Literature DB >> 27370147

A mathematical framework for virtual IMRT QA using machine learning.

G Valdes1, R Scheuermann1, C Y Hung1, A Olszanski1, M Bellerive1, T D Solberg1.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: It is common practice to perform patient-specific pretreatment verifications to the clinical delivery of IMRT. This process can be time-consuming and not altogether instructive due to the myriad sources that may produce a failing result. The purpose of this study was to develop an algorithm capable of predicting IMRT QA passing rates a priori.
METHODS: From all treatment, 498 IMRT plans sites were planned in eclipse version 11 and delivered using a dynamic sliding window technique on Clinac iX or TrueBeam Linacs. 3%/3 mm local dose/distance-to-agreement (DTA) was recorded using a commercial 2D diode array. Each plan was characterized by 78 metrics that describe different aspects of their complexity that could lead to disagreements between the calculated and measured dose. A Poisson regression with Lasso regularization was trained to learn the relation between the plan characteristics and each passing rate.
RESULTS: Passing rates 3%/3 mm local dose/DTA can be predicted with an error smaller than 3% for all plans analyzed. The most important metrics to describe the passing rates were determined to be the MU factor (MU per Gy), small aperture score, irregularity factor, and fraction of the plan delivered at the corners of a 40 × 40 cm field. The higher the value of these metrics, the worse the passing rates.
CONCLUSIONS: The Virtual QA process predicts IMRT passing rates with a high likelihood, allows the detection of failures due to setup errors, and it is sensitive enough to detect small differences between matched Linacs.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27370147     DOI: 10.1118/1.4953835

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


  24 in total

Review 1.  Complexity metrics for IMRT and VMAT plans: a review of current literature and applications.

Authors:  Sophie Chiavassa; Igor Bessieres; Magali Edouard; Michel Mathot; Alexandra Moignier
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2019-07-24       Impact factor: 3.039

Review 2.  Artificial intelligence in radiation oncology.

Authors:  Elizabeth Huynh; Ahmed Hosny; Christian Guthier; Danielle S Bitterman; Steven F Petit; Daphne A Haas-Kogan; Benjamin Kann; Hugo J W L Aerts; Raymond H Mak
Journal:  Nat Rev Clin Oncol       Date:  2020-08-25       Impact factor: 66.675

Review 3.  Artificial Intelligence: reshaping the practice of radiological sciences in the 21st century.

Authors:  Issam El Naqa; Masoom A Haider; Maryellen L Giger; Randall K Ten Haken
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2020-02-01       Impact factor: 3.039

4.  Assessing the robustness of artificial intelligence powered planning tools in radiotherapy clinical settings-a phantom simulation approach.

Authors:  Martin Hito; Wentao Wang; Hunter Stephens; Yibo Xie; Ruilin Li; Fang-Fang Yin; Yaorong Ge; Q Jackie Wu; Qiuwen Wu; Yang Sheng
Journal:  Quant Imaging Med Surg       Date:  2021-12

5.  Predicting gamma evaluation results of patient-specific head and neck volumetric-modulated arc therapy quality assurance based on multileaf collimator patterns and fluence map features: A feasibility study.

Authors:  Sangutid Thongsawad; Somyot Srisatit; Todsaporn Fuangrod
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2022-05-18       Impact factor: 2.243

6.  Deep Learning for Patient-Specific Quality Assurance: Predicting Gamma Passing Rates for IMRT Based on Delivery Fluence Informed by log Files.

Authors:  Ying Huang; Yifei Pi; Kui Ma; Xiaojuan Miao; Sichao Fu; Zhen Zhu; Yifan Cheng; Zhepei Zhang; Hua Chen; Hao Wang; Hengle Gu; Yan Shao; Yanhua Duan; Aihui Feng; Weihai Zhuo; Zhiyong Xu
Journal:  Technol Cancer Res Treat       Date:  2022 Jan-Dec

7.  Machine learning and modeling: Data, validation, communication challenges.

Authors:  Issam El Naqa; Dan Ruan; Gilmer Valdes; Andre Dekker; Todd McNutt; Yaorong Ge; Q Jackie Wu; Jung Hun Oh; Maria Thor; Wade Smith; Arvind Rao; Clifton Fuller; Ying Xiao; Frank Manion; Matthew Schipper; Charles Mayo; Jean M Moran; Randall Ten Haken
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2018-08-24       Impact factor: 4.071

8.  Predictive time-series modeling using artificial neural networks for Linac beam symmetry: an empirical study.

Authors:  Qiongge Li; Maria F Chan
Journal:  Ann N Y Acad Sci       Date:  2016-09-14       Impact factor: 5.691

9.  Commissioning and clinical implementation of an Autoencoder based Classification-Regression model for VMAT patient-specific QA in a multi-institution scenario.

Authors:  Ruijie Yang; Xueying Yang; Le Wang; Dingjie Li; Yuexin Guo; Ying Li; Yumin Guan; Xiangyang Wu; Shouping Xu; Shuming Zhang; Maria F Chan; Lisheng Geng; Jing Sui
Journal:  Radiother Oncol       Date:  2021-06-21       Impact factor: 6.901

10.  IMRT QA using machine learning: A multi-institutional validation.

Authors:  Gilmer Valdes; Maria F Chan; Seng Boh Lim; Ryan Scheuermann; Joseph O Deasy; Timothy D Solberg
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2017-08-17       Impact factor: 2.102

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.