Cargando…

Inverse treatment planning for spinal robotic radiosurgery: an international multi‐institutional benchmark trial

Stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) is the accurate, conformal delivery of high‐dose radiation to well‐defined targets while minimizing normal structure doses via steep dose gradients. While inverse treatment planning (ITP) with computerized optimization algorithms are routine, many aspects of the plann...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Blanck, Oliver, Wang, Lei, Baus, Wolfgang, Grimm, Jimm, Lacornerie, Thomas, Nilsson, Joakim, Luchkovskyi, Sergii, Cano, Isabel Palazon, Shou, Zhenyu, Ayadi, Myriam, Treuer, Harald, Viard, Romain, Siebert, Frank‐Andre, Chan, Mark K.H., Hildebrandt, Guido, Dunst, Jürgen, Imhoff, Detlef, Wurster, Stefan, Wolff, Robert, Romanelli, Pantaleo, Lartigau, Eric, Semrau, Robert, Soltys, Scott G., Schweikard, Achim
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5690905/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27167291
http://dx.doi.org/10.1120/jacmp.v17i3.6151
_version_ 1783279690255958016
author Blanck, Oliver
Wang, Lei
Baus, Wolfgang
Grimm, Jimm
Lacornerie, Thomas
Nilsson, Joakim
Luchkovskyi, Sergii
Cano, Isabel Palazon
Shou, Zhenyu
Ayadi, Myriam
Treuer, Harald
Viard, Romain
Siebert, Frank‐Andre
Chan, Mark K.H.
Hildebrandt, Guido
Dunst, Jürgen
Imhoff, Detlef
Wurster, Stefan
Wolff, Robert
Romanelli, Pantaleo
Lartigau, Eric
Semrau, Robert
Soltys, Scott G.
Schweikard, Achim
author_facet Blanck, Oliver
Wang, Lei
Baus, Wolfgang
Grimm, Jimm
Lacornerie, Thomas
Nilsson, Joakim
Luchkovskyi, Sergii
Cano, Isabel Palazon
Shou, Zhenyu
Ayadi, Myriam
Treuer, Harald
Viard, Romain
Siebert, Frank‐Andre
Chan, Mark K.H.
Hildebrandt, Guido
Dunst, Jürgen
Imhoff, Detlef
Wurster, Stefan
Wolff, Robert
Romanelli, Pantaleo
Lartigau, Eric
Semrau, Robert
Soltys, Scott G.
Schweikard, Achim
author_sort Blanck, Oliver
collection PubMed
description Stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) is the accurate, conformal delivery of high‐dose radiation to well‐defined targets while minimizing normal structure doses via steep dose gradients. While inverse treatment planning (ITP) with computerized optimization algorithms are routine, many aspects of the planning process remain user‐dependent. We performed an international, multi‐institutional benchmark trial to study planning variability and to analyze preferable ITP practice for spinal robotic radiosurgery. 10 SRS treatment plans were generated for a complex‐shaped spinal metastasis with 21 Gy in 3 fractions and tight constraints for spinal cord ([Formula: see text] , [Formula: see text]) and target (coverage [Formula: see text]). The resulting plans were rated on a scale from 1 to 4 (excellent‐poor) in five categories (constraint compliance, optimization goals, low‐dose regions, ITP complexity, and clinical acceptability) by a blinded review panel. Additionally, the plans were mathematically rated based on plan indices (critical structure and target doses, conformity, monitor units, normal tissue complication probability, and treatment time) and compared to the human rankings. The treatment plans and the reviewers' rankings varied substantially among the participating centers. The average mean overall rank was 2.4 (1.2‐4.0) and 8/10 plans were rated excellent in at least one category by at least one reviewer. The mathematical rankings agreed with the mean overall human rankings in 9/10 cases pointing toward the possibility for sole mathematical plan quality comparison. The final rankings revealed that a plan with a well‐balanced trade‐off among all planning objectives was preferred for treatment by most participants, reviewers, and the mathematical ranking system. Furthermore, this plan was generated with simple planning techniques. Our multi‐institutional planning study found wide variability in ITP approaches for spinal robotic radiosurgery. The participants', reviewers', and mathematical match on preferable treatment plans and ITP techniques indicate that agreement on treatment planning and plan quality can be reached for spinal robotic radiosurgery. PACS number(s): 87.55.de
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5690905
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-56909052018-04-02 Inverse treatment planning for spinal robotic radiosurgery: an international multi‐institutional benchmark trial Blanck, Oliver Wang, Lei Baus, Wolfgang Grimm, Jimm Lacornerie, Thomas Nilsson, Joakim Luchkovskyi, Sergii Cano, Isabel Palazon Shou, Zhenyu Ayadi, Myriam Treuer, Harald Viard, Romain Siebert, Frank‐Andre Chan, Mark K.H. Hildebrandt, Guido Dunst, Jürgen Imhoff, Detlef Wurster, Stefan Wolff, Robert Romanelli, Pantaleo Lartigau, Eric Semrau, Robert Soltys, Scott G. Schweikard, Achim J Appl Clin Med Phys Radiation Oncology Physics Stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) is the accurate, conformal delivery of high‐dose radiation to well‐defined targets while minimizing normal structure doses via steep dose gradients. While inverse treatment planning (ITP) with computerized optimization algorithms are routine, many aspects of the planning process remain user‐dependent. We performed an international, multi‐institutional benchmark trial to study planning variability and to analyze preferable ITP practice for spinal robotic radiosurgery. 10 SRS treatment plans were generated for a complex‐shaped spinal metastasis with 21 Gy in 3 fractions and tight constraints for spinal cord ([Formula: see text] , [Formula: see text]) and target (coverage [Formula: see text]). The resulting plans were rated on a scale from 1 to 4 (excellent‐poor) in five categories (constraint compliance, optimization goals, low‐dose regions, ITP complexity, and clinical acceptability) by a blinded review panel. Additionally, the plans were mathematically rated based on plan indices (critical structure and target doses, conformity, monitor units, normal tissue complication probability, and treatment time) and compared to the human rankings. The treatment plans and the reviewers' rankings varied substantially among the participating centers. The average mean overall rank was 2.4 (1.2‐4.0) and 8/10 plans were rated excellent in at least one category by at least one reviewer. The mathematical rankings agreed with the mean overall human rankings in 9/10 cases pointing toward the possibility for sole mathematical plan quality comparison. The final rankings revealed that a plan with a well‐balanced trade‐off among all planning objectives was preferred for treatment by most participants, reviewers, and the mathematical ranking system. Furthermore, this plan was generated with simple planning techniques. Our multi‐institutional planning study found wide variability in ITP approaches for spinal robotic radiosurgery. The participants', reviewers', and mathematical match on preferable treatment plans and ITP techniques indicate that agreement on treatment planning and plan quality can be reached for spinal robotic radiosurgery. PACS number(s): 87.55.de John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2016-05-08 /pmc/articles/PMC5690905/ /pubmed/27167291 http://dx.doi.org/10.1120/jacmp.v17i3.6151 Text en © 2016 The Authors. This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/) License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Radiation Oncology Physics
Blanck, Oliver
Wang, Lei
Baus, Wolfgang
Grimm, Jimm
Lacornerie, Thomas
Nilsson, Joakim
Luchkovskyi, Sergii
Cano, Isabel Palazon
Shou, Zhenyu
Ayadi, Myriam
Treuer, Harald
Viard, Romain
Siebert, Frank‐Andre
Chan, Mark K.H.
Hildebrandt, Guido
Dunst, Jürgen
Imhoff, Detlef
Wurster, Stefan
Wolff, Robert
Romanelli, Pantaleo
Lartigau, Eric
Semrau, Robert
Soltys, Scott G.
Schweikard, Achim
Inverse treatment planning for spinal robotic radiosurgery: an international multi‐institutional benchmark trial
title Inverse treatment planning for spinal robotic radiosurgery: an international multi‐institutional benchmark trial
title_full Inverse treatment planning for spinal robotic radiosurgery: an international multi‐institutional benchmark trial
title_fullStr Inverse treatment planning for spinal robotic radiosurgery: an international multi‐institutional benchmark trial
title_full_unstemmed Inverse treatment planning for spinal robotic radiosurgery: an international multi‐institutional benchmark trial
title_short Inverse treatment planning for spinal robotic radiosurgery: an international multi‐institutional benchmark trial
title_sort inverse treatment planning for spinal robotic radiosurgery: an international multi‐institutional benchmark trial
topic Radiation Oncology Physics
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5690905/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27167291
http://dx.doi.org/10.1120/jacmp.v17i3.6151
work_keys_str_mv AT blanckoliver inversetreatmentplanningforspinalroboticradiosurgeryaninternationalmultiinstitutionalbenchmarktrial
AT wanglei inversetreatmentplanningforspinalroboticradiosurgeryaninternationalmultiinstitutionalbenchmarktrial
AT bauswolfgang inversetreatmentplanningforspinalroboticradiosurgeryaninternationalmultiinstitutionalbenchmarktrial
AT grimmjimm inversetreatmentplanningforspinalroboticradiosurgeryaninternationalmultiinstitutionalbenchmarktrial
AT lacorneriethomas inversetreatmentplanningforspinalroboticradiosurgeryaninternationalmultiinstitutionalbenchmarktrial
AT nilssonjoakim inversetreatmentplanningforspinalroboticradiosurgeryaninternationalmultiinstitutionalbenchmarktrial
AT luchkovskyisergii inversetreatmentplanningforspinalroboticradiosurgeryaninternationalmultiinstitutionalbenchmarktrial
AT canoisabelpalazon inversetreatmentplanningforspinalroboticradiosurgeryaninternationalmultiinstitutionalbenchmarktrial
AT shouzhenyu inversetreatmentplanningforspinalroboticradiosurgeryaninternationalmultiinstitutionalbenchmarktrial
AT ayadimyriam inversetreatmentplanningforspinalroboticradiosurgeryaninternationalmultiinstitutionalbenchmarktrial
AT treuerharald inversetreatmentplanningforspinalroboticradiosurgeryaninternationalmultiinstitutionalbenchmarktrial
AT viardromain inversetreatmentplanningforspinalroboticradiosurgeryaninternationalmultiinstitutionalbenchmarktrial
AT siebertfrankandre inversetreatmentplanningforspinalroboticradiosurgeryaninternationalmultiinstitutionalbenchmarktrial
AT chanmarkkh inversetreatmentplanningforspinalroboticradiosurgeryaninternationalmultiinstitutionalbenchmarktrial
AT hildebrandtguido inversetreatmentplanningforspinalroboticradiosurgeryaninternationalmultiinstitutionalbenchmarktrial
AT dunstjurgen inversetreatmentplanningforspinalroboticradiosurgeryaninternationalmultiinstitutionalbenchmarktrial
AT imhoffdetlef inversetreatmentplanningforspinalroboticradiosurgeryaninternationalmultiinstitutionalbenchmarktrial
AT wursterstefan inversetreatmentplanningforspinalroboticradiosurgeryaninternationalmultiinstitutionalbenchmarktrial
AT wolffrobert inversetreatmentplanningforspinalroboticradiosurgeryaninternationalmultiinstitutionalbenchmarktrial
AT romanellipantaleo inversetreatmentplanningforspinalroboticradiosurgeryaninternationalmultiinstitutionalbenchmarktrial
AT lartigaueric inversetreatmentplanningforspinalroboticradiosurgeryaninternationalmultiinstitutionalbenchmarktrial
AT semraurobert inversetreatmentplanningforspinalroboticradiosurgeryaninternationalmultiinstitutionalbenchmarktrial
AT soltysscottg inversetreatmentplanningforspinalroboticradiosurgeryaninternationalmultiinstitutionalbenchmarktrial
AT schweikardachim inversetreatmentplanningforspinalroboticradiosurgeryaninternationalmultiinstitutionalbenchmarktrial