Comparison of Planning Quality and Efficiency Between Conventional and Knowledge-based Algorithms in Nasopharyngeal Cancer Patients Using Intensity Modulated Radiation Therapy

International Journal of Radiation Oncology Biology Physics

Volumn 95, Issue 3, 2016, Pages 981-990

  Chang, Amy T Y ^a   Hung, Albert W M ^a   Cheung, Fion W K ^a   Lee, Michael C H ^a   Chan, Oscar S H ^a   Philips, Helen ^b   Cheng, Yung Tang ^b   Ng, Wai Tong ^a  

^a PAMELA YOUDE NETHERSOLE EASTERN HOSPITAL   (Hong Kong)

^b VARIAN MEDICAL SYSTEMS   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

BRAIN; EFFICIENCY; KNOWLEDGE BASED SYSTEMS; OPTIMIZATION; PATIENT TREATMENT; QUALITY CONTROL;

INTENSITY MODULATED RADIATION THERAPY; KNOWLEDGE-BASED ALGORITHMS; METHODS AND MATERIALS; NASOPHARYNGEAL CANCER; NASOPHARYNGEAL CARCINOMA; OPTIMAL PLAN; PLANNING TIME; TREATMENT OUTCOMES;

RADIOTHERAPY;

ALGORITHM; BRAIN STEM; CANCER RADIOTHERAPY; CLINICAL ARTICLE; COCHLEA; CONFERENCE PAPER; DOSIMETRY; EYEBALL; HUMAN; INTENSITY MODULATED RADIATION THERAPY; NASOPHARYNX CARCINOMA; OPTIC CHIASM; OPTIC NERVE; PAROTID GLAND; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RADIATION DOSE DISTRIBUTION; RADIOTHERAPY PLANNING SYSTEM; SPINAL CORD; TEMPORAL LOBE; TREATMENT OUTCOME; TREATMENT PLANNING; COMPARATIVE STUDY; COMPUTER INTERFACE; CONFORMAL RADIOTHERAPY; EVALUATION STUDY; KNOWLEDGE BASE; NASOPHARYNGEAL NEOPLASMS; PROCEDURES; RADIOTHERAPY DOSAGE; REPRODUCIBILITY; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; SOFTWARE; SOFTWARE VALIDATION; WORKLOAD;

HUMANS; KNOWLEDGE BASES; NASOPHARYNGEAL NEOPLASMS; RADIOTHERAPY DOSAGE; RADIOTHERAPY PLANNING, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; RADIOTHERAPY, CONFORMAL; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; SOFTWARE; SOFTWARE VALIDATION; TREATMENT OUTCOME; USER-COMPUTER INTERFACE; WORKLOAD;

EID: 85009761160     PISSN: 03603016     EISSN: 1879355X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2016.02.017     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (21)

1. 1 Wolden, S.L., Chen, W.C., Pfister, D.G., et al. Intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) for nasopharynx cancer: Update of the Memorial Sloan-Kettering experience. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 64 (2006), 57–62.
2. 2 Kam, M.K., Teo, P.M., Chau, R.M., et al. Treatment of nasopharyngeal carcinoma with intensity-modulated radiotherapy: The Hong Kong experience. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 60 (2004), 1440–1450.
3. 3 Ng, W.T., Lee, M.C., Hung, W.M., et al. Clinical outcomes and patterns of failure after intensity-modulated radiotherapy for nasopharyngeal carcinoma. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 79 (2011), 420–428.
4. 4 Tham, I.W., Hee, S.W., Yeo, R.M., et al. Treatment of nasopharyngeal carcinoma using intensity-modulated radiotherapy—The National Cancer Centre Singapore experience. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 75 (2009), 1481–1486.
5. 5 Lee, N., Harris, J., Garden, A.S., et al. Intensity-modulated radiation therapy with or without chemotherapy for nasopharyngeal carcinoma: Radiation Therapy Oncology Group phase II trial 0225. J Clin Oncol 27 (2009), 3684–3690.
6. 6 Webb, S., The physical basis of IMRT and inverse planning. Br J Radiol 76 (2003), 678–689.
7. 7 Ng, W.T., Lee, M.C., Chang, A.T., et al. The impact of dosimetric inadequacy on treatment outcome of nasopharyngeal carcinoma with IMRT. Oral Oncol 50 (2014), 506–512.
8. 8 Wu, B., McNutt, T., Zahurak, M., et al. Fully automated simultaneous integrated boosted-intensity modulated radiation therapy treatment planning is feasible for head-and-neck cancer: A prospective clinical study. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 84 (2012), e647–e653.
9. 9 Chen, H., Craft, D.L., Gierga, D.P., Multicriteria optimization informed VMAT planning. Med Dosim 39 (2014), 64–73.
10. 10 Zhu, X., Ge, Y., Li, T., et al. A planning quality evaluation tool for prostate adaptive IMRT based on machine learning. Med Phys 38 (2011), 719–726.
11. 11 Moore, K.L., Brame, R.S., Low, D.A., et al. Experience-based quality control of clinical intensity-modulated radiotherapy planning. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 81 (2011), 545–551.
12. 12 Appenzoller, L.M., Michalski, J.M., Thorstad, W.L., et al. Predicting dose-volume histograms for organs-at-risk in IMRT planning. Med Phys 39 (2012), 7446–7461.
13. 13 Chanyavanich, V., Das, S.K., Lee, W.R., et al. Knowledge-based IMRT treatment planning for prostate cancer. Med Phys 38 (2011), 2515–2522.
14. 14 Petit, S.F., Wu, B., Kazhdan, M., et al. Increased organ sparing using shape-based treatment plan optimization for intensity modulated radiation therapy of pancreatic adenocarcinoma. Radiother Oncol 102 (2012), 38–44.
15. 15 Good, D., Lo, J., Lee, W.R., et al. A knowledge-based approach to improving and homogenizing intensity modulated radiation therapy planning quality among treatment centers: An example application to prostate cancer planning. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 87 (2013), 176–181.
16. 16 Tol, J.P., Delaney, A.R., Dahele, M., et al. Evaluation of a knowledge-based planning solution for head and neck cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 91 (2015), 612–620.
17. 17 Fogliata, A., Belosi, F., Clivio, A., et al. On the pre-clinical validation of a commercial model-based optimisation engine: Application to volumetric modulated arc therapy for patients with lung or prostate cancer. Radiother Oncol 113 (2014), 385–391.
18. 18 Wu, B., Ricchetti, F., Sanguineti, G., et al. Data-driven approach to generating achievable dose-volume histogram objectives in intensity-modulated radiotherapy planning. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 79 (2011), 1241–1247.
19. 19 Yuan, L., Ge, Y., Lee, W.R., et al. Quantitative analysis of the factors which affect the interpatient organ-at-risk dose sparing variation in IMRT plans. Med Phys 39 (2012), 6868–6878.
20. 20 Lian, J., Yuan, L., Ge, Y., et al. Modeling the dosimetry of organ-at-risk in head and neck IMRT planning: An intertechnique and interinstitutional study. Med Phys, 40, 2013, 121704.
21. 21 Nakamura, J.L., Verhey, L.J., Smith, V., et al. Dose conformity of gamma knife radiosurgery and risk factors for complications. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 51 (2001), 1313–1519.