Paper detail

Dwell time modulation restrictions do not necessarily improve treatment plan quality for prostate HDR brachytherapy

Inverse planning algorithms for dwell time optimisation in interstitial high-dose-rate (HDR) brachytherapy may produce solutions with large dwell time variations within catheters, which may result in undesirable selective high-dose subvolumes. Extending the optimisation model with a dwell time modulation restriction (DTMR) that limits dwell time differences between neighboring dwell positions has been suggested to eliminate this issue. DTMRs may additionally reduce the sensitivity for uncertainties in dwell positions that result from catheter reconstruction errors and source positioning inaccuracies. This study quantifies the reduction of high-dose subvolumes and the robustness against these uncertainties by applying a DTMR to template-based prostate HDR brachytherapy implants. Three different DTMRs were consecutively applied to a linear dose-based penalty model (LD) and a dose-volume based model (LDV), both obtained from literature. The models were solved with DTMR levels ranging from no restriction to uniform dwell times within catheters. Uncertainties were simulated on clinical cases using in-house developed software, and dose-volume metrics were calculated in each simulation. For the assessment of high-dose subvolumes, the dose homogeneity index (DHI) and the contiguous dose volume histogram were analysed. Robustness was measured by the improvement of the lowest $D_{90\%}$ of the planning target volume (PTV) observed in the simulations. For (LD), a DTMR yields an increase in DHI of 30% and reduces the size of the largest high-dose volume by 2 to 5 cc. This came at a cost of a reduction in $D_{90\%}$ of the PTV of 10%, which often implies that it drops below the desired minimum of 100%. For (LDV), none of the DTMRs improved high-dose volume measures. DTMRs were not capable of improving robustness of PTV $D_{90\%}$ against uncertainty in dwell positions for both models.

preprint2016arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access4 authors1 topic

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 map preview

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.