Multi-criteria optimization for planning volumetric-modulated arc therapy for prostate cancer

Effectiveness of multi-criteria optimization in combination with knowledge-based modeling in radiotherapy of left-sided breast including regional nodes

Multi-criteria optimization (MCO) is a method that was added to treatment planning to create high-quality treatment plans. This study aimed to investigate the effectiveness of MCO in combination with knowledge-based planning (KBP) in radiotherapy for left-sided breasts, including regional nodes. Dose/volume parameters were evaluated for manual plans (MP), KBP, and KBP + MCO. Planning target volume doses of MP had better coverage while KBP + MCO plans demonstrated the lowest organ at risk doses. KBP and KBP + MCO plans had increasing complexity as expressed in the number of monitor units.

Comparative Study of Eclipse and RayStation Multi-Criteria Optimization-Based Prostate Radiotherapy Treatment Planning Quality

Multi-criteria optimization (MCO) function has been available on commercial radiotherapy (RT) treatment planning systems to improve plan quality; however, no study has compared Eclipse and RayStation MCO functions for prostate RT planning. The purpose of this study was to compare prostate RT MCO plan qualities in terms of discrepancies between Pareto optimal and final deliverable plans, and dosimetric impact of final deliverable plans. In total, 25 computed tomography datasets of prostate cancer patients were used for Eclipse (version 16.1) and RayStation (version 12A) MCO-based plannings with doses received by 98% of planning target volume having 76 Gy prescription (PTV76D98%) and 50% of rectum (rectum D50%) selected as trade-off criteria. Pareto optimal and final deliverable plan discrepancies were determined based on PTV76D98% and rectum D50% percentage differences. Their final deliverable plans were compared in terms of doses received by PTV76 and other structures including rectum, and PTV76 homogeneity index (HI) and conformity index (CI), using a t-test. Both systems showed discrepancies between Pareto optimal and final deliverable plans (Eclipse: -0.89% (PTV76D98%) and -2.49% (Rectum D50%); RayStation: 3.56% (PTV76D98%) and -1.96% (Rectum D50%)). Statistically significantly different average values of PTV76D98%,HI and CI, and mean dose received by rectum (Eclipse: 76.07 Gy, 0.06, 1.05 and 39.36 Gy; RayStation: 70.43 Gy, 0.11, 0.87 and 51.65 Gy) are noted, respectively (p < 0.001). Eclipse MCO-based prostate RT plan quality appears better than that of RayStation.

Dosimetric comparison of hippocampal-sparing technologies in patients with low-grade glioma

Background

Radiotherapy (RT) plays an integral role in the management of low-grade gliomas (LGG). Late toxicity from RT can cause progressive neurocognitive dysfunction. Radiation-induced damage to the hippocampus (HCP) plays a considerable role in memory decline. Advancements in photon planning software have resulted in the development of multi-criteria optimization (MCO) and HyperArc technologies which may improve HCP sparing while maintaining planning target volume (PTV) target coverage.

Methods

Three planning methods for hippocampal sparing (HS) were compared, volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) without HS (VMAT_noHS), VMAT with HS (VMAT_HS), MCO with HS (MCO_HS), and HyperArc with HS (HyperArc_HS).

Results

Twenty-five patients were identified. The contralateral HCP was spared in 16 patients and bilateral HCP in 9 patients with superiorly located tumors. All 3 HS planning techniques showed significant reductions in dose to the spared HCP in contralateral cases but only VMAT_HS and MCO_HS achieved this in bilateral cases (P < .008). Only MCO_HS was superior to VMAT_HS in lowering the dose to both contralateral HCP and bilateral HCP in all measured metrics (P < .008). PTV and OAR (organ at risk) dose constraints were achieved for all plans.

Conclusions

This retrospective dosimetric study demonstrated the feasibility of HS for low-grade glioma. All 3 HS planning techniques achieved significant dose reductions to the spared contralateral hippocampus, but only MCO_HS and VMAT_HS achieved this in bilateral cases. MCO was superior to other planning techniques for sparing both bilateral and contralateral hippocampi.

Advantages of IMRT optimization with MCO compared to IMRT optimization without MCO in reducing small bowel high dose index for cervical cancer patients-individualized treatment options

Background

Traditional intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) planning for cervical cancer is time-consuming and require iterative repeated optimization. In this study, we focused on leveraging multi-criteria optimization (MCO) to reduce the impact of small bowel high-dose indices on other optimization targets, thereby providing a rapid approach to individualized IMRT for cervical cancer patients.

Methods

Our research involved a cohort of 25 cervical cancer patients who underwent IMRT radiotherapy. The patient inclusion criteria were as follows: (I) histopathological confirmation of cervical cancer, (II) underwent IMRT radiation therapy, and (III) a prescribed dose of 180 cGy/28 fractions for the patient. All plans were replanned by an experienced dosimetrist without the MCO (W-IMRT). On the basis of the W-IMRT plan, the individualized IMRT (I-IMRT) plan was generated under the priority trade-off of reducing the D2cc (D2cc is the minimal dose to the 2 cm3 of the small bowel receiving the maximal dose) index of the small bowel using the MCO method, maintaining target coverage and protecting other organs at risk (OARs) as much as possible. Statistical analysis was performed using the Wilcoxon signature rank test.

Results

When the MCO method was applied to the IMRT plan, the high dose index decreased in the overlapping area between the small bowel and the planning treatment volume (PTV) (P<0.001, respectively). The D2cc index of the small bowel decreased to below 5,200 cGy in all I-IMRT plans. On the other hand, in PTV, the I-IMRT plan achieved a better homogeneity index (HI) compared to the W-IMRT plan. Significant dose reductions were also observed in the bladder (Dmean 144.8 cGy and V40 1.45%) (P<0.001, respectively), rectum (Dmean 43.9 cGy and V40 2.7%) (P<0.001, respectively) and bilateral femur heads (Dmean 150 cGy) (P<0.001, respectively).

Conclusions

Dosimetric differences suggest that the I-IMRT plan using the MCO method provides better protection of other OARs and equivalently in PTV coverage, while lowering the high-dose index in the small bowel as much as possible for patients with cervical cancer, thus providing a rapid approach to achieving individualized IMRT for cervical cancer patients.

ICON-P - A double-blind evaluation of quality improvements with individualized CONstraints from low-cost knowledge-based radiation therapy planning in prostate cancer

Purpose

/Objective(S)A low-cost, prior knowledge-based individualized dose-constraint generator for organs-at-risk has been developed for prostate cancer radiation therapy (RT) planning. In this study, we aimed to evaluate the feasibility and improvements in organs-at-risk (OAR) doses in prostate cancer RT planning using this tool served on a web application.

Materials And Methods

A set of previously treated prostate cancer cases planned and treated with generic constraints were replanned using individualized dose constraints derived from a library of cases with similar volumes of target, OAR, and overlap regions and served on the web-based application. The goal was to assess the reduction in mean dose, specified dose volumes (V59Gy, V56Gy, V53Gy, V47Gy, and V40Gy), and generalized equivalent uniform dose (gEUD) to the rectum and bladder. Planners and assessors were blinded to the initial achieved doses and penalties. Sample size estimation was based on improvement in V53Gy for the rectum and bladder with a paired evaluation.

Results

Twenty-four patients were replanned. All the plans had a PTV D95 of at least 97% of the prescribed dose. The individualized OAR constraints could be met for 87.5% of patients for all dose levels. The mean dose, V59Gy, V53Gy, and V47Gy for the bladder was reduced by 7.5 Gy, 1.12%, 5.51%, and 10.53% respectively. Similarly for the rectum, the mean dose, V59Gy, V53Gy, V47Gy and was reduced by 5.5 Gy, 4.34%, 6.97%, and 11.61% respectively. All dose reductions were statistically significant. The gEUD of the bladder was reduced by 2.47 Gy (p < 0.001) and the rectum by 3.21 Gy (p < 0.001).

Conclusion

Treatment planning based on individualized dose constraints served on a web application is feasible and leads to improvement at clinically important dose volumes in prostate cancer RT planning. This application can be served publicly for improvements in RT plan quality.