IMRT treatment planning for prostate cancer using prioritized prescription optimization and mean-tail-dose functions.
Treatment planning for intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) is challenging due to both the size of the computational problems (thousands of variables and constraints) and the multi-objective, imprecise nature of the goals. We apply hierarchical programming to IMRT treatment planning. In this formulation, treatment planning goals/objectives are ordered in an absolute hierarchy, and the problem is solved from the top-down such that more important goals are optimized in turn. After each objective is optimized, that objective function is converted into a constraint when optimizing lower-priority objectives. We also demonstrate the usefulness of a linear/quadratic formulation, including the use of mean-tail-dose (mean dose to the hottest fraction of a given structure), to facilitate computational efficiency. In contrast to the conventional use of dose-volume constraints (no more than x% volume of a structure should receive more than y dose), the mean-tail-dose formulation ensures convex feasibility spaces and convex objective functions. To widen the search space without seriously degrading higher priority goals, we allowed higher priority constraints to relax or 'slip' a clinically negligible amount during lower priority iterations. This method was developed and tuned for external beam prostate planning and subsequently tested using a suite of 10 patient datasets. In all cases, good dose distributions were generated without individual plan parameter adjustments. It was found that allowance for a small amount of 'slip,' especially in target dose homogeneity, often resulted in improved normal tissue dose burdens. Compared to the conventional IMRT treatment planning objective function formulation using a weighted linear sum of terms representing very different dosimetric goals, this method: (1) is completely automatic, requiring no user intervention, (2) ensures high-priority planning goals are not seriously degraded by lower-priority goals, and (3) ensures that lower priority, yet still important, normal tissue goals are separately pushed as far as possible without seriously impacting higher priority goals.
Clark
V H
VH
Department of Radiation Oncology, Washington University School of Medicine, and the Siteman Cancer Center, Saint Louis, MO, USA.
Chen
Y
Y
Wilkens
J
J
Alaly
J R
JR
Zakaryan
K
K
Deasy
J O
JO