Dataset Information

A longitudinal evaluation of improvements in treatment plan quality for lung cancer with volumetric modulated arc therapy.

ABSTRACT:

Purpose

To investigate planning time and number of optimizations in routine clinical lung cancer plans based on the plan quality improvements following each optimization.

Materials and method

We selected 40 patients with lung cancer who were treated with conventional fractionated radiotherapy (CFRT). The 40 plans (divided into two groups with one or two target volumes) were completed by 9 planners using volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT). A planning strategy, including technique script for each group and a planning process for data collection, was introduced. The total planning time, number of optimizations, and dose-volume parameters of each plan were recorded and analyzed. A plan quality metric (PQM) was defined according to the clinical constraints. Statistical analysis of parameters of each plan following each optimization was performed for evaluating improvements in plan quality.

Results

According to the clinical plans generated by different planners, the median number of optimizations of each group was 4, and the median planning time was approximately 1 h (68.6 min and 62.0 min for plans with one or two target volumes, respectively). The dose deposited in organs at risk (OARs) gradually decreased, and the PQM values gradually improved following each optimization. The improvements were significant only between adjacent optimizations from the first optimization (Opt1) to the third optimization (Opt3).

Conclusion

Increasing the number of optimizations was associated with significantly improved sparing of OARs with slight effects on the dose coverage and homogeneity of target volume. Generally, based on the designed planning strategy, there was no significant improvement of the plan quality for more than three optimizations.

SUBMITTER: Xia W

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7324705 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Jun

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

A longitudinal evaluation of improvements in treatment plan quality for lung cancer with volumetric modulated arc therapy.

Xia Wenlong W Liu Zhiqiang Z Yan Lingling L Han Fei F Hu Zhihui Z Tian Yuan Y Cui Weijie W Ren Wenting W Guo Chenlei C Miao Junjie J Dai Jianrong J

Journal of applied clinical medical physics 20200401 6

<h4>Purpose</h4>To investigate planning time and number of optimizations in routine clinical lung cancer plans based on the plan quality improvements following each optimization.<h4>Materials and method</h4>We selected 40 patients with lung cancer who were treated with conventional fractionated radiotherapy (CFRT). The 40 plans (divided into two groups with one or two target volumes) were completed by 9 planners using volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT). A planning strategy, including techni ...[more]

PMID: 32237271

Similar Datasets

Project description:The aim of this study is to provide a practical approach to the planning technique and evaluation of plan quality for the multi-lesion, single-isocenter stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR) of the lung. Eleven patients with two or more lung lesions underwent single-isocenter volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) radiosurgery or IMRS. All plans were normalized to the target maximum dose. For each plan, all targets were treated to the same dose. Plan conformity and dose gradient were maximized with dose-control tuning structures surrounding targets. For comparison, multi-isocenter plans were retrospectively created for four patients. Conformity index (CI), homogeneity index (HI), gradient index (GI), and gradient distance (GD) were calculated for each plan. V5, V10, and V20 of the lung and organs at risk (OARs) were collected. Treatment time and total monitor units (MUs) were also recorded. One patient had four lesions and the remainder had two lesions. Six patients received VMAT and five patients received intensity-modulated radiosurgery (IMRS). For those treated with VMAT, two patients received 3-arc VMAT and four received 2-arc VMAT. For those treated with IMRS, two patients were treated with 10 and 11 beams, respectively, and the rest received 12 beams. Prescription doses ranged from 30 to 54?Gy in three to five fractions. The median prescribed isodose line was 84% (range: 80-86%). The median maximum dose was 57.1?Gy (range: 35.7-65.1?Gy). The mean combined PTV was 49.57?cm(3) (range: 14.90-87.38?cm(3)). For single-isocenter plans, the median CI was 1.15 (range: 0.97-1.53). The median HI was 1.19 (range: 1.16-1.28). The median GI was 4.60 (range: 4.16-7.37). The median maximum radiation dose (Dmax) to total lung was 55.6?Gy (range: 35.7-62.0?Gy). The median mean radiation dose to the lung (Dmean) was 4.2?Gy (range: 1.1-9.3?Gy). The median lung V5 was 18.7% (range: 3.8-41.3%). There was no significant difference in CI, HI, GI, GD, V5, V10, and V20 (lung, heart, trachea, esophagus, and spinal cord) between single-isocenter and multi-isocenter plans. This multi-lesion, single-isocenter lung SABR planning technique demonstrated excellent plan quality and clinical efficiency and is recommended for radiosurgical treatment of two or more lung targets for well-suited patients.

Project description:Purpose: This study aimed to evaluate the utility of a new plan feature (planomics feature) for predicting the results of patient-specific quality assurance using the head and neck (H&N) volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) plan. Methods: One hundred and thirty-one H&N VMAT plans in our institution from 2019 to 2021 were retrospectively collected. Dosimetric verification for all plans was carried out using the portal dosimetry system integrated into the Eclipse treatment planning system based on the electronic portal imaging devices. Gamma passing rates (GPR) were analyzed using three gamma indices of 3%/3 mm, 3%/2 mm, and 2%/2 mm with a 10% dose threshold. Forty-eight conventional features affecting the dose delivery accuracy were used in the study, and 2,476 planomics features were extracted based on the radiotherapy plan file. Three prediction and classification models using conventional features (CF), planomics features (PF), and hybrid features (HF) combining two sets of features were constructed by the gradient boosting regressor (GBR) and Ridge classifier for each GPR of 3%/3 mm, 3%/2 mm, and 2%/2 mm, respectively. The absolute prediction error (APE) and the area under the curve (AUC) were adopted for assessing the performance of prediction and classification models. Results: In the GPR prediction, the average APE of the models using CF, PF, and HF was 1.3 ± 1.2%/3.6 ± 3.0%, 1.7 ± 1.5%/3.8 ± 3.5%, and 1.1 ± 1.0%/4.1 ± 3.1% for 2%/2 mm; 0.7 ± 0.6%/2.0 ± 2.0%, 1.0±1.1%/2.2 ± 1.8%, and 0.6 ± 0.6%/2.2 ± 1.9% for 3%/2 mm; and 0.4 ± 0.3%/1.2 ± 1.2%, 0.4±0.5%/1.3 ± 1.0%, and 0.3±0.3%/1.2 ± 1.1% for 3%/3 mm, respectively. In the regression prediction, three models give a similar modeling performance for predicting the GPR. The classification results were 0.67 ± 0.03/0.66 ± 0.07, 0.77 ± 0.03/0.73 ± 0.06, and 0.78 ± 0.02/0.75 ± 0.04 for 3%/3 mm, respectively. For 3%/2 mm, the AUCs of the training and testing cohorts were 0.64 ± 0.03/0.62 ± 0.07, 0.70 ± 0.03/0.67 ± 0.06, and 0.75 ± 0.03/0.71 ± 0.07, respectively, and for 2%/2 mm, the average AUCs of the training and testing cohorts were 0.72 ± 0.03/0.72 ± 0.06, 0.78 ± 0.04/0.73 ± 0.07, and 0.81 ± 0.03/0.75 ± 0.06, respectively. In the classification, the PF model has a better classification performance than the CF model. Moreover, the HF model provides the best result among the three classifications models. Conclusions: The planomics features can be used for predicting and classifying the GPR results and for improving the model performance after combining the conventional features for the GPR classification.

Project description:PurposePlanning studies to compare x-ray and proton techniques and to select the most suitable technique for each patient have been hampered by the nonequivalence of several aspects of treatment planning and delivery. A fair comparison should compare similarly advanced delivery techniques from current clinical practice and also assess the robustness of each technique. The present study therefore compared volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) and single-field optimization (SFO) spot scanning proton therapy plans created using a simultaneous integrated boost (SIB) for dose escalation in midesophageal cancer and analyzed the effect of setup and range uncertainties on these plans.Methods and materialsFor 21 patients, SIB plans with a physical dose prescription of 2 Gy or 2.5 Gy/fraction in 25 fractions to planning target volume (PTV)50Gy or PTV62.5Gy (primary tumor with 0.5 cm margins) were created and evaluated for robustness to random setup errors and proton range errors. Dose-volume metrics were compared for the optimal and uncertainty plans, with P<.05 (Wilcoxon) considered significant.ResultsSFO reduced the mean lung dose by 51.4% (range 35.1%-76.1%) and the mean heart dose by 40.9% (range 15.0%-57.4%) compared with VMAT. Proton plan robustness to a 3.5% range error was acceptable. For all patients, the clinical target volume D98 was 95.0% to 100.4% of the prescribed dose and gross tumor volume (GTV) D98 was 98.8% to 101%. Setup error robustness was patient anatomy dependent, and the potential minimum dose per fraction was always lower with SFO than with VMAT. The clinical target volume D98 was lower by 0.6% to 7.8% of the prescribed dose, and the GTV D98 was lower by 0.3% to 2.2% of the prescribed GTV dose.ConclusionsThe SFO plans achieved significant sparing of normal tissue compared with the VMAT plans for midesophageal cancer. The target dose coverage in the SIB proton plans was less robust to random setup errors and might be unacceptable for certain patients. Robust optimization to ensure adequate target coverage of SIB proton plans might be beneficial.

Project description:It is crucial to spare lung when treating early stage lung carcinoma with stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) for minimizing the radiation induced toxicities, such as radiation pneumonitis and late fibrosis. A retrospective study was performed with a combination of approaches to determine the optimal range of prescription isodose line (P-IDL) within which lung tissue was best spared in SBRT plans with Volumetric-Modulated Arc Therapy (VMAT) and Monte-Carlo-like dose calculation algorithm. Twenty clinically-delivered SBRT lung plans were optimized using traditional LINAC MLC based approaches: an average P-IDL of (88.8 ± 0.5)% (the error bar of all the data is the 95% confidence interval (CI)). The plans were then re-optimized using a new combination of approaches with variation of P-IDL from 60% to 90% for each case. The combination of approaches included finding and utilizing an optimal P-IDL, implementing tuning ring structures internal and external to the target, as well as normal tissue objective and equivalent. The plans were evaluated with the following indexes: 1. R50%, the ratio of 50% prescription isodose volume to the plan target volume (PTV); 2. V20 and V5, the volume of lung within 20Gy and 5Gy, respectively; 3. PCI, the Paddick comformity index; 4. D2cm, the maximum dose at 2 cm from PTV in any direction; 5. MLD, the mean dose in total lung volume; 6. Focal Index (FI), an indicator of dose in the core of the target. The optimal P-IDL was found to be in the range of 75-80%. The average optimal P-IDL for the 20 cases was (77.9 ± 0.9)%. With the optimization strategies the average PCI was increased by (10.3 ± 2.1)%; the average R50%, V20, V5, D2cm and MLD were decreased by (29.1 ± 4.1)%, (26.9 ± 5.4)%, (13.9 ± 3.5)%, (13.4 ± 4.3)% and (16.7 ± 2.3)%, respectively. The FI was increased by (23.7 ± 1.3)%. The optimal P-IDL range was 75-80% for SBRT VMAT lung treatment plans. The application of the set of optimization approaches can significantly improve the lung sparing in SBRT VMAT plans with AXB dose calculation algorithm and makes treatment plans more conformal in high, intermediate and low dose regions, while higher dose is delivered to the target.

Project description:In radiotherapy, air-filled ion chamber detectors are ubiquitously used in routine dose measurements for treatment planning. However, its use has been restricted by intrinsic low spatial resolution barriers. We developed one procedure for patient-specific quality assurance (QA) in arc radiotherapy by coalescing two adjacent measurement images into a single image to improve spatial resolution and sampling frequency, and investigated how different spatial resolutions affect the QA results. PTW 729 and 1500 ion chamber detectors were used for dosimetric verification via coalescing two measurements with 5 mm-couch shift and the isocenter, and only isocenter measurement, which we call coalescence and standard acquisition (SA). Statistical process control (SPC), process capability analysis (PCA), and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve were used to compare the performance of the two procedures in determining tolerance levels and identifying clinically relevant errors. By analyzing 1256 γ values calculated on interpolated data points, our results indicated that detector 1500 showed higher averages in coalescence cohorts at different tolerance criteria and the dispersion degrees were spread out smaller. Detector 729 yielded a slightly lower process capability of 0.79, 0.76, 1.10, and 1.34, but detector 1500 exhibited somewhat different results of 0.94, 1.42, 1.19, and 1.60 in magnitude. The results of SPC individual control chart showed that cases in coalescence cohorts with γ values lowering its lower control limit (LCL) were greater than those in SA cohorts for detector 1500. A combination of the width of multi-leaf collimator (MLC) leaf, the cross-sectional area of the single detector, and the spacing between adjacent detectors might lead to discrepancies in percent γ values across diverse spatial resolution scenarios. The accuracy of reconstructed volume dose is mainly determined by the interpolation algorithm used in dosimetric systems. The magnitude of filling factor in the ion chamber detectors determined its ability to detect dose deviations. SPC and PCA results indicated that coalescence procedure could detect more potential failure QA results than SA while enhancing action thresholds.

Dataset Information

A longitudinal evaluation of improvements in treatment plan quality for lung cancer with volumetric modulated arc therapy.

Purpose

Materials and method

Results

Conclusion

Publications

A longitudinal evaluation of improvements in treatment plan quality for lung cancer with volumetric modulated arc therapy.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets