Patient-specific quality assurance prediction models based on machine learning for novel dual-layered MLC linac

被引:7
|
作者
Zhu, Heling [1 ]
Zhu, Qizhen [1 ]
Wang, Zhiqun [1 ]
Yang, Bo [1 ]
Zhang, Wenjun [1 ]
Qiu, Jie [1 ]
机构
[1] Chinese Acad Med Sci & Peking Union Med Coll, Peking Union Med Coll Hosp, Dept Radiat Oncol, Beijing 100730, Peoples R China
关键词
dual-layered MLC; machine learning; portal dosimetry; quality assurance; TREATMENT PLAN COMPLEXITY; IMRT; METRICS; QA; COLLIMATOR; MODULATION; SYSTEM;
D O I
10.1002/mp.16091
中图分类号
R8 [特种医学]; R445 [影像诊断学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100207 ; 1009 ;
摘要
BackgroundPatient-specific quality assurance (PSQA) is an indispensable and essential procedure in radiotherapy workflow, and several studies have been done to develop prediction models based on the conventional C-arm linac of single-layered multileaf collimator (MLC) with machine learning (ML) and deep learning techniques to predict PSQA results and improve efficiency. Recently, a newly designed O-ring gantry linac "Halcyon" equipped with unique jawless stacked-and-staggered dual-layered MLC was released. However, few studies have focused on developing PSQA prediction models for this novel dual-layered MLC system. PurposeTo evaluate the performance of ML to predict PSQA results of fixed field intensity-modulated radiation therapy (FF-IMRT) plans for linac equipped with dual-layered MLC. Methods and materialsA total of 213 FF-IMRT treatment plans, including 1383 beams from various treatment sites, were selected and delivered with portal dosimetry verification on Halcyon linac. Gamma analysis was performed using 1%/1, 2%/2, and 3%/2 mm criteria with a 10% threshold. The training set (TS) of ML models consisted of 1106 beams, and an independent evaluation set (ES) consisted of 277 beams. For each beam, 33 complexity metrics were extracted as input data for training models. Three ML algorithms (gradient boosting decision tree/GBDT, random forest/RF, and Poisson Lasso/PL) were utilized to build the models and predict gamma passing rates (GPRs). To improve the prediction accuracy in the rare region, a method of reweighting for TS has been performed and compared to the unweighted results. The importance of complexity metrics was studied by permuted interesting features. ResultsThe GBDT model had the best performance in this study. In ES, the minimal mean prediction error for unweighted results was 1.93%, 1.16%, 0.78% under 1%/1, 2%/2, and 3%/2 mm criteria, respectively, from GBDT model. Comparing to the unweighted results, the models after reweighting gained up to 30% improvement in the rare region, whereas the overall prediction error was slightly worse depending on the kind of models. For feature importance, 2 tree-based models (GBDT and RF) had in common the top 10 most important metrics as well as the same metric with the largest impact. ConclusionFor linac equipped with novel dual-layered MLC, the ML model based on GBDT algorithm shows a certain degree of accuracy for GPRs prediction. The specific ML model for dual-layered MLC configuration could be a useful tool for physicists detecting PSQA measurement failures.
引用
收藏
页码:1205 / 1214
页数:10
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Patient-specific quality assurance prediction models based on machine learning for novel dual-layered MLC linac
    Zhu, Heling
    Zhu, Qizhen
    Wang, Zhiqun
    Yang, Bo
    Zhang, Wenjun
    Qiu, Jie
    [J]. Medical Physics, 2023, 50 (02): : 1205 - 1214
  • [2] Machine Learning for Patient-Specific Quality Assurance of VMAT: Prediction and Classification Accuracy
    Li, J.
    Wang, L.
    Zhang, X.
    Liu, L.
    Li, J.
    Chan, M.
    Sui, J.
    Yang, R.
    [J]. MEDICAL PHYSICS, 2019, 46 (06) : E497 - E497
  • [3] Machine Learning for Patient-Specific Quality Assurance of VMAT: Prediction and Classification Accuracy
    Li, Jiaqi
    Wang, Le
    Zhang, Xile
    Liu, Lu
    Li, Jun
    Chan, Maria F.
    Sui, Jing
    Yang, Ruijie
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RADIATION ONCOLOGY BIOLOGY PHYSICS, 2019, 105 (04): : 893 - 902
  • [4] Machine Learning Based Prediction for Patient-Specific Quality Assurance: Understand the Plan Complexity for VMAT
    Zhang, X.
    Zhang, Y.
    Liu, B.
    Yue, N.
    Nie, K.
    [J]. MEDICAL PHYSICS, 2021, 48 (06)
  • [5] Evaluation of a Phantom for Patient-specific Quality Assurance in the MR Linac
    Baumgartl, M.
    Safarkhanlo, Y.
    Ehrbar, S.
    Wilke, L.
    Krayenbuhl, J.
    Chamberlain, M.
    Zamburlini, M.
    Guckenberger, M.
    Andratschke, N.
    Tanadini-Lang, S.
    [J]. STRAHLENTHERAPIE UND ONKOLOGIE, 2021, 197 (SUPPL 1) : S33 - S34
  • [6] Patient-specific quality assurance failure prediction with deep tabular models
    Levin, R.
    Aravkin, A. Y.
    Kim, M.
    [J]. BIOMEDICAL PHYSICS & ENGINEERING EXPRESS, 2023, 9 (04)
  • [7] Machine-learning-based patient-specific prediction models for knee osteoarthritis
    Jamshidi, Afshin
    Pelletier, Jean-Pierre
    Martel-Pelletier, Johanne
    [J]. NATURE REVIEWS RHEUMATOLOGY, 2019, 15 (01) : 49 - 60
  • [8] Machine-learning-based patient-specific prediction models for knee osteoarthritis
    Afshin Jamshidi
    Jean-Pierre Pelletier
    Johanne Martel-Pelletier
    [J]. Nature Reviews Rheumatology, 2019, 15 : 49 - 60
  • [9] Commissioning and Validation of Patient-Specific Quality Assurance On An MR-Linac
    Du, D.
    Kim, J.
    Glide-Hurst, C.
    Doemer, A.
    Wen, N.
    Movsas, B.
    Dragovic, J.
    Chetty, I.
    [J]. MEDICAL PHYSICS, 2018, 45 (06) : E143 - E143
  • [10] Applications of machine and deep learning to patient-specific IMRT/VMAT quality assurance
    Osman, Alexander F. I.
    Maalej, Nabil M.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF APPLIED CLINICAL MEDICAL PHYSICS, 2021, 22 (09): : 20 - 36