SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “Plan”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 739 records · Page 41

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

DOE OSTI2015

SU-E-J-80: A Comparative Analysis of MIM and Pinnacle Software for Adaptive Planning

Purpose: IMRT treatment is often administered with image guidance and small PTV margins. Change in body habitus such as weight loss and tumor response during the course of a treatment could be significant, thus warranting re-simulation and re-planning. Adaptive planning is challenging and places significant burden on the staff, as such some commercial vendors are now offering adaptive planning software to stream line the process of re-planning and dose accumulation between different CT data set. The purpose of this abstract is to compare the adaptive planning tools between Pinnacle version 9.8 and MIM 6.4 software. Methods: Head and Neck cases of previously treated patients that experienced anatomical changes during the course of their treatment were chosen for evaluation. The new CT data set from the re-simulation was imported to Pinnacle and MIM software. The dynamic planning tool in pinnacle was used to calculate the old plan with fixed MU setting on the new CT data. In MIM, the old CT was registered to the new data set, followed by a dose transformation to the new CT. The dose distribution to the PTV and critical structures from each software were analyzed and compared. Results: 9% difference was observed between the Global maximum doses reported by both software. Mean doses to organs at risk and PTV’s were within 6 % however pinnacle showed greater difference in PTV coverage change. Conclusion: MIM software adaptive planning corrects for geometrical changes without consideration for the effect of radiological path length on dose distribution; however Pinnacle corrects for both geometric and radiological effect on the dose distribution. Pinnacle gives a better estimate of the dosimetric impact due to anatomical changes.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2015

SU-E-T-465: Implementation of An Automated Collision Detection Program Using Open Source Software for the Pinnacle Treatment Planning System

Purpose: Potential collisions between the gantry head and the patient or table assembly are difficult to detect in most treatment planning systems. We have developed and implemented a novel software package for the representation of potential gantry collisions with the couch assembly at the time of treatment planning. Methods: Physical dimensions of the Varian Edge linear accelerator treatment head were measured and reproduced using the Visual Python display package. A script was developed for the Pinnacle treatment planning system to generate a file with the relevant couch, gantry, and isocenter positions for each beam in a planning trial. A python program was developed to parse the information from the TPS and produce a representative model of the couch/gantry system. Using the model and the Visual Python libraries, a rendering window is generated for each beam that allows the planner to evaluate the possibility of a collision. Results: Comparison against heuristic methods and direct verification on the machine validated the collision model generated by the software. Encounters of <1 cm between the gantry treatment head and table were visualized as collisions in our virtual model. Visual windows were created depicting the angle of collision for each beam, including the anticipated table coordinates. Visual rendering of a 6 arc trial with multiple couch positions was completed in under 1 minute, with network bandwidth being the primary bottleneck. Conclusion: The developed software allows for quick examination of possible collisions during the treatment planning process and helps to prevent major collisions prior to plan approval. The software can easily be implemented on future planning systems due to the versatility and platform independence of the Python programming language. Further integration of the software with the treatment planning system will allow the possibility of patient-gantry collision detection for a range of treatment machines.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2015

SU-E-T-500: Initial Implementation of GPU-Based Particle Swarm Optimization for 4D IMRT Planning in Lung SBRT

Purpose 4D-IMRT planning, combined with dynamic MLC tracking delivery, utilizes the temporal dimension as an additional degree of freedom to achieve improved OAR-sparing. The computational complexity for such optimization increases exponentially with increase in dimensionality. In order to accomplish this task in a clinically-feasible time frame, we present an initial implementation of GPU-based 4D-IMRT planning based on particle swarm optimization (PSO). Methods The target and normal structures were manually contoured on ten phases of a 4DCT scan of a NSCLC patient with a 54cm3 right-lower-lobe tumor (1.5cm motion). Corresponding ten 3D-IMRT plans were created in the Eclipse treatment planning system (Ver-13.6). A vendor-provided scripting interface was used to export 3D-dose matrices corresponding to each control point (10 phases × 9 beams × 166 control points = 14,940), which served as input to PSO. The optimization task was to iteratively adjust the weights of each control point and scale the corresponding dose matrices. In order to handle the large amount of data in GPU memory, dose matrices were sparsified and placed in contiguous memory blocks with the 14,940 weight-variables. PSO was implemented on CPU (dual-Xeon, 3.1GHz) and GPU (dual-K20 Tesla, 2496 cores, 3.52Tflops, each) platforms. NiftyReg, an open-source deformable image registration package, was used to calculate the summed dose. Results The 4D-PSO plan yielded PTV coverage comparable to the clinical ITV-based plan and significantly higher OAR-sparing, as follows: lung Dmean=33%; lung V20=27%; spinal cord Dmax=26%; esophagus Dmax=42%; heart Dmax=0%; heart Dmean=47%. The GPU-PSO processing time for 14940 variables and 7 PSO-particles was 41% that of CPU-PSO (199 vs. 488 minutes). Conclusion Truly 4D-IMRT planning can yield significant OAR dose-sparing while preserving PTV coverage. The corresponding optimization problem is large-scale, non-convex and computationally rigorous. Our initial results indicate that GPU-based PSO with further software optimization can make such planning clinically feasible. This work was supported through funding from the National Institutes of Health and Varian Medical Systems.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2015

MO-F-CAMPUS-J-05: Using 2D Relative Gamma Analysis From EPID Image as a Predictor of Plan Deterioration Due to Anatomical Changes

Purpose: One of the side effects of radiotherapy for head and neck (H&N) cancer is the patient’s anatomical changes. The changes can strongly affect the planned dose distribution. In this work, our goal is to demonstrate that relative analysis of EPID images is a fast and simple method to detect anatomical changes that can have a strong dosimetric impact on the treatment plan for H&N patients. Methods: EPID images were recorded at every beam and all fractions for 50 H&N patients. Of these, five patients that showed important anatomical changes were selected to evaluate dosimetric impacts of these changes and to correlate them with a 2D relative gamma analysis of EPID images. The planning CT and original contours were deformed onto CBCTs (one mid treatment and one at the end of treatment). By using deformable image registration, it was possible to map accurate CT numbers from the planning CT to the anatomy of the day obtained with CBCTs. Clinical treatment plan were then copied on the deformed dataset and dose was re-computed. In parallel, EPID images were analysed using the gamma index (3%3mm) relative to the first image. Results: It was possible to divide patients in two distinct, statistically different (p<0.001) categories using an average gamma index of 0.5 as a threshold. Below this threshold no significant dosimetric degradation of the plan are observed. Above this threshold two types of plan deterioration were seen: (1) target dose increases, but coverage remains adequate while dose to at least one OAR increases beyond tolerances; (2) the OAR doses remain low, but the target dose is reduced and coverage becomes inadequate. Conclusion: Relative analysis gamma of EPID images could indeed be a fast and simple method to detect anatomical changes that can potentially deteriorates treatment plan for H&N patients. This work was supported in part by Varian Medical System.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2015

WE-AB-201-00: Treatment Planning System Commissioning and QA

Treatment planning systems (TPS) are a cornerstone of modern radiation therapy. Errors in their commissioning or use can have a devastating impact on many patients. To support safe and high quality care, medical physicists must conduct efficient and proper commissioning, good clinical integration, and ongoing quality assurance (QA) of the TPS. AAPM Task Group 53 and related publications have served as seminal benchmarks for TPS commissioning and QA over the past two decades. Over the same time, continuing innovations have made the TPS even more complex and more central to the clinical process. Medical goals are now expressed in terms of the dose and margins around organs and tissues that are delineated from multiple imaging modalities (CT, MR and PET); and even temporally resolved (i.e., 4D) imaging. This information is passed on to optimization algorithms to establish accelerator movements that are programmed directly for IMRT, VMAT and stereotactic treatments. These advances have made commissioning and QA of the TPS much more challenging. This education session reviews up-to-date experience and guidance on this subject; including the recently published AAPM Medical Physics Practice Guideline (MPPG) #5 “Commissioning and QA of Treatment Planning Dose Calculations: Megavoltage Photon and Electron Beams”. Treatment Planning System Commissioning and QA: Challenges and Opportunities (Greg Salomons) This session will provide some key background and review publications describing prominent incidents relating to TPS commissioning and QA. Traditional approaches have been hardware and feature oriented. They aim to establish a functional configuration and establish specifications for regular testing of features (like dose calculation) to assure stable operation and detect failures. With the advent of more complex systems, more patient-specific testing has also been adopted. A number of actual TPS defects will be presented along with heuristics for identifying similar defects in the future. Finally, the Gamma test has become a popular metric for reporting TPS Commissioning and QA results. It simplifies complex testing into a numerical index, but noisy data and casual application can make it misleading. A brief review of the issues around the use of the Gamma test will be presented. TPS commissioning and QA: A process orientation and application of control charts (Michael Sharpe) A framework for commissioning a treatment planning system will be presented, focusing on preparations, practical aspects of configuration, priorities, specifications, and establishing performance. The complexity of the modern TPS make modular testing of features inadequate, and modern QA tools can provide “too much information” about the performance of techniques like IMRT and VMAT. We have adopted a process orientation and quality tools, like control charts, for ongoing TPS QA and assessment of patient-specific tests. The trending nature of these tools reveals the overall performance of the TPS system, and quantifies the variations that arise from individual plans, discrete calculations, and experimentation based on discrete measurements. Examples demonstrating application of these tools to TPS QA will be presented. TPS commissioning and QA: Incorporating the entire planning process (Sasa Mutic) The TPS and its features do not perform in isolation. Instead, the features and modules are key components in a complex process that begins with CT Simulation and extends to treatment delivery, along with image guidance and verification. Most importantly, the TPS is used by people working in a multi-disciplinary environment. It is very difficult to predict the outcomes of human interactions with software. Therefore, an interdisciplinary approach to training, commissioning and QA will be presented, along with an approach to the physics chart check and end-to-end testing as a tool for TPS QA. The role of standardization and automation in QA will also be discussed. The recommendations of MPPG #5 and practical implementation strategies (Jennifer Smilowitz) The recently published recommendations from Task Group No. 244, Medical Physics Practice Guideline on Commissioning and QA of Treatment Planning Dose Calculations: Megavoltage Photon and Electron Beams will be presented. The recommendations focus on the validation of commissioning data and dose calculations. Tolerance values for non-IMRT beam configurations are summarized based on established criteria and data collected by the IROC. More stringent evaluation criteria for IMRT dose calculations are suggested to test the limitations of the TPS dose algorithms for advanced delivery conditions. The MPPG encourages users to create a suite of validation tests for dose calculation for various conditions for static photon beams, heterogeneities, IMRT/VMAT and electron beams. This test suite is intended to be used for subsequent testing, including TPS software upgrades. In the past, the recommendations of some reports have not been widely implemented due to practical limitations. Implementation strategies, tools and processes developed by multiple centers for efficient and “do-able” MPPG # 5 testing will be presented, as well as a discussion on the overall validation experience. Learning Objectives: Identify some of the key documents relevant for TPS commissioning and QA Understand strategies for testing TPS software Gain a practical knowledge of the Gamma test criteria Increase familiarity with the process of commissioning a TPS Learn about the use of Control Charts for TPS QA Review the role of the TPS in the overall planning process Increase awareness of the link between TPS QA and chart checking Gain an increased appreciation for the importance of interdisciplinary communication Understand the new recommendations from MPPG #5 on TPS Dose Algorithm Commissioning and QC/QA Learn practical implementation processes and tools for MPPG #5 validation recommendations.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2015

WE-AB-201-01: Treatment Planning System Commissioning and QA: Challenges and Opportunities

Treatment planning systems (TPS) are a cornerstone of modern radiation therapy. Errors in their commissioning or use can have a devastating impact on many patients. To support safe and high quality care, medical physicists must conduct efficient and proper commissioning, good clinical integration, and ongoing quality assurance (QA) of the TPS. AAPM Task Group 53 and related publications have served as seminal benchmarks for TPS commissioning and QA over the past two decades. Over the same time, continuing innovations have made the TPS even more complex and more central to the clinical process. Medical goals are now expressed in terms of the dose and margins around organs and tissues that are delineated from multiple imaging modalities (CT, MR and PET); and even temporally resolved (i.e., 4D) imaging. This information is passed on to optimization algorithms to establish accelerator movements that are programmed directly for IMRT, VMAT and stereotactic treatments. These advances have made commissioning and QA of the TPS much more challenging. This education session reviews up-to-date experience and guidance on this subject; including the recently published AAPM Medical Physics Practice Guideline (MPPG) #5 “Commissioning and QA of Treatment Planning Dose Calculations: Megavoltage Photon and Electron Beams”. Treatment Planning System Commissioning and QA: Challenges and Opportunities (Greg Salomons) This session will provide some key background and review publications describing prominent incidents relating to TPS commissioning and QA. Traditional approaches have been hardware and feature oriented. They aim to establish a functional configuration and establish specifications for regular testing of features (like dose calculation) to assure stable operation and detect failures. With the advent of more complex systems, more patient-specific testing has also been adopted. A number of actual TPS defects will be presented along with heuristics for identifying similar defects in the future. Finally, the Gamma test has become a popular metric for reporting TPS Commissioning and QA results. It simplifies complex testing into a numerical index, but noisy data and casual application can make it misleading. A brief review of the issues around the use of the Gamma test will be presented. TPS commissioning and QA: A process orientation and application of control charts (Michael Sharpe) A framework for commissioning a treatment planning system will be presented, focusing on preparations, practical aspects of configuration, priorities, specifications, and establishing performance. The complexity of the modern TPS make modular testing of features inadequate, and modern QA tools can provide “too much information” about the performance of techniques like IMRT and VMAT. We have adopted a process orientation and quality tools, like control charts, for ongoing TPS QA and assessment of patient-specific tests. The trending nature of these tools reveals the overall performance of the TPS system, and quantifies the variations that arise from individual plans, discrete calculations, and experimentation based on discrete measurements. Examples demonstrating application of these tools to TPS QA will be presented. TPS commissioning and QA: Incorporating the entire planning process (Sasa Mutic) The TPS and its features do not perform in isolation. Instead, the features and modules are key components in a complex process that begins with CT Simulation and extends to treatment delivery, along with image guidance and verification. Most importantly, the TPS is used by people working in a multi-disciplinary environment. It is very difficult to predict the outcomes of human interactions with software. Therefore, an interdisciplinary approach to training, commissioning and QA will be presented, along with an approach to the physics chart check and end-to-end testing as a tool for TPS QA. The role of standardization and automation in QA will also be discussed. The recommendations of MPPG #5 and practical implementation strategies (Jennifer Smilowitz) The recently published recommendations from Task Group No. 244, Medical Physics Practice Guideline on Commissioning and QA of Treatment Planning Dose Calculations: Megavoltage Photon and Electron Beams will be presented. The recommendations focus on the validation of commissioning data and dose calculations. Tolerance values for non-IMRT beam configurations are summarized based on established criteria and data collected by the IROC. More stringent evaluation criteria for IMRT dose calculations are suggested to test the limitations of the TPS dose algorithms for advanced delivery conditions. The MPPG encourages users to create a suite of validation tests for dose calculation for various conditions for static photon beams, heterogeneities, IMRT/VMAT and electron beams. This test suite is intended to be used for subsequent testing, including TPS software upgrades. In the past, the recommendations of some reports have not been widely implemented due to practical limitations. Implementation strategies, tools and processes developed by multiple centers for efficient and “do-able” MPPG #5 testing will be presented, as well as a discussion on the overall validation experience. Learning Objectives: Identify some of the key documents relevant for TPS commissioning and QA Understand strategies for testing TPS software Gain a practical knowledge of the Gamma test criteria Increase familiarity with the process of commissioning a TPS Learn about the use of Control Charts for TPS QA Review the role of the TPS in the overall planning process Increase awareness of the link between TPS QA and chart checking Gain an increased appreciation for the importance of interdisciplinary communication Understand the new recommendations from MPPG #5 on TPS Dose Algorithm Commissioning and QC/QA Learn practical implementation processes and tools for MPPG #5 validation recommendations.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2015

WE-F-BRB-00: New Developments in Knowledge-Based Treatment Planning and Automation

Advancements in informatics in radiotherapy are opening up opportunities to improve our ability to assess treatment plans. Models on individualizing patient dose constraints from prior patient data and shape relationships have been extensively researched and are now making their way into commercial products. New developments in knowledge based treatment planning involve understanding the impact of the radiation dosimetry on the patient. Akin to radiobiology models that have driven intensity modulated radiotherapy optimization, toxicity and outcome predictions based on treatment plans and prior patient experiences may be the next step in knowledge based planning. In order to realize these predictions, it is necessary to understand how the clinical information can be captured, structured and organized with ontologies and databases designed for recall. Large databases containing radiation dosimetry and outcomes present the opportunity to evaluate treatment plans against predictions of toxicity and disease response. Such evaluations can be based on dose volume histogram or even the full 3-dimensional dose distribution and its relation to the critical anatomy. This session will provide an understanding of ontologies and standard terminologies used to capture clinical knowledge into structured databases; How data can be organized and accessed to utilize the knowledge in planning; and examples of research and clinical efforts to incorporate that clinical knowledge into planning for improved care for our patients. Learning Objectives: Understand the role of standard terminologies, ontologies and data organization in oncology Understand methods to capture clinical toxicity and outcomes in a clinical setting Understand opportunities to learn from clinical data and its application to treatment planning Todd McNutt receives funding from Philips, Elekta and Toshiba for some of the work presented.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2015

WE-F-BRB-02: Setting the Stage for Incorporation of Toxicity Measures in Treatment Plan Assessments

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2015

WE-F-BRB-03: Inclusion of Data-Driven Risk Predictions in Radiation Treatment Planning in the Context of a Local Level Learning Health System

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2016

Robotic path-finding in inverse treatment planning for stereotactic radiosurgery with continuous dose delivery

Purpose: Continuous dose delivery in radiation therapy treatments has been shown to decrease total treatment time while improving the dose conformity and distribution homogeneity over the conventional step-and-shoot approach. The authors develop an inverse treatment planning method for Gamma Knife® Perfexion™ that continuously delivers dose along a path in the target. Methods: The authors’ method is comprised of two steps: find a path within the target, then solve a mixed integer optimization model to find the optimal collimator configurations and durations along the selected path. Robotic path-finding techniques, specifically, simultaneous localization and mapping (SLAM) using an extended Kalman filter, are used to obtain a path that travels sufficiently close to selected isocentre locations. SLAM is novelly extended to explore a 3D, discrete environment, which is the target discretized into voxels. Further novel extensions are incorporated into the steering mechanism to account for target geometry. Results: The SLAM method was tested on seven clinical cases and compared to clinical, Hamiltonian path continuous delivery, and inverse step-and-shoot treatment plans. The SLAM approach improved dose metrics compared to the clinical plans and Hamiltonian path continuous delivery plans. Beam-on times improved over clinical plans, and had mixed performance compared to Hamiltonian path continuous plans. The SLAM method is also shown to be robust to path selection inaccuracies, isocentre selection, and dose distribution. Conclusions: The SLAM method for continuous delivery provides decreased total treatment time and increased treatment quality compared to both clinical and inverse step-and-shoot plans, and outperforms existing path methods in treatment quality. It also accounts for uncertainty in treatment planning by accommodating inaccuracies.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2016

SU-F-J-148: A Collapsed Cone Algorithm Can Be Used for Quality Assurance for Monaco Treatment Plans for the MR-Linac

Purpose: Treatment plans for the MR-linac, calculated in Monaco v5.19, include direct simulation of the effects of the 1.5T B{sub 0}-field. We tested the feasibility of using a collapsed-cone (CC) algorithm in Oncentra, which does not account for effects of the B{sub 0}-field, as a fast online, independent 3D check of dose calculations. Methods: Treatment plans for six patients were generated in Monaco with a 6 MV FFF beam and the B{sub 0}-field. All plans were recalculated with a CC model of the same beam. Plans for the same patients were also generated in Monaco without the B{sub 0}-field. The mean dose (Dmean) and doses to 10% (D10%) and 90% (D90%) of the volume were determined, as percentages of the prescribed dose, for target volumes and OARs in each calculated dose distribution. Student’s t-tests between paired parameters from Monaco plans and corresponding CC calculations were performed. Results: Figure 1 shows an example of the difference between dose distributions calculated in Monaco, with the B{sub 0}-field, and the CC algorithm. Figure 2 shows distributions of (absolute) difference between parameters for Monaco plans, with the B{sub 0}-field, and CC calculations. The Dmean and D90% values for the CTVs and PTVs were significantly different, but differences in dose distributions arose predominantly at the edges of the target volumes. Inclusion of the B{sub 0}-field had little effect on agreement of the Dmean values, as illustrated by Figure 3, nor on agreement of the D10% and D90% values. Conclusion: Dose distributions recalculated with a CC algorithm show good agreement with those calculated with Monaco, for plans both with and without the B{sub 0}-field, indicating that the CC algorithm could be used to check online treatment planning for the MRlinac. Agreement for a wider range of treatment sites, and the feasibility of using the γ-test as a simple pass/fail criterion, will be investigated.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2016

SU-F-T-205: Effectiveness of Robust Treatment Planning to Account for Inter- Fractional Variation in Intensity Modulated Proton Therapy for Head Neck Cancer

Purpose: To evaluate the potential benefits of robust optimization in intensity modulated proton therapy(IMPT) treatment planning to account for inter-fractional variation for Head Neck Cancer(HNC). Methods: One patient with bilateral HNC previous treated at our institution was used in this study. Ten daily CBCTs were selected. The CT numbers of the CBCTs were corrected by mapping the CT numbers from simulation CT via Deformable Image Registration. The planning target volumes(PTVs) were defined by a 3mm expansion from clinical target volumes(CTVs). The prescription was 70Gy, 54Gy to CTV1, CTV2, and PTV1, PTV2 for robust optimized(RO) and conventionally optimized(CO) plans respectively. Both techniques were generated by RayStation with the same beam angles: two anterior oblique and two posterior oblique angles. The similar dose constraints were used to achieve 99% of CTV1 received 100% prescription dose while kept the hotspots less than 110% of the prescription. In order to evaluate the dosimetric result through the course of treatment, the contours were deformed from simulation CT to daily CBCTs, modified, and approved by a radiation oncologist. The initial plan on the simulation CT was re-replayed on the daily CBCTs followed the bony alignment. The target coverage was evaluated using the daily doses and the cumulative dose. Results: Eight of 10 daily deliveries with using RO plan achieved at least 95% prescription dose to CTV1 and CTV2, while still kept maximum hotspot less than 112% of prescription compared with only one of 10 for the CO plan to achieve the same standards. For the cumulative doses, the target coverage for both RO and CO plans was quite similar, which was due to the compensation of cold and hot spots. Conclusion: Robust optimization can be effectively applied to compensate for target dose deficit caused by inter-fractional target geometric variation in IMPT treatment planning.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2016

SU-F-T-238: Analyzing the Performance of MapCHECK2 and Delta4 Quality Assurance Phantoms in IMRT and VMAT Plans

Purpose: Intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) and volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) have been widely investigated for use in radiotherapy and found to have a highly conformal dose distribution. Delta{sup 4} is a novel cylindrical phantom consisting of 1069 p-type diodes with true treatments measured in the 3D target volume. The goal of this study was to compare the performance of a Delta{sup 4} diode array for IMRT and VMAT planning with ion chamber and MapCHECK2. Methods: Fifty-four IMRT (n=9) and VMAT (n=45) plans were imported to Philips Pinnacle Planning System 9.2 for recalculation with a solid water phantom, MapCHECK2, and the Delta4 phantom. To evaluate the difference between the measured and calculated dose, we used MapCHECK2 and Delta{sup 4} for a dose-map comparison and an ion chamber (PTW 31010 Semiflex 0.125 cc) for a point-dose comparison. Results: All 54 plans met the criteria of <3% difference for the point dose (at least two points) by ion chamber. The mean difference was 0.784% with a standard deviation of 1.962%. With a criteria of 3 mm/3% in a gamma analysis, the average passing rates were 96.86%±2.19% and 98.42%±1.97% for MapCHECK2 and Delta{sup 4}, respectively. The student t-test of MapCHECK2/Delta{sup 4}, ion chamber/Delta{sup 4}, and ion chamber/MapCHECK2 were 0.0008, 0.2944, and 0.0002, respectively. There was no significant difference in passing rates between MapCHECK2 and Delta{sup 4} for the IMRT plan (p = 0.25). However, a higher pass rate was observed in Delta{sup 4} (98.36%) as compared to MapCHECK2 (96.64%, p < 0.0001) for the VMAT plan. Conclusion: The Pinnacle planning system can accurately calculate doses for VMAT and IMRT plans. The Delta{sup 4} shows a similar result when compared to ion chamber and MapCHECK2, and is an efficient tool for patient-specific quality assurance, especially for rotation therapy.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2016

SU-F-T-504: Non-Divergent Planning Method for Craniospinal Irradiation

Purpose: Traditional Craniospinal Irradiation (CSI) planning techniques require careful field placement to allow optimal divergence and field overlap at depth, and measurement of skin gap. The result of this is a necessary field overlap resulting in dose heterogeneity in the spinal canal. A novel, nondivergent field matching method has been developed to allow simple treatment planning and delivery without the need to measure skin gap. Methods: The CSI patient was simulated in the prone, and a plan was developed. Bilateral cranial fields were designed with couch and collimator rotation to eliminate divergence with the upper spine field and minimize anterior divergence into the lenses. Spinal posterior-to-anterior fields were designed with the couch rotated to 90 degrees to allow gantry rotation to eliminate divergence at the match line, and the collimator rotated to 90 degrees to allow appropriate field blocking with the MLCs. A match line for the two spinal fields was placed and the gantry rotated to equal angles in opposite directions about the match line. Jaw positions were then defined to allow 1mm overlap at the match line to avoid cold spots. A traditional CSI plan was generated using diverging spinal fields, and a comparison between the two techniques was generated. Results: The non-divergent treatment plan was able to deliver a highly uniform dose to the spinal cord with a cold spot of only 95% and maximum point dose of 115.8%, as compared to traditional plan cold spots of 87% and hot spots of 132% of the prescription dose. Conclusion: A non-divergent method for planning CSI patients has been developed and clinically implemented. Planning requires some geometric manipulation in order to achieve an adequate dose distribution, however, it can help to manage cold spots and simplify the shifts needed between spinal fields.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2016

WE-DE-201-01: BEST IN PHYSICS (THERAPY): A Fast Multi-Target Inverse Treatment Planning Strategy Optimizing Dosimetric Measures for High-Dose-Rate (HDR) Brachytherapy

Purpose: Inverse treatment planning (ITP) for interstitial HDR brachytherapy of gynecologic cancers seeks to maximize coverage of the clinical target volumes (tumor and vagina) while respecting dose-volume-histogram related dosimetric measures (DMs) for organs at risk (OARs). Commercially available ITP tools do not support DM-based planning because it is computationally too expensive to solve. In this study we present a novel approach that allows fast ITP for gynecologic cancers based on DMs for the first time. Methods: This novel strategy is an optimization model based on a smooth DM-based objective function. The smooth approximation is achieved by utilizing a logistic function for the evaluation of DMs. The resulting nonconvex and constrained optimization problem is then optimized with a BFGS algorithm. The model was evaluated using the implant geometry extracted from 20 patient treatment plans under an IRB-approved retrospective study. For each plan, the final DMs were evaluated and compared to the original clinical plans. The CTVs were the contoured tumor volume and the contoured surface of the vagina. Statistical significance was evaluated with a one-sided paired Wilcoxon signed-rank test. Results: As did the clinical plans, all generated plans fulfilled the defined DMs for OARs. The proposed strategy showed a statistically significant improvement (p<0.001) in coverage of the tumor and vagina, with absolute improvements of related DMs of (6.9 +/− 7.9)% and (28.2 +/− 12.0)%, respectively. This was achieved with a statistically significant (p<0.01) decrease of the high-dose-related DM for the tumor. The runtime of the optimization was (2.3 +/− 2.0) seconds. Conclusion: We demonstrated using clinical data that our novel approach allows rapid DM-based optimization with improved coverage of CTVs with fewer hot spots. Being up to three orders of magnitude faster than the current clinical practice, the method dramatically shortens planning time.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2016

WE-DE-201-03: Combined Use of 192Ir, 60Co, and 169Yb Sources with the Novel Direction Modulated Brachytherapy Tandem Applicator for High Dose Rate Brachytherapy Planning of Cervical Cancer

Purpose: To evaluate the improvement in plan quality when various combinations of 192Ir, 60Co, and 169Yb sources are used in combination with a novel direction modulated brachytherapy (DMBT) tandem applicator for high dose rate brachytherapy of cervical cancer. Methods: The proposed DMBT tandem applicator is designed for image-guided adaptive brachytherapy (IGABT), especially MRI, of cervical cancer. It has 6 peripheral holes of 1.3-mm width, grooved along a 5.4-mm diameter nonmagnetic tungsten alloy rod of density 18.0 g/cc, capable of generating directional dose profiles - leading to enhanced dose sculpting capacity through inverse planning. Monte Carlo simulations of the three HDR sources individually inside the DMBT applicator were performed and imported into an in-house developed inverse optimization code. We then performed inverse planning with 14 cervical cancer patients enrolled in EMBRACE study. In all patients, 3D MRI-based planning was performed while utilizing 1) tandem-ring and needles attached-to-ring (7 patients) and 2) tandem-ring and needles both attached-to-ring and free-hand-loaded (7 patients), in accordance with the GEC-ESTRO recommendations. All plans were normalized to receive the same HRCTV D90 and DVH parameters were evaluated. Results: The DMBT tandem was used in all cases. Overall, the combined use of two sources (192Ir-60Co and 192Ir-169Yb, but not 60Co-169Yb) generally produced better quality plans than with the 192Ir source alone in terms of sparing OARs. For example, up to 3.5, 4.4, and 3.9% individual reductions in D2cc were observed for the bladder, rectum, and sigmoid, respectively, between 192Ir-60Co and 192Ir-only plans for patient cases in #1. While up to 5.5, 2.0, and 5.7% individual reductions were observed for patient cases in #2. Conclusion: We have demonstrated that, in addition to “directional modulation” of DMBT, use of multiple sources with sufficient differences in energy can be utilized to achieve additional improvement in plan quality for IGABT of cervical cancer.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2016

WE-DE-201-04: Cross Validation of Knowledge-Based Treatment Planning for Prostate LDR Brachytherapy Using Principle Component Analysis

Purpose: To validate a knowledge-based algorithm for prostate LDR brachytherapy treatment planning. Methods: A dataset of 100 cases was compiled from an active prostate seed implant service. Cases were randomized into 10 subsets. For each subset, the 90 remaining library cases were registered to a common reference frame and then characterized on a point by point basis using principle component analysis (PCA). Each test case was converted to PCA vectors using the same process and compared with each library case using a Mahalanobis distance to evaluate similarity. Rank order PCA scores were used to select the best-matched library case. The seed arrangement was extracted from the best-matched case and used as a starting point for planning the test case. Any subsequent modifications were recorded that required input from a treatment planner to achieve V100>95%, V150<60%, V200<20%. To simulate operating-room planning constraints, seed activity was held constant, and the seed count could not increase. Results: The computational time required to register test-case contours and evaluate PCA similarity across the library was 10s. Preliminary analysis of 2 subsets shows that 9 of 20 test cases did not require any seed modifications to obtain an acceptable plan. Five test cases required fewer than 10 seed modifications or a grid shift. Another 5 test cases required approximately 20 seed modifications. An acceptable plan was not achieved for 1 outlier, which was substantially larger than its best match. Modifications took between 5s and 6min. Conclusion: A knowledge-based treatment planning algorithm for prostate LDR brachytherapy is being cross validated using 100 prior cases. Preliminary results suggest that for this size library, acceptable plans can be achieved without planner input in about half of the cases while varying amounts of planner input are needed in remaining cases. Computational time and planning time are compatible with clinical practice.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2016

TH-AB-201-12: Using Machine Log-Files for Treatment Planning and Delivery QA

Purpose: To determine the segment reduction and dose resolution necessary for machine log-files to effectively replace current phantom-based patient-specific quality assurance, while minimizing computational cost. Methods: Elekta’s Log File Convertor R3.2 records linac delivery parameters (dose rate, gantry angle, leaf position) every 40ms. Five VMAT plans [4 H&N, 1 Pulsed Brain] comprised of 2 arcs each were delivered on the ArcCHECK phantom. Log-files were reconstructed in Pinnacle on the phantom geometry using 1/2/3/4° control point spacing and 2/3/4mm dose grid resolution. Reconstruction effectiveness was quantified by comparing 2%/2mm gamma passing rates of the original and log-file plans. Modulation complexity scores (MCS) were calculated for each beam to correlate reconstruction accuracy and beam modulation. Percent error in absolute dose for each plan-pair combination (log-file vs. ArcCHECK, original vs. ArcCHECK, log-file vs. original) was calculated for each arc and every diode greater than 10% of the maximum measured dose (per beam). Comparing standard deviations of the three plan-pair distributions, relative noise of the ArcCHECK and log-file systems was elucidated. Results: The original plans exhibit a mean passing rate of 95.1±1.3%. The eight more modulated H&N arcs [MCS=0.088±0.014] and two less modulated brain arcs [MCS=0.291±0.004] yielded log-file pass rates most similar to the original plan when using 1°/2mm [0.05%±1.3% lower] and 2°/3mm [0.35±0.64% higher] log-file reconstructions respectively. Log-file and original plans displayed percent diode dose errors 4.29±6.27% and 3.61±6.57% higher than measurement. Excluding the phantom eliminates diode miscalibration and setup errors; log-file dose errors were 0.72±3.06% higher than the original plans – significantly less noisy. Conclusion: For log-file reconstructed VMAT arcs, 1° control point spacing and 2mm dose resolution is recommended, however, less modulated arcs may allow less stringent reconstructions. Following the aforementioned reconstruction recommendations, the log-file technique is capable of detecting delivery errors with equivalent accuracy and less noise than ArcCHECK QA. I am funded by an Elekta Research Grant.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗