K Bzdusek

Development and evaluation of an efficient approach to volumetric arc therapy planning

An efficient method for volumetric intensity modulated arc therapy (VMAT) planning was developed, where a single arc (360 degrees or less) is delivered under continuous variation of multileaf collimator (MLC) segments, dose rate, and gantry speed. Plans can be generated for any current linear accelerator that supports these degrees of freedom. MLC segments are derived from fluence maps at relatively coarsely sampled angular positions. The beam segments, dose rate, and gantry speed are then optimized using direct machine parameter optimization based on dose volume objectives and leaf motion constraints to minimize arc delivery time. The method can vary both dose rate and gantry speed or alternatively determine the optimal plan at constant dose rate and gantry speed. The method was used to retrospectively generate variable dose rate VMAT plans to ten patients (head and neck, prostate, brain, lung, and tonsil). In comparison to step-and-shoot intensity modulated radiation therapy, dosimetric plan quality was comparable or improved, estimated delivery times ranged from 70 to 160 s, and monitor units were consistently reduced in nine out of the ten cases by an average of approximately 6%. Optimization and final dose calculation took between 5 and 35 min depending on plan complexity.

What CTV-to-PTV Margins Should Be Applied for Prostate Irradiation? Four-Dimensional Quantitative Assessment Using Model-Based Deformable Image Registration Techniques

PURPOSE To quantify adequate anisotropic clinical target volume (CTV)-to-planning target volume (PTV) margins for three different setup strategies used during prostate irradiation: (1) no setup corrections, (2) on-line corrections determined from bony anatomy, and (3) on-line corrections determined from gold markers. METHOD AND MATERIALS Three radiation oncologists independently delineated the CTV on computed tomography images of 30 prostate cancer patients. Eight repeat scans were acquired to allow simulation of the delivered dose distributions in changing geometry. Different registration approaches were taken to mimic the different setup strategies. A surface model-based deformable image registration system was used to warp the delivered dose distributions back to the dose in the planning computed tomography scan. On the basis of the geometric extent of the underdosed areas, a set of anisotropic margins was derived to ensure a minimal dose to the CTV of 95% for 90% of the patients. RESULTS Without setup correction, margins of approximately 11 mm for the corpus of the prostate and 15 mm for the seminal vesicles were required. These margins could be reduced to 8 and 13 mm when aligning the patient to the bony anatomy and to 3 and 8 mm aligning the patient to implanted gold markers. A larger margin at the apex was required to account for the significant observer variability and steep dose gradients at this location (11 mm using skin marker registration, 9 mm using bony anatomy registration, and 6 mm using gold marker registration). CONCLUSIONS Novel voxel tracking techniques have enabled us to calculate accumulated dose distributions and design accurate three-dimensional CTV-to-PTV margins for prostate irradiation.

A multi-institution evaluation of deformable image registration algorithms for automatic organ delineation in adaptive head and neck radiotherapy

BackgroundAdaptive Radiotherapy aims to identify anatomical deviations during a radiotherapy course and modify the treatment plan to maintain treatment objectives. This requires regions of interest (ROIs) to be defined using the most recent imaging data. This study investigates the clinical utility of using deformable image registration (DIR) to automatically propagate ROIs.MethodsTarget (GTV) and organ-at-risk (OAR) ROIs were non-rigidly propagated from a planning CT scan to a per-treatment CT scan for 22 patients. Propagated ROIs were quantitatively compared with expert physician-drawn ROIs on the per-treatment scan using Dice scores and mean slicewise Hausdorff distances, and center of mass distances for GTVs. The propagated ROIs were qualitatively examined by experts and scored based on their clinical utility.ResultsGood agreement between the DIR-propagated ROIs and expert-drawn ROIs was observed based on the metrics used. 94% of all ROIs generated using DIR were scored as being clinically useful, requiring minimal or no edits. However, 27% (12/44) of the GTVs required major edits.ConclusionDIR was successfully used on 22 patients to propagate target and OAR structures for ART with good anatomical agreement for OARs. It is recommended that propagated target structures be thoroughly reviewed by the treating physician.

Validation of physics improvements for IMRT with a commercial treatment planning system

A new Pinnacle 3D treatment‐planning system software release has recently become available (v7.4, Philips Radiation Oncology Systems, Milpitas, CA), which supports modeling of rounded multileaf collimator (MLC) leaf ends; it also includes a number of other software enhancements intended to improve the overall dose calculation accuracy. In this report, we provide a general discussion of the dose calculation algorithm and new beam‐modeling parameters. The accuracy of a diode dosimeter was established for measurement of MLC‐shaped beam profiles required by the new software version by comparison with film and ion chamber measurements in various regions of the field. The results suggest that a suitable diode or other small volume dosimeter with appropriate energy sensitivity should be used to obtain profiles for commissioning the planning system. Film should be used with caution, especially for larger field profile measurements. The dose calculation algorithm and modeling parameters chosen were validated through various test field measurements including a bar pattern, a strip pattern, and a clinical head and neck IMRT field. For the bar and strip patterns, the agreement between Pinnacle calculations and diode measurements was generally very good. These tests were helpful in establishing the new model parameter values, especially tongue‐and‐groove width, additional interleaf leakage, rounded leaf tip radius, and MLC transmission. For the clinical head and neck field, the comparison between Pinnacle and film measurements showed regions of approximately 2 cGy under‐ or overdose. However, the Pinnacle calculations agreed with diode measurements at all points to within 1 cGy or 1% of the maximum dose for the field (67 cGy). The greatest discrepancy between film and diode measurements for the clinical field (maximum of 2.8%) occurred in low‐dose regions in the central part of the field. The disagreement may be due to the overresponse of film to scattered radiation in the low‐dose regions, which have significant shielding by the MLCs. PACS numbers: 87.53.Bn, 87.53.Dq

Accuracy of deformable image registration for contour propagation in adaptive lung radiotherapy

BackgroundDeformable image registration (DIR) is an attractive method for automatic propagation of regions of interest (ROIs) in adaptive lung radiotherapy. This study investigates DIR for automatic contour propagation in adaptive Non Small Cell Lung Carcinoma patients.MethodsPre and mid-treatment fan beam 4D-kVCT scans were taken for 17 NSCLC patients. Gross tumour volumes (GTV), nodal-GTVs, lungs, esophagus and spinal cord were delineated on all kVCT scans. ROIs were propagated from pre- to mid-treatment images using three DIR algorithms. DIR-propagated ROIs were compared with physician-drawn ROIs on the mid-treatment scan using the Dice score and the mean slicewise Hausdorff distance to agreement (MSHD). A physician scored the DIR-propagated ROIs based on clinical utility.ResultsGood agreement between the DIR-propagated and physician drawn ROIs was observed for the lungs and spinal cord. Agreement was not as good for the nodal-GTVs and esophagus, due to poor soft-tissue contrast surrounding these structures. 96% of OARs and 85% of target volumes were scored as requiring no or minor adjustments.ConclusionsDIR has been shown to be a clinically useful method for automatic contour propagation in adaptive radiotherapy however thorough assessment of propagated ROIs by the treating physician is recommended.

Potential Dosimetric Benefits of Four-Dimensional Radiation Treatment Planning

PURPOSE To determine the extent of dosimetric differences between conventional three-dimensional (3D) dose calculations and four-dimensional (4D) dose calculations based on deformation of organ models. METHODS AND MATERIALS Four-dimensional dose calculations were retrospectively performed on computed tomography data sets for 15 patients with Stage III non-small-cell lung cancer, using a model-based deformable registration algorithm on a research version of a commercial radiation treatment planning system. Target volume coverage and doses to critical structures calculated using the 4D methodology were compared with those calculated using conventional 3D methodology. RESULTS For 11 of 15 patients, clinical target volume coverage was comparable in the 3D and 4D calculations, whereas for 7 of 15 patients, planning target volume coverage was comparable. For the other patients, the 4D calculation indicated a difference in target volume dose sufficiently great to warrant replanning. No correlations could be established between differences in 3D and 4D calculations and gross tumor volume size or extent of motion. Negligible differences were observed between 3D and 4D dose-volume relationships for normal anatomic structures. CONCLUSIONS Use of 4D dose calculations, when possible, helps ensure that target volumes will not be underirradiated when respiratory motion may affect the dose distribution.

Automatic planning of head and neck treatment plans

Treatment planning is time-consuming and the outcome depends on the person performing the optimization. A system that automates treatment planning could potentially reduce the manual time required for optimization and could also provide a method to reduce the variation between persons performing radiation dose planning (dosimetrist) and potentially improve the overall plan quality. This study evaluates the performance of the Auto-Planning module that has recently become clinically available in the Pinnacle3 radiation therapy treatment planning system. Twenty-six clinically delivered head and neck treatment plans were reoptimized with the Auto-Planning module. Comparison of the two types of treatment plans were performed using DVH metrics and a blinded clinical evaluation by two senior radiation oncologists using a scale from one to six. Both evaluations investigated dose coverage of target and dose to healthy tissues. Auto-Planning was able to produce clinically acceptable treatment plans in all 26 cases. Target coverages in the two types of plans were similar, but automatically generated plans had less irradiation of healthy tissue. In 94% of the evaluations, the autoplans scored at least as high as the previously delivered clinical plans. For all patients, the Auto-Planning tool produced clinically acceptable head and neck treatment plans without any manual intervention, except for the initial target and OAR delineations. The main benefit of the method is the likely improvement in the overall treatment quality since consistent, high-quality plans are generated which even can be further optimized, if necessary. This makes it possible for the dosimetrist to focus more time on difficult dose planning goals and to spend less time on the more tedious parts of the planning process. PACS number: 87.55.de.Treatment planning is time‐consuming and the outcome depends on the person performing the optimization. A system that automates treatment planning could potentially reduce the manual time required for optimization and could also provide a method to reduce the variation between persons performing radiation dose planning (dosimetrist) and potentially improve the overall plan quality. This study evaluates the performance of the Auto‐Planning module that has recently become clinically available in the Pinnacle3 radiation therapy treatment planning system. Twenty‐six clinically delivered head and neck treatment plans were reoptimized with the Auto‐Planning module. Comparison of the two types of treatment plans were performed using DVH metrics and a blinded clinical evaluation by two senior radiation oncologists using a scale from one to six. Both evaluations investigated dose coverage of target and dose to healthy tissues. Auto‐Planning was able to produce clinically acceptable treatment plans in all 26 cases. Target coverages in the two types of plans were similar, but automatically generated plans had less irradiation of healthy tissue. In 94% of the evaluations, the autoplans scored at least as high as the previously delivered clinical plans. For all patients, the Auto‐Planning tool produced clinically acceptable head and neck treatment plans without any manual intervention, except for the initial target and OAR delineations. The main benefit of the method is the likely improvement in the overall treatment quality since consistent, high‐quality plans are generated which even can be further optimized, if necessary. This makes it possible for the dosimetrist to focus more time on difficult dose planning goals and to spend less time on the more tedious parts of the planning process. PACS number: 87.55.de

Automated IMRT planning with regional optimization using planning scripts

Intensity‐modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) has become a standard technique in radiation therapy for treating different types of cancers. Various class solutions have been developed for simple cases (e.g., localized prostate, whole breast) to generate IMRT plans efficiently. However, for more complex cases (e.g., head and neck, pelvic nodes), it can be time‐consuming for a planner to generate optimized IMRT plans. To generate optimal plans in these more complex cases which generally have multiple target volumes and organs at risk, it is often required to have additional IMRT optimization structures such as dose limiting ring structures, adjust beam geometry, select inverse planning objectives and associated weights, and additional IMRT objectives to reduce cold and hot spots in the dose distribution. These parameters are generally manually adjusted with a repeated trial and error approach during the optimization process. To improve IMRT planning efficiency in these more complex cases, an iterative method that incorporates some of these adjustment processes automatically in a planning script is designed, implemented, and validated. In particular, regional optimization has been implemented in an iterative way to reduce various hot or cold spots during the optimization process that begins with defining and automatic segmentation of hot and cold spots, introducing new objectives and their relative weights into inverse planning, and turn this into an iterative process with termination criteria. The method has been applied to three clinical sites: prostate with pelvic nodes, head and neck, and anal canal cancers, and has shown to reduce IMRT planning time significantly for clinical applications with improved plan quality. The IMRT planning scripts have been used for more than 500 clinical cases. PACS numbers: 87.55.D, 87.55.de

An evaluation of an automated 4D-CT contour propagation tool to define an internal gross tumour volume for lung cancer radiotherapy

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE To evaluate an automated 4D-CT contouring propagation tool by its impact on the inter- and intra-physician variability in lung tumour delineation. MATERIALS AND METHODS In a previous study, six radiation oncologists contoured the gross tumour volume (GTV) and nodes on 10 phases of the 4D-CT dataset of 10 lung cancer patients to examine the intra- and inter-physician variability. In this study, a model-based deformable image registration algorithm was used to propagate the GTV and nodes on each phase of the same 4D-CT datasets. A blind review of the contours was performed by each physician and edited. Inter- and intra-physician variability for both the manual and automated methods was assessed by calculating the centroid motion of the GTV using the Pearson correlation coefficient and the variability in the internal gross tumour volume (IGTV) overlap using the Dice similarity coefficient (DSC). RESULTS The time for manual delineation was (42.7±18.6)min versus (17.7±5.4)min when the propagation tool was used. A significant improvement in the mean Pearson correlation coefficient was also observed. There was a significant decrease in mean DSC in only 1 out of 10 primary IGTVs and 2 out of 10 nodal IGTVs. Intra-physician variability was not significantly impacted (DSC>0.742). CONCLUSIONS Automated 4D-CT propagation tools can significantly decrease the IGTV delineation time without significantly decreasing the inter- and intra-physician variability.

An energy fluence-convolution model for amorphous silicon EPID dose prediction.

In this work, an amorphous silicon electronic portal imaging device (a-Si EPID) dose prediction model based on the energy fluence model of the Pinnacle treatment planning system Version 7 (Philips Medical Systems, Madison, WI) is developed. An energy fluence matrix at very high resolution (< 1 mm) is used to incorporate multileaf collimator (MLC) leaf effects in the predicted EPID images. The primary dose deposited in the EPID is calculated from the energy fluence using experimentally derived radially dependent EPID interaction coefficients. Separate coefficients are used for the open beam energy fluence component and the component of the energy fluence transmitted through closed MLC leaves to each EPID pixel. A spatially invariant EPID dose deposition kernel that describes both radiative dose deposition, central axis EPID backscatter, and optical glare is convolved with the primary dose. The kernel is further optimized to give accurate EPID penumbra prediction and EPID scatter factor with changing MLC field size. An EPID calibration method was developed to reduce the effect of nonuniform backscatter from the support arm (E-arm) in a calibrated EPID image. This method removes the backscatter component from the pixel sensitivity (flood field) correction matrix retaining only field-specific backscatter in the images. The model was compared to EPID images for jaw and MLC defined open fields and eight head and neck intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) fields. For the head and neck IMRT fields with 2%, 2 mm criteria 97.6 +/- 0.6% (mean +/- 1 standard deviation) of points passed with a gamma index less than 1, and for 3%, 3 mm 99.4 +/- 0.4% of points were within the criteria. For these fields, the 2%, 2 mm pass score reduced to 96.0 +/- 1.5% when backscatter was present in the pixel sensitivity correction matrix. The model incorporates the effect of MLC leaf transmission, EPID response to open and MLC leakage dose components, and accurately predicts EPID images of IMRT fields. Removing the backscatter component of the pixel sensitivity matrix correction reduces the effect of nonuniform E-arm backscatter.