Cargando…

Customizable landmark‐based field aperture design for automated whole‐brain radiotherapy treatment planning

PURPOSE: To develop and evaluate an automated whole‐brain radiotherapy (WBRT) treatment planning pipeline with a deep learning–based auto‐contouring and customizable landmark‐based field aperture design. METHODS: The pipeline consisted of the following steps: (1) Auto‐contour normal structures on co...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Xiao, Yao, Cardenas, Carlos, Rhee, Dong Joo, Netherton, Tucker, Zhang, Lifei, Nguyen, Callistus, Douglas, Raphael, Mumme, Raymond, Skett, Stephen, Patel, Tina, Trauernicht, Chris, Chung, Caroline, Simonds, Hannah, Aggarwal, Ajay, Court, Laurence
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10018662/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36412092
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/acm2.13839
_version_ 1784907860185972736
author Xiao, Yao
Cardenas, Carlos
Rhee, Dong Joo
Netherton, Tucker
Zhang, Lifei
Nguyen, Callistus
Douglas, Raphael
Mumme, Raymond
Skett, Stephen
Patel, Tina
Trauernicht, Chris
Chung, Caroline
Simonds, Hannah
Aggarwal, Ajay
Court, Laurence
author_facet Xiao, Yao
Cardenas, Carlos
Rhee, Dong Joo
Netherton, Tucker
Zhang, Lifei
Nguyen, Callistus
Douglas, Raphael
Mumme, Raymond
Skett, Stephen
Patel, Tina
Trauernicht, Chris
Chung, Caroline
Simonds, Hannah
Aggarwal, Ajay
Court, Laurence
author_sort Xiao, Yao
collection PubMed
description PURPOSE: To develop and evaluate an automated whole‐brain radiotherapy (WBRT) treatment planning pipeline with a deep learning–based auto‐contouring and customizable landmark‐based field aperture design. METHODS: The pipeline consisted of the following steps: (1) Auto‐contour normal structures on computed tomography scans and digitally reconstructed radiographs using deep learning techniques, (2) locate the landmark structures using the beam's‐eye‐view, (3) generate field apertures based on eight different landmark rules addressing different clinical purposes and physician preferences. Two parallel approaches for generating field apertures were developed for quality control. The performance of the generated field shapes and dose distributions were compared with the original clinical plans. The clinical acceptability of the plans was assessed by five radiation oncologists from four hospitals. RESULTS: The performance of the generated field apertures was evaluated by the Hausdorff distance (HD) and mean surface distance (MSD) from 182 patients’ field apertures used in the clinic. The average HD and MSD for the generated field apertures were 16 ± 7 and 7 ± 3 mm for the first approach, respectively, and 17 ± 7 and 7 ± 3 mm, respectively, for the second approach. The differences regarding HD and MSD between the first and the second approaches were 1 ± 2 and 1 ± 3 mm, respectively. A clinical review of the field aperture design, conducted using 30 patients, achieved a 100% acceptance rate for both the first and second approaches, and the plan review achieved a 100% acceptance rate for the first approach and a 93% acceptance rate for the second approach. The average acceptance rate for meeting lens dosimetric recommendations was 80% (left lens) and 77% (right lens) for the first approach, and 70% (both left and right lenses) for the second approach, compared with 50% (left lens) and 53% (right lens) for the clinical plans. CONCLUSION: This study provided an automated pipeline with two field aperture generation approaches to automatically generate WBRT treatment plans. Both quantitative and qualitative evaluations demonstrated that our novel pipeline was comparable with the original clinical plans.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10018662
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-100186622023-03-17 Customizable landmark‐based field aperture design for automated whole‐brain radiotherapy treatment planning Xiao, Yao Cardenas, Carlos Rhee, Dong Joo Netherton, Tucker Zhang, Lifei Nguyen, Callistus Douglas, Raphael Mumme, Raymond Skett, Stephen Patel, Tina Trauernicht, Chris Chung, Caroline Simonds, Hannah Aggarwal, Ajay Court, Laurence J Appl Clin Med Phys Radiation Oncology Physics PURPOSE: To develop and evaluate an automated whole‐brain radiotherapy (WBRT) treatment planning pipeline with a deep learning–based auto‐contouring and customizable landmark‐based field aperture design. METHODS: The pipeline consisted of the following steps: (1) Auto‐contour normal structures on computed tomography scans and digitally reconstructed radiographs using deep learning techniques, (2) locate the landmark structures using the beam's‐eye‐view, (3) generate field apertures based on eight different landmark rules addressing different clinical purposes and physician preferences. Two parallel approaches for generating field apertures were developed for quality control. The performance of the generated field shapes and dose distributions were compared with the original clinical plans. The clinical acceptability of the plans was assessed by five radiation oncologists from four hospitals. RESULTS: The performance of the generated field apertures was evaluated by the Hausdorff distance (HD) and mean surface distance (MSD) from 182 patients’ field apertures used in the clinic. The average HD and MSD for the generated field apertures were 16 ± 7 and 7 ± 3 mm for the first approach, respectively, and 17 ± 7 and 7 ± 3 mm, respectively, for the second approach. The differences regarding HD and MSD between the first and the second approaches were 1 ± 2 and 1 ± 3 mm, respectively. A clinical review of the field aperture design, conducted using 30 patients, achieved a 100% acceptance rate for both the first and second approaches, and the plan review achieved a 100% acceptance rate for the first approach and a 93% acceptance rate for the second approach. The average acceptance rate for meeting lens dosimetric recommendations was 80% (left lens) and 77% (right lens) for the first approach, and 70% (both left and right lenses) for the second approach, compared with 50% (left lens) and 53% (right lens) for the clinical plans. CONCLUSION: This study provided an automated pipeline with two field aperture generation approaches to automatically generate WBRT treatment plans. Both quantitative and qualitative evaluations demonstrated that our novel pipeline was comparable with the original clinical plans. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2022-11-22 /pmc/articles/PMC10018662/ /pubmed/36412092 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/acm2.13839 Text en © 2022 The Authors. Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics published by Wiley Periodicals, LLC on behalf of The American Association of Physicists in Medicine. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Radiation Oncology Physics
Xiao, Yao
Cardenas, Carlos
Rhee, Dong Joo
Netherton, Tucker
Zhang, Lifei
Nguyen, Callistus
Douglas, Raphael
Mumme, Raymond
Skett, Stephen
Patel, Tina
Trauernicht, Chris
Chung, Caroline
Simonds, Hannah
Aggarwal, Ajay
Court, Laurence
Customizable landmark‐based field aperture design for automated whole‐brain radiotherapy treatment planning
title Customizable landmark‐based field aperture design for automated whole‐brain radiotherapy treatment planning
title_full Customizable landmark‐based field aperture design for automated whole‐brain radiotherapy treatment planning
title_fullStr Customizable landmark‐based field aperture design for automated whole‐brain radiotherapy treatment planning
title_full_unstemmed Customizable landmark‐based field aperture design for automated whole‐brain radiotherapy treatment planning
title_short Customizable landmark‐based field aperture design for automated whole‐brain radiotherapy treatment planning
title_sort customizable landmark‐based field aperture design for automated whole‐brain radiotherapy treatment planning
topic Radiation Oncology Physics
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10018662/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36412092
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/acm2.13839
work_keys_str_mv AT xiaoyao customizablelandmarkbasedfieldaperturedesignforautomatedwholebrainradiotherapytreatmentplanning
AT cardenascarlos customizablelandmarkbasedfieldaperturedesignforautomatedwholebrainradiotherapytreatmentplanning
AT rheedongjoo customizablelandmarkbasedfieldaperturedesignforautomatedwholebrainradiotherapytreatmentplanning
AT nethertontucker customizablelandmarkbasedfieldaperturedesignforautomatedwholebrainradiotherapytreatmentplanning
AT zhanglifei customizablelandmarkbasedfieldaperturedesignforautomatedwholebrainradiotherapytreatmentplanning
AT nguyencallistus customizablelandmarkbasedfieldaperturedesignforautomatedwholebrainradiotherapytreatmentplanning
AT douglasraphael customizablelandmarkbasedfieldaperturedesignforautomatedwholebrainradiotherapytreatmentplanning
AT mummeraymond customizablelandmarkbasedfieldaperturedesignforautomatedwholebrainradiotherapytreatmentplanning
AT skettstephen customizablelandmarkbasedfieldaperturedesignforautomatedwholebrainradiotherapytreatmentplanning
AT pateltina customizablelandmarkbasedfieldaperturedesignforautomatedwholebrainradiotherapytreatmentplanning
AT trauernichtchris customizablelandmarkbasedfieldaperturedesignforautomatedwholebrainradiotherapytreatmentplanning
AT chungcaroline customizablelandmarkbasedfieldaperturedesignforautomatedwholebrainradiotherapytreatmentplanning
AT simondshannah customizablelandmarkbasedfieldaperturedesignforautomatedwholebrainradiotherapytreatmentplanning
AT aggarwalajay customizablelandmarkbasedfieldaperturedesignforautomatedwholebrainradiotherapytreatmentplanning
AT courtlaurence customizablelandmarkbasedfieldaperturedesignforautomatedwholebrainradiotherapytreatmentplanning