Cargando…

Use of Receiver Operating Curve Analysis and Machine Learning With an Independent Dose Calculation System Reduces the Number of Physical Dose Measurements Required for Patient-Specific Quality Assurance

PURPOSE: Our purpose was to assess the use of machine learning methods and Mobius 3D (M3D) dose calculation software to reduce the number of physical ion chamber (IC) dose measurements required for patient-specific quality assurance during corona virus disease 2019. METHODS AND MATERIALS: In this st...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Hasse, K., Scholey, J., Ziemer, B.P., Natsuaki, Y., Morin, O., Solberg, T.D., Hirata, E., Valdes, G., Witztum, A.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Elsevier, Inc 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9758537/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33197530
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrobp.2020.10.035
Descripción
Sumario:PURPOSE: Our purpose was to assess the use of machine learning methods and Mobius 3D (M3D) dose calculation software to reduce the number of physical ion chamber (IC) dose measurements required for patient-specific quality assurance during corona virus disease 2019. METHODS AND MATERIALS: In this study, 1464 inversely planned treatments using Pinnacle or Raystation treatment planning software (TPS) were delivered using Elekta Versa HD and Varian Truebeam and Truebeam STx linear accelerators between June 2018 and November 2019. For each plan, an independent dose calculation was performed using M3D, and an absolute dose measurement was taken using a Pinpoint IC inside the Mobius phantom. The point dose differences between the TPS and M3D calculation and between TPS and IC measurements were calculated. Agreement between the TPS and IC was used to define the ground truth plan failure. To reduce the on-site personnel during the pandemic, 2 methods of receiver operating characteristic analysis (n = 1464) and machine learning (n = 603) were used to identify patient plans that would require physical dose measurements. RESULTS: In the receiver operating characteristic analysis, a predelivery M3D difference threshold of 3% identified plans that failed an IC measurement at a 4% threshold with 100% sensitivity and 76.3% specificity. This indicates that fewer than 25% of plans required a physical dose measurement. A threshold of 1% on a machine learning model was able to identify plans that failed an IC measurement at a 3% threshold with 100% sensitivity and 54.3% specificity, leading to fewer than 50% of plans that required a physical dose measurement. CONCLUSIONS: It is possible to identify plans that are more likely to fail IC patient-specific quality assurance measurements before delivery. This possibly allows for a reduction of physical measurements taken, freeing up significant clinical resources and reducing the required amount of on-site personnel while maintaining patient safety.