Intercenter validation of a knowledge based model for automated planning of volumetric modulated arc therapy for prostate cancer. The experience of the German RapidPlan Consortium

Schubert, C.; Waletzko, Oliver; Weiß, Christian; Voelzke, D.; Toperim, S.; Roeser, Arnd; Puccini, Silvia; Piroth, Marc D.; Mehrens, Christian; Kueter, Jan Dirk; Hierholz, Kirsten; Gerull, Karsten; Fogliata, Antonella; Block, Andreas; Cozzi, Luca

doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0178034

Cited by 64 publications

(79 citation statements)

References 24 publications

(13 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Knowledge‐based radiotherapy treatment planning is deemed to reduce the inter‐planner varieties of plan quality1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13 and expedite the planning process 14, 15, 16, 1718, 19 and displayed good compatibility across patient orientations, treatment techniques, and systems 20, 21…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

An interactive plan and model evolution method for knowledge‐based pelvic VMAT planning

Wang

Huang

et al. 2018

J Applied Clin Med Phys

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposeTo test if a RapidPlan DVH estimation model and its training plans can be improved interactively through a closed‐loop evolution process.Methods and materialsEighty‐one manual plans (P0) that were used to configure an initial rectal RapidPlan model (M0) were reoptimized using M0 (closed‐loop), yielding 81 P1 plans. The 75 improved P1 (P1+) and the remaining 6 P0 were used to configure model M1. The 81 training plans were reoptimized again using M1, producing 23 P2 plans that were superior to both their P0 and P1 forms (P2+). Hence, the knowledge base of model M2 composed of 6 P0, 52 P1+, and 23 P2+. Models were tested dosimetrically on 30 VMAT validation cases (Pv) that were not used for training, yielding Pv(M0), Pv(M1), and Pv(M2) respectively. The 30 Pv were also optimized by M2_new as trained by the library of M2 and 30 Pv(M0).ResultsBased on comparable target dose coverage, the first closed‐loop reoptimization significantly (P < 0.01) reduced the 81 training plans’ mean dose to femoral head, urinary bladder, and small bowel by 2.65 Gy/15.63%, 2.06 Gy/8.11%, and 1.47 Gy/6.31% respectively, which were further reduced significantly (P < 0.01) in the second closed‐loop reoptimization by 0.04 Gy/0.28%, 0.18 Gy/0.77%, 0.22 Gy/1.01% respectively. However, open‐loop VMAT validations displayed more complex and intertwined plan quality changes: mean dose to urinary bladder and small bowel decreased monotonically using M1 (by 0.34 Gy/1.47%, 0.25 Gy/1.13%) and M2 (by 0.36 Gy/1.56%, 0.30 Gy/1.36%) than using M0. However, mean dose to femoral head increased by 0.81 Gy/6.64% (M1) and 0.91 Gy/7.46% (M2) than using M0. The overfitting problem was relieved by applying model M2_new.ConclusionsThe RapidPlan model and its constituent plans can improve each other interactively through a closed‐loop evolution process. Incorporating new patients into the original training library can improve the RapidPlan model and the upcoming plans interactively.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

An interactive plan and model evolution method for knowledge‐based pelvic VMAT planning

Wang

Huang

et al. 2018

J Applied Clin Med Phys

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Such differences may limit the desired organs‐at‐risk (OAR) sparing and the target coverage that can be achieved. Recent investigations have demonstrated that knowledge based planning (KBP), which utilizes a library of previously treated patient plans, has enormous potential for improving the quality and consistency of treatment plans …”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessment of specific versus combined purpose knowledge based models in prostate radiotherapy

Bossart

Duffy

Simpson

et al. 2018

J Applied Clin Med Phys

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Knowledge‐based planning (KBP) can be used to improve plan quality, planning speed, and reduce the inter‐patient plan variability. KPB may also identify and reduce systematic variations in VMAT plans, something very important in multi‐institutional clinical trials. Training of a KBP library is a complex and difficult process, and models must be validated prior to their clinical use. The purpose of this work is to assess the quality of the treatment plans generated using a specific versus combined purpose model KBP library for prostate cancer. Seven KBP model libraries were created from a set of patients treated on various Institutional Review Board (IRB) approved protocols. All KBP libraries were validated using an independent set of twenty patients (half treated Pr: Prostate alone half treated PLN: prostate plus pelvic lymph nodes). Two models were tested on the Pr patients only, four tested on PLN patients only, and one tested on all patients. All plans were normalized such that at least 95% of the prostate planning target volume received 100% of the planned dose. The plans based on different model libraries were compared to each other and the expert clinical plan. For Pr plans there were almost no statistically significant differences (P < 0.008) between the plans types except conformity index (CI) with library plans better than the expert. For PLN plans, all model libraries in generally showed femur doses and CI better than the expert plans (P < 0.003). This study demonstrated that no large differences were observed between specific versus combined KBP model libraries in dosimetry of prostate cancer patients. This would allow for a fewer specific plans to be needed to create a model library. Further studies are needed to evaluate benefits of combined purpose model libraries for planning of complex sites such as head and neck cancer.

show abstract

“…When comparing to previously published studies, for the tumour site of PSV a thorough summary has recently been presented by Heijmen et al [26]; with 12 studies identified as demonstrating small differences between automated and manual plans [2,10,18,[27][28][29][30][31][32][33][34][35], and only their more recent multi-centre study showing the overall dosimetric superiority of automation through reduced rectum doses [26]. For PPN, to the authors' knowledge two studies have been published.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluating the application of Pareto navigation guided automated radiotherapy treatment planning to prostate cancer

Wheeler

Chu

Holmes

et al. 2019

Radiotherapy and Oncology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

a b s t r a c tBackground and purpose: Current automated planning methods do not allow for the intuitive exploration of clinical trade-offs during calibration. Recently a novel automated planning solution, which is calibrated using Pareto navigation principles, has been developed to address this issue. The purpose of this work was to clinically validate the solution for prostate cancer patients with and without elective nodal irradiation. Materials and methods: For 40 randomly selected patients (20 prostate and seminal vesicles (PSV) and 20 prostate and pelvic nodes (PPN)) automatically generated volumetric modulated arc therapy plans (VMAT Auto ) were compared against plans created by expert dosimetrists under clinical conditions (VMAT Clinical ) and no time pressures (VMAT Ideal ). Plans were compared through quantitative comparison of dosimetric parameters and blind review by an oncologist. Results: Upon blind review 39/40 and 33/40 VMAT Auto plans were considered preferable or equal to VMAT Clinical and VMAT Ideal respectively, with all deemed clinically acceptable. Dosimetrically, VMAT Auto , VMAT Clinical and VMAT Ideal were similar, with observed differences generally of low clinical significance. Compared to VMAT Clinical , VMAT Auto reduced hands-on planning time by 94% and 79% for PSV and PPN respectively. Total planning time was significantly reduced from 22.2 mins to 14.0 mins for PSV, with no significant reduction observed for PPN. Conclusions: A novel automated planning solution has been evaluated, whose Pareto navigation based calibration enabled clinical decision-making on trade-off balancing to be intuitively incorporated into automated protocols. It was successfully applied to two sites of differing complexity and robustly generated high quality plans in an efficient manner. Ó 2019 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. Radiotherapy and Oncology 141 (2019) 220-226 This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).Intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) and volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) treatment plan generation is a complex process, traditionally performed manually by medical physicists or specialist dosimetrists. Manual methods can be time consuming and dependent on the treatment planner's experience [1]. A solution to this problem is automated planning, where high quality plans are generated autonomously with minimal operator interaction [2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9].A key challenge in automated planning is incorporating treatment planners' or oncologists' clinical experience and decisionmaking within the autonomous process. A number of different methods have been employed: knowledge based planning (KBP) utilises databases of previous clinical plans to correlate the relationship between patient geometry and the resultant dose distribution, which then informs the optimisation of new patients [3,[10][11][12][13]; sequential e-constraint planning (ec) optimises plans based on a list of clinically prioritised goals [2,7,8,[14][15...

show abstract

Intercenter validation of a knowledge based model for automated planning of volumetric modulated arc therapy for prostate cancer. The experience of the German RapidPlan Consortium

Cited by 64 publications

References 24 publications

An interactive plan and model evolution method for knowledge‐based pelvic VMAT planning

An interactive plan and model evolution method for knowledge‐based pelvic VMAT planning

Assessment of specific versus combined purpose knowledge based models in prostate radiotherapy

Evaluating the application of Pareto navigation guided automated radiotherapy treatment planning to prostate cancer

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About