Room: Exhibit Hall
Purpose: To combine both benefits of AutoPlanning (AP) and multicriteria optimization (MCO) (APMCO) for achieving an individual VMAT plan according to the patient-specific tradeoff between conflicting priorities.
Methods: 20 NPC patients with various stages were enrolled in this study. General MCO and APMCO plans were generated for each patient on the treatment planning systems and the differences between two planning schemes were evaluated and compared.
Results: All plans were capable of achieving the prescription requirement. The planning target volumes coverage and conformation number were remarkably similar between general MCO and APMCO plans. No statistically significant dosimetric difference was observed in most of organ at risk sparing, except for glottic larynx and pharyngeal constrictor muscles. The average mean dose to these organs was reduced by 8.50% and 7.93% (p=0.00 and 0.00), respectively. An average of 10 hours was found for the APMCO technique although longer than general MCO one.
Conclusion: The potential of the APMCO strategy is best realized with a clinical implementation that exploits that individual generation of Pareto surface representations without manual interaction and assists the physician to ensure navigation in a timely and efficient manner and without solving the computationally expensive problem.
Not Applicable / None Entered.