PURPOSE: Pancreas stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) treatment planning requires planners to make sequential, time-consuming interactions with the treatment planning system to reach the optimal dose distribution. We sought to develop a reinforcement learning (RL)-based planning bot to systematically address complex tradeoffs and achieve high plan quality consistently and efficiently. METHODS AND MATERIALS: The focus of pancreas SBRT planning is finding a balance between organ-at-risk sparing and planning target volume (PTV) coverage. Planners evaluate dose distributions and make planning adjustments to optimize PTV coverage while adhering to organ-at-risk dose constraints. We formulated such interactions between the planner and treatment planning system into a finite-horizon RL model. First, planning status features were evaluated based on human planners' experience and defined as planning states. Second, planning actions were defined to represent steps that planners would commonly implement to address different planning needs. Finally, we derived a reward system based on an objective function guided by physician-assigned constraints. The planning bot trained itself with 48 plans augmented from 16 previously treated patients, and generated plans for 24 cases in a separate validation set. RESULTS: All 24 bot-generated plans achieved similar PTV coverages compared with clinical plans while satisfying all clinical planning constraints. Moreover, the knowledge learned by the bot could be visualized and interpreted as consistent with human planning knowledge, and the knowledge maps learned in separate training sessions were consistent, indicating reproducibility of the learning process. CONCLUSIONS: We developed a planning bot that generates high-quality treatment plans for pancreas SBRT. We demonstrated that the training phase of the bot is tractable and reproducible, and the knowledge acquired is interpretable. As a result, the RL planning bot can potentially be incorporated into the clinical workflow and reduce planning inefficiencies.
PURPOSE: Pancreas stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) treatment planning requires planners to make sequential, time-consuming interactions with the treatment planning system to reach the optimal dose distribution. We sought to develop a reinforcement learning (RL)-based planning bot to systematically address complex tradeoffs and achieve high plan quality consistently and efficiently. METHODS AND MATERIALS: The focus of pancreas SBRT planning is finding a balance between organ-at-risk sparing and planning target volume (PTV) coverage. Planners evaluate dose distributions and make planning adjustments to optimize PTV coverage while adhering to organ-at-risk dose constraints. We formulated such interactions between the planner and treatment planning system into a finite-horizon RL model. First, planning status features were evaluated based on human planners' experience and defined as planning states. Second, planning actions were defined to represent steps that planners would commonly implement to address different planning needs. Finally, we derived a reward system based on an objective function guided by physician-assigned constraints. The planning bot trained itself with 48 plans augmented from 16 previously treated patients, and generated plans for 24 cases in a separate validation set. RESULTS: All 24 bot-generated plans achieved similar PTV coverages compared with clinical plans while satisfying all clinical planning constraints. Moreover, the knowledge learned by the bot could be visualized and interpreted as consistent with human planning knowledge, and the knowledge maps learned in separate training sessions were consistent, indicating reproducibility of the learning process. CONCLUSIONS: We developed a planning bot that generates high-quality treatment plans for pancreas SBRT. We demonstrated that the training phase of the bot is tractable and reproducible, and the knowledge acquired is interpretable. As a result, the RL planning bot can potentially be incorporated into the clinical workflow and reduce planning inefficiencies.
Authors: Susanna W L de Geus; Mariam F Eskander; Gyulnara G Kasumova; Sing Chau Ng; Tara S Kent; Joseph D Mancias; Mark P Callery; Anand Mahadevan; Jennifer F Tseng Journal: Cancer Date: 2017-07-14 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Jim Zhong; Kirtesh Patel; Jeffrey Switchenko; Richard J Cassidy; William A Hall; Theresa Gillespie; Pretesh R Patel; David Kooby; Jerome Landry Journal: Cancer Date: 2017-05-10 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Jean-Claude M Rwigema; Simul D Parikh; Dwight E Heron; Michael Howell; Herbert Zeh; A James Moser; Nathan Bahary; Annette Quinn; Steven A Burton Journal: Am J Clin Oncol Date: 2011-02 Impact factor: 2.339
Authors: Binbin Wu; Francesco Ricchetti; Giuseppe Sanguineti; Michael Kazhdan; Patricio Simari; Robert Jacques; Russell Taylor; Todd McNutt Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2010-08-26 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Joseph M Herman; Daniel T Chang; Karyn A Goodman; Avani S Dholakia; Siva P Raman; Amy Hacker-Prietz; Christine A Iacobuzio-Donahue; Mary E Griffith; Timothy M Pawlik; Jonathan S Pai; Eileen O'Reilly; George A Fisher; Aaron T Wild; Lauren M Rosati; Lei Zheng; Christopher L Wolfgang; Daniel A Laheru; Laurie A Columbo; Elizabeth A Sugar; Albert C Koong Journal: Cancer Date: 2014-12-23 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Marie K Gurka; Sean P Collins; Rebecca Slack; Gary Tse; Aline Charabaty; Lisa Ley; Liam Berzcel; Siyuan Lei; Simeng Suy; Nadim Haddad; Reena Jha; Colin D Johnson; Patrick Jackson; John L Marshall; Michael J Pishvaian Journal: Radiat Oncol Date: 2013-03-01 Impact factor: 3.481
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: Ana Barragán-Montero; Umair Javaid; Gilmer Valdés; Dan Nguyen; Paul Desbordes; Benoit Macq; Siri Willems; Liesbeth Vandewinckele; Mats Holmström; Fredrik Löfman; Steven Michiels; Kevin Souris; Edmond Sterpin; John A Lee Journal: Phys Med Date: 2021-05-09 Impact factor: 2.685