Kelly C Younge1, Robin B Marsh2, Dawn Owen2, Huaizhi Geng3, Ying Xiao3, Daniel E Spratt2, Joseph Foy2, Krithika Suresh2, Q Jackie Wu4, Fang-Fang Yin4, Samuel Ryu5, Martha M Matuszak2. 1. Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan. Electronic address: kyounge@med.umich.edu. 2. Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan. 3. Imaging and Radiation Oncology Core Group, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. 4. Department of Radiation Oncology, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina. 5. Department of Radiation Oncology, Stony Brook University, Stony Brook, New York.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To use knowledge-based planning (KBP) as a method of producing high-quality, consistent, protocol-compliant treatment plans in a complex setting of spine stereotactic body radiation therapy on NRG Oncology Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) 0631. METHODS AND MATERIALS: An internally developed KBP model was applied to an external validation cohort of 22 anonymized cases submitted under NRG Oncology RTOG 0631. The original and KBP plans were compared via their protocol compliance, target conformity and gradient index, dose to critical structures, and dose to surrounding normal tissues. RESULTS: The KBP model generated plans meeting all protocol objectives in a single optimization when tested on both internal and protocol-submitted NRG Oncology RTOG 0631 cases. Two submitted plans that were considered to have a protocol-unacceptable deviation were made protocol compliant through the use of the model. There were no statistically significant differences in protocol spinal cord metrics (D10% and D0.03cc) between the manually optimized plans and the KBP plans. The volume of planning target volume receiving prescription dose increased from 93.3% ± 3.2% to 98.3% ± 1.4% (P = .01) when using KBP. High-dose spillage to surrounding normal tissues (V105%) showed no significant differences (2.1 ± 7.3 cm3 for manual plans to 1.8 ± 0.6 cm3 with KBP), and dosimetric outliers with large amounts of spillage were eliminated through the use of KBP. Knowledge-based planning plans were also found to be significantly more consistent in several metrics, including target coverage and high dose outside of the target. CONCLUSION: Incorporation of KBP models into the clinical trial setting may have a profound impact on the quality of trial results, owing to the increase in consistency and standardization of planning, especially for treatment sites or techniques that are nonstandard.
PURPOSE: To use knowledge-based planning (KBP) as a method of producing high-quality, consistent, protocol-compliant treatment plans in a complex setting of spine stereotactic body radiation therapy on NRG Oncology Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) 0631. METHODS AND MATERIALS: An internally developed KBP model was applied to an external validation cohort of 22 anonymized cases submitted under NRG Oncology RTOG 0631. The original and KBP plans were compared via their protocol compliance, target conformity and gradient index, dose to critical structures, and dose to surrounding normal tissues. RESULTS: The KBP model generated plans meeting all protocol objectives in a single optimization when tested on both internal and protocol-submitted NRG Oncology RTOG 0631 cases. Two submitted plans that were considered to have a protocol-unacceptable deviation were made protocol compliant through the use of the model. There were no statistically significant differences in protocol spinal cord metrics (D10% and D0.03cc) between the manually optimized plans and the KBP plans. The volume of planning target volume receiving prescription dose increased from 93.3% ± 3.2% to 98.3% ± 1.4% (P = .01) when using KBP. High-dose spillage to surrounding normal tissues (V105%) showed no significant differences (2.1 ± 7.3 cm3 for manual plans to 1.8 ± 0.6 cm3 with KBP), and dosimetric outliers with large amounts of spillage were eliminated through the use of KBP. Knowledge-based planning plans were also found to be significantly more consistent in several metrics, including target coverage and high dose outside of the target. CONCLUSION: Incorporation of KBP models into the clinical trial setting may have a profound impact on the quality of trial results, owing to the increase in consistency and standardization of planning, especially for treatment sites or techniques that are nonstandard.
Authors: Joseph J Foy; Robin Marsh; Randall K Ten Haken; Kelly C Younge; Matthew Schipper; Yilun Sun; Dawn Owen; Martha M Matuszak Journal: Pract Radiat Oncol Date: 2017-03-02
Authors: Nitin Ohri; Xinglei Shen; Adam P Dicker; Laura A Doyle; Amy S Harrison; Timothy N Showalter Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2013-03-06 Impact factor: 13.506
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
Authors: Mohammad Hussein; Christopher P South; Miriam A Barry; Elizabeth J Adams; Tom J Jordan; Alexandra J Stewart; Andrew Nisbet Journal: Radiother Oncol Date: 2016-07-14 Impact factor: 6.280
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
Authors: Kirsten van Gysen; Andrew Kneebone; Andrew Le; Kenny Wu; Annette Haworth; Regina Bromley; George Hruby; James O'Toole; Jeremy Booth; Chris Brown; Maria Pearse; Mark Sidhom; Kirsty Wiltshire; Colin Tang; Thomas Eade Journal: Phys Imaging Radiat Oncol Date: 2022-05-13
Authors: James A Kavanaugh; Sarah Holler; Todd A DeWees; Clifford G Robinson; Jeffrey D Bradley; Puneeth Iyengar; Kristin A Higgins; Sasa Mutic; Lindsey A Olsen Journal: Pract Radiat Oncol Date: 2018-12-15
Authors: Justin Visak; Gary Y Ge; Ronald C McGarry; Marcus Randall; Damodar Pokhrel Journal: J Appl Clin Med Phys Date: 2020-12-03 Impact factor: 2.102
Authors: Kirsten van Gysen; James O'Toole; Andrew Le; Kenny Wu; Thilo Schuler; Brian Porter; John Kipritidis; John Atyeo; Chris Brown; Thomas Eade Journal: J Med Radiat Sci Date: 2020-09-03
Authors: Nicholas Hardcastle; Olivia Cook; Xenia Ray; Alisha Moore; Kevin L Moore; David Pryor; Alana Rossi; Farshad Foroudi; Tomas Kron; Shankar Siva Journal: Radiat Oncol Date: 2021-08-03 Impact factor: 3.481