Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
A comparison of inverse optimization algorithms for HDR/PDR prostate brachytherapy treatment planning.
Dinkla, Anna M; van der Laarse, Rob; Kaljouw, Emmie; Pieters, Bradley R; Koedooder, Kees; van Wieringen, Niek; Bel, Arjan.
Affiliation
  • Dinkla AM; Department of Radiation Oncology, Academic Medical Centre, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. Electronic address: a.m.dinkla@amc.uva.nl.
  • van der Laarse R; Department of Radiation Oncology, Academic Medical Centre, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
  • Kaljouw E; Department of Radiation Oncology, Academic Medical Centre, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
  • Pieters BR; Department of Radiation Oncology, Academic Medical Centre, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
  • Koedooder K; Department of Radiation Oncology, Academic Medical Centre, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
  • van Wieringen N; Department of Radiation Oncology, Academic Medical Centre, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
  • Bel A; Department of Radiation Oncology, Academic Medical Centre, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Brachytherapy ; 14(2): 279-88, 2015.
Article in En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-25447341
ABSTRACT

PURPOSE:

Graphical optimization (GrO) is a common method for high-dose-rate/pulsed-dose-rate (PDR) prostate brachytherapy treatment planning. New methods performing inverse optimization of the dose distribution have been developed over the past years. The purpose is to compare GrO and two established inverse methods, inverse planning simulated annealing (IPSA) and hybrid inverse treatment planning and optimization (HIPO), and one new method, enhanced geometric optimization-interactive inverse planning (EGO-IIP), in terms of speed and dose-volume histogram (DVH) parameters. METHODS AND MATERIALS For 26 prostate cancer patients treated with a PDR brachytherapy boost, an experienced treatment planner optimized the dose distributions using four different

methods:

GrO, IPSA, HIPO, and EGO-IIP. Relevant DVH parameters (prostate-V100%, D90%, V150%; urethra-D(0.1cm3) and D(1.0cm3); rectum-D(0.1cm3) and D(2.0cm3); bladder-D(2.0cm3)) were evaluated and their compliance to the constraints. Treatment planning time was also recorded.

RESULTS:

All inverse methods resulted in shorter planning time (mean, 4-6.7 min), as compared with GrO (mean, 7.6 min). In terms of DVH parameters, none of the inverse methods outperformed the others. However, all inverse methods improved on compliance to the planning constraints as compared with GrO. On average, EGO-IIP and GrO resulted in highest D90%, and the IPSA plans resulted in lowest bladder D2.0cm3 and urethra D(1.0cm3).

CONCLUSIONS:

Inverse planning methods decrease planning time as compared with GrO for PDR/high-dose-rate prostate brachytherapy. DVH parameters are comparable for all methods.
Subject(s)
Key words

Full text: 1 Collection: 01-internacional Database: MEDLINE Main subject: Prostatic Neoplasms / Algorithms / Radiotherapy Planning, Computer-Assisted / Brachytherapy Type of study: Observational_studies Limits: Humans / Male Language: En Journal: Brachytherapy Journal subject: RADIOTERAPIA Year: 2015 Document type: Article

Full text: 1 Collection: 01-internacional Database: MEDLINE Main subject: Prostatic Neoplasms / Algorithms / Radiotherapy Planning, Computer-Assisted / Brachytherapy Type of study: Observational_studies Limits: Humans / Male Language: En Journal: Brachytherapy Journal subject: RADIOTERAPIA Year: 2015 Document type: Article