Loading…

SU‐E‐T‐590: Automate IMRT Planning in Pinnacle: A Study in Head‐And‐Neck Cancer

Purpose: We investigated whether the auto‐planning prototype included in a research version of Pinnacle 9.700 (Philips Healthcare) is able to create treatment plans with consistent quality, independent of the experience of the planner using a single template. Methods: The auto‐planning module requir...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Medical Physics 2013-06, Vol.40 (6), p.341-341
Main Authors: Kusters, M, Bzdusek, K, Kumar, P, van Kollenburg, P, Kunze‐Busch, M, Kaanders, H
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
cited_by
cites
container_end_page 341
container_issue 6
container_start_page 341
container_title Medical Physics
container_volume 40
creator Kusters, M
Bzdusek, K
Kumar, P
van Kollenburg, P
Kunze‐Busch, M
Kaanders, H
description Purpose: We investigated whether the auto‐planning prototype included in a research version of Pinnacle 9.700 (Philips Healthcare) is able to create treatment plans with consistent quality, independent of the experience of the planner using a single template. Methods: The auto‐planning module requires the user to define a template with prioritized optimization goals for PTV‐coverage and dose constraints for organ at risks (OARs). Prioritized optimization goals are used by the auto‐planning engine to formulate optimization objectives. Multiple optimization loops iteratively reformulate and adjust the optimization objectives to meet the goals and further lower dose to OAR with minimal compromise to the target coverage. Dose conformality and uniformity to the target(s) are also controlled automatically. The quality of ten oropharynx IMRT auto‐planned plans was evaluated by calculating the target coverage (V95) and conformity index (CI) of the PTVs (prescribed dose to PTV> was 50.3 Gy and 68 Gy to PTV were 99.1% +/−1.6% and 0.8 +/−0.1, respectively and to PTV< 96.2% +/−1.5% and 0.6 + −0.1, respectively. The average maximum dose to the cord was 44.9 +/−2.0 Gy, average mean dose to the parotids was 28.4 +/−4.5 Gy and 33.7 +/−7.0 Gy to the oral cavity. Total planning time could be reduced from about 4 hours to less than 30 minutes. Conclusion: The auto‐planning module generates plans with consistent quality and reduces total planning time significantly. The tool is designed to automatically perform many of the manual operations in the current IMRT process, any further optimization for an individual patient has to be done outside auto‐plan.
doi_str_mv 10.1118/1.4815018
format article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>wiley_scita</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_scitation_primary_10_1118_1_4815018</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>MP5018</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c1778-3da9e168a9dd9d536daec6fe5e17e126c437dd103f92917df6b57e05b17b5ed83</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kMFOwzAQRC0EEqVw4A98BSllN47jmFtVAa3UQkXbA6fItTfIkLooSYV64xP4Rr6EVO0VDrMjrd7MYRi7ROghYnaDvSRDCZgdsU6cKBElMehj1gHQSRQnIE_ZWV2_AUAqJHTYy2zx8_V912reSmq45f1Ns16Zhvho8jzn09KE4MMr94FPfQjGltQyfNZs3Hb3HJJxbbQfdveR7DsfmGCpOmcnhSlrujh4ly3u7-aDYTR-ehgN-uPIolJZJJzRhGlmtHPaSZE6QzYtSBIqwji1iVDOIYhCxxqVK9KlVARyiWopyWWiy672vbZa13VFRf5R-ZWptjlCvtskx_ywSctGe_bTl7T9G8wn0wN_vedr6xvT-HX4p_wXjHNw7A</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype></control><display><type>article</type><title>SU‐E‐T‐590: Automate IMRT Planning in Pinnacle: A Study in Head‐And‐Neck Cancer</title><source>Wiley-Blackwell Read &amp; Publish Collection</source><creator>Kusters, M ; Bzdusek, K ; Kumar, P ; van Kollenburg, P ; Kunze‐Busch, M ; Kaanders, H</creator><creatorcontrib>Kusters, M ; Bzdusek, K ; Kumar, P ; van Kollenburg, P ; Kunze‐Busch, M ; Kaanders, H</creatorcontrib><description>Purpose: We investigated whether the auto‐planning prototype included in a research version of Pinnacle 9.700 (Philips Healthcare) is able to create treatment plans with consistent quality, independent of the experience of the planner using a single template. Methods: The auto‐planning module requires the user to define a template with prioritized optimization goals for PTV‐coverage and dose constraints for organ at risks (OARs). Prioritized optimization goals are used by the auto‐planning engine to formulate optimization objectives. Multiple optimization loops iteratively reformulate and adjust the optimization objectives to meet the goals and further lower dose to OAR with minimal compromise to the target coverage. Dose conformality and uniformity to the target(s) are also controlled automatically. The quality of ten oropharynx IMRT auto‐planned plans was evaluated by calculating the target coverage (V95) and conformity index (CI) of the PTVs (prescribed dose to PTV&gt; was 50.3 Gy and 68 Gy to PTV&lt;), the maximum dose to the cord, and mean dose to parotids and oral cavity. Efficiency was evaluated by measuring the total planning time. Results: All auto‐planned plans fulfilled the clinical dose criteria for OARs and PTV coverage. The average V95 and CI to PTV&gt; were 99.1% +/−1.6% and 0.8 +/−0.1, respectively and to PTV&lt; 96.2% +/−1.5% and 0.6 + −0.1, respectively. The average maximum dose to the cord was 44.9 +/−2.0 Gy, average mean dose to the parotids was 28.4 +/−4.5 Gy and 33.7 +/−7.0 Gy to the oral cavity. Total planning time could be reduced from about 4 hours to less than 30 minutes. Conclusion: The auto‐planning module generates plans with consistent quality and reduces total planning time significantly. The tool is designed to automatically perform many of the manual operations in the current IMRT process, any further optimization for an individual patient has to be done outside auto‐plan.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0094-2405</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 2473-4209</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1118/1.4815018</identifier><identifier>CODEN: MPHYA6</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>American Association of Physicists in Medicine</publisher><subject>Anatomy ; Cancer ; Intensity modulated radiation therapy ; Optimization</subject><ispartof>Medical Physics, 2013-06, Vol.40 (6), p.341-341</ispartof><rights>American Association of Physicists in Medicine</rights><rights>2013 American Association of Physicists in Medicine</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>309,310,314,780,784,789,790,23930,23931,25140,27924,27925</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Kusters, M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bzdusek, K</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kumar, P</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>van Kollenburg, P</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kunze‐Busch, M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kaanders, H</creatorcontrib><title>SU‐E‐T‐590: Automate IMRT Planning in Pinnacle: A Study in Head‐And‐Neck Cancer</title><title>Medical Physics</title><description>Purpose: We investigated whether the auto‐planning prototype included in a research version of Pinnacle 9.700 (Philips Healthcare) is able to create treatment plans with consistent quality, independent of the experience of the planner using a single template. Methods: The auto‐planning module requires the user to define a template with prioritized optimization goals for PTV‐coverage and dose constraints for organ at risks (OARs). Prioritized optimization goals are used by the auto‐planning engine to formulate optimization objectives. Multiple optimization loops iteratively reformulate and adjust the optimization objectives to meet the goals and further lower dose to OAR with minimal compromise to the target coverage. Dose conformality and uniformity to the target(s) are also controlled automatically. The quality of ten oropharynx IMRT auto‐planned plans was evaluated by calculating the target coverage (V95) and conformity index (CI) of the PTVs (prescribed dose to PTV&gt; was 50.3 Gy and 68 Gy to PTV&lt;), the maximum dose to the cord, and mean dose to parotids and oral cavity. Efficiency was evaluated by measuring the total planning time. Results: All auto‐planned plans fulfilled the clinical dose criteria for OARs and PTV coverage. The average V95 and CI to PTV&gt; were 99.1% +/−1.6% and 0.8 +/−0.1, respectively and to PTV&lt; 96.2% +/−1.5% and 0.6 + −0.1, respectively. The average maximum dose to the cord was 44.9 +/−2.0 Gy, average mean dose to the parotids was 28.4 +/−4.5 Gy and 33.7 +/−7.0 Gy to the oral cavity. Total planning time could be reduced from about 4 hours to less than 30 minutes. Conclusion: The auto‐planning module generates plans with consistent quality and reduces total planning time significantly. The tool is designed to automatically perform many of the manual operations in the current IMRT process, any further optimization for an individual patient has to be done outside auto‐plan.</description><subject>Anatomy</subject><subject>Cancer</subject><subject>Intensity modulated radiation therapy</subject><subject>Optimization</subject><issn>0094-2405</issn><issn>2473-4209</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2013</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNp9kMFOwzAQRC0EEqVw4A98BSllN47jmFtVAa3UQkXbA6fItTfIkLooSYV64xP4Rr6EVO0VDrMjrd7MYRi7ROghYnaDvSRDCZgdsU6cKBElMehj1gHQSRQnIE_ZWV2_AUAqJHTYy2zx8_V912reSmq45f1Ns16Zhvho8jzn09KE4MMr94FPfQjGltQyfNZs3Hb3HJJxbbQfdveR7DsfmGCpOmcnhSlrujh4ly3u7-aDYTR-ehgN-uPIolJZJJzRhGlmtHPaSZE6QzYtSBIqwji1iVDOIYhCxxqVK9KlVARyiWopyWWiy672vbZa13VFRf5R-ZWptjlCvtskx_ywSctGe_bTl7T9G8wn0wN_vedr6xvT-HX4p_wXjHNw7A</recordid><startdate>201306</startdate><enddate>201306</enddate><creator>Kusters, M</creator><creator>Bzdusek, K</creator><creator>Kumar, P</creator><creator>van Kollenburg, P</creator><creator>Kunze‐Busch, M</creator><creator>Kaanders, H</creator><general>American Association of Physicists in Medicine</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope></search><sort><creationdate>201306</creationdate><title>SU‐E‐T‐590: Automate IMRT Planning in Pinnacle: A Study in Head‐And‐Neck Cancer</title><author>Kusters, M ; Bzdusek, K ; Kumar, P ; van Kollenburg, P ; Kunze‐Busch, M ; Kaanders, H</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c1778-3da9e168a9dd9d536daec6fe5e17e126c437dd103f92917df6b57e05b17b5ed83</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2013</creationdate><topic>Anatomy</topic><topic>Cancer</topic><topic>Intensity modulated radiation therapy</topic><topic>Optimization</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Kusters, M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bzdusek, K</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kumar, P</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>van Kollenburg, P</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kunze‐Busch, M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kaanders, H</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><jtitle>Medical Physics</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Kusters, M</au><au>Bzdusek, K</au><au>Kumar, P</au><au>van Kollenburg, P</au><au>Kunze‐Busch, M</au><au>Kaanders, H</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>SU‐E‐T‐590: Automate IMRT Planning in Pinnacle: A Study in Head‐And‐Neck Cancer</atitle><jtitle>Medical Physics</jtitle><date>2013-06</date><risdate>2013</risdate><volume>40</volume><issue>6</issue><spage>341</spage><epage>341</epage><pages>341-341</pages><issn>0094-2405</issn><eissn>2473-4209</eissn><coden>MPHYA6</coden><abstract>Purpose: We investigated whether the auto‐planning prototype included in a research version of Pinnacle 9.700 (Philips Healthcare) is able to create treatment plans with consistent quality, independent of the experience of the planner using a single template. Methods: The auto‐planning module requires the user to define a template with prioritized optimization goals for PTV‐coverage and dose constraints for organ at risks (OARs). Prioritized optimization goals are used by the auto‐planning engine to formulate optimization objectives. Multiple optimization loops iteratively reformulate and adjust the optimization objectives to meet the goals and further lower dose to OAR with minimal compromise to the target coverage. Dose conformality and uniformity to the target(s) are also controlled automatically. The quality of ten oropharynx IMRT auto‐planned plans was evaluated by calculating the target coverage (V95) and conformity index (CI) of the PTVs (prescribed dose to PTV&gt; was 50.3 Gy and 68 Gy to PTV&lt;), the maximum dose to the cord, and mean dose to parotids and oral cavity. Efficiency was evaluated by measuring the total planning time. Results: All auto‐planned plans fulfilled the clinical dose criteria for OARs and PTV coverage. The average V95 and CI to PTV&gt; were 99.1% +/−1.6% and 0.8 +/−0.1, respectively and to PTV&lt; 96.2% +/−1.5% and 0.6 + −0.1, respectively. The average maximum dose to the cord was 44.9 +/−2.0 Gy, average mean dose to the parotids was 28.4 +/−4.5 Gy and 33.7 +/−7.0 Gy to the oral cavity. Total planning time could be reduced from about 4 hours to less than 30 minutes. Conclusion: The auto‐planning module generates plans with consistent quality and reduces total planning time significantly. The tool is designed to automatically perform many of the manual operations in the current IMRT process, any further optimization for an individual patient has to be done outside auto‐plan.</abstract><pub>American Association of Physicists in Medicine</pub><doi>10.1118/1.4815018</doi><tpages>1</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0094-2405
ispartof Medical Physics, 2013-06, Vol.40 (6), p.341-341
issn 0094-2405
2473-4209
language eng
recordid cdi_scitation_primary_10_1118_1_4815018
source Wiley-Blackwell Read & Publish Collection
subjects Anatomy
Cancer
Intensity modulated radiation therapy
Optimization
title SU‐E‐T‐590: Automate IMRT Planning in Pinnacle: A Study in Head‐And‐Neck Cancer
url http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-25T21%3A58%3A51IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-wiley_scita&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=SU%E2%80%90E%E2%80%90T%E2%80%90590:%20Automate%20IMRT%20Planning%20in%20Pinnacle:%20A%20Study%20in%20Head%E2%80%90And%E2%80%90Neck%20Cancer&rft.jtitle=Medical%20Physics&rft.au=Kusters,%20M&rft.date=2013-06&rft.volume=40&rft.issue=6&rft.spage=341&rft.epage=341&rft.pages=341-341&rft.issn=0094-2405&rft.eissn=2473-4209&rft.coden=MPHYA6&rft_id=info:doi/10.1118/1.4815018&rft_dat=%3Cwiley_scita%3EMP5018%3C/wiley_scita%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c1778-3da9e168a9dd9d536daec6fe5e17e126c437dd103f92917df6b57e05b17b5ed83%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true