simplified imrt plans can be delivered with conventional jaws ping xia, ph.d. university of...
TRANSCRIPT
Simplified IMRT Plans Can Be Delivered with Conventional Jaws
Ping Xia, Ph.D.
University of California
San Francisco
Premise of IMRT
• IMRT plans are too complicated, not intuitive, requiring a lot of extra resources- software, hardware, and human.
• IMRT plans use too many small segments and small MUs, overly stretching the limitation of Linac stability, and the initial design of MLCs.
Premise of IMRT
• IMRT plans are delivered with a prolonged time, resulting in biological disadvantages for tumor control.
• IMRT plans requires a lot more MUs than the conventional CRT plans, increasing the total body dose and the requirement of room shielding.
Are Complicated IMRT Plans Necessary?
• Complicated IMRT plans are due to the use of two-step optimization.
• It first optimizes ideal beam profiles, without considering delivery constraints.
• Then it converts the optimized profiles into deliverable MLC shapes (segments).
How Simply They Can Be?
• For typical H&N plans, the number of segments can be reduced from 140-120 segment to 50-60 segments.
• For typical prostate + pelvic lymph node plans, the number of segments can be reduced from 80 segments to 40 segments.
One Step Optimization
• Directly optimize the shapes and weightings for a given number of segments,
• This method is often referred to as Direct Aperture Optimization (DAO).
• DAO was first proposed by Cedric Yu’s group• This method has been first implemented in
Prowess Planning System.• A similar method also has been implemented in
ADAC planning system, referred to as DMPO.
Med. Phys. 29 1001-1018 (2002)
Prostate + Pelvic Lymph Nodes
Average Plan Quality Indices
0.8
0.825
0.85
0.875
0.9
10 levels 5 levels 3 levels DMPO
Trial
Hom
ogen
eity
Ind
ex
1
2
3
4
5
Con
form
alit
y In
dex
H.I.
C.I.
One Step
Average Plan Quality Indices
0.8
0.825
0.85
0.875
0.9
10 levels 5 levels 3 levels DMPO
Trial
Hom
ogen
eity
Ind
ex
1
2
3
4
5
Con
form
alit
y In
dex
H.I.
C.I.
One Step
Prostate + Pelvic Lymph Nodes
0
30
60
90
120
150
180
10 levels 5 levels 3 levels DMPO
Trial
Seg
men
ts/F
ract
ion
600
700
800
900
1000
Mon
itor
Un
its/
Fra
ctio
n Segments
MU
Average Number of Segments and MU per Fraction
One Step0
30
60
90
120
150
180
10 levels 5 levels 3 levels DMPO
Trial
Seg
men
ts/F
ract
ion
600
700
800
900
1000
Mon
itor
Un
its/
Fra
ctio
n Segments
MU
Average Number of Segments and MU per Fraction
One Step
3 levels
5 levels10 levels
One Step Opt
58 Gy54 Gy48.6 Gy35 Gy
10 levels 5 levels
3 levels One Step Opt
58 Gy54 Gy48.6 Gy35 Gy
Jaws Only Delivery
• The algorithm of using conventional Jaws to deliver IMRT fields was first proposed by Dai and Hu’s group.
• The algorithm attempted to convert intensity profiles obtained by the conventional two-step optimization using jaws only method
• For a typical prostate and a NPC case, they found that the total number of segments was 147, 426 with jaw only vs 40, 69 with MLC delivery, respectively.
Medical Physics, Vol. 26, (1999)
MLC Plan (21 segs)
Jaw Only Plan (28 segs)3D Plan
78 Gy,72 Gy,65 Gy,50 Gy35 Gy
78 Gy,72 Gy,65 Gy,50 Gy35 Gy
MLC Plan (21 segments)
Jaw Only Plan (28 Segs)3D Plan
(b) COIN
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1.0
MLC-3AJO-4A
CO
IN v
alu
e
3D
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 800
20
40
60
80
100V
olum
e [%
]
Dose [Gy]
3DJO-4AMLC-3A
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 800
20
40
60
80
100
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 800
20
40
60
80
100V
olum
e [%
]
Dose [Gy]
3DJO-4AMLC-3A
(a) PTV
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 800
20
40
60
80
100
Vol
ume
[%]
Dose [Gy]
3DJO-4AMLC-3A
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 800
20
40
60
80
100
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 800
20
40
60
80
100
Vol
ume
[%]
Dose [Gy]
3DJO-4AMLC-3A
(b) Rectum
(c) Bladder
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 800
20
40
60
80
100V
olu
me
[%]
Dose [Gy]
3DJO-4AMLC-3A
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 800
20
40
60
80
100
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 800
20
40
60
80
100V
olu
me
[%]
Dose [Gy]
3DJO-4AMLC-3A
(c) Bladder
(a) MU
300
400
500
600
700
800
MU
va
lue
pe
r fr
act
ion
MLC-3AJO-4A3D
MLC-54 segs Jaw only -63 segs
70 Gy, 59.4 Gy, 54 Gy, 45 Gy
MLC-54 segs Jaw only -63 segs
70 Gy, 59.4 Gy, 54 Gy, 45 Gy
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
0 20 40 60 80
Dose (cGy)
Vo
leu
me
(%
)
PGTV (Jaw)
pCTV(Jaw)
pGTV(MLC)
pCTV (MLC)
Tumor Target Dose Volume Histograms
Brain Stem DVHs
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
Dose (cGy)
Vo
leu
me
(%
)
Jaw
MLC
RT-Parotid DVHs
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
Dose (cGy)
Vo
leu
me
(%
)
Jaw
MLC
Chiasm Dose Voluem Histograms
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
Dose (cGy)
Vo
leu
me
(%
)
Jaw
MLC
Conclusion (1)
• For complicated cases, inverse planning is simpler than 3D-CRT planning.
• It is possible to simply IMRT plans while keeping the same plan quality and improving delivery efficiency.
• The key to simply IMRT plans is to use one step optimization method.
Conclusion (2)
• Using one step optimization method, the conventional jaws can be used for IMRT delivery while keeping the delivery time within 15-20 minutes.
• Inverse planned Jaw only IMRT plans are better than 3D CRT plans.
• Jaw only IMRT plans are clinical achievable without significantly increasing hardware resource.
Acknowledgement
Yongbok Kim, Ph.D.
Guangwei Mu, Ph.D
Erica Ludlum, M.S.
Prowess Inc.
Siemens Medical Solutions