Comparative behaviour of the Dynamically Penalized Likelihood algorithm in inverse radiation therapy planning

Abstract

This paper presents a description of tests carried out to compare the behaviour of five algorithms in inverse radiation therapy planning: (1) The Dynamically Penalized Likelihood (DPL), an algorithm based on statistical estimation theory; (2) an accelerated version of the same algorithm: (3) a new fast adaptive simulated annealing (ASA) algorithm; (4) a conjugate gradient method; and (5) a Newton gradient method. A three-dimensional mathematical phantom and two clinical cases have been studied in detail. The phantom consisted of a U-shaped tumour with a partially enclosed 'spinal cord'. The clinical examples were a cavernous sinus meningioma and a prostate case. The algorithms have been tested in carefully selected and controlled conditions so as to ensure fairness in the assessment of results. It has been found that all five methods can yield relatively similar optimizations, except when a very demanding optimization is carried out. For the easier cases. the differences are principally in robustness, ease of use and optimization speed. In the more demanding case, there are significant differences in the resulting dose distributions. The accelerated DPL emerges as possibly the algorithm of choice for clinical practice. An appendix describes the differences in behaviour between the new ASA method and the one based on a patent by the Nomos Corporation.

Are simple IMRT beams more robust against MLC error? Exploring the impact of MLC errors on planar quality assurance and plan quality for different complexity beams

“…Fractal dimension was used to assess the level of beam modulation (11) . In the inverse optimization, the complexity metric was used to get a smoother fluence (12) . Some aperture‐based metrics were also developed 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 …”

Historical Development of Stereotactic Ablative Radiotherapy

“…In 2000, BrainLAB provided an IMRT solution for the Novalis, with inverse planning based on the dynamically penalized maximum likelihood (DPL) algorithm described by Llacer (1997). Theoretical and practical characteristics of the DPL algorithm, including performance under gated operation, have been described by several authors (Chetty et al 2000;Arellano et al 2000;Solberg et al 2000a, b;Llacer et al 2001;Hugo et al 2002;. In 2001 BrainLAB introduced their image guidance system based on stereoscopic X-ray imaging.…”

Analysis of the dose calculation accuracy for IMRT in lung: A 2D approach

“…Furthermore, they differ in the optimization algorithm for IP and in leaf sequencing, i.e. the quadratic difference between desired and actual dose is used in Helax-TMS while the Dynamically Penalized Likelihood is applied in BrainSCAN [11]. Leaf sequencing is parameterized by mean (BrainSCAN) or maximum (Helax-TMS) segment numbers, and in the latter TPS also by a 'minimum segment area'.…”