Effectiveness of noncoplanar IMRT planning using a parallelized multiresolution beam angle optimization method for paranasal sinus carcinoma

Purpose: To determine the effectiveness of noncoplanar beam configurations and the benefit of plans using fewer but optimally placed beams designed by a parallelized multiple-resolution beam angle optimization (PMBAO) approach. Methods and Materials: The PMBAO approach uses a combination of coplanar and noncoplanar beam configurations for intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) treatment planning of paranasal sinus cancers. A smaller number of beams (e.g. 3) are first used to explore the solution space to determine the best and worst beam directions. The results of this exploration are then used as a starting point for determining an optimum beam orientation configuration with more beams (e.g. 5). This process is parallelized using a message passing interface, which greatly reduces the overall computation time for routine clinical practice. To test this approach, treatment for 10 patients with paranasal sinus cancer was planned using a total of 5 beams from a pool of 46 possible beam angles. The PMBAO treatment plans were also compared with IMRT plans designed using 9 equally spaced coplanar beams, which is the standard approach in our clinic. Plans with these two different beam configurations were compared with respect to dose conformity, dose heterogeneity, dose-volume histograms, and doses to organs at risk (i.e., eyes, optic nerve, optic chiasm, and brain). Results: The noncoplanar beam configuration was superior in most paranasal sinus carcinoma cases. The target dose homogeneity was better using a PMBAO 5-beam configuration. However, the dose conformity using PMBAO was not improved and was case dependent. Compared with the 9-beam configuration, the PMBAO configuration significantly reduced the mean dose to the eyes and optic nerves and the maximum dose to the contralateral optical path (e.g. the contralateral eye and optic nerve). The maximum dose to the ipsilateral eye and optic nerve was also lower using the PMBAO configuration than using the 9-beam configuration, although this difference was not significant. The mean doses to the optic chiasm and brain are marginally lower using the PMBAO configuration than using 9-beam configuration. The maximum doses to the optic chiasm and brain are the same with the PMBAO configuration and the 9-beam configuration. Conclusion: Parallelized multiple-resolution beam angle optimization with an optimized noncoplanar beam configuration is an effective and practical approach for IMRT treatment planning. Five-beam treatment plans optimized using the PMBAO are at least equivalent to, and overall better than, the plans using 9 equally spaced coplanar beams.