Integrated beam angle and profile optimization with iCycle may result in significant improvements in treatment plan quality. Due to automation, the plan generation workload is minimal. Clinical application has started.

No abstract

No abstract

Several methods can be used to achieve multi-criteria optimization of radiation therapy treatment planning, which strive for Pareto-optimality. The property of the solution being Pareto optimal is desired, because it guarantees that no criteria can be improved without deteriorating another criteria. The most widely used methods are the weighted-sum method, in which the different treatment objectives are weighted, and constrained optimization methods, in which treatment goals are set and the algorithm has to find the best plan fulfilling these goals. The constrained method used in this paper, the 2p element of c (2-phase element-constraint) method is based on the element-constraint method, which generates Pareto-optimal solutions. Both approaches are uniquely related to each other. In this paper, we will show that it is possible to switch from the constrained method to the weighted-sum method by using the Lagrange multipliers from the constrained optimization problem, and vice versa by setting the appropriate constraints. In general, the theory presented in this paper can be useful in cases where a new situation is slightly different from the original situation, e.g. in online treatment planning, with deformations of the volumes of interest, or in automated treatment planning, where changes to the automated plan have to be made. An example of the latter is given where the planner is not satisfied with the result from the constrained method and wishes to decrease the dose in a structure. By using the Lagrange multipliers, a weighted-sum optimization problem is constructed, which generates a Pareto-optimal solution in the neighbourhood of the original plan, but fulfills the new treatment objectives.

Treatment plan optimization is a multi-criteria process. Optimizing solely on one objective or on a sum of a priori weighted objectives may result in inferior treatment plans. Manually adjusting weights or constraints in a trial and error procedure is time consuming. In this paper we introduce a novel multi-criteria optimization approach to automatically optimize treatment constraints (dosevolume and maximum-dose). The algorithm tries to meet these constraints as well as possible, but in the case of conflicts it relaxes lower priority constraints so that higher priority constraints can be met. Afterwards, all constraints are tightened, starting with the highest priority constraints. Applied constraint priority lists can be used as class solutions for patients with similar tumour types. The presented algorithm does iteratively apply an underlying algorithm for beam profile optimization, based on a quadratic objective function with voxeldependent importance factors. These voxel-dependent importance factors are automatically adjusted to reduce dose-volume and maximum-dose constraint violations.

No abstract

Observed advantages of autoplanning were clinically relevant and larger than reported in the literature. The latter is likely related to the multi-criterial nature of the applied autoplanning algorithm, with for each center a dedicated configuration that aims at plan improvements relative to its (clinical) training plans. Large variations among patients in differences between manVMAT and autoVMAT point at inconsistencies in manual planning.

Proton therapy is very sensitive to daily density changes along the pencil beam paths. The purpose of this study is to develop and evaluate an automated method for adaptation of IMPT plans to compensate for these daily tissue density variations. A two-step restoration method for 'densities-of-the-day' was created: (1) restoration of spot positions (Bragg peaks) by adapting the energy of each pencil beam to the new water equivalent path length; and (2) re-optimization of pencil beam weights by minimizing the dosimetric difference with the planned dose distribution, using a fast and exact quadratic solver. The method was developed and evaluated using 8-10 repeat CT scans of 10 prostate cancer patients. Experiments demonstrated that giving a high weight to the PTV in the re-optimization resulted in clinically acceptable restorations. For all scans we obtained V ⩾  98% and V ⩽  2%. For the bladder, the differences between the restored and the intended treatment plan were below  +2 Gy and  +2%-point. The rectum differences were below  +2 Gy and  +2%-point for 90% of the scans. In the remaining scans the rectum was filled with air, which partly overlapped with the PTV. The air cavity distorted the Bragg peak resulting in less favorable rectum doses.