
AbstractPurposeTo perform fully automated noncoplanar (NC) treatment planning, we propose a method called NC‐POPS to produce NC plans using the Pareto optimal projection search (POPS) algorithm.MethodsNC radiation therapy treatment planning has the potential to improve dosimetric quality as compared to traditional coplanar techniques. Likewise, automated treatment planning algorithms can reduce a planner's active treatment planning time and remove inter‐planner variability. Our NC‐POPS algorithm extends the original POPS algorithm to the NC setting with potential applications to both intensity‐modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) and volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT). The proposed algorithm consists of two main parts: (1) NC beam angle optimization (BAO) and (2) fully automated inverse planning using the POPS algorithm.ResultsWe evaluate the performance of NC‐POPS by comparing between various NC and coplanar configurations. To evaluate plan quality, we compute the homogeneity index (HI), conformity index (CI), and dose–volume histogram statistics for various organs‐at‐risk (OARs). As compared to the evaluated coplanar baseline methods, the proposed NC‐POPS method achieves significantly better OAR sparing, comparable or better dose conformity, and similar dose homogeneity.ConclusionsOur proposed NC‐POPS algorithm provides a modular approach for fully automated treatment planning of NC IMRT cases with the potential to substantially improve treatment planning workflow and plan quality.
Organs at Risk, Radiotherapy Planning, Computer-Assisted, FOS: Physical sciences, Radiotherapy Dosage, Radiotherapy, Intensity-Modulated, Medical Physics (physics.med-ph), Radiometry, Physics - Medical Physics
Organs at Risk, Radiotherapy Planning, Computer-Assisted, FOS: Physical sciences, Radiotherapy Dosage, Radiotherapy, Intensity-Modulated, Medical Physics (physics.med-ph), Radiometry, Physics - Medical Physics
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 7 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Average | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% |
