Potter Larry D, Chang Sha X, Cullip Timothy J, Siochi Alfredo C
Department of Radiation Oncology, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, 27514, USA.
Med Phys. 2002 Mar;29(3):275-83. doi: 10.1118/1.1428755.
The performance of segmentation algorithms used in IMFAST for "step & shoot" IMRT treatment delivery is evaluated for three head and neck clinical treatments of different optimization objectives. The segmentation uses the intensity maps generated by the in-house TPS PLANUNC using the index-dose minimization algorithm. The dose optimization objectives include PTV dose uniformity and dose volume histogram-specified critical structure sparing. The optimized continuous intensity maps were truncated into five and ten intensity levels and exported to IMFAST for MLC segments optimization. The MLC segments were imported back to PLUNC for dose optimization quality calculation. The five basic segmentation algorithms included in IMFAST were evaluated alone and in combination with either tongue and groove/match line correction or fluence correction or both. Two criteria were used in the evaluation: treatment efficiency represented by the total number of MLC segments and optimization quality represented by a clinically relevant optimization quality factor. We found that the treatment efficiency depends first on the number of intensity levels used in the intensity map and second the segmentation technique used. The standard optimal segmentation with fluence correction is a consistent good performer for all treatment plans studied. All segmentation techniques evaluated produced treatments with similar dose optimization quality values, especially when ten-level intensity maps are used.
针对“步进式”调强放疗(IMRT)治疗中IMFAST所使用的分割算法,在三种具有不同优化目标的头颈部临床治疗中进行了评估。分割使用了内部治疗计划系统PLANUNC采用指数剂量最小化算法生成的强度图。剂量优化目标包括计划靶区(PTV)剂量均匀性和剂量体积直方图指定的危及器官保留。将优化后的连续强度图截断为五个和十个强度级别,并导出到IMFAST进行多叶准直器(MLC)段优化。将MLC段导入回PLUNC进行剂量优化质量计算。对IMFAST中包含的五种基本分割算法单独进行了评估,并与舌槽/匹配线校正或注量校正或两者结合进行了评估。评估中使用了两个标准:以MLC段总数表示的治疗效率和以临床相关优化质量因子表示的优化质量。我们发现,治疗效率首先取决于强度图中使用的强度级别数量,其次取决于所使用的分割技术。对于所有研究的治疗计划,采用注量校正的标准最优分割始终表现良好。所有评估的分割技术产生的治疗具有相似的剂量优化质量值,特别是当使用十级强度图时。