Minimax optimization for handling range and setup uncertainties in proton therapy.

PURPOSE Intensity modulated proton therapy (IMPT) is sensitive to errors, mainly due to high stopping power dependency and steep beam dose gradients. Conventional margins are often insufficient to ensure robustness of treatment plans. In this article, a method is developed that takes the uncertainties into account during the plan optimization. METHODS Dose contributions for a number of range and setup errors are calculated and a minimax optimization is performed. The minimax optimization aims at minimizing the penalty of the worst case scenario. Any optimization function from conventional treatment planning can be utilized by the method. By considering only scenarios that are physically realizable, the unnecessary conservativeness of other robust optimization methods is avoided. Minimax optimization is related to stochastic programming by the more general minimax stochastic programming formulation, which enables accounting for uncertainties in the probability distributions of the errors. RESULTS The minimax optimization method is applied to a lung case, a paraspinal case with titanium implants, and a prostate case. It is compared to conventional methods that use margins, single field uniform dose (SFUD), and material override (MO) to handle the uncertainties. For the lung case, the minimax method and the SFUD with MO method yield robust target coverage. The minimax method yields better sparing of the lung than the other methods. For the paraspinal case, the minimax method yields more robust target coverage and better sparing of the spinal cord than the other methods. For the prostate case, the minimax method and the SFUD method yield robust target coverage and the minimax method yields better sparing of the rectum than the other methods. CONCLUSIONS Minimax optimization provides robust target coverage without sacrificing the sparing of healthy tissues, even in the presence of low density lung tissue and high density titanium implants. Conventional methods using margins, SFUD, and MO do not utilize the full potential of IMPT and deliver unnecessarily high doses to healthy tissues.

[1]  J. Dupacová Minimax stochastic programs with nonseparable penalties , 1980 .

[2]  J. Unkelbach,et al.  Inclusion of organ movements in IMRT treatment planning via inverse planning based on probability distributions. , 2004, Physics in medicine and biology.

[3]  Dan T. L. Jones,et al.  Presentation of the ICRU-IAEA joint report "Prescribing, Recording, and Reporting Proton-beam Therapy" , 2007 .

[4]  A. Brahme,et al.  Optimal radiation beam profiles considering the stochastic process of patient positioning in fractionated radiation therapy , 1995 .

[5]  John N Tsitsiklis,et al.  A robust approach to IMRT optimization , 2006, Physics in medicine and biology.

[6]  Melvyn Sim,et al.  The Price of Robustness , 2004, Oper. Res..

[7]  M Alber,et al.  Robust optimization based upon statistical theory. , 2010, Medical physics.

[8]  Thomas Bortfeld,et al.  Reducing the sensitivity of IMPT treatment plans to setup errors and range uncertainties via probabilistic treatment planning. , 2008, Medical physics.

[9]  Arkadi Nemirovski,et al.  Robust Convex Optimization , 1998, Math. Oper. Res..

[10]  Stephen J. Wright,et al.  Efficient schemes for robust IMRT treatment planning , 2006, Physics in medicine and biology.

[11]  Alexander Shapiro,et al.  On a Class of Minimax Stochastic Programs , 2004, SIAM J. Optim..

[12]  J. Llacer,et al.  Absence of multiple local minima effects in intensity modulated optimization with dose-volume constraints. , 2003, Physics in medicine and biology.

[13]  E Pedroni,et al.  The precision of proton range calculations in proton radiotherapy treatment planning: experimental verification of the relation between CT-HU and proton stopping power. , 1998, Physics in medicine and biology.

[14]  A. Lomax,et al.  Intensity modulated proton therapy and its sensitivity to treatment uncertainties 1: the potential effects of calculational uncertainties , 2008, Physics in medicine and biology.

[15]  A. Brahme,et al.  An adaptive control algorithm for optimization of intensity modulated radiotherapy considering uncertainties in beam profiles, patient set-up and internal organ motion. , 1998, Physics in medicine and biology.

[16]  S. Henderson,et al.  Robust optimization for intensity modulated radiation therapy treatment planning under uncertainty , 2005, Physics in medicine and biology.

[17]  Daniel W. Miller,et al.  Methodologies and tools for proton beam design for lung tumors. , 2001, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[18]  Timothy C Y Chan,et al.  Accounting for range uncertainties in the optimization of intensity modulated proton therapy , 2007, Physics in medicine and biology.

[19]  U Oelfke,et al.  Worst case optimization: a method to account for uncertainties in the optimization of intensity modulated proton therapy , 2008, Physics in medicine and biology.

[20]  Michael Gillin,et al.  Spot scanning proton beam therapy for prostate cancer: treatment planning technique and analysis of consequences of rotational and translational alignment errors. , 2010, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[21]  Timothy C. Y. Chan,et al.  Optimization under uncertainty in radiation therapy , 2007 .

[22]  A J Lomax,et al.  Intensity modulated proton therapy and its sensitivity to treatment uncertainties 2: the potential effects of inter-fraction and inter-field motions , 2008, Physics in medicine and biology.

[23]  J. Kemperman The General Moment Problem, A Geometric Approach , 1968 .

[24]  Michael A. Saunders,et al.  SNOPT: An SQP Algorithm for Large-Scale Constrained Optimization , 2002, SIAM J. Optim..