Open AccessAn Automated knowledge‐based planning routine for stereotactic body radiotherapy of peripheral lung tumors via DCA‐based volumetric modulated arc therapy
Author(s) -
Visak Justin,
Ge Gary Y.,
McGarry Ronald C.,
Randall Marcus,
Pokhrel Damodar
Publication year - 2021
Publication title -
journal of applied clinical medical physics
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.83
H-Index - 48
ISSN - 1526-9914
DOI - 10.1002/acm2.13114
Subject(s) - radiation treatment planning , dosimetry , medicine , radiation therapy , nuclear medicine , quality assurance , lung cancer , medical physics , computer science , radiology , oncology , pathology , external quality assessment
Purpose To develop a knowledge‐based planning (KBP) routine for stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) of peripherally located early‐stage non‐small‐cell lung cancer (NSCLC) tumors via dynamic conformal arc (DCA)‐based volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) using the commercially available RapidPlan TM software. This proposed technique potentially improves plan quality, reduces complexity, and minimizes interplay effect and small‐field dosimetry errors associated with treatment delivery. Methods KBP model was developed and validated using 70 clinically treated high quality non‐coplanar VMAT lung SBRT plans for training and 20 independent plans for validation. All patients were treated with 54 Gy in three treatments. Additionally, a novel k ‐DCA planning routine was deployed to create plans incorporating historical three‐dimensional‐conformal SBRT planning practices via DCA‐based approach prior to VMAT optimization in an automated planning engine. Conventional KBPs and k ‐DCA plans were compared with clinically treated plans per RTOG‐0618 requirements for target conformity, tumor dose heterogeneity, intermediate dose fall‐off and organs‐at‐risk (OAR) sparing. Treatment planning time, treatment delivery efficiency, and accuracy were recorded. Results KBPs and k ‐DCA plans were similar or better than clinical plans. Average planning target volume for validation was 22.4 ± 14.1 cc (7.1–62.3 cc). KBPs and k ‐DCA plans provided similar conformity to clinical plans with average absolute differences of 0.01 and 0.01, respectively. Maximal doses to OAR were lowered in both KBPs and k ‐DCA plans. KBPs increased monitor units (MU) on average 1316 ( P < 0.001) while k ‐DCA reduced total MU on average by 1114 ( P < 0.001). This routine can create k ‐DCA plan in less than 30 min. Independent Monte Carlo calculation demonstrated that k ‐DCA plans showed better agreement with planned dose distribution. Conclusion A k ‐DCA planning routine was developed in concurrence with a knowledge‐based approach for the treatment of peripherally located lung tumors. This method minimizes plan complexity associated with model‐based KBP techniques and improve plan quality and treatment planning efficiency.