Comparison of simulated annealing algorithms for conformal therapy treatment planning.

PURPOSE The efficiency of four fast simulated annealing algorithms for optimizing conformal radiation therapy treatment plans was studied and the resulting plans were compared with each other and to optimized conventional plans. METHODS AND MATERIALS Four algorithms were selected on the basis of their reported successes in solving other minimization problems: fast simulated annealing with a Cauchy generating function, fast simulated annealing with a Lorentzian generating function, variable step size generalized simulated annealing (VSGSA), and very fast simulated reannealing (VFSR). They were tested on six clinical cases using a multiple beam coplanar conformal treatment technique. Relative beam weights were computed that maximized the minimum tumor dose subject to dose-volume constraints on normal organ doses. Following some initial tuning of the annealing parameters, each algorithm was applied identically to each test case. Optimization tests were run using different random number sequences and different numbers of iterations. RESULTS The VSGSA algorithm consistently produced the best results. Using long run times, it generated plans with the highest minimum tumor dose in five of the six cases. For the short run times, the VSGSA solutions averaged larger minimum tumor doses than those of the other algorithms for all six patients, with increases ranging from 0.4 to 5.9 Gy. For three of the patients, the conformal plan gave a clinically significant increase in the minimum tumor dose over the conventional plan, ranging from 8.2 to 13.0 Gy. In two other cases, there was little difference between the two treatment approaches. For one case, the optimized conventional plan was much better than the conformal plan because the conventional beam arrangement included wedges, which offset the multiple beam advantage of the conformal plans. CONCLUSIONS For equal computing times of both long and short duration, the VSGSA algorithm consistently produced conformal plans that were superior to those produced by the other algorithms. The simple conformal technique used in this study showed a significant potential advantage in the treatment of abdominal tumors. In three of the cases, the conformal plans showed clinically important increases in tumor dose over optimized conventional plans.

[1]  John H. Kalivas,et al.  Convergence of generalized simulated annealing with variable step size with application towards parameter estimations of linear and nonlinear models , 1991 .

[2]  S. Webb.  Optimization by simulated annealing of three-dimensional, conformal treatment planning for radiation fields defined by a multileaf collimator: II. Inclusion of two-dimensional modulation of the x-ray intensity. , 1992, Physics in medicine and biology.

[3]  N. Metropolis,et al.  Equation of State Calculations by Fast Computing Machines , 1953, Resonance.

[4]  M. E. Johnson,et al.  Generalized simulated annealing for function optimization , 1986 .

[5]  S Webb.  Optimization of conformal radiotherapy dose distributions by simulated annealing: 2. Inclusion of scatter in the 2D technique. , 1991, Physics in medicine and biology.

[6]  I I Rosen,et al.  Constrained simulated annealing for optimized radiation therapy treatment planning. , 1990, Computer methods and programs in biomedicine.

[7]  R. Sloboda,et al.  Optimization of brachytherapy dose distributions by simulated annealing. , 1992, Medical physics.

[8]  A Niemierko,et al.  Random search algorithm (RONSC) for optimization of radiation therapy with both physical and biological end points and constraints. , 1992, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[9]  C. D. Gelatt,et al.  Optimization by Simulated Annealing , 1983, Science.

[10]  I I Rosen,et al.  Treatment planning optimization using constrained simulated annealing. , 1991, Physics in medicine and biology.

[11]  R Mohan,et al.  Application of fast simulated annealing to optimization of conformal radiation treatments. , 1993, Medical physics.

[12]  S. Webb.  Optimisation of conformal radiotherapy dose distributions by simulated annealing. , 1989, Physics in medicine and biology.

[13]  Ingber,et al.  Statistical-mechanical aids to calculating term-structure models. , 1990, Physical review. A, Atomic, molecular, and optical physics.

[14]  S. Webb.  Optimization by simulated annealing of three-dimensional conformal treatment planning for radiation fields defined by a multileaf collimator. , 1991, Physics in medicine and biology.

[15]  T. Bortfeld,et al.  Optimization of beam orientations in radiation therapy: some theoretical considerations. , 1993, Physics in medicine and biology.

[16]  H. Szu.  Fast simulated annealing , 1987 .

[17]  R Mohan,et al.  Clinically relevant optimization of 3-D conformal treatments. , 1992, Medical physics.

[18]  Sandro Ridella,et al.  Minimizing multimodal functions of continuous variables with the “simulated annealing” algorithmCorrigenda for this article is available here , 1987, TOMS.

[19]  R. Sloboda,et al.  Optimized low dose rate pellet configurations for intravaginal brachytherapy. , 1993, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[20]  Bruce E. Rosen,et al.  Genetic Algorithms and Very Fast Simulated Reannealing: A comparison , 1992 .

[21]  S Webb,et al.  SPECT reconstruction by simulated annealing. , 1989 .

[22]  James R. Parker,et al.  Computer‐assisted photometry using simulated annealing , 1993 .

[23]  L. Ingber.  Very fast simulated re-annealing , 1989 .