Treatment plan quality during online adaptive re-planning.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: van Timmeren JE
PROVIDER: S-EPMC7441614 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Aug
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Treatment plan quality during online adaptive re-planning.
van Timmeren Janita E JE Chamberlain Madalyne M Krayenbuehl Jérôme J Wilke Lotte L Ehrbar Stefanie S Bogowicz Marta M Hartley Callum C Zamburlini Mariangela M Andratschke Nicolaus N Garcia Schüler Helena H Pavic Matea M Balermpas Panagiotis P Ryu Chaehee C Guckenberger Matthias M Tanadini-Lang Stephanie S
Radiation oncology (London, England) 20200821 1
<h4>Background</h4>Online adaptive radiotherapy is intended to prevent plan degradation caused by inter-fractional tumor volume and shape changes, but time limitations make online re-planning challenging. The aim of this study was to compare the quality of online-adapted plans to their respective reference treatment plans.<h4>Methods</h4>Fifty-two patients treated on a ViewRay MRIdian Linac were included in this retrospective study. In total 238 online-adapted plans were analyzed, which were opt ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:Background and purposeDaily online treatment plan adaptation requires a fast workflow and planning process. Current online planning consists of adaptation of a predefined reference plan, which might be suboptimal in cases of large anatomic changes. The aim of this study was to investigate plan quality differences between the current online re-planning approach and a complete re-optimization.Material and methodsMagnetic resonance linear accelerator reference plans for ten prostate cancer patients were automatically generated using particle swarm optimization (PSO). Adapted plans were created for each fraction using (1) the current re-planning approach and (2) full PSO re-optimization and evaluated overall compliance with institutional dose-volume criteria compared to (3) clinically delivered fractions. Relative volume differences between reference and daily anatomy were assessed for planning target volumes (PTV60, PTV57.6), rectum and bladder and correlated with dose-volume results.ResultsThe PSO approach showed significantly higher adherence to dose-volume criteria than the reference approach and clinical fractions (p < 0.001). In 74 % of PSO plans at most one criterion failed compared to 56 % in the reference approach and 41 % in clinical plans. A fair correlation between PTV60 D98% and relative bladder volume change was observed for the reference approach. Bladder volume reductions larger than 50 % compared to the reference plan recurrently decreased PTV60 D98% below 56 Gy.ConclusionComplete re-optimization maintained target coverage and organs at risk sparing even after large anatomic variations. Re-planning based on daily magnetic resonance imaging was sufficient for small variations, while large variations led to decreasing target coverage and organ-at-risk sparing.
| S-EPMC10827578 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The optimal approach for magnetic resonance imaging-guided online adaptive radiotherapy is currently unknown and needs to consider patient on-couch time constraints. The aim of this study was to compare two different plan optimization approaches. The comparison was performed in 238 clinically applied online-adapted treatment plans from 55 patients, in which the approach of re-optimization was selected based on the physician's choice. For 33 patients where both optimization approaches were used at least once, the median treatment planning dose metrics of both target and organ at risk differed less than 1%. Therefore, we concluded that beam segment weight optimization was chosen adequately for most patients without compromising plan quality.
| S-EPMC8058019 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background & purposeClinical introduction of magnetic resonance (MR)-guided radiotherapy involves treatment planning while taking into account machine-specific characteristics. Our aim was to investigate the feasibility of high-quality MR-linac treatment planning for an MR-linac and to benchmark MR-linac plan quality (IMRT) against current clinical practice (VMAT).Materials & methodsData of eight rectal and eight prostate cancer patients, who received radiotherapy on a conventional CBCT-integrated linac, were selected. Clinically acquired CTs and associated delineations of target volumes and organs-at-risk (OARs) were used for MR-linac treatment planning in Monaco. To investigate treatment planning software bias 'quasi MR-linac plans' were generated in Pinnacle3 by mimicking MR-linac specific beam characteristics. MR-linac, quasi MR-linac, and clinical plans were compared and differences in target and OAR doses assessed. Differences in plan complexity were determined by the number of segments and monitor units.ResultsCompared to clinical plans, MR-linac plans showed a statistically significant decrease in plan homogeneity, an increase in PTV Dmean (prostate: 0.6 Gy; rectum: 0.8 Gy) and D1% (prostate: 1.9 Gy; rectum: 2.0 Gy), and increases in OAR dose. Quasi MR-linac plans were comparable to MR-linac plans with respect to OAR dose and plan homogeneity. For rectal cancer an increase was seen in PTV Dmean (0.12 Gy) and D1% (0.5 Gy) compared to regular MR-linac plans. All created plans were clinically equivalent to current clinical practice.ConclusionsThis study demonstrates the feasibility of creating high-quality MR-linac treatment plans. The results supported the clinical introduction of an MR-linac.
| S-EPMC7807609 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PurposeA planning strategy was developed and the utility of online-adaptation with the Ethos CBCT-guided ring-gantry adaptive radiotherapy (ART) system was evaluated using retrospective data from Head-and-neck (H&N) patients that required clinical offline adaptation during treatment.MethodsClinical data were used to re-plan 20 H&N patients (10 sequential boost (SEQ) with separate base and boost plans plus 10 simultaneous integrated boost (SIB)). An optimal approach, robust to online adaptation, for Ethos-initial plans using clinical goal prioritization was developed. Anatomically-derived isodose-shaping helper structures, air-density override, goals for controlling hotspot location(s), and plan normalization were investigated. Online adaptation was simulated using clinical offline adaptive simulation-CTs to represent an on-treatment CBCT. Dosimetric comparisons were based on institutional guidelines for Clinical-initial versus Ethos-initial plans and Ethos-scheduled versus Ethos-adapted plans. Timing for five components of the online adaptive workflow was analyzed.ResultsThe Ethos H&N planning approach generated Ethos-initial SEQ plans with clinically comparable PTV coverage (average PTVHigh V100% = 98.3%, Dmin,0.03cc = 97.9% and D0.03cc = 105.5%) and OAR sparing. However, Ethos-initial SIB plans were clinically inferior (average PTVHigh V100% = 96.4%, Dmin,0.03cc = 93.7%, D0.03cc = 110.6%). Fixed-field IMRT was superior to VMAT for 93.3% of plans. Online adaptation succeeded in achieving conformal coverage to the new anatomy in both SEQ and SIB plans that was even superior to that achieved in the initial plans (which was due to the changes in anatomy that simplified the optimization). The average adaptive workflow duration for SIB, SEQ base and SEQ boost was 30:14, 22.56, and 14:03 (min: sec), respectively.ConclusionsWith an optimal planning approach, Ethos efficiently auto-generated dosimetrically comparable and clinically acceptable initial SEQ plans for H&N patients. Initial SIB plans were inferior and clinically unacceptable, but adapted SIB plans became clinically acceptable. Online adapted plans optimized dose to new anatomy and maintained target coverage/homogeneity with improved OAR sparing in a time-efficient manner.
| S-EPMC10691641 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:To compare online adaptive radiation therapy (ART) to a clinically implemented plan selection strategy (PS) with respect to dose to the organs at risk (OAR) for rectal cancer. METHODS:The first 20 patients treated with PS between May-September 2016 were included. This resulted in 10 short (SCRT) and 10 long (LCRT) course radiotherapy treatment schedules with a total of 300 Conebeam CT scans (CBCT). New dual arc VMAT plans were generated using auto-planning for both the online ART and PS strategy. For each fraction bowel bag, bladder and mesorectum were delineated on daily Conebeam CTs. The dose distribution planned was used to calculate daily DVHs. Coverage of the CTV was calculated, as defined by the dose received by 99% of the CTV volume (D99%). The volume of normal tissue irradiated with 95% of the prescribed fraction dose was calculated by calculating the volume receiving 95% of the prescribed fraction or more dose minus the volume of the CTV. For each fraction the difference between the plan selection and online adaptive strategy of each DVH parameter was calculated, as well as the average difference per patient. RESULTS:Target coverage remained the same for online ART. The median volume of the normal tissue irradiated with 95% of the prescribed dose dropped from 642?cm3 (PS) to 237?cm3 (online-ART)(p <?0.001). Online ART reduced dose to the OARs for all tested dose levels for SCRT and LCRT (p <?0.001). For V15Gy of the bowel bag the median difference over all fractions of all patients was -?126?cm3 in LCRT, while the average difference per patient ranged from -?206?cm3 to -?40?cm3. For SCRT the median difference was -?62?cm3, while the range of the average difference per patient was -?105?cm3 to -?51?cm3. For V15Gy of the bladder the median difference over all fractions of all patients was 26% in LCRT, while the average difference per patient ranged from -?34 to 12%. For SCRT the median difference of V95% was -?8%, while the range of the average difference per patient was -?29 to 0%. CONCLUSIONS:Online ART for rectal cancer reduces dose the OARs significantly compared to a clinically implemented plan selection strategy, without compromising target coverage. TRIAL REGISTRATION:Medical Research Involving Human Subjects Act (WMO) does not apply to this study and was retrospectively approved by the Medical Ethics review Committee of the Academic Medical Center (W19_357 # 19.420; Amsterdam University Medical Centers, Location Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands).
| S-EPMC7371470 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundTo investigate the capability of a not-yet commercially available fully automated lexicographic optimization (LO) planning algorithm, called mCycle (Elekta AB, Stockholm, Sweden), to further improve the plan quality of an already-validated Wish List (WL) pushing on the organs-at-risk (OAR) sparing without compromising target coverage and plan delivery accuracy.Material and methodsTwenty-four mono-institutional consecutive cervical cancer Volumetric-Modulated Arc Therapy (VMAT) plans delivered between November 2019 and April 2022 (50 Gy/25 fractions) have been retrospectively selected. In mCycle the LO planning algorithm was combined with the a-priori multi-criterial optimization (MCO). Two versions of WL have been defined to reproduce manual plans (WL01), and to improve the OAR sparing without affecting minimum target coverage and plan delivery accuracy (WL02). Robust WLs have been tuned using a subset of 4 randomly selected patients. The remaining plans have been automatically re-planned by using the designed WLs. Manual plans (MP) and mCycle plans (mCP01 and mCP02) were compared in terms of dose distributions, complexity, delivery accuracy, and clinical acceptability. Two senior physicians independently performed a blind clinical evaluation, ranking the three competing plans. Furthermore, a previous defined global quality index has been used to gather into a single score the plan quality evaluation.ResultsThe WL tweaking requests 5 and 3 working days for the WL01 and the WL02, respectively. The re-planning took in both cases 3 working days. mCP01 best performed in terms of target coverage (PTV V95% (%): MP 98.0 [95.6-99.3], mCP01 99.2 [89.7-99.9], mCP02 96.9 [89.4-99.5]), while mCP02 showed a large OAR sparing improvement, especially in the rectum parameters (e.g., Rectum D50% (Gy): MP 41.7 [30.2-47.0], mCP01 40.3 [31.4-45.8], mCP02 32.6 [26.9-42.6]). An increase in plan complexity has been registered in mCPs without affecting plan delivery accuracy. In the blind comparisons, all automated plans were considered clinically acceptable, and mCPs were preferred over MP in 90% of cases. Globally, automated plans registered a plan quality score at least comparable to MP.ConclusionsThis study showed the flexibility of the Lexicographic approach in creating more demanding Wish Lists able to potentially minimize toxicities in RT plans.
| S-EPMC10541351 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PurposeThe purpose of this study was to develop an auto-planning platform to be interfaced with a commercial treatment planning system (TPS). The main goal was to obtain robust and high-quality plans for different anatomic sites and various dosimetric requirements.MethodsMonaco (Elekta, St. Louis, US) was the TPS in this work. All input parameters for inverse planning could be defined in a plan template inside Monaco. A software tool called Robot Framework was used to launch auto-planning trials with updated plan templates. The template modifier external to Monaco was the major component of our auto-planning platform. For current implementation, it was a rule-based system that mimics the trial-and-error process of an experienced planner. A template was automatically updated by changing the optimization constraints based on dosimetric evaluation of the plan obtained in the previous trial, along with the data of the iterative optimization extracted from Monaco. Treatment plans generated by Monaco with all plan evaluation criteria satisfied were considered acceptable, and such plans would be saved for further evaluation by clinicians. The auto-planning platform was validated for 10 prostate and 10 head-and-neck cases in comparison with clinical plans generated by experienced planners.ResultsThe performance and robustness of our auto-planning platform was tested with clinical cases of prostate and head and neck treatment. For prostate cases, automatically generated plans had very similar plan quality with the clinical plans, and the bladder volume receiving 62.5 Gy, 50 Gy, and 40 Gy in auto-plans was reduced by 1%, 3%, and 5%, respectively. For head and neck cases, auto-plans had better conformity with reduced dose to the normal structures but slightly higher dose inhomogeneity in the target volume. Remarkably, the maximum dose in the spinal cord and brain stem was reduced by more than 3.5 Gy in auto-plans. Fluence map optimization only with less than 30 trials was adequate to generate acceptable plans, and subsequent optimization for final plans was completed by Monaco without further intervention. The plan quality was weakly dependent on the parameter selection in the initial template and the choices of the step sizes for changing the constraint values.ConclusionAn automated planning platform to interface with Monaco was developed, and our reported tests showed preliminary results for prostate and head and neck cases.
| S-EPMC7286016 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) currently plays an important role in radiotherapy, but its treatment plan quality can vary significantly among institutions and planners. Treatment plan quality control (QC) is a necessary component for individual clinics to ensure that patients receive treatments with high therapeutic gain ratios. The voxel-weighting factor-based plan re-optimization mechanism has been proved able to explore a larger Pareto surface (solution domain) and therefore increase the possibility of finding an optimal treatment plan. In this study, we incorporated additional modules into an in-house developed voxel weighting factor-based re-optimization algorithm, which was enhanced as a highly automated and accurate IMRT plan QC tool (TPS-QC tool). After importing an under-assessment plan, the TPS-QC tool was able to generate a QC report within 2 minutes. This QC report contains the plan quality determination as well as information supporting the determination. Finally, the IMRT plan quality can be controlled by approving quality-passed plans and replacing quality-failed plans using the TPS-QC tool. The feasibility and accuracy of the proposed TPS-QC tool were evaluated using 25 clinically approved cervical cancer patient IMRT plans and 5 manually created poor-quality IMRT plans. The results showed high consistency between the QC report quality determinations and the actual plan quality. In the 25 clinically approved cases that the TPS-QC tool identified as passed, a greater difference could be observed for dosimetric endpoints for organs at risk (OAR) than for planning target volume (PTV), implying that better dose sparing could be achieved in OAR than in PTV. In addition, the dose-volume histogram (DVH) curves of the TPS-QC tool re-optimized plans satisfied the dosimetric criteria more frequently than did the under-assessment plans. In addition, the criteria for unsatisfied dosimetric endpoints in the 5 poor-quality plans could typically be satisfied when the TPS-QC tool generated re-optimized plans without sacrificing other dosimetric endpoints. In addition to its feasibility and accuracy, the proposed TPS-QC tool is also user-friendly and easy to operate, both of which are necessary characteristics for clinical use.
| S-EPMC4773182 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundTreatment adaptation based on tumour biomarker response during radiotherapy of prostate cancer, could be used for both escalation and de-escalation of radiation doses and volumes. To execute an adaptation involving extension of treatment volumes during radiation can however be restricted by the doses already delivered. The aim of this work was to develop a treatment planning method that addresses this challenge.Material and methodsA volumetric-modulated-arc-therapy (VMAT) planning method with sequential plan-on-plan optimization was developed for a prospective phase II trial including 100 patients on salvage radiotherapy (SRT) for prostate cancer recurrence. A treatment adaptation was performed after five weeks of SRT based on prostate-specific antigen response during this phase of the treatment. This involved extension of treatment volumes for non-responders (n = 64) to include pelvic lymph nodes and boost to 68Gallium-Prostate-Specific-Membrane-Antigen-Positron-Emission-Tomography positive lesions. This method was evolved by introducing an EQD2 (equivalent dose in 2.0 Gy fractions) correction of the base plan for improved dose coverage.ResultsAll dose-volume criteria for target coverage were met for the non-responders when based on physical dose. An EQD2 correction of the base plan for non-responders, implemented for the final 29 patients, led to a statistically significant improvement in dose coverage as compared to the 35 patients treated without EQD2 correction.ConclusionsThis is to our knowledge the only study presented on biomarker-guided sequential VMAT radiotherapy using a plan-on-plan technique in the pelvis. By using a biologically adapted technique an improved target coverage was achieved without compromising doses to organs at risk.
| S-EPMC8254191 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionQuality assurance (QA) of treatment plans in clinical trials improves protocol compliance and patient outcomes. Retrospective use of knowledge-based-planning (KBP) in clinical trials has demonstrated improved treatment plan quality and consistency. We report the results of prospective use of KBP for real-time QA of treatment plan quality in the TROG 15.03 FASTRACK II trial, which evaluates efficacy of stereotactic ablative body radiotherapy (SABR) for kidney cancer.MethodsA KBP model was generated based on single institution data. For each patient in the KBP phase (open to the last 31 patients in the trial), the treating centre submitted treatment plans 7 days prior to treatment. A treatment plan was created by using the KBP model, which was compared with the submitted plan for each organ-at-risk (OAR) dose constraint. A report comparing each plan for each OAR constraint was provided to the submitting centre within 24 h of receiving the plan. The centre could then modify the plan based on the KBP report, or continue with the existing plan.ResultsReal-time feedback using KBP was provided in 24/31 cases. Consistent plan quality was in general achieved between KBP and the submitted plan. KBP review resulted in replan and improvement of OAR dosimetry in two patients. All centres indicated that the feedback was a useful QA check of their treatment plan.ConclusionKBP for real-time treatment plan review was feasible for 24/31 cases, and demonstrated ability to improve treatment plan quality in two cases. Challenges include integration of KBP feedback into clinical timelines, interpretation of KBP results with respect to clinical trade-offs, and determination of appropriate plan quality improvement criteria.
| S-EPMC8330099 | biostudies-literature