Kenny Guida, Chaoqiong Ma, Joy Patel, Krishna Reddy, H Harold Li
{"title":"Improving VMAT dose calculation accuracy and planning quality via a GPU-accelerated Fourier transform dose calculation algorithm.","authors":"Kenny Guida, Chaoqiong Ma, Joy Patel, Krishna Reddy, H Harold Li","doi":"10.1002/acm2.70002","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Inverse planning typically utilizes fast, less accurate dose calculation algorithms during the iterative optimization process, thus leading to dose calculation errors (DCEs) and suboptimal plans that often require dose normalization and/or plan re-optimization.</p><p><strong>Purpose: </strong>A graphic processing unit (GPU) accelerated Fourier transform dose calculation (FTDC) was recently commissioned at our institution during the Eclipse treatment planning system (Varian Medical Systems) v18.0 upgrade. We hypothesize that FTDC could reduce DCEs and planning failure rates (PFRs) compared to its predecessor, multi-resolution dose calculation (MRDC), while improving efficiency through utilization of GPUs.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Fifty lung SBRT plans were optimized with MRDC and FTDC dose calculation algorithms. Acuros XB (AXB) was then used for final dose calculations. DCEs for target and organ-at-risk (OAR) were calculated as the percent difference between AXB and dose calculated at the final optimization step. Plan quality was assessed using an in-house planning scorecard where PFRs were calculated as the percentage of plans that had a plan score less than 90% with optimal plans scored at 100%.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>FTDC showed excellent agreement with AXB in terms of planning target volume (PTV) coverage, as PTV D95% DCE<sub>FTDC</sub> averaged 0.8% ± 0.9%, compared to DCE<sub>MRDC</sub>'s -2.5% ± 3.2%. DCEs for thoracic OARs were reduced with less variation when optimizing with FTDC as compared to MRDC. FTDC had a PFR of 10% (5 out of 50) versus MRDC's 32% (16 out of 50). The subsequent re-optimization rate resulted from a plan normalization of 3% or greater was 4% for FTDC compared to MRDC's 38%. FTDC with GPU acceleration reduced optimization time by 75% on average compared to MRDC without GPU acceleration.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>FTDC shows more accurate dose calculation accuracy compared to MRDC. Its use during the optimization process improved planning quality and efficiency assisted with GPUs.</p>","PeriodicalId":14989,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics","volume":" ","pages":"e70002"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/acm2.70002","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: Inverse planning typically utilizes fast, less accurate dose calculation algorithms during the iterative optimization process, thus leading to dose calculation errors (DCEs) and suboptimal plans that often require dose normalization and/or plan re-optimization.
Purpose: A graphic processing unit (GPU) accelerated Fourier transform dose calculation (FTDC) was recently commissioned at our institution during the Eclipse treatment planning system (Varian Medical Systems) v18.0 upgrade. We hypothesize that FTDC could reduce DCEs and planning failure rates (PFRs) compared to its predecessor, multi-resolution dose calculation (MRDC), while improving efficiency through utilization of GPUs.
Methods: Fifty lung SBRT plans were optimized with MRDC and FTDC dose calculation algorithms. Acuros XB (AXB) was then used for final dose calculations. DCEs for target and organ-at-risk (OAR) were calculated as the percent difference between AXB and dose calculated at the final optimization step. Plan quality was assessed using an in-house planning scorecard where PFRs were calculated as the percentage of plans that had a plan score less than 90% with optimal plans scored at 100%.
Results: FTDC showed excellent agreement with AXB in terms of planning target volume (PTV) coverage, as PTV D95% DCEFTDC averaged 0.8% ± 0.9%, compared to DCEMRDC's -2.5% ± 3.2%. DCEs for thoracic OARs were reduced with less variation when optimizing with FTDC as compared to MRDC. FTDC had a PFR of 10% (5 out of 50) versus MRDC's 32% (16 out of 50). The subsequent re-optimization rate resulted from a plan normalization of 3% or greater was 4% for FTDC compared to MRDC's 38%. FTDC with GPU acceleration reduced optimization time by 75% on average compared to MRDC without GPU acceleration.
Conclusions: FTDC shows more accurate dose calculation accuracy compared to MRDC. Its use during the optimization process improved planning quality and efficiency assisted with GPUs.
期刊介绍:
Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics is an international Open Access publication dedicated to clinical medical physics. JACMP welcomes original contributions dealing with all aspects of medical physics from scientists working in the clinical medical physics around the world. JACMP accepts only online submission.
JACMP will publish:
-Original Contributions: Peer-reviewed, investigations that represent new and significant contributions to the field. Recommended word count: up to 7500.
-Review Articles: Reviews of major areas or sub-areas in the field of clinical medical physics. These articles may be of any length and are peer reviewed.
-Technical Notes: These should be no longer than 3000 words, including key references.
-Letters to the Editor: Comments on papers published in JACMP or on any other matters of interest to clinical medical physics. These should not be more than 1250 (including the literature) and their publication is only based on the decision of the editor, who occasionally asks experts on the merit of the contents.
-Book Reviews: The editorial office solicits Book Reviews.
-Announcements of Forthcoming Meetings: The Editor may provide notice of forthcoming meetings, course offerings, and other events relevant to clinical medical physics.
-Parallel Opposed Editorial: We welcome topics relevant to clinical practice and medical physics profession. The contents can be controversial debate or opposed aspects of an issue. One author argues for the position and the other against. Each side of the debate contains an opening statement up to 800 words, followed by a rebuttal up to 500 words. Readers interested in participating in this series should contact the moderator with a proposed title and a short description of the topic