Cargando…
A hybrid automated treatment planning solution for esophageal cancer
OBJECTIVE: This study aims to investigate a hybrid automated treatment planning (HAP) solution that combines knowledge-based planning (KBP) and script-based planning for esophageal cancer. METHODS: In order to fully investigate the advantages of HAP, three planning strategies were implemented in the...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2019
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6923830/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31856866 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13014-019-1443-5 |
_version_ | 1783481601062076416 |
---|---|
author | Ling, Chifang Han, Xu Zhai, Peng Xu, Hao Chen, Jiayan Wang, Jiazhou Hu, Weigang |
author_facet | Ling, Chifang Han, Xu Zhai, Peng Xu, Hao Chen, Jiayan Wang, Jiazhou Hu, Weigang |
author_sort | Ling, Chifang |
collection | PubMed |
description | OBJECTIVE: This study aims to investigate a hybrid automated treatment planning (HAP) solution that combines knowledge-based planning (KBP) and script-based planning for esophageal cancer. METHODS: In order to fully investigate the advantages of HAP, three planning strategies were implemented in the present study: HAP, KBP, and full manual planning. Each method was applied to 20 patients. For HAP and KBP, the objective functions for plan optimization were generated from a dose–volume histogram (DVH) estimation model, which was based on 70 esophageal patients. Script-based automated planning was used for HAP, while the regular IMRT inverse planning method was used for KBP. For full manual planning, clinical standards were applied to create the plans. Paired t-tests were performed to compare the differences in dose-volume indices among the three planning methods. RESULTS: Among the three planning strategies, HAP exhibited the best performance in all dose-volume indices, except for PTV dose homogeneity and lung V5. PTV conformity and spinal cord sparing were significantly improved in HAP (P < 0.001). Compared to KBP, HAP improved all indices, except for lung V5. Furthermore, the OAR sparing and target coverage between HAP and full manual planning were similar. Moreover, HAP had the shortest average planning time (57 min), when compared to KBP (63 min) and full manual planning (118 min). CONCLUSION: HAP is an effective planning strategy for obtaining a high quality treatment plan for esophageal cancer. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6923830 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2019 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-69238302019-12-30 A hybrid automated treatment planning solution for esophageal cancer Ling, Chifang Han, Xu Zhai, Peng Xu, Hao Chen, Jiayan Wang, Jiazhou Hu, Weigang Radiat Oncol Research OBJECTIVE: This study aims to investigate a hybrid automated treatment planning (HAP) solution that combines knowledge-based planning (KBP) and script-based planning for esophageal cancer. METHODS: In order to fully investigate the advantages of HAP, three planning strategies were implemented in the present study: HAP, KBP, and full manual planning. Each method was applied to 20 patients. For HAP and KBP, the objective functions for plan optimization were generated from a dose–volume histogram (DVH) estimation model, which was based on 70 esophageal patients. Script-based automated planning was used for HAP, while the regular IMRT inverse planning method was used for KBP. For full manual planning, clinical standards were applied to create the plans. Paired t-tests were performed to compare the differences in dose-volume indices among the three planning methods. RESULTS: Among the three planning strategies, HAP exhibited the best performance in all dose-volume indices, except for PTV dose homogeneity and lung V5. PTV conformity and spinal cord sparing were significantly improved in HAP (P < 0.001). Compared to KBP, HAP improved all indices, except for lung V5. Furthermore, the OAR sparing and target coverage between HAP and full manual planning were similar. Moreover, HAP had the shortest average planning time (57 min), when compared to KBP (63 min) and full manual planning (118 min). CONCLUSION: HAP is an effective planning strategy for obtaining a high quality treatment plan for esophageal cancer. BioMed Central 2019-12-19 /pmc/articles/PMC6923830/ /pubmed/31856866 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13014-019-1443-5 Text en © The Author(s). 2019 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated. |
spellingShingle | Research Ling, Chifang Han, Xu Zhai, Peng Xu, Hao Chen, Jiayan Wang, Jiazhou Hu, Weigang A hybrid automated treatment planning solution for esophageal cancer |
title | A hybrid automated treatment planning solution for esophageal cancer |
title_full | A hybrid automated treatment planning solution for esophageal cancer |
title_fullStr | A hybrid automated treatment planning solution for esophageal cancer |
title_full_unstemmed | A hybrid automated treatment planning solution for esophageal cancer |
title_short | A hybrid automated treatment planning solution for esophageal cancer |
title_sort | hybrid automated treatment planning solution for esophageal cancer |
topic | Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6923830/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31856866 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13014-019-1443-5 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT lingchifang ahybridautomatedtreatmentplanningsolutionforesophagealcancer AT hanxu ahybridautomatedtreatmentplanningsolutionforesophagealcancer AT zhaipeng ahybridautomatedtreatmentplanningsolutionforesophagealcancer AT xuhao ahybridautomatedtreatmentplanningsolutionforesophagealcancer AT chenjiayan ahybridautomatedtreatmentplanningsolutionforesophagealcancer AT wangjiazhou ahybridautomatedtreatmentplanningsolutionforesophagealcancer AT huweigang ahybridautomatedtreatmentplanningsolutionforesophagealcancer AT lingchifang hybridautomatedtreatmentplanningsolutionforesophagealcancer AT hanxu hybridautomatedtreatmentplanningsolutionforesophagealcancer AT zhaipeng hybridautomatedtreatmentplanningsolutionforesophagealcancer AT xuhao hybridautomatedtreatmentplanningsolutionforesophagealcancer AT chenjiayan hybridautomatedtreatmentplanningsolutionforesophagealcancer AT wangjiazhou hybridautomatedtreatmentplanningsolutionforesophagealcancer AT huweigang hybridautomatedtreatmentplanningsolutionforesophagealcancer |