BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Reported plan quality improvements with autoplanning of radiotherapy of the prostate and seminal vesicles are poor. A system for automated multi-criterial planning has been validated for this treatment in a large international multi-center study. The system is configured with training plans using a mechanism that strives for quality improvements relative to those plans. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Each of the four participating centers included thirty manually generated clinical Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy prostate plans (manVMAT). Ten plans were used for autoplanning training. The other twenty were compared with an automatically generated plan (autoVMAT). Plan evaluations considered dosimetric plan parameters and blinded side-by-side plan comparisons by clinicians. RESULTS: With equivalent Planning Target Volume (PTV) V95%, D2%, D98%, and dose homogeneity autoVMAT was overall superior for rectum with median differences of 3.4 Gy (p < 0.001) in Dmean, 4.0% (p < 0.001) in V60Gy, and 1.5% (p = 0.001) in V75Gy, and for bladder Dmean (0.9 Gy, p < 0.001). Also the clinicians' plan comparisons pointed at an overall preference for autoVMAT. Advantages of autoVMAT were highly treatment center- and patient-specific with overall ranges for differences in rectum Dmean and V60Gy of [-4,12] Gy and [-2,15]%, respectively. CONCLUSION: Observed advantages of autoplanning were clinically relevant and larger than reported in the literature. The latter is likely related to the multi-criterial nature of the applied autoplanning algorithm, with for each center a dedicated configuration that aims at plan improvements relative to its (clinical) training plans. Large variations among patients in differences between manVMAT and autoVMAT point at inconsistencies in manual planning.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Reported plan quality improvements with autoplanning of radiotherapy of the prostate and seminal vesicles are poor. A system for automated multi-criterial planning has been validated for this treatment in a large international multi-center study. The system is configured with training plans using a mechanism that strives for quality improvements relative to those plans. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Each of the four participating centers included thirty manually generated clinical Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy prostate plans (manVMAT). Ten plans were used for autoplanning training. The other twenty were compared with an automatically generated plan (autoVMAT). Plan evaluations considered dosimetric plan parameters and blinded side-by-side plan comparisons by clinicians. RESULTS: With equivalent Planning Target Volume (PTV) V95%, D2%, D98%, and dose homogeneity autoVMAT was overall superior for rectum with median differences of 3.4 Gy (p < 0.001) in Dmean, 4.0% (p < 0.001) in V60Gy, and 1.5% (p = 0.001) in V75Gy, and for bladder Dmean (0.9 Gy, p < 0.001). Also the clinicians' plan comparisons pointed at an overall preference for autoVMAT. Advantages of autoVMAT were highly treatment center- and patient-specific with overall ranges for differences in rectum Dmean and V60Gy of [-4,12] Gy and [-2,15]%, respectively. CONCLUSION: Observed advantages of autoplanning were clinically relevant and larger than reported in the literature. The latter is likely related to the multi-criterial nature of the applied autoplanning algorithm, with for each center a dedicated configuration that aims at plan improvements relative to its (clinical) training plans. Large variations among patients in differences between manVMAT and autoVMAT point at inconsistencies in manual planning.
Authors: Sophie Chiavassa; Igor Bessieres; Magali Edouard; Michel Mathot; Alexandra Moignier Journal: Br J Radiol Date: 2019-07-24 Impact factor: 3.039
Authors: Masoud Zarepisheh; Linda Hong; Ying Zhou; Jung Hun Oh; James G Mechalakos; Margie A Hunt; Gig S Mageras; Joseph O Deasy Journal: Med Phys Date: 2019-05-29 Impact factor: 4.071
Authors: Dale Roach; Geert Wortel; Cesar Ochoa; Henrik R Jensen; Eugene Damen; Philip Vial; Tomas Janssen; Christian Rønn Hansen Journal: Phys Imaging Radiat Oncol Date: 2019-04-24
Authors: Abdul Wahab M Sharfo; Linda Rossi; Maarten L P Dirkx; Sebastiaan Breedveld; Shafak Aluwini; Ben J M Heijmen Journal: Front Oncol Date: 2021-03-19 Impact factor: 6.244
Authors: Derek S Tsang; Grace Tsui; Chris McIntosh; Thomas Purdie; Glenn Bauman; Hitesh Dama; Normand Laperriere; Barbara-Ann Millar; David B Shultz; Sameera Ahmed; Mohammad Khandwala; David C Hodgson Journal: Radiat Oncol Date: 2022-01-06 Impact factor: 3.481
Authors: Rik Bijman; Linda Rossi; Tomas Janssen; Peter de Ruiter; Baukelien van Triest; Sebastiaan Breedveld; Jan-Jakob Sonke; Ben Heijmen Journal: Front Oncol Date: 2021-10-01 Impact factor: 6.244