Deep learning‐based optimization of field geometry for total marrow irradiation delivered with volumetric modulated arc therapy

Nicola Lambri,Giorgio Longari,Daniele Loiacono,Ricardo Coimbra Brioso,Leonardo Crespi,Carmela Galdieri,Francesca Lobefalo,Giacomo Reggiori,Roberto Rusconi,Stefano Tomatis,Luisa Bellu,Stefania Bramanti,Elena Clerici,Chiara De Philippis,Damiano Dei,Pierina Navarria,Carmelo Carlo‐Stella,Ciro Franzese,Marta Scorsetti,Pietro Mancosu
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/mp.17089
IF: 4.506
2024-04-20
Medical Physics
Abstract:Background Total marrow (lymphoid) irradiation (TMI/TMLI) is a radiotherapy treatment used to selectively target the bone marrow and lymph nodes in conditioning regimens for allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. A complex field geometry is needed to cover the large planning target volume (PTV) of TMI/TMLI with volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT). Five isocenters and ten overlapping fields are needed for the upper body, while, for patients with large anatomical conformation, two specific isocenters are placed on the arms. The creation of a field geometry is clinically challenging and is performed by a medical physicist (MP) specialized in TMI/TMLI. Purpose To develop convolutional neural networks (CNNs) for automatically generating the field geometry of TMI/TMLI. Methods The dataset comprised 117 patients treated with TMI/TMLI between 2011 and 2023 at our Institute. The CNN input image consisted of three channels, obtained by projecting along the sagittal plane: (1) average CT pixel intensity within the PTV; (2) PTV mask; (3) brain, lungs, liver, bowel, and bladder masks. This "averaged" frontal view combined the information analyzed by the MP when setting the field geometry in the treatment planning system (TPS). Two CNNs were trained to predict the isocenters coordinates and jaws apertures for patients with (CNN‐1) and without (CNN‐2) isocenters on the arms. Local optimization methods were used to refine the models output based on the anatomy of the patient. Model evaluation was performed on a test set of 15 patients in two ways: (1) by computing the root mean squared error (RMSE) between the CNN output and ground truth; (2) with a qualitative assessment of manual and generated field geometries—scale: 1 = not adequate, 4 = adequate—carried out in blind mode by three MPs with different expertise in TMI/TMLI. The Wilcoxon signed‐rank test was used to evaluate the independence of the given scores between manual and generated configurations (p
radiology, nuclear medicine & medical imaging
What problem does this paper attempt to address?