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

Abstract 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.

[1]  P. Xia,et al.  A study of planning dose constraints for treatment of nasopharyngeal carcinoma using a commercial inverse treatment planning system. , 2004, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[2]  Geoffrey G. Zhang,et al.  Initial evaluation of automated treatment planning software. , 2016, Journal of applied clinical medical physics.

[3]  Fernando Alonso,et al.  A new concept for interactive radiotherapy planning with multicriteria optimization: first clinical evaluation. , 2007, Radiotherapy and oncology : journal of the European Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology.

[4]  Steve Webb,et al.  Configuration space analysis of common cost functions in radiotherapy beam-weight optimization algorithms. , 2002, Physics in medicine and biology.

[5]  Ping Xia,et al.  Can all centers plan intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) effectively? An external audit of dosimetric comparisons between three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy and IMRT for adjuvant chemoradiation for gastric cancer. , 2008, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[6]  L. Xing,et al.  Feasibility study of beam orientation class-solutions for prostate IMRT. , 2004, Medical physics.

[7]  Indra J Das,et al.  Analysis of treatment planning time among systems and planners for intensity-modulated radiation therapy. , 2009, Journal of the American College of Radiology : JACR.

[8]  Y. Ge,et al.  Quantitative analysis of the factors which affect the interpatient organ-at-risk dose sparing variation in IMRT plans. , 2012, Medical physics.

[9]  Carsten Brink,et al.  Automatic planning of head and neck treatment plans. , 2016, Journal of applied clinical medical physics.

[10]  David Craft,et al.  An approach for practical multiobjective IMRT treatment planning. , 2007, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[11]  Yaorong Ge,et al.  Modeling the dosimetry of organ-at-risk in head and neck IMRT planning: an intertechnique and interinstitutional study. , 2013, Medical physics.

[12]  T. Bortfeld,et al.  Improved planning time and plan quality through multicriteria optimization for intensity-modulated radiotherapy. , 2012, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[13]  Radhe Mohan,et al.  Intensity-modulated radiotherapy optimization with gEUD-guided dose-volume objectives. , 2003, Physics in medicine and biology.

[14]  R. Jena,et al.  Intensity-modulated radiotherapy plan optimisation for skull base lesions: practical class solutions for dose escalation. , 2010, Clinical oncology (Royal College of Radiologists (Great Britain)).

[15]  P E Metcalfe,et al.  Multicentre quality assurance of intensity-modulated radiation therapy plans: a precursor to clinical trials. , 2007, Australasian radiology.

[16]  D. Low,et al.  Experience-based quality control of clinical intensity-modulated radiotherapy planning. , 2011, International Journal of Radiation Oncology, Biology, Physics.

[17]  Justin J Boutilier,et al.  Sample size requirements for knowledge-based treatment planning. , 2016, Medical physics.

[18]  J. Lo,et al.  A knowledge-based approach to improving and homogenizing intensity modulated radiation therapy planning quality among treatment centers: an example application to prostate cancer planning. , 2013, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[19]  Conor K. McGarry,et al.  Class solutions for SABR-VMAT for high-risk prostate cancer with and without elective nodal irradiation , 2016, Radiation oncology.

[20]  Yaorong Ge,et al.  Outlier identification in radiation therapy knowledge‐based planning: A study of pelvic cases , 2017, Medical physics.

[21]  R. Jeraj,et al.  Optimizer convergence and local minima errors and their clinical importance. , 2003, Physics in medicine and biology.

[22]  Russell H. Taylor,et al.  Data-driven approach to generating achievable dose-volume histogram objectives in intensity-modulated radiotherapy planning. , 2011, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[23]  Fang-Fang Yin,et al.  A planning quality evaluation tool for prostate adaptive IMRT based on machine learning. , 2011, Medical physics.

[24]  Carsten Brink,et al.  Automatic treatment planning improves the clinical quality of head and neck cancer treatment plans , 2016, Clinical and translational radiation oncology.

[25]  M. Sharpe,et al.  Automated planning of tangential breast intensity-modulated radiotherapy using heuristic optimization. , 2011, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[26]  David L Craft,et al.  Approximating convex pareto surfaces in multiobjective radiotherapy planning. , 2006, Medical physics.

[27]  David Craft,et al.  The tradeoff between treatment plan quality and required number of monitor units in intensity-modulated radiotherapy. , 2007, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[28]  Fredrik Carlsson,et al.  Multicriteria optimization in intensity-modulated radiation therapy treatment planning for locally advanced cancer of the pancreatic head. , 2008, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[29]  Andrew Jackson,et al.  Geometric factors influencing dosimetric sparing of the parotid glands using IMRT. , 2006, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[30]  Kuan J Lee,et al.  Automated gamma knife radiosurgery treatment planning with image registration, data-mining, and Nelder-Mead simplex optimization. , 2006, Medical physics.