Literature DB >> 32356335

Automating proton treatment planning with beam angle selection using Bayesian optimization.

Vicki T Taasti1, Linda Hong1, Jin Sup Andy Shim2, Joseph O Deasy1, Masoud Zarepisheh1.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To present a fully automated treatment planning process for proton therapy including beam angle selection using a novel Bayesian optimization approach and previously developed constrained hierarchical fluence optimization method.
METHODS: We adapted our in-house automated intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) treatment planning system, which is based on constrained hierarchical optimization and referred to as ECHO (expedited constrained hierarchical optimization), for proton therapy. To couple this to beam angle selection, we propose using a novel Bayesian approach. By integrating ECHO with this Bayesian beam selection approach, we obtain a fully automated treatment planning framework including beam angle selection. Bayesian optimization is a global optimization technique which only needs to search a small fraction of the search space for slowly varying objective functions (i.e., smooth functions). Expedited constrained hierarchical optimization is run for some initial beam angle candidates and the resultant treatment plan for each beam configuration is rated using a clinically relevant treatment score function. Bayesian optimization iteratively predicts the treatment score for not-yet-evaluated candidates to find the best candidate to be optimized next with ECHO. We tested this technique on five head-and-neck (HN) patients with two coplanar beams. In addition, tests were performed with two noncoplanar and three coplanar beams for two patients.
RESULTS: For the two coplanar configurations, the Bayesian optimization found the optimal beam configuration after running ECHO for, at most, 4% of all potential configurations (23 iterations) for all patients (range: 2%-4%). Compared with the beam configurations chosen by the planner, the optimal configurations reduced the mandible maximum dose by 6.6 Gy and high dose to the unspecified normal tissues by 3.8 Gy, on average. For the two noncoplanar and three coplanar beam configurations, the algorithm converged after 45 iterations (examining <1% of all potential configurations).
CONCLUSIONS: A fully automated and efficient treatment planning process for proton therapy, including beam angle optimization was developed. The algorithm automatically generates high-quality plans with optimal beam angle configuration by combining Bayesian optimization and ECHO. As the Bayesian optimization is capable of handling complex nonconvex functions, the treatment score function which is used in the algorithm to evaluate the dose distribution corresponding to each beam configuration can contain any clinically relevant metric.
© 2020 American Association of Physicists in Medicine.

Entities:  

Keywords:  automated treatment planning; bayesian optimization; beam angle optimization; constrained optimization; proton treatment planning

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2020        PMID: 32356335      PMCID: PMC7429260          DOI: 10.1002/mp.14215

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


  23 in total

1.  Selection of beam orientations in intensity-modulated radiation therapy using single-beam indices and integer programming.

Authors:  Warren D D'Souza; Robert R Meyer; Leyuan Shi
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2004-08-07       Impact factor: 3.609

2.  IMRT treatment planning based on prioritizing prescription goals.

Authors:  Jan J Wilkens; James R Alaly; Konstantin Zakarian; Wade L Thorstad; Joseph O Deasy
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2007-02-27       Impact factor: 3.609

3.  Prioritized optimization in intensity modulated proton therapy.

Authors:  Marita Falkinger; Stefan Schell; Johannes Müller; Jan J Wilkens
Journal:  Z Med Phys       Date:  2011-06-30       Impact factor: 4.820

4.  Development of the open-source dose calculation and optimization toolkit matRad.

Authors:  Hans-Peter Wieser; Eduardo Cisternas; Niklas Wahl; Silke Ulrich; Alexander Stadler; Henning Mescher; Lucas-Raphael Müller; Thomas Klinge; Hubert Gabrys; Lucas Burigo; Andrea Mairani; Swantje Ecker; Benjamin Ackermann; Malte Ellerbrock; Katia Parodi; Oliver Jäkel; Mark Bangert
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2017-05-12       Impact factor: 4.071

5.  Predicting dose-volume histograms for organs-at-risk in IMRT planning.

Authors:  Lindsey M Appenzoller; Jeff M Michalski; Wade L Thorstad; Sasa Mutic; Kevin L Moore
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2012-12       Impact factor: 4.071

6.  The Cancer Imaging Archive (TCIA): maintaining and operating a public information repository.

Authors:  Kenneth Clark; Bruce Vendt; Kirk Smith; John Freymann; Justin Kirby; Paul Koppel; Stephen Moore; Stanley Phillips; David Maffitt; Michael Pringle; Lawrence Tarbox; Fred Prior
Journal:  J Digit Imaging       Date:  2013-12       Impact factor: 4.056

7.  Robust beam orientation optimization for intensity-modulated proton therapy.

Authors:  Wenbo Gu; Ryan Neph; Dan Ruan; Wei Zou; Lei Dong; Ke Sheng
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2019-06-26       Impact factor: 4.071

8.  Uncertainty incorporated beam angle optimization for IMPT treatment planning.

Authors:  Wenhua Cao; Gino J Lim; Andrew Lee; Yupeng Li; Wei Liu; X Ronald Zhu; Xiaodong Zhang
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2012-08       Impact factor: 4.071

9.  Automated proton treatment planning with robust optimization using constrained hierarchical optimization.

Authors:  Vicki T Taasti; Linda Hong; Joseph O Deasy; Masoud Zarepisheh
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2020-04-13       Impact factor: 4.071

10.  On the gEUD biological optimization objective for organs at risk in Photon Optimizer of Eclipse treatment planning system.

Authors:  Antonella Fogliata; Stephen Thompson; Antonella Stravato; Stefano Tomatis; Marta Scorsetti; Luca Cozzi
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2017-11-20       Impact factor: 2.102

View more
  3 in total

1.  Automated and Clinically Optimal Treatment Planning for Cancer Radiotherapy.

Authors:  Masoud Zarepisheh; Linda Hong; Ying Zhou; Qijie Huang; Jie Yang; Gourav Jhanwar; Hai D Pham; Pinar Dursun; Pengpeng Zhang; Margie A Hunt; Gig S Mageras; Jonathan T Yang; Yoshiya Yamada; Joseph O Deasy
Journal:  INFORMS J Appl Anal       Date:  2022-02-01

2.  A reinforcement learning application of a guided Monte Carlo Tree Search algorithm for beam orientation selection in radiation therapy.

Authors:  Azar Sadeghnejad-Barkousaraie; Gyanendra Bohara; Steve Jiang; Dan Nguyen
Journal:  Mach Learn Sci Technol       Date:  2021-05-13

3.  Influence of Beam Angle on Normal Tissue Complication Probability of Knowledge-Based Head and Neck Cancer Proton Planning.

Authors:  Roni Hytönen; Reynald Vanderstraeten; Max Dahele; Wilko F A R Verbakel
Journal:  Cancers (Basel)       Date:  2022-06-09       Impact factor: 6.575

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.