An approach to multiobjective optimization of rotational therapy. II. Pareto optimal surfaces and linear combinations of modulated blocked arcs for a prostate geometry.
OBJECTIVE
The purpose of this work is twofold: To further develop an approach to multiobjective optimization of rotational therapy treatments recently introduced by the authors [J. Pardo-Montero and J. D. Fenwick, "An approach to multiobjective optimization of rotational therapy," Med. Phys. 36, 3292-3303 (2009)], especially regarding its application to realistic geometries, and to study the quality (Pareto optimality) of plans obtained using such an approach by comparing them with Pareto optimal plans obtained through inverse planning.


METHODS
In the previous work of the authors, a methodology is proposed for constructing a large number of plans, with different compromises between the objectives involved, from a small number of geometrically based arcs, each arc prioritizing different objectives. Here, this method has been further developed and studied. Two different techniques for constructing these arcs are investigated, one based on image-reconstruction algorithms and the other based on more common gradient-descent algorithms. The difficulty of dealing with organs abutting the target, briefly reported in previous work of the authors, has been investigated using partial OAR unblocking. Optimality of the solutions has been investigated by comparison with a Pareto front obtained from inverse planning. A relative Euclidean distance has been used to measure the distance of these plans to the Pareto front, and dose volume histogram comparisons have been used to gauge the clinical impact of these distances. A prostate geometry has been used for the study.


RESULTS
For geometries where a blocked OAR abuts the target, moderate OAR unblocking can substantially improve target dose distribution and minimize hot spots while not overly compromising dose sparing of the organ. Image-reconstruction type and gradient-descent blocked-arc computations generate similar results. The Pareto front for the prostate geometry, reconstructed using a large number of inverse plans, presents a hockey-stick shape comprising two regions: One where the dose to the target is close to prescription and trade-offs can be made between doses to the organs at risk and (small) changes in target dose, and one where very substantial rectal sparing is achieved at the cost of large target underdosage. Plans computed following the approach using a conformal arc and four blocked arcs generally lie close to the Pareto front, although distances of some plans from high gradient regions of the Pareto front can be greater. Only around 12% of plans lie a relative Euclidean distance of 0.15 or greater from the Pareto front. Using the alternative distance measure of Craft ["Calculating and controlling the error of discrete representations of Pareto surfaces in convex multi-criteria optimization," Phys. Medica (to be published)], around 2/5 of plans lie more than 0.05 from the front. Computation of blocked arcs is quite fast, the algorithms requiring 35%-80% of the running time per iteration needed for conventional inverse plan computation.


CONCLUSIONS
The geometry-based arc approach to multicriteria optimization of rotational therapy allows solutions to be obtained that lie close to the Pareto front. Both the image-reconstruction type and gradient-descent algorithms produce similar modulated arcs, the latter one perhaps being preferred because it is more easily implementable in standard treatment planning systems. Moderate unblocking provides a good way of dealing with OARs which abut the PTV. Optimization of geometry-based arcs is faster than usual inverse optimization of treatment plans, making this approach more rapid than an inverse-based Pareto front reconstruction.
Pardo-Montero
Juan
J
Department of Physics, Clatterbridge Centre for Oncology, Clatterbridge Road, Bebington CH63 4JY, United Kingdom. juanpm@liverpool.ac.uk
Fenwick
John D
JD
D000465:Algorithms; D003198:Computer Simulation; D006801:Humans; D016014:Linear Models; D008297:Male; D008954:Models, Biological; D011467:Prostate / Q000503:physiopathology*; D011471:Prostatic Neoplasms / Q000503:physiopathology* / Q000532:radiotherapy*; D011874:Radiometry / Q000379:methods*; D011879:Radiotherapy Dosage; D011880:Radiotherapy Planning, Computer-Assisted / Q000379:methods*; D020266:Radiotherapy, Conformal / Q000379:methods*