Fast and insightful bi-objective optimization for prostate cancer treatment planning with high-dose-rate brachytherapy

Abstract Purpose: Prostate high-dose-rate brachytherapy (HDR-BT) planning involves determining the movement that a high-strength radiation stepping source travels through the patient’s body, such that the resulting radiation dose distribution sufficiently covers tumor volumes and safely spares nearby healthy organs from radiation risks. The Multi-Objective Real-Valued Gene-pool Optimal Mixing Evolutionary Algorithm (MO-RV-GOMEA) has been shown to be able to effectively handle this inherent bi-objective nature of HDR-BT planning. However, in clinical practice there is a very restricted planning time budget (often less than 1 h) for HDR-BT planning, and a considerable amount of running time needs to be spent before MO-RV-GOMEA finds a good trade-off front of treatment plans (about20–30 min on a single CPU core) with sufficiently accurate dose calculations, limiting the applicability of the approach in the clinic. To address this limitation, we propose an efficiency enhancement technique for MO-RV-GOMEA solving the bi-objective prostate HDR-BT planning problem. Methods: Dose-Volume (DV) indices are often used to assess the quality of HDR-BT plans. The accuracy of these indices depends on the number of dose calculation points at which radiation doses are computed. These are randomly uniformly sampled inside target volumes and organs at risk. In available HDR-BT planning optimization algorithms, the number of dose calculation points is fixed. The more points are used, the better the accuracy of the obtained results will be, but also the longer the algorithms need to be run. In this work, we introduce a so-called multi-resolution scheme that gradually increases the number of dose calculation points during the optimization run such that the running time can be substantially reduced without compromising on the accuracy of the obtained results. Results and conclusion: Experiments on a data set of 18 patient cases show that with the multi-resolution scheme, MO-RV-GOMEA can achieve a sufficiently good trade-off front of treatment plans after five minutes of running time on a single CPU core (4–6 times faster than the old approach with a fixed number of dose calculation points). When the optimization with the multi-resolution scheme is run on a quad-core machine, five minutes are enough to obtain trade-off fronts that are nearly as good as those obtained by running optimization with the old approach in one hour (i.e., 12 times faster). This leaves ample time to perform the selection of the preferred treatment plan from the trade-off front for the specific patient at hand. Furthermore, comparisons with real clinical treatment plans, which were manually made by experienced BT planners within 30–60 min, confirm that the plans obtained by our approach are superior in terms of DV indices. These results indicate that our proposed approach has the potential to be employed in clinical practice.

[1]  Dimos Baltas,et al.  40 HIPO: A hybrid inverse treatment planning optimization algorithm in HDR brachytherapy , 2005 .

[2]  Alper Atamtürk,et al.  IPIP: A new approach to inverse planning for HDR brachytherapy by directly optimizing dosimetric indices. , 2010, Medical physics.

[3]  Peter A. N. Bosman,et al.  Application and benchmarking of multi-objective evolutionary algorithms on high-dose-rate brachytherapy planning for prostate cancer treatment , 2017, Swarm Evol. Comput..

[4]  Yunzhi Ma,et al.  A GPU-based multi-criteria optimization algorithm for HDR brachytherapy , 2019, Physics in medicine and biology.

[5]  Kalyanmoy Deb,et al.  An Evolutionary Many-Objective Optimization Algorithm Using Reference-Point Based Nondominated Sorting Approach, Part II: Handling Constraints and Extending to an Adaptive Approach , 2014, IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation.

[6]  Kalyanmoy Deb,et al.  An Evolutionary Many-Objective Optimization Algorithm Using Reference-Point-Based Nondominated Sorting Approach, Part I: Solving Problems With Box Constraints , 2014, IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation.

[7]  Peter A. N. Bosman,et al.  Multi-objective Gene-pool Optimal Mixing Evolutionary Algorithm with the Interleaved Multi-start Scheme , 2018, Swarm Evol. Comput..

[8]  Nikolaus Hansen,et al.  Completely Derandomized Self-Adaptation in Evolution Strategies , 2001, Evolutionary Computation.

[9]  J. Nicholas Lukens,et al.  What Radiation Oncology Wants Medical Oncology to Know , 2016, Journal of the advanced practitioner in oncology.

[10]  Minjie Zhang,et al.  A Multi-objective Evolutionary Algorithm Based on Decomposition , 2006 .

[11]  Dorin A. Todor,et al.  OC-37 THE PROSTATE TUMORLET PROJECT. CRITICAL ANALYSIS OF D90: TILTING AT WINDMILLS? , 2012 .

[12]  Jeroen Belien,et al.  Dose optimization in high-dose-rate brachytherapy: A literature review of quantitative models from 1990 to 2010 , 2014 .

[13]  Peter A. N. Bosman,et al.  Sensitivity of dose‐volume indices to computation settings in high‐dose‐rate prostate brachytherapy treatment plan evaluation , 2019, Journal of applied clinical medical physics.

[14]  Fernando G. Lobo,et al.  A parameter-less genetic algorithm , 1999, GECCO.

[15]  Ken Goldberg,et al.  Optimization of HDR brachytherapy dose distributions using linear programming with penalty costs. , 2006, Medical physics.

[16]  Peter A. N. Bosman,et al.  Efficient, effective, and insightful tackling of the high-dose-rate brachytherapy treatment planning problem for prostate cancer using evolutionary multi-objective optimization algorithms , 2017, GECCO.

[17]  Philippe Després,et al.  A multi-criteria optimization approach for HDR prostate brachytherapy: I. Pareto surface approximation , 2018, Physics in medicine and biology.

[18]  Carlos A. Coello Coello,et al.  Evolutionary multiobjective optimization: open research areas and some challenges lying ahead , 2019, Complex & Intelligent Systems.

[19]  J Pouliot,et al.  Inverse planning anatomy-based dose optimization for HDR-brachytherapy of the prostate using fast simulated annealing algorithm and dedicated objective function. , 2001, Medical physics.

[20]  W. Butler,et al.  Supplement to the 2004 update of the AAPM Task Group No. 43 Report. , 2007, Medical physics.

[21]  Peter A. N. Bosman,et al.  Elitist Archiving for Multi-Objective Evolutionary Algorithms: To Adapt or Not to Adapt , 2012, PPSN.

[22]  Shlomo Moran,et al.  Optimal implementations of UPGMA and other common clustering algorithms , 2007, Inf. Process. Lett..

[23]  Surega Anbumani,et al.  A Brachytherapy Plan Evaluation Tool for Interstitial Applications , 2014, Adv. Bioinformatics.

[24]  N. H. Luong,et al.  Evaluation of bi-objective treatment planning for high-dose-rate prostate brachytherapy-A retrospective observer study. , 2019, Brachytherapy.

[25]  M. Lahanas,et al.  A hybrid evolutionary algorithm for multi-objective anatomy-based dose optimization in high-dose-rate brachytherapy. , 2003, Physics in medicine and biology.

[26]  David W. Corne,et al.  Properties of an adaptive archiving algorithm for storing nondominated vectors , 2003, IEEE Trans. Evol. Comput..

[27]  Peter A. N. Bosman,et al.  The anticipated mean shift and cluster registration in mixture-based EDAs for multi-objective optimization , 2010, GECCO '10.

[28]  Peter A. N. Bosman,et al.  Exploiting linkage information in real-valued optimization with the real-valued gene-pool optimal mixing evolutionary algorithm , 2017, GECCO.

[29]  Åsa Holm,et al.  Dose Plan Optimization in HDR Brachytherapy using Penalties Properties and Extensions , 2011 .

[30]  Daniela M. Witten,et al.  An Introduction to Statistical Learning: with Applications in R , 2013 .

[31]  D Baltas,et al.  Brachytherapy dose-volume histogram computations using optimized stratified sampling methods. , 2002, Medical physics.

[32]  Tanja Alderliesten,et al.  GPU-Accelerated Bi-Objective Treatment Planning for Prostate High-Dose-Rate Brachytherapy. , 2019, Medical physics.

[33]  Peter A. N. Bosman,et al.  The multi-objective real-valued gene-pool optimal mixing evolutionary algorithm , 2017, GECCO.

[34]  Philippe Després,et al.  A multi-criteria optimization approach for HDR prostate brachytherapy: II. Benchmark against clinical plans , 2018, Physics in medicine and biology.

[35]  A. Dinkla Stepping source prostate brachytherapy: From target definition to dose delivery , 2015 .

[36]  Kalyanmoy Deb,et al.  A fast and elitist multiobjective genetic algorithm: NSGA-II , 2002, IEEE Trans. Evol. Comput..

[37]  Ali S. Meigooni,et al.  Introduction and Innovations in Brachytherapy , 2012 .

[38]  J. Williamson,et al.  Update of AAPM Task Group No. 43 Report: A revised AAPM protocol for brachytherapy dose calculations. , 2003, Medical physics.

[39]  Tom Schaul,et al.  Natural Evolution Strategies , 2008, 2008 IEEE Congress on Evolutionary Computation (IEEE World Congress on Computational Intelligence).

[40]  Sui Shen,et al.  Image-guided brachytherapy for cervical cancer: analysis of D2 cc hot spot in three-dimensional and anatomic factors affecting D2 cc hot spot in organs at risk. , 2014, Brachytherapy.

[41]  L. Anderson,et al.  Dosimetry of interstitial brachytherapy sources: Recommendations of the AAPM Radiation Therapy Committee Task Group No. 43 , 1995 .

[42]  R. Cormack,et al.  Evaluation of an active magnetic resonance tracking system for interstitial brachytherapy. , 2015, Medical physics.

[43]  G. G. Stokes "J." , 1890, The New Yale Book of Quotations.