Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Gemini 2.5 Flash
Gemini 2.5 Flash
134 tokens/sec
GPT-4o
10 tokens/sec
Gemini 2.5 Pro Pro
47 tokens/sec
o3 Pro
4 tokens/sec
GPT-4.1 Pro
38 tokens/sec
DeepSeek R1 via Azure Pro
28 tokens/sec
2000 character limit reached

Probabilistic Proton Treatment Planning: a novel approach for optimizing underdosage and overdosage probabilities of target and organ structures (2507.01763v1)

Published 2 Jul 2025 in physics.med-ph

Abstract: Treatment planning uncertainties are typically managed using margin-based or robust optimization. Margin-based methods expand the clinical target volume (CTV) to a planning target volume, generally unsuited for proton therapy. Robust optimization considers worst-case scenarios, but its quality depends on the uncertainty scenario set: excluding extremes reduces robustness, while too many make plans overly conservative. Probabilistic optimization overcomes these limits by modeling a continuous scenario distribution. We propose a novel probabilistic optimization approach that steers plans toward individualized probability levels to control CTV and organs-at-risk (OARs) under- and overdosage. Voxel-wise dose percentiles ($d$) are estimated by expected value ($E$) and standard deviation (SD) as $E[d] \pm \delta \cdot SD[d]$, where $\delta$ is iteratively tuned to match the target percentile given Gaussian-distributed setup (3 mm) and range (3%) uncertainties. The method involves an inner optimization of $E[d] \pm \delta \cdot SD[d]$ for fixed $\delta$, and an outer loop updating $\delta$. Polynomial Chaos Expansion (PCE) provides accurate and efficient dose estimates during optimization. We validated the method on a spherical CTV abutted by an OAR in different directions and a horseshoe-shaped CTV surrounding a cylindrical spine. For spherical cases with similar CTV coverage, $P(D_{2\%} > 30 Gy)$ dropped by 10-15%; for matched OAR dose, $P(D_{98\%} > 57 Gy)$ increased by 67.5-71%. In spinal plans, $P(D_{98\%} > 57 Gy)$ increased by 10-15% while $P(D_{2\%} > 30 Gy)$ dropped 24-28%. Probabilistic and robust optimization times were comparable for spherical (hours) but longer for spinal cases (7.5 - 11.5 h vs. 9 - 20 min). Compared to discrete scenario-based optimization, the probabilistic method offered better OAR sparing or target coverage depending on the set priorities.

Summary

We haven't generated a summary for this paper yet.