Literature DB >> 35523130

The development of a deep reinforcement learning network for dose-volume-constrained treatment planning in prostate cancer intensity modulated radiotherapy.

Damon Sprouts1, Yin Gao2, Chao Wang2, Xun Jia2, Chenyang Shen2, Yujie Chi1.   

Abstract

Although commercial treatment planning systems (TPSs) can automatically solve the optimization problem for treatment planning, human planners need to define and adjust the planning objectives/constraints to obtain clinically acceptable plans. Such a process is labor-intensive and time-consuming. In this work, we show an end-to-end study to train a deep reinforcement learning (DRL) based virtual treatment planner (VTP) that can behave like a human to operate a dose-volume constrained treatment plan optimization engine following the parameters used in Eclipse TPS for high-quality treatment planning. We considered the prostate cancer IMRT treatment plan as the testbed. The VTP took the dose-volume histogram (DVH) of a plan as input and predicted the optimal strategy for constraint adjustment to improve the plan quality. The training of VTP followed the state-of-the-art Q-learning framework. Experience replay was implemented with epsilon-greedy search to explore the impacts of taking different actions on a large number of automatically generated plans, from which an optimal policy can be learned. Since a major computational cost in training was to solve the plan optimization problem repeatedly, we implemented a graphical processing unit (GPU)-based technique to improve the efficiency by 2-fold. Upon the completion of training, the established VTP was deployed to plan for an independent set of 50 testing patient cases. Connecting the established VTP with the Eclipse workstation via the application programming interface, we tested the performance the VTP in operating Eclipse TPS for automatic treatment planning with another two independent patient cases. Like a human planner, VTP kept adjusting the planning objectives/constraints to improve plan quality until the plan was acceptable or the maximum number of adjustment steps was reached under both scenarios. The generated plans were evaluated using the ProKnow scoring system. The mean plan score (± standard deviation) of the 50 testing cases were improved from 6.18 ± 1.75 to 8.14 ± 1.27 by the VTP, with 9 being the maximal score. As for the two cases under Eclipse dose optimization, the plan scores were improved from 8 to 8.4 and 8.7 respectively by the VTP. These results indicated that the proposed DRL-based VTP was able to operate the in-house dose-volume constrained TPS and Eclipse TPS to automatically generate high-quality treatment plans for prostate cancer IMRT.
© 2022 IOP Publishing Ltd.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Q learning; automatic treatment planning; deep learning; reinforcement learning; treatment planning optimization

Mesh:

Year:  2022        PMID: 35523130      PMCID: PMC9297721          DOI: 10.1088/2057-1976/ac6d82

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Biomed Phys Eng Express        ISSN: 2057-1976


  24 in total

Review 1.  Intensity-modulated radiotherapy: current status and issues of interest.

Authors: 
Journal:  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys       Date:  2001-11-15       Impact factor: 7.038

2.  Knowledge-based IMRT treatment planning for prostate cancer.

Authors:  Vorakarn Chanyavanich; Shiva K Das; William R Lee; Joseph Y Lo
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2011-05       Impact factor: 4.071

3.  Dosimetric comparison of RapidPlan and manually optimized plans in volumetric modulated arc therapy for prostate cancer.

Authors:  Kazuki Kubo; Hajime Monzen; Kentaro Ishii; Mikoto Tamura; Ryu Kawamorita; Iori Sumida; Hirokazu Mizuno; Yasumasa Nishimura
Journal:  Phys Med       Date:  2017-07-10       Impact factor: 2.685

Review 4.  Automation in intensity modulated radiotherapy treatment planning-a review of recent innovations.

Authors:  Mohammad Hussein; Ben J M Heijmen; Dirk Verellen; Andrew Nisbet
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2018-09-04       Impact factor: 3.039

5.  Intelligent inverse treatment planning via deep reinforcement learning, a proof-of-principle study in high dose-rate brachytherapy for cervical cancer.

Authors:  Chenyang Shen; Yesenia Gonzalez; Peter Klages; Nan Qin; Hyunuk Jung; Liyuan Chen; Dan Nguyen; Steve B Jiang; Xun Jia
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2019-05-29       Impact factor: 3.609

6.  Comparison of Planning Quality and Efficiency Between Conventional and Knowledge-based Algorithms in Nasopharyngeal Cancer Patients Using Intensity Modulated Radiation Therapy.

Authors:  Amy T Y Chang; Albert W M Hung; Fion W K Cheung; Michael C H Lee; Oscar S H Chan; Helen Philips; Yung-Tang Cheng; Wai-Tong Ng
Journal:  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys       Date:  2016-02-12       Impact factor: 7.038

7.  Including robustness in multi-criteria optimization for intensity-modulated proton therapy.

Authors:  Wei Chen; Jan Unkelbach; Alexei Trofimov; Thomas Madden; Hanne Kooy; Thomas Bortfeld; David Craft
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2012-01-06       Impact factor: 3.609

8.  On the pre-clinical validation of a commercial model-based optimisation engine: application to volumetric modulated arc therapy for patients with lung or prostate cancer.

Authors:  Antonella Fogliata; Francesca Belosi; Alessandro Clivio; Piera Navarria; Giorgia Nicolini; Marta Scorsetti; Eugenio Vanetti; Luca Cozzi
Journal:  Radiother Oncol       Date:  2014-11-21       Impact factor: 6.280

9.  Operating a treatment planning system using a deep-reinforcement learning-based virtual treatment planner for prostate cancer intensity-modulated radiation therapy treatment planning.

Authors:  Chenyang Shen; Dan Nguyen; Liyuan Chen; Yesenia Gonzalez; Rafe McBeth; Nan Qin; Steve B Jiang; Xun Jia
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2020-03-28       Impact factor: 4.071

10.  Is it possible for knowledge-based planning to improve intensity modulated radiation therapy plan quality for planners with different planning experiences in left-sided breast cancer patients?

Authors:  Juanqi Wang; Weigang Hu; Zhaozhi Yang; Xiaohui Chen; Zhiqiang Wu; Xiaoli Yu; Xiaomao Guo; Saiquan Lu; Kaixuan Li; Gongyi Yu
Journal:  Radiat Oncol       Date:  2017-05-22       Impact factor: 3.481

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.