Applying mixed-integer linear programming to the non-coplanar beam angle optimization of intensity-modulated radiotherapy for liver cancer.

Background: Currently, intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) is commonly used in radiotherapy clinics. However, designing a treatment plan with multiple beam angles depends on the experience of human planners, and is mostly achieved using a trial-and-error approach. It is preferrable but challenging to solve this issue automatically and mathematically using an optimization approach. The goal of this study is to develop a mixed-integer linear programming (MILP) approach for the beam angle optimization (BAO) of non-coplanar IMRT for liver cancer. Methods: MILP models for the BAO of both coplanar and non-coplanar IMRT treatment plans were developed. The beam angles of the IMRT plans were first selected by the MILP model built using mathematical optimization software. Next, the IMRT plans with the selected beam angles was created in a commercial treatment planning system. Finally, the fluence map and dose distribution of the IMRT plans were generated under pre-defined dose-volume constraints. The IMRT plans of 10 liver cancer patients previously treated at our institute were used to assessed the proposed MILP models. For each patient, both coplanar and non-coplanar IMRT plans with beam angles optimized by the MILP models were compared with the IMRT plan clinically approved by physicians. Results: The MILP model-guided IMRT plans showed reduced doses for most of the organs at risk (OARs). Compared with the IMRT plans clinically approved by physicians, the doses for the spinal cord (28.5 vs. 36.1, P=0.001<0.05) and liver (27.6 vs. 29.1, P=0.005<0.05) decreased significantly in the IMRT plans with non-coplanar beams selected by the MILP models. Conclusions: The MILP model is an effective tool for the BAO in coplanar and non-coplanar IMRT treatment planning. It facilitates the automation of IMRT treatment planning for current high-precision radiotherapy.

Automatic planning for functional lung avoidance radiotherapy based on function-guided beam angle selection and plan optimization.

Objective.This study aims to develop a fully automatic planning framework for functional lung avoidance radiotherapy (AP-FLART).Approach.The AP-FLART integrates a dosimetric score-based beam angle selection method and a meta-optimization-based plan optimization method, both of which incorporate lung function information to guide dose redirection from high functional lung (HFL) to low functional lung (LFL). It is applicable to both contour-based FLART (cFLART) and voxel-based FLART (vFLART) optimization options. A cohort of 18 lung cancer patient cases underwent planning-CT and SPECT perfusion scans were collected. AP-FLART was applied to generate conventional RT (ConvRT), cFLART, and vFLART plans for all cases. We compared automatic against manual ConvRT plans as well as automatic ConvRT against FLART plans, to evaluate the effectiveness of AP-FLART. Ablation studies were performed to evaluate the contribution of function-guided beam angle selection and plan optimization to dose redirection.Main results.Automatic ConvRT plans generated by AP-FLART exhibited similar quality compared to manual counterparts. Furthermore, compared to automatic ConvRT plans, HFL mean dose,V20, andV5were significantly reduced by 1.13 Gy (p< .001), 2.01% (p< .001), and 6.66% (p< .001) respectively for cFLART plans. Besides, vFLART plans showed a decrease in lung functionally weighted mean dose by 0.64 Gy (p< .01),fV20by 0.90% (p= 0.099), andfV5by 5.07% (p< .01) respectively. Though inferior conformity was observed, all dose constraints were well satisfied. The ablation study results indicated that both function-guided beam angle selection and plan optimization significantly contributed to dose redirection.Significance.AP-FLART can effectively redirect doses from HFL to LFL without severely degrading conventional dose metrics, producing high-quality FLART plans. It has the potential to advance the research and clinical application of FLART by providing labor-free, consistent, and high-quality plans.

A Beam Angle Selection Method to Improve Plan Robustness Against Position Error in Intensity-Modulated Radiotherapy for Left-Sided Breast Cancer.

PURPOSE: We report a dosimetric study in whole breast irradiation (WBI) of plan robustness evaluation against position error with two radiation techniques: tangential intensity-modulated radiotherapy (T-IMRT) and multi-angle IMRT (M-IMRT). METHODS: Ten left-sided patients underwent WBI were selected. The dosimetric characteristics, biological evaluation and plan robustness were evaluated. The plan robustness quantification was performed by calculating the dose differences (Δ) of the original plan and perturbed plans, which were recalculated by introducing a 3-, 5-, and 10-mm shift in 18 directions. RESULTS: M-IMRT showed better sparing of high-dose volume of organs at risk (OARs), but performed a larger low-dose irradiation volume of normal tissue. The greater shift worsened plan robustness. For a 10-mm perturbation, greater dose differences were observed in T-IMRT plans in nearly all directions, with higher ΔD98%, ΔD95%, and ΔDmean of CTV Boost and CTV. A 10-mm shift in inferior (I) direction induced CTV Boost in T-IMRT plans a 1.1 (ΔD98%), 1.1 (ΔD95%), and 1.7 (ΔDmean) times dose differences greater than dose differences in M-IMRT plans. For CTV Boost, shifts in the right (R) and I directions generated greater dose differences in T-IMRT plans, while shifts in left (L) and superior (S) directions generated larger dose differences in M-IMRT plans. For CTV, T-IMRT plans showed higher sensitivity to a shift in the R direction. M-IMRT plans showed higher sensitivity to shifts in L, S, and I directions. For OARs, negligible dose differences were found in V20 of the lungs and heart. Greater ΔDmax of the left anterior descending artery (LAD) was seen in M-IMRT plans. CONCLUSION: We proposed a plan robustness evaluation method to determine the beam angle against position uncertainty accompanied by optimal dose distribution and OAR sparing.

Dosimetrically motivated beam-angle optimization for non-coplanar arc radiotherapy with and without dynamic collimator rotation.

BACKGROUND: Non-coplanar techniques have shown to improve the achievable dose distribution compared to standard coplanar techniques for multiple treatment sites but finding optimal beam directions is challenging. Dynamic collimator trajectory radiotherapy (colli-DTRT) is a new intensity modulated radiotherapy technique that uses non-coplanar partial arcs and dynamic collimator rotation. PURPOSE: To solve the beam angle optimization (BAO) problem for colli-DTRT and non-coplanar VMAT (NC-VMAT) by determining the table-angle and the gantry-angle ranges of the partial arcs through iterative 4π fluence map optimization (FMO) and beam direction elimination. METHODS: BAO considers all available beam directions sampled on a gantry-table map with the collimator angle aligned to the superior-inferior axis (colli-DTRT) or static (NC-VMAT). First, FMO is performed, and beam directions are scored based on their contributions to the objective function. The map is thresholded to remove the least contributing beam directions, and arc candidates are formed by adjacent beam directions with the same table angle. Next, FMO and arc candidate trimming, based on objective function penalty score, is performed iteratively until a desired total gantry angle range is reached. Direct aperture optimization on the final set of colli-DTRT or NC-VMAT arcs generates deliverable plans. colli-DTRT and NC-VMAT plans were created for seven clinically-motivated cases with targets in the head and neck (two cases), brain, esophagus, lung, breast, and prostate. colli-DTRT and NC-VMAT were compared to coplanar VMAT plans as well as to class-solution non-coplanar VMAT plans for the brain and head and neck cases. Dosimetric validation was performed for one colli-DTRT (head and neck) and one NC-VMAT (breast) plan using film measurements. RESULTS: Target coverage and conformity was similar for all techniques. colli-DTRT and NC-VMAT plans had improved dosimetric performance compared to coplanar VMAT for all treatment sites except prostate where all techniques were equivalent. For the head and neck and brain cases, mean dose reduction-in percentage of the prescription dose-to parallel organs was on average 0.7% (colli-DTRT), 0.8% (NC-VMAT) and 0.4% (class-solution) compared to VMAT. The reduction in D2% for the serial organs was on average 1.7% (colli-DTRT), 2.0% (NC-VMAT) and 0.9% (class-solution). For the esophagus, lung, and breast cases, mean dose reduction to parallel organs was on average 0.2% (colli-DTRT) and 0.3% (NC-VMAT) compared to VMAT. The reduction in D2% for the serial organs was on average 1.3% (colli-DTRT) and 0.9% (NC-VMAT). Estimated delivery times for colli-DTRT and NC-VMAT were below 4 min for a full gantry angle range of 720°, including transitions between arcs, except for the brain case where multiple arcs covered the whole table angle range. These times are in the same order as the class-solution for the head and neck and brain cases. Total optimization times were 25%-107% longer for colli-DTRT, including BAO, compared to VMAT. CONCLUSIONS: We successfully developed dosimetrically motivated BAO for colli-DTRT and NC-VMAT treatment planning. colli-DTRT and NC-VMAT are applicable to multiple treatment sites, including body sites, with beneficial or equivalent dosimetric performances compared to coplanar VMAT and reasonable delivery times.

Implementation and evaluation of an iterative-based algorithm for automatic beam angle optimization in breast cancer treatment planning.

INTRODUCTION: A beam angle optimization (BAO) algorithm was developed to evaluate its clinical feasibility and investigate the impact of varying BAO constraints on breast cancer treatment plans. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A two-part study was designed. In part 1, we retrospectively selected 20 patients treated with radiotherapy after breast-conserving surgery. For each patient, BAO plans were designed using beam angles optimized by the BAO algorithm and the same optimization constraints as manual plans. Dosimetric indices were compared between BAO and manual plans. In part 2, fifteen patients with left breast cancer were included. For each patient, three distinct cardiac constraints (mean heart dose < 5 Gy, 3 Gy or 1 Gy) were established during the BAO process to obtain three optimized beam sets which were marked as BAO_H1, BAO_H3, BAO_H5, respectively. These sets of beams were then utilized under identical IMRT constraints for planning. Comparative analysis was conducted among the three groups of plans. RESULTS: For part 1, no significant differences were observed between BAO plans and manual plans in all dosimetric indices, except for ipsilateral lung V5, where BAO plans performed slightly better than manual plans (35.5% ± 5.6% vs 36.9% ± 4.3%, p = 0.034). For part 2, Stricter BAO heart constraints resulted in more perpendicular beams. However, there was no significant difference between BAO_H1, BAO_H3 and BAO_H5 with the same IMRT constraint in the heart dose. Meanwhile, the left lung dose was increased while the right breast and lung doses were decreased with stricter heart constraints in BAO. When mean heart dose < 5 Gy in IMRT constraint, the mean dose to the right lung was decreased from 0.46 Gy for BAO_H5 to 0.33 Gy for BAO_H1 (p = 0.027). CONCLUSIONS: The BAO algorithm can achieve quality plans comparable to manual plans. IMRT constraints dominate the final plan dose, while varying BAO constraints alter the trade-off among structures, providing an additional degree of freedom in planning design.

[Feasibility Study of Beam Angle Optimization Based on Scripts in Automated-planning for Liver Cancer].

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.

An uncertainty-incorporated method for fast beam angle selection in intensity-modulated proton therapy.

Aim: We propose a novel metric called ψ - score to rank the Intensity Modulated Proton Therapy (IMPT) beams in the order of their optimality and robustness. The beams ranked based on this metric were accordingly chosen for IMPT optimization. The objective of this work is to study the effectiveness of the proposed method in various clinical cases. Methods and Materials: We have used Pinnacle TPS (Philips Medical System V 16.2) for performing the optimization. To validate our approach, we have applied it in four clinical cases: Lung, Pancreas, Prostate+Node and Prostate. Basically, for all clinical cases, four set of plans were created using Multi field optimization (MFO) and Robust Optimization (RO) with same clinical objectives, namely (1) Conventional angle plan without Robust Optimization (CA Plan), (2) Suitable angle Plan without Robust Optimization (SA Plan), (3) Conventional angle plan with Robust Optimization (CA-RO Plan), (4) Suitable angle Plan with Robust Optimization (SA-RO Plan). Initial plan was generated with 20 equiangular beams starting from the gantry angle of 0°. In the corresponding SA Plan and SA-RO Plan, the beam angles were obtained using the guidance provided by ψ - score. Results: All CA plans were compared against the SA plans in terms of Dose distribution, Dose volume histogram (DVH) and percentage of dose difference. The results obtained from the clinical cases indicate that the plan quality is considerably improved without significantly compromising the robustness when the beam angles are optimized using the proposed method. It takes approximately 10-15 min to find the suitable beam angles without Robust Optimization (RO), while it takes approximately 20-30 min to find the suitable beam angles with RO. However, the inclusion of RO in BAO did not result in a change in the final beam angles for anatomies other than lung. Conclusion: The results obtained in different anatomic sites demonstrate the usefulness of our approach in improving the plan quality by determining optimal beam angles in IMPT.

Beam angle optimization for proton therapy via group-sparsity based angle generation method.

BACKGROUND: In treatment planning, beam angle optimization (BAO) refers to the selection of a subset with a given number of beam angles from all available angles that provides the best plan quality. BAO is a NP-hard combinatorial problem. Although exhaustive search (ES) can exactly solve BAO by exploring all possible combinations, ES is very time-consuming and practically infeasible. PURPOSE: To the best of our knowledge, (1) no optimization method has been demonstrated that can provide the exact solution to BAO, and (2) no study has validated an optimization method for solving BAO by benchmarking with the optimal BAO solution (e.g., via ES), both of which will be addressed by this work. METHODS: This work considers BAO for proton therapy, for example, the selection of 2-4 beam angles for IMPT. The optimal BAO solution is obtained via ES and serves as the ground truth. A new BAO algorithm, namely angle generation (AG) method, is proposed, and demonstrated to provide nearly-exact solutions for BAO in reference to the ES solution. AG iteratively optimizes the angular set via group-sparsity (GS) regularization, until the planning objective does not decrease further. RESULTS: Since GS alone can also solve BAO, AG was validated and compared with GS for 2-angle brain, 3-angle lung, and 4-angle brain cases, in reference to the optimal BAO solutions obtained by ES: the AG solution had the rank (1/276, 1/2024, 4/10 626), while the GS solution had the rank (42/276, 279/2024, 4328/10 626). CONCLUSIONS: A new BAO algorithm called AG is proposed and shown to provide substantially improved accuracy for BAO from current methods with nearly-exact solutions to BAO, in reference to the ground truth of optimal BAO solution via ES.

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.

Automated multi-criterial planning with beam angle optimization to establish non-coplanar VMAT class solutions for nasopharyngeal carcinoma.

PURPOSE: Complexity in selecting optimal non-coplanar beam setups and prolonged delivery times may hamper the use of non-coplanar treatments for nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC). Automated multi-criterial planning with integrated beam angle optimization was used to define non-coplanar VMAT class solutions (CSs), each consisting of a coplanar arc and additional 1 or 2 fixed, non-coplanar partial arcs. METHODS: Automated planning was used to generate a coplanar VMAT plan with 5 complementary computer-optimized non-coplanar IMRT beams (VMAT+5) for each of the 20 included patients. Subsequently, the frequency distribution of the 100 patient-specific non-coplanar IMRT beam directions was used to select non-coplanar arcs for supplementing coplanar VMAT. A second investigated CS with only one non-coplanar arc consisted of coplanar VMAT plus a partial arc at 90° couch angle (VMATCS90). Plans generated with the two VMATCSs were compared to coplanar VMAT. RESULTS: VMAT+5 analysis resulted in VMATCS60: two partial non-coplanar arcs at couch angles 60° and -60° to complement coplanar VMAT. Compared to coplanar VMAT, the non-coplanar VMATCS60 and VMATCS90 yielded substantial average dose reductions in OARs associated with xerostomia and dysphagia, i.e., parotids, submandibular glands, oral cavity and swallowing muscles (p < 0.05) for the same PTV coverage and without violating hard constraints. Impact of non-coplanar treatment and superiority of either VMACS60 and VMATCS90 was highly patient dependent. CONCLUSIONS: Compared to coplanar VMAT, dose to OARs was substantially reduced with a CS with one or two non-coplanar arcs. Preferences for coplanar or one or two additional arcs are highly patient-specific, balancing plan quality and treatment time.

Reflections on beam configuration optimization for intensity-modulated proton therapy.

Presumably, intensity-modulated proton radiotherapy (IMPT) is the most powerful form of proton radiotherapy. In the current state of the art, IMPT beam configurations (i.e. the number of beams and their directions) are, in general, chosen subjectively based on prior experience and practicality. Beam configuration optimization (BCO) for IMPT could, in theory, significantly enhance IMPT's therapeutic potential. However, BCO is complex and highly computer resource-intensive. Some algorithms for BCO have been developed for intensity-modulated photon therapy (IMRT). They are rarely used clinically mainly because the large number of beams typically employed in IMRT renders BCO essentially unnecessary. Moreover, in the newer form of IMRT, volumetric modulated arc therapy, there are no individual static beams. BCO is of greater importance for IMPT because it typically employs a very small number of beams (2-4) and, when the number of beams is small, BCO is critical for improving plan quality. However, the unique properties and requirements of protons, particularly in IMPT, make BCO challenging. Protons are more sensitive than photons to anatomic changes, exhibit variable relative biological effectiveness along their paths, and, as recently discovered, may spare the immune system. Such factors must be considered in IMPT BCO, though doing so would make BCO more resource intensive and make it more challenging to extend BCO algorithms developed for IMRT to IMPT. A limited amount of research in IMPT BCO has been conducted; however, considerable additional work is needed for its further development to make it truly effective and computationally practical. This article aims to provide a review of existing BCO algorithms, most of which were developed for IMRT, and addresses important requirements specific to BCO for IMPT optimization that necessitate the modification of existing approaches or the development of new effective and efficient ones.

Toward automatic beam angle selection for pencil-beam scanning proton liver treatments: A deep learning-based approach.

BACKGROUND: Dose deposition characteristics of proton radiation can be advantageous over photons. Proton treatment planning, however, poses additional challenges for the planners. Proton therapy is usually delivered with only a small number of beam angles, and the quality of a proton treatment plan is largely determined by the beam angles employed. Finding the optimal beam angles for a proton treatment plan requires time and experience, motivating the investigation of automatic beam angle selection methods. PURPOSE: A deep learning-based approach to automatic beam angle selection is proposed for the proton pencil-beam scanning treatment planning of liver lesions. METHODS: We cast beam-angle selection as a multi-label classification problem. To account for angular boundary discontinuity, the underlying convolution neural network is trained with the proposed Circular Earth Mover's Distance-based regularization and multi-label circular-smooth label technique. Furthermore, an analytical algorithm emulating proton treatment planners' clinical practice is employed in post-processing to improve the output of the model. Forty-nine patients that received proton liver treatments between 2017 and 2020 were randomly divided into training (n = 31), validation (n = 7), and test sets (n = 11). AI-selected beam angles were compared with those angles selected by human planners, and the dosimetric outcome was investigated by creating plans using knowledge-based treatment planning. RESULTS: For 7 of the 11 cases in the test set, AI-selected beam angles agreed with those chosen by human planners to within 20° (median angle difference = 10°; mean = 18.6°). Moreover, out of the total 22 beam angles predicted by the model, 15 (68%) were within 10° of the human-selected angles. The high correlation in beam angles resulted in comparable dosimetric statistics between proton treatment plans generated using AI- and human-selected angles. For the cases with beam angle differences exceeding 20°, the dosimetric analysis showed similar plan quality although with different emphases on organ-at-risk sparing. CONCLUSIONS: This pilot study demonstrated the feasibility of a novel deep learning-based beam angle selection technique. Testing on liver cancer patients showed that the resulting plans were clinically viable with comparable dosimetric quality to those using human-selected beam angles. In tandem with auto-contouring and knowledge-based treatment planning tools, the proposed model could represent a pathway for nearly fully automated treatment planning in proton therapy.

TBS-BAO: fully automated beam angle optimization for IMRT guided by a total-beam-space reference plan.

Properly selected beam angles contribute to the quality of radiotherapy treatment plans. However, the beam angle optimization (BAO) problem is difficult to solve to optimality due to its non-convex discrete nature with many local minima. In this study, we propose TBS-BAO, a novel approach for solving the BAO problem, and test it for non-coplanar robotic CyberKnife radiotherapy for prostate cancer. First, an ideal Pareto-optimal reference dose distribution is automatically generated usinga priorimulti-criterial fluence map optimization (FMO) to generate a plan that includes all candidate beams (total-beam-space, TBS). Then, this ideal dose distribution is reproduced as closely as possible in a subsequent segmentation/beam angle optimization step (SEG/BAO), while limiting the number of allowed beams to a user-selectable preset value. SEG/BAO aims at a close reproduction of the ideal dose distribution. For each of 33 prostate SBRT patients, 18 treatment plans with different pre-set numbers of allowed beams were automatically generated with the proposed TBS-BAO. For each patient, the TBS-BAO plans were then compared to a plan that was automatically generated with an alternative BAO method (Erasmus-iCycle) and to a high-quality manually generated plan. TBS-BAO was able to automatically generate plans with clinically feasible numbers of beams (∼25), with a quality highly similar to corresponding 91-beam ideal reference plans. Compared to the alternative Erasmus-iCycle BAO approach, similar plan quality was obtained for 25-beam segmented plans, while computation times were reduced from 10.7 hours to 4.8/1.5 hours, depending on the applied pencil-beam resolution in TBS-BAO. 25-beam TBS-BAO plans had similar quality as manually generated plans with on average 48 beams, while delivery times reduced from 22.3 to 18.4/18.1 min. TBS reference plans could effectively steer the discrete non-convex BAO.

A novel method for determining the X-ray beam angulation of the supraspinatus outlet view.

BACKGROUND: Rapid and accurate quantification of the supraspinatus outlet view (SOV) is a clinical challenge. PURPOSE: To quantify the X-ray beam angle of the SOV using the horizontal angle of the subscapular spine line (SSSL) and to further verify the feasibility of this method. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A total of 119 patients who underwent shoulder computed tomography (CT) examination were enrolled in the retrospective study. Three-dimensional (3D) CT reconstruction was performed and manually adjusted to provide the position similar to SOV. The rotation angle of the 3D image along the long axis of the human body (marked as ß) was obtained. The horizontal angle of SSSL (marked as α) was measured on the anteroposterior localizer image of shoulder CT. Pearson correlation and linear regression correlation analysis were performed. In addition, the first-time success rate between the experience-based group and the measurement-based group were compared to verify the novel method. RESULTS: We found a linear correlation between α and ß (r = 0.962; P = 0.000). There was no significant correlation between the experience-based group and the measurement-based group in terms of age (P = 0.500), sex (P = 0.397), and side (P = 0.710), but there was a significant statistical difference in the first success rate between the two validation groups (χ2 = 5.808a, P = 0.016). CONCLUSION: This novel quantitative measurement method for determining the X-ray beam angle of SOV using the horizontal angle of SSSL is feasible.

A data-driven approach to optimal beam/arc angle selection for liver stereotactic body radiation therapy treatment planning.

BACKGROUND: Stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) for liver cancer has shown promising therapeutic effects. Effective treatment relies not only on the precise delivery provided by image-guided radiation therapy (IGRT) but also high dose gradient formed around the treatment volume to spare functional liver tissue, which is highly dependent on the beam/arc angle selection. In this study, we aim to develop a decision support model to learn human planner's beam navigation approach for beam angle/arc angle selection for liver SBRT. METHODS: A total of 27 liver SBRT/HIGRT patients (10 IMRT, 17 VMAT/DCA) were included in this study. A dosimetric budget index was defined for each beam angle/control point considering dose penetration through the patient body and liver tissue. Optimal beam angle setting (beam angles for IMRT and start/terminal angle for VMAT/DCA) was determined by minimizing the loss function defined as the sum of total dosimetric budget index and beam span penalty function. Leave-one-out validation was exercised on all 27 cases while weighting coefficients in the loss function was tuned in nested cross validation. To compare the efficacy of the model, a model plan was generated using automatically generated beam setting while retaining the original optimization constraints in the clinical plan. Model plan was normalized to the same planning target volume (PTV) V100% as the clinical plans. Dosimetric endpoints including PTV D98%, D2%, liver V20Gy and total MU were compared between two plan groups. Wilcoxon Signed-Rank test was performed with the null hypothesis being that no difference exists between two plan groups. RESULTS: Beam setting prediction was instantaneous. Mean PTV D98% was 91.3% and 91.3% (P=0.566), while mean PTV D2% was 107.9% and 108.1% (P=0.164) for clinical plan and model plan respectively. Liver V20Gy showed no significant difference (P=0.590) with 23.3% for clinical plan and 23.4% for the model plan. Total MU is comparable (P=0.256) between the clinical plan (avg. 2,389.6) and model plan (avg. 2,319.6). CONCLUSIONS: The evidence driven beam setting model yielded similar plan quality as hand-crafted clinical plan. It is capable of capturing human's knowledge in beam selection decision making. This model could facilitate decision making for beam angle selection while eliminating lengthy trial-and-error process of adjusting beam setting during liver SBRT treatment planning.

Enhancing Radiotherapy for Locally Advanced Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer Patients with iCE, a Novel System for Automated Multi-Criterial Treatment Planning Including Beam Angle Optimization.

In this study, the novel iCE radiotherapy treatment planning system (TPS) for automated multi-criterial planning with integrated beam angle optimization (BAO) was developed, and applied to optimize organ at risk (OAR) sparing and systematically investigate the impact of beam angles on radiotherapy dose in locally advanced non-small cell lung cancer (LA-NSCLC). iCE consists of an in-house, sophisticated multi-criterial optimizer with integrated BAO, coupled to a broadly used commercial TPS. The in-house optimizer performs fluence map optimization to automatically generate an intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) plan with optimal beam angles for each patient. The obtained angles and dose-volume histograms are then used to automatically generate the final deliverable plan with the commercial TPS. For the majority of 26 LA-NSCLC patients, iCE achieved improved heart and esophagus sparing compared to the manually created clinical plans, with significant reductions in the median heart Dmean (8.1 vs. 9.0 Gy, p = 0.02) and esophagus Dmean (18.5 vs. 20.3 Gy, p = 0.02), and reductions of up to 6.7 Gy and 5.8 Gy for individual patients. iCE was superior to automated planning using manually selected beam angles. Differences in the OAR doses of iCE plans with 6 beams compared to 4 and 8 beams were statistically significant overall, but highly patient-specific. In conclusion, automated planning with integrated BAO can further enhance and individualize radiotherapy for LA-NSCLC.

Comparison of non-coplanar optimization of static beams and arc trajectories for intensity-modulated treatments of meningioma cases.

Two methods for non-coplanar beam direction optimization, one for static beams and another for arc trajectories, were proposed for intracranial tumours. The results of the beam angle optimizations were compared with the beam directions used in the clinical plans. Ten meningioma cases already treated were selected for this retrospective planning study. Algorithms for non-coplanar beam angle optimization (BAO) and arc trajectory optimization (ATO) were used to generate the corresponding plans. A plan quality score, calculated by a graphical method for plan assessment and comparison, was used to guide the beam angle optimization process. For each patient, the clinical plans (CLIN), created with the static beam orientations used for treatment, and coplanar VMAT approximated plans (VMAT) were also generated. To make fair plan comparisons, all plan optimizations were performed in an automated multicriteria calculation engine and the dosimetric plan quality was assessed. BAO and ATO plans presented, on average, moderate global plan score improvements over VMAT and CLIN plans. Nevertheless, while BAO and CLIN plans assured a more efficient OARs sparing, the ATO and VMAT plans presented a higher coverage and conformity of the PTV. Globally, all plans presented high-quality dose distributions. No statistically significant quality differences were found, on average, between BAO, ATO and CLIN plans. However, automated plan solution optimizations (BAO or ATO) may improve plan generation efficiency and standardization. In some individual patients, plan quality improvements were achieved with ATO plans, demonstrating the possible benefits of this automated optimized delivery technique.

Beam Angle Optimization for Double-Scattering Proton Delivery Technique Using an Eclipse Application Programming Interface and Convolutional Neural Network.

To automatically identify optimal beam angles for proton therapy configured with the double-scattering delivery technique, a beam angle optimization method based on a convolutional neural network (BAODS-Net) is proposed. Fifty liver plans were used for training in BAODS-Net. To generate a sequence of input data, 25 rays on the eye view of the beam were determined per angle. Each ray collects nine features, including the normalized Hounsfield unit and the position information of eight structures per 2° of gantry angle. The outputs are a set of beam angle ranking scores (S beam) ranging from 0° to 359°, with a step size of 1°. Based on these input and output designs, BAODS-Net consists of eight convolution layers and four fully connected layers. To evaluate the plan qualities of deep-learning, equi-spaced, and clinical plans, we compared the performances of three types of loss functions and performed K-fold cross-validation (K = 5). For statistical analysis, the volumes V27Gy and V30Gy as well as the mean, minimum, and maximum doses were calculated for organs-at-risk by using a paired-samples t-test. As a result, smooth-L1 loss showed the best optimization performance. At the end of the training procedure, the mean squared errors between the reference and predicted S beam were 0.031, 0.011, and 0.004 for L1, L2, and smooth-L1 loss, respectively. In terms of the plan quality, statistically, PlanBAO has no significant difference from PlanClinic (P >.05). In our test, a deep-learning based beam angle optimization method for proton double-scattering treatments was developed and verified. Using Eclipse API and BAODS-Net, a plan with clinically acceptable quality was created within 5 min.

Robust Angle Selection in Particle Therapy.

The popularity of particle radiotherapy has grown exponentially over recent years owing to the marked advantage of the depth-dose curve and its unique biological property. However, particle therapy is sensitive to changes in anatomical structure, and the dose distribution may deteriorate. In particle therapy, robust beam angle selection plays a crucial role in mitigating inter- and intrafractional variation, including daily patient setup uncertainties and tumor motion. With the development of a rotating gantry, angle optimization has gained increasing attention. Currently, several studies use the variation in the water equivalent thickness to quantify anatomical changes during treatment. This method seems helpful in determining better beam angles and improving the robustness of planning. Therefore, this review will discuss and summarize the robust beam angles at different tumor sites in particle radiotherapy.

MR-Linac Radiotherapy - The Beam Angle Selection Problem.

BACKGROUND: With the large-scale introduction of volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT), selection of optimal beam angles for coplanar static-beam IMRT has increasingly become obsolete. Due to unavailability of VMAT in current MR-linacs, the problem has re-gained importance. An application for automated IMRT treatment planning with integrated, patient-specific computer-optimization of beam angles (BAO) was used to systematically investigate computer-aided generation of beam angle class solutions (CS) for replacement of computationally expensive patient-specific BAO. Rectal cancer was used as a model case. MATERIALS AND METHODS: 23 patients treated at a Unity MR-linac were included. BAOx plans (x=7-12 beams) were generated for all patients. Analyses of BAO12 plans resulted in CSx class solutions. BAOx plans, CSx plans, and plans with equi-angular setups (EQUIx, x=9-56) were mutually compared. RESULTS: For x>7, plan quality for CSx and BAOx was highly similar, while both were superior to EQUIx. E.g. with CS9, bowel/bladder Dmean reduced by 22% [11%, 38%] compared to EQUI9 (p<0.001). For equal plan quality, the number of EQUI beams had to be doubled compared to BAO and CS. CONCLUSIONS: Computer-generated beam angle CS could replace individualized BAO without loss in plan quality, while reducing planning complexity and calculation times, and resulting in a simpler clinical workflow. CS and BAO largely outperformed equi-angular treatment. With the developed CS, time consuming beam angle re-optimization in daily adaptive MR-linac treatment could be avoided. Further systematic research on computerized development of beam angle class solutions for MR-linac treatment planning is warranted.