Literature DB >> 25652503

Knowledge-based prediction of plan quality metrics in intracranial stereotactic radiosurgery.

Satomi Shiraishi1, Jun Tan2, Lindsey A Olsen3, Kevin L Moore1.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: The objective of this work was to develop a comprehensive knowledge-based methodology for predicting achievable dose-volume histograms (DVHs) and highly precise DVH-based quality metrics (QMs) in stereotactic radiosurgery/radiotherapy (SRS/SRT) plans. Accurate QM estimation can identify suboptimal treatment plans and provide target optimization objectives to standardize and improve treatment planning.
METHODS: Correlating observed dose as it relates to the geometric relationship of organs-at-risk (OARs) to planning target volumes (PTVs) yields mathematical models to predict achievable DVHs. In SRS, DVH-based QMs such as brain V10Gy (volume receiving 10 Gy or more), gradient measure (GM), and conformity index (CI) are used to evaluate plan quality. This study encompasses 223 linear accelerator-based SRS/SRT treatment plans (SRS plans) using volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT), representing 95% of the institution's VMAT radiosurgery load from the past four and a half years. Unfiltered models that use all available plans for the model training were built for each category with a stratification scheme based on target and OAR characteristics determined emergently through initial modeling process. Model predictive accuracy is measured by the mean and standard deviation of the difference between clinical and predicted QMs, δQM = QMclin - QMpred, and a coefficient of determination, R(2). For categories with a large number of plans, refined models are constructed by automatic elimination of suspected suboptimal plans from the training set. Using the refined model as a presumed achievable standard, potentially suboptimal plans are identified. Predictions of QM improvement are validated via standardized replanning of 20 suspected suboptimal plans based on dosimetric predictions. The significance of the QM improvement is evaluated using the Wilcoxon signed rank test.
RESULTS: The most accurate predictions are obtained when plans are stratified based on proximity to OARs and their PTV volume sizes. Volumes are categorized into small (VPTV < 2 cm(3)), medium (2 cm(3) < VPTV < 25 cm(3)), and large (25 cm(3) < VPTV). The unfiltered models demonstrate the ability to predict GMs to ∼1 mm and fractional brain V10Gy to ∼25% for plans with large VPTV and critical OAR involvements. Increased accuracy and precision of QM predictions are obtained when high quality plans are selected for the model training. For the small and medium VPTV plans without critical OAR involvement, predictive ability was evaluated using the refined model. For training plans, the model predicted GM to an accuracy of 0.2 ± 0.3 mm and fractional brain V10Gy to 0.04 ± 0.12, suggesting highly accurate predictive ability. For excluded plans, the average δGM was 1.1 mm and fractional brain V10Gy was 0.20. These δQM are significantly greater than those of the model training plans (p < 0.001). For CI, predictions are close to clinical values and no significant difference was observed between the training and excluded plans (p = 0.19). Twenty outliers with δGM > 1.35 mm were identified as potentially suboptimal, and replanning these cases using predicted target objectives demonstrates significant improvements on QMs: on average, 1.1 mm reduction in GM (p < 0.001) and 23% reduction in brain V10Gy (p < 0.001). After replanning, the difference of δGM distribution between the 20 replans and the refined model training plans was marginal.
CONCLUSIONS: The results demonstrate the ability to predict SRS QMs precisely and to identify suboptimal plans. Furthermore, the knowledge-based DVH predictions were directly used as target optimization objectives and allowed a standardized planning process that bettered the clinically approved plans. Full clinical application of this methodology can improve consistency of SRS plan quality in a wide range of PTV volume and proximity to OARs and facilitate automated treatment planning for this critical treatment site.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 25652503     DOI: 10.1118/1.4906183

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


  28 in total

1.  Functional-guided radiotherapy using knowledge-based planning.

Authors:  Austin M Faught; Lindsey Olsen; Leah Schubert; Chad Rusthoven; Edward Castillo; Richard Castillo; Jingjing Zhang; Thomas Guerrero; Moyed Miften; Yevgeniy Vinogradskiy
Journal:  Radiother Oncol       Date:  2018-04-05       Impact factor: 6.280

2.  An atlas-based method to predict three-dimensional dose distributions for cancer patients who receive radiotherapy.

Authors:  S A Yoganathan; Rui Zhang
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2019-04-12       Impact factor: 3.609

3.  Highly Efficient Training, Refinement, and Validation of a Knowledge-based Planning Quality-Control System for Radiation Therapy Clinical Trials.

Authors:  Nan Li; Ruben Carmona; Igor Sirak; Linda Kasaova; David Followill; Jeff Michalski; Walter Bosch; William Straube; Loren K Mell; Kevin L Moore
Journal:  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys       Date:  2016-10-13       Impact factor: 7.038

4.  Determining normal tissue dose in intracranial stereotactic radiosurgery: A diameter-based predictive nomogram.

Authors:  Donal Cummins; Siobhra O'Sullivan; Mary Dunne; Ronan McDermott; Maeve Keys; David Fitzpatrick; Clare Faul; Mohsen Javadpour; Christina Skourou
Journal:  J Radiosurg SBRT       Date:  2020

5.  Artificial Intelligence in Radiation Therapy.

Authors:  Yabo Fu; Hao Zhang; Eric D Morris; Carri K Glide-Hurst; Suraj Pai; Alberto Traverso; Leonard Wee; Ibrahim Hadzic; Per-Ivar Lønne; Chenyang Shen; Tian Liu; Xiaofeng Yang
Journal:  IEEE Trans Radiat Plasma Med Sci       Date:  2021-08-24

6.  A comparison of Monte Carlo dropout and bootstrap aggregation on the performance and uncertainty estimation in radiation therapy dose prediction with deep learning neural networks.

Authors:  Dan Nguyen; Azar Sadeghnejad Barkousaraie; Gyanendra Bohara; Anjali Balagopal; Rafe McBeth; Mu-Han Lin; Steve Jiang
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2021-02-24       Impact factor: 3.609

7.  ORBIT-RT: A Real-Time, Open Platform for Knowledge-Based Quality Control of Radiotherapy Treatment Planning.

Authors:  Brent M Covele; Kartikeya S Puri; Karoline Kallis; James D Murphy; Kevin L Moore
Journal:  JCO Clin Cancer Inform       Date:  2021-01

Review 8.  Towards the Interpretability of Machine Learning Predictions for Medical Applications Targeting Personalised Therapies: A Cancer Case Survey.

Authors:  Antonio Jesús Banegas-Luna; Jorge Peña-García; Adrian Iftene; Fiorella Guadagni; Patrizia Ferroni; Noemi Scarpato; Fabio Massimo Zanzotto; Andrés Bueno-Crespo; Horacio Pérez-Sánchez
Journal:  Int J Mol Sci       Date:  2021-04-22       Impact factor: 5.923

9.  Validation of Fully Automated VMAT Plan Generation for Library-Based Plan-of-the-Day Cervical Cancer Radiotherapy.

Authors:  Abdul Wahab M Sharfo; Sebastiaan Breedveld; Peter W J Voet; Sabrina T Heijkoop; Jan-Willem M Mens; Mischa S Hoogeman; Ben J M Heijmen
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2016-12-29       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  Single isocenter SRS using CAVMAT offers improved robustness to commissioning and treatment delivery uncertainty compared to VMAT.

Authors:  Edward T Cullom; Yuqing Xia; Kai-Cheng Chuang; Zachary W Gude; Yana Zlateva; Justus D Adamson; William M Giles
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2021-06-24       Impact factor: 2.102

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.