Abstract

BackgroundThis study evaluated an automated inverse treatment planning algorithm, Pinnacle Auto-Planning (AP), and compared automatically generated plans with historical plans in a large cohort of head and neck cancer patients.MethodsFifty consecutive patients treated with volumetric modulated arc therapy (Eclipse, Varian Medical System, Palo Alto, CA) for head and neck were re-planned with AP version 9.10. Only one single cycle of plan optimization using one single template was allowed for AP. The dose to the planning target volumes (PTV’s; 3–4 dose levels), the organs at risk (OAR’s) and the effective working time for planning was evaluated. Additionally, two experienced radiation oncologists blind-reviewed and ranked 10 plans.ResultsDose coverage and dose homogeneity of the PTV were significantly improved with AP, however manually optimized plans showed significantly improved dose conformity. The mean dose to the parotid glands, oral mucosa, swallowing muscles, dorsal neck tissue and maximal dose to the spinal cord were significantly reduced with AP. In 64 % of the plans, the mean dose to any OAR (spinal cord excluded) was reduced by >20 % with AP in comparison to the manually optimized plans. In 12 % of the plans, the manually optimized plans showed reduced doses by >20 % in at least one OAR. The experienced radiation oncologists preferred the AP plan and the clinical plan in 80 and 20 % of the cases, respectively. The average effective working time was 3.8 min ± 1.1 min in comparison to 48.5 min ± 6.0 min using AP compared to the manually optimized plans, respectively.ConclusionThe evaluated automated planning algorithm achieved highly consistent and significantly improved treatment plans with potentially clinically relevant OAR sparing by >20 % in 64 % of the cases. The effective working time was substantially reduced with Auto-Planning.

Highlights

  • Intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) and volumetric modulated radiotherapy (VMAT) have been used for more than a decade and are standard techniques for external beam radiotherapy treatment (RT)

  • We have evaluated a fully automated treatment planning system (TPS), Pinnacle Auto-Planning (Philips Radiation Oncology Systems), which uses an iterative algorithm based approach to automatically adapt objectives, constraints and dose shaping contours during the optimization process to achieve clinical goals

  • It was the aim of this study to evaluate Auto-Planning in a large cohort of head and neck cancer patients: treatment plans were compared with historical, clinically accepted VMAT treatment plans generated by Eclipse RapidArc planning (Varian Medical System, Palo Alto, CA)

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) and volumetric modulated radiotherapy (VMAT) have been used for more than a decade and are standard techniques for external beam radiotherapy treatment (RT). We have evaluated a fully automated treatment planning system (TPS), Pinnacle Auto-Planning (Philips Radiation Oncology Systems), which uses an iterative algorithm based approach to automatically adapt objectives, constraints and dose shaping contours during the optimization process to achieve clinical goals. It was the aim of this study to evaluate Auto-Planning in a large cohort of head and neck cancer patients: treatment plans were compared with historical, clinically accepted VMAT treatment plans generated by Eclipse RapidArc planning (Varian Medical System, Palo Alto, CA). This study evaluated an automated inverse treatment planning algorithm, Pinnacle Auto-Planning (AP), and compared automatically generated plans with historical plans in a large cohort of head and neck cancer patients

Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call