Literature DB >> 28379849

Sparsity constrained split feasibility for dose-volume constraints in inverse planning of intensity-modulated photon or proton therapy.

Scott Penfold1, Rafał Zalas, Margherita Casiraghi, Mark Brooke, Yair Censor, Reinhard Schulte.   

Abstract

A split feasibility formulation for the inverse problem of intensity-modulated radiation therapy treatment planning with dose-volume constraints included in the planning algorithm is presented. It involves a new type of sparsity constraint that enables the inclusion of a percentage-violation constraint in the model problem and its handling by continuous (as opposed to integer) methods. We propose an iterative algorithmic framework for solving such a problem by applying the feasibility-seeking CQ-algorithm of Byrne combined with the automatic relaxation method that uses cyclic projections. Detailed implementation instructions are furnished. Functionality of the algorithm was demonstrated through the creation of an intensity-modulated proton therapy plan for a simple 2D C-shaped geometry and also for a realistic base-of-skull chordoma treatment site. Monte Carlo simulations of proton pencil beams of varying energy were conducted to obtain dose distributions for the 2D test case. A research release of the Pinnacle 3 proton treatment planning system was used to extract pencil beam doses for a clinical base-of-skull chordoma case. In both cases the beamlet doses were calculated to satisfy dose-volume constraints according to our new algorithm. Examination of the dose-volume histograms following inverse planning with our algorithm demonstrated that it performed as intended. The application of our proposed algorithm to dose-volume constraint inverse planning was successfully demonstrated. Comparison with optimized dose distributions from the research release of the Pinnacle 3 treatment planning system showed the algorithm could achieve equivalent or superior results.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28379849      PMCID: PMC5989041          DOI: 10.1088/1361-6560/aa602b

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Phys Med Biol        ISSN: 0031-9155            Impact factor:   3.609


  15 in total

1.  A novel linear programming approach to fluence map optimization for intensity modulated radiation therapy treatment planning.

Authors:  H Edwin Romeijn; Ravindra K Ahuja; James F Dempsey; Arvind Kumar; Jonathan G Li
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2003-11-07       Impact factor: 3.609

2.  Radiobiological considerations in the design of fractionation strategies for intensity-modulated radiation therapy of head and neck cancers.

Authors:  R Mohan; Q Wu; M Manning; R Schmidt-Ullrich
Journal:  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys       Date:  2000-02-01       Impact factor: 7.038

3.  On Linear Infeasibility Arising in Intensity-Modulated Radiation Therapy Inverse Planning.

Authors:  Yair Censor; Adi Ben-Israel; Ying Xiao; James M Galvin
Journal:  Linear Algebra Appl       Date:  2008-03-01       Impact factor: 1.401

4.  Optimization of intensity modulated beams with volume constraints using two methods: cost function minimization and projections onto convex sets.

Authors:  P S Cho; S Lee; R J Marks; S Oh; S G Sutlief; M H Phillips
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  1998-04       Impact factor: 4.071

5.  Intensity modulated proton therapy.

Authors:  H M Kooy; C Grassberger
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2015-05-27       Impact factor: 3.039

6.  Intensity-modulated proton therapy reduces the dose to normal tissue compared with intensity-modulated radiation therapy or passive scattering proton therapy and enables individualized radical radiotherapy for extensive stage IIIB non-small-cell lung cancer: a virtual clinical study.

Authors:  Xiaodong Zhang; Yupeng Li; Xiaoning Pan; Li Xiaoqiang; Radhe Mohan; Ritsuko Komaki; James D Cox; Joe Y Chang
Journal:  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys       Date:  2009-08-05       Impact factor: 7.038

7.  Intensity-modulated radiotherapy in high-grade gliomas: clinical and dosimetric results.

Authors:  Ashwatha Narayana; Josh Yamada; Sean Berry; Priti Shah; Margie Hunt; Philip H Gutin; Steven A Leibel
Journal:  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys       Date:  2006-03-01       Impact factor: 7.038

8.  Intensity-modulated proton therapy further reduces normal tissue exposure during definitive therapy for locally advanced distal esophageal tumors: a dosimetric study.

Authors:  James Welsh; Daniel Gomez; Matthew B Palmer; Beverly A Riley; Amin V Mayankkumar; Ritsuko Komaki; Lei Dong; X Ronald Zhu; Anna Likhacheva; Zhongxing Liao; Wayne L Hofstetter; Jaffer A Ajani; James D Cox
Journal:  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys       Date:  2011-04-04       Impact factor: 7.038

9.  Dose-volume constraints to reduce rectal side effects from prostate radiotherapy: evidence from MRC RT01 Trial ISRCTN 47772397.

Authors:  Sarah L Gulliford; Kerwyn Foo; Rachel C Morgan; Edwin G Aird; A Margaret Bidmead; Helen Critchley; Philip M Evans; Stefano Gianolini; W Philip Mayles; A Rollo Moore; Beatriz Sánchez-Nieto; Mike Partridge; Matthew R Sydes; Steve Webb; David P Dearnaley
Journal:  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys       Date:  2009-06-18       Impact factor: 7.038

Review 10.  Reduction of radiotherapy-induced late complications in early breast cancer: the role of intensity-modulated radiation therapy and partial breast irradiation. Part I--normal tissue complications.

Authors:  C E Coles; A M Moody; C B Wilson; N G Burnet
Journal:  Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol)       Date:  2005-02       Impact factor: 4.126

View more
  1 in total

1.  A feasibility study for predicting optimal radiation therapy dose distributions of prostate cancer patients from patient anatomy using deep learning.

Authors:  Dan Nguyen; Troy Long; Xun Jia; Weiguo Lu; Xuejun Gu; Zohaib Iqbal; Steve Jiang
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2019-01-31       Impact factor: 4.379

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.