Engineering topics

Phillips, Mark H.

Publications and source records attributed to Phillips, Mark H..

3 records

DOE OSTI2016

A feasibility study of dynamic adaptive radiotherapy for nonsmall cell lung cancer

Purpose: The final state of the tumor at the end of a radiotherapy course is dependent on the doses given in each fraction during the treatment course. This study investigates the feasibility of using dynamic adaptive radiotherapy (DART) in treating lung cancers assuming CBCT is available to observe midtreatment tumor states. DART adapts treatment plans using a dynamic programming technique to consider the expected changes of the tumor in the optimization process. Methods: DART is constructed using a stochastic control formalism framework. It minimizes the total expected number of tumor cells at the end of a treatment course, which is equivalent to maximizing tumor control probability, subject to the uncertainty inherent in the tumor response. This formulation allows for nonstationary dose distributions as well as nonstationary fractional doses as needed to achieve a series of optimal plans that are conformal to the tumor over time, i.e., spatiotemporally optimal plans. Sixteen phantom cases with various sizes and locations of tumors and organs-at-risk (OAR) were generated using in-house software. Each case was planned with DART and conventional IMRT prescribing 60 Gy in 30 fractions. The observations of the change in the tumor volume over a treatment course were simulated using a two-level cell population model. Monte Carlo simulations of the treatment course for each case were run to account for uncertainty in the tumor response. The same OAR dose constraints were applied for both methods. The frequency of replanning was varied between 1, 2, 5 (weekly), and 29 times (daily). The final average tumor dose and OAR doses have been compared to quantify the potential dosimetric benefits of DART. Results: The average tumor max, min, mean, and D95 doses using DART relative to these using conventional IMRT were 124.0%–125.2%, 102.1%–114.7%, 113.7%–123.4%, and 102.0%–115.9% (range dependent on the frequency of replanning). The average relative maximum doses for the cord and esophagus, mean doses for the heart and lungs, and D05 for the unspecified tissue resulting 84%–102.4%, 99.8%–106.9%, 66.9%–85.6%, 58.2%–78.8%, and 85.2%–94.0%, respectively. Conclusions: It is feasible to apply DART to the treatment of NSCLC using CBCT to observe the midtreatment tumor state. Potential increases in the tumor dose and reductions in the OAR dose, particularly for parallel OARs with mean or dose–volume constraints, could be achieved using DART compared to nonadaptive IMRT.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2015

A feasibility study: Selection of a personalized radiotherapy fractionation schedule using spatiotemporal optimization

Purpose: To investigate the impact of using spatiotemporal optimization, i.e., intensity-modulated spatial optimization followed by fractionation schedule optimization, to select the patient-specific fractionation schedule that maximizes the tumor biologically equivalent dose (BED) under dose constraints for multiple organs-at-risk (OARs). Methods: Spatiotemporal optimization was applied to a variety of lung tumors in a phantom geometry using a range of tumor sizes and locations. The optimal fractionation schedule for a patient using the linear-quadratic cell survival model depends on the tumor and OAR sensitivity to fraction size (α/β), the effective tumor doubling time (T{sub d}), and the size and location of tumor target relative to one or more OARs (dose distribution). The authors used a spatiotemporal optimization method to identify the optimal number of fractions N that maximizes the 3D tumor BED distribution for 16 lung phantom cases. The selection of the optimal fractionation schedule used equivalent (30-fraction) OAR constraints for the heart (D{sub mean} ≤ 45 Gy), lungs (D{sub mean} ≤ 20 Gy), cord (D{sub max} ≤ 45 Gy), esophagus (D{sub max} ≤ 63 Gy), and unspecified tissues (D{sub 05} ≤ 60 Gy). To assess plan quality, the authors compared the minimum, mean, maximum, and D{sub 95} of tumor BED, as well as the equivalent uniform dose (EUD) for optimized plans to conventional intensity-modulated radiation therapy plans prescribing 60 Gy in 30 fractions. A sensitivity analysis was performed to assess the effects of T{sub d} (3–100 days), tumor lag-time (T{sub k} = 0–10 days), and the size of tumors on optimal fractionation schedule. Results: Using an α/β ratio of 10 Gy, the average values of tumor max, min, mean BED, and D{sub 95} were up to 19%, 21%, 20%, and 19% larger than those from conventional prescription, depending on T{sub d} and T{sub k} used. Tumor EUD was up to 17% larger than the conventional prescription. For fast proliferating tumors with T{sub d} less than 10 days, there was no significant increase in tumor BED but the treatment course could be shortened without a loss in tumor BED. The improvement in the tumor mean BED was more pronounced with smaller tumors (p-value = 0.08). Conclusions: Spatiotemporal optimization of patient plans has the potential to significantly improve local tumor control (larger BED/EUD) of patients with a favorable geometry, such as smaller tumors with larger distances between the tumor target and nearby OAR. In patients with a less favorable geometry and for fast growing tumors, plans optimized using spatiotemporal optimization and conventional (spatial-only) optimization are equivalent (negligible differences in tumor BED/EUD). However, spatiotemporal optimization yields shorter treatment courses than conventional spatial-only optimization. Personalized, spatiotemporal optimization of treatment schedules can increase patient convenience and help with the efficient allocation of clinical resources. Spatiotemporal optimization can also help identify a subset of patients that might benefit from nonconventional (large dose per fraction) treatments that are ineligible for the current practice of stereotactic body radiation therapy.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2011

When is better best? A multiobjective perspective

Purpose: To identify the most informative methods for reporting results of treatment planning comparisons. Methods: Seven articles from the past year of International Journal of Radiation Oncology Biology Physics reported on comparisons of treatment plans for IMRT and IMAT. The articles were reviewed to identify methods of comparisons. Decision theoretical concepts were used to evaluate the study methods and highlight those that provide the most information. Results: None of the studies examined the correlation between objectives. Statistical comparisons provided some information but not enough to provide support for a robust decision analysis. Conclusions: The increased use of treatment planning studies to evaluate different methods in radiation therapy requires improved standards for designing the studies and reporting the results.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗