Dylan Koprivec, Cedric Belanger, Luc Beaulieu, Philippe Y Chatigny, Anatoly Rosenfeld, Dean Cutajar, Marco Petasecca, Andrew Howie, Joseph Bucci, Joel Poder
{"title":"鲁棒优化对高剂量率前列腺近距离治疗源跟踪患者特异性误差阈值的影响。","authors":"Dylan Koprivec, Cedric Belanger, Luc Beaulieu, Philippe Y Chatigny, Anatoly Rosenfeld, Dean Cutajar, Marco Petasecca, Andrew Howie, Joseph Bucci, Joel Poder","doi":"10.1016/j.brachy.2024.11.012","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>The purpose of this study was to compare the effect of catheter shift errors and determine patient specific error thresholds (PSETs) for different high dose rate prostate brachytherapy (HDRPBT) plans generated by different forms of inverse optimization.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Three plans were generated for 50 HDRPBT patients and PSETs were determined for each of the 3 plans. Plan 1 was the original Oncentra Prostate (v4.2.2.4, Elekta Brachytherapy, Veenendaal, The Netherlands) plan, the second plan used the graphical processor unit multi-criteria optimization (gMCO) algorithm, and plan 3 used gMCO but had a robustness parameter as an additional optimization criterion (gMCOr). gMCO and gMCOr plans were selected from a pool of 2000 pareto optimal plans. gMCO plan selection involved increasing prostate V100% and reducing rectum Dmax/urethra D01.cc progressively until only 1 plan remained. The gMCOr plan was the most robust plan (using robustness parameter) that met the clinical DVH criteria (V100% ≥ 95%, rectum Dmax ≤ 80%, urethra D0.1cc ≤ 118%). PSETs were determined using catheter shift software.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The initial dose volume histogram (DVH) characteristics showed all 50 patient plans met a prostate V100% > 95% and resulted in significant reduction in rectum Dmax and urethra D0.1cc for gMCO and gMCOr plans. No single plan showed benefits in PSETs for all shift directions compared to the other plans, however gMCO and gMCOr plans exhibit the best initial DVH characteristics assuming no errors occur. The robustness parameter showed no significant impact when considered in plan optimization.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>PSETs were found to be equivalent regardless of optimization method. Indicating, no single optimization method can significantly increase the patient specific thresholds.</p>","PeriodicalId":93914,"journal":{"name":"Brachytherapy","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Impact of robust optimization on patient specific error thresholds for high dose rate prostate brachytherapy source tracking.\",\"authors\":\"Dylan Koprivec, Cedric Belanger, Luc Beaulieu, Philippe Y Chatigny, Anatoly Rosenfeld, Dean Cutajar, Marco Petasecca, Andrew Howie, Joseph Bucci, Joel Poder\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.brachy.2024.11.012\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>The purpose of this study was to compare the effect of catheter shift errors and determine patient specific error thresholds (PSETs) for different high dose rate prostate brachytherapy (HDRPBT) plans generated by different forms of inverse optimization.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Three plans were generated for 50 HDRPBT patients and PSETs were determined for each of the 3 plans. Plan 1 was the original Oncentra Prostate (v4.2.2.4, Elekta Brachytherapy, Veenendaal, The Netherlands) plan, the second plan used the graphical processor unit multi-criteria optimization (gMCO) algorithm, and plan 3 used gMCO but had a robustness parameter as an additional optimization criterion (gMCOr). gMCO and gMCOr plans were selected from a pool of 2000 pareto optimal plans. gMCO plan selection involved increasing prostate V100% and reducing rectum Dmax/urethra D01.cc progressively until only 1 plan remained. The gMCOr plan was the most robust plan (using robustness parameter) that met the clinical DVH criteria (V100% ≥ 95%, rectum Dmax ≤ 80%, urethra D0.1cc ≤ 118%). PSETs were determined using catheter shift software.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The initial dose volume histogram (DVH) characteristics showed all 50 patient plans met a prostate V100% > 95% and resulted in significant reduction in rectum Dmax and urethra D0.1cc for gMCO and gMCOr plans. No single plan showed benefits in PSETs for all shift directions compared to the other plans, however gMCO and gMCOr plans exhibit the best initial DVH characteristics assuming no errors occur. The robustness parameter showed no significant impact when considered in plan optimization.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>PSETs were found to be equivalent regardless of optimization method. Indicating, no single optimization method can significantly increase the patient specific thresholds.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":93914,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Brachytherapy\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-12-16\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Brachytherapy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brachy.2024.11.012\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Brachytherapy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brachy.2024.11.012","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:本研究的目的是比较不同形式的逆优化产生的不同高剂量率前列腺近距离放射治疗(HDRPBT)方案中导管移位误差的影响,并确定患者特异性误差阈值(PSETs)。方法:对50例HDRPBT患者制定3个计划,并测定每个计划的pset。方案1为原始的Oncentra前列腺(v4.2.2.4, Elekta Brachytherapy, Veenendaal, the Netherlands)方案,第二个方案使用图形处理器单元多标准优化(gMCO)算法,方案3使用gMCO,但增加一个鲁棒性参数作为附加优化标准(gMCOr)。从2000个帕累托最优方案中选择gMCO和gMCOr方案。gMCO方案选择包括提高前列腺V100%和降低直肠Dmax/尿道D01。循序渐进,直到只剩下一个计划。gMCOr方案是满足临床DVH标准(V100%≥95%,直肠Dmax≤80%,尿道D0.1cc≤118%)的最稳健方案(采用鲁棒性参数)。采用导管移位软件测定PSETs。结果:初始剂量体积直方图(DVH)特征显示,所有50例患者方案均达到前列腺V100% bbb95 %, gMCO和gMCOr方案直肠Dmax和尿道D0.1cc显著降低。与其他方案相比,没有一种方案在所有移位方向的PSETs中都表现出优势,然而,假设没有发生误差,gMCO和gMCOr方案表现出最佳的初始DVH特性。鲁棒性参数对规划优化的影响不显著。结论:无论采用何种优化方法,pset都是等效的。这表明,没有一种优化方法可以显著提高患者特异性阈值。
Impact of robust optimization on patient specific error thresholds for high dose rate prostate brachytherapy source tracking.
Purpose: The purpose of this study was to compare the effect of catheter shift errors and determine patient specific error thresholds (PSETs) for different high dose rate prostate brachytherapy (HDRPBT) plans generated by different forms of inverse optimization.
Methods: Three plans were generated for 50 HDRPBT patients and PSETs were determined for each of the 3 plans. Plan 1 was the original Oncentra Prostate (v4.2.2.4, Elekta Brachytherapy, Veenendaal, The Netherlands) plan, the second plan used the graphical processor unit multi-criteria optimization (gMCO) algorithm, and plan 3 used gMCO but had a robustness parameter as an additional optimization criterion (gMCOr). gMCO and gMCOr plans were selected from a pool of 2000 pareto optimal plans. gMCO plan selection involved increasing prostate V100% and reducing rectum Dmax/urethra D01.cc progressively until only 1 plan remained. The gMCOr plan was the most robust plan (using robustness parameter) that met the clinical DVH criteria (V100% ≥ 95%, rectum Dmax ≤ 80%, urethra D0.1cc ≤ 118%). PSETs were determined using catheter shift software.
Results: The initial dose volume histogram (DVH) characteristics showed all 50 patient plans met a prostate V100% > 95% and resulted in significant reduction in rectum Dmax and urethra D0.1cc for gMCO and gMCOr plans. No single plan showed benefits in PSETs for all shift directions compared to the other plans, however gMCO and gMCOr plans exhibit the best initial DVH characteristics assuming no errors occur. The robustness parameter showed no significant impact when considered in plan optimization.
Conclusions: PSETs were found to be equivalent regardless of optimization method. Indicating, no single optimization method can significantly increase the patient specific thresholds.