Affiliation:
1. Department of Radiation Medicine Guangdong Provincial Key Laboratory of Tropical Disease Research, NMPA Key Laboratory for Safety Evaluation of Cosmetics School of Public Health Southern Medical University Guangzhou Guangdong China
2. Department of Radiation Oncology Nanfang Hospital Southern Medical University Guangzhou Guangdong China
3. Department of Clinical Engineer Nanfang Hospital Southern Medical University Guangzhou Guangdong China
Abstract
AbstractBackgroundQuality assurance (QA) of patient‐specific treatment plans for intensity‐modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) and volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) necessitates prior validation. However, the standard methodology exhibits deficiencies and lacks sensitivity in the analysis of positional dose distribution data, leading to difficulties in accurately identifying reasons for plan verification failure. This issue complicates and impedes the efficiency of QA tasks.PurposeThe primary aim of this research is to utilize deep learning algorithms for the extraction of 3D dose distribution maps and the creation of a predictive model for error classification across multiple machine models, treatment methodologies, and tumor locations.MethodWe devised five categories of validation plans (normal, gantry error, collimator error, couch error, and dose error), conforming to tolerance limits of different accuracy levels and employing 3D dose distribution data from a sample of 94 tumor patients. A CNN model was then constructed to predict the diverse error types, with predictions compared against the gamma pass rate (GPR) standard employing distinct thresholds (3%, 3 mm; 3%, 2 mm; 2%, 2 mm) to evaluate the model's performance. Furthermore, we appraised the model's robustness by assessing its functionality across diverse accelerators.ResultsThe accuracy, precision, recall, and F1 scores of CNN model performance were 0.907, 0.925, 0.907, and 0.908, respectively. Meanwhile, the performance on another device is 0.900, 0.918, 0.900, and 0.898. In addition, compared to the GPR method, the CNN model achieved better results in predicting different types of errors.ConclusionWhen juxtaposed with the GPR methodology, the CNN model exhibits superior predictive capability for classification in the validation of the radiation therapy plan on different devices. By using this model, the plan validation failures can be detected more rapidly and efficiently, minimizing the time required for QA tasks and serving as a valuable adjunct to overcome the constraints of the GPR method.
Funder
National Natural Science Foundation of China