Cargando…

Does inverse planning improve plan quality in interstitial high-dose-rate breast brachytherapy?

PURPOSE: To investigate the effect of input parameters for an inverse optimization algorithm, and dosimetrically evaluate and compare clinical treatment plans made by inverse and forward planning in high-dose-rate interstitial breast implants. MATERIAL AND METHODS: By using a representative breast i...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Major, Tibor, Fröhlich, Georgina, Mészáros, Norbert, Smanykó, Viktor, Polgár, Csaba
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Termedia Publishing House 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7207228/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32395141
http://dx.doi.org/10.5114/jcb.2020.94584
_version_ 1783530558229315584
author Major, Tibor
Fröhlich, Georgina
Mészáros, Norbert
Smanykó, Viktor
Polgár, Csaba
author_facet Major, Tibor
Fröhlich, Georgina
Mészáros, Norbert
Smanykó, Viktor
Polgár, Csaba
author_sort Major, Tibor
collection PubMed
description PURPOSE: To investigate the effect of input parameters for an inverse optimization algorithm, and dosimetrically evaluate and compare clinical treatment plans made by inverse and forward planning in high-dose-rate interstitial breast implants. MATERIAL AND METHODS: By using a representative breast implant, input parameters responsible for target coverage and dose homogeneity were changed step-by-step, and their optimal values were determined. Then, effects of parameters on dosimetry of normal tissue and organs at risk were investigated. The role of dwell time modulation restriction was also studied. With optimal input parameters, treatment plans of forty-two patients were re-calculated using an inverse optimization algorithm (HIPO). Then, a pair-wise comparison between forward and inverse plans was performed using dose-volume parameters. RESULTS: To find a compromise between target coverage and dose homogeneity, we recommend using weight factors in the range of 70-90 for minimum dose, and in the range of 10-30 for maximum dose. Maximum dose value of 120% with a weight factor of 5 is recommended for normal tissue. Dose constraints for organs at risk did not play an important role, and the dwell time gradient restriction had only minor effect on target dosimetry. In clinical treatment plans, at identical target coverage, the inverse planning significantly increased the dose conformality (COIN, 0.75 vs. 0.69, p < 0.0001) and improved the homogeneity (DNR, 0.35 vs. 0.39, p = 0.0027), as compared to forward planning. All dosimetric parameters for non-target breast, ipsilateral lung, ribs, and heart were significantly better with inverse planning. The most exposed small volumes for skin were less in HIPO plans, but without statistical significance. Volume irradiated by 5% was 173.5 cm(3) in forward and 167.7 cm(3) in inverse plans (p = 0.0247). CONCLUSIONS: By using appropriate input parameters, inverse planning can provide dosimetrically superior dose distributions over forward planning in interstitial breast implants.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7207228
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher Termedia Publishing House
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-72072282020-05-11 Does inverse planning improve plan quality in interstitial high-dose-rate breast brachytherapy? Major, Tibor Fröhlich, Georgina Mészáros, Norbert Smanykó, Viktor Polgár, Csaba J Contemp Brachytherapy Original Paper PURPOSE: To investigate the effect of input parameters for an inverse optimization algorithm, and dosimetrically evaluate and compare clinical treatment plans made by inverse and forward planning in high-dose-rate interstitial breast implants. MATERIAL AND METHODS: By using a representative breast implant, input parameters responsible for target coverage and dose homogeneity were changed step-by-step, and their optimal values were determined. Then, effects of parameters on dosimetry of normal tissue and organs at risk were investigated. The role of dwell time modulation restriction was also studied. With optimal input parameters, treatment plans of forty-two patients were re-calculated using an inverse optimization algorithm (HIPO). Then, a pair-wise comparison between forward and inverse plans was performed using dose-volume parameters. RESULTS: To find a compromise between target coverage and dose homogeneity, we recommend using weight factors in the range of 70-90 for minimum dose, and in the range of 10-30 for maximum dose. Maximum dose value of 120% with a weight factor of 5 is recommended for normal tissue. Dose constraints for organs at risk did not play an important role, and the dwell time gradient restriction had only minor effect on target dosimetry. In clinical treatment plans, at identical target coverage, the inverse planning significantly increased the dose conformality (COIN, 0.75 vs. 0.69, p < 0.0001) and improved the homogeneity (DNR, 0.35 vs. 0.39, p = 0.0027), as compared to forward planning. All dosimetric parameters for non-target breast, ipsilateral lung, ribs, and heart were significantly better with inverse planning. The most exposed small volumes for skin were less in HIPO plans, but without statistical significance. Volume irradiated by 5% was 173.5 cm(3) in forward and 167.7 cm(3) in inverse plans (p = 0.0247). CONCLUSIONS: By using appropriate input parameters, inverse planning can provide dosimetrically superior dose distributions over forward planning in interstitial breast implants. Termedia Publishing House 2020-04-30 2020-04 /pmc/articles/PMC7207228/ /pubmed/32395141 http://dx.doi.org/10.5114/jcb.2020.94584 Text en Copyright © 2020 Termedia http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/ This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0). License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/)
spellingShingle Original Paper
Major, Tibor
Fröhlich, Georgina
Mészáros, Norbert
Smanykó, Viktor
Polgár, Csaba
Does inverse planning improve plan quality in interstitial high-dose-rate breast brachytherapy?
title Does inverse planning improve plan quality in interstitial high-dose-rate breast brachytherapy?
title_full Does inverse planning improve plan quality in interstitial high-dose-rate breast brachytherapy?
title_fullStr Does inverse planning improve plan quality in interstitial high-dose-rate breast brachytherapy?
title_full_unstemmed Does inverse planning improve plan quality in interstitial high-dose-rate breast brachytherapy?
title_short Does inverse planning improve plan quality in interstitial high-dose-rate breast brachytherapy?
title_sort does inverse planning improve plan quality in interstitial high-dose-rate breast brachytherapy?
topic Original Paper
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7207228/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32395141
http://dx.doi.org/10.5114/jcb.2020.94584
work_keys_str_mv AT majortibor doesinverseplanningimproveplanqualityininterstitialhighdoseratebreastbrachytherapy
AT frohlichgeorgina doesinverseplanningimproveplanqualityininterstitialhighdoseratebreastbrachytherapy
AT meszarosnorbert doesinverseplanningimproveplanqualityininterstitialhighdoseratebreastbrachytherapy
AT smanykoviktor doesinverseplanningimproveplanqualityininterstitialhighdoseratebreastbrachytherapy
AT polgarcsaba doesinverseplanningimproveplanqualityininterstitialhighdoseratebreastbrachytherapy