Literature DB >> 20229863

Coverage optimized planning: probabilistic treatment planning based on dose coverage histogram criteria.

J J Gordon1, N Sayah, E Weiss, J V Siebers.   

Abstract

This work (i) proposes a probabilistic treatment planning framework, termed coverage optimized planning (COP), based on dose coverage histogram (DCH) criteria; (ii) describes a concrete proof-of-concept implementation of COP within the PINNACLE treatment planning system; and (iii) for a set of 28 prostate anatomies, compares COP plans generated with this implementation to traditional PTV-based plans generated with planning criteria approximating those in the high dose arm of the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group 0126 protocol. Let Dv denote the dose delivered to fractional volume v of a structure. In conventional intensity modulated radiation therapy planning, Dv has a unique value derived from the static (planned) dose distribution. In the presence of geometric uncertainties (e.g., setup errors) Dv assumes a range of values. The DCH is the complementary cumulative distribution function of D(v+). DCHs are similar to dose volume histograms (DVHs). Whereas a DVH plots volume v versus dose D, a DCH plots coverage probability Q versus D. For a given patient, Q is the probability (i.e., percentage of geometric uncertainties) for which the realized value of Dv exceeds D. PTV-based treatment plans can be converted to COP plans by replacing DVH optimization criteria with corresponding DCH criteria. In this approach, PTVs and planning organ at risk volumes are discarded, and DCH criteria are instead applied directly to clinical target volumes (CTVs) or organs at risk (OARs). Plans are optimized using a similar strategy as for DVH criteria. The specific implementation is described. COP was found to produce better plans than standard PTV-based plans, in the following sense. While target OAR dose tradeoff curves were equivalent to those for PTV-based plans, COP plans were able to exploit slack in OAR doses, i.e., cases where OAR doses were below their optimization limits, to increase target coverage. Specifically, because COP plans were not constrained by a predefined PTV, they were able to provide wider dosimetric margins around the CTV, by pushing OAR doses up to, but not beyond, their optimization limits. COP plans demonstrated improved target coverage when averaged over all 28 prostate anatomies, indicating that the COP approach can provide benefits for many patients. However, the degree to which slack OAR doses can be exploited to increase target coverage will vary according to the individual patient anatomy. The proof-of-concept COP implementation investigated here utilized a probabilistic DCH criteria only for the CTV minimum dose criterion. All other optimization criteria were conventional DVH criteria. In a mature COP implementation, all optimization criteria will be DCH criteria, enabling direct planning control over probabilistic dose distributions. Further research is necessary to determine the benefits of COP planning, in terms of tumor control probability and/or normal tissue complication probabilities.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20229863      PMCID: PMC2816984          DOI: 10.1118/1.3273063

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Med Phys        ISSN: 0094-2405            Impact factor:   4.071


  24 in total

1.  Geometric uncertainties in radiotherapy.

Authors:  J M Wilkinson
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2004-02       Impact factor: 3.039

2.  Inclusion of organ movements in IMRT treatment planning via inverse planning based on probability distributions.

Authors:  J Unkelbach; U Oelfke
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2004-09-07       Impact factor: 3.609

3.  Incorporating organ movements in inverse planning: assessing dose uncertainties by Bayesian inference.

Authors:  J Unkelbach; U Oelfke
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2005-01-07       Impact factor: 3.609

4.  A new method of incorporating systematic uncertainties in intensity-modulated radiotherapy optimization.

Authors:  Jie Yang; Gig S Mageras; Spiridon V Spirou; Andrew Jackson; Ellen Yorke; C Clifton Ling; Chen-Shou Chui
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2005-08       Impact factor: 4.071

5.  Temporo-spatial IMRT optimization: concepts, implementation and initial results.

Authors:  Alexei Trofimov; Eike Rietzel; Hsiao-Ming Lu; Benjamin Martin; Steve Jiang; George T Y Chen; Thomas Bortfeld
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2005-05-25       Impact factor: 3.609

6.  An adaptive control algorithm for optimization of intensity modulated radiotherapy considering uncertainties in beam profiles, patient set-up and internal organ motion.

Authors:  J Löf; B K Lind; A Brahme
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  1998-06       Impact factor: 3.609

7.  Adaptive radiation therapy for compensation of errors in patient setup and treatment delivery.

Authors:  Henrik Rehbinder; Camilla Forsgren; Johan Löf
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2004-12       Impact factor: 4.071

8.  Incorporating organ movements in IMRT treatment planning for prostate cancer: minimizing uncertainties in the inverse planning process.

Authors:  Jan Unkelbach; Uwe Oelfke
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2005-08       Impact factor: 4.071

9.  Adapting inverse planning to patient and organ geometrical variation: algorithm and implementation.

Authors:  M Birkner; D Yan; M Alber; J Liang; F Nüsslin
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2003-10       Impact factor: 4.071

10.  Comparisons of treatment optimization directly incorporating random patient setup uncertainty with a margin-based approach.

Authors:  Joseph A Moore; John J Gordon; Mitchell S Anscher; Jeffrey V Siebers
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2009-09       Impact factor: 4.071

View more
  16 in total

1.  The effect of uterine motion and uterine margins on target and normal tissue doses in intensity modulated radiation therapy of cervical cancer.

Authors:  J J Gordon; E Weiss; O K Abayomi; J V Siebers; N Dogan
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2011-04-13       Impact factor: 3.609

2.  Robust optimization for intensity-modulated proton therapy with soft spot sensitivity regularization.

Authors:  Wenbo Gu; Dan Ruan; Daniel O'Connor; Wei Zou; Lei Dong; Min-Yu Tsai; Xun Jia; Ke Sheng
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2019-01-21       Impact factor: 4.071

Review 3.  Robustness Analysis for External Beam Radiation Therapy Treatment Plans: Describing Uncertainty Scenarios and Reporting Their Dosimetric Consequences.

Authors:  Adam D Yock; Radhe Mohan; Stella Flampouri; Walter Bosch; Paige A Taylor; David Gladstone; Siyong Kim; Jason Sohn; Robert Wallace; Ying Xiao; Jeff Buchsbaum
Journal:  Pract Radiat Oncol       Date:  2018-12-15

4.  Sensitivity of postplanning target and OAR coverage estimates to dosimetric margin distribution sampling parameters.

Authors:  Huijun Xu; J James Gordon; Jeffrey V Siebers
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2011-02       Impact factor: 4.071

5.  Beyond the margin recipe: the probability of correct target dosage and tumor control in the presence of a dose limiting structure.

Authors:  Marnix G Witte; Jan-Jakob Sonke; Jeffrey Siebers; Joseph O Deasy; Marcel van Herk
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2017-09-20       Impact factor: 3.609

6.  Voxel-based statistical analysis of uncertainties associated with deformable image registration.

Authors:  Shunshan Li; Carri Glide-Hurst; Mei Lu; Jinkoo Kim; Ning Wen; Jeffrey N Adams; James Gordon; Indrin J Chetty; Hualiang Zhong
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2013-09-03       Impact factor: 3.609

7.  Coverage-based treatment planning to accommodate delineation uncertainties in prostate cancer treatment.

Authors:  Huijun Xu; J James Gordon; Jeffrey V Siebers
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2015-09       Impact factor: 4.071

8.  Dose deformation-invariance in adaptive prostate radiation therapy: implication for treatment simulations.

Authors:  Manju Sharma; Elisabeth Weiss; Jeffrey V Siebers
Journal:  Radiother Oncol       Date:  2012-11-29       Impact factor: 6.280

9.  Robustness quantification methods comparison in volumetric modulated arc therapy to treat head and neck cancer.

Authors:  Wei Liu; Samir H Patel; Jiajian Jason Shen; Yanle Hu; Daniel P Harrington; Xiaoning Ding; Michele Y Halyard; Steven E Schild; William W Wong; Gary A Ezzell; Martin Bues
Journal:  Pract Radiat Oncol       Date:  2016-02-13

10.  Coverage-based treatment planning to accommodate deformable organ variations in prostate cancer treatment.

Authors:  Huijun Xu; Douglas J Vile; Manju Sharma; J James Gordon; Jeffrey V Siebers
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2014-10       Impact factor: 4.071

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.