Exploring the dosimetric impact of systematic and random setup uncertainties in robust optimization of head and neck IMPT plans

IF 3.3 3区 医学 Q1 RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING Physica Medica-European Journal of Medical Physics Pub Date : 2024-12-01 DOI:10.1016/j.ejmp.2024.104863
Suresh Rana, Noufal Manthala Padannayil, Youssef Zeidan, Shyam Pokharel, Samuel Richter, Michael Kasper, Hina Saeed
{"title":"Exploring the dosimetric impact of systematic and random setup uncertainties in robust optimization of head and neck IMPT plans","authors":"Suresh Rana,&nbsp;Noufal Manthala Padannayil,&nbsp;Youssef Zeidan,&nbsp;Shyam Pokharel,&nbsp;Samuel Richter,&nbsp;Michael Kasper,&nbsp;Hina Saeed","doi":"10.1016/j.ejmp.2024.104863","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Purpose</h3><div>This study aims to compare the dosimetric impact of incorporating systematic and random setup uncertainties in the robust optimization of head and neck cancer (HNC) Intensity Modulated Proton Therapy (IMPT) plans.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>Bilateral HNC patients (n = 10) previously treated with conventional photon therapy at our institution were included. Both systematic and random setup uncertainties were incorporated into the robust optimization process of IMPT planning. Dosimetric comparisons were made between plans optimized with systematic (IMPT-S) versus random (IMPT-R) setup uncertainties, assessing both the clinical target volume (CTVs) and organs at risk (OARs) across various dosimetric metrics. Both plans applied a fixed range uncertainty of ± 3 % and a maximum setup uncertainty of ± 3 mm.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Both IMPT-S and IMPT-R plans achieved similar target coverage, meeting robustness criteria for CTVs. On average, the D<sub>95%</sub> voxel-wise min to the high-risk CTV (CTV_HR) was slightly higher in IMPT-S plans by 1.78 ± 0.72 % compared to IMPT-R plans. However, IMPT-R plans provided better OAR sparing, which was evident in both nominal and voxel-wise maximum values. While random setup errors in robust optimization improved OAR sparing, the clinical impact may be minimal where OAR doses are already well below tolerance levels.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>Both IMPT-S and IMPT-R techniques met the robustness criteria for CTVs in HNC IMPT planning. Incorporating random setup uncertainties in robust optimization improves OAR sparing compared to systematic setup uncertainties. Further research is needed to explore the broader applicability of random setup errors and to integrate random uncertainties in robustness evaluations for a more comprehensive assessment of treatment plans.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":56092,"journal":{"name":"Physica Medica-European Journal of Medical Physics","volume":"128 ","pages":"Article 104863"},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Physica Medica-European Journal of Medical Physics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1120179724013310","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose

This study aims to compare the dosimetric impact of incorporating systematic and random setup uncertainties in the robust optimization of head and neck cancer (HNC) Intensity Modulated Proton Therapy (IMPT) plans.

Methods

Bilateral HNC patients (n = 10) previously treated with conventional photon therapy at our institution were included. Both systematic and random setup uncertainties were incorporated into the robust optimization process of IMPT planning. Dosimetric comparisons were made between plans optimized with systematic (IMPT-S) versus random (IMPT-R) setup uncertainties, assessing both the clinical target volume (CTVs) and organs at risk (OARs) across various dosimetric metrics. Both plans applied a fixed range uncertainty of ± 3 % and a maximum setup uncertainty of ± 3 mm.

Results

Both IMPT-S and IMPT-R plans achieved similar target coverage, meeting robustness criteria for CTVs. On average, the D95% voxel-wise min to the high-risk CTV (CTV_HR) was slightly higher in IMPT-S plans by 1.78 ± 0.72 % compared to IMPT-R plans. However, IMPT-R plans provided better OAR sparing, which was evident in both nominal and voxel-wise maximum values. While random setup errors in robust optimization improved OAR sparing, the clinical impact may be minimal where OAR doses are already well below tolerance levels.

Conclusion

Both IMPT-S and IMPT-R techniques met the robustness criteria for CTVs in HNC IMPT planning. Incorporating random setup uncertainties in robust optimization improves OAR sparing compared to systematic setup uncertainties. Further research is needed to explore the broader applicability of random setup errors and to integrate random uncertainties in robustness evaluations for a more comprehensive assessment of treatment plans.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
探索系统和随机设置不确定性对头颈部IMPT计划稳健优化的剂量学影响
目的本研究旨在比较在头颈癌(HNC)强度调制质子治疗(IMPT)方案稳健优化中纳入系统和随机设置不确定性对剂量学的影响。方法选取我院常规光子治疗的双侧HNC患者(n = 10)。将系统不确定性和随机不确定性纳入IMPT规划的鲁棒优化过程。在系统(IMPT-S)和随机(IMPT-R)设置不确定性优化的方案之间进行剂量学比较,评估临床靶体积(cvs)和危险器官(OARs)。两种方案的固定范围不确定度均为±3%,最大设置不确定度均为±3mm。结果IMPT-S和IMPT-R方案均实现了相似的目标覆盖,满足ctv的鲁棒性标准。平均而言,与IMPT-R计划相比,IMPT-S计划的D95%体素最小值与高危CTV (CTV_HR)略高1.78±0.72%。然而,IMPT-R方案提供了更好的声速节约,这在名义和体素方面的最大值上都很明显。虽然稳健优化中的随机设置误差改善了OAR保护,但在OAR剂量已经远远低于耐受水平的情况下,临床影响可能微乎其微。结论IMPT- s和IMPT- r技术均满足CTVs在HNC IMPT计划中的鲁棒性标准。与系统设置不确定性相比,在鲁棒优化中加入随机设置不确定性可以改善桨部节约。需要进一步的研究来探索随机设置误差的更广泛的适用性,并在稳健性评估中整合随机不确定性,以更全面地评估治疗计划。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.80
自引率
14.70%
发文量
493
审稿时长
78 days
期刊介绍: Physica Medica, European Journal of Medical Physics, publishing with Elsevier from 2007, provides an international forum for research and reviews on the following main topics: Medical Imaging Radiation Therapy Radiation Protection Measuring Systems and Signal Processing Education and training in Medical Physics Professional issues in Medical Physics.
期刊最新文献
Breast ultrasound imaging systems performance evaluation using novel Contrast-Detail (C-D) and Anechoic-Target (A-T) phantoms. Intrafraction motion in intra-cranial multi-target stereotactic radiosurgery plans: A multi-institutional investigation on robustness. A straightforward method for assessing the technical image quality of reconstructed and synthetic 2D images for Digital breast tomosynthesis systems. Characterization and evaluation methods of fused deposition modeling and stereolithography additive manufacturing for clinical linear accelerator photon and electron radiotherapy applications. Comparison of AAPM TG282 and Dance breast dosimetry models: Impact on estimates of average MGD for the United Kingdom breast screening programmes.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1