Cross-institutional knowledge-based planning (KBP) implementation and its performance comparison to Auto-Planning Engine (APE)

B. Wu, M. Kusters, M. Kunze-Busch, T. Dijkema, T. McNutt, G. Sanguineti, K. Bzdusek, A. Dritschilo, D. Pang

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: To investigate (1) whether a plan library established at one institution can be applied for another institution's knowledge-based planning (KBP); (2) the performance of cross-institutional KBP compared to Auto-Planning Engine (APE). MATERIAL AND METHODS: Radboud University Medical Center (RUMC) provided 35 oropharyngeal cancer patients (68Gy to PTV68 and 50.3Gy to PTV50.3) with clinically-delivered and comparative APE plans. The Johns Hopkins University (JHU) contributed a three-dose-level plan library consisting of 179 clinically-delivered plans. MedStar Georgetown University Hospital (MGUH) contributed a KBP approach employing overlap-volume histogram (OVH-KBP), where the JHU library was used for guiding RUMC patients' KBP. Since clinical protocols adopted at RUMC and JHU are different and both approaches require protocol-specific planning parameters as initial input, 10 randomly selected patients from RUMC were set aside for deriving them. The finalized parameters were applied to the remaining 25 patients for OVH-KBP and APE plan generation. A Wilcoxon rank-sum test was used for statistical comparison. RESULTS: PTV68 and PTV50.3's V95 in OVH-KBP and APE were similar (p>0.36). Cord's D0.1 cc in OVH-KBP was reduced by 5.1Gy (p=0.0001); doses to other organs were similar (p>0.2). CONCLUSION: APE and OVH-KBP's plan quality is comparable. Institutional-protocol differences can be addressed to allow cross-institutional library sharing.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)57-62
Number of pages6
JournalRadiotherapy and Oncology
Volume123
Issue number1
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Apr 1 2017

Fingerprint

Libraries
Nonparametric Statistics
Oropharyngeal Neoplasms
Clinical Protocols

Keywords

  • APE
  • IMRT
  • KBP
  • OVH

Cite this

Cross-institutional knowledge-based planning (KBP) implementation and its performance comparison to Auto-Planning Engine (APE). / Wu, B.; Kusters, M.; Kunze-Busch, M.; Dijkema, T.; McNutt, T.; Sanguineti, G.; Bzdusek, K.; Dritschilo, A.; Pang, D.

In: Radiotherapy and Oncology, Vol. 123, No. 1, 01.04.2017, p. 57-62.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Wu, B. ; Kusters, M. ; Kunze-Busch, M. ; Dijkema, T. ; McNutt, T. ; Sanguineti, G. ; Bzdusek, K. ; Dritschilo, A. ; Pang, D. / Cross-institutional knowledge-based planning (KBP) implementation and its performance comparison to Auto-Planning Engine (APE). In: Radiotherapy and Oncology. 2017 ; Vol. 123, No. 1. pp. 57-62.
@article{793f54e2fe87472d88176b2f85b86a45,
title = "Cross-institutional knowledge-based planning (KBP) implementation and its performance comparison to Auto-Planning Engine (APE)",
abstract = "BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: To investigate (1) whether a plan library established at one institution can be applied for another institution's knowledge-based planning (KBP); (2) the performance of cross-institutional KBP compared to Auto-Planning Engine (APE). MATERIAL AND METHODS: Radboud University Medical Center (RUMC) provided 35 oropharyngeal cancer patients (68Gy to PTV68 and 50.3Gy to PTV50.3) with clinically-delivered and comparative APE plans. The Johns Hopkins University (JHU) contributed a three-dose-level plan library consisting of 179 clinically-delivered plans. MedStar Georgetown University Hospital (MGUH) contributed a KBP approach employing overlap-volume histogram (OVH-KBP), where the JHU library was used for guiding RUMC patients' KBP. Since clinical protocols adopted at RUMC and JHU are different and both approaches require protocol-specific planning parameters as initial input, 10 randomly selected patients from RUMC were set aside for deriving them. The finalized parameters were applied to the remaining 25 patients for OVH-KBP and APE plan generation. A Wilcoxon rank-sum test was used for statistical comparison. RESULTS: PTV68 and PTV50.3's V95 in OVH-KBP and APE were similar (p>0.36). Cord's D0.1 cc in OVH-KBP was reduced by 5.1Gy (p=0.0001); doses to other organs were similar (p>0.2). CONCLUSION: APE and OVH-KBP's plan quality is comparable. Institutional-protocol differences can be addressed to allow cross-institutional library sharing.",
keywords = "APE, IMRT, KBP, OVH",
author = "B. Wu and M. Kusters and M. Kunze-Busch and T. Dijkema and T. McNutt and G. Sanguineti and K. Bzdusek and A. Dritschilo and D. Pang",
note = "LR: 20170410; CI: Copyright (c) 2017; JID: 8407192; OTO: NOTNLM; 2016/08/29 [received]; 2017/01/19 [revised]; 2017/01/21 [accepted]; ppublish",
year = "2017",
month = "4",
day = "1",
doi = "S0167-8140(17)30037-3 [pii]",
language = "English",
volume = "123",
pages = "57--62",
journal = "Radiotherapy and Oncology",
issn = "0167-8140",
publisher = "Elsevier Ireland Ltd",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Cross-institutional knowledge-based planning (KBP) implementation and its performance comparison to Auto-Planning Engine (APE)

AU - Wu, B.

AU - Kusters, M.

AU - Kunze-Busch, M.

AU - Dijkema, T.

AU - McNutt, T.

AU - Sanguineti, G.

AU - Bzdusek, K.

AU - Dritschilo, A.

AU - Pang, D.

N1 - LR: 20170410; CI: Copyright (c) 2017; JID: 8407192; OTO: NOTNLM; 2016/08/29 [received]; 2017/01/19 [revised]; 2017/01/21 [accepted]; ppublish

PY - 2017/4/1

Y1 - 2017/4/1

N2 - BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: To investigate (1) whether a plan library established at one institution can be applied for another institution's knowledge-based planning (KBP); (2) the performance of cross-institutional KBP compared to Auto-Planning Engine (APE). MATERIAL AND METHODS: Radboud University Medical Center (RUMC) provided 35 oropharyngeal cancer patients (68Gy to PTV68 and 50.3Gy to PTV50.3) with clinically-delivered and comparative APE plans. The Johns Hopkins University (JHU) contributed a three-dose-level plan library consisting of 179 clinically-delivered plans. MedStar Georgetown University Hospital (MGUH) contributed a KBP approach employing overlap-volume histogram (OVH-KBP), where the JHU library was used for guiding RUMC patients' KBP. Since clinical protocols adopted at RUMC and JHU are different and both approaches require protocol-specific planning parameters as initial input, 10 randomly selected patients from RUMC were set aside for deriving them. The finalized parameters were applied to the remaining 25 patients for OVH-KBP and APE plan generation. A Wilcoxon rank-sum test was used for statistical comparison. RESULTS: PTV68 and PTV50.3's V95 in OVH-KBP and APE were similar (p>0.36). Cord's D0.1 cc in OVH-KBP was reduced by 5.1Gy (p=0.0001); doses to other organs were similar (p>0.2). CONCLUSION: APE and OVH-KBP's plan quality is comparable. Institutional-protocol differences can be addressed to allow cross-institutional library sharing.

AB - BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: To investigate (1) whether a plan library established at one institution can be applied for another institution's knowledge-based planning (KBP); (2) the performance of cross-institutional KBP compared to Auto-Planning Engine (APE). MATERIAL AND METHODS: Radboud University Medical Center (RUMC) provided 35 oropharyngeal cancer patients (68Gy to PTV68 and 50.3Gy to PTV50.3) with clinically-delivered and comparative APE plans. The Johns Hopkins University (JHU) contributed a three-dose-level plan library consisting of 179 clinically-delivered plans. MedStar Georgetown University Hospital (MGUH) contributed a KBP approach employing overlap-volume histogram (OVH-KBP), where the JHU library was used for guiding RUMC patients' KBP. Since clinical protocols adopted at RUMC and JHU are different and both approaches require protocol-specific planning parameters as initial input, 10 randomly selected patients from RUMC were set aside for deriving them. The finalized parameters were applied to the remaining 25 patients for OVH-KBP and APE plan generation. A Wilcoxon rank-sum test was used for statistical comparison. RESULTS: PTV68 and PTV50.3's V95 in OVH-KBP and APE were similar (p>0.36). Cord's D0.1 cc in OVH-KBP was reduced by 5.1Gy (p=0.0001); doses to other organs were similar (p>0.2). CONCLUSION: APE and OVH-KBP's plan quality is comparable. Institutional-protocol differences can be addressed to allow cross-institutional library sharing.

KW - APE

KW - IMRT

KW - KBP

KW - OVH

U2 - S0167-8140(17)30037-3 [pii]

DO - S0167-8140(17)30037-3 [pii]

M3 - Article

VL - 123

SP - 57

EP - 62

JO - Radiotherapy and Oncology

JF - Radiotherapy and Oncology

SN - 0167-8140

IS - 1

ER -