Inverse treatment planning using volume-based objective functions.

The results of optimization of inverse treatment plans depend on a choice of the objective function. Even when the optimal solution for a given cost function can be obtained, a better solution may exist for a given clinical scenario and it could be obtained with a revised objective function. In the approach presented in this work mixed integer programming was used to introduce a new volume-based objective function, which allowed for minimization of the number of under- or overdosed voxels in selected structures. By selecting and prioritizing components of this function the user could drive the computations towards the desired solution. This optimization approach was tested using cases of patients treated for prostate and oropharyngeal cancer. Initial solutions were obtained based on minimization/maximization of the dose to critical structures and targets. Subsequently, the volume-based objective functions were used to locate solutions, which satisfied better clinical objectives particular to each of the cases. For prostate cases, these additional solutions offered further improvements in sparing of the rectum or the bladder. For oropharyngeal cases, families of solutions were obtained satisfying an intensity modulated radiation therapy protocol for this disease site, while offering significant improvement in the sparing of selected critical structures, e.g., parotid glands. An additional advantage of the present approach was in providing a convenient mechanism to test the feasibility of the dose-volume histogram constraints.

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

[2]  Ying Xiao,et al.  The use of mixed-integer programming for inverse treatment planning with pre-defined field segments. , 2001, Physics in medicine and biology.

[3]  R. Lane,et al.  A comparison of mixed integer programming and fast simulated annealing for optimizing beam weights in radiation therapy. , 1996, Medical physics.

[4]  Ellis L. Johnson,et al.  Solving Large-Scale Zero-One Linear Programming Problems , 1983, Oper. Res..

[5]  D M Shepard,et al.  Direct aperture optimization: a turnkey solution for step-and-shoot IMRT. , 2002, Medical physics.

[6]  Michael C. Ferris,et al.  Optimizing the Delivery of Radiation Therapy to Cancer Patients , 1999, SIAM Rev..

[7]  J. Shapiro,et al.  Large scale optimization of beam weights under dose-volume restrictions. , 1990, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[8]  I I Rosen,et al.  Dose-volume considerations with linear programming optimization. , 1991, Medical physics.

[9]  Yair Censor,et al.  The dose–volume constraint satisfaction problem for inverse treatment planning with field segments , 2004, Physics in medicine and biology.

[10]  G Starkschall,et al.  Treatment planning using a dose-volume feasibility search algorithm. , 2001, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[11]  G J Budgell,et al.  Improved delivery efficiency for step and shoot intensity modulated radiotherapy using a fast-tuning magnetron. , 2001, Physics in medicine and biology.

[12]  Practical considerations in using calculated healthy-tissue complication probabilities for treatment-plan optimization. , 1999, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[13]  R Mohan,et al.  Algorithms and functionality of an intensity modulated radiotherapy optimization system. , 2000, Medical physics.

[14]  Yair Censor,et al.  The Least-Intensity Feasible Solution for Aperture-Based Inverse Planning in Radiation Therapy , 2003, Ann. Oper. Res..

[15]  S. Spirou,et al.  A gradient inverse planning algorithm with dose-volume constraints. , 1998, Medical physics.

[16]  John Wong,et al.  Intensity modulation to improve dose uniformity with tangential breast radiotherapy: initial clinical experience. , 2000 .

[17]  G. Nemhauser,et al.  Integer Programming , 2020 .

[18]  W. De Gersem,et al.  An anatomy-based beam segmentation tool for intensity-modulated radiation therapy and its application to head-and-neck cancer. , 2001, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[19]  Eva K. Lee,et al.  Integer Programming Applied to Intensity-Modulated Radiation Therapy Treatment Planning , 2003, Ann. Oper. Res..

[20]  G Starkschall,et al.  Evaluation and scoring of radiotherapy treatment plans using an artificial neural network. , 1996, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[21]  M. Langer,et al.  Optimization of beam weights under dose-volume restrictions. , 1987, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.