Being certain about uncertainties: a robust evaluation method for high-dose-rate prostate brachytherapy treatment plans including the combination of uncertainties
Abstract In high-dose-rate (HDR) prostate brachytherapy the combined effect of uncertainties cause a range of possible dose distributions deviating from the nominal plan, and which are not considered during treatment plan evaluation. This could lead to dosimetric misses for critical structures and o...
Ausführliche Beschreibung
Gespeichert in:
| Autor*in: |
Kennedy, Andrew C. [verfasserIn] |
|---|
| Format: |
E-Artikel |
|---|---|
| Sprache: |
Englisch |
| Erschienen: |
2023 |
|---|
| Schlagwörter: |
|---|
| Anmerkung: |
© The Author(s) 2023 |
|---|
| Übergeordnetes Werk: |
Enthalten in: Australasian physical & engineering sciences in medicine - Cham : Springer, 2001, 46(2023), 3 vom: 30. Mai, Seite 1115-1130 |
|---|---|
| Übergeordnetes Werk: |
volume:46 ; year:2023 ; number:3 ; day:30 ; month:05 ; pages:1115-1130 |
| Links: |
|---|
| DOI / URN: |
10.1007/s13246-023-01279-8 |
|---|
| Katalog-ID: |
SPR052994791 |
|---|
| LEADER | 01000naa a22002652 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | SPR052994791 | ||
| 003 | DE-627 | ||
| 005 | 20230906064737.0 | ||
| 007 | cr uuu---uuuuu | ||
| 008 | 230906s2023 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c | ||
| 024 | 7 | |a 10.1007/s13246-023-01279-8 |2 doi | |
| 035 | |a (DE-627)SPR052994791 | ||
| 035 | |a (SPR)s13246-023-01279-8-e | ||
| 040 | |a DE-627 |b ger |c DE-627 |e rakwb | ||
| 041 | |a eng | ||
| 100 | 1 | |a Kennedy, Andrew C. |e verfasserin |0 (orcid)0000-0003-3053-6052 |4 aut | |
| 245 | 1 | 0 | |a Being certain about uncertainties: a robust evaluation method for high-dose-rate prostate brachytherapy treatment plans including the combination of uncertainties |
| 264 | 1 | |c 2023 | |
| 336 | |a Text |b txt |2 rdacontent | ||
| 337 | |a Computermedien |b c |2 rdamedia | ||
| 338 | |a Online-Ressource |b cr |2 rdacarrier | ||
| 500 | |a © The Author(s) 2023 | ||
| 520 | |a Abstract In high-dose-rate (HDR) prostate brachytherapy the combined effect of uncertainties cause a range of possible dose distributions deviating from the nominal plan, and which are not considered during treatment plan evaluation. This could lead to dosimetric misses for critical structures and overdosing of organs at risk. A robust evaluation method to assess the combination of uncertainties during plan evaluation is presented and demonstrated on one HDR prostate ultrasound treatment plan retrospectively. A range of uncertainty scenarios are simulated by changing six parameters in the nominal plan and calculating the corresponding dose distribution. Two methods are employed to change the parameters, a probabilistic approach using random number sampling to evaluate the likelihood of variation in dose distributions, and a combination of the most extreme possible values to access the worst-case dosimetric outcomes. One thousand probabilistic scenarios were run on the single treatment plan with 43.2% of scenarios passing seven of the eight clinical objectives. The prostate D90 had a standard deviation of 4.4%, with the worst case decreasing the dose by up to 27.2%. The urethra D10 was up to 29.3% higher than planned in the worst case. All DVH metrics in the probabilistic scenarios were found to be within acceptable clinical constraints for the plan under statistical tests for significance. The clinical significance of the results from the robust evaluation method presented on any individual treatment plan needs to be compared in the context of a historical data set that contains patient outcomes with robustness analysis data to ascertain a baseline acceptance. | ||
| 650 | 4 | |a Robust evaluation |7 (dpeaa)DE-He213 | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Brachytherapy |7 (dpeaa)DE-He213 | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Radiotherapy planning |7 (dpeaa)DE-He213 | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Uncertainty |7 (dpeaa)DE-He213 | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Douglass, Michael J. J. |0 (orcid)0000-0002-3862-2644 |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Santos, Alexandre M. C. |0 (orcid)0000-0001-8482-6982 |4 aut | |
| 773 | 0 | 8 | |i Enthalten in |t Australasian physical & engineering sciences in medicine |d Cham : Springer, 2001 |g 46(2023), 3 vom: 30. Mai, Seite 1115-1130 |w (DE-627)320430707 |w (DE-600)2003728-4 |x 1879-5447 |7 nnns |
| 773 | 1 | 8 | |g volume:46 |g year:2023 |g number:3 |g day:30 |g month:05 |g pages:1115-1130 |
| 856 | 4 | 0 | |u https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s13246-023-01279-8 |z kostenfrei |3 Volltext |
| 912 | |a GBV_USEFLAG_A | ||
| 912 | |a SYSFLAG_A | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_SPRINGER | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_120 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_150 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2188 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2336 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2472 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2522 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4246 | ||
| 951 | |a AR | ||
| 952 | |d 46 |j 2023 |e 3 |b 30 |c 05 |h 1115-1130 | ||
| author_variant |
a c k ac ack m j j d mjj mjjd a m c s amc amcs |
|---|---|
| matchkey_str |
article:18795447:2023----::encranbuucranisrbseautomtofrihoeaersaercyhrptetetlni |
| hierarchy_sort_str |
2023 |
| publishDate |
2023 |
| allfields |
10.1007/s13246-023-01279-8 doi (DE-627)SPR052994791 (SPR)s13246-023-01279-8-e DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng Kennedy, Andrew C. verfasserin (orcid)0000-0003-3053-6052 aut Being certain about uncertainties: a robust evaluation method for high-dose-rate prostate brachytherapy treatment plans including the combination of uncertainties 2023 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier © The Author(s) 2023 Abstract In high-dose-rate (HDR) prostate brachytherapy the combined effect of uncertainties cause a range of possible dose distributions deviating from the nominal plan, and which are not considered during treatment plan evaluation. This could lead to dosimetric misses for critical structures and overdosing of organs at risk. A robust evaluation method to assess the combination of uncertainties during plan evaluation is presented and demonstrated on one HDR prostate ultrasound treatment plan retrospectively. A range of uncertainty scenarios are simulated by changing six parameters in the nominal plan and calculating the corresponding dose distribution. Two methods are employed to change the parameters, a probabilistic approach using random number sampling to evaluate the likelihood of variation in dose distributions, and a combination of the most extreme possible values to access the worst-case dosimetric outcomes. One thousand probabilistic scenarios were run on the single treatment plan with 43.2% of scenarios passing seven of the eight clinical objectives. The prostate D90 had a standard deviation of 4.4%, with the worst case decreasing the dose by up to 27.2%. The urethra D10 was up to 29.3% higher than planned in the worst case. All DVH metrics in the probabilistic scenarios were found to be within acceptable clinical constraints for the plan under statistical tests for significance. The clinical significance of the results from the robust evaluation method presented on any individual treatment plan needs to be compared in the context of a historical data set that contains patient outcomes with robustness analysis data to ascertain a baseline acceptance. Robust evaluation (dpeaa)DE-He213 Brachytherapy (dpeaa)DE-He213 Radiotherapy planning (dpeaa)DE-He213 Uncertainty (dpeaa)DE-He213 Douglass, Michael J. J. (orcid)0000-0002-3862-2644 aut Santos, Alexandre M. C. (orcid)0000-0001-8482-6982 aut Enthalten in Australasian physical & engineering sciences in medicine Cham : Springer, 2001 46(2023), 3 vom: 30. Mai, Seite 1115-1130 (DE-627)320430707 (DE-600)2003728-4 1879-5447 nnns volume:46 year:2023 number:3 day:30 month:05 pages:1115-1130 https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s13246-023-01279-8 kostenfrei Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_SPRINGER GBV_ILN_120 GBV_ILN_150 GBV_ILN_2188 GBV_ILN_2336 GBV_ILN_2472 GBV_ILN_2522 GBV_ILN_4246 AR 46 2023 3 30 05 1115-1130 |
| spelling |
10.1007/s13246-023-01279-8 doi (DE-627)SPR052994791 (SPR)s13246-023-01279-8-e DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng Kennedy, Andrew C. verfasserin (orcid)0000-0003-3053-6052 aut Being certain about uncertainties: a robust evaluation method for high-dose-rate prostate brachytherapy treatment plans including the combination of uncertainties 2023 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier © The Author(s) 2023 Abstract In high-dose-rate (HDR) prostate brachytherapy the combined effect of uncertainties cause a range of possible dose distributions deviating from the nominal plan, and which are not considered during treatment plan evaluation. This could lead to dosimetric misses for critical structures and overdosing of organs at risk. A robust evaluation method to assess the combination of uncertainties during plan evaluation is presented and demonstrated on one HDR prostate ultrasound treatment plan retrospectively. A range of uncertainty scenarios are simulated by changing six parameters in the nominal plan and calculating the corresponding dose distribution. Two methods are employed to change the parameters, a probabilistic approach using random number sampling to evaluate the likelihood of variation in dose distributions, and a combination of the most extreme possible values to access the worst-case dosimetric outcomes. One thousand probabilistic scenarios were run on the single treatment plan with 43.2% of scenarios passing seven of the eight clinical objectives. The prostate D90 had a standard deviation of 4.4%, with the worst case decreasing the dose by up to 27.2%. The urethra D10 was up to 29.3% higher than planned in the worst case. All DVH metrics in the probabilistic scenarios were found to be within acceptable clinical constraints for the plan under statistical tests for significance. The clinical significance of the results from the robust evaluation method presented on any individual treatment plan needs to be compared in the context of a historical data set that contains patient outcomes with robustness analysis data to ascertain a baseline acceptance. Robust evaluation (dpeaa)DE-He213 Brachytherapy (dpeaa)DE-He213 Radiotherapy planning (dpeaa)DE-He213 Uncertainty (dpeaa)DE-He213 Douglass, Michael J. J. (orcid)0000-0002-3862-2644 aut Santos, Alexandre M. C. (orcid)0000-0001-8482-6982 aut Enthalten in Australasian physical & engineering sciences in medicine Cham : Springer, 2001 46(2023), 3 vom: 30. Mai, Seite 1115-1130 (DE-627)320430707 (DE-600)2003728-4 1879-5447 nnns volume:46 year:2023 number:3 day:30 month:05 pages:1115-1130 https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s13246-023-01279-8 kostenfrei Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_SPRINGER GBV_ILN_120 GBV_ILN_150 GBV_ILN_2188 GBV_ILN_2336 GBV_ILN_2472 GBV_ILN_2522 GBV_ILN_4246 AR 46 2023 3 30 05 1115-1130 |
| allfields_unstemmed |
10.1007/s13246-023-01279-8 doi (DE-627)SPR052994791 (SPR)s13246-023-01279-8-e DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng Kennedy, Andrew C. verfasserin (orcid)0000-0003-3053-6052 aut Being certain about uncertainties: a robust evaluation method for high-dose-rate prostate brachytherapy treatment plans including the combination of uncertainties 2023 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier © The Author(s) 2023 Abstract In high-dose-rate (HDR) prostate brachytherapy the combined effect of uncertainties cause a range of possible dose distributions deviating from the nominal plan, and which are not considered during treatment plan evaluation. This could lead to dosimetric misses for critical structures and overdosing of organs at risk. A robust evaluation method to assess the combination of uncertainties during plan evaluation is presented and demonstrated on one HDR prostate ultrasound treatment plan retrospectively. A range of uncertainty scenarios are simulated by changing six parameters in the nominal plan and calculating the corresponding dose distribution. Two methods are employed to change the parameters, a probabilistic approach using random number sampling to evaluate the likelihood of variation in dose distributions, and a combination of the most extreme possible values to access the worst-case dosimetric outcomes. One thousand probabilistic scenarios were run on the single treatment plan with 43.2% of scenarios passing seven of the eight clinical objectives. The prostate D90 had a standard deviation of 4.4%, with the worst case decreasing the dose by up to 27.2%. The urethra D10 was up to 29.3% higher than planned in the worst case. All DVH metrics in the probabilistic scenarios were found to be within acceptable clinical constraints for the plan under statistical tests for significance. The clinical significance of the results from the robust evaluation method presented on any individual treatment plan needs to be compared in the context of a historical data set that contains patient outcomes with robustness analysis data to ascertain a baseline acceptance. Robust evaluation (dpeaa)DE-He213 Brachytherapy (dpeaa)DE-He213 Radiotherapy planning (dpeaa)DE-He213 Uncertainty (dpeaa)DE-He213 Douglass, Michael J. J. (orcid)0000-0002-3862-2644 aut Santos, Alexandre M. C. (orcid)0000-0001-8482-6982 aut Enthalten in Australasian physical & engineering sciences in medicine Cham : Springer, 2001 46(2023), 3 vom: 30. Mai, Seite 1115-1130 (DE-627)320430707 (DE-600)2003728-4 1879-5447 nnns volume:46 year:2023 number:3 day:30 month:05 pages:1115-1130 https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s13246-023-01279-8 kostenfrei Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_SPRINGER GBV_ILN_120 GBV_ILN_150 GBV_ILN_2188 GBV_ILN_2336 GBV_ILN_2472 GBV_ILN_2522 GBV_ILN_4246 AR 46 2023 3 30 05 1115-1130 |
| allfieldsGer |
10.1007/s13246-023-01279-8 doi (DE-627)SPR052994791 (SPR)s13246-023-01279-8-e DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng Kennedy, Andrew C. verfasserin (orcid)0000-0003-3053-6052 aut Being certain about uncertainties: a robust evaluation method for high-dose-rate prostate brachytherapy treatment plans including the combination of uncertainties 2023 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier © The Author(s) 2023 Abstract In high-dose-rate (HDR) prostate brachytherapy the combined effect of uncertainties cause a range of possible dose distributions deviating from the nominal plan, and which are not considered during treatment plan evaluation. This could lead to dosimetric misses for critical structures and overdosing of organs at risk. A robust evaluation method to assess the combination of uncertainties during plan evaluation is presented and demonstrated on one HDR prostate ultrasound treatment plan retrospectively. A range of uncertainty scenarios are simulated by changing six parameters in the nominal plan and calculating the corresponding dose distribution. Two methods are employed to change the parameters, a probabilistic approach using random number sampling to evaluate the likelihood of variation in dose distributions, and a combination of the most extreme possible values to access the worst-case dosimetric outcomes. One thousand probabilistic scenarios were run on the single treatment plan with 43.2% of scenarios passing seven of the eight clinical objectives. The prostate D90 had a standard deviation of 4.4%, with the worst case decreasing the dose by up to 27.2%. The urethra D10 was up to 29.3% higher than planned in the worst case. All DVH metrics in the probabilistic scenarios were found to be within acceptable clinical constraints for the plan under statistical tests for significance. The clinical significance of the results from the robust evaluation method presented on any individual treatment plan needs to be compared in the context of a historical data set that contains patient outcomes with robustness analysis data to ascertain a baseline acceptance. Robust evaluation (dpeaa)DE-He213 Brachytherapy (dpeaa)DE-He213 Radiotherapy planning (dpeaa)DE-He213 Uncertainty (dpeaa)DE-He213 Douglass, Michael J. J. (orcid)0000-0002-3862-2644 aut Santos, Alexandre M. C. (orcid)0000-0001-8482-6982 aut Enthalten in Australasian physical & engineering sciences in medicine Cham : Springer, 2001 46(2023), 3 vom: 30. Mai, Seite 1115-1130 (DE-627)320430707 (DE-600)2003728-4 1879-5447 nnns volume:46 year:2023 number:3 day:30 month:05 pages:1115-1130 https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s13246-023-01279-8 kostenfrei Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_SPRINGER GBV_ILN_120 GBV_ILN_150 GBV_ILN_2188 GBV_ILN_2336 GBV_ILN_2472 GBV_ILN_2522 GBV_ILN_4246 AR 46 2023 3 30 05 1115-1130 |
| allfieldsSound |
10.1007/s13246-023-01279-8 doi (DE-627)SPR052994791 (SPR)s13246-023-01279-8-e DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng Kennedy, Andrew C. verfasserin (orcid)0000-0003-3053-6052 aut Being certain about uncertainties: a robust evaluation method for high-dose-rate prostate brachytherapy treatment plans including the combination of uncertainties 2023 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier © The Author(s) 2023 Abstract In high-dose-rate (HDR) prostate brachytherapy the combined effect of uncertainties cause a range of possible dose distributions deviating from the nominal plan, and which are not considered during treatment plan evaluation. This could lead to dosimetric misses for critical structures and overdosing of organs at risk. A robust evaluation method to assess the combination of uncertainties during plan evaluation is presented and demonstrated on one HDR prostate ultrasound treatment plan retrospectively. A range of uncertainty scenarios are simulated by changing six parameters in the nominal plan and calculating the corresponding dose distribution. Two methods are employed to change the parameters, a probabilistic approach using random number sampling to evaluate the likelihood of variation in dose distributions, and a combination of the most extreme possible values to access the worst-case dosimetric outcomes. One thousand probabilistic scenarios were run on the single treatment plan with 43.2% of scenarios passing seven of the eight clinical objectives. The prostate D90 had a standard deviation of 4.4%, with the worst case decreasing the dose by up to 27.2%. The urethra D10 was up to 29.3% higher than planned in the worst case. All DVH metrics in the probabilistic scenarios were found to be within acceptable clinical constraints for the plan under statistical tests for significance. The clinical significance of the results from the robust evaluation method presented on any individual treatment plan needs to be compared in the context of a historical data set that contains patient outcomes with robustness analysis data to ascertain a baseline acceptance. Robust evaluation (dpeaa)DE-He213 Brachytherapy (dpeaa)DE-He213 Radiotherapy planning (dpeaa)DE-He213 Uncertainty (dpeaa)DE-He213 Douglass, Michael J. J. (orcid)0000-0002-3862-2644 aut Santos, Alexandre M. C. (orcid)0000-0001-8482-6982 aut Enthalten in Australasian physical & engineering sciences in medicine Cham : Springer, 2001 46(2023), 3 vom: 30. Mai, Seite 1115-1130 (DE-627)320430707 (DE-600)2003728-4 1879-5447 nnns volume:46 year:2023 number:3 day:30 month:05 pages:1115-1130 https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s13246-023-01279-8 kostenfrei Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_SPRINGER GBV_ILN_120 GBV_ILN_150 GBV_ILN_2188 GBV_ILN_2336 GBV_ILN_2472 GBV_ILN_2522 GBV_ILN_4246 AR 46 2023 3 30 05 1115-1130 |
| language |
English |
| source |
Enthalten in Australasian physical & engineering sciences in medicine 46(2023), 3 vom: 30. Mai, Seite 1115-1130 volume:46 year:2023 number:3 day:30 month:05 pages:1115-1130 |
| sourceStr |
Enthalten in Australasian physical & engineering sciences in medicine 46(2023), 3 vom: 30. Mai, Seite 1115-1130 volume:46 year:2023 number:3 day:30 month:05 pages:1115-1130 |
| format_phy_str_mv |
Article |
| institution |
findex.gbv.de |
| topic_facet |
Robust evaluation Brachytherapy Radiotherapy planning Uncertainty |
| isfreeaccess_bool |
true |
| container_title |
Australasian physical & engineering sciences in medicine |
| authorswithroles_txt_mv |
Kennedy, Andrew C. @@aut@@ Douglass, Michael J. J. @@aut@@ Santos, Alexandre M. C. @@aut@@ |
| publishDateDaySort_date |
2023-05-30T00:00:00Z |
| hierarchy_top_id |
320430707 |
| id |
SPR052994791 |
| language_de |
englisch |
| fullrecord |
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000naa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">SPR052994791</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20230906064737.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">230906s2023 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.1007/s13246-023-01279-8</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)SPR052994791</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(SPR)s13246-023-01279-8-e</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Kennedy, Andrew C.</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="0">(orcid)0000-0003-3053-6052</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Being certain about uncertainties: a robust evaluation method for high-dose-rate prostate brachytherapy treatment plans including the combination of uncertainties</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2023</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Text</subfield><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Computermedien</subfield><subfield code="b">c</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Online-Ressource</subfield><subfield code="b">cr</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="500" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">© The Author(s) 2023</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Abstract In high-dose-rate (HDR) prostate brachytherapy the combined effect of uncertainties cause a range of possible dose distributions deviating from the nominal plan, and which are not considered during treatment plan evaluation. This could lead to dosimetric misses for critical structures and overdosing of organs at risk. A robust evaluation method to assess the combination of uncertainties during plan evaluation is presented and demonstrated on one HDR prostate ultrasound treatment plan retrospectively. A range of uncertainty scenarios are simulated by changing six parameters in the nominal plan and calculating the corresponding dose distribution. Two methods are employed to change the parameters, a probabilistic approach using random number sampling to evaluate the likelihood of variation in dose distributions, and a combination of the most extreme possible values to access the worst-case dosimetric outcomes. One thousand probabilistic scenarios were run on the single treatment plan with 43.2% of scenarios passing seven of the eight clinical objectives. The prostate D90 had a standard deviation of 4.4%, with the worst case decreasing the dose by up to 27.2%. The urethra D10 was up to 29.3% higher than planned in the worst case. All DVH metrics in the probabilistic scenarios were found to be within acceptable clinical constraints for the plan under statistical tests for significance. The clinical significance of the results from the robust evaluation method presented on any individual treatment plan needs to be compared in the context of a historical data set that contains patient outcomes with robustness analysis data to ascertain a baseline acceptance.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Robust evaluation</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Brachytherapy</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Radiotherapy planning</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Uncertainty</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Douglass, Michael J. J.</subfield><subfield code="0">(orcid)0000-0002-3862-2644</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Santos, Alexandre M. C.</subfield><subfield code="0">(orcid)0000-0001-8482-6982</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">Enthalten in</subfield><subfield code="t">Australasian physical & engineering sciences in medicine</subfield><subfield code="d">Cham : Springer, 2001</subfield><subfield code="g">46(2023), 3 vom: 30. Mai, Seite 1115-1130</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)320430707</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-600)2003728-4</subfield><subfield code="x">1879-5447</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:46</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2023</subfield><subfield code="g">number:3</subfield><subfield code="g">day:30</subfield><subfield code="g">month:05</subfield><subfield code="g">pages:1115-1130</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s13246-023-01279-8</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield><subfield code="3">Volltext</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_SPRINGER</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_120</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_150</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2188</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2336</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2472</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2522</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4246</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">46</subfield><subfield code="j">2023</subfield><subfield code="e">3</subfield><subfield code="b">30</subfield><subfield code="c">05</subfield><subfield code="h">1115-1130</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
|
| author |
Kennedy, Andrew C. |
| spellingShingle |
Kennedy, Andrew C. misc Robust evaluation misc Brachytherapy misc Radiotherapy planning misc Uncertainty Being certain about uncertainties: a robust evaluation method for high-dose-rate prostate brachytherapy treatment plans including the combination of uncertainties |
| authorStr |
Kennedy, Andrew C. |
| ppnlink_with_tag_str_mv |
@@773@@(DE-627)320430707 |
| format |
electronic Article |
| delete_txt_mv |
keep |
| author_role |
aut aut aut |
| collection |
springer |
| remote_str |
true |
| illustrated |
Not Illustrated |
| issn |
1879-5447 |
| topic_title |
Being certain about uncertainties: a robust evaluation method for high-dose-rate prostate brachytherapy treatment plans including the combination of uncertainties Robust evaluation (dpeaa)DE-He213 Brachytherapy (dpeaa)DE-He213 Radiotherapy planning (dpeaa)DE-He213 Uncertainty (dpeaa)DE-He213 |
| topic |
misc Robust evaluation misc Brachytherapy misc Radiotherapy planning misc Uncertainty |
| topic_unstemmed |
misc Robust evaluation misc Brachytherapy misc Radiotherapy planning misc Uncertainty |
| topic_browse |
misc Robust evaluation misc Brachytherapy misc Radiotherapy planning misc Uncertainty |
| format_facet |
Elektronische Aufsätze Aufsätze Elektronische Ressource |
| format_main_str_mv |
Text Zeitschrift/Artikel |
| carriertype_str_mv |
cr |
| hierarchy_parent_title |
Australasian physical & engineering sciences in medicine |
| hierarchy_parent_id |
320430707 |
| hierarchy_top_title |
Australasian physical & engineering sciences in medicine |
| isfreeaccess_txt |
true |
| familylinks_str_mv |
(DE-627)320430707 (DE-600)2003728-4 |
| title |
Being certain about uncertainties: a robust evaluation method for high-dose-rate prostate brachytherapy treatment plans including the combination of uncertainties |
| ctrlnum |
(DE-627)SPR052994791 (SPR)s13246-023-01279-8-e |
| title_full |
Being certain about uncertainties: a robust evaluation method for high-dose-rate prostate brachytherapy treatment plans including the combination of uncertainties |
| author_sort |
Kennedy, Andrew C. |
| journal |
Australasian physical & engineering sciences in medicine |
| journalStr |
Australasian physical & engineering sciences in medicine |
| lang_code |
eng |
| isOA_bool |
true |
| recordtype |
marc |
| publishDateSort |
2023 |
| contenttype_str_mv |
txt |
| container_start_page |
1115 |
| author_browse |
Kennedy, Andrew C. Douglass, Michael J. J. Santos, Alexandre M. C. |
| container_volume |
46 |
| format_se |
Elektronische Aufsätze |
| author-letter |
Kennedy, Andrew C. |
| doi_str_mv |
10.1007/s13246-023-01279-8 |
| normlink |
(ORCID)0000-0003-3053-6052 (ORCID)0000-0002-3862-2644 (ORCID)0000-0001-8482-6982 |
| normlink_prefix_str_mv |
(orcid)0000-0003-3053-6052 (orcid)0000-0002-3862-2644 (orcid)0000-0001-8482-6982 |
| title_sort |
being certain about uncertainties: a robust evaluation method for high-dose-rate prostate brachytherapy treatment plans including the combination of uncertainties |
| title_auth |
Being certain about uncertainties: a robust evaluation method for high-dose-rate prostate brachytherapy treatment plans including the combination of uncertainties |
| abstract |
Abstract In high-dose-rate (HDR) prostate brachytherapy the combined effect of uncertainties cause a range of possible dose distributions deviating from the nominal plan, and which are not considered during treatment plan evaluation. This could lead to dosimetric misses for critical structures and overdosing of organs at risk. A robust evaluation method to assess the combination of uncertainties during plan evaluation is presented and demonstrated on one HDR prostate ultrasound treatment plan retrospectively. A range of uncertainty scenarios are simulated by changing six parameters in the nominal plan and calculating the corresponding dose distribution. Two methods are employed to change the parameters, a probabilistic approach using random number sampling to evaluate the likelihood of variation in dose distributions, and a combination of the most extreme possible values to access the worst-case dosimetric outcomes. One thousand probabilistic scenarios were run on the single treatment plan with 43.2% of scenarios passing seven of the eight clinical objectives. The prostate D90 had a standard deviation of 4.4%, with the worst case decreasing the dose by up to 27.2%. The urethra D10 was up to 29.3% higher than planned in the worst case. All DVH metrics in the probabilistic scenarios were found to be within acceptable clinical constraints for the plan under statistical tests for significance. The clinical significance of the results from the robust evaluation method presented on any individual treatment plan needs to be compared in the context of a historical data set that contains patient outcomes with robustness analysis data to ascertain a baseline acceptance. © The Author(s) 2023 |
| abstractGer |
Abstract In high-dose-rate (HDR) prostate brachytherapy the combined effect of uncertainties cause a range of possible dose distributions deviating from the nominal plan, and which are not considered during treatment plan evaluation. This could lead to dosimetric misses for critical structures and overdosing of organs at risk. A robust evaluation method to assess the combination of uncertainties during plan evaluation is presented and demonstrated on one HDR prostate ultrasound treatment plan retrospectively. A range of uncertainty scenarios are simulated by changing six parameters in the nominal plan and calculating the corresponding dose distribution. Two methods are employed to change the parameters, a probabilistic approach using random number sampling to evaluate the likelihood of variation in dose distributions, and a combination of the most extreme possible values to access the worst-case dosimetric outcomes. One thousand probabilistic scenarios were run on the single treatment plan with 43.2% of scenarios passing seven of the eight clinical objectives. The prostate D90 had a standard deviation of 4.4%, with the worst case decreasing the dose by up to 27.2%. The urethra D10 was up to 29.3% higher than planned in the worst case. All DVH metrics in the probabilistic scenarios were found to be within acceptable clinical constraints for the plan under statistical tests for significance. The clinical significance of the results from the robust evaluation method presented on any individual treatment plan needs to be compared in the context of a historical data set that contains patient outcomes with robustness analysis data to ascertain a baseline acceptance. © The Author(s) 2023 |
| abstract_unstemmed |
Abstract In high-dose-rate (HDR) prostate brachytherapy the combined effect of uncertainties cause a range of possible dose distributions deviating from the nominal plan, and which are not considered during treatment plan evaluation. This could lead to dosimetric misses for critical structures and overdosing of organs at risk. A robust evaluation method to assess the combination of uncertainties during plan evaluation is presented and demonstrated on one HDR prostate ultrasound treatment plan retrospectively. A range of uncertainty scenarios are simulated by changing six parameters in the nominal plan and calculating the corresponding dose distribution. Two methods are employed to change the parameters, a probabilistic approach using random number sampling to evaluate the likelihood of variation in dose distributions, and a combination of the most extreme possible values to access the worst-case dosimetric outcomes. One thousand probabilistic scenarios were run on the single treatment plan with 43.2% of scenarios passing seven of the eight clinical objectives. The prostate D90 had a standard deviation of 4.4%, with the worst case decreasing the dose by up to 27.2%. The urethra D10 was up to 29.3% higher than planned in the worst case. All DVH metrics in the probabilistic scenarios were found to be within acceptable clinical constraints for the plan under statistical tests for significance. The clinical significance of the results from the robust evaluation method presented on any individual treatment plan needs to be compared in the context of a historical data set that contains patient outcomes with robustness analysis data to ascertain a baseline acceptance. © The Author(s) 2023 |
| collection_details |
GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_SPRINGER GBV_ILN_120 GBV_ILN_150 GBV_ILN_2188 GBV_ILN_2336 GBV_ILN_2472 GBV_ILN_2522 GBV_ILN_4246 |
| container_issue |
3 |
| title_short |
Being certain about uncertainties: a robust evaluation method for high-dose-rate prostate brachytherapy treatment plans including the combination of uncertainties |
| url |
https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s13246-023-01279-8 |
| remote_bool |
true |
| author2 |
Douglass, Michael J. J. Santos, Alexandre M. C. |
| author2Str |
Douglass, Michael J. J. Santos, Alexandre M. C. |
| ppnlink |
320430707 |
| mediatype_str_mv |
c |
| isOA_txt |
true |
| hochschulschrift_bool |
false |
| doi_str |
10.1007/s13246-023-01279-8 |
| up_date |
2024-07-03T16:17:58.718Z |
| _version_ |
1803575339225448448 |
| fullrecord_marcxml |
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000naa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">SPR052994791</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20230906064737.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">230906s2023 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.1007/s13246-023-01279-8</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)SPR052994791</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(SPR)s13246-023-01279-8-e</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Kennedy, Andrew C.</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="0">(orcid)0000-0003-3053-6052</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Being certain about uncertainties: a robust evaluation method for high-dose-rate prostate brachytherapy treatment plans including the combination of uncertainties</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2023</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Text</subfield><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Computermedien</subfield><subfield code="b">c</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Online-Ressource</subfield><subfield code="b">cr</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="500" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">© The Author(s) 2023</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Abstract In high-dose-rate (HDR) prostate brachytherapy the combined effect of uncertainties cause a range of possible dose distributions deviating from the nominal plan, and which are not considered during treatment plan evaluation. This could lead to dosimetric misses for critical structures and overdosing of organs at risk. A robust evaluation method to assess the combination of uncertainties during plan evaluation is presented and demonstrated on one HDR prostate ultrasound treatment plan retrospectively. A range of uncertainty scenarios are simulated by changing six parameters in the nominal plan and calculating the corresponding dose distribution. Two methods are employed to change the parameters, a probabilistic approach using random number sampling to evaluate the likelihood of variation in dose distributions, and a combination of the most extreme possible values to access the worst-case dosimetric outcomes. One thousand probabilistic scenarios were run on the single treatment plan with 43.2% of scenarios passing seven of the eight clinical objectives. The prostate D90 had a standard deviation of 4.4%, with the worst case decreasing the dose by up to 27.2%. The urethra D10 was up to 29.3% higher than planned in the worst case. All DVH metrics in the probabilistic scenarios were found to be within acceptable clinical constraints for the plan under statistical tests for significance. The clinical significance of the results from the robust evaluation method presented on any individual treatment plan needs to be compared in the context of a historical data set that contains patient outcomes with robustness analysis data to ascertain a baseline acceptance.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Robust evaluation</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Brachytherapy</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Radiotherapy planning</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Uncertainty</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Douglass, Michael J. J.</subfield><subfield code="0">(orcid)0000-0002-3862-2644</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Santos, Alexandre M. C.</subfield><subfield code="0">(orcid)0000-0001-8482-6982</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">Enthalten in</subfield><subfield code="t">Australasian physical & engineering sciences in medicine</subfield><subfield code="d">Cham : Springer, 2001</subfield><subfield code="g">46(2023), 3 vom: 30. Mai, Seite 1115-1130</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)320430707</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-600)2003728-4</subfield><subfield code="x">1879-5447</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:46</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2023</subfield><subfield code="g">number:3</subfield><subfield code="g">day:30</subfield><subfield code="g">month:05</subfield><subfield code="g">pages:1115-1130</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s13246-023-01279-8</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield><subfield code="3">Volltext</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_SPRINGER</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_120</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_150</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2188</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2336</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2472</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2522</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4246</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">46</subfield><subfield code="j">2023</subfield><subfield code="e">3</subfield><subfield code="b">30</subfield><subfield code="c">05</subfield><subfield code="h">1115-1130</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
|
| score |
7.3991537 |