BackgroundA knowledge-based radiation therapy (KBRT) treatment planning algorithm was recently developed. The purpose of this work is to investigate how plans that are generated with the objective KBRT approach compare to those that rely on the judgment of the experienced planner.MethodsThirty volumetric modulated arc therapy plans were randomly selected from a database of prostate plans that were generated by experienced planners (expert plans). The anatomical data (CT scan and delineation of organs) of these patients and the KBRT algorithm were given to a novice with no prior treatment planning experience. The inexperienced planner used the knowledge-based algorithm to predict the dose that the OARs receive based on their proximity to the treated volume. The population-based OAR constraints were changed to the predicted doses. A KBRT plan was subsequently generated. The KBRT and expert plans were compared for the achieved target coverage and OAR sparing. The target coverages were compared using the Uniformity Index (UI), while 5 dose-volume points (D10, D30, D50, D70 and D90) were used to compare the OARs (bladder and rectum) doses. Wilcoxon matched-pairs signed rank test was used to check for significant differences (p < 0.05) between both datasets.ResultsThe KBRT and expert plans achieved mean UI values of 1.10 ± 0.03 and 1.10 ± 0.04, respectively. The Wilcoxon test showed no statistically significant difference between both results. The D90, D70, D50, D30 and D10 values of the two planning strategies, and the Wilcoxon test results suggests that the KBRT plans achieved a statistically significant lower bladder dose (at D30), while the expert plans achieved a statistically significant lower rectal dose (at D10 and D30).ConclusionsThe results of this study show that the KBRT treatment planning approach is a promising method to objectively incorporate patient anatomical variations in radiotherapy treatment planning.

During total body irradiation (TBI), customized shielding blocks are positioned in front of the lungs to reduce radiation dose. The difficulty is to accurately position the blocks to cover the entire lungs. A new technique based on Computed Tomography (CT) simulation was developed to determine the exact position of lung blocks prior to treatment in order to decrease overall treatment time and reduce patient discomfort. Material/Methods: Patients were CT simulated and lungs were contoured using a treatment planning system. Anteroposterior/posteroanterior (AP/PA) fields were designed with MLC aperture conforming to lung contours. The fields were used to represent the extent of the lungs, which was subsequently marked on the patient's skin. The lung blocks were positioned with their shadow matching the lungs' marks. Their position was radiographically verified prior to the delivery of each beam. To evaluate the efficiency of this technique, the treatment session time and the number of repeated attempts to correctly position the shielding blocks was recorded for each beam. Exact treatment times for patients treated with the old technique were not available and were hence approximated based on previous experience. Results: We succeeded in positioning the shielding blocks from the first attempt in 10/12 beams. The position of the shielding blocks was adjusted only one time prior to treatment in 2/12 beams. These results are compared to an average of 3 attempts per beam for each patient using the conventional technique of trial and error. The average time of a treatment session was 29 min with a maximum of 41 min versus approximately 60 min in past treatments and a maximum of 120 min. Conclusion: This new technique succeeded in reducing the length of the overall treatment session of the conventional TBI procedure and hence reduced patient discomfort while ensuring accurate shielding of the lungs.