Paper detail

Bi-level Multi-criteria Optimization for Risk-informed Radiotherapy

In radiation therapy (RT) treatment planning, multi-criteria optimization (MCO) supports efficient plan selection but is usually solved for population-based dosimetric criteria and ignores patient-specific biological risk, potentially compromising outcomes in high-risk patients. We propose risk-guided MCO, a one-shot method that embeds a clinical risk model into conventional MCO, enabling interactive navigation between dosimetric and biological endpoints. The proposed algorithm uses a special order relation to fuse the classical MCO sandwiching algorithm with bi-level optimization, restricting the Pareto set to plans that achieve improvement in the secondary risk objective for user-defined, acceptable loss in primary clinical objectives. Thus, risk-guided MCO generates risk-optimized counterparts of clinical plans in a single run rather than by sequential or lexicographic planning. To assess the performance, we retrospectively analyzed 19 lung cancer patients treated with RT. The endpoint was the risk of grade 2+ radiation pneumonitis (RP), modeled using bootstrapped stepwise logistics regression with interaction terms, including baseline lung function, smoking history, and dosimetric factors. The risk-guided plans yielded a mean reduction of 8.0% in total lung V20 and 9.5% in right lung V5, translating into an average RP risk reduction of 7.7% (range=0.3%-20.1%), with small changes in target coverage (mean -1.2 D98[%] for CTV) and modest increase in heart dose (mean +1.74 Gy). This study presents the first proof-of-concept for integrating biological risk models directly within multi-criteria RT planning, enabling an interactive balance between established population-wide dose protocols and individualized outcome prediction. Our results demonstrate that the risk-informed MCO can reduce the risk of RP while maintaining target coverage.

preprint2026arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.