Premium
SU‐E‐T‐500: Initial Implementation of GPU‐Based Particle Swarm Optimization for 4D IMRT Planning in Lung SBRT
Author(s) -
Modiri A,
Hagan A,
Gu X,
Sawant A
Publication year - 2015
Publication title -
medical physics
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.473
H-Index - 180
eISSN - 2473-4209
pISSN - 0094-2405
DOI - 10.1118/1.4924862
Subject(s) - computer science , particle swarm optimization , radiation treatment planning , mathematical optimization , algorithm , computational science , mathematics , radiation therapy , medicine , radiology
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.