Literature DB >> 9651029

An adaptive control algorithm for optimization of intensity modulated radiotherapy considering uncertainties in beam profiles, patient set-up and internal organ motion.

J Löf1, B K Lind, A Brahme.   

Abstract

A new general beam optimization algorithm for inverse treatment planning is presented. It utilizes a new formulation of the probability to achieve complication-free tumour control. The new formulation explicitly describes the dependence of the treatment outcome on the incident fluence distribution, the patient geometry, the radiobiological properties of the patient and the fractionation schedule. In order to account for both measured and non-measured positioning uncertainties, the algorithm is based on a combination of dynamic and stochastic optimization techniques. Because of the difficulty in measuring all aspects of the intra- and interfractional variations in the patient geometry, such as internal organ displacements and deformations, these uncertainties are primarily accounted for in the treatment planning process by intensity modulation using stochastic optimization. The information about the deviations from the nominal fluence profiles and the nominal position of the patient relative to the beam that is obtained by portal imaging during treatment delivery, is used in a feedback loop to automatically adjust the profiles and the location of the patient for all subsequent treatments. Based on the treatment delivered in previous fractions, the algorithm furnishes optimal corrections for the remaining dose delivery both with regard to the fluence profile and its position relative to the patient. By dynamically refining the beam configuration from fraction to fraction, the algorithm generates an optimal sequence of treatments that very effectively reduces the influence of systematic and random set-up uncertainties to minimize and almost eliminate their overall effect on the treatment. Computer simulations have shown that the present algorithm leads to a significant increase in the probability of uncomplicated tumour control compared with the simple classical approach of adding fixed set-up margins to the internal target volume.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1998        PMID: 9651029     DOI: 10.1088/0031-9155/43/6/018

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Phys Med Biol        ISSN: 0031-9155            Impact factor:   3.609


  11 in total

1.  Towards more optimal medical diagnosing with evolutionary algorithms.

Authors:  V Podgorelec; P Kokol
Journal:  J Med Syst       Date:  2001-06       Impact factor: 4.460

2.  Coverage-based treatment planning: optimizing the IMRT PTV to meet a CTV coverage criterion.

Authors:  J J Gordon; J V Siebers
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2009-03       Impact factor: 4.071

3.  The potential of helical tomotherapy in the treatment of head and neck cancer.

Authors:  Dirk Van Gestel; Dirk Verellen; Lien Van De Voorde; Bie de Ost; Geert De Kerf; Olivier Vanderveken; Carl Van Laer; Danielle Van den Weyngaert; Jan B Vermorken; Vincent Gregoire
Journal:  Oncologist       Date:  2013-05-30

4.  Beyond the margin recipe: the probability of correct target dosage and tumor control in the presence of a dose limiting structure.

Authors:  Marnix G Witte; Jan-Jakob Sonke; Jeffrey Siebers; Joseph O Deasy; Marcel van Herk
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2017-09-20       Impact factor: 3.609

5.  Coverage optimized planning: probabilistic treatment planning based on dose coverage histogram criteria.

Authors:  J J Gordon; N Sayah; E Weiss; J V Siebers
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2010-02       Impact factor: 4.071

6.  Comparisons of treatment optimization directly incorporating systematic patient setup uncertainty with a margin-based approach.

Authors:  Joseph A Moore; J James Gordon; Mitchell Anscher; Joaquin Silva; Jeffrey V Siebers
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2012-02       Impact factor: 4.071

Review 7.  Adaptive proton therapy.

Authors:  Harald Paganetti; Pablo Botas; Gregory C Sharp; Brian Winey
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2021-11-15       Impact factor: 3.609

8.  Comparisons of treatment optimization directly incorporating random patient setup uncertainty with a margin-based approach.

Authors:  Joseph A Moore; John J Gordon; Mitchell S Anscher; Jeffrey V Siebers
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2009-09       Impact factor: 4.071

9.  Magnetic resonance imaging for adaptive cobalt tomotherapy: A proposal.

Authors:  Tomas Kron; David Eyles; L John Schreiner; Jerry Battista
Journal:  J Med Phys       Date:  2006-10

10.  The perils of adapting to dose errors in radiation therapy.

Authors:  Velibor V Mišić; Timothy C Y Chan
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2015-05-05       Impact factor: 3.240

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.