Evaluation of two independent dose prediction methods to personalize the automated radiotherapy planning process for prostate cancer

被引:3
|
作者
Kusters, Martijn [1 ]
Miki, Kentaro [2 ]
Bouwmans, Liza [3 ]
Bzdusek, Karl [3 ]
van Kollenburg, Peter [1 ]
Smeenk, Robert Jan [1 ]
Monshouwer, Rene [1 ]
Nagata, Yasushi [2 ]
机构
[1] Radboud Univ Nijmegen Med Ctr, Dept Radiat Oncol, Nijmegen, Netherlands
[2] Hiroshima Univ Hosp, Dept Radiat Oncol, Hiroshima, Japan
[3] Philips Healthcare, Radiat Oncol Solut, Fitchburg, WI USA
关键词
Radiotherapy; Ideal dose distribution; Automated treatment planning; Optimization; Volumetric-modulated arc therapy; MODULATED ARC THERAPY; HEAD;
D O I
10.1016/j.phro.2022.01.006
中图分类号
R73 [肿瘤学];
学科分类号
100214 ;
摘要
Background and purpose: Currently, automatic approaches for radiotherapy planning are widely used, however creation of high quality treatment plans is still challenging. In this study, two independent dose prediction methods were used to personalize the initial settings for the automated planning template for optimizing prostate cancer treatment plans. This study evaluated the dose metrics of these plans comparing both methods with the current clinical automated prostate cancer treatment plans. Material and methods: Datasets of 20 high-risk prostate cancer treatment plans were taken from our clinical database. The prescription dose for these plans was 70 Gy given in fractions of 2.5 Gy. Plans were replanned using the current clinical automated treatment and compared with two personalized automated planning methods. The feasibility dose volume histogram (FDVH) and modified filter back projection (mFBP) methods were used to calculate independent dose predictions. Parameters for the initial objective values of the planning template were extracted from these predictions and used to personalize the optimization of the automated planning process. Results: The current automated replanned clinical plans and the automated plans optimized with the personalized template methods fulfilled the clinical dose criteria. For both methods a reduction in the average mean dose of the rectal wall was found, from 22.5 to 20.1 Gy for the FDVH and from 22.5 to 19.6 Gy for the mFBP method. Conclusions: With both dose-prediction methods the initial settings of the template could be personalized. Hereby, the average dose to the rectal wall was reduced compared to the standard template method.
引用
收藏
页码:24 / 29
页数:6
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Dose Prediction for Prostate Radiotherapy Planning
    Delasalles, Edouard
    Vauclin, Remi
    Mengin, Elie
    Ungun, Baris
    Costea, Madalina-Liana
    Bus, Norbert
    Komodakis, Nikos
    Fenoglietto, Pascal
    Gungor, Gorkem
    Paragios, Nikos
    RADIOTHERAPY AND ONCOLOGY, 2024, 194 : S3560 - S3562
  • [2] Evaluation of Automated Treatment Planning and Organ Dose Prediction for Lung Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy
    Ouyang, Zi
    Zhuang, Tingliang
    Marwaha, Gaurav
    Kolar, Matthew D.
    Qi, Peng
    Videtic, Gregory M.
    Stephans, Kevin L.
    Xia, Ping
    CUREUS JOURNAL OF MEDICAL SCIENCE, 2021, 13 (10)
  • [3] Quantitative and qualitative evaluation of an automated planning solution for prostate radiotherapy
    Costea, Madalina-Liana
    Ungun, Baris
    Vauclin, Remi
    Delasalles, Edouard
    Mengin, Elie
    Bus, Norbert
    Gungor, Gorkem
    Moll, Matthias
    Cozzi, Salvatore
    Gregoire, Vincent
    Fenoglietto, Pascal
    Paragios, Nikos
    RADIOTHERAPY AND ONCOLOGY, 2024, 194 : S3565 - S3567
  • [4] Quantitative and Qualitative Evaluation of an Automated Planning Solution for Prostate Radiotherapy
    Green, W.
    McBeth, R.
    Gungor, G.
    Moll, M.
    Cozzi, S.
    Gregoire, V. G.
    Ungun, B.
    Costea, M.
    Bus, N.
    Paragyos, N.
    Teo, K.
    Fenoglietto, P.
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RADIATION ONCOLOGY BIOLOGY PHYSICS, 2024, 120 (02): : E627 - E627
  • [5] Development and Clinical Introduction of Automated Radiotherapy Treatment Planning for Prostate Cancer
    Winkel, D.
    Bol, G. H.
    van Asselen, B.
    Hes, J.
    Scholten, V.
    Kerkmeijer, L. G. W.
    Raaymakers, B. W.
    MEDICAL PHYSICS, 2016, 43 (06) : 3652 - 3653
  • [6] Development and clinical introduction of automated radiotherapy treatment planning for prostate cancer
    Winkel, D.
    Bol, G. H.
    van Asselen, B.
    Hes, J.
    Scholten, V.
    Kerkmeijer, L. G. W.
    Raaymakers, B. W.
    PHYSICS IN MEDICINE AND BIOLOGY, 2016, 61 (24): : 8587 - 8595
  • [7] Evaluation of an automated template-based treatment planning system for radiotherapy of anal, rectal and prostate cancer
    Calmels, Lucie
    Sibolt, Patrik
    Astroem, Lina M.
    Serup-Hansen, Eva
    Lindberg, Henriette
    Fromm, Anna-Lene
    Persson, Gitte
    Sjoestroem, David
    Geertsen, Poul
    Behrens, Claus P.
    TECHNICAL INNOVATIONS & PATIENT SUPPORT IN RADIATION ONCOLOGY, 2022, 22 : 30 - 36
  • [8] Multi-institutional evaluation of a Pareto navigation guided automated radiotherapy planning solution for prostate cancer
    Philip A Wheeler
    Nicholas S West
    Richard Powis
    Rhydian Maggs
    Michael Chu
    Rachel A Pearson
    Nick Willis
    Bartlomiej Kurec
    Katie L. Reed
    David G. Lewis
    John Staffurth
    Emiliano Spezi
    Anthony E. Millin
    Radiation Oncology, 19
  • [9] Multi-institutional evaluation of a Pareto navigation guided automated radiotherapy planning solution for prostate cancer
    Wheeler, Philip A.
    West, Nicholas S.
    Powis, Richard
    Maggs, Rhydian
    Chu, Michael
    Pearson, Rachel A.
    Willis, Nick
    Kurec, Bartlomiej
    Reed, Katie L.
    Lewis, David G.
    Staffurth, John
    Spezi, Emiliano
    Millin, Anthony E.
    RADIATION ONCOLOGY, 2024, 19 (01)
  • [10] Comparison of two automated treatment planning solutions for prostate cancer
    Kopec, D.
    Zawadzka, A.
    Bodzak, D.
    Kukolowicz, P.
    RADIOTHERAPY AND ONCOLOGY, 2021, 161 : S1559 - S1559