使用替代真相评估方法,对治疗规划中使用替代 OAR 划线的剂量学效应进行定量评估,将其作为划线、设置不确定性和规划技术的函数。

ArXiv Pub Date : 2024-08-13
M N H Rashad, Abishek Karki, Jason Czak, Victor Gabriel Alves, Hamidreza Nourzadeh, Wookjin Choi, Jeffrey V Siebers
{"title":"使用替代真相评估方法,对治疗规划中使用替代 OAR 划线的剂量学效应进行定量评估,将其作为划线、设置不确定性和规划技术的函数。","authors":"M N H Rashad, Abishek Karki, Jason Czak, Victor Gabriel Alves, Hamidreza Nourzadeh, Wookjin Choi, Jeffrey V Siebers","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>This study quantifies the variation in dose-volume histogram (DVH) and normal tissue complication probability (NTCP) metrics for head-and-neck (HN) cancer patients when alternative organ-at-risk (OAR) delineations are used for treatment planning and for treatment plan evaluation. We particularly focus on the effects of daily patient positioning/setup variations (SV) in relation to treatment technique and delineation variability.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>We generated two-arc VMAT, 5-beam IMRT, and 9-beam IMRT treatment plans for a cohort of 209 HN patients. These plans incorporated five different OAR delineation sets, including manual and four automated algorithms. Each treatment plan was assessed under various simulated per-fraction patient setup uncertainties, evaluating the potential clinical impacts through DVH and NTCP metrics.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The study demonstrates that increasing setup variability generally reduces differences in DVH metrics between alternative delineations. However, in contrast, differences in NTCP metrics tend to increase with higher setup variability. This pattern is observed consistently across different treatment plans and delineator combinations, illustrating the intricate relationship between SV and delineation accuracy. Additionally, the need for delineation accuracy in treatment planning is shown to be case-specific and dependent on factors beyond geometric variations.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The findings highlight the necessity for comprehensive quality assurance programs in radiotherapy, incorporating both dosimetric impact analysis and geometric variation assessment to ensure optimal delineation quality. The study emphasizes the complex dynamics of treatment planning in radiotherapy, advocating for personalized, case-specific strategies in clinical practice to enhance patient care quality and efficacy in the face of varying SV and delineation accuracies.</p>","PeriodicalId":93888,"journal":{"name":"ArXiv","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10802674/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Divergent Clinical Equivalence Findings from DVH and NTCP Metrics for Alternative OAR Delineations with Increasing Setup Variability in Head-and-Neck Radiotherapy.\",\"authors\":\"M N H Rashad, Abishek Karki, Jason Czak, Victor Gabriel Alves, Hamidreza Nourzadeh, Wookjin Choi, Jeffrey V Siebers\",\"doi\":\"\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>This study quantifies the variation in dose-volume histogram (DVH) and normal tissue complication probability (NTCP) metrics for head-and-neck (HN) cancer patients when alternative organ-at-risk (OAR) delineations are used for treatment planning and for treatment plan evaluation. We particularly focus on the effects of daily patient positioning/setup variations (SV) in relation to treatment technique and delineation variability.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>We generated two-arc VMAT, 5-beam IMRT, and 9-beam IMRT treatment plans for a cohort of 209 HN patients. These plans incorporated five different OAR delineation sets, including manual and four automated algorithms. Each treatment plan was assessed under various simulated per-fraction patient setup uncertainties, evaluating the potential clinical impacts through DVH and NTCP metrics.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The study demonstrates that increasing setup variability generally reduces differences in DVH metrics between alternative delineations. However, in contrast, differences in NTCP metrics tend to increase with higher setup variability. This pattern is observed consistently across different treatment plans and delineator combinations, illustrating the intricate relationship between SV and delineation accuracy. Additionally, the need for delineation accuracy in treatment planning is shown to be case-specific and dependent on factors beyond geometric variations.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The findings highlight the necessity for comprehensive quality assurance programs in radiotherapy, incorporating both dosimetric impact analysis and geometric variation assessment to ensure optimal delineation quality. The study emphasizes the complex dynamics of treatment planning in radiotherapy, advocating for personalized, case-specific strategies in clinical practice to enhance patient care quality and efficacy in the face of varying SV and delineation accuracies.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":93888,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"ArXiv\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-13\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10802674/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"ArXiv\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ArXiv","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:本研究旨在量化头颈部(HN)癌症患者在使用替代风险器官(OAR)划线进行治疗规划和治疗方案评估时,剂量-体积直方图(DVH)和正常组织并发症概率(NTCP)指标的变化。我们特别关注病人日常定位/设置变化(SV)对治疗技术和划线变化的影响:我们为一组 209 名 HN 患者生成了双弧 VMAT、5 束 IMRT 和 9 束 IMRT 治疗计划。这些计划采用了五种不同的 OAR 划线集,包括手动算法和四种自动算法。每个治疗计划都在不同的模拟每分次患者设置不确定性下进行了评估,通过 DVH 和 NTCP 指标评估了潜在的临床影响:研究结果表明,增加 SV 一般会减少不同划定方案之间的 DVH 指标差异。然而,与此相反,NTCP 指标的差异往往会随着设置变异性的增加而增大。在不同的治疗方案和划线器组合中都能观察到这种模式,这说明 SV 和划线准确性之间的关系错综复杂。此外,在治疗计划中对划线准确性的需求也显示出与具体病例相关,并取决于几何变异以外的因素:结论:研究结果凸显了放射治疗中全面质量保证计划的必要性,其中包括剂量影响分析和几何变化评估,以确保最佳的划线质量。该研究强调了放疗中治疗计划的复杂动态性,提倡在临床实践中采取个性化的、针对具体病例的策略,以提高患者治疗质量和疗效,应对不同的 SV 和划线精确度。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Divergent Clinical Equivalence Findings from DVH and NTCP Metrics for Alternative OAR Delineations with Increasing Setup Variability in Head-and-Neck Radiotherapy.

Purpose: This study quantifies the variation in dose-volume histogram (DVH) and normal tissue complication probability (NTCP) metrics for head-and-neck (HN) cancer patients when alternative organ-at-risk (OAR) delineations are used for treatment planning and for treatment plan evaluation. We particularly focus on the effects of daily patient positioning/setup variations (SV) in relation to treatment technique and delineation variability.

Materials and methods: We generated two-arc VMAT, 5-beam IMRT, and 9-beam IMRT treatment plans for a cohort of 209 HN patients. These plans incorporated five different OAR delineation sets, including manual and four automated algorithms. Each treatment plan was assessed under various simulated per-fraction patient setup uncertainties, evaluating the potential clinical impacts through DVH and NTCP metrics.

Results: The study demonstrates that increasing setup variability generally reduces differences in DVH metrics between alternative delineations. However, in contrast, differences in NTCP metrics tend to increase with higher setup variability. This pattern is observed consistently across different treatment plans and delineator combinations, illustrating the intricate relationship between SV and delineation accuracy. Additionally, the need for delineation accuracy in treatment planning is shown to be case-specific and dependent on factors beyond geometric variations.

Conclusions: The findings highlight the necessity for comprehensive quality assurance programs in radiotherapy, incorporating both dosimetric impact analysis and geometric variation assessment to ensure optimal delineation quality. The study emphasizes the complex dynamics of treatment planning in radiotherapy, advocating for personalized, case-specific strategies in clinical practice to enhance patient care quality and efficacy in the face of varying SV and delineation accuracies.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Categorization of 33 computational methods to detect spatially variable genes from spatially resolved transcriptomics data. A Geometric Tension Dynamics Model of Epithelial Convergent Extension. Learning Molecular Representation in a Cell. Ankle Exoskeletons May Hinder Standing Balance in Simple Models of Older and Younger Adults. Nonparametric causal inference for optogenetics: sequential excursion effects for dynamic regimes.
×
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