BackgroundKnowledge-based planning (KBP) is a promising technique that can improve plan quality and increase planning efficiency. However, no attempts have been made to extend the domain of KBP for planners with different planning experiences so far. The purpose of this study was to quantify the potential gains for planners with different planning experiences after implementing KBP in intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) plans for left-sided breast cancer patients.MethodsThe model libraries were populated with 80 expert clinical plans from treated patients who previously received left-sided breast-conserving surgery and IMRT with simultaneously integrated boost. The libraries were created on the RapidPlanTM. 6 planners with different planning experiences (2 beginner planners, 2 junior planners and 2 senior planners) generated manual and KBP optimized plans for additional 10 patients, similar to those included in the model libraries. The plan qualities were compared between manual and KBP plans.ResultsAll plans were capable of achieving the prescription requirement. There were almost no statistically significant differences in terms of the planning target volume (PTV) coverage and dose conformality. It was demonstrated that the doses for most of organs-at-risk (OARs) were on average lower or equal in KBP plans compared to manual plans except for the senior planners, where the very small differences were not statistically significant. KBP data showed a systematic trend to have superior dose sparing at most parameters for the heart and ipsilateral lung. The observed decrease in the doses to these OARs could be achieved, particularly for the beginner and junior planners. Many differences were statistically significant.ConclusionsIt is feasible to generate acceptable IMRT plans after implementing KBP for left-sided breast cancer. KBP helps to effectively improve the quality of IMRT plans against the benchmark of manual plans for less experienced planners without any manual intervention. KBP showed promise for homogenizing the plan quality by transferring planning expertise from more experienced to less experienced planners.

No abstract

BackgroundA new strategy for making the appropriate choice of the representative optimization parameters in planning processes and accurate selection criteria during Pareto surface navigation for general multicriteria optimization (MCO) was recommended in the study. The purpose was to combine both benefits of AutoPlanning optimization and MCO (APMCO) for achieving an individual volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) plan according to the clinically achieved patient-specific tradeoff among conflicting priorities. The preclinical investigation of this optimization approach for nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC) radiotherapy was performed and compared to general MCO VMAT.MethodsA total of 60 NPC patients with various stages were enrolled in this study. General MCO and APMCO plans were generated for each patient on the treatment planning system. The differences between two planning schemes were evaluated and compared.ResultsAll plans were capable of achieving the prescription requirement. The planning target volume coverage and conformation number were remarkably similar between general MCO and APMCO plans. There were no significant differences in most of organs at risk (OARs) sparing. However, in APMCO plans, relatively remarkable decreases were observed in the mean dose (Dmean) to the glottic larynx and pharyngeal constrictor muscles. The reductions of average Dmean to the two OARs were 10.5% (p < 0.0001) and 8.4% (p < 0.0001), respectively. APMCO technique was found to increase the planning time for an average of approximately 5 h and did not lead to a significant increase of monitor units compared to general MCO.ConclusionsThe potential of the APMCO strategy is best realized with a clinical implementation that exploits individual generation of Pareto surface representations without manual interaction. It also assists physicians to ensure navigation in a more efficient and straightforward manner.

The purpose of this study is to evaluate the intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) with the fixed collimator jaws technique (FJT) for the left breast and regional lymph node. The targeted breast tissue and the lymph nodes, and the normal tissues were contoured for 16 left-sided breast cancer patients previously treated with radiotherapy after lumpectomy. For each patient, treatment plans using different planning techniques, i.e., volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT), tangential IMRT (tangential-IMRT), and IMRT with FJT (FJT-IMRT) were developed for dosimetric comparisons. A dose of 50Gy was prescribed to the planning target volume. The dose-volume histograms were generated, and the paired t-test was used to analyze the dose differences. FJT-IMRT had similar mean heart volume receiving 30Gy (V30 Gy) with tangential-IMRT (1.5% and 1.6%, p = 0.41), but inferior to the VMAT (0.8%, p < 0.001). In the average heart mean dose comparison, FJT-IMRT had the lowest value, and it was 0.6Gy lower than that for the VMAT plans (p < 0.01). A significant dose increase in the contralateral breast and lung was observed in VMAT plans. Compared with tangential-IMRT and VMAT plans, FJT-IMRT reduced the mean dose of thyroid, humeral head and cervical esophageal by 47.6% (p < 0.01) and 45.7% (p < 0.01), 74.3% (p = < 0.01) and 73% (p = < 0.01), and 26.7% (p = < 0.01) and 29.2% (p = < 0.01). In conclusion, compared with tangential-IMRT and VMAT, FJT-IMRT plan has the lowest thyroid, humeral head and cervical esophageal mean dose and it can be a reasonable treatment option for a certain subgroup of patients, such as young left-breast cancer patients and/or patients with previous thyroid disease.