Improving IMRT-plan quality with MLC leaf position refinement post plan optimization.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Niu Y
PROVIDER: S-EPMC3416882 | biostudies-other | 2012 Aug
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other
Similar Datasets
Project description:This study investigated the impact of beam complexities on planar quality assur-ance and plan quality robustness by introducing MLC errors in intensity-modulate radiation therapy. Forty patients' planar quality assurance (QA) plans were enrolled in this study, including 20 dynamic MLC (DMLC) IMRT plans and 20 static MLC (SMLC) IMRT plans. The total beam numbers were 150 and 160 for DMLC and SMLC, respectively. Six different magnitudes of MLC errors were introduced to these beams. Gamma pass rates were calculated by comparing error-free fluence and error-induced fluence. The plan quality variation was acquired by comparing PTV coverage. Eight complexity scores were calculated based on the beam flu-ence and the MLC sequence. The complexity scores include fractal dimension, monitor unit, modulation index, fluence map complexity, weighted average of field area, weighted average of field perimeter, and small aperture ratio (< 5 cm2 and < 50cm2). The Spearman's rank correlation coefficient was calculated to analyze the correlation between these scores and gamma pass rate and plan quality varia-tion. For planar QA, the most significant complexity index was fractal dimension for DMLC (p = -0.40) and weighted segment area for SMLC (p = 0.27) at low magnitude MLC error. For plan quality, the most significant complexity index was weighted segment perimeter for DMLC (p = 0.56) and weighted segment area for SMLC (p= 0.497) at low magnitude MLC error. The sensitivity of planar QA was weakly associated with the field complexity with low magnitude MLC error, but the plan quality robustness was associated with beam complexity. Plans with simple beams were more robust to MLC error.
| S-EPMC5690928 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PurposeThis study compares the plan quality of magnetic-resonance image (MRI)-based intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) using a linac (MR-linac-IMRT), MRI-based IMRT using tri-Co-60 sources (MR-Co-60-IMRT), and volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) for spine stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR).MethodsTwenty patients with thoracic spine metastasis were retrospectively selected for this study. For each patient, the MR-linac-IMRT, MR-Co-60-IMRT, and VMAT plans were generated using an identical CT image set and structures, except for the spinal cord and spinal cord planning organ-at-risk volume (PRV). Those two structures were contoured based on CT image sets for VMAT planning while those were contoured based on MR image sets for MR-linac-IMRT and MR-Co-60-IMRT planning. The initial prescription doses were 18 Gy in a single fraction for every plan in this study. If the tolerance level of the spinal cord was not met, the prescription doses were reduced to meet the tolerance level of the spinal cord. Dose-volumetric parameters of each plan were analyzed.ResultsThe average spinal cord volumes contoured based on the CT and MR images were 3.8±1.6 cm3 and 1.1±1.0 cm3, respectively (p<0.001). For four patients, the prescription doses of VMAT plans were reduced to 16 Gy to satisfy the spinal cord tolerance level. For thirteen patients, the prescription doses of MR-Co-60-IMRT plans were reduced to be less than 16 Gy to meet the spinal cord tolerance level. However, for every MR-linac-IMRT plan, the initial prescription doses of 18 Gy could be delivered to the target volume while satisfying the spinal cord tolerance. The average values of D10%, V10Gy, and V14Gy of the spinal cord PRV consistently indicated that the doses to the spinal cord PRV in the MR-linac-IMRT plans were the lowest among three types of plans in this study (all with p≤0.003).ConclusionMR-linac-IMRT appears promising for spine SABR.
| S-EPMC6645671 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PURPOSE:Multileaf collimator (MLC) tracking is being clinically pioneered to continuously compensate for thoracic and pelvic motion during radiotherapy. The purpose of this work was to characterize the performance of two MLC leaf-fitting algorithms, direct optimization and piecewise optimization, for real-time motion compensation with different plan complexity and tumor trajectories. METHODS:To test the algorithms, both in silico and phantom experiments were performed. The phantom experiments were performed on a Trilogy Varian linac and a HexaMotion programmable motion platform. High and low modulation VMAT plans for lung and prostate cancer cases were used along with eight patient-measured organ-specific trajectories. For both MLC leaf-fitting algorithms, the plans were run with their corresponding patient trajectories. To compare algorithms, the average exposure errors, i.e., the difference in shape between ideal and fitted MLC leaves by the algorithm, plan complexity and system latency of each experiment were calculated. RESULTS:Comparison of exposure errors for the in silico and phantom experiments showed minor differences between the two algorithms. The average exposure errors for in silico experiments with low/high plan complexity were 0.66/0.88 cm2 for direct optimization and 0.66/0.88 cm2 for piecewise optimization, respectively. The average exposure errors for the phantom experiments with low/high plan complexity were 0.73/1.02 cm2 for direct and 0.73/1.02 cm2 for piecewise optimization, respectively. The measured latency for the direct optimization was 226 ± 10 ms and for the piecewise algorithm was 228 ± 10 ms. In silico and phantom exposure errors quantified for each treatment plan demonstrated that the exposure errors from the high plan complexity (0.96 cm2 mean, 2.88 cm2 95% percentile) were all significantly different from the low plan complexity (0.70 cm2 mean, 2.18 cm2 95% percentile) (P < 0.001, two-tailed, Mann-Whitney statistical test). CONCLUSIONS:The comparison between the two leaf-fitting algorithms demonstrated no significant differences in exposure errors, neither in silico nor with phantom experiments. This study revealed that plan complexity impacts the overall exposure errors significantly more than the difference between the algorithms.
| S-EPMC7441573 | biostudies-literature
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:Plan degradation resulting from compromises made to enhance delivery efficiency is an important consideration for intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) treatment plans. IMRT optimization and/or multileaf collimator (MLC) sequencing schemes can be modified to generate more efficient treatment delivery, but the effect those modifications have on plan quality is often difficult to quantify. In this work, the authors present a method for quantitative assessment of overall plan quality degradation due to tradeoffs between delivery efficiency and treatment plan quality, illustrated using comparisons between plans developed allowing different numbers of intensity levels in IMRT optimization and/or MLC sequencing for static segmental MLC IMRT plans.A plan quality degradation method to evaluate delivery efficiency and plan quality tradeoffs was developed and used to assess planning for 14 prostate and 12 head and neck patients treated with static IMRT. Plan quality was evaluated using a physician's predetermined "quality degradation" factors for relevant clinical plan metrics associated with the plan optimization strategy. Delivery efficiency and plan quality were assessed for a range of optimization and sequencing limitations. The "optimal" (baseline) plan for each case was derived using a clinical cost function with an unlimited number of intensity levels. These plans were sequenced with a clinical MLC leaf sequencer which uses >100 segments, assuring delivered intensities to be within 1% of the optimized intensity pattern. Each patient's optimal plan was also sequenced limiting the number of intensity levels (20, 10, and 5), and then separately optimized with these same numbers of intensity levels. Delivery time was measured for all plans, and direct evaluation of the tradeoffs between delivery time and plan degradation was performed.When considering tradeoffs, the optimal number of intensity levels depends on the treatment site and on the stage in the process at which the levels are limited. The cost of improved delivery efficiency, in terms of plan quality degradation, increased as the number of intensity levels in the sequencer or optimizer decreased. The degradation was more substantial for the head and neck cases relative to the prostate cases, particularly when fewer than 20 intensity levels were used. Plan quality degradation was less severe when the number of intensity levels was limited in the optimizer rather than the sequencer.Analysis of plan quality degradation allows for a quantitative assessment of the compromises in clinical plan quality as delivery efficiency is improved, in order to determine the optimal delivery settings. The technique is based on physician-determined quality degradation factors and can be extended to other clinical situations where investigation of various tradeoffs is warranted.
| S-EPMC3695972 | biostudies-other
Project description:The structure of human protein HSPC034 has been determined by both solution nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) spectroscopy and X-ray crystallography. Refinement of the NMR structure ensemble, using a Rosetta protocol in the absence of NMR restraints, resulted in significant improvements not only in structure quality, but also in molecular replacement (MR) performance with the raw X-ray diffraction data using MOLREP and Phaser. This method has recently been shown to be generally applicable with improved MR performance demonstrated for eight NMR structures refined using Rosetta (Qian et al., Nature 2007;450:259-264). Additionally, NMR structures of HSPC034 calculated by standard methods that include NMR restraints have improvements in the RMSD to the crystal structure and MR performance in the order DYANA, CYANA, XPLOR-NIH, and CNS with explicit water refinement (CNSw). Further Rosetta refinement of the CNSw structures, perhaps due to more thorough conformational sampling and/or a superior force field, was capable of finding alternative low energy protein conformations that were equally consistent with the NMR data according to the Recall, Precision, and F-measure (RPF) scores. On further examination, the additional MR-performance shortfall for NMR refined structures as compared with the X-ray structure were attributed, in part, to crystal-packing effects, real structural differences, and inferior hydrogen bonding in the NMR structures. A good correlation between a decrease in the number of buried unsatisfied hydrogen-bond donors and improved MR performance demonstrates the importance of hydrogen-bond terms in the force field for improving NMR structures. The superior hydrogen-bond network in Rosetta-refined structures demonstrates that correct identification of hydrogen bonds should be a critical goal of NMR structure refinement. Inclusion of nonbivalent hydrogen bonds identified from Rosetta structures as additional restraints in the structure calculation results in NMR structures with improved MR performance.
| S-EPMC2878636 | biostudies-literature
Project description:This work outlines the development of a robust method of calculating modulation factors used for the independent verification of MUs for IMRT and VMAT treatments, to replace onerous ion chamber measurements. Two-dimensional fluence maps were calculated for dynamic MLC fields that include MLC interleaf leakage, transmission, and tongue-and-groove effects, as characterized from EPID-acquired images. Monte Carlo-generated dose kernels were then used to calculate doses for a modulated field and that field with the modulation removed at a depth specific to the calculation point in the patient using in-house written software, Mod_Calc. The ratio of these two doses was taken to calculate modulation factors. Comparison between Mod_Calc calculation and ion chamber measurement of modulation factors for 121 IMRT fields yielded excellent agreement, where the mean difference between the two was -0.3% ± 1.2%. This validated use of Mod_Calc clinically. Analysis of 5,271 dynamic fields from clinical use of Mod_Calc gave a mean difference of 0.3% ± 1.0% between Mod_Calc and Eclipse-generated factors. In addition, 99.3% and 96.5% fields pass 5% and 2% criteria, respectively, for agreement between these two predictions. The development and use of Mod_Calc at our clinic has considerably streamlined our QA process for IMRT and RapidArc fields, compared to our previous method based on ion chamber measurements. As a result, it has made it feasible to maintain our established and trusted current in-house method of MU verification, without resorting to commercial software alternatives.
| S-EPMC5714641 | biostudies-literature
Project description:In this work, overshoot and undershoot effects associated with step-and-shoot IMRT (SSIMRT) delivery on a Varian Clinac 21iX are investigated, and their impact on patient-specific QA point dose measurements and treatment plan delivery are evaluated. Pinnacle3 SSIMRT plans consisting of 5, 10, and 15 identical 5 × 5 cm2 MLC defined segments and MU/segment values of 5 MU, 10 MU, and 20 MU were utilized and delivered at 600/300 MU/min. Independent of the number of segments the overshoot and undershoot at 600 MU/min were approximately ± 10%, ± 5%, and ± 2.5% for 5 MU/segment, 10 MU/segment, and 20 MU/segment, respectively. At 300 MU/min, each of these values is approximately halved. Interfractional variation of these effects (10 fractions), as well as dosimetric variations for intermediate segments, are reduced at the lower dose rate. QA point-dose measurements for a sample (n = 29) of head and neck SSIMRT beams were on average 2.9% (600 MU/min) and 1.7% (300 MU/min) higher than Pinnacle3 planned doses. In comparison for prostate beams (n = 46), measured point doses were 0.8% (600 MU/min) and 0.4% (300 MU/min) higher. The reduction in planned-measured point-dose discrepancies at 300 MU/min can be attributed in part to the inclusion of the first segment (overshoot) in the admixture of segments that deliver measured dose. Pinnacle3 plans for 10/9 head and neck/prostate treatments were adjusted by ± 0.5 MU to include the effects of overshoot and undershoot at 600 MU/min. Comparing original and adjusted plans for each site indicated that the original plan was preferred in 70% and 89% of head and neck and prostate cases, respectively. The disparity between planned and delivered treatment that this suggests can potentially be mitigated by treating SSIMRT at a dose rate below 600 MU/min.
| S-EPMC5690035 | 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:IntroductionPremedication with acetaminophen and/or diphenhydramine to prevent febrile nonhemolytic transfusion reactions and minor allergic transfusion reactions is a common practice based on historical recommendations. However, recent small randomized-controlled trials showed no benefit of premedication. This inconsistency leads to practice variability, which results in the inefficiency of our institution's blood product ordering process. This project aimed to improve the number of transfusion encounters with premedication plan documentation from a baseline of 19% to 80% in 12 months.MethodsA multidisciplinary quality improvement (QI) team used QI tools to design interventions to improve the efficiency of the ordering process for blood products. Measures were tracked monthly and analyzed using statistical process control.ResultsFrom September 2018 to January 2021, 5,351 blood product transfusion visits were scheduled. At baseline, 34% of patients received premedication, and 19% had premedication plans documented. Interventions included a passive computerized provider order entry alert, clinical care pathway development, and clinician education. Postimplementation, the average number of encounters with a premedication plan increased from 19% to 87%, whereas encounters receiving premedication decreased from 34% to 25%. There was no change in the average number of transfusion reactions (1.8 per 100 transfusions).ConclusionsUsing QI methods, our team successfully standardized the blood product premedication plan documentation despite unclear best practices regarding blood product transfusion premedication. The team added premedication plan documentation training to new employee orientation for sustainability.
| S-EPMC9197348 | biostudies-literature