001     132901
005     20240229105038.0
024 7 _ |a 10.1002/mp.12775
|2 doi
024 7 _ |a pmid:29393506
|2 pmid
024 7 _ |a 0094-2405
|2 ISSN
024 7 _ |a 1522-8541
|2 ISSN
037 _ _ |a DKFZ-2018-00543
041 _ _ |a eng
082 _ _ |a 610
100 1 _ |a Wahl, Niklas
|0 P:(DE-He78)dfd5aaf608015baaaed0a15b473f1336
|b 0
|e First author
|u dkfz
245 _ _ |a Analytical incorporation of fractionation effects in probabilistic treatment planning for intensity-modulated proton therapy.
260 _ _ |a New York, NY
|c 2018
336 7 _ |a article
|2 DRIVER
336 7 _ |a Output Types/Journal article
|2 DataCite
336 7 _ |a Journal Article
|b journal
|m journal
|0 PUB:(DE-HGF)16
|s 1526385531_1634
|2 PUB:(DE-HGF)
336 7 _ |a ARTICLE
|2 BibTeX
336 7 _ |a JOURNAL_ARTICLE
|2 ORCID
336 7 _ |a Journal Article
|0 0
|2 EndNote
520 _ _ |a We show that it is possible to explicitly incorporate fractionation effects into closed-form probabilistic treatment plan analysis and optimization for intensity-modulated proton therapy with analytical probabilistic modeling (APM). We study the impact of different fractionation schemes on the dosimetric uncertainty induced by random and systematic sources of range and setup uncertainty for treatment plans that were optimized with and without consideration of the number of treatment fractions.The APM framework is capable of handling arbitrarily correlated uncertainty models including systematic and random errors in the context of fractionation. On this basis, we construct an analytical dose variance computation pipeline that explicitly considers the number of treatment fractions for uncertainty quantitation and minimization during treatment planning. We evaluate the variance computation model in comparison to random sampling of 100 treatments for conventional and probabilistic treatment plans under different fractionation schemes (1, 5, 30 fractions) for an intracranial, a paraspinal and a prostate case. The impact of neglecting the fractionation scheme during treatment planning is investigated by applying treatment plans that were generated with probabilistic optimization for 1 fraction in a higher number of fractions and comparing them to the probabilistic plans optimized under explicit consideration of the number of fractions.APM enables the construction of an analytical variance computation model for dose uncertainty considering fractionation at negligible computational overhead. It is computationally feasible (a) to simultaneously perform a robustness analysis for all possible fraction numbers and (b) to perform a probabilistic treatment plan optimization for a specific fraction number. The incorporation of fractionation assumptions for robustness analysis exposes a dose to uncertainty trade-off, i.e., the dose in the organs at risk is increased for a reduced fraction number and/or for more robust treatment plans. By explicit consideration of fractionation effects during planning, we demonstrate that it is possible to exploit this trade-off during optimization. APM optimization considering the fraction number reduced the dose in organs at risk compared to conventional probabilistic optimization neglecting the fraction number.APM enables computationally efficient incorporation of fractionation effects in probabilistic uncertainty analysis and probabilistic treatment plan optimization. The consideration of the fractionation scheme in probabilistic treatment planning reveals the trade-off between number of fractions, nominal dose, and treatment plan robustness.
536 _ _ |a 315 - Imaging and radiooncology (POF3-315)
|0 G:(DE-HGF)POF3-315
|c POF3-315
|f POF III
|x 0
588 _ _ |a Dataset connected to CrossRef, PubMed,
700 1 _ |a Hennig, Philipp
|b 1
700 1 _ |a Wieser, Hans-Peter
|0 P:(DE-He78)59c02b7b30ad8972cf422bb1c955956c
|b 2
|u dkfz
700 1 _ |a Bangert, Mark
|0 P:(DE-He78)fec480a99b1869ec73688e95c2f0a43b
|b 3
|e Last author
|u dkfz
773 _ _ |a 10.1002/mp.12775
|g Vol. 45, no. 4, p. 1317 - 1328
|0 PERI:(DE-600)1466421-5
|n 4
|p 1317 - 1328
|t Medical physics
|v 45
|y 2018
|x 0094-2405
909 C O |o oai:inrepo02.dkfz.de:132901
|p VDB
910 1 _ |a Deutsches Krebsforschungszentrum
|0 I:(DE-588b)2036810-0
|k DKFZ
|b 0
|6 P:(DE-He78)dfd5aaf608015baaaed0a15b473f1336
910 1 _ |a Deutsches Krebsforschungszentrum
|0 I:(DE-588b)2036810-0
|k DKFZ
|b 2
|6 P:(DE-He78)59c02b7b30ad8972cf422bb1c955956c
910 1 _ |a Deutsches Krebsforschungszentrum
|0 I:(DE-588b)2036810-0
|k DKFZ
|b 3
|6 P:(DE-He78)fec480a99b1869ec73688e95c2f0a43b
913 1 _ |a DE-HGF
|l Krebsforschung
|1 G:(DE-HGF)POF3-310
|0 G:(DE-HGF)POF3-315
|2 G:(DE-HGF)POF3-300
|v Imaging and radiooncology
|x 0
|4 G:(DE-HGF)POF
|3 G:(DE-HGF)POF3
|b Gesundheit
914 1 _ |y 2018
915 _ _ |a JCR
|0 StatID:(DE-HGF)0100
|2 StatID
|b MED PHYS : 2015
915 _ _ |a DBCoverage
|0 StatID:(DE-HGF)0200
|2 StatID
|b SCOPUS
915 _ _ |a DBCoverage
|0 StatID:(DE-HGF)0300
|2 StatID
|b Medline
915 _ _ |a DBCoverage
|0 StatID:(DE-HGF)0600
|2 StatID
|b Ebsco Academic Search
915 _ _ |a Peer Review
|0 StatID:(DE-HGF)0030
|2 StatID
|b ASC
915 _ _ |a DBCoverage
|0 StatID:(DE-HGF)0199
|2 StatID
|b Thomson Reuters Master Journal List
915 _ _ |a WoS
|0 StatID:(DE-HGF)0110
|2 StatID
|b Science Citation Index
915 _ _ |a DBCoverage
|0 StatID:(DE-HGF)0150
|2 StatID
|b Web of Science Core Collection
915 _ _ |a WoS
|0 StatID:(DE-HGF)0111
|2 StatID
|b Science Citation Index Expanded
915 _ _ |a DBCoverage
|0 StatID:(DE-HGF)1110
|2 StatID
|b Current Contents - Clinical Medicine
915 _ _ |a DBCoverage
|0 StatID:(DE-HGF)1030
|2 StatID
|b Current Contents - Life Sciences
915 _ _ |a IF < 5
|0 StatID:(DE-HGF)9900
|2 StatID
920 1 _ |0 I:(DE-He78)E040-20160331
|k E040
|l Medizinische Physik in der Strahlentherapie
|x 0
980 _ _ |a journal
980 _ _ |a VDB
980 _ _ |a I:(DE-He78)E040-20160331
980 _ _ |a UNRESTRICTED


LibraryCollectionCLSMajorCLSMinorLanguageAuthor
Marc 21