Publication

Automated Robust Proton Planning Using Dose-Volume Histogram-Based Mimicking of the Photon Reference Dose and Reducing Organ at Risk Dose Optimization

Kierkels, R. G. J., Fredriksson, A., Both, S., Langendijk, J. A., Scandurra, D. & Korevaar, E. W., 1-Jan-2019, In : International Journal of Radiation Oncology, Biology, Physics. 103, 1, p. 251-258 8 p.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

APA

Kierkels, R. G. J., Fredriksson, A., Both, S., Langendijk, J. A., Scandurra, D., & Korevaar, E. W. (2019). Automated Robust Proton Planning Using Dose-Volume Histogram-Based Mimicking of the Photon Reference Dose and Reducing Organ at Risk Dose Optimization. International Journal of Radiation Oncology, Biology, Physics, 103(1), 251-258. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrobp.2018.08.023

Author

Kierkels, R G J ; Fredriksson, A ; Both, S ; Langendijk, J A ; Scandurra, D ; Korevaar, E W. / Automated Robust Proton Planning Using Dose-Volume Histogram-Based Mimicking of the Photon Reference Dose and Reducing Organ at Risk Dose Optimization. In: International Journal of Radiation Oncology, Biology, Physics. 2019 ; Vol. 103, No. 1. pp. 251-258.

Harvard

Kierkels, RGJ, Fredriksson, A, Both, S, Langendijk, JA, Scandurra, D & Korevaar, EW 2019, 'Automated Robust Proton Planning Using Dose-Volume Histogram-Based Mimicking of the Photon Reference Dose and Reducing Organ at Risk Dose Optimization', International Journal of Radiation Oncology, Biology, Physics, vol. 103, no. 1, pp. 251-258. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrobp.2018.08.023

Standard

Automated Robust Proton Planning Using Dose-Volume Histogram-Based Mimicking of the Photon Reference Dose and Reducing Organ at Risk Dose Optimization. / Kierkels, R G J; Fredriksson, A; Both, S; Langendijk, J A; Scandurra, D; Korevaar, E W.

In: International Journal of Radiation Oncology, Biology, Physics, Vol. 103, No. 1, 01.01.2019, p. 251-258.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

Vancouver

Kierkels RGJ, Fredriksson A, Both S, Langendijk JA, Scandurra D, Korevaar EW. Automated Robust Proton Planning Using Dose-Volume Histogram-Based Mimicking of the Photon Reference Dose and Reducing Organ at Risk Dose Optimization. International Journal of Radiation Oncology, Biology, Physics. 2019 Jan 1;103(1):251-258. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrobp.2018.08.023


BibTeX

@article{cfadbbacd0a943e3a640171fb15d6fc7,
title = "Automated Robust Proton Planning Using Dose-Volume Histogram-Based Mimicking of the Photon Reference Dose and Reducing Organ at Risk Dose Optimization",
abstract = "Purpose: Patient selection for proton therapy is increasingly based on proton to photon plan comparisons. To improve efficient decision making, we developed a dose mimicking and reducing (DMR) algorithm to automatically generate a robust proton plan from a reference photon dose, as well as target and organ at risk (OAR) delineations.Methods and Materials: The DMR algorithm was evaluated in 40 patients with head and neck cancer. The first step of the DMR algorithm comprises dose-volume histogram-based mimicking of the photon dose distribution in the clinical target volumes and OARs. Target robustness is included by mimicking the nominal photon dose in 21 perturbed scenarios. The second step of the optimization aims to reduce the OAR doses while retaining the robust target coverage as achieved in the first step. We evaluated each DMR plan against the manually robustly optimized reference proton plan in terms of plan robustness (voxel-wise minimum dose). Furthermore, the DMR plans were evaluated against the reference photon plan using normal tissue complication probability (NTCP) models of xerostomia, dysphagia, and tube feeding dependence. Consequently, Delta NTCPs were defined as the difference between the NTCPs of the photon and proton plans.Results: The dose distributions of the DMR and reference proton plans were very similar in terms of target robustness and OAR dose values. Regardless of proton planning technique (ie, DMR or reference proton plan), the same treatment modality was selected in 80{\%} (32 of 40) of cases based on the Sigma Delta NTCPs. In 15{\%} (6 of 40) of cases, a conflicting decision was made based on relatively small dose differences to the OARs (Conclusions: The DMR algorithm automatically optimized robust proton plans from a photon reference dose that were comparable to the dosimetrist-optimized proton plans in patients with head and neck cancer. This algorithm has been successfully embedded into a framework to automatically select patients for proton therapy based on NTCPs. (C) 2018 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.",
keywords = "MULTICRITERIA OPTIMIZATION, RADIOTHERAPY, THERAPY, HEAD",
author = "Kierkels, {R G J} and A Fredriksson and S Both and Langendijk, {J A} and D Scandurra and Korevaar, {E W}",
note = "Copyright {\circledC} 2018 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.",
year = "2019",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.ijrobp.2018.08.023",
language = "English",
volume = "103",
pages = "251--258",
journal = "International Journal of Radiation Oncology Biology Physics",
issn = "0360-3016",
publisher = "ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC",
number = "1",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Automated Robust Proton Planning Using Dose-Volume Histogram-Based Mimicking of the Photon Reference Dose and Reducing Organ at Risk Dose Optimization

AU - Kierkels, R G J

AU - Fredriksson, A

AU - Both, S

AU - Langendijk, J A

AU - Scandurra, D

AU - Korevaar, E W

N1 - Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

PY - 2019/1/1

Y1 - 2019/1/1

N2 - Purpose: Patient selection for proton therapy is increasingly based on proton to photon plan comparisons. To improve efficient decision making, we developed a dose mimicking and reducing (DMR) algorithm to automatically generate a robust proton plan from a reference photon dose, as well as target and organ at risk (OAR) delineations.Methods and Materials: The DMR algorithm was evaluated in 40 patients with head and neck cancer. The first step of the DMR algorithm comprises dose-volume histogram-based mimicking of the photon dose distribution in the clinical target volumes and OARs. Target robustness is included by mimicking the nominal photon dose in 21 perturbed scenarios. The second step of the optimization aims to reduce the OAR doses while retaining the robust target coverage as achieved in the first step. We evaluated each DMR plan against the manually robustly optimized reference proton plan in terms of plan robustness (voxel-wise minimum dose). Furthermore, the DMR plans were evaluated against the reference photon plan using normal tissue complication probability (NTCP) models of xerostomia, dysphagia, and tube feeding dependence. Consequently, Delta NTCPs were defined as the difference between the NTCPs of the photon and proton plans.Results: The dose distributions of the DMR and reference proton plans were very similar in terms of target robustness and OAR dose values. Regardless of proton planning technique (ie, DMR or reference proton plan), the same treatment modality was selected in 80% (32 of 40) of cases based on the Sigma Delta NTCPs. In 15% (6 of 40) of cases, a conflicting decision was made based on relatively small dose differences to the OARs (Conclusions: The DMR algorithm automatically optimized robust proton plans from a photon reference dose that were comparable to the dosimetrist-optimized proton plans in patients with head and neck cancer. This algorithm has been successfully embedded into a framework to automatically select patients for proton therapy based on NTCPs. (C) 2018 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

AB - Purpose: Patient selection for proton therapy is increasingly based on proton to photon plan comparisons. To improve efficient decision making, we developed a dose mimicking and reducing (DMR) algorithm to automatically generate a robust proton plan from a reference photon dose, as well as target and organ at risk (OAR) delineations.Methods and Materials: The DMR algorithm was evaluated in 40 patients with head and neck cancer. The first step of the DMR algorithm comprises dose-volume histogram-based mimicking of the photon dose distribution in the clinical target volumes and OARs. Target robustness is included by mimicking the nominal photon dose in 21 perturbed scenarios. The second step of the optimization aims to reduce the OAR doses while retaining the robust target coverage as achieved in the first step. We evaluated each DMR plan against the manually robustly optimized reference proton plan in terms of plan robustness (voxel-wise minimum dose). Furthermore, the DMR plans were evaluated against the reference photon plan using normal tissue complication probability (NTCP) models of xerostomia, dysphagia, and tube feeding dependence. Consequently, Delta NTCPs were defined as the difference between the NTCPs of the photon and proton plans.Results: The dose distributions of the DMR and reference proton plans were very similar in terms of target robustness and OAR dose values. Regardless of proton planning technique (ie, DMR or reference proton plan), the same treatment modality was selected in 80% (32 of 40) of cases based on the Sigma Delta NTCPs. In 15% (6 of 40) of cases, a conflicting decision was made based on relatively small dose differences to the OARs (Conclusions: The DMR algorithm automatically optimized robust proton plans from a photon reference dose that were comparable to the dosimetrist-optimized proton plans in patients with head and neck cancer. This algorithm has been successfully embedded into a framework to automatically select patients for proton therapy based on NTCPs. (C) 2018 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

KW - MULTICRITERIA OPTIMIZATION

KW - RADIOTHERAPY

KW - THERAPY

KW - HEAD

U2 - 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2018.08.023

DO - 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2018.08.023

M3 - Article

VL - 103

SP - 251

EP - 258

JO - International Journal of Radiation Oncology Biology Physics

JF - International Journal of Radiation Oncology Biology Physics

SN - 0360-3016

IS - 1

ER -

ID: 64438742