The tradeoff between treatment plan quality and required number of monitor units in intensity-modulated radiotherapy

被引:85
作者
Craft, David [1 ]
Suess, Philipp
Bortfeld, Thomas
机构
[1] Massachusetts Gen Hosp, Dept Radiat Oncol, Boston, MA 02114 USA
[2] Harvard Univ, Sch Med, Boston, MA 02114 USA
[3] Fraunhofer Inst Techno & Wirtschaftsmath, Dept Optimizat, Kaiserslautern, Germany
来源
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RADIATION ONCOLOGY BIOLOGY PHYSICS | 2007年 / 67卷 / 05期
关键词
IMRT complexity; monitor units; multi-objective optimization; slim of positive gradients;
D O I
10.1016/j.ijrobp.2006.11.034
中图分类号
R73 [肿瘤学];
学科分类号
100214 ;
摘要
Purpose: To provide a mathematical approach for quantifying the tradeoff between intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) complexity and plan quality. Methods and Materials: We solve a multi-objective program that includes IMRT complexity, measured as the number of monitor units (MU) needed to deliver the plan using a multileaf collimator, as an objective. Clinical feasibility of plans is ensured by the use of hard constraints in the formulation. Optimization output is a Pareto surface of treatment plans, which allows the tradeoffs between IMRT complexity, tumor coverage, and tissue sparing to be observed. Paraspinal and lung cases are presented. Results: Although the amount of possible MU reduction is highly dependent on the difficulty of the underlying treatment plan (difficult plans requiring a high degree of intensity modulation are more sensitive to MU reduction), in some cases the number of MU can be reduced more than twofold with a < 1% increase in the objective function. Conclusions: The largely increased number of MU and irradiation time in IMRT is sometimes unnecessary. Tools like the one presented should be considered for integration into daily clinical practice to avoid this problem. (c) 2007 Elsevier Inc.
引用
收藏
页码:1596 / 1605
页数:10
相关论文
共 32 条
[1]   Intensity modulated photon beams subject to a minimal surface smoothing constraint [J].
Alber, M ;
Nüsslin, F .
PHYSICS IN MEDICINE AND BIOLOGY, 2000, 45 (05) :N49-N52
[2]  
Bertsimas D., 1997, Introduction to linear optimization
[3]   METHODS OF IMAGE-RECONSTRUCTION FROM PROJECTIONS APPLIED TO CONFORMATION RADIOTHERAPY [J].
BORTFELD, T ;
BURKELBACH, J ;
BOESECKE, R ;
SCHLEGEL, W .
PHYSICS IN MEDICINE AND BIOLOGY, 1990, 35 (10) :1423-1434
[4]  
BORTFELD T, 1997, 12 INT C US COMP RAD, P1
[5]   X-RAY FIELD COMPENSATION WITH MULTILEAF COLLIMATORS [J].
BORTFELD, TR ;
KAHLER, DL ;
WALDRON, TJ ;
BOYER, AL .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RADIATION ONCOLOGY BIOLOGY PHYSICS, 1994, 28 (03) :723-730
[6]   THE GENERATION OF INTENSITY-MODULATED FIELDS FOR CONFORMAL RADIOTHERAPY BY DYNAMIC COLLIMATION [J].
CONVERY, DJ ;
ROSENBLOOM, ME .
PHYSICS IN MEDICINE AND BIOLOGY, 1992, 37 (06) :1359-1374
[7]   Improving IMRT delivery efficiency using intensity limits during inverse planning [J].
Coselmon, MM ;
Moran, JM ;
Radawski, JD ;
Fraass, BA .
MEDICAL PHYSICS, 2005, 32 (05) :1234-1245
[8]   Exploration of tradeoffs in intensity-modulated radiotherapy [J].
Craft, D ;
Halabi, T ;
Bortfeld, T .
PHYSICS IN MEDICINE AND BIOLOGY, 2005, 50 (24) :5857-5868
[9]  
CRAFT D, 2006, MED PHYS, V33, P2857
[10]   Dose-volume objectives in multi-criteria optimization [J].
Halabi, Tarek ;
Craft, David ;
Bortfeld, Thomas .
PHYSICS IN MEDICINE AND BIOLOGY, 2006, 51 (15) :3809-3818