David Craft

Volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) has found widespread clinical application in recent years. A large number of treatment planning studies have evaluated the potential for VMAT for different disease sites based on the currently available commercial implementations of VMAT planning. In contrast, literature on the underlying mathematical optimization methods used in treatment planning is scarce. VMAT planning represents a challenging large scale optimization problem. In contrast to fluence map optimization in intensity-modulated radiotherapy planning for static beams, VMAT planning represents a nonconvex optimization problem. In this paper, the authors review the state-of-the-art in VMAT planning from an algorithmic perspective. Different approaches to VMAT optimization, including arc sequencing methods, extensions of direct aperture optimization, and direct optimization of leaf trajectories are reviewed. Their advantages and limitations are outlined and recommendations for impro...

We provide common datasets (which we call the CORT dataset: common optimization for radiation therapy) that researchers can use when developing and contrasting radiation treatment planning optimization algorithms. The datasets allow researchers to make one-to-one comparisons of algorithms in order to solve various instances of the radiation therapy treatment planning problem in intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT), including beam angle optimization, volumetric modulated arc therapy and direct aperture optimization. We provide datasets for a prostate case, a liver case, a head and neck case, and a standard IMRT phantom. We provide the dose-influence matrix from a variety of beam/couch angle pairs for each dataset. The dose-influence matrix is the main entity needed to perform optimizations: it contains the dose to each patient voxel from each pencil beam. In addition, the original Digital Imaging and Communications in Medicine (DICOM) computed tomography (CT) scan, as well as...

The main approach to smooth Pareto surface navigation for radiation therapy multi-criteria treatment planning involves taking real-time averages of pre-computed treatment plans. In fluence-based treatment planning, fluence maps themselves can be averaged, which leads to the dose distributions being averaged due to the linear relationship between fluence and dose. This works for fluence-based photon plans and proton spot scanning plans. In this technical note, we show that two or more sliding window volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) plans can be combined by averaging leaf positions in a certain way, and we demonstrate that the resulting dose distribution for the averaged plan is approximately the average of the dose distributions of the original plans. This leads to the ability to do Pareto surface navigation, i.e. interactive multi-criteria exploration of VMAT plan dosimetric tradeoffs.

ABSTRACT Purpose: In split-course radiotherapy, a patient is treated in several stages separated by weeks or months. This regimen has been motivated by radiobiological considerations. However, using modern image-guidance, it also provides an approach to reduce normal tissue dose by exploiting tumor shrinkage. In this work, we consider the optimal design of split-course treatments, motivated by the clinical management of large liver tumors for which normal liver dose constraints prohibit the administration of an ablative radiation dose in a single treatment.

We present a method to include robustness in a multi-criteria optimization (MCO) framework for intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT). The approach allows one to simultaneously explore the trade-off between different objectives as well as the trade-off between robustness and nominal plan quality. In MCO, a database of plans each emphasizing different treatment planning objectives, is pre-computed to approximate the Pareto surface. An IMPT treatment plan that strikes the best balance between the different objectives can be selected by navigating on the Pareto surface. In our approach, robustness is integrated into MCO by adding robustified objectives and constraints to the MCO problem. Uncertainties (or errors) of the robust problem are modeled by pre-calculated dose-influence matrices for a nominal scenario and a number of pre-defined error scenarios (shifted patient positions, proton beam undershoot and overshoot). Objectives and constraints can be defined for the nominal scenario, thus characterizing nominal plan quality. A robustified objective represents the worst objective function value that can be realized for any of the error scenarios and thus provides a measure of plan robustness. The optimization method is based on a linear projection solver and is capable of handling large problem sizes resulting from a fine dose grid resolution, many scenarios, and a large number of proton pencil beams. A base-of-skull case is used to demonstrate the robust optimization method. It is demonstrated that the robust optimization method reduces the sensitivity of the treatment plan to setup and range errors to a degree that is not achieved by a safety margin approach. A chordoma case is analyzed in more detail to demonstrate the involved trade-offs between target underdose and brainstem sparing as well as robustness and nominal plan quality. The latter illustrates the advantage of MCO in the context of robust planning. For all cases examined, the robust optimization for each Pareto optimal plan takes less than 5 min on a standard computer, making a computationally friendly interface possible to the planner. In conclusion, the uncertainty pertinent to the IMPT procedure can be reduced during treatment planning by optimizing plans that emphasize different treatment objectives, including robustness, and then interactively seeking for a most-preferred one from the solution Pareto surface.

To describe a method for combining sliding window plans [intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) or volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT)] for use in treatment plan averaging, which is needed for Pareto surface navigation based multicriteria treatment planning. The authors show that by taking an appropriately defined average of leaf trajectories of sliding window plans, the authors obtain a sliding window plan whose fluence map is the exact average of the fluence maps corresponding to the initial plans. In the case of static-beam IMRT, this also implies that the dose distribution of the averaged plan is the exact dosimetric average of the initial plans. In VMAT delivery, the dose distribution of the averaged plan is a close approximation of the dosimetric average of the initial plans. The authors demonstrate the method on three Pareto optimal VMAT plans created for a demanding paraspinal case, where the tumor surrounds the spinal cord. The results show that the leaf averaged plans yield dose distributions that approximate the dosimetric averages of the precomputed Pareto optimal plans well. The proposed method enables the navigation of deliverable Pareto optimal plans directly, i.e., interactive multicriteria exploration of deliverable sliding window IMRT and VMAT plans, eliminating the need for a sequencing step after navigation and hence the dose degradation that is caused by such a sequencing step.

ABSTRACT Purpose: We present a method to include robustness in a multi-criteria optimization (MCO) framework for intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT). The approach allows one to simultaneously explore the trade-off between different objectives including robustness and nominal plan quality. Methods: A database of plans each emphasizing different treatment planning objectives, is pre-computed to approximate the Pareto surface. An IMPT treatment plan that strikes the best balance between the different objectives can be selected by navigating on the Pareto surface. We integrate robustness into MCO by adding robustified objectives and constraints. Uncertainties are modeled by pre-calculated dose-influence matrices for a nominal scenario and a number of pre-defined error scenarios (shifted patient positions, proton beam undershoot and overshoot). A robustified objective represents the worst objective function value that can be realized for any of the error scenarios and thus provides a measure of plan robustness. The optimization method uses a linear projection solver and is capable of handling large problem sizes resulting from a fine dose grid resolution, many scenarios, and a large number of proton pencil beams. Results: A base-of-skull case is used to demonstrate that the robust optimization method reduces the sensitivity of the treatment plan to setup and range errors to a degree that is not achieved by a safety margin approach. A chordoma case is analyzed in more detail to demonstrate the involved trade-offs between target underdose and brainstem sparing as well as robustness and nominal plan quality. The robust optimization for each Pareto optimal plan takes less than 5 min on a standard computer. Conclusions: The uncertainty pertinent to the IMPT procedure can be reduced during treatment planning by optimizing a database of plans that emphasize different treatment objectives, including robustness. The planner can then interactively explore all convex combinations of database plans to decide on the most-preferred trade-off.