Effectiveness of Multi-Criteria Optimization-based Trade-Off exploration in combination with RapidPlan for head & neck radiotherapy planning

Abstract

Background: A new strategy is introduced combining the use of Multi-Criteria Optimization-based Trade-Off Exploration (TO) and RapidPlan™ (RP) for the selection of optimisation parameters that improve the trade-off between sparing of organs at risk (OAR) and target coverage for head and neck radiotherapy planning. Using both approaches simultaneously; three different workflows were proposed for the optimisation process of volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) plans. The generated plans were compared to the clinical plans and the plans that resulted using RP and TO individually. Methods: Twenty clinical VMAT plans previously administered were selected. Five additional plans were created for each patient: a clinical plan further optimised with TO (Clin+TO); two plans generated by in-house built RP models, RP-1 with the model built with VMAT clinical plans and RP-TO with the model built with VMAT plans optimised by TO. Finally, these last two plans were additionally optimised with TO for the creation of the plans RP-1 + TO and RP-TO+ respectively. The TO management was standardised to maximise the sparing of the parotid glands without compromising a clinically acceptable PTV coverage. Resulting plans were inter-compared based on dose-volume parameters for OAR and PTVs, target homogeneity, conformity, and plans complexity and deliverability. Results: The plans optimised using TO in combination with RP showed significantly improved OAR sparing while maintaining comparable target dose coverage to the clinical plans. The largest OAR sparing compared to the clinical plans was achieved by the RP-TO+ plans, which reported a mean parotid dose average of 15.0 ± 4.6 Gy vs 22.9 ± 5.5 Gy (left) and 17.1 ± 5.0 Gy vs 24.8 ± 5.8 Gy (right). However, at the same time, RP-TO+ showed a slight dose reduction for the 99% volume of the nodal PTV and an increase for the 95% (when comparing to the clinical plans 76.0 ± 1.2 vs 77.4 ± 0.6 and 80.9 ± 0.9 vs 79.7 ± 0.4) but remained within clinical acceptance. Plans optimised with RP and TO combined, showed an increase in complexity but were proven to be deliverable. Conclusion: The use of TO combined with RP during the optimisation of VMAT plans enhanced plan quality the most. For the RP-TO+ plans, acceptance of a slight deterioration in nodal PTV allowed the largest reduction in OAR dose to be achieved.