Knowledge-Based Tradeoff Hyperplanes for Head and Neck Treatment Planning

Artificial intelligence in radiotherapy: Current applications and future trends

Radiation therapy has dramatically changed with the advent of computed tomography and intensity modulation. This added complexity to the workflow but allowed for more precise and reproducible treatment. As a result, these advances required the accurate delineation of many more volumes, raising questions about how to delineate them, in a uniform manner across centers. Then, as computing power improved, reverse planning became possible and three-dimensional dose distributions could be generated. Artificial intelligence offers the opportunity to make such workflow more efficient while increasing practice homogeneity. Many artificial intelligence-based tools are being implemented in routine practice to increase efficiency, reduce workload and improve homogeneity of treatments. Data retrieved from this workflow could be combined with clinical data and omic data to develop predictive tools to support clinical decision-making process. Such predictive tools are at the stage of proof-of-concept and need to be explainatory, prospectively validated, and based on large and multicenter cohorts. Nevertheless, they could bridge the gap to personalized radiation oncology, by personalizing oncologic strategies, dose prescriptions to tumor volumes and dose constraints to organs at risk.

Evaluating Pareto optimal tradeoffs for hippocampal avoidance whole brain radiotherapy with knowledge-based multicriteria optimization

The goal of this study is to investigate the Pareto optimal tradeoffs between target coverage and hippocampal sparing using knowledge-based multicriteria optimization (MCO). Ten prior clinical cases were selected that were treated with hippocampal avoidance whole brain radiotherapy (HA-WBRT) using VMAT. A new, balanced plan was generated for each case using an in-house RapidPlan model in the Eclipse V16.1 treatment planning system. The MCO decision support tool was used to create 4 Pareto optimal plans. The Pareto optimal plans were created using PTV Dmin and hippocampus Dmax as tradeoff criteria. The tradeoff plans were generated for each patient by adjusting PTV Dmin from the value achieved by the corresponding balanced plan in fixed intervals as follows: -4 Gy, -2 Gy, +2 Gy, and +4 Gy. All plans were normalized so that 95% of the PTV was covered by the prescription dose. A 1-way ANOVA, with Geisser-Greenhouse correction, was used for statistical analysis. When evaluating the achieved PTV Dmin and D98%, the results showed the dose to the hippocampus decreased as coverage lowered and in comparison, D98% was higher when the PTV coverage was increased. When comparing multiple tradeoffs, the p-value for PTV D98% was 0.0026, and the p-values for PTV D2%, PTV Dmin, Hippocampus Dmax, Dmin, and Dmean were all less than 0.0001, indicating that the tradeoff plans achieved statistically significant differences. The results also showed that Pareto optimal plans failed to reduce hippocampal dose beyond a certain point, indicating more limited achievability of the MCO-navigated plans than the interface suggested. This study presents valuable data for planning results for HA-WBRT using MCO. MCO has shown to be mostly effective in adjusting the tradeoff between PTV coverage and hippocampal dose.

Evaluating the plan quality of a general head-and-neck knowledge-based planning model versus separate unilateral/bilateral models

The implementation of knowledge-based planning (KBP) continues to grow in radiotherapy clinics. KBP guides radiation treatment design by generating clinically acceptable plans in a timely and resource-efficient manner. The role of multiple KBP models tailored for variations within a disease site remains undefined in part because of the substantial effort and number of training cases required to create a high-quality KBP model. In this study, our aim was to explore whether site-specific KBP models lead to clinically meaningful differences in plan quality for head-and-neck (HN) patients when compared to a general model. One KBP model was created from prior volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) cases that treated unilateral HN lymph nodes while another model was created from VMAT cases that treated bilateral HN nodes. Thirty cases from each model (60 cases total) were randomly selected to create a third, general model. These models were applied to 60 HN test cases - 30 unilateral and 30 bilateral - to generate 180 VMAT plans in Eclipse. Clinically relevant dose metrics were compared between models. Paired-sample t-tests were used for statistical analysis, with the threshold for statistical significance set a priori at 0.007, taking into consideration multiple hypothesis testing to avoid type I error. For unilateral test cases, the unilateral model-generated plans had significantly lower spinal cord maximum doses (12.1 Gy vs 19.3 Gy, p < 0.001) and oral cavity mean doses (20.8 Gy vs 23.0 Gy, p < 0.001), compared with the bilateral model-generated plans. The unilateral and general models generated comparable plans for unilateral HN test cases. For bilateral test cases, the bilateral model created plans had significantly lower brainstem maximum doses (10.8 Gy vs 12.2 Gy, p < 0.001) and parotid mean doses (24.0 Gy vs 25.5 Gy, p < 0.001) when compared to the unilateral model. Right parotid mean doses were lower for bilateral model plans compared to general model plans (23.8 Gy vs 24.4 Gy). The general model created plans with significantly lower brainstem maximum doses (10.3 Gy vs 10.8 Gy) and oral cavity mean doses (35.3 Gy vs 36.7 Gy) when compared with bilateral model-generated plans. The general model outperformed the bilateral model in several dose metrics but they were not deemed clinically significant. For both case sets, the unilateral and general model created plans had higher monitor units when compared to the bilateral model, likely due to more stringent constraint settings. All other dose metrics were comparable. This study demonstrates that a balanced general HN model created using carefully curated treatment plans can produce high quality plans comparable to dedicated unilateral and bilateral models.

Technical note: Determining the applicability of a clinical knowledge-based learning model via prospective outlier detection

BACKGROUND

Knowledge-based planning (KBP) is increasingly implemented clinically because of its demonstrated ability to improve treatment planning efficiency and reduce plan quality variations. However, cases with large dose-volume histogram (DVH) prediction uncertainties may still need manual adjustments by the planner to achieve high plan quality.

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study is to develop a data-driven method to detect patients with high prediction uncertainties so that intentional effort is directed to these patients.

METHODS

We apply an anomaly detection method known as the local outlier factor (LOF) to a dataset consisting of the training set and each of the prospective patients considered, to evaluate their likelihood of being an anomaly when compared with the training cases. Features used in the LOF analysis include anatomical features and the model-generated DVH principal component scores. To test the efficacy of the proposed model, 142 prostate patients were retrieved from the clinical database and split into a training dataset of 100 patients and a test dataset of 42 patients. The outlier identification performance was quantified by the difference between the DVH prediction root-mean-squared errors (RMSE) of the identified outlier cases and that of the remaining inlier cases.

RESULTS

With a predefined LOF threshold of 1.4, the inlier cases achieved average RMSEs of 5.0 and 6.7 for bladder and rectum, while the outlier cases have substantially higher RMSEs of 6.7 and 13.0 in comparison.

CONCLUSIONS

We propose a method that can determine the prospective patient's outlier status. This method can be integrated into existing automated treatment planning workflows to reduce the risk of generating suboptimal treatment plans while providing an upfront alert to the treatment planner.

Probabilistic Pareto plan generation for semiautomated multicriteria radiation therapy treatment planning

Objective.We propose a semiautomatic pipeline for radiation therapy treatment planning, combining ideas from machine learning-automated planning and multicriteria optimization (MCO).Approach.Using knowledge extracted from historically delivered plans, prediction models for spatial dose and dose statistics are trained and furthermore systematically modified to simulate changes in tradeoff priorities, creating a set of differently biased predictions. Based on the predictions, an MCO problem is subsequently constructed using previously developed dose mimicking functions, designed in such a way that its Pareto surface spans the range of clinically acceptable yet realistically achievable plans as exactly as possible. The result is an algorithm outputting a set of Pareto optimal plans, either fluence-based or machine parameter-based, which the user can navigate between in real time to make adjustments before a final deliverable plan is created.Main results.Numerical experiments performed on a dataset of prostate cancer patients show that one may often navigate to a better plan than one produced by a single-plan-output algorithm.Significance.We demonstrate the potential of merging MCO and a data-driven workflow to automate labor-intensive parts of the treatment planning process while maintaining a certain extent of manual control for the user.

Assessing the robustness of artificial intelligence powered planning tools in radiotherapy clinical settings-a phantom simulation approach

Background

Artificial intelligence (AI) based radiotherapy treatment planning tools have gained interest in automating the treatment planning process. It is essential to understand their overall robustness in various clinical scenarios. This is an existing gap between many AI based tools and their actual clinical deployment. This study works to fill the gap for AI based treatment planning by investigating a clinical robustness assessment (CRA) tool for the AI based planning methods using a phantom simulation approach.

Methods

A cylindrical phantom was created in the treatment planning system (TPS) with the axial dimension of 30 cm by 18 cm. Key structures involved in pancreas stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) including PTV25, PTV33, C-Loop, stomach, bowel and liver were created within the phantom. Several simulation scenarios were created to mimic multiple scenarios of anatomical changes, including displacement, expansion, rotation and combination of three. The goal of treatment planning was to deliver 25 Gy to PTV25 and 33 Gy to PTV33 in 5 fractions in simultaneous integral boost (SIB) manner while limiting luminal organ-at-risk (OAR) max dose to be under 29 Gy. A previously developed deep learning based AI treatment planning tool for pancreas SBRT was identified as the validation object. For each scenario, the anatomy information was fed into the AI tool and the final fluence map associated to the plan was generated, which was subsequently sent to TPS for leaf sequencing and dose calculation. The final auto plan's quality was analyzed against the treatment planning constraint. The final plans' quality was further analyzed to evaluate potential correlation with anatomical changes using the Manhattan plot.

Results

A total of 32 scenarios were simulated in this study. For all scenarios, the mean PTV25 V25Gy of the AI based auto plans was 96.7% while mean PTV33 V33Gy was 82.2%. Large variation (16.3%) in PTV33 V33Gy was observed due to anatomical variations, a.k.a. proximity of luminal structure to PTV33. Mean max dose was 28.55, 27.68 and 24.63 Gy for C-Loop, bowel and stomach, respectively. Using D_0.03cc as max dose surrogate, the value was 28.03, 27.12 and 23.84 Gy for C-Loop, bowel and stomach, respectively. Max dose constraint of 29 Gy was achieved for 81.3% cases for C-Loop and stomach, and 78.1% for bowel. Using D_0.03cc as max dose surrogate, the passing rate was 90.6% for C-Loop, and 81.3% for bowel and stomach. Manhattan plot revealed high correlation between the OAR over dose and the minimal distance between the PTV33 and OAR.

Conclusions

The results showed promising robustness of the pancreas SBRT AI tool, providing important evidence of its readiness for clinical implementation. The established workflow could guide the process of assuring clinical readiness of future AI based treatment planning tools.

Artificial intelligence applications in intensity modulated radiation treatment planning: an overview

Artificial intelligence (AI) refers to methods that improve and automate challenging human tasks by systematically capturing and applying relevant knowledge in these tasks. Over the past decades, a number of approaches have been developed to address different types and needs of system intelligence ranging from search strategies to knowledge representation and inference to robotic planning. In the context of radiation treatment planning, multiple AI approaches may be adopted to improve the planning quality and efficiency. For example, knowledge representation and inference methods may improve dose prescription by integrating and reasoning about the domain knowledge described in many clinical guidelines and clinical trials reports. In this review, we will focus on the most studied AI approach in intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT)/volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT)-machine learning (ML) and describe our recent efforts in applying ML to improve the quality, consistency, and efficiency of IMRT/VMAT planning. With the available high-quality data, we can build models to accurately predict critical variables for each step of the planning process and thus automate and improve its outcomes. Specific to the IMRT/VMAT planning process, we can build models for each of the four critical components in the process: dose-volume histogram (DVH), Dose, Fluence, and Human Planner. These models can be divided into two general groups. The first group focuses on encoding prior experience and knowledge through ML and more recently deep learning (DL) from prior clinical plans and using these models to predict the optimal DVH (DVH prediction model), or 3D dose distribution (dose prediction model), or fluence map (fluence map model). The goal of these models is to reduce or remove the trial-and-error process and guarantee consistently high-quality plans. The second group of models focuses on mimicking human planners' decision-making process (planning strategy model) during the iterative adjustments/guidance of the optimization engine. Each critical step of the IMRT/VMAT treatment planning process can be improved and automated by AI methods. As more training data becomes available and more sophisticated models are developed, we can expect that the AI methods in treatment planning will continue to improve accuracy, efficiency, and robustness.

Insights of an AI agent via analysis of prediction errors: a case study of fluence map prediction for radiation therapy planning

Purpose.We have previously reported an artificial intelligence (AI) agent that automatically generates intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) plans via fluence map prediction, by-passing inverse planning. This AI agent achieved clinically comparable quality for prostate cases, but its performance on head-and-neck patients leaves room for improvement. This study aims to collect insights of the deep-learning-based (DL-based) fluence map prediction model by systematically analyzing its prediction errors.Methods.From the modeling perspective, the DL model's output is the fluence maps of IMRT plans. However, from the clinical planning perspective, the plan quality evaluation should be based on the clinical dosimetric criteria such as dose-volume histograms. To account for the complex and non-intuitive relationships between fluence map prediction errors and the corresponding dose distribution changes, we propose a novel error analysis approach that systematically examines plan dosimetric changes that are induced by varying amounts of fluence prediction errors. We investigated four decomposition modes of model prediction errors. The two spatial domain decompositions are based on fluence intensity and fluence gradient. The two frequency domain decompositions are based on Fourier-space banded frequency rings and Fourier-space truncated low-frequency disks. The decomposed error was analyzed for its impact on the resulting plans' dosimetric metrics. The analysis was conducted on 15 test cases spared from the 200 training and 16 validation cases used to train the model.Results.Most planning target volume metrics were significantly correlated with most error decompositions. The Fourier space disk radii had the largest Spearman's coefficients. The low-frequency region within a disk of ∼20% Fourier space contained most of errors that impact overall plan quality.Conclusions.This study demonstrates the feasibility of using fluence map prediction error analysis to understand the AI agent's performance. Such insights will help fine-tune the DL models in architecture design and loss function selection.

Machine learning for dose-volume histogram based clinical decision-making support system in radiation therapy plans for brain tumors

•

Extraction, analysis, and interpretation of historical treatment planning data is valuable but very time-consuming.

•

Proposed machine learning model classifies radiotherapy plans based on their treatment planning objectives and trade-offs.

•

Application of double nested cross-validation enabled to build a robust model that achieved 94% accuracy on a testing data.

•

Model reasoning investigated with SHAP values showed consistency with clinical observations.

Purpose

To create and investigate a novel, clinical decision-support system using machine learning (ML).

Methods and Materials

The ML model was developed based on 79 radiotherapy plans of brain tumor patients that were prescribed a total dose of 60 Gy delivered with volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT). Structures considered for analysis included planning target volume (PTV), brainstem, cochleae, and optic chiasm. The model aimed to classify the target variable that included class-0 corresponding to plans for which the PTV treatment planning objective was met and class-1 that was associated with plans for which the PTV objective was not met due to the priority trade-off to meet one or more organs-at-risk constraints. Several models were evaluated using double-nested cross-validation and an area-under-the-curve (AUC) metric, with the highest performing one selected for further investigation. The model predictions were explained with Shapely additive explanation (SHAP) interaction values.

Results

The highest-performing model was Logistic Regression achieving an accuracy of 93.8 ± 4.1% and AUC of 0.98 ± 0.02 on the testing data. The SHAP analysis indicated that the ΔD_99% metric for PTV had the greatest influence on the model predictions. The least important feature was ΔD_MAX for the left and right cochleae.

Conclusions

The trained model achieved satisfactory accuracy and can be used by medical physicists in a data-driven quality assurance program as well as by radiation oncologists to support their decision-making process in terms of treatment plan approval and potential plan modifications. Model explanation analysis showed that the model relies on clinically valid logic when making predictions.

Knowledge-based radiation treatment planning: A data-driven method survey

This paper surveys the data-driven dose prediction methods investigated for knowledge-based planning (KBP) in the last decade. These methods were classified into two major categories-traditional KBP methods and deep-learning (DL) methods-according to their techniques of utilizing previous knowledge. Traditional KBP methods include studies that require geometric or anatomical features to either find the best-matched case(s) from a repository of prior treatment plans or to build dose prediction models. DL methods include studies that train neural networks to make dose predictions. A comprehensive review of each category is presented, highlighting key features, methods, and their advancements over the years. We separated the cited works according to the framework and cancer site in each category. Finally, we briefly discuss the performance of both traditional KBP methods and DL methods, then discuss future trends of both data-driven KBP methods to dose prediction.

An artificial intelligence-driven agent for real-time head-and-neck IMRT plan generation using conditional generative adversarial network (cGAN)

PURPOSE

To develop an artificial intelligence (AI) agent for fully automated rapid head-and-neck intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) plan generation without time-consuming dose-volume-based inverse planning.

METHODS

This AI agent was trained via implementing a conditional generative adversarial network (cGAN) architecture. The generator, PyraNet, is a novel deep learning network that implements 28 classic ResNet blocks in pyramid-like concatenations. The discriminator is a customized four-layer DenseNet. The AI agent first generates multiple customized two-dimensional projections at nine template beam angles from a patient's three-dimensional computed tomography (CT) volume and structures. These projections are then stacked as four-dimensional inputs of PyraNet, from which nine radiation fluence maps of the corresponding template beam angles are generated simultaneously. Finally, the predicted fluence maps are automatically postprocessed by Gaussian deconvolution operations and imported into a commercial treatment planning system (TPS) for plan integrity check and visualization. The AI agent was built and tested upon 231 oropharyngeal IMRT plans from a TPS plan library. 200/16/15 plans were assigned for training/validation/testing, respectively. Only the primary plans in the sequential boost regime were studied. All plans were normalized to 44 Gy prescription (2 Gy/fx). A customized Harr wavelet loss was adopted for fluence map comparison during the training of the PyraNet. For test cases, isodose distributions in AI plans and TPS plans were qualitatively evaluated for overall dose distributions. Key dosimetric metrics were compared by Wilcoxon signed-rank tests with a significance level of 0.05.

RESULTS

All 15 AI plans were successfully generated. Isodose gradients outside of PTV in AI plans were comparable to those of the TPS plans. After PTV coverage normalization, D_mean of left parotid (D_AI  = 23.1 ± 2.4 Gy; D_TPS  = 23.1 ± 2.0 Gy), right parotid (D_AI  = 23.8 ± 3.0 Gy; D_TPS  = 23.9 ± 2.3 Gy), and oral cavity (D_AI  = 24.7 ± 6.0 Gy; D_TPS  = 23.9 ± 4.3 Gy) in the AI plans and the TPS plans were comparable without statistical significance. AI plans achieved comparable results for maximum dose at 0.01cc of brainstem (D_AI  = 15.0 ± 2.1 Gy; D_TPS  = 15.5 ± 2.7 Gy) and cord + 5mm (D_AI  = 27.5 ± 2.3 Gy; D_TPS  = 25.8 ± 1.9 Gy) without clinically relevant differences, but body D_max results (D_AI  = 121.1 ± 3.9 Gy; D_TPS  = 109.0 ± 0.9 Gy) were higher than the TPS plan results. The AI agent needed ~3 s for predicting fluence maps of an IMRT plan.

CONCLUSIONS

With rapid and fully automated execution, the developed AI agent can generate complex head-and-neck IMRT plans with acceptable dosimetry quality. This approach holds great potential for clinical applications in preplanning decision-making and real-time planning.