2018
DOI: 10.1016/j.ejmp.2018.08.016
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Reducing inter- and intra-planner variability in radiotherapy plan output with a commercial knowledge-based planning solution

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

2
55
0

Year Published

2019
2019
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 75 publications
(57 citation statements)
references
References 25 publications
2
55
0
Order By: Relevance
“…PQM was first introduced by Nelms 27 ) and prior experience. 28,29 The detailed description can be found in the supplementary materials.…”
Section: C | Plan Quality Assessmentmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…PQM was first introduced by Nelms 27 ) and prior experience. 28,29 The detailed description can be found in the supplementary materials.…”
Section: C | Plan Quality Assessmentmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Several studies reported that the performance of RapidPlan TM was comparable with that of manually optimized plans for different treatment techniques and that the sites and sub-potential manual plans could be improved with RapidPlan TM [1216]. However, some studies also reported that this algorithm could not be applied to automation for all treatment plans [17, 18] and that it was still limited by the inherent information present in the hand-crafted features. In addition, the feature quantity could only capture low-level features, and this algorithm was not sufficiently accurate for prediction [19].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Castriconi et al [17] implemented a KB optimization strategy for adaptive treatments which resulted in robust, better or equivalent clinical plans and a significantly lower dose to the OARs (up to 3 Gy to the bowel bag). For other sites, such as the prostate [18][19][20], head and neck [21] and esophagus [22], automated planning software showed superior consistency and less variation than manual planning, which demonstrates the reduction of intra-and inter-planner subjective dependency. However, to establish an acceptable model for automated planning, it is important to manually fine-tune the optimization objectives during model training [23] and to use a large variety of patients to validate the model, i.e.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 97%