Jie Shan1, Yu An2, Martin Bues2, Steven E Schild2, Wei Liu2. 1. Department of Biomedical Informatics, Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ, USA. 2. Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic Hospital, Phoenix, AZ, USA.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Currently, in clinical practice of intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT), the influence of the minimum monitor unit (MU) constraint is taken into account through postprocessing after the optimization is completed. This may degrade the plan quality and plan robustness. This study aims to mitigate the impact of the minimum MU constraint directly during the plan robust optimization. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Cao et al. have demonstrated a two-stage method to account for the minimum MU constraint using linear programming without the impact of uncertainties considered. In this study, we took the minimum MU constraint into consideration using quadratic optimization and simultaneously had the impact of uncertainties considered using robust optimization. We evaluated our method using seven cancer patients with different machine settings. RESULT: The new method achieved better plan quality than the conventional method. The D95% of the clinical target volume (CTV) normalized to the prescription dose was (mean [min-max]): (99.4% [99.2%-99.6%]) vs. (99.2% [98.6%-99.6%]). Plan robustness derived from these two methods was comparable. For all seven patients, the CTV dose-volume histogram band gap (narrower band gap means more robust plans) at D95% normalized to the prescription dose was (mean [min-max]): (1.5% [0.5%-4.3%]) vs. (1.2% [0.6%-3.8%]). CONCLUSION: Our new method of incorporating the minimum MU constraint directly into the plan robust optimization can produce machine-deliverable plans with better tumor coverage while maintaining high-plan robustness.
PURPOSE: Currently, in clinical practice of intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT), the influence of the minimum monitor unit (MU) constraint is taken into account through postprocessing after the optimization is completed. This may degrade the plan quality and plan robustness. This study aims to mitigate the impact of the minimum MU constraint directly during the plan robust optimization. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Cao et al. have demonstrated a two-stage method to account for the minimum MU constraint using linear programming without the impact of uncertainties considered. In this study, we took the minimum MU constraint into consideration using quadratic optimization and simultaneously had the impact of uncertainties considered using robust optimization. We evaluated our method using seven cancerpatients with different machine settings. RESULT: The new method achieved better plan quality than the conventional method. The D95% of the clinical target volume (CTV) normalized to the prescription dose was (mean [min-max]): (99.4% [99.2%-99.6%]) vs. (99.2% [98.6%-99.6%]). Plan robustness derived from these two methods was comparable. For all seven patients, the CTV dose-volume histogram band gap (narrower band gap means more robust plans) at D95% normalized to the prescription dose was (mean [min-max]): (1.5% [0.5%-4.3%]) vs. (1.2% [0.6%-3.8%]). CONCLUSION: Our new method of incorporating the minimum MU constraint directly into the plan robust optimization can produce machine-deliverable plans with better tumor coverage while maintaining high-plan robustness.
Authors: Yuting Lin; Hanne Kooy; David Craft; Nicolas Depauw; Jacob Flanz; Benjamin Clasie Journal: Phys Med Biol Date: 2016-06-01 Impact factor: 3.609
Authors: Wei Liu; Steven E Schild; Joe Y Chang; Zhongxing Liao; Yu-Hui Chang; Zhifei Wen; Jiajian Shen; Joshua B Stoker; Xiaoning Ding; Yanle Hu; Narayan Sahoo; Michael G Herman; Carlos Vargas; Sameer Keole; William Wong; Martin Bues Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2015-11-10 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Bowen Lin; Shujun Fu; Yuting Lin; Ronny L Rotondo; Weizhang Huang; Harold H Li; Ronald C Chen; Hao Gao Journal: Phys Med Biol Date: 2021-12-02 Impact factor: 4.174
Authors: Jie Shan; Yunze Yang; Steven E Schild; Thomas B Daniels; William W Wong; Mirek Fatyga; Martin Bues; Terence T Sio; Wei Liu Journal: Med Phys Date: 2020-10-13 Impact factor: 4.071
Authors: Hongying Feng; Terence T Sio; William G Rule; Ronik S Bhangoo; Pedro Lara; Christopher L Patrick; Shawn Korte; Mirek Fatyga; William W Wong; Steven E Schild; Jonathan B Ashman; Wei Liu Journal: J Appl Clin Med Phys Date: 2020-10-15 Impact factor: 2.243