TY - JOUR
T1 - A comparison of two methodologies for radiotherapy treatment plan optimization and QA for clinical trials
AU - Geng, Huaizhi
AU - Giaddui, Tawfik
AU - Cheng, Chingyun
AU - Zhong, Haoyu
AU - Ryu, Samuel
AU - Liao, Zhongxing
AU - Yin, Fang Fang
AU - Gillin, Michael
AU - Mohan, Radhe
AU - Xiao, Ying
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2021 The Authors. Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics published by Wiley Periodicals, LLC on behalf of The American Association of Physicists in Medicine.
PY - 2021/10
Y1 - 2021/10
N2 - Background and purpose: The efficacy of clinical trials and the outcome of patient treatment are dependent on the quality assurance (QA) of radiation therapy (RT) plans. There are two widely utilized approaches that include plan optimization guidance created based on patient-specific anatomy. This study examined these two techniques for dose-volume histogram predictions, RT plan optimizations, and prospective QA processes, namely the knowledge-based planning (KBP) technique and another first principle (FP) technique. Methods: This analysis included 60, 44, and 10 RT plans from three Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) multi-institutional trials: RTOG 0631 (Spine SRS), RTOG 1308 (NSCLC), and RTOG 0522 (H&N), respectively. Both approaches were compared in terms of dose prediction and plan optimization. The dose predictions were also compared to the original plan submitted to the trials for the QA procedure. Results: For the RTOG 0631 (Spine SRS) and RTOG 0522 (H&N) plans, the dose predictions from both techniques have correlation coefficients of >0.9. The RT plans that were re-optimized based on the predictions from both techniques showed similar quality, with no statistically significant differences in target coverage or organ-at-risk sparing. The predictions of mean lung and heart doses from both methods for RTOG1308 patients, on the other hand, have a discrepancy of up to 14 Gy. Conclusions: Both methods are valuable tools for optimization guidance of RT plans for Spine SRS and Head and Neck cases, as well as for QA purposes. On the other hand, the findings suggest that KBP may be more feasible in the case of inoperable lung cancer patients who are treated with IMRT plans that have spatially unevenly distributed beam angles.
AB - Background and purpose: The efficacy of clinical trials and the outcome of patient treatment are dependent on the quality assurance (QA) of radiation therapy (RT) plans. There are two widely utilized approaches that include plan optimization guidance created based on patient-specific anatomy. This study examined these two techniques for dose-volume histogram predictions, RT plan optimizations, and prospective QA processes, namely the knowledge-based planning (KBP) technique and another first principle (FP) technique. Methods: This analysis included 60, 44, and 10 RT plans from three Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) multi-institutional trials: RTOG 0631 (Spine SRS), RTOG 1308 (NSCLC), and RTOG 0522 (H&N), respectively. Both approaches were compared in terms of dose prediction and plan optimization. The dose predictions were also compared to the original plan submitted to the trials for the QA procedure. Results: For the RTOG 0631 (Spine SRS) and RTOG 0522 (H&N) plans, the dose predictions from both techniques have correlation coefficients of >0.9. The RT plans that were re-optimized based on the predictions from both techniques showed similar quality, with no statistically significant differences in target coverage or organ-at-risk sparing. The predictions of mean lung and heart doses from both methods for RTOG1308 patients, on the other hand, have a discrepancy of up to 14 Gy. Conclusions: Both methods are valuable tools for optimization guidance of RT plans for Spine SRS and Head and Neck cases, as well as for QA purposes. On the other hand, the findings suggest that KBP may be more feasible in the case of inoperable lung cancer patients who are treated with IMRT plans that have spatially unevenly distributed beam angles.
KW - PlanIQ
KW - RapidPlan
KW - knowledge based planning
KW - radiotherapy quality assurance
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85113515743&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85113515743&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1002/acm2.13401
DO - 10.1002/acm2.13401
M3 - Article
C2 - 34432946
AN - SCOPUS:85113515743
SN - 1526-9914
VL - 22
SP - 329
EP - 337
JO - Journal of applied clinical medical physics
JF - Journal of applied clinical medical physics
IS - 10
ER -