Unified dosimetry index (UDI): a figure of merit for ranking treatment plans

Definition of a framework for volumetric modulated arc therapy plan quality assessment with integration of dose-, complexity-, and robustness metrics

Background and purpose

Conventionally, the quality of radiotherapy treatment plans is assessed through visual inspection of dose distributions and dose-volume histograms. This study developed a framework to evaluate plan quality using dose, complexity, and robustness metrics. Additionally, a method for predicting plan robustness metrics using dose and complexity metrics was introduced for cases where plan robustness evaluation is unavailable or impractical.

Materials and methods

The framework and prediction models were developed and validated using 103-bronchial Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy (VMAT)-plans. The application of the framework was demonstrated using 25-VMAT-plans. To identify significant metrics for plan evaluation, 122-metrics were analysed and narrowed down using multivariate Spearman correlation. Metric limits were set with Statistical process control (SPC). Robustness metrics were predicted using multivariable or single linear regression models based on dose-and complexity-metrics.

Results

Twenty-five-metrics were selected based on the amount and strength of correlations. R95(dose coverage) and HI95/5(homogeneity index) stood out among the dose-metrics, while the complexity-metrics showed similar correlations. Average scenarios dose at 95 % Clinical Target Volume D95mean(CTV) and Errorbar-based Volume-Histograms (EVH) were notable for robustness metrics. Approximately 99 % of evaluated metrics fell within established SPC limits. The prediction model for D95mean(CTV) showed good performance (adjusted R2 = 0.88, mean squared error (MSE) = 3.84 × 10-6), while the model for EVH demonstrated moderate reliability (adjusted R2 = 0.52, MSE = 0.2). No statistically significant differences were found between the predicted (using dose-and complexity-metrics) and calculated robustness metrics (EVH (p-value = 0.9) and D95mean(CTV) (p-value = 1)).

Conclusions

The developed framework enables early detection of sub-optimal, complex and non-robust treatment plans. The predictive model can be used when robustness evaluations are impractical.

A Monte Carlo simulation-based decision support system for radiation oncologists in the treatment of glioblastoma multiforme

In the present research, we have developed a model-based crisp logic function statistical classifier decision support system supplemented with treatment planning systems for radiation oncologists in the treatment of glioblastoma multiforme (GBM). This system is based on Monte Carlo radiation transport simulation and it recreates visualization of treatment environments on mathematical anthropomorphic brain (MAB) phantoms. Energy deposition within tumour tissue and normal tissues are graded by quality audit factors which ensure planned dose delivery to tumour site thereby minimising damages to healthy tissues. The proposed novel methodology predicts tumour growth response to radiation therapy from a patient-specific medicine quality audit perspective. Validation of the study was achieved by recreating thirty-eight patient-specific mathematical anthropomorphic brain phantoms of treatment environments by taking into consideration density variation and composition of brain tissues. Dose computations accomplished through water phantom, tissue-equivalent head phantoms are neither cost-effective, nor patient-specific customized and is often less accurate. The above-highlighted drawbacks can be overcome by using open-source Electron Gamma Shower (EGSnrc) software and clinical case reports for MAB phantom synthesis which would result in accurate dosimetry with due consideration to the time factors. Considerable dose deviations occur at the tumour site for environments with intraventricular glioblastoma, haematoma, abscess, trapped air and cranial flaps leading to quality factors with a lower logic value of 0. Logic value of 1 depicts higher dose deposition within healthy tissues and also leptomeninges for majority of the environments which results in radiation-induced laceration.

Radiobiological analysis of VMAT treatment plan with flattened and flattening filter free photon beam: an EUD and TCP based comparative study

Background

This study aimed to evaluate the dosimetric and radiobiological differences between 6MV flattened filter (FF) and flattening filter free (FFF) using volumetric modulated arc (VMAT) technique for head and neck (H&N) cancer patients.

Materials and methods

Fifteen patients with H&N carcinoma were selected and treated with VMAT with FF (VMATFF) treatment plan. Retrospectively, additional VMAT treatment plans were developed using FFF beams (VMATFFF). Radiobiological parameters, such as equivalent uniform dose (EUD), tumor cure probability (TCP), and normal tissue complication probability (NTCP), were calculated using Niemierko's model for both VMATFF and VMATFFF. Correlation between dosimetric and radiobiological data were analyzed and compared.

Results

The conformity index (CI) was 0.975 ± 0.014 (VMATFF) and 0.964 ± 0. 019 (VMATFFF) with p ≥ 0.05. Statistically, there was an insignificant difference in the planning target volume (PTV) results for TCP (%) values, with values of 81.20 ± 0.88% (VMATFF) and 81.01 ± 0.92 (%) (VMATFF). Similarly, there was an insignificant difference in the EUD (Gy) values, which were 71.53 ± 0.33 Gy (VMATFF) and 71.46 ± 0.34 Gy (VMATFFF). The NTCP values for the spinal cord, left parotid, and right parotid were 6.54 × 10-07%, 8.04%, and 7.69%, respectively, in the case of VMATFF. For VMATFFF, the corresponding NTCP values for the spinal cord, parotids left, and parotid right were 3.09 × 10-07%, 6.57%, and 6.73%, respectively.

Conclusion

The EUD and Mean Dose to PTV were strongly correlated for VMATFFF. An increased mean dose to the PTV and greater TCP were reported for the VMATFF, which can enhance the delivery of the therapeutic dose to the target.

Online adaptive radiotherapy: Assessment of planning technique and its impact on longitudinal plan quality robustness in pancreatic cancer

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Planning on a static dataset that reflects the simulation day anatomy is routine for SBRT. We hypothesize the quality of on-table adaptive plans is similar to the baseline plan when delivering stereotactic MR-guided adaptive radiotherapy (SMART) for pancreatic cancer (PCa).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Sixty-seven inoperable PCa patients were prescribed 50 Gy/5-fraction SMART. Baseline planning included: 3-5 mm gastrointestinal (GI) PRV, 50 Gy optimization target (PTVopt) based on GI PRV, conformality rings, and contracted GTV to guide the hotspot. For each adaptation, GI anatomy was re-contoured, followed by re-optimization. Plan quality was evaluated for target coverage (TC = PTVopt V100%/volume), PTV D90% and D80%, homogeneity index (HI = PTVopt D2%/D98%), prescription isodose/target volume (PITV), low-dose conformity (D2cm = maximum dose at 2 cm from PTVopt/Rx dose), and gradient index (R50%=50% Rx isodose volume/PTVopt volume).A novel global planning metric, termed the Pancreas Adaptive Radiotherapy Score (PARTS), was developed and implemented based on GI OAR sparing, PTV/GTV coverage, and conformality. Adaptive robustness (baseline to fraction 1) and stability (difference between two fractions with highest GI PRV variation) were quantified.

RESULTS

OAR constraints were met on all baseline (n = 67) and adaptive (n = 318) plans. Coverage for baseline/adaptive plans was mean ± SD at 44.9 ± 5.8 Gy/44.3 ± 5.5 Gy (PTV D80%), 50.1 ± 4.2 Gy/49.1 ± 4.7 Gy (PTVopt D80%), and 80%±18%/74%±18% (TC), respectively. Mean homogeneity and conformality for baseline/adaptive plans were 0.87 ± 0.25/0.81 ± 0.30 (PITV), 3.81 ± 1.87/3.87 ± 2.0 (R50%), 1.53 ± 0.23/1.55 ± 0.23 (HI), and 58%±7%/59%±7% (D2cm), respectively. PARTS was found to be a sensitive metric due to its additive influence of geometry changes on PARTS' sub-metrics. There were no statistical differences (p > 0.05) for stability, except for PARTS (p = 0.04, median difference -0.6%). Statistical differences for robustness when significant were small for most metrics (<2.0% median). Median adaptive re-optimizations were 2.

CONCLUSION

We describe a 5-fraction ablative SMART planning approach for PCa that is robust and stable during on-table adaption, due to gradients controlled by a GI PRV technique and the use of rings. These findings are noteworthy given that daily interfraction anatomic GI OAR differences are routine, thus necessitating on-table adaptation. This work supports feasibility towards utilizing a patient-independent, template on-table adaptive approach.

IMRT as an Alternative Technique for Intracavitary Brachytherapy in Patients with Carcinoma of the Cervix: A Feasibility Study Using Unified Dosimetric Index

OBJECTIVE

Intracavitary brachytherapy (ICBT) plays an important role in the management of carcinoma of the cervix. This study attempts to find the feasibility of intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) as a boost for patients who are not suitable for ICBT in order to improve their disease-free and overall survival.

METHODS

Twenty patients with carcinoma of the cervix were included in this study. Nine fields of IMRT and ICBT plans were generated for PTVBoost. Various dosimetric indices like coverage, conformity, homogeneity, and gradient index were calculated, and the corresponding unified dosimetric index (UDI) values were generated. Plans were classified based on combined UDI, and the UDI values were compared with those of ICBT. In addition, rectum and bladder doses were compared.

RESULTS

All the dosimetric indices were within acceptable limits except for the gradient index. The gradient index of the IMRT and ICBT plans were 8.77 ± 0.26 and 1.33 ± 0.06 respectively (p < 0.0001). The mean of combined UDI with standard deviation was 32.557 ± 8.940 and plan quality was calculated from these values. Rectum and bladder doses for ICBT were lesser than IMRT (p < 0.0001).

CONCLUSION

ICBT is the gold standard for boost RT in carcinoma of the cervix patients. IMRT boost is feasible for patients who are unsuitable on medical grounds for brachytherapy.

Updating a clinical Knowledge-Based Planning prediction model for prostate radiotherapy

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Clinical knowledge-based planning (KBP) models dedicated to prostate radiotherapy treatment may require periodical updates to remain relevant and to adapt to possible changes in the clinic. This study proposes a paired comparison of two different update approaches through a longitudinal analysis.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A clinically validated KBP model for moderately hypofractionated prostate therapy was periodically updated using two approaches: one was targeted at achieving the biggest library size (M_t), while the other one at achieving the highest mean sample quality (R_t). Four subsequent updates were accomplished. The goodness, robustness and quality of the outcomes were measured and compared to those of the common ancestor. Plan quality was assessed through the Plan Quality Metric (PQM) and plan complexity was monitored.

RESULTS

Both update procedures allowed for an increase in the OARs sparing between +3.9 % and +19.2 % compared to plans generated by a human planner. Target coverage and homogeneity slightly reduced [-0.2 %;-14.7 %] while plan complexity showed only minor changes. Increasing the sample size resulted in more reliable predictions and improved goodness-of-fit, while increasing the mean sample quality improved the outcomes but slightly reduced the models reliability.

CONCLUSIONS

Repeated updates of clinical KBP models can enhance their robustness, reliability and the overall quality of automatically generated plans. The periodical expansion of the model sample accompanied by the removal of the unacceptable low quality plans should maximize the benefits of the updates while limiting the associated workload.

Integrated scoring approach to assess radiotherapy plan quality for breast cancer treatment

Background

Proposal of an integrated scoring approach assessing the quality of different treatment techniques in a radiotherapy planning comparison. This scoring method incorporates all dosimetric indices of planning target volumes (PTVs) as well as organs at risk (OARs) and provides a single quantitative measure to select an ideal plan.

Materials and methods

The radiotherapy planning techniques compared were field-in-field (FinF), intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT), volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT), hybrid IMRT (H-IMRT), and hybrid VMAT (H-VMAT). These plans were generated for twenty-five locally advanced left-sided breast cancer patients. The PTVs were prescribed a hypofractionation dose of 40.5 Gy in 15 fractions. The integrated score for each planning technique was calculated using the proposed formula.

Results

An integrated score value that is close to zero indicates a superior plan. The integrated score that incorporates all dosimetric indices (PTVs and OARs) were 1.37, 1.64, 1.72, 1.18, and 1.24 for FinF, IMRT, VMAT, H-IMRT, and H-VMAT plans, respectively.

Conclusion

The proposed integrated scoring approach is scientific to select a better plan and flexible to incorporate the patient-specific clinical demands. This simple tool is useful to quantify the treatment techniques and able to differentiate the acceptable and unacceptable plans.

Plan quality assessment in clinical practice: Results of the 2020 ESTRO survey on plan complexity and robustness

PURPOSE

Plan complexity and robustness are two essential aspects of treatment plan quality but there is a great variability in their management in clinical practice. This study reports the results of the 2020 ESTRO survey on plan complexity and robustness to identify needs and guide future discussions and consensus.

METHODS

A survey was distributed online to ESTRO members. Plan complexity was defined as the modulation of machine parameters and increased uncertainty in dose calculation and delivery. Robustness was defined as a dose distribution's sensitivity towards errors stemming from treatment uncertainties, patient setup, or anatomical changes.

RESULTS

A total of 126 radiotherapy centres from 33 countries participated, 95 of them (75%) from Europe and Central Asia. The majority controlled and evaluated plan complexity using monitor units (56 centres) and aperture shapes (38 centres). To control robustness, 98 (97% of question responses) photon and 5 (50%) proton centres used PTV margins for plan optimization while 75 (94%) and 5 (50%), respectively, used margins for plan evaluation. Seventeen (21%) photon and 8 (80%) proton centres used robust optimisation, while 10 (13%) and 8 (80%), respectively, used robust evaluation. Primary uncertainties considered were patient setup (photons and protons) and range calculation uncertainties (protons). Participants expressed the need for improved commercial tools to control and evaluate plan complexity and robustness.

CONCLUSION

Clinical implementation of methods to control and evaluate plan complexity and robustness is very heterogeneous. Better tools are needed to manage complexity and robustness in treatment planning systems. International guidelines may promote harmonization.

Modeling physician's preference in treatment plan approval of stereotactic body radiation therapy of prostate cancer

Objective.Treatment planning of radiation therapy is a time-consuming task. It is desirable to develop automatic planning approaches to generate plans favorable to physicians. The purpose of this study is to develop a deep learning based virtual physician network (VPN) that models physician's preference on plan approval for prostate cancer stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT).Approach.VPN takes one planning target volume (PTV) and eight organs at risk structure images, as well as a dose distribution of a plan seeking approval as input. It outputs a probability of approving the plan, and a dose distribution indicating improvements to the input dose. Due to the lack of unapproved plans in our database, VPN is trained using an adversarial framework. 68 prostate cancer patients who received 45Gyin 5-fraction SBRT were selected in this study, with 60 patients for training and cross validation, and 8 patients for independent testing.Main results.The trained VPN was able to differentiate approved and unapproved plans with Area under the curve 0.97 for testing data. For unapproved plans, after applying VPN's suggested dose improvement, the improved dose agreed with ground truth with relative differences2.03±2.17%for PTVD98%,0.49±0.29%for PTVV95%,3.08±2.24%for penile bulbDmean,3.73±2.20%for rectumV50%,and2.06±1.73%for bladderV50%.Significance.VPN was developed to accurately model a physician's preference on plan approval and to provide suggestions on how to improve the dose distribution.

Plan quality in radiotherapy treatment planning - Review of the factors and challenges

A high-quality treatment plan aims to best achieve the clinical prescription, balancing high target dose to maximise tumour control against sufficiently low organ-at-risk dose for acceptably low toxicity. Treatment planning (TP) includes multiple steps from simulation/imaging and segmentation to technical plan production and reporting. Consistent quality across this process requires close collaboration and communication between clinical and technical experts, to clearly understand clinical requirements and priorities and also practical uncertainties, limitations and compromises. TP quality depends on many aspects, starting from commissioning and quality management of the treatment planning system (TPS), including its measured input data and detailed understanding of TPS models and limitations. It requires rigorous quality assurance of the whole planning process and it links to plan deliverability, assessable by measurement-based verification. This review highlights some factors influencing plan quality, for consideration for optimal plan construction and hence optimal outcomes for each patient. It also indicates some challenges, sources of difference and current developments. The topics considered include: the evolution of TP techniques; dose prescription issues; tools and methods to evaluate plan quality; and some aspects of practical TP. The understanding of what constitutes a high-quality treatment plan continues to evolve with new techniques, delivery methods and related evidence-based science. This review summarises the current position, noting developments in the concept and the need for further robust tools to help achieve it.

Comparison of two inverse planning algorithms for cervical cancer brachytherapy

PURPOSE

To compare two inverse planning algorithms, the hybrid inverse planning optimization (HIPO) algorithm and the inverse planning simulated annealing (IPSA) algorithm, for cervical cancer brachytherapy and provide suggestions for their usage.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

This study consisted of 24 cervical cancer patients treated with CT image-based high-dose-rate brachytherapy using various combinations of tandem/ovoid applicator and interstitial needles. For fixed catheter configurations, plans were retrospectively optimized with two methods: IPSA and HIPO. The dosimetric parameters with respect to target coverage, localization of high dose volume (LHDV), conformal index (COIN), and sparing of organs at risk (OARs) were evaluated. A plan assessment method which combines a graphical analysis and a scoring index was used to compare the quality of two plans for each case. The characteristics of dwell time distributions of the two plans were also analyzed in detail.

RESULTS

Both IPSA and HIPO can produce clinically acceptable treatment plans. The rectum D_2cc was slightly lower for HIPO as compared to IPSA (P = 0.002). All other dosimetric parameters for targets and OARs were not significantly different between the two algorithms. The generated radar plots and scores intuitively presented the plan properties and enabled to reflect the clinical priorities for the treatment plans. Significant different characteristics were observed between the dwell time distributions generated by IPSA and HIPO.

CONCLUSIONS

Both algorithms could generate high-quality treatment plans, but their performances were slightly different in terms of each specific patient. The clinical decision on the optimal plan for each patient can be made quickly and consistently with the help of the plan assessment method. Besides, the characteristics of dwell time distribution were suggested to be taken into account during plan selection. Compared to IPSA, the dwell time distributions generated by HIPO may be closer to clinical preference.

Dosimetric comparison of intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) and RapidArc in low grade mucoepidermoid carcinoma of the salivary gland: a single institutional experience

Purpose:

To report a single-institution experience of intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) and RapidArc treatment plans for the patients treated with low grade mucoepidermoid carcinoma (MEC) of the salivary gland while sparing the organs at risk (OARs) within tolerance limits.

Material and Methods:

Twenty-five patients with MEC were selected to develop and analyse the treatment plans using both of the techniques. Dose distributions were calculated using Eclipse treatment planning system (Varian Medical Systems, Palo Alto, CA). Plans were generated to deliver the dose of 6000 cGy in 30 fractions. For IMRT, seven angle plans were used and for RapidArc, two half arcs were used with the same 6 MV photon beam. Quality of treatment plans was evaluated by using parameters such as, coverage, conformity index (CI), homogeneity index (HI), gradient index (GI), unified dosimetry index (UDI), dose volume histogram, delivery time and OARs sparing for IMRT and RapidArc plans.

Results:

The analysis revealed that IMRT and RapidArc coverages are 0·90 and 0·94, respectively; CIs are 1·15 and 1·10, respectively; HIs are 1·12 and 1·07, respectively; GIs are 0·94 and 0·98, respectively. Average UDI values for RapidArc and IMRT are 1·09 and 1·11, respectively. Integral dose comparison shows better OAR sparing for RapidArc. RapidArc plans have the shorter beam on time (45%) in comparison with IMRT plans.

Conclusion:

Planning constraints were achieved in both techniques. However, RapidArc showed better quality treatment plan, OARs sparing and shorter delivery time as compared to IMRT.

What is plan quality in radiotherapy? The importance of evaluating dose metrics, complexity, and robustness of treatment plans

Plan evaluation is a key step in the radiotherapy treatment workflow. Central to this step is the assessment of treatment plan quality. Hence, it is important to agree on what we mean by plan quality and to be fully aware of which parameters it depends on. We understand plan quality in radiotherapy as the clinical suitability of the delivered dose distribution that can be realistically expected from a treatment plan. Plan quality is commonly assessed by evaluating the dose distribution calculated by the treatment planning system (TPS). Evaluating the 3D dose distribution is not easy, however; it is hard to fully evaluate its spatial characteristics and we still lack the knowledge for personalising the prediction of the clinical outcome based on individual patient characteristics. This advocates for standardisation and systematic collection of clinical data and outcomes after radiotherapy. Additionally, the calculated dose distribution is not exactly the dose delivered to the patient due to uncertainties in the dose calculation and the treatment delivery, including variations in the patient set-up and anatomy. Consequently, plan quality also depends on the robustness and complexity of the treatment plan. We believe that future work and consensus on the best metrics for quality indices are required. Better tools are needed in TPSs for the evaluation of dose distributions, for the robust evaluation and optimisation of treatment plans, and for controlling and reporting plan complexity. Implementation of such tools and a better understanding of these concepts will facilitate the handling of these characteristics in clinical practice and be helpful to increase the overall quality of treatment plans in radiotherapy.

Plan evaluation indices: A journey of evolution

AIM

A systemic review and analysis of evolution journey of indices, such as conformity index (CI), homogeneity index (HI) and gradient index (GI), described in the literature.

BACKGROUND

Modern radiotherapy techniques like VMAT, SRS and SBRT produce highly conformal plans and provide better critical structure and normal tissue sparing. These treatment techniques can generate a number of competitive plans for the same patients with different dose distributions. Therefore, indices like CI, HI and GI serve as complementary tools in addition to visual slice by slice isodose verification while plan evaluation. Reliability and accuracy of these indices have been tested in the past and found shortcomings and benefits when compared to one another.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Potentially relevant studies published after 1993 were identified through a pubmed and web of science search using words "conformity index", "Homogeneity index", "Gradient index"," Stereotactic radiosurgery"," stereotactic Body radiotherapy" "complexity metrics" and "plan evaluation index". Combinations of words "plan evaluation index conformity index" were also searched as were bibliographies of downloaded papers.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS

Mathematical definitions of plan evaluation indices modified with time. CI definitions presented by various authors tested at their own and could not be generalized. Those mathematical definitions of CI which take into account OAR sparing grant more confidence in plan evaluation. Gradient index emerged as a significant plan evaluation index in addition to CI whereas homogeneity index losing its credibility. Biological index base plan evaluation is becoming popular and may replace or alter the role of dosimetrical indices.

The superficially averaged dose gradient at the target volume's boundary: A two-dimensional formulation and solution of anisotropic dose gradient problems

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Dose conformity and steepness of dose fall-off at a target volume's boundary are important quality criteria in treatment planning to predict complication rates in normal tissue and critical structures. Several dose gradient measures are in use; ICRU Report 91 recommends one of two gradient metrics for reporting. All of the common gradient indices are one-dimensional, although dose gradient problems are at least two-dimensional and anisotropic. Four of ten investigated gradient indices show false characteristics on the mean value of the physical dose gradients. Anisotropic dose gradient measures can be the basis of clinical therapeutic decisions if tumours are surrounded by organs at risk with various tolerance dose values. To close this information gap, the author presents a mathematical description and solution of anisotropic dose gradient problems.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The new two-dimensional dose gradient measure is called the superficially averaged dose gradient (SADG). The particular informative content of the ten common dose gradient indices was assessed by classification and analysing their properties. The correlations between all of the dose gradient measures were investigated for linac-based stereotactic radiosurgery of 13 brain metastases.

RESULTS

From all of the one-dimensional dose gradient indices, the approximated SADG* showed the best correlation on the SADG. Here, Pearson's correlation coefficient was 1.000 and the relative errors were in a range of -0.2 to 2.9%. Distributions of anisotropic dose gradients were graphically represented by dose gradient-solid angle histograms.

CONCLUSIONS

Two-dimensional dose gradient measures such as the SADG are urgently required for lesions that are located in non-homogeneous normal tissue. The quality of each present and future dose gradient measure concerning the description of anisotropic dose gradient problems is now verifiable by use of the SADG. Through the SADG, the influences of collimation types on the dose fall-off at the target volume's boundary can be investigated. The algorithm for determining the SADG should be implemented in treatment planning systems to utilise the formalism for all users. The dose gradient indices recommended in ICRU Report 91 overestimate and underestimate physical dose gradients, respectively.

Physical and Radiobiological Evaluation of Accelerated Intensity Modulated Radiotherapy for Locally Advanced Head and Neck Cancer and Comparison with Short-Term Clinical Outcomes

Objective:

The present study aims to evaluate the accelerated intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) of head and neck (HandN) treatments using physical indices and radiobiological models with its clinical correlation using histogram analysis in radiation therapy (HART). The radiobiological evaluation in terms of tumor control probability (TCP) and normal tissue complication probability (NTCP) indices were compared with acute toxicity.

Materials and Methods:

A total of twenty patients with stage III and IV of HandN cases treated with accelerated IMRT using 6MV photons were chosen for the study. Using HART software, physical indices of the IMRT plans have been defined by universal plan indices (UPI’s) which summarize the various recognized plan indices. The overall quality factor (QF) of a plan was determined by a linear combination of all indices in UPI set. The clinical outcomes in terms of the acute toxicity like dysphagia and xerostomia were compared with NTCP values of the OAR calculated from HART software.

Results:

The mean QF and the mean Poisson TCP index was found to be 0.993±0.02 and 0.86 ±0.02 respectively. The mean JT Lyman NTCP index for bilateral parotid, constrictors, and larynx were found to be 0.23±0.14, 0.30±0.17 and 0.22±0.15 respectively. The acute toxicities in terms of severity of xerostomia and dysphagia have shown a moderate correlation with NTCP values of bilateral parotids, constrictors, and larynx, respectively.

Conclusion:

The mean QF based on UPI was found to be close to unity, which correlates with being a better IMRT plan. The present study suggested the existence of a moderate correlation between the calculated NTCP values and their respective severities of the organ at risk (OAR’s). Accelerated IMRT with chemotherapy is a clinically feasible option in the treatment of locally advanced head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) with encouraging initial tumor response and acceptable acute toxicities.

Does deep inspiration breath hold reduce plan complexity? Multicentric experience of left breast cancer radiotherapy with volumetric modulated arc therapy

PURPOSE

Volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) for left breast treatments allows heart sparing without compromising PTV coverage. However, this technique may require highly complex plans. Deep Inspiration Breath Hold (DIBH) procedure increases the heart-to-breast distance, facilitating the dose sparing of the heart. The aim of the present work was to investigate if the cardiac-sparing benefits of the DIBH technique were achieved with lower plan modulation and complexity than Free Breathing (FB) treatments.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Ten left side breast cases were considered by two centers with different treatment planning systems (TPS) and Linacs. VMAT plans were elaborated in FB and DIBH according to the same protocol. Plan complexity was evaluated by scoring several complexity indices. A new global score index accounting for both plan quality and dosimetric parameters was defined. Pre-treatment QA was performed for all VMAT plans using EPID and Epiqa software.

RESULTS

DIBH-VMAT plans were associated with significant PTV coverage improvement and mean heart dose reduction (p < 0.003), increasing the resulting global score index. All the evaluated complexity indices showed lower plan complexity for DIBH plans than FB ones, but only in few cases the results were statistically significant. All plans passed the gamma analysis with the selected criteria.

CONCLUSIONS

The DIBH technique is superior to the FB technique when the heart needs further sparing, allowing a reduction of the doses to OARs with a slightly lower degree of plan complexity and without compromising plan deliverability. These benefits were achieved regardless of the technological scenarios adopted.

A novel index for assessing treatment plan quality in stereotactic radiosurgery

OBJECTIVE

Stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) is characterized by high levels of conformity and steep dose gradients from the periphery of the target to surrounding tissue. Clinical studies have backed up the importance of these factors through evidence of symptomatic complications. Available data suggest that there are threshold doses above which the risk of symptomatic radionecrosis increases with the volume irradiated. Therefore, radiosurgical treatment plans should be optimized by minimizing dose to the surrounding tissue while maximizing dose to the target volume. Several metrics have been proposed to quantify radiosurgical plan quality, but all present certain weaknesses. To overcome limitations of the currently used metrics, a novel metric is proposed, the efficiency index (η50%), which is based on the principle of calculating integral doses: η50% = integral doseTV/integral dosePIV50%.

METHODS

The value of η50% can be easily calculated by dividing the integral dose (mean dose × volume) to the target volume (TV) by the integral dose to the volume of 50% of the prescription isodose (PIV50%). Alternatively, differential dose-volume histograms (DVHs) of the TV and PIV50% can be used. The resulting η50% value is effectively the proportion of energy within the PIV50% that falls into the target. This value has theoretical limits of 0 and 1, with 1 being perfect. The index combines conformity, gradient, and mean dose to the target into a single value. The value of η50% was retrospectively calculated for 100 clinical SRS plans.

RESULTS

The value of η50% for the 100 clinical SRS plans ranged from 37.7% to 58.0% with a mean value of 49.0%. This study also showed that the same principles used for the calculation of η50% can be adapted to produce an index suitable for multiple-target plans (Gη12Gy). Furthermore, the authors present another adaptation of the index that may play a role in plan optimization by calculating and minimizing the proportion of energy delivered to surrounding organs at risk (OARη50%).

CONCLUSIONS

The proposed efficiency index is a novel approach in quantifying plan quality by combining conformity, gradient, and mean dose into a single value. It quantifies the ratio of the dose “doing good” versus the dose “doing harm,” and its adaptations can be used for multiple-target plan optimization and OAR sparing.

A comparative study of RapidArc and intensity-modulated radiotherapy plan quality for cervical cancer treatment

BACKGROUND

RapidArc therapy, a complex form of intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT), is now widely used to treat cancer patients.

AIMS

This study aimed to investigate and compare the plan quality of IMRT and RapidArc techniques using various dosimetric indices to find the better treatment modality for treating patients with cervix cancer.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Thirteen cervical cancer patients treated with IMRT were selected for analysis and original plans were subsequently re-optimized using the RapidArc technique. Plans were generated such that dose of 5000 cGy was delivered in 25 equal fractions. Inverse planning was done by Eclipse (Varian Medical Systems, Palo Alto, CA) treatment planning system for 15 MV photon beams from computed tomographic data. Double arcs were used for RapidArc plans. Quality of treatment plans was evaluated by calculating conformity index (CI), homogeneity index (HI), gradient index (GI), coverage, and unified dosimetry index (UDI) for each plan.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSION

RapidArc resulted in better planning target volume (PTV) coverage as is evident from its superior conformation number, coverage, CI, HI, GI, and UDI. Regarding organs at risk (OARs), RapidArc plans exhibit superior organ sparing as is evident from integral dose comparison. Difference between both techniques was determined by statistical analysis. For all cases under study, modest differences between IMRT and RapidArc treatment were observed. RapidArc-based treatment planning is safer with similar planning goals compared to the standard fixed IMRT technique. This study clearly demonstrated that favorable dose distribution in PTV and OARs was achieved using RapidArc technique, and hence, the risk of damage to normal tissues is reduced.

Fine-tuning the normal tissue objective in eclipse for lung stereotactic body radiation therapy

The purpose of this study was to characterize the effects of the normal tissue objective (NTO) on lung stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) dose distributions. The NTO is a spatially varying constraint used in Eclipse to limit dose to normal tissues by steepening the dose gradient. However, the multitude of potential NTO setting combinations challenges optimal NTO tuning. In the present study, a broad range of NTO settings are investigated for lung SBRT treatment planning with volumetric modulated arc therapy(VMAT). Ten prior lung SBRT cases were replanned using NTO priorities of 1, 50, 100, 200, 500, and 999 in combination with fall-off values of 0.01, 0.05, 0.10, 0.15, 0.20, 0.30, 0.50, 1.00, and 5.00 mm^-1 and the automatic NTO. NTO distances to planning target volume (PTV), start dose, and end dose were 1 mm, 100%, and 10%, respectively, for all 600 plans. Prescription dose covered 95% of the PTV. The following metrics were recorded: conformity index (CI), ratio of the 50% prescription isodose volume to PTV (R_50%), maximum dose 2 cm away from PTV (D_2cm), lung volume of ≥20 Gy (V_20Gy), maximum PTV dose (PTV_max), and monitor units (MUs). Differences between prior plans and NTO plans were evaluated using the Wilcoxon signed-rank test. Different combinations of NTO settings resulted in wide-ranging plan quality metrics: CI (1.00 to 1.54), R_50% (3.95 to 7.57), D_2cm (33.4% to 67.9%), V_20Gy (1.66% to 2.75%), MU (1.81 cGy^-1 to 4.69 cGy^-1), and PTV_max (118% to 175%). Although no settings were optimal for all metrics, a fall-off of 0.15 mm^-1 and a priority of 500 best satisfied institutional criteria. Compared with prior plans, NTO plans resulted in significantly lower R_50% (4.00 vs 4.35, p = 0.002), lower V_20Gy (1.22% vs 1.32%, p = 0.006), and higher PTV_max (138% vs 122%, p = 0.002). All of the prior and well-tuned NTO plans met Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) 0813 guidelines. Lung SBRT dose distributions were characterized across a range of NTO settings. NTO plans with well-tuned settings compared favorably with prior plans.

The use of TCP based EUD to rank and compare lung radiotherapy plans: in-silico study to evaluate the correlation between TCP with physical quality indices

BACKGROUND

To apply the equivalent uniform dose (EUD) radiobiological model to estimate the tumor control probability (TCP) scores for treatment plans using different radiobiological parameter settings, and to evaluate the correlation between TCP and physical quality indices of the treatment plans.

METHODS

Ten radiotherapy treatment plans for lung cancer were generated. The dose distributions were calculated using anisotropic analytical algorithm (AAA). Dose parameters and quality indices derived from dose volume histograms (DVH) for target volumes were evaluated. The predicted TCP was computed using EUD model with tissue-specific parameter (a=-10). The assumed radiobiological parameter setting for adjuvant therapy [tumor dose to control 50% of the tumor (TCD₅₀) =36.5 Gy and γ₅₀=0.72] and curative intent (TCD₅₀=51.24 Gy and γ₅₀=0.83) were used. The bootstrap method was used to estimate the 95% confidence interval (95% CI). The coefficients (ρ) from Spearman's rank test were calculated to assess the correlation between quality indices with TCP. Wilcoxon paired test was used to calculate P value.

RESULTS

The 95% CI of TCP were 70.6-81.5 and 46.6-64.7, respectively, for adjuvant radiotherapy and curative intent. The TCP outcome showed a positive and good correlation with calculated dose to 95% of the target volume (D95%) and minimum dose (Dmin). Consistently, TCP correlate negatively with heterogeneity indices.

CONCLUSIONS

This study confirms that more relevant and robust radiobiological parameters setting should be integrated according to cancer type. The positive correlation with quality indices gives chance to improve the clinical out-come by optimizing the treatment plans to maximize the Dmin and D95%. This attempt to increase the TCP should be carried out with the respect of dose constraints for organs at risks. However, the negative correlation with heterogeneity indices shows that the optimization of beam arrangements could be also useful. Attention should be paid to obtain an appropriate optimization of initial plans, when comparing and ranking radiotherapy plans using TCP models, to avoid over or underestimated for TCP outcome.

Comparison of Rapid Arc and Intensity-modulated Radiotherapy Plans Using Unified Dosimetry Index and the Impact of Conformity Index on Unified Dosimetry Index Evaluation

The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of conformity index in the unified dosimetry index (UDI) score for two different planning techniques namely intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) and Rapid Arc. Rapid Arc and IMRT plans of 57 patients were evaluated and compared using UDI score which incorporates four indices. To determine the impact of conformity index on the IMRT and Rapid Arc plans, UDI at conformity index one of all plan (UDI_{unit_CI}) score was calculated by assuming conformity index is equal to one. Mean and standard deviations of all indices were calculated. Rapid Arc technique plans of different treatment sites of all patients scored lesser UDI than IMRT plans, and the conformity index of Rapid Arc plan was significantly better than IMRT plan. The average dose gradient, homogeneity, coverage, and conformity index of all sites with Rapid Arc plans were 0.212 ± 0.05, 1.123 ± 0.03, 0.959 ± 0.03, and 1.056 ± 0.09; with IMRT plans were 0.190 ± 0.05, 1.113 ± 0.04, 0.950 ± 0.04, and 1.172 ± 0.16, respectively. UDI score value with actual conformity index of Rapid Arc and IMRT plans differed significantly (P < 0.001). However, UDI_{unit_CI} score values with assumed conformity index equal to one did not differ significantly (P = 0.528). In the comparison of IMRT and Rapid Arc plans using the UDI score, the impact of conformity index was significant.

Comparison of treatment plans: a retrospective study by the method of radiobiological evaluation

There are many situations in radiotherapy where multiple treatment plans need to be compared for selection of an optimal plan. In this study we performed the radiobiological method of plan evaluation to verify the treatment plan comparison procedure of our clinical practice. We estimated and correlated various radiobiological dose indices with physical dose metrics for a total of 30 patients representing typical cases of head and neck, prostate and brain tumors. Three sets of plans along with a clinically approved plan (final plan) treated by either Intensity Modulated Radiation Therapy (IMRT) or Rapid Arc (RA) techniques were considered. The study yielded improved target coverage for final plans, however, no appreciable differences in doses and the complication probabilities of organs at risk were noticed. Even though all four plans showed adequate dose distributions, from dosimetric point of view, the final plan had more acceptable dose distribution. The estimated biological outcome and dose volume histogram data showed least differences between plans for IMRT when compared to RA. Our retrospective study based on 120 plans, validated the radiobiological method of plan evaluation. The tumor cure or normal tissue complication probabilities were found to be correlated with the corresponding physical dose indices.

SPIDERplan: A tool to support decision-making in radiation therapy treatment plan assessment

AIM

In this work, a graphical method for radiotherapy treatment plan assessment and comparison, named SPIDERplan, is proposed. It aims to support plan approval allowing independent and consistent comparisons of different treatment techniques, algorithms or treatment planning systems.

BACKGROUND

Optimized plans from modern radiotherapy are not easy to evaluate and compare because of their inherent multicriterial nature. The clinical decision on the best treatment plan is mostly based on subjective options.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

SPIDERplan combines a graphical analysis with a scoring index. Customized radar plots based on the categorization of structures into groups and on the determination of individual structures scores are generated. To each group and structure, an angular amplitude is assigned expressing the clinical importance defined by the radiation oncologist. Completing the graphical evaluation, a global plan score, based on the structures score and their clinical weights, is determined. After a necessary clinical validation of the group weights, SPIDERplan efficacy, to compare and rank different plans, was tested through a planning exercise where plans had been generated for a nasal cavity case using different treatment planning systems.

RESULTS

SPIDERplan method was applied to the dose metrics achieved by the nasal cavity test plans. The generated diagrams and scores successfully ranked the plans according to the prescribed dose objectives and constraints and the radiation oncologist priorities, after a necessary clinical validation process.

CONCLUSIONS

SPIDERplan enables a fast and consistent evaluation of plan quality considering all targets and organs at risk.

Inverse treatment planning for spinal robotic radiosurgery: an international multi-institutional benchmark trial

Stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) is the accurate, conformal delivery of high‐dose radiation to well‐defined targets while minimizing normal structure doses via steep dose gradients. While inverse treatment planning (ITP) with computerized optimization algorithms are routine, many aspects of the planning process remain user‐dependent. We performed an international, multi‐institutional benchmark trial to study planning variability and to analyze preferable ITP practice for spinal robotic radiosurgery. 10 SRS treatment plans were generated for a complex‐shaped spinal metastasis with 21 Gy in 3 fractions and tight constraints for spinal cord (V14Gy<2 cc, V18Gy<0.1 cc) and target (coverage >95%). The resulting plans were rated on a scale from 1 to 4 (excellent‐poor) in five categories (constraint compliance, optimization goals, low‐dose regions, ITP complexity, and clinical acceptability) by a blinded review panel. Additionally, the plans were mathematically rated based on plan indices (critical structure and target doses, conformity, monitor units, normal tissue complication probability, and treatment time) and compared to the human rankings. The treatment plans and the reviewers' rankings varied substantially among the participating centers. The average mean overall rank was 2.4 (1.2‐4.0) and 8/10 plans were rated excellent in at least one category by at least one reviewer. The mathematical rankings agreed with the mean overall human rankings in 9/10 cases pointing toward the possibility for sole mathematical plan quality comparison. The final rankings revealed that a plan with a well‐balanced trade‐off among all planning objectives was preferred for treatment by most participants, reviewers, and the mathematical ranking system. Furthermore, this plan was generated with simple planning techniques. Our multi‐institutional planning study found wide variability in ITP approaches for spinal robotic radiosurgery. The participants', reviewers', and mathematical match on preferable treatment plans and ITP techniques indicate that agreement on treatment planning and plan quality can be reached for spinal robotic radiosurgery.

PACS number(s): 87.55.de

A dose-volume histogram based decision-support system for dosimetric comparison of radiotherapy treatment plans

Background

The choice of any radiotherapy treatment plan is usually made after the evaluation of a few preliminary isodose distributions obtained from different beam configurations. Despite considerable advances in planning techniques, such final decision remains a challenging task that would greatly benefit from efficient and reliable assessment tools.

Methods

For any dosimetric plan considered, data on dose-volume histograms supplied by treatment planning systems are used to provide estimates on planning target coverage as well as on sparing of organs at risk and the remaining healthy tissue. These partial metrics are then combined into a dose distribution index (DDI), which provides a unified, easy-to-read score for each competing radiotherapy plan. To assess the performance of the proposed scoring system, DDI figures for fifty brain cancer patients were retrospectively evaluated. Patients were divided in three groups depending on tumor location and malignancy. For each patient, three tentative plans were designed and recorded during planning, one of which was eventually selected for treatment. We thus were able to compare the plans with better DDI scores and those actually delivered.

Results

When planning target coverage and organs at risk sparing are considered as equally important, the tentative plan with the highest DDI score is shown to coincide with that actually delivered in 32 of the 50 patients considered. In 15 (respectively 3) of the remaining 18 cases, the plan with highest DDI value still coincides with that actually selected, provided that organs at risk sparing is given higher priority (respectively, lower priority) than target coverage.

Conclusions

DDI provides a straightforward and non-subjective tool for dosimetric comparison of tentative radiotherapy plans. In particular, DDI readily quantifies differences among competing plans with similar-looking dose-volume histograms and can be easily implemented for any tumor type and localization, irrespective of the planning system and irradiation technique considered. Moreover, DDI permits to estimate the dosimetry impact of different priorities being assigned to sparing of organs at risk or to better target coverage.

Differential dosimetric benefit of proton beam therapy over intensity modulated radiotherapy for a variety of targets in patients with intracranial germ cell tumors

Background

We performed dosimetric comparisons between proton beam therapy and intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) of intracranial germ cell tumors (ICGCTs) arising in various locations of the brain.

Materials

IMRT, passively scattered proton therapy (PSPT), and spot scanning proton therapy (SSPT) plans were performed for four different target volumes: the whole ventricle (WV), pineal gland (PG), suprasellar (SS), and basal ganglia (BG). Five consecutive clinical cases were selected from the patients treated between 2011 and 2014 for each target volume. Total 20 cases from the 17 patients were included in the analyses with three overlap cases which were used in plan comparison both for the whole ventricle and boost targets. The conformity index, homogeneity index, gradient index, plan quality index (PQI), and doses applied to the normal substructures of the brain were calculated for each treatment plan.

Results

The PQI was significantly superior for PSPT and SSPT than IMRT for ICGCTs in all locations (median; WV: 2.89 and 2.37 vs 4.06, PG: 3.38 and 2.70 vs 4.39, SS: 3.92 and 2.49 vs 4.46, BG: 3.01 and 2.49 vs 4.45). PSPT and SSPT significantly reduced the mean dose, and the 10 and 15 Gy dose volumes applied to the normal brain compared with IMRT (p ≤ 0.05). PSPT and SSPT saved significantly greater volumes of the temporal lobes and hippocampi (p < 0.05) in the SS and PG targets than IMRT. For tumors arising in the BG, PSPT and SSPT also saved greater volumes of the contralateral temporal lobes.

Conclusions

PSPT and SSPT provide superior target volume coverage and saved more normal tissue compared with IMRT for ICGCTs in various locations. Future studies should assess whether the extent of normal tissue saved has clinical benefits in children with ICGCTs.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13014-015-0441-5) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Optimization by visualization of indices

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Physical 3D treatment planning provides a pool of parameters describing dose distributions. It is often useful to define conformal indices to enable quicker evaluation. However, the application of individual indices is controversial and not always effective. The aim of this study was to design a quick check of dose distributions based on several indices detecting underdosages within planning target volumes (PTVs) and overdosages in normal tissue.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Dose distributions of 215 cancer patients were considered. Treatment modalities used were three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3DCRT), radiosurgery, intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT), intensity-modulated arc therapy (IMAT) and tomotherapy. The volumes recommended in ICRU 50 and 83 were used for planning and six conformation and homogeneity indices were selected: CI, CN, CICRU, COV, C∆, and HI. These were based on the PTV, the partial volume covered by the prescribed isodose (PI; PTVPI), the treated volume (TVPI), near maximum D2 and near minimum D98. Results were presented as a hexagon-the corners of which represent the values of the indices-and a modified test function F (Rosenbrock's function) was calculated. Results refer to clinical examples and mean values, in order to allow evaluation of the power of F and hexagon-based decision support procedures in detail and in general.

RESULTS

IMAT and tomotherapy showed the best values for the indices and the lowest standard deviation followed by static IMRT. DCRT and radiosurgery (e.g. CN: IMAT 0.85 ± 0.06; tomotherapy 0.84 ± 0.06; IMRT 0.83 ± 0.07; 3DCRT 0.65 ± 0.08; radiosurgery 0.64 ± 0.11). In extreme situations, not all indices reflected the situation correctly. Over- and underdosing of PTV and normal tissue could be qualitatively assessed from the distortion of the hexagon in graphic analysis. Tomotherapy, IMRT, IMAT, 3DCRT and radiosurgery showed increasingly distorted hexagons, the type of distortion indicating exposure of normal tissue volumes. The calculated F values correlated with these observations.

CONCLUSION

An evaluation of dose distributions cannot be based on a single conformal index. A solution could be the use of several indices presented as a hexagonal graphic and/or as a test function.

Selecting radiotherapy dose distributions by means of constrained optimization problems

The main steps in planning radiotherapy consist in selecting for any patient diagnosed with a solid tumor (i) a prescribed radiation dose on the tumor, (ii) bounds on the radiation side effects on nearby organs at risk and (iii) a fractionation scheme specifying the number and frequency of therapeutic sessions during treatment. The goal of any radiotherapy treatment is to deliver on the tumor a radiation dose as close as possible to that selected in (i), while at the same time conforming to the constraints prescribed in (ii). To this day, considerable uncertainties remain concerning the best manner in which such issues should be addressed. In particular, the choice of a prescription radiation dose is mostly based on clinical experience accumulated on the particular type of tumor considered, without any direct reference to quantitative radiobiological assessment. Interestingly, mathematical models for the effect of radiation on biological matter have existed for quite some time, and are widely acknowledged by clinicians. However, the difficulty to obtain accurate in vivo measurements of the radiobiological parameters involved has severely restricted their direct application in current clinical practice.In this work, we first propose a mathematical model to select radiation dose distributions as solutions (minimizers) of suitable variational problems, under the assumption that key radiobiological parameters for tumors and organs at risk involved are known. Second, by analyzing the dependence of such solutions on the parameters involved, we then discuss the manner in which the use of those minimizers can improve current decision-making processes to select clinical dosimetries when (as is generally the case) only partial information on model radiosensitivity parameters is available. A comparison of the proposed radiation dose distributions with those actually delivered in a number of clinical cases strongly suggests that solutions of our mathematical model can be instrumental in deriving good quality tests to select radiotherapy treatment plans in rather general situations.

Keeping an eye on the ring: COMS plaque loading optimization for improved dose conformity and homogeneity

PURPOSE

To improve tumor dose conformity and homogeneity for COMS plaque brachytherapy by investigating the dosimetric effects of varying component source ring radionuclides and source strengths.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

The MCNP5 Monte Carlo (MC) radiation transport code was used to simulate plaque heterogeneity-corrected dose distributions for individually-activated source rings of 14, 16 and 18 mm diameter COMS plaques, populated with (103)Pd, (125)I and (131)Cs sources. Ellipsoidal tumors were contoured for each plaque size and MATLAB programming was developed to generate tumor dose distributions for all possible ring weighting and radionuclide permutations for a given plaque size and source strength resolution, assuming a 75 Gy apical prescription dose. These dose distributions were analyzed for conformity and homogeneity and compared to reference dose distributions from uniformly-loaded (125)I plaques. The most conformal and homogeneous dose distributions were reproduced within a reference eye environment to assess organ-at-risk (OAR) doses in the Pinnacle(3) treatment planning system (TPS). The gamma-index analysis method was used to quantitatively compare MC and TPS-generated dose distributions.

RESULTS

Concentrating > 97% of the total source strength in a single or pair of central (103)Pd seeds produced the most conformal dose distributions, with tumor basal doses a factor of 2-3 higher and OAR doses a factor of 2-3 lower than those of corresponding uniformly-loaded (125)I plaques. Concentrating 82-86% of the total source strength in peripherally-loaded (131)Cs seeds produced the most homogeneous dose distributions, with tumor basal doses 17-25% lower and OAR doses typically 20% higher than those of corresponding uniformly-loaded (125)I plaques. Gamma-index analysis found > 99% agreement between MC and TPS dose distributions.

CONCLUSIONS

A method was developed to select intra-plaque ring radionuclide compositions and source strengths to deliver more conformal and homogeneous tumor dose distributions than uniformly-loaded (125)I plaques. This method may support coordinated investigations of an appropriate clinical target for eye plaque brachytherapy.

Homogeneity Index: An objective tool for assessment of conformal radiation treatments

Homogeneity Index (HI) is an objective tool to analyz the uniformity of dose distribution in the target volume. Various formulae have been described in literature for its calculation but there is paucity of data regarding the ideal formula and the factors affecting this index. This study was undertaken to analyze HI in our patients using various formulae and to find out the co-relation between HI and prescribed dose, target volume and target location. A retrospective review of 99 patients was performed. HI was calculated using five different formulae (A-E). The patients were divided in five groups each, based on prescribed dose, target volume and target location and mean HI of each group was analysed to find the co-relation between these factors and HI. When there were multiple target volumes the primary target volume was studied. The statistical calculation was done using SPSS version 16.0. Ninety nine patients were found evaluable with 75 males and 24 females. Ninety five patients were treated with radical intent and four with palliative intent. The sites treated were head and neck (46.4%), Pelvis (17.1%), brain (15.1%), abdomen (12.1%), and thorax (6.1%). The mean prescribed dose was 4304 cGy (centiGray) and the mean target volume was 476.2 cc. The mean value of HI was 1.21, 2.08, 30.13, 21.51 and 1.27 with different formulae. There was considerable agreement between HI calculated using various formulae specially the formulae considering prescribed dose (C, D). On statistical analysis, there was no significant co-relation between the location and volume of target but there was a trend toward better HI with increasing prescribed dose. Future studies with more number of patients can confirm our results.

Dose gradient analyses in Linac-based intracranial stereotactic radiosurgery using Paddick's gradient index: consideration of the optimal method for plan evaluation

The objective of our study was to describe the dose gradient characteristics of Linac-based stereotactic radiosurgery using Paddick's gradient index (GI) and to elucidate the factors influencing the GI value. Seventy-three plans for brain metastases using the dynamic conformal arcs were reviewed. The GI values were calculated at the 80% and 90% isodose surfaces (IDSs) and at the different target coverage IDSs (D99, D95, D90, and D85). The GI values significantly decreased as the target coverage of the reference IDS increased (the percentage of the IDS decreased). There was a significant inverse correlation between the GI values and target volume. The plans generated with the addition of a 1-mm leaf margin had worse GI values both at the D99 and D95 relative to those without leaf margin. The number and arrangement of arcs also affected the GI value. The GI values are highly sensitive to (1) the IDS selection variability for dose prescription or evaluation, (2) the target volume, and (3) the planning method. To objectively compare the quality of dose gradient between rival plans, it would be preferable to employ the GI defined at the reference IDS indicating the specific target coverage (e.g., D95), irrespective of the intended marginal dose. The modified GI (mGI), defined in this study, substituting the denominator of the original GI with the target volume, would be useful to compensate for the false superior GI value in cases of target over-coverage with the reference IDS and to objectively evaluate the dose gradient outside the target boundary.

A computational tool for the efficient analysis of dose-volume histograms from radiation therapy treatment plans

A Histogram Analysis in Radiation Therapy (HART) program was primarily developed to increase the efficiency and accuracy of dose–volume histogram (DVH) analysis of large quantities of patient data in radiation therapy research. The program was written in MATLAB to analyze patient plans exported from the treatment planning system (Pinnacle3) in the American Association of Physicists in Medicine/Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (AAPM/RTOG) format. HART‐computed DVH data was validated against manually extracted data from the planning system for five head and neck cancer patients treated with the intensity‐modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) technique. HART calculated over 4000 parameters from the differential DVH (dDVH) curves for each patient in approximately 10–15 minutes. Manual extraction of this amount of data required 5 to 6 hours. The normalized root mean square deviation (NRMSD) for the HART–extracted DVH outcomes was less than 1%, or within 0.5% distance‐to‐agreement (DTA). This tool is supported with various user‐friendly options and graphical displays. Additional features include optimal polynomial modeling of DVH curves for organs, treatment plan indices (TPI) evaluation, plan‐specific outcome analysis (POA), and spatial DVH (zDVH) and dose surface histogram (DSH) analyses, respectively. HART is freely available to the radiation oncology community.

PACS numbers: 87.53.‐j; 87.53.Tf; 87.53.Xd.