiation oncologists and ten medical physicists to rate pairs of plans presented side by side. A choice of the optimal plan on the Pareto front was made by all decision makers.

RESULTS

The plans in the central region of the Pareto front (1-4% PTV under-dosage) received the best evaluations. Radiation oncologists preferred the organ at risk (OAR) sparing region (2.5-4% PTV under-dosage) while medical physicists preferred better PTV coverage (1-2.5% PTV under-dosage). When the Pareto fronts were additionally presented to the decisions makers they systematically chose the plan in the trade-off region (0.5-1% PTV under-dosage).

CONCLUSION

We determined a specific region on the Pareto front preferred by the radiation oncologists and medical physicists and found a difference between them.

Three IMRT advanced planning tools: A multi-institutional side-by-side comparison

Purpose

To assess three advanced radiation therapy treatment planning tools on the intensity‐modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) quality and consistency when compared to the clinically approved plans, referred as manual plans, which were planned without using any of these advanced planning tools.

Materials and Methods

Three advanced radiation therapy treatment planning tools, including auto‐planning, knowledge‐based planning, and multiple criteria optimization, were assessed on 20 previously treated clinical cases. Three institutions participated in this study, each with expertise in one of these tools. The twenty cases were retrospectively selected from Cleveland Clinic, including five head‐and‐neck (HN) cases, five brain cases, five prostate with pelvic lymph nodes cases, and five spine cases. A set of general planning objectives and organs‐at‐risk (OAR) dose constraints for each disease site from Cleveland Clinic was shared with other two institutions. A total of 60 IMRT research plans (20 from each institution) were designed with the same beam configuration as in the respective manual plans. For each disease site, detailed isodoseline distributions and dose volume histograms for a randomly selected representative case were compared among the three research plans and manual plan. In addition, dosimetric endpoints of five cases for each site were compared.

Results

Compared to the manual plans, the research plans using advanced tools showed substantial improvement for the HN patient cases, including the maximum dose to the spinal cord and brainstem and mean dose to the parotid glands. For the brain, prostate, and spine cases, the four types of plans were comparable based on dosimetric endpoint comparisons.

Conclusion

With minimal planner interventions, advanced treatment planning tools are clinically useful, producing a plan quality similarly to or better than manual plans, improving plan consistency. For difficult cases such as HN cancer, advanced planning tools can further reduce radiation doses to numerous OARs while delivering adequate dose to the tumor targets.

Adaptive method for multicriteria optimization of intensity-modulated proton therapy

PURPOSE

Provide an adaptive multicriteria optimization (MCO) method for intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT) utilizing GPU technology. Previously described limitations of MCO such as Pareto approximation and limitation on the number of objectives were addressed.

METHODS

The treatment planning process for IMPT must account for multiple objectives, which requires extensive treatment planning resources. Often a large number of objectives (>10) are required. Hence the need for an MCO algorithm that can handle large number of objectives. The novelty of the MCO method presented here lies on the introduction of the adaptive weighting scheme that can generate a well-distributed and dense representation of the Pareto surface for a large number of objectives in an efficient manner. In our approach the generated Pareto surface is constructed for a set of DVH objectives. The MCO algorithm is based on the augmented weighted Chebychev metric (AWCM) method with an adaptive weighting scheme. This scheme uses the differential evolution (DE) method to generate a set of well-distributed Pareto points. The quality of the Pareto points' distribution in the objective space was assessed quantitatively using the Pareto sampling metric. The MCO algorithm was developed to perform multiple parallel searches to achieve a rapid mapping of the Pareto surface, produce clinically deliverable plans, and was implemented on a GPU cluster. The MCO algorithm was tested on two clinical cases with 10 and 18 objectives. For each case one of the MCO-generated plans was selected for comparison with the clinically generated plan. The MCO plan was randomly selected out of the set of MCO plans that had target coverage similar to the clinically generated plan and the same or better sparing of the organs at risk (OAR). Additionally, a validation study of the AWCM method vs the weighted sum method was performed.

RESULTS

The adaptive MCO algorithm generated Pareto points on the Pareto hypersurface in a fast (2-3 hr) and efficient manner for 2 cases with 10 and 18 objectives. The MCO algorithm generated a dense and well-distributed set of Pareto points on the objective space, and was able to achieve minimization of the Pareto sampling metric. The selected MCO plan showed an improvement of the DVH objectives in comparison to the clinically optimized plan in both cases. For case one, the MCO plan showed a 48% reduction of the 50% dose to OARs and a 16% reduction of the 1% dose to OARs. For case 2, the MCO plan showed a 72% reduction of the 50% dose to OARs and a 42% reduction of the 1% dose to OARs. The comparison of AWCM to WS showed that the AWCM method has a dosimetric advantage over WS for both patient cases.

CONCLUSION

We introduced an adaptive MCO algorithm for IMPT accelerated using GPUs. The algorithm is based on an adaptive method for generating Pareto plans in the objective space. We have shown that the algorithm can provide rapid and efficient mapping of the multicriteria Pareto surface with clinically deliverable plans.

Automation in intensity modulated radiotherapy treatment planning-a review of recent innovations

Radiotherapy treatment planning of complex radiotherapy techniques, such as intensity modulated radiotherapy and volumetric modulated arc therapy, is a resource-intensive process requiring a high level of treatment planner intervention to ensure high plan quality. This can lead to variability in the quality of treatment plans and the efficiency in which plans are produced, depending on the skills and experience of the operator and available planning time. Within the last few years, there has been significant progress in the research and development of intensity modulated radiotherapy treatment planning approaches with automation support, with most commercial manufacturers now offering some form of solution. There is a rapidly growing number of research articles published in the scientific literature on the topic. This paper critically reviews the body of publications up to April 2018. The review describes the different types of automation algorithms, including the advantages and current limitations. Also included is a discussion on the potential issues with routine clinical implementation of such software, and highlights areas for future research.

A new strategy for volumetric-modulated arc therapy planning using AutoPlanning based multicriteria optimization for nasopharyngeal carcinoma

BACKGROUND

A new strategy for making the appropriate choice of the representative optimization parameters in planning processes and accurate selection criteria during Pareto surface navigation for general multicriteria optimization (MCO) was recommended in the study. The purpose was to combine both benefits of AutoPlanning optimization and MCO (APMCO) for achieving an individual volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) plan according to the clinically achieved patient-specific tradeoff among conflicting priorities. The preclinical investigation of this optimization approach for nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC) radiotherapy was performed and compared to general MCO VMAT.

METHODS

A total of 60 NPC patients with various stages were enrolled in this study. General MCO and APMCO plans were generated for each patient on the treatment planning system. The differences between two planning schemes were evaluated and compared.

RESULTS

All plans were capable of achieving the prescription requirement. The planning target volume coverage and conformation number were remarkably similar between general MCO and APMCO plans. There were no significant differences in most of organs at risk (OARs) sparing. However, in APMCO plans, relatively remarkable decreases were observed in the mean dose (D_mean) to the glottic larynx and pharyngeal constrictor muscles. The reductions of average D_mean to the two OARs were 10.5% (p < 0.0001) and 8.4% (p < 0.0001), respectively. APMCO technique was found to increase the planning time for an average of approximately 5 h and did not lead to a significant increase of monitor units compared to general MCO.

CONCLUSIONS

The potential of the APMCO strategy is best realized with a clinical implementation that exploits individual generation of Pareto surface representations without manual interaction. It also assists physicians to ensure navigation in a more efficient and straightforward manner.

Knowledge-based IMRT planning for individual liver cancer patients using a novel specific model

Background

The purpose of this work is to benchmark RapidPlan against clinical plans for liver Intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) treatment of patients with special anatomical characteristics, and to investigate the prediction capability of the general model (Model-G) versus our specific model (Model-S).

Methods

A library consisting of 60 liver cancer patients with IMRT planning was used to set up two models (Model-S, Model-G), using the RapidPlan knowledge-based planning system. Model-S consisted of 30 patients with special anatomical characteristics where the distance from planning target volume (PTV) to the right kidney was less than three centimeters and Model-G was configurated using all 60 patients in this library. Knowledge-based IMRT plans were created for the evaluation group formed of 13 patients similar to those included in Model-S by Model-G, Model-S and manually (M), named RPG-plans, RPS-plans and M-plans, respectively. The differences in the dose-volume histograms (DVHs) were compared, not only between RP-plans and their respective M-plans, but also between RPG-plans and RPS-plans.

Results

For all 13 patients, RapidPlan could automatically produce clinically acceptable plans. Comparing RP-plans to M-plans, RP-plans improved V_95% of PTV and had greater dose sparing in the right kidney. For the normal liver, RPG-plans delivered similar doses, while RPS-plans delivered a higher dose than M-plans. With respect to RapidPlan models, RPS-plans had better conformity index (CI) values and delivered lower doses to the right kidney V_20Gy and maximizing point doses to spinal cord, while delivering higher doses to the normal liver.

Conclusion

The study shows that RapidPlan can create high-quality plans, and our specific model can improve the CI of PTV, resulting in more sparing of OAR in IMRT for individual liver cancer patients.

Is it possible for knowledge-based planning to improve intensity modulated radiation therapy plan quality for planners with different planning experiences in left-sided breast cancer patients?

Background

Knowledge-based planning (KBP) is a promising technique that can improve plan quality and increase planning efficiency. However, no attempts have been made to extend the domain of KBP for planners with different planning experiences so far. The purpose of this study was to quantify the potential gains for planners with different planning experiences after implementing KBP in intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) plans for left-sided breast cancer patients.

Methods

The model libraries were populated with 80 expert clinical plans from treated patients who previously received left-sided breast-conserving surgery and IMRT with simultaneously integrated boost. The libraries were created on the RapidPlan^TM. 6 planners with different planning experiences (2 beginner planners, 2 junior planners and 2 senior planners) generated manual and KBP optimized plans for additional 10 patients, similar to those included in the model libraries. The plan qualities were compared between manual and KBP plans.

Results

All plans were capable of achieving the prescription requirement. There were almost no statistically significant differences in terms of the planning target volume (PTV) coverage and dose conformality. It was demonstrated that the doses for most of organs-at-risk (OARs) were on average lower or equal in KBP plans compared to manual plans except for the senior planners, where the very small differences were not statistically significant. KBP data showed a systematic trend to have superior dose sparing at most parameters for the heart and ipsilateral lung. The observed decrease in the doses to these OARs could be achieved, particularly for the beginner and junior planners. Many differences were statistically significant.

Conclusions

It is feasible to generate acceptable IMRT plans after implementing KBP for left-sided breast cancer. KBP helps to effectively improve the quality of IMRT plans against the benchmark of manual plans for less experienced planners without any manual intervention. KBP showed promise for homogenizing the plan quality by transferring planning expertise from more experienced to less experienced planners.

Investigating multi-objective fluence and beam orientation IMRT optimization

Radiation Oncology treatment planning requires compromises to be made between clinical objectives that are invariably in conflict. It would be beneficial to have a 'bird's-eye-view' perspective of the full spectrum of treatment plans that represent the possible trade-offs between delivering the intended dose to the planning target volume (PTV) while optimally sparing the organs-at-risk (OARs). In this work, the authors demonstrate Pareto-aware radiotherapy evolutionary treatment optimization (PARETO), a multi-objective tool featuring such bird's-eye-view functionality, which optimizes fluence patterns and beam angles for intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) treatment planning. The problem of IMRT treatment plan optimization is managed as a combined monolithic problem, where all beam fluence and angle parameters are treated equally during the optimization. To achieve this, PARETO is built around a powerful multi-objective evolutionary algorithm, called Ferret, which simultaneously optimizes multiple fitness functions that encode the attributes of the desired dose distribution for the PTV and OARs. The graphical interfaces within PARETO provide useful information such as: the convergence behavior during optimization, trade-off plots between the competing objectives, and a graphical representation of the optimal solution database allowing for the rapid exploration of treatment plan quality through the evaluation of dose-volume histograms and isodose distributions. PARETO was evaluated for two relatively complex clinical cases, a paranasal sinus and a pancreas case. The end result of each PARETO run was a database of optimal (non-dominated) treatment plans that demonstrated trade-offs between the OAR and PTV fitness functions, which were all equally good in the Pareto-optimal sense (where no one objective can be improved without worsening at least one other). Ferret was able to produce high quality solutions even though a large number of parameters, such as beam fluence and beam angles, were included in the optimization.

Detailed evaluation of an automated approach to interactive optimization for volumetric modulated arc therapy plans

PURPOSE

Interactive optimization during treatment planning requires intermittent adjustment of organ-at-risk (OAR) objectives relative to the dose-volume histogram line. This is a labor-intensive process and the resulting plans are prone to variations in quality. The authors' in-house developed approach to automated interactive optimization (AIO) automatically moves the mouse cursor to adjust the position of on-screen optimization objectives. This allows for the use of more objectives per OAR and results in a more frequent and consistent adjustment of these objectives during optimization. The authors report a detailed evaluation of AIO performance in support of its implementation for routine head and neck cancer (HNC) planning and an evaluation for locally advanced lung cancer (LC) planning which requires a different optimization strategy.

METHODS

Volumetric modulated arc therapy AIO plans (APs) were created for 70 HNC patients with a simultaneously integrated boost and 20 LC patients and benchmarked against their respective manually interactively optimized plans (MPs). The same set of optimization objectives and priorities was used for all APs, although planning target volume (PTV) optimization priorities could be increased manually in a subsequent "continue previous optimization" calculation. HNC plans were benchmarked using mean dose to individual and composite OARs and elective/boost PTV (PTVE/PTVB) volumes receiving 95% and 107% of the prescription dose (V95% and V107%, respectively). A clinician performed blinded comparison of 20 APs and respective MPs. LC plans were compared using PTV V95%/V107%, contralateral lung (CL) volume receiving 5 Gy (V5Gy), total lung (TL)-PTV V5Gy/V20Gy, and esophagus and heart V40Gy/V60Gy/mean doses.

RESULTS

For HNC, statistically significant improvements in sparing of all OARs, except for the ipsilateral submandibular gland and trachea, were obtained in the APs compared to MPs. Average mean dose to oral cavity, composite salivary, and swallowing structures were 25.4/23.8, 24.2/23.2, and 29.5/25.5 Gy, respectively, for the MPs/APs. PTV heterogeneity was similar: in the APs, PTVB V95% was 0.2% higher while PTV B/PTV E V107% was 0.4%/1.0% lower. In 19 out of 20 HNC patients, the clinician preferred the AP, mainly because of better OAR sparing and PTV dose homogeneity. For LC, APs had a significantly lower CL V5Gy (6.1%), heart mean dose/V60Gy (0.9 Gy/1.2%) and esophagus mean dose/V60Gy (0.9 Gy/2.8%), a nonsignificantly higher TL V20Gy (1.4%), and a slight, but significantly higher dose deposition to the body. PTV dose coverage and homogeneity were similar in the APs and MPs. AIO was considered sufficiently robust for clinical use in LC.

CONCLUSIONS

HNC and LC APs were at least as good as, and often of improved quality over MPs. To date, AIO has been clinically implemented for HNC planning.

Volumetric-modulated arc therapy using multicriteria optimization for body and extremity sarcoma

This study evaluates the implementation of volumetric‐modulated arc therapy (VMAT) using multicriteria optimization (MCO) in the RayStation treatment planning system (TPS) for complex sites, namely extremity and body sarcoma. The VMAT‐MCO algorithm implemented in RayStation is newly developed and requires an integrated, comprehensive analysis of plan generation, delivery, and treatment efficiency. Ten patients previously treated by intensity‐modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) with MCO were randomly selected and replanned using VMAT‐MCO. The plan quality was compared using homogeneity index (HI) and conformity index (CI) of the planning target volume (PTV) and dose sparing of organs at risk (OARs). Given the diversity of the tumor location, the 10 plans did not have a common OAR except for skin. The skin D₅₀ and Dmean was directly compared between VMAT‐MCO and IMRT‐MCO. Additional OAR dose points were compared on a plan‐by‐plan basis. The treatment efficiency was compared using plan monitor units (MU) and net beam‐on time. Plan quality assurance was performed using the Sun Nuclear ArcCHECK phantom and a gamma criteria of 3%/3 mm. No statistically significant differences were found between VMAT‐ and IMRT‐MCO for HI and CI of the PTV or D₅₀ and Dmean to the skin. The VMAT‐MCO plans showed general improvements in sparing to OARs. The VMAT‐MCO plan set showed statistically significant improvements over the IMRT‐MCO set in treatment efficiency per plan MU (p<0.05) and net beam‐on time (p<0.01). The VMAT‐MCO plan deliverability was validated. Similar gamma passing rates were observed for the two modalities. This study verifies the suitability of VMAT‐MCO for sarcoma cancer and highlighted the comparability in plan quality and improvement in treatment efficiency offered by VMAT‐MCO as compared to IMRT‐MCO.

PACS number(s): separated by commas 87.55.D, 87.55.de, 87.55.Qr

Technical Note: scuda: A software platform for cumulative dose assessment

PURPOSE

Accurate tracking of anatomical changes and computation of actually delivered dose to the patient are critical for successful adaptive radiation therapy (ART). Additionally, efficient data management and fast processing are practically important for the adoption in clinic as ART involves a large amount of image and treatment data. The purpose of this study was to develop an accurate and efficient Software platform for CUmulative Dose Assessment (scuda) that can be seamlessly integrated into the clinical workflow.

METHODS

scuda consists of deformable image registration (DIR), segmentation, dose computation modules, and a graphical user interface. It is connected to our image PACS and radiotherapy informatics databases from which it automatically queries/retrieves patient images, radiotherapy plan, beam data, and daily treatment information, thus providing an efficient and unified workflow. For accurate registration of the planning CT and daily CBCTs, the authors iteratively correct CBCT intensities by matching local intensity histograms during the DIR process. Contours of the target tumor and critical structures are then propagated from the planning CT to daily CBCTs using the computed deformations. The actual delivered daily dose is computed using the registered CT and patient setup information by a superposition/convolution algorithm, and accumulated using the computed deformation fields. Both DIR and dose computation modules are accelerated by a graphics processing unit.

RESULTS

The cumulative dose computation process has been validated on 30 head and neck (HN) cancer cases, showing 3.5 ± 5.0 Gy (mean±STD) absolute mean dose differences between the planned and the actually delivered doses in the parotid glands. On average, DIR, dose computation, and segmentation take 20 s/fraction and 17 min for a 35-fraction treatment including additional computation for dose accumulation.

CONCLUSIONS

The authors developed a unified software platform that provides accurate and efficient monitoring of anatomical changes and computation of actually delivered dose to the patient, thus realizing an efficient cumulative dose computation workflow. Evaluation on HN cases demonstrated the utility of our platform for monitoring the treatment quality and detecting significant dosimetric variations that are keys to successful ART.

Discrepancies between selected Pareto optimal plans and final deliverable plans in radiotherapy multi-criteria optimization

Multi-criteria optimization provides decision makers with a range of clinical choices through Pareto plans that can be explored during real time navigation and then converted into deliverable plans. Our study shows that dosimetric differences can arise between the two steps, which could compromise the clinical choices made during navigation.

Multi-criteria optimization achieves superior normal tissue sparing in a planning study of intensity-modulated radiation therapy for RTOG 1308-eligible non-small cell lung cancer patients

PURPOSE

In this planning study, we studied the benefit of intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) with multi-criteria optimization (MCO) in locally advanced non-small cell lung carcinoma (NSCLC).

METHODS

We selected 10 consecutive patients with gross tumor within 1cm of the esophagus eligible for RTOG 1308, randomized phase II trial of 70 Gy protons vs photons. Planning was performed per protocol. In addition, a novel approach for esophagus sparing was applied by making the contralateral esophagus (CE) an avoidance structure. MCO and non-MCO plans underwent double-blinded review. Plan differences in dose-volume histogram parameters were analyzed.

RESULTS

Median plan differences were mean lung dose=0.8 Gy (p=0.01), lung V20=1.1% (p=0.06), heart V30=1.0% (p=0.03), heart V45=0.6% (p=0.03), esophagus V60=1.2% (p=0.04), and CE V45=3.2% (p=0.01), all favoring MCO over non-MCO. PTV coverage with 95% dose was ⩾98.0% for both plans. There were 5 minor protocol deviations with non-MCO plans and 2 with MCO. Median improvement of active planning time with MCO was 88 min (p<0.01). Physicians preferred 8 MCO and 2 non-MCO plans (p=0.04).

CONCLUSIONS

MCO plans yielded significant improvements in organ-at-risk sparing without compromising target coverage, consumed less dosimetrist time, and were preferred by physicians. We suggest incorporating MCO into prospective clinical trials.

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 multicriteria framework with voxel-dependent parameters for radiotherapy treatment plan optimization

PURPOSE

To establish a new mathematical framework for radiotherapy treatment optimization with voxel-dependent optimization parameters.

METHODS

In the treatment plan optimization problem for radiotherapy, a clinically acceptable plan is usually generated by an optimization process with weighting factors or reference doses adjusted for a set of the objective functions associated to the organs. Recent discoveries indicate that adjusting parameters associated with each voxel may lead to better plan quality. However, it is still unclear regarding the mathematical reasons behind it. Furthermore, questions about the objective function selection and parameter adjustment to assure Pareto optimality as well as the relationship between the optimal solutions obtained from the organ-based and voxel-based models remain unanswered. To answer these questions, the authors establish in this work a new mathematical framework equipped with two theorems.

RESULTS

The new framework clarifies the different consequences of adjusting organ-dependent and voxel-dependent parameters for the treatment plan optimization of radiation therapy, as well as the impact of using different objective functions on plan qualities and Pareto surfaces. The main discoveries are threefold: (1) While in the organ-based model the selection of the objective function has an impact on the quality of the optimized plans, this is no longer an issue for the voxel-based model since the Pareto surface is independent of the objective function selection and the entire Pareto surface could be generated as long as the objective function satisfies certain mathematical conditions; (2) All Pareto solutions generated by the organ-based model with different objective functions are parts of a unique Pareto surface generated by the voxel-based model with any appropriate objective function; (3) A much larger Pareto surface is explored by adjusting voxel-dependent parameters than by adjusting organ-dependent parameters, possibly allowing for the generation of plans with better trade-offs among different clinical objectives.

CONCLUSIONS

The authors have developed a mathematical framework for radiotherapy treatment optimization using voxel-based parameters. The authors can improve the plan quality by adjusting voxel-based weighting factors and exploring the unique and large Pareto surface which include all the Pareto surfaces that can be generated by organ-based model using different objective functions.

Advantages and limitations of navigation-based multicriteria optimization (MCO) for localized prostate cancer IMRT planning

Efficacy of inverse planning is becoming increasingly important for advanced radiotherapy techniques. This study's aims were to validate multicriteria optimization (MCO) in RayStation (v2.4, RaySearch Laboratories, Sweden) against standard intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) optimization in Oncentra (v4.1, Nucletron BV, the Netherlands) and characterize dose differences due to conversion of navigated MCO plans into deliverable multileaf collimator apertures. Step-and-shoot IMRT plans were created for 10 patients with localized prostate cancer using both standard optimization and MCO. Acceptable standard IMRT plans with minimal average rectal dose were chosen for comparison with deliverable MCO plans. The trade-off was, for the MCO plans, managed through a user interface that permits continuous navigation between fluence-based plans. Navigated MCO plans were made deliverable at incremental steps along a trajectory between maximal target homogeneity and maximal rectal sparing. Dosimetric differences between navigated and deliverable MCO plans were also quantified. MCO plans, chosen as acceptable under navigated and deliverable conditions resulted in similar rectal sparing compared with standard optimization (33.7 ± 1.8 Gy vs 35.5 ± 4.2 Gy, p = 0.117). The dose differences between navigated and deliverable MCO plans increased as higher priority was placed on rectal avoidance. If the best possible deliverable MCO was chosen, a significant reduction in rectal dose was observed in comparison with standard optimization (30.6 ± 1.4 Gy vs 35.5 ± 4.2 Gy, p = 0.047). Improvements were, however, to some extent, at the expense of less conformal dose distributions, which resulted in significantly higher doses to the bladder for 2 of the 3 tolerance levels. In conclusion, similar IMRT plans can be created for patients with prostate cancer using MCO compared with standard optimization. Limitations exist within MCO regarding conversion of navigated plans to deliverable apertures, particularly for plans that emphasize avoidance of critical structures. Minimizing these differences would result in better quality treatments for patients with prostate cancer who were treated with radiotherapy using MCO plans.

Multicriteria optimization informed VMAT planning

We developed a patient-specific volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) optimization procedure using dose-volume histogram (DVH) information from multicriteria optimization (MCO) of intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) plans. The study included 10 patients with prostate cancer undergoing standard fractionation treatment, 10 patients with prostate cancer undergoing hypofractionation treatment, and 5 patients with head/neck cancer. MCO-IMRT plans using 20 and 7 treatment fields were generated for each patient on the RayStation treatment planning system (clinical version 2.5, RaySearch Laboratories, Stockholm, Sweden). The resulting DVH of the 20-field MCO-IMRT plan for each patient was used as the reference DVH, and the extracted point values of the resulting DVH of the MCO-IMRT plan were used as objectives and constraints for VMAT optimization. Weights of objectives or constraints of VMAT optimization or both were further tuned to generate the best match with the reference DVH of the MCO-IMRT plan. The final optimal VMAT plan quality was evaluated by comparison with MCO-IMRT plans based on homogeneity index, conformity number of planning target volume, and organ at risk sparing. The influence of gantry spacing, arc number, and delivery time on VMAT plan quality for different tumor sites was also evaluated. The resulting VMAT plan quality essentially matched the 20-field MCO-IMRT plan but with a shorter delivery time and less monitor units. VMAT plan quality of head/neck cancer cases improved using dual arcs whereas prostate cases did not. VMAT plan quality was improved by fine gantry spacing of 2 for the head/neck cancer cases and the hypofractionation-treated prostate cancer cases but not for the standard fractionation-treated prostate cancer cases. MCO-informed VMAT optimization is a useful and valuable way to generate patient-specific optimal VMAT plans, though modification of the weights of objectives or constraints extracted from resulting DVH of MCO-IMRT or both is necessary.

Distributed approximation of Pareto surfaces in multicriteria radiation therapy treatment planning

We consider multicriteria radiation therapy treatment planning by navigation over the Pareto surface, implemented by interpolation between discrete treatment plans. Current state of the art for calculation of a discrete representation of the Pareto surface is to sandwich this set between inner and outer approximations that are updated one point at a time. In this paper, we generalize this sequential method to an algorithm that permits parallelization. The principle of the generalization is to apply the sequential method to an approximation of an inexpensive model of the Pareto surface. The information gathered from the model is sub-sequently used for the calculation of points from the exact Pareto surface, which are processed in parallel. The model is constructed according to the current inner and outer approximations, and given a shape that is difficult to approximate, in order to avoid that parts of the Pareto surface are incorrectly disregarded. Approximations of comparable quality to those generated by the sequential method are demonstrated when the degree of parallelization is up to twice the number of dimensions of the objective space. For practical applications, the number of dimensions is typically at least five, so that a speed-up of one order of magnitude is obtained.

Maximizing dosimetric benefits of IMRT in the treatment of localized prostate cancer through multicriteria optimization planning

We examine the quality of plans created using multicriteria optimization (MCO) treatment planning in intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) in treatment of localized prostate cancer. Nine random cases of patients receiving IMRT to the prostate were selected. Each case was associated with a clinically approved plan created using Corvus. The cases were replanned using MCO-based planning in RayStation. Dose-volume histogram data from both planning systems were presented to 2 radiation oncologists in a blinded evaluation, and were compared at a number of dose-volume points. Both physicians rated all 9 MCO plans as superior to the clinically approved plans (p<10(-5)). Target coverage was equivalent (p = 0.81). Maximum doses to the prostate and bladder and the V50 and V70 to the anterior rectum were reduced in all MCO plans (p<0.05). Treatment planning time with MCO took approximately 60 minutes per case. MCO-based planning for prostate IMRT is efficient and produces high-quality plans with good target homogeneity and sparing of the anterior rectum, bladder, and femoral heads, without sacrificing target coverage.

Current developments, problems and solutions in the non-surgical treatment of pancreatic cancer

Pancreatic cancer is a common malignant neoplasm of the pancreas with an increasing incidence, a low early diagnostic rate and a fairly poor prognosis. To date, the only curative therapy for pancreatic cancer is surgical resection, but only about 20% patients have this option at the time of diagnosis and the mean 5-year survival rate after resection is only 10%-25%. Therefore, developing new treatments to improve the survival rate has practical significance for patients with this disease. This review deals with a current unmet need in medical oncology: the improvement of the treatment outcome of patients with pancreatic cancer. We summarize and discuss the latest systemic chemotherapy treatments (including adjuvant, neoadjuvant and targeted agents), radiotherapy, interventional therapy and immunotherapy. Besides discussing the current developments, we outline some of the main problems, solutions and prospects in this field.

Automated IMRT planning with regional optimization using planning scripts

Intensity‐modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) has become a standard technique in radiation therapy for treating different types of cancers. Various class solutions have been developed for simple cases (e.g., localized prostate, whole breast) to generate IMRT plans efficiently. However, for more complex cases (e.g., head and neck, pelvic nodes), it can be time‐consuming for a planner to generate optimized IMRT plans. To generate optimal plans in these more complex cases which generally have multiple target volumes and organs at risk, it is often required to have additional IMRT optimization structures such as dose limiting ring structures, adjust beam geometry, select inverse planning objectives and associated weights, and additional IMRT objectives to reduce cold and hot spots in the dose distribution. These parameters are generally manually adjusted with a repeated trial and error approach during the optimization process. To improve IMRT planning efficiency in these more complex cases, an iterative method that incorporates some of these adjustment processes automatically in a planning script is designed, implemented, and validated. In particular, regional optimization has been implemented in an iterative way to reduce various hot or cold spots during the optimization process that begins with defining and automatic segmentation of hot and cold spots, introducing new objectives and their relative weights into inverse planning, and turn this into an iterative process with termination criteria. The method has been applied to three clinical sites: prostate with pelvic nodes, head and neck, and anal canal cancers, and has shown to reduce IMRT planning time significantly for clinical applications with improved plan quality. The IMRT planning scripts have been used for more than 500 clinical cases.

PACS numbers: 87.55.D, 87.55.de

Deliverable navigation for multicriteria step and shoot IMRT treatment planning

We consider Pareto surface based multi-criteria optimization for step and shoot IMRT planning. By analyzing two navigation algorithms, we show both theoretically and in practice that the number of plans needed to form convex combinations of plans during navigation can be kept small (much less than the theoretical maximum number needed in general, which is equal to the number of objectives for on-surface Pareto navigation). Therefore a workable approach for directly deliverable navigation in this setting is to segment the underlying Pareto surface plans and then enforce the mild restriction that only a small number of these plans are active at any time during plan navigation, thus limiting the total number of segments used in the final plan.

Sensitivity analysis for lexicographic ordering in radiation therapy treatment planning

PURPOSE

To introduce a method to efficiently identify and calculate meaningful tradeoffs between criteria in an interactive IMRT treatment planning procedure. The method provides a systematic approach to developing high-quality radiation therapy treatment plans.

METHODS

Treatment planners consider numerous dosimetric criteria of varying importance that, when optimized simultaneously through multicriteria optimization, yield a Pareto frontier which represents the set of Pareto-optimal treatment plans. However, generating and navigating this frontier is a time-consuming, nontrivial process. A lexicographic ordering (LO) approach to IMRT uses a physician's criteria preferences to partition the treatment planning decisions into a multistage treatment planning model. Because the relative importance of criteria optimized in the different stages may not necessarily constitute a strict prioritization, the authors introduce an interactive process, sensitivity analysis in lexicographic ordering (SALO), to allow the treatment planner control over the relative sequential-stage tradeoffs. By allowing this flexibility within a structured process, SALO implicitly restricts attention to and allows exploration of a subset of the Pareto efficient frontier that the physicians have deemed most important.

RESULTS

Improvements to treatment plans over a LO approach were found by implementing the SALO procedure on a brain case and a prostate case. In each stage, a physician assessed the tradeoff between previous stage and current stage criteria. The SALO method provided critical tradeoff information through curves approximating the relationship between criteria, which allowed the physician to determine the most desirable treatment plan.

CONCLUSIONS

The SALO procedure provides treatment planners with a directed, systematic process to treatment plan selection. By following a physician's prioritization, the treatment planner can avoid wasting effort considering clinically inferior treatment plans. The planner is guided by criteria importance, but given the information necessary to accurately adjust the relative importance at each stage. Through these attributes, the SALO procedure delivers an approach well balanced between efficiency and flexibility.

The use of a multiobjective evolutionary algorithm to increase flexibility in the search for better IMRT plans

PURPOSE

To evaluate how a more flexible and thorough multiobjective search of feasible IMRT plans affects performance in IMRT optimization.

METHODS

A multiobjective evolutionary algorithm (MOEA) was used as a tool to investigate how expanding the search space to include a wider range of penalty functions affects the quality of the set of IMRT plans produced. The MOEA uses a population of IMRT plans to generate new IMRT plans through deterministic minimization of recombined penalty functions that are weighted sums of multiple, tissue-specific objective functions. The quality of the generated plans are judged by an independent set of nonconvex, clinically relevant decision criteria, and all dominated plans are eliminated. As this process repeats itself, better plans are produced so that the population of IMRT plans will approach the Pareto front. Three different approaches were used to explore the effects of expanding the search space. First, the evolutionary algorithm used genetic optimization principles to search by simultaneously optimizing both the weights and tissue-specific dose parameters in penalty functions. Second, penalty function parameters were individually optimized for each voxel in all organs at risk (OARs) in the MOEA. Finally, a heuristic voxel-specific improvement (VSI) algorithm that can be used on any IMRT plan was developed that incrementally improves voxel-specific penalty function parameters for all structures (OARs and targets). Different approaches were compared using the concept of domination comparison applied to the sets of plans obtained by multiobjective optimization.

RESULTS

MOEA optimizations that simultaneously searched both importance weights and dose parameters generated sets of IMRT plans that were superior to sets of plans produced when either type of parameter was fixed for four example prostate plans. The amount of improvement increased with greater overlap between OARs and targets. Allowing the MOEA to search for voxel-specific penalty functions improved results for simple cases with three structures but did not improve results for a more complex case with seven structures. For this modification, the amount of improvement increased with less overlap between OARs and targets. The voxel-specific improvement algorithm improved results for all cases, and its clinical relevance was demonstrated in a complex prostate and a very complex head and neck case.

CONCLUSIONS

Using an evolutionary algorithm as a tool, it was found that allowing more flexibility in the search space enhanced performance. The two strategies of (a) varying the weights and reference doses in the objective function and (b) removing the constraint of equal penalties for all voxels in a structure both generated sets of plans that dominated sets of plans considered to be "Pareto optimal" within the conventional, more limited search space. When considering voxel-specific objectives, the very large search space can lead to convergence problems in the MOEA for complex cases, but this is not an issue for the VSI algorithm.

Multicriteria VMAT optimization

PURPOSE

To make the planning of volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) faster and to explore the tradeoffs between planning objectives and delivery efficiency.

METHODS

A convex multicriteria dose optimization problem is solved for an angular grid of 180 equi-spaced beams. This allows the planner to navigate the ideal dose distribution Pareto surface and select a plan of desired target coverage versus organ at risk sparing. The selected plan is then made VMAT deliverable by a fluence map merging and sequencing algorithm, which combines neighboring fluence maps based on a similarity score and then delivers the merged maps together, simplifying delivery. Successive merges are made as long as the dose distribution quality is maintained. The complete algorithm is called VMERGE.

RESULTS

VMERGE is applied to three cases: a prostate, a pancreas, and a brain. In each case, the selected Pareto-optimal plan is matched almost exactly with the VMAT merging routine, resulting in a high quality plan delivered with a single arc in less than 5 min on average.

CONCLUSIONS

VMERGE offers significant improvements over existing VMAT algorithms. The first is the multicriteria planning aspect, which greatly speeds up planning time and allows the user to select the plan, which represents the most desirable compromise between target coverage and organ at risk sparing. The second is the user-chosen epsilon-optimality guarantee of the final VMAT plan. Finally, the user can explore the tradeoff between delivery time and plan quality, which is a fundamental aspect of VMAT that cannot be easily investigated with current commercial planning systems.

Quantitative metrics for assessing plan quality

Despite many studies over the last 3 decades that have attempted to explicitly quantify the decision-making process for radiotherapy treatment plan evaluation, judgments of an individual plan's degree of quality are still largely subjective and can show inter- and intra-practitioner variability even if the clinical treatment goals are the same. Several factors conspire to confound the full quantification of treatment plan quality, including uncertainties in dose response of cancerous and normal tissue, the rapid pace of new technology adoption, and the human component of treatment planning. However, new developments in clinical informatics and automation are lowering the bar for developing and implementing quantitative metrics into the treatment planning process. This review discusses general strategies for using quantitative metrics in the treatment planning process and presents a case study in intensity-modulated radiation therapy planning whereby control was established on a variable system via such techniques.

Feasibility of identification of gamma knife planning strategies by identification of pareto optimal gamma knife plans

The use of conformity indices to optimize Gamma Knife planning is common, but does not address important tradeoffs between dose to tumor and normal tissue. Pareto analysis has been used for this purpose in other applications, but not for Gamma Knife (GK) planning. The goal of this work is to use computer models to show that Pareto analysis may be feasible for GK planning to identify dosimetric tradeoffs. We define a GK plan A to be Pareto dominant to B if the prescription isodose volume of A covers more tumor but not more normal tissue than B, or if A covers less normal tissue but not less tumor than B. A plan is Pareto optimal if it is not dominated by any other plan. Two different Pareto optimal plans represent different tradeoffs between dose to tumor and normal tissue, because neither plan dominates the other. ‘GK simulator’ software calculated dose distributions for GK plans, and was called repetitively by a genetic algorithm to calculate Pareto dominant plans. Three irregular tumor shapes were tested in 17 trials using various combinations of shots. The mean number of Pareto dominant plans/trial was 59 ± 17 (sd). Different planning strategies were identified by large differences in shot positions, and 70 of the 153 coordinate plots (46%) showed differences of 5mm or more. The Pareto dominant plans dominated other nearby plans. Pareto dominant plans represent different dosimetric tradeoffs and can be systematically calculated using genetic algorithms. Automatic identification of non-intuitive planning strategies may be feasible with these methods.

Visualization of a variety of possible dosimetric outcomes in radiation therapy using dose-volume histogram bands

PURPOSE

Dose-volume histograms (DVH) are the most common tool used in the appraisal of the quality of a clinical treatment plan. However, when delivery uncertainties are present, the DVH may not always accurately describe the dose distribution actually delivered to the patient. We present a method, based on DVH formalism, to visualize the variability in the expected dosimetric outcome of a treatment plan.

METHODS

For a case of chordoma of the cervical spine, we compared 2 intensity modulated proton therapy plans. Treatment plan A was optimized based on dosimetric objectives alone (ie, desired target coverage, normal tissue tolerance). Plan B was created employing a published probabilistic optimization method that considered the uncertainties in patient setup and proton range in tissue. Dose distributions and DVH for both plans were calculated for the nominal delivery scenario, as well as for scenarios representing deviations from the nominal setup, and a systematic error in the estimate of range in tissue. The histograms from various scenarios were combined to create DVH bands to illustrate possible deviations from the nominal plan for the expected magnitude of setup and range errors.

RESULTS

In the nominal scenario, the DVH from plan A showed superior dose coverage, higher dose homogeneity within the target, and improved sparing of the adjacent critical structure. However, when the dose distributions and DVH from plans A and B were recalculated for different error scenarios (eg, proton range underestimation by 3 mm), the plan quality, reflected by DVH, deteriorated significantly for plan A, while plan B was only minimally affected. In the DVH-band representation, plan A produced wider bands, reflecting its higher vulnerability to delivery errors, and uncertainty in the dosimetric outcome.

CONCLUSIONS

The results illustrate that comparison of DVH for the nominal scenario alone does not provide any information about the relative sensitivity of dosimetric outcome to delivery uncertainties. Thus, such comparison may be misleading and may result in the selection of an inferior plan for delivery to a patient. A better-informed decision can be made if additional information about possible dosimetric variability is presented; for example, in the form of DVH bands.

Preoperative chemoradiation followed by surgical resection for resectable pancreatic cancer: a review of current results

BACKGROUND

There has been an interest in the interdisciplinary and multimodality approach that combines chemotherapy and radiation therapy as a preoperative treatment for patients with resectable pancreatic cancer.

METHODS

Literature search of databases (Medline and PubMed) to identify published studies of preoperative chemoradiation for resectable pancreatic cancer (potentially resectable and borderline resectable) was undertaken. Response to treatment and survival outcomes was examined as endpoints of this review.

RESULTS

Seventeen studies; eight phase II studies, and nine observational studies, comprising of 977 patients were reviewed. Gemcitabine-based chemotherapy with radiotherapy was the most common preoperative regimen. Following preoperative treatment, pancreatic surgical resection was performed in 35-100% (median=61%) of patients after a range of 6-32 weeks (median=7 weeks). Rate of pathological response was complete in 5-15% of patients, partial in 33-60% and minimal in 38-42%. The median overall survival ranged from 12 months to 40 months (median=25 months) with a 5-year overall survival rate ranging between 8% and 36% (median=28%). Patients who underwent chemoradiation but did not undergo surgery survived a median period of 7-11 months (median=9 months).

CONCLUSION

Preoperative gemcitabine-based chemoradiation followed by restaging and surgical evaluation for pancreatic resection may identify a sub-population of patients with resectable disease who would benefit the most from surgery. Investigation of this schema of preoperative therapy in a randomized setting of resectable pancreatic cancer is warranted.

The physical basis and future of radiation therapy

The remarkable progress in radiation therapy over the last century has been largely due to our ability to more effectively focus and deliver radiation to the tumour target volume. Physics discoveries and technology inventions have been an important driving force behind this progress. However, there is still plenty of room left for future improvements through physics, for example image guidance and four-dimensional motion management and particle therapy, as well as increased efficiency of more compact and cheaper technologies. Bigger challenges lie ahead of physicists in radiation therapy beyond the dose localisation problem, for example in the areas of biological target definition, improved modelling for normal tissues and tumours, advanced multicriteria and robust optimisation, and continuous incorporation of advanced technologies such as molecular imaging. The success of physics in radiation therapy has been based on the continued "fuelling" of the field with new discoveries and inventions from physics research. A key to the success has been the application of the rigorous scientific method. In spite of the importance of physics research for radiation therapy, too few physicists are currently involved in cutting-edge research. The increased emphasis on more "professionalism" in medical physics will tip the situation even more off balance. To prevent this from happening, we argue that medical physics needs more research positions, and more and better academic programmes. Only with more emphasis on medical physics research will the future of radiation therapy and other physics-related medical specialties look as bright as the past, and medical physics will maintain a status as one of the most exciting fields of applied physics.

Improved planning time and plan quality through multicriteria optimization for intensity-modulated radiotherapy

PURPOSE

To test whether multicriteria optimization (MCO) can reduce treatment planning time and improve plan quality in intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT).

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Ten IMRT patients (5 with glioblastoma and 5 with locally advanced pancreatic cancers) were logged during the standard treatment planning procedure currently in use at Massachusetts General Hospital (MGH). Planning durations and other relevant planning information were recorded. In parallel, the patients were planned using an MCO planning system, and similar planning time data were collected. The patients were treated with the standard plan, but each MCO plan was also approved by the physicians. Plans were then blindly reviewed 3 weeks after planning by the treating physician.

RESULTS

In all cases, the treatment planning time was vastly shorter for the MCO planning (average MCO treatment planning time was 12 min; average standard planning time was 135 min). The physician involvement time in the planning process increased from an average of 4.8 min for the standard process to 8.6 min for the MCO process. In all cases, the MCO plan was blindly identified as the superior plan.

CONCLUSIONS

This provides the first concrete evidence that MCO-based planning is superior in terms of both planning efficiency and dose distribution quality compared with the current trial and error-based IMRT planning approach.

Experience-based quality control of clinical intensity-modulated radiotherapy planning

PURPOSE

To incorporate a quality control tool, according to previous planning experience and patient-specific anatomic information, into the intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) plan generation process and to determine whether the tool improved treatment plan quality.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

A retrospective study of 42 IMRT plans demonstrated a correlation between the fraction of organs at risk (OARs) overlapping the planning target volume and the mean dose. This yielded a model, predicted dose = prescription dose (0.2 + 0.8 [1 - exp(-3 overlapping planning target volume/volume of OAR)]), that predicted the achievable mean doses according to the planning target volume overlap/volume of OAR and the prescription dose. The model was incorporated into the planning process by way of a user-executable script that reported the predicted dose for any OAR. The script was introduced to clinicians engaged in IMRT planning and deployed thereafter. The script's effect was evaluated by tracking δ = (mean dose-predicted dose)/predicted dose, the fraction by which the mean dose exceeded the model.

RESULTS

All OARs under investigation (rectum and bladder in prostate cancer; parotid glands, esophagus, and larynx in head-and-neck cancer) exhibited both smaller δ and reduced variability after script implementation. These effects were substantial for the parotid glands, for which the previous δ = 0.28 ± 0.24 was reduced to δ = 0.13 ± 0.10. The clinical relevance was most evident in the subset of cases in which the parotid glands were potentially salvageable (predicted dose <30 Gy). Before script implementation, an average of 30.1 Gy was delivered to the salvageable cases, with an average predicted dose of 20.3 Gy. After implementation, an average of 18.7 Gy was delivered to salvageable cases, with an average predicted dose of 17.2 Gy. In the prostate cases, the rectum model excess was reduced from δ = 0.28 ± 0.20 to δ = 0.07 ± 0.15. On surveying dosimetrists at the end of the study, most reported that the script both improved their IMRT planning (8 of 10) and increased their efficiency (6 of 10).

CONCLUSIONS

This tool proved successful in increasing normal tissue sparing and reducing interclinician variability, providing effective quality control of the IMRT plan development process.

A hierarchical evolutionary algorithm for multiobjective optimization in IMRT

PURPOSE

The current inverse planning methods for intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) are limited because they are not designed to explore the trade-offs between the competing objectives of tumor and normal tissues. The goal was to develop an efficient multiobjective optimization algorithm that was flexible enough to handle any form of objective function and that resulted in a set of Pareto optimal plans.

METHODS

A hierarchical evolutionary multiobjective algorithm designed to quickly generate a small diverse Pareto optimal set of IMRT plans that meet all clinical constraints and reflect the optimal trade-offs in any radiation therapy plan was developed. The top level of the hierarchical algorithm is a multiobjective evolutionary algorithm (MOEA). The genes of the individuals generated in the MOEA are the parameters that define the penalty function minimized during an accelerated deterministic IMRT optimization that represents the bottom level of the hierarchy. The MOEA incorporates clinical criteria to restrict the search space through protocol objectives and then uses Pareto optimality among the fitness objectives to select individuals. The population size is not fixed, but a specialized niche effect, domination advantage, is used to control the population and plan diversity. The number of fitness objectives is kept to a minimum for greater selective pressure, but the number of genes is expanded for flexibility that allows a better approximation of the Pareto front.

RESULTS

The MOEA improvements were evaluated for two example prostate cases with one target and two organs at risk (OARs). The population of plans generated by the modified MOEA was closer to the Pareto front than populations of plans generated using a standard genetic algorithm package. Statistical significance of the method was established by compiling the results of 25 multiobjective optimizations using each method. From these sets of 12-15 plans, any random plan selected from a MOEA population had a 11.3% +/- 0.7% chance of dominating any random plan selected by a standard genetic package with 0.04% +/- 0.02% chance of domination in reverse. By implementing domination advantage and protocol objectives, small and diverse populations of clinically acceptable plans that approximated the Pareto front could be generated in a fraction of 1 h. Acceleration techniques implemented on both levels of the hierarchical algorithm resulted in short, practical runtimes for multiobjective optimizations.

CONCLUSIONS

The MOEA produces a diverse Pareto optimal set of plans that meet all dosimetric protocol criteria in a feasible amount of time. The final goal is to improve practical aspects of the algorithm and integrate it with a decision analysis tool or human interface for selection of the IMRT plan with the best possible balance of successful treatment of the target with low OAR dose and low risk of complication for any specific patient situation.