TY - JOUR
T1 - Predicting patient specific Pareto fronts from patient anatomy only
AU - van der Bijl, Erik
AU - Wang, Yibing
AU - Janssen, Tomas
AU - Petit, Steven
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2020 Elsevier B.V.
PY - 2020/9
Y1 - 2020/9
N2 - Purpose: To demonstrate the feasibility of predicting the patient-specific treatment planning Pareto front (PF) for prostate cancer patients based only on delineations of PTV, rectum and body. Material/methods: Our methodology consists of four steps. First, using Erasmus-iCycle, the Pareto fronts of 112 prostate cancer patients were constructed by generating per patient 42 Pareto optimal treatment plans with different priorities. Dose parameters associated to homogeneity, conformity and dose to rectum were extracted. Second, a 3D convex function representing the PF spanned by the 42 plans was fitted for each patient using three patient-specific parameters. Third, ten features were extracted from the, aforementioned, structures to train a linear-regressor prediction algorithm to predict these three patient-specific parameters. Fourth, the quality of the predictions was assessed by calculating the average and maximum distances of the predicted PF to the 42 plans for patients in the validation cohort. Results: The prediction model was able to predict the clinically relevant PF within 2 Gy for 90% of the patients with a median average distance of 0.6 Gy. Conclusions: We demonstrate the feasibility of fast, accurate predictions of the patient-specific PF for prostate cancer patients based only on delineations of PTV, rectum and body.
AB - Purpose: To demonstrate the feasibility of predicting the patient-specific treatment planning Pareto front (PF) for prostate cancer patients based only on delineations of PTV, rectum and body. Material/methods: Our methodology consists of four steps. First, using Erasmus-iCycle, the Pareto fronts of 112 prostate cancer patients were constructed by generating per patient 42 Pareto optimal treatment plans with different priorities. Dose parameters associated to homogeneity, conformity and dose to rectum were extracted. Second, a 3D convex function representing the PF spanned by the 42 plans was fitted for each patient using three patient-specific parameters. Third, ten features were extracted from the, aforementioned, structures to train a linear-regressor prediction algorithm to predict these three patient-specific parameters. Fourth, the quality of the predictions was assessed by calculating the average and maximum distances of the predicted PF to the 42 plans for patients in the validation cohort. Results: The prediction model was able to predict the clinically relevant PF within 2 Gy for 90% of the patients with a median average distance of 0.6 Gy. Conclusions: We demonstrate the feasibility of fast, accurate predictions of the patient-specific PF for prostate cancer patients based only on delineations of PTV, rectum and body.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85086672303&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.radonc.2020.05.050
DO - 10.1016/j.radonc.2020.05.050
M3 - Article
C2 - 32526316
AN - SCOPUS:85086672303
SN - 0167-8140
VL - 150
SP - 46
EP - 50
JO - Radiotherapy and Oncology
JF - Radiotherapy and Oncology
ER -