Feasibility Study of Beam Angle Optimization Based on Scripts in Automated-planning for Liver Cancer / 中国医疗器械杂志

OBJECTIVE@#To study the feasibility and potential benefits of beam angle optimization (BAO) to automated planning in liver cancer.@*METHODS@#An approach of beam angle sampling is proposed to implement BAO along with the module Auto-planning in treatment planning system (TPS) Pinnacle. An in-house developed plan quality metric (PQM) is taken as the preferred evaluating method during the sampling. The process is driven automatically by in-house made Pinnacle scripts both in sampling and scoring. In addition, dosimetry analysis and physician's opinion are also performed as the supplementary and compared with the result of PQM.@*RESULTS@#It is revealed by the numerical analysis of PQM scores that only 15% patients whose superior trials evaluated by PQM are also the initial trials. Gantry optimization can bring benefit to plan quality along with auto-planning in liver cancer. Similar results are provided by both dose comparison and physician's opinion.@*CONCLUSIONS@#It is possible to introduce a full automated approach of beam angle optimization to automated planning process. The advantages of this procedure can be observed both in numerical analysis and physician's opinion.

Quantitative evaluation of radiotherapy plan in precise external beam radiotherapy process management for cervical cancer / 南方医科大学学报

OBJECTIVE@#To identify the problems in clinical radiotherapy planning for cervical cancer through quantitative evaluation of the radiotherapy plans to improve the quality of the plans and the radiotherapy process.@*METHODS@#We selected the clinically approved and administered radiotherapy plans for 227 cervical cancer patients undergoing external radiotherapy at Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center from May, 2019 to January, 2022. These plans were transferred from the treatment planning system to the Plan IQTM workstation. The plan quality metrics were determined based on the guidelines of ICRU83 report, the GEC-ESTRO Working Group, and the clinical requirements of our center and were approved by a senior clinician. The problems in the radiotherapy plans were summarized and documented, and those with low scores were re-planned and the differences were analyzed.@*RESULTS@#We identified several problems in the 277 plans by quantitative evaluation. Inappropriate target volume selection (with scores < 60) in terms of GTV, PGTV (CI) and PGTV (V66 Gy) was found in 10.6%, 65.2%, and 1% of the plans, respectively; and the PGTV (CI), GTV, and PCTV (D98%, HI) had a score of 0 in 0.4%, 10.1%, 0.4%, 0.4% of the plans, respectively. The problems in the organs at risk (OARs) involved mainly the intestines (the rectum, small intestine, and colon), found in 20.7% of the plans, and in occasional cases, the rectum, small intestine, colon, kidney, and the femoral head had a score of 0. Senior planners showed significantly better performance than junior planners in PGTV (V60 Gy, D98%), PCTV (CI), and CTV (D98%) (P≤0.046) especially in terms of spinal cord and small intestine protection (P≤0.034). The bowel (the rectum, small intestine and colon) dose was significantly lower in the prone plans than supine plans (P < 0.05), and targets coverage all met clinical requirements. Twenty radiotherapy plans with low scores were selected for re-planning. The re-planned plans had significantly higher GTV (Dmin) and PTV (V45 Gy, D98%) (P < 0.05) with significantly reduced doses of the small intestines (V40 Gy vs V30 Gy), the colon (V40 Gy vs V30 Gy), and the bladder (D35%) (P < 0.05).@*CONCLUSION@#Quantitative evaluation of the radiotherapy plans can not only improve the quality of radiotherapy plan, but also facilitate risk management of the radiotherapy process.

Personalized quantitative evaluation of the quality of radiotherapy plans based on dose prediction / 中华放射医学与防护杂志

Objective:To develop a dose prediction-based quantitative evaluation method of the quality of radiotherapy plans, and to verify the clinical feasibility and clinical value of the method .Methods:The 3D U-Netwas trained using the radiotherapy plans of 45 rectal cancer cases that were formulated by physicists with more than five years of radiotherapy experience. After obtaining 3D dose distribution using 3D U-Net prediction, this study established the plan quality metrics of intensity modulated radiotherapy(IMRT) rectal cancer radiotherapy plans using dose-volume histogram(DVH) indexes of dose prediction. Then, the initial scores of rectal cancer radiotherapy plans were determined.Taking the predicted dose as the optimization goal, the radiotherapy plans were optimized and scored again. The clinical significance of this scoring method was verified by comparing the scores and dosimetric parameters of the 15 rectal cancer cases before and after optimization.Results:The radiotherapy plans before and after optimization all met the clinical dose requirements. The total scores were(77.21±9.74) before optimization, and (88.78±4.92) after optimization. Therefore, the optimized radiotherapy planswon increased scores with a statistically significant difference( t=-4.105, P<0.05). Compared to the plans before optimization, the optimized plans show decreased Dmax of all organs at risk to different extents. Moreover, the Dmax, V107%, and HI of PTV and the Dmax of the bladder decreased in the optimized plans, with statistically significant differences ( t=2.346-5.771, P<0.05). There was no statistically significant difference in other indexes before and after optimization ( P>0.05).The quality of the optimized plans were improved to a certain extent. Conclusions:This study proposed a dose prediction-based quantitative evaluation method of the quality of radiotherapy plans. It can be used for the effective personalized elevation of the quality of radiotherapy plans, which is beneficial to effectively compare and review the quality of clinical plans determined by different physicists and provide personalized dose indicators. Moreover, it can provide great guidance for the formulation of clinical therapy plans.

Quantitative comparison of volumetric-modulated arc therapy plans for liver cancer using flattening filter-free and flattening filter modes based on plan quality metric ( PQM) / 中华放射医学与防护杂志

Objective To quantitatively assess the plan quality of conventional fractionated volumetric modulated arc therapy ( VMAT ) plans for liver cancer treatments using flattening filter-free (FFF) and flattening filter (FF) modes based on plan quality metric (PQM). Methods A total of ten patients with liver tumor were selected. The patients were planned in FF and FFF mode of 6 MV X-ray respectively. The dose distribution of the planning target volume ( PTV) and the organ at risk ( OAR) were evaluated, and the monitor units ( MUs) and the beam on time ( BoT) were compared. According to the clinical requirements, a PQM with 16 submetrics was defined to evaluate the plan quality of the two modes. Results The maximal dose of FFF plan was less than that of FF plan (t =3.828, P <0.05). The normalized volume of 5 Gy ( V5 ) and mean dose ( Dmean ) of the normal liver of FFF plan were lower than those of the FF plan (t=2.716, 3.007, P<0.05). The average MU of FFF plan [(574 ± 130) MU] was higher than that of FF plan [(518 ± 81) MU](t= -2. 782,P<0. 05), while the average BoT of FFF plan [(108 ±36)s] was significantly lower than that of FF plan [(160 ±29) s](t=6.767,P<0.05). The score of FFF plan was higher than that of FF plan (t= -2.746, P<0.05). Conclusions FFF mode can better protect the OAR at low dose levels. The MU of FFF mode plan were higher, but the beam on time was significantly lower than FF mode plan. With reference to the PQM evaluation criteria, the overall plan quality of the FFF mode was slightly higher.

Evaluation of plan quality between two treatment planning systems for volumetric modulated arc therapy / 中华放射肿瘤学杂志

Objective To investigate the plan quality between two treatment planning systems (TPSs) for volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT). Methods VMAT plans based on Varian Eclipse and Philips Pinnacle TPS were designed for 10 cervical cancer patients (2, 3 Arcs) and 10 prostate cancer patients ( 1, 2 Arcs) . The delivery system of VMAT was Varian ClinaciX machine, and RapidArc was used. The treatment plan quality between the two TPSs was evaluated based on dose distribution, delivery efficiency, and parameter settings. The differences between the two TPSs were compared using paired t-test. Results For cervical cancer patients, the 2-Arc VMAT plans based on the Pinnacle was slightly better than those based on the Eclipse in terms of the conformal index ( CI) of planning target volume ( PTV) , rectum V30 and V40 , and bladder V30 and V40 , and the homogeneity index ( HI) of PTV and PTV1 as well as CI of PTV1 in the Eclips were slightly better than those in the Pinnacle( P<005) Pinnacle were slightly worse than those in the Eclipse ( P>005) . The number of monitor units with 2-Arcs and 3-Arcs plans of the Eclipse was significantly smaller than those in the Pinnacle (P<005). For prostate cancer patients, The 1-arc VMAT plans of the Pinnacle TPS were slightly superior to those of the Eclipse TPS in terms of the HI of PTV, rectumV30 and V40 , and bladderV30 and V40 , but the former was slight inferior to the latter in terms of the CI of PTV (P<005). The number of monitor units of 1-arc and 2-Arcs plans showed no significant difference between the two TPSs (P>005). Conclusions For patients with cervical cancer and prostate cancer, the VMAT plans based on Varian Eclipse and Philips Pinnacle TPS can achieve a clinically acceptable dose distribution and show a little difference in the treatment plan quality. However, we will still need more cases to further study and determine the performance characteristics of the commercial TPSs for optimizing VMAT.

Evaluation of plan quality between two treatment planning systems for volumetric modulated arc therapy / 中华放射肿瘤学杂志

Objective To investigate the plan quality between two treatment planning systems (TPSs) for volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT). Methods VMAT plans based on Varian Eclipse and Philips Pinnacle TPS were designed for 10 cervical cancer patients (2, 3 Arcs) and 10 prostate cancer patients ( 1, 2 Arcs) . The delivery system of VMAT was Varian ClinaciX machine, and RapidArc was used. The treatment plan quality between the two TPSs was evaluated based on dose distribution, delivery efficiency, and parameter settings. The differences between the two TPSs were compared using paired t-test. Results For cervical cancer patients, the 2-Arc VMAT plans based on the Pinnacle was slightly better than those based on the Eclipse in terms of the conformal index ( CI) of planning target volume ( PTV) , rectum V30 and V40 , and bladder V30 and V40 , and the homogeneity index ( HI) of PTV and PTV1 as well as CI of PTV1 in the Eclips were slightly better than those in the Pinnacle( P<005) Pinnacle were slightly worse than those in the Eclipse ( P>005) . The number of monitor units with 2-Arcs and 3-Arcs plans of the Eclipse was significantly smaller than those in the Pinnacle (P<005). For prostate cancer patients, The 1-arc VMAT plans of the Pinnacle TPS were slightly superior to those of the Eclipse TPS in terms of the HI of PTV, rectumV30 and V40 , and bladderV30 and V40 , but the former was slight inferior to the latter in terms of the CI of PTV (P<005). The number of monitor units of 1-arc and 2-Arcs plans showed no significant difference between the two TPSs (P>005). Conclusions For patients with cervical cancer and prostate cancer, the VMAT plans based on Varian Eclipse and Philips Pinnacle TPS can achieve a clinically acceptable dose distribution and show a little difference in the treatment plan quality. However, we will still need more cases to further study and determine the performance characteristics of the commercial TPSs for optimizing VMAT.

Evaluation of the quality and efficiency of SRT plans for intracranial tumors using Fixed and Iris collimators of CyberKnife / 中华放射肿瘤学杂志

Objective To discuss and evaluate the dosimetric characteristics of different plans implementing stereotactic radiotherapy(SRT)for intracranial tumors using Fixed and Iris collimators of CyberKnife VSI.Methods Twenty patients with intracranial tumors were selected and divided into group A with a small target volume(≤30 cm3)and group B with a large target volume(≥30 cm3). There were 10 patients in each group,and the prescribed dose to the target was 21 Gy in 3 fractions. For each patient, two treatment plans were designed using Fixed and Iris collimators. By analyzing the dosimetric parameters such as conformity index(CI),homogeneity index(HI), gradient index(GI), gradient score index(GSI), and organs at risk (OAR),the quality and efficiency of the plans were evaluated in order to discuss the beam characteristics for two sets of collimators. The difference was analyzed with the paired t-test. Results The mean time of Iris plan for delivering was significantly less than that of Fixed plan(group A:P=0.001;group B:P=0.000). In group B,the peripheral dose(20% and 10% of the prescribed dose)volumes of Fixed plan were significantly less than those of Iris plan(P=0.001 and 0.009). For OAR,D minof the visual pathway and D meanor D minof the eyeball in group B were significantly different between Fixed and Iris plans(all P<0.05), while in group A, only D minof the optic chiasm was significantly different between the two plans(P=0.043). For the other parameters of targets,there were no significant differences between Fixed and Iris plans in both groups(all P>0.05). Conclusions Apart from less treatment time in the Iris plan, there are no significant dosimetric differences between the two collimator plans of CyberKnife VSI in treating small intracranial tumor. For the large and complex tumor,although Iris plan meets the requirement for OAR dose constraints,its low-dose volumes are larger than those of Fixed plan. Further studies of the dosimetric characteristics in CyberKnife should be done.

Comparison of planning parameter selection for volumetric modulated arc therapy of nasopharyngeal carcinoma in two different treatment planning systems / 中华放射肿瘤学杂志

Objective To investigate the impact of planning parameter settings on plan quality and delivery efficiency of VMAT for nasopharyngeal carcinoma with two treatment planning systems (TPS),as references for clinic plan optimization. Methods 25 patients with nasopharyngeal carcinoma were selected and planned for SIB?VMAT treatment. The same planning aims were used in the two kinds of TPS ( TPS?1 and TPS?2). Multiple planning parameters were set for plan optimization. Dose distribution to the target volumes and organs at risk,monitor unit ( MU) and delivery time were compared. Paired t?test or one?way ANOVA was used for the data which was in accordance to normal distribution;otherwise, nonparametric Wilcoxon signed rank test or nonparametric Friedman test was used. Results More segments lead to better plan quality and less MU but longer delivery time ( Minor impact was observed when segment number was larger than 120) in TPS?1,while it had little impact on both plan quality and delivery efficiency in TPS?2. Comparing to single?arc plans,dual?arc VMAT achieved no significant benefit in plan quality but had more MU and longer delivery time in TPS?1 ( P= 0?000 ) . However, dual?arc VMAT plans had better dose distribution in TPS?2, decreased the maximum and mean dose for spinal cord in 3?9% and 13?7%respectively (P=0?000,0?000).Changing the settings of maximum or minimum dose rate did not affect the plan quality in both of the tested TPSs. Increasing the maximum or minimum dose rate reduced the delivery time but the latter increased the number of MU ( P=0?000,0?000) . Conclusions VMAT plan quality and delivery efficiency is affected significantly and differently by planning parameter settings for two TPSs. Trial test should be conducted for different TPS to determine the optimal parameter settings.