PURPOSE: Graphical optimization (GrO) is a common method for high-dose-rate/pulsed-dose-rate (PDR) prostate brachytherapy treatment planning.
FREE DAILY AND WEEKLY NEWSLETTERS OFFERED BY CONTENT OF INTEREST
Did you find this article relevant? Subscribe to UroToday-GUOncToday!
The fields of GU Oncology and Urology are advancing rapidly including new treatments, enrolling clinical trials, screening and surveillance recommendations along with updated guidelines. Join us as one of our subscribers who rely on UroToday as their must-read source for the latest news and data on drugs. Sign up today for blogs, video conversations, conference highlights and abstracts from peer-review publications by disease and condition delivered to your inbox and read on the go.
New methods performing inverse optimization of the dose distribution have been developed over the past years. The purpose is to compare GrO and two established inverse methods, inverse planning simulated annealing (IPSA) and hybrid inverse treatment planning and optimization (HIPO), and one new method, enhanced geometric optimization-interactive inverse planning (EGO-IIP), in terms of speed and dose-volume histogram (DVH) parameters.
METHODS AND MATERIALS: For 26 prostate cancer patients treated with a PDR brachytherapy boost, an experienced treatment planner optimized the dose distributions using four different methods: GrO, IPSA, HIPO, and EGO-IIP. Relevant DVH parameters (prostate-V100%, D90%, V150%; urethra-D0.1cm3 and D1.0cm3; rectum-D0.1cm3 and D2.0cm3; bladder-D2.0cm3) were evaluated and their compliance to the constraints. Treatment planning time was also recorded.
RESULTS: All inverse methods resulted in shorter planning time (mean, 4-6.7 min), as compared with GrO (mean, 7.6 min). In terms of DVH parameters, none of the inverse methods outperformed the others. However, all inverse methods improved on compliance to the planning constraints as compared with GrO. On average, EGO-IIP and GrO resulted in highest D90%, and the IPSA plans resulted in lowest bladder D2.0cm3 and urethra D1.0cm3.
CONCLUSIONS: Inverse planning methods decrease planning time as compared with GrO for PDR/high-dose-rate prostate brachytherapy. DVH parameters are comparable for all methods.
Dinkla AM, van der Laarse R, Kaljouw E, Pieters BR, Koedooder K, van Wieringen N, Bel A. Are you the author?
Department of Radiation Oncology, Academic Medical Centre, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Reference: Brachytherapy. 2014 Oct 22. pii: S1538-4721(14)00648-5.