Cargando…
A head and neck treatment planning strategy for a CBCT‐guided ring‐gantry online adaptive radiotherapy system
PURPOSE: A planning strategy was developed and the utility of online‐adaptation with the Ethos CBCT‐guided ring‐gantry adaptive radiotherapy (ART) system was evaluated using retrospective data from Head‐and‐neck (H&N) patients that required clinical offline adaptation during treatment. METHODS:...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
John Wiley and Sons Inc.
2023
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10691641/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37621133 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/acm2.14134 |
_version_ | 1785152777309126656 |
---|---|
author | Nasser, Nour Yang, George Q. Koo, Jihye Bowers, Mark Greco, Kevin Feygelman, Vladimir Moros, Eduardo G. Caudell, Jimmy J. Redler, Gage |
author_facet | Nasser, Nour Yang, George Q. Koo, Jihye Bowers, Mark Greco, Kevin Feygelman, Vladimir Moros, Eduardo G. Caudell, Jimmy J. Redler, Gage |
author_sort | Nasser, Nour |
collection | PubMed |
description | PURPOSE: A planning strategy was developed and the utility of online‐adaptation with the Ethos CBCT‐guided ring‐gantry adaptive radiotherapy (ART) system was evaluated using retrospective data from Head‐and‐neck (H&N) patients that required clinical offline adaptation during treatment. METHODS: Clinical data were used to re‐plan 20 H&N patients (10 sequential boost (SEQ) with separate base and boost plans plus 10 simultaneous integrated boost (SIB)). An optimal approach, robust to online adaptation, for Ethos‐initial plans using clinical goal prioritization was developed. Anatomically‐derived isodose‐shaping helper structures, air‐density override, goals for controlling hotspot location(s), and plan normalization were investigated. Online adaptation was simulated using clinical offline adaptive simulation‐CTs to represent an on‐treatment CBCT. Dosimetric comparisons were based on institutional guidelines for Clinical‐initial versus Ethos‐initial plans and Ethos‐scheduled versus Ethos‐adapted plans. Timing for five components of the online adaptive workflow was analyzed. RESULTS: The Ethos H&N planning approach generated Ethos‐initial SEQ plans with clinically comparable PTV coverage (average PTV(High) V(100%) = 98.3%, D(min,0.03cc) = 97.9% and D(0.03cc) = 105.5%) and OAR sparing. However, Ethos‐initial SIB plans were clinically inferior (average PTV(High) V(100%) = 96.4%, D(min,0.03cc) = 93.7%, D(0.03cc) = 110.6%). Fixed‐field IMRT was superior to VMAT for 93.3% of plans. Online adaptation succeeded in achieving conformal coverage to the new anatomy in both SEQ and SIB plans that was even superior to that achieved in the initial plans (which was due to the changes in anatomy that simplified the optimization). The average adaptive workflow duration for SIB, SEQ base and SEQ boost was 30:14, 22.56, and 14:03 (min: sec), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: With an optimal planning approach, Ethos efficiently auto‐generated dosimetrically comparable and clinically acceptable initial SEQ plans for H&N patients. Initial SIB plans were inferior and clinically unacceptable, but adapted SIB plans became clinically acceptable. Online adapted plans optimized dose to new anatomy and maintained target coverage/homogeneity with improved OAR sparing in a time‐efficient manner. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-10691641 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2023 |
publisher | John Wiley and Sons Inc. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-106916412023-12-02 A head and neck treatment planning strategy for a CBCT‐guided ring‐gantry online adaptive radiotherapy system Nasser, Nour Yang, George Q. Koo, Jihye Bowers, Mark Greco, Kevin Feygelman, Vladimir Moros, Eduardo G. Caudell, Jimmy J. Redler, Gage J Appl Clin Med Phys Radiation Oncology Physics PURPOSE: A planning strategy was developed and the utility of online‐adaptation with the Ethos CBCT‐guided ring‐gantry adaptive radiotherapy (ART) system was evaluated using retrospective data from Head‐and‐neck (H&N) patients that required clinical offline adaptation during treatment. METHODS: Clinical data were used to re‐plan 20 H&N patients (10 sequential boost (SEQ) with separate base and boost plans plus 10 simultaneous integrated boost (SIB)). An optimal approach, robust to online adaptation, for Ethos‐initial plans using clinical goal prioritization was developed. Anatomically‐derived isodose‐shaping helper structures, air‐density override, goals for controlling hotspot location(s), and plan normalization were investigated. Online adaptation was simulated using clinical offline adaptive simulation‐CTs to represent an on‐treatment CBCT. Dosimetric comparisons were based on institutional guidelines for Clinical‐initial versus Ethos‐initial plans and Ethos‐scheduled versus Ethos‐adapted plans. Timing for five components of the online adaptive workflow was analyzed. RESULTS: The Ethos H&N planning approach generated Ethos‐initial SEQ plans with clinically comparable PTV coverage (average PTV(High) V(100%) = 98.3%, D(min,0.03cc) = 97.9% and D(0.03cc) = 105.5%) and OAR sparing. However, Ethos‐initial SIB plans were clinically inferior (average PTV(High) V(100%) = 96.4%, D(min,0.03cc) = 93.7%, D(0.03cc) = 110.6%). Fixed‐field IMRT was superior to VMAT for 93.3% of plans. Online adaptation succeeded in achieving conformal coverage to the new anatomy in both SEQ and SIB plans that was even superior to that achieved in the initial plans (which was due to the changes in anatomy that simplified the optimization). The average adaptive workflow duration for SIB, SEQ base and SEQ boost was 30:14, 22.56, and 14:03 (min: sec), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: With an optimal planning approach, Ethos efficiently auto‐generated dosimetrically comparable and clinically acceptable initial SEQ plans for H&N patients. Initial SIB plans were inferior and clinically unacceptable, but adapted SIB plans became clinically acceptable. Online adapted plans optimized dose to new anatomy and maintained target coverage/homogeneity with improved OAR sparing in a time‐efficient manner. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2023-08-24 /pmc/articles/PMC10691641/ /pubmed/37621133 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/acm2.14134 Text en © 2023 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 Nasser, Nour Yang, George Q. Koo, Jihye Bowers, Mark Greco, Kevin Feygelman, Vladimir Moros, Eduardo G. Caudell, Jimmy J. Redler, Gage A head and neck treatment planning strategy for a CBCT‐guided ring‐gantry online adaptive radiotherapy system |
title | A head and neck treatment planning strategy for a CBCT‐guided ring‐gantry online adaptive radiotherapy system |
title_full | A head and neck treatment planning strategy for a CBCT‐guided ring‐gantry online adaptive radiotherapy system |
title_fullStr | A head and neck treatment planning strategy for a CBCT‐guided ring‐gantry online adaptive radiotherapy system |
title_full_unstemmed | A head and neck treatment planning strategy for a CBCT‐guided ring‐gantry online adaptive radiotherapy system |
title_short | A head and neck treatment planning strategy for a CBCT‐guided ring‐gantry online adaptive radiotherapy system |
title_sort | head and neck treatment planning strategy for a cbct‐guided ring‐gantry online adaptive radiotherapy system |
topic | Radiation Oncology Physics |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10691641/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37621133 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/acm2.14134 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT nassernour aheadandnecktreatmentplanningstrategyforacbctguidedringgantryonlineadaptiveradiotherapysystem AT yanggeorgeq aheadandnecktreatmentplanningstrategyforacbctguidedringgantryonlineadaptiveradiotherapysystem AT koojihye aheadandnecktreatmentplanningstrategyforacbctguidedringgantryonlineadaptiveradiotherapysystem AT bowersmark aheadandnecktreatmentplanningstrategyforacbctguidedringgantryonlineadaptiveradiotherapysystem AT grecokevin aheadandnecktreatmentplanningstrategyforacbctguidedringgantryonlineadaptiveradiotherapysystem AT feygelmanvladimir aheadandnecktreatmentplanningstrategyforacbctguidedringgantryonlineadaptiveradiotherapysystem AT moroseduardog aheadandnecktreatmentplanningstrategyforacbctguidedringgantryonlineadaptiveradiotherapysystem AT caudelljimmyj aheadandnecktreatmentplanningstrategyforacbctguidedringgantryonlineadaptiveradiotherapysystem AT redlergage aheadandnecktreatmentplanningstrategyforacbctguidedringgantryonlineadaptiveradiotherapysystem AT nassernour headandnecktreatmentplanningstrategyforacbctguidedringgantryonlineadaptiveradiotherapysystem AT yanggeorgeq headandnecktreatmentplanningstrategyforacbctguidedringgantryonlineadaptiveradiotherapysystem AT koojihye headandnecktreatmentplanningstrategyforacbctguidedringgantryonlineadaptiveradiotherapysystem AT bowersmark headandnecktreatmentplanningstrategyforacbctguidedringgantryonlineadaptiveradiotherapysystem AT grecokevin headandnecktreatmentplanningstrategyforacbctguidedringgantryonlineadaptiveradiotherapysystem AT feygelmanvladimir headandnecktreatmentplanningstrategyforacbctguidedringgantryonlineadaptiveradiotherapysystem AT moroseduardog headandnecktreatmentplanningstrategyforacbctguidedringgantryonlineadaptiveradiotherapysystem AT caudelljimmyj headandnecktreatmentplanningstrategyforacbctguidedringgantryonlineadaptiveradiotherapysystem AT redlergage headandnecktreatmentplanningstrategyforacbctguidedringgantryonlineadaptiveradiotherapysystem |