Cargando…

Volumetric modulated arc therapy dose prediction and deliverable treatment plan generation for prostate cancer patients using a densely connected deep learning model

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Radiation therapy treatment planning is a manual, time-consuming task that might be accelerated using machine learning algorithms. In this study, we aimed to evaluate if a triplet-based deep learning model can predict volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) dose distributions...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Lempart, Michael, Benedek, Hunor, Jamtheim Gustafsson, Christian, Nilsson, Mikael, Eliasson, Niklas, Bäck, Sven, Munck af Rosenschöld, Per, Olsson, Lars E.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Elsevier 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8353474/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34401537
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.phro.2021.07.008
Descripción
Sumario:BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Radiation therapy treatment planning is a manual, time-consuming task that might be accelerated using machine learning algorithms. In this study, we aimed to evaluate if a triplet-based deep learning model can predict volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) dose distributions for prostate cancer patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A modified U-Net was trained on triplets, a combination of three consecutive image slices and corresponding segmentations, from 160 patients, and compared to a baseline U-Net. Dose predictions from 17 test patients were transformed into deliverable treatment plans using a novel planning workflow. RESULTS: The model achieved a mean absolute dose error of 1.3%, 1.9%, 1.0% and ≤ 2.6% for clinical target volume (CTV) CTV_D(100%), planning target volume (PTV) PTV_D(98%), PTV(_)D(95%) and organs at risk (OAR) respectively, when compared to the clinical ground truth (GT) dose distributions. All predicted distributions were successfully transformed into deliverable treatment plans and tested on a phantom, resulting in a passing rate of 100% (global gamma, 3%, 2 mm, 15% cutoff). The dose difference between deliverable treatment plans and GT dose distributions was within 4.4%. The difference between the baseline model and our improved model was statistically significant (p < 0.05) for CVT_D(100%), PTV_D(98%) and PTV_D(95%). CONCLUSION: Triplet-based training improved VMAT dose distribution predictions when compared to 2D. Dose predictions were successfully transformed into deliverable treatment plans using our proposed treatment planning procedure. Our method may automate parts of the workflow for external beam prostate radiation therapy and improve the overall treatment speed and plan quality.