» Articles » PMID: 31982497

Knowledge-Based Tradeoff Hyperplanes for Head and Neck Treatment Planning

Overview
Specialties Oncology
Radiology
Date 2020 Jan 27
PMID 31982497
Citations 5
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Purpose: To develop a tradeoff hyperplane model to facilitate tradeoff decision-making before inverse planning.

Methods And Materials: We propose a model-based approach to determine the tradeoff hyperplanes that allow physicians to navigate the clinically viable space of plans with best achievable dose-volume parameters before planning. For a given case, a case reference set (CRS) is selected using a novel anatomic similarity metric from a large reference plan pool. Then, a regression model is built on the CRS to estimate the expected dose-volume histograms (DVHs) for the current case. This model also predicts the DVHs for all CRS cases and captures the variation from the corresponding DVHs in the clinical plans. Finally, these DVH variations are analyzed using the principal component analysis to determine the tradeoff hyperplane for the current case. To evaluate the effectiveness of the proposed approach, 244 head and neck cases were randomly partitioned into reference (214) and validation (30) sets. A tradeoff hyperplane was built for each validation case and evenly sampled for 12 tradeoff predictions. Each prediction yielded a tradeoff plan. The root-mean-square errors of the predicted and the realized plan DVHs were computed for prediction achievability evaluation.

Results: The tradeoff hyperplane with 3 principal directions accounts for 57.8% ± 3.6% of variations in the validation cases, suggesting the hyperplanes capture a significant portion of the clinical tradeoff space. The average root-mean-square errors in 3 tradeoff directions are 5.23 ± 2.46, 5.20 ± 2.52, and 5.19 ± 2.49, compared with 4.96 ± 2.48 of the knowledge-based planning predictions, indicating that the tradeoff predictions are comparably achievable.

Conclusions: Clinically relevant tradeoffs can be effectively extracted from existing plans and characterized by a tradeoff hyperplane model. The hyperplane allows physicians and planners to explore the best clinically achievable plans with different organ-at-risk sparing goals before inverse planning and is a natural extension of the current knowledge-based planning framework.

Citing Articles

Transformer-Integrated Hybrid Convolutional Neural Network for Dose Prediction in Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma Radiotherapy.

Li X, Liu Y, Zhao F, Yang F, Luo W J Imaging Inform Med. 2024; .

PMID: 39424665 DOI: 10.1007/s10278-024-01296-3.


Technical note: Determining the applicability of a clinical knowledge-based learning model via prospective outlier detection.

Zhang J, Sheng Y, Wolf J, Kayode O, Bradley J, Ge Y Med Phys. 2022; 49(4):2193-2202.

PMID: 35157318 PMC: 11742179. DOI: 10.1002/mp.15516.


Artificial intelligence applications in intensity modulated radiation treatment planning: an overview.

Sheng Y, Zhang J, Ge Y, Li X, Wang W, Stephens H Quant Imaging Med Surg. 2021; 11(12):4859-4880.

PMID: 34888195 PMC: 8611458. DOI: 10.21037/qims-21-208.


Assessing the robustness of artificial intelligence powered planning tools in radiotherapy clinical settings-a phantom simulation approach.

Hito M, Wang W, Stephens H, Xie Y, Li R, Yin F Quant Imaging Med Surg. 2021; 11(12):4835-4846.

PMID: 34888193 PMC: 8611457. DOI: 10.21037/qims-21-51.


Machine learning for dose-volume histogram based clinical decision-making support system in radiation therapy plans for brain tumors.

Siciarz P, Alfaifi S, Van Uytven E, Rathod S, Koul R, McCurdy B Clin Transl Radiat Oncol. 2021; 31:50-57.

PMID: 34632117 PMC: 8487981. DOI: 10.1016/j.ctro.2021.09.001.


References
1.
Halabi T, Craft D, Bortfeld T . Dose-volume objectives in multi-criteria optimization. Phys Med Biol. 2006; 51(15):3809-18. DOI: 10.1088/0031-9155/51/15/014. View

2.
Zhang J, Ge Y, Sheng Y, Yin F, Wu Q . Modeling of multiple planning target volumes for head and neck treatments in knowledge-based treatment planning. Med Phys. 2019; 46(9):3812-3822. PMC: 6739188. DOI: 10.1002/mp.13679. View

3.
Chang A, Hung A, Cheung F, Lee M, Chan O, Philips H . Comparison of Planning Quality and Efficiency Between Conventional and Knowledge-based Algorithms in Nasopharyngeal Cancer Patients Using Intensity Modulated Radiation Therapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2016; 95(3):981-990. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2016.02.017. View

4.
Tol J, Dahele M, Delaney A, Slotman B, Verbakel W . Can knowledge-based DVH predictions be used for automated, individualized quality assurance of radiotherapy treatment plans?. Radiat Oncol. 2015; 10:234. PMC: 4653923. DOI: 10.1186/s13014-015-0542-1. View

5.
Appenzoller L, Michalski J, Thorstad W, Mutic S, Moore K . Predicting dose-volume histograms for organs-at-risk in IMRT planning. Med Phys. 2012; 39(12):7446-61. DOI: 10.1118/1.4761864. View