Influence of the Planning Parameters of a New Algorithm on the Dosimetric Quality, Beam-on Time and Delivery Accuracy of Tomotherapy Plans

Cancers Pub Date : 2024-05-15 DOI:10.3390/cancers16101883

Théo Burckbuchler, N. Dehaynin, C. Niederst, Laurent Bartolucci, Halima Elazhar, D. Jarnet, Florence Arbor, Philippe Meyer

{"title":"Influence of the Planning Parameters of a New Algorithm on the Dosimetric Quality, Beam-on Time and Delivery Accuracy of Tomotherapy Plans","authors":"Théo Burckbuchler, N. Dehaynin, C. Niederst, Laurent Bartolucci, Halima Elazhar, D. Jarnet, Florence Arbor, Philippe Meyer","doi":"10.3390/cancers16101883","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: This work aimed to determine the optimum VOLOTM Ultra algorithm parameters for tomotherapy treatments. Methods: 1056 treatment plans were generated with VOLOTM Ultra for 36 patients and six anatomical locations. The impact of varying four parameters was studied: the accelerated treatment (AT), leaf open/close time (LOT) cutoff, normal tissue objective (NTO) weight, and number of iterations. The beam-on time and dosimetric metrics were quantified for the target volumes and organs at risk (OARs). Delivery quality assurance measurements were obtained for 36 plans to assess the delivery accuracy. Results: The mean beam-on time for the helical tomotherapy and TomoDirect (TD) plans decreased by 26.6 ± 2.8% and 17.4 ± 4.3%, respectively, when the accelerated treatment parameter was increased from 0 to 10, at the expense of the planning target volume (PTV) coverage (2% lower D98%) and OAR dose (up to 15% increase). For TD plans, it seems preferable to systematically use an AT value of 10. Increasing the number of iterations beyond six seems unnecessary. In this study, an NTO weight of approximately 10 appears to be ideal and eliminates the need to use rings in the treatment plan. Finally, no correlation was found between the leaf open/close time cutoff and the delivery accuracy, while a leaf open/close cutoff of 60 ms seemed to degrade dosimetry quality. Conclusion: Optimal values for the AT, LOT cutoff, NTO weight, and number of optimization rounds were identified and should help improve the management of patients whose tomotherapy treatments are planned with VOLOTM Ultra.","PeriodicalId":504676,"journal":{"name":"Cancers","volume":"19 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cancers","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers16101883","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: This work aimed to determine the optimum VOLOTM Ultra algorithm parameters for tomotherapy treatments. Methods: 1056 treatment plans were generated with VOLOTM Ultra for 36 patients and six anatomical locations. The impact of varying four parameters was studied: the accelerated treatment (AT), leaf open/close time (LOT) cutoff, normal tissue objective (NTO) weight, and number of iterations. The beam-on time and dosimetric metrics were quantified for the target volumes and organs at risk (OARs). Delivery quality assurance measurements were obtained for 36 plans to assess the delivery accuracy. Results: The mean beam-on time for the helical tomotherapy and TomoDirect (TD) plans decreased by 26.6 ± 2.8% and 17.4 ± 4.3%, respectively, when the accelerated treatment parameter was increased from 0 to 10, at the expense of the planning target volume (PTV) coverage (2% lower D98%) and OAR dose (up to 15% increase). For TD plans, it seems preferable to systematically use an AT value of 10. Increasing the number of iterations beyond six seems unnecessary. In this study, an NTO weight of approximately 10 appears to be ideal and eliminates the need to use rings in the treatment plan. Finally, no correlation was found between the leaf open/close time cutoff and the delivery accuracy, while a leaf open/close cutoff of 60 ms seemed to degrade dosimetry quality. Conclusion: Optimal values for the AT, LOT cutoff, NTO weight, and number of optimization rounds were identified and should help improve the management of patients whose tomotherapy treatments are planned with VOLOTM Ultra.

查看原文本刊更多论文

新算法的规划参数对透射治疗计划的剂量质量、光束开启时间和传输精度的影响

背景：这项研究旨在确定断层治疗的最佳 VOLOTM Ultra 算法参数。方法：使用 VOLOTM Ultra 为 36 名患者和 6 个解剖位置生成了 1056 个治疗计划。研究了四个参数变化的影响：加速治疗（AT）、叶片打开/关闭时间（LOT）截止、正常组织目标（NTO）权重和迭代次数。对靶体积和危险器官（OAR）的射束时间和剂量测定指标进行了量化。对 36 个计划进行了投射质量保证测量，以评估投射的准确性。结果：当加速治疗参数从0增加到10时，螺旋断层治疗和TomoDirect（TD）计划的平均射束时间分别减少了26.6±2.8%和17.4±4.3%，但却牺牲了计划靶体积（PTV）覆盖率（D98%降低2%）和OAR剂量（增加15%）。对于 TD 计划，似乎最好系统地使用 10 的 AT 值。将迭代次数增加到六次以上似乎没有必要。在本研究中，NTO 权重约为 10 似乎比较理想，无需在治疗计划中使用环。最后，没有发现叶片打开/关闭时间截止值与投放准确性之间存在相关性，而叶片打开/关闭截止值为 60 毫秒似乎会降低剂量测定质量。结论确定了 AT、LOT 截止值、NTO 重量和优化轮数的最佳值，这将有助于改善使用 VOLOTM Ultra 计划进行断层治疗的患者的管理。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Cancers

自引率

0.00%

发文量