No abstract

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

HighlightsAutoplan can produce clinically better VMAT radiotherapy plans for H&N cancer.Autoplan plans have similar target coverage with significant sparing of OAR.With a template the TPS can automatically create better plans than manually created plans.

Purpose: A 1.5 T MR Linac (MRL) has recently become available. MRL treatment workflows (WF) include online plan adaptation based on daily MR images (MRI). This study reports initial clinical experiences after five months of use in terms of patient compliance, cases, WF timings, and dosimetric accuracy. Method and materials: Two different WF were used dependent on the clinical situation of the day; Adapt To Position WF (ATP) where the reference plan position is adjusted rigidly to match the position of the targets and the OARs, and Adapt To Shape WF (ATS), where a new plan is created to match the anatomy of the day, using deformable image registration. Both WFs included three 3D MRI scans for plan adaptation, verification before beam on, and validation during IMRT delivery. Patient compliance and WF timings were recorded. Accuracy in dose delivery was assessed using a cylindrical diode phantom. Results: 19 patients have completed their treatment receiving a total of 176 fractions. Cases vary from prostate treatments (60 Gy/20F) to SBRT treatments of lymph nodes (45 Gy/3F) and castration by ovarian irradiation (15 Gy/3F). The median session time (patient in to patient out) for 127 ATPs was 26[21-78] min, four fractions lasted more than 45 minutes due to additional plan adaptation. For the 49 ATSs a median time of 12[1-24] min was used for contouring resulting in a total median session time of 42[29-91] min. Three SBRT fractions lasted more than an hour. The time on the MRL couch was well tolerated by the patients. The median gamma pass rate (2mm,2% global max) for the adapted plans was 99.2[93.4-100]%, showing good agreement between planned and delivered dose. Conclusion: MRL treatments, including daily MRIs, plan adaptation and accurate dose delivery is possible within a clinically acceptable timeframe and is well tolerated by the patients.

No abstract

No abstract

Delineation of structures in the head and neck were affected by metal artifacts and volumes were generally larger and more consistent after reduction of metal artifacts, however, only small changes were observed in the dose calculations.

The AU plans were in general preferred and showed a lower mean dose to the lungs. The automation of the planning process generated esophageal cancer treatment plans quickly and with high quality.