Literature DB >> 34891150

Minimum-monitor-unit optimization via a stochastic coordinate descent method.

Jian-Feng Cai1, Ronald C Chen2, Junyi Fan1, Hao Gao2.   

Abstract

Objective. Deliverable proton spots are subject to the minimum monitor-unit (MMU) constraint. The MMU optimization problem with relatively large MMU threshold remains mathematically challenging due to its strong nonconvexity. However, the MMU optimization is fundamental to proton radiotherapy (RT), including efficient IMPT and proton arc delivery (ARC). This work aims to develop a new optimization algorithm that is effective in solving the MMU problem.Approach.Our new algorithm is primarily based on stochastic coordinate decent (SCD) method. It involves three major steps: first to decouple the determination of active sets for dose-volume-histogram (DVH) planning constraints from the MMU problem via iterative convex relaxation method; second to handle the nonconvexity of the MMU constraint via SCD to localize the index set of nonzero spots; third to solve convex subproblems projected to this convex set of nonzero spots via projected gradient descent method.Main results.Our new method SCD is validated and compared with alternating direction method of multipliers (ADMM) for IMPT and ARC. The results suggest SCD had better plan quality than ADMM, e.g. the improvement of conformal index (CI) from 0.56 to 0.69 during IMPT, and from 0.28 to 0.80 during ARC for the lung case. Moreover, SCD successfully handled the nonconvexity from large MMU threshold that ADMM failed to handle, in the sense that (1) the plan quality from ARC was worse than IMPT (e.g. CI was 0.28 with IMPT and 0.56 with ARC for the lung case), when ADMM was used; (2) in contrast, with SCD, ARC achieved better plan quality than IMPT (e.g. CI was 0.69 with IMPT and 0.80 with ARC for the lung case), which is compatible with more optimization degrees of freedom from ARC compared to IMPT.Significance. To the best of our knowledge, our new MMU optimization method via SCD can effectively handle the nonconvexity from large MMU threshold that none of the current methods can solve. Therefore, we have developed a unique MMU optimization algorithm via SCD that can be used for efficient IMPT, proton ARC, and other particle RT applications where large MMU threshold is desirable (e.g. for the delivery of high dose rates or/and a large number of spots).
© 2022 Institute of Physics and Engineering in Medicine.

Entities:  

Keywords:  IMPT; inverse optimization; proton therapy; treatment planning

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2022        PMID: 34891150      PMCID: PMC9295687          DOI: 10.1088/1361-6560/ac4212

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Phys Med Biol        ISSN: 0031-9155            Impact factor:   4.174


  19 in total

1.  Multicriteria VMAT optimization.

Authors:  David Craft; Dualta McQuaid; Jeremiah Wala; Wei Chen; Ehsan Salari; Thomas Bortfeld
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2012-02       Impact factor: 4.071

2.  Technical Note: Plan-delivery-time constrained inverse optimization method with minimum-MU-per-energy-layer (MMPEL) for efficient pencil beam scanning proton therapy.

Authors:  Hao Gao; Benjamin Clasie; Mark McDonald; Katja M Langen; Tian Liu; Yuting Lin
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2020-07-28       Impact factor: 4.071

3.  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

4.  Robust optimization in IMPT using quadratic objective functions to account for the minimum MU constraint.

Authors:  Jie Shan; Yu An; Martin Bues; Steven E Schild; Wei Liu
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2017-12-05       Impact factor: 4.071

5.  Intensity modulated proton therapy treatment planning using single-field optimization: the impact of monitor unit constraints on plan quality.

Authors:  X R Zhu; N Sahoo; X Zhang; D Robertson; H Li; S Choi; A K Lee; M T Gillin
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2010-03       Impact factor: 4.071

6.  Robust fluence map optimization via alternating direction method of multipliers with empirical parameter optimization.

Authors:  Hao Gao
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2016-03-17       Impact factor: 3.609

7.  A Greedy reassignment algorithm for the PBS minimum monitor unit constraint.

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

8.  Minimum-MU and sparse-energy-layer (MMSEL) constrained inverse optimization method for efficiently deliverable PBS plans.

Authors:  Yuting Lin; Benjamin Clasie; Tian Liu; Mark McDonald; Katja M Langen; Hao Gao
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2019-10-10       Impact factor: 3.609

9.  SDDRO-joint: simultaneous dose and dose rate optimization with the joint use of transmission beams and Bragg peaks for FLASH proton therapy.

Authors:  Yuting Lin; Bowen Lin; Shujun Fu; Michael M Folkerts; Eric Abel; Jeffrey Bradley; Hao Gao
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2021-06-14       Impact factor: 4.174

Review 10.  Ultra-High Dose Rate (FLASH) Radiotherapy: Silver Bullet or Fool's Gold?

Authors:  Joseph D Wilson; Ester M Hammond; Geoff S Higgins; Kristoffer Petersson
Journal:  Front Oncol       Date:  2020-01-17       Impact factor: 6.244

View more
  1 in total

1.  Energy layer optimization via energy matrix regularization for proton spot-scanning arc therapy.

Authors:  Gezhi Zhang; Haozheng Shen; Yuting Lin; Ronald C Chen; Yong Long; Hao Gao
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2022-07-25       Impact factor: 4.506

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.