Clinical utility of automatic treatment planning for proton therapy of head-and-neck cancer patients using JulianA

Abstract

Background: Automatic treatment planning promises many benefits for both research and clinical environments. For clinics, autoplanning promises to reduce planning time and achieve more comparable treatment plans and thereby reduce inter-planner variability. Further, it can assist clinicians in quality assurance by providing a minimum plan quality standard. Finally, autoplanning is an essential part of patient selection, which is crucial for the advancement of proton therapy itself. Methods: A retrospective planning study using a cohort of 17 head-and-neck cancer patients treated at our institute. The clinically accepted plans created by dosimetrists (d-plans) were compared to automatically generated JulianA plans (j-plans). Both methods used the same beam arrangement. The plans were analysed by two expert reviewers without knowing how each plan was created. They assessed the plan quality and stated a preference. Results: All of the j-plans were deemed rather or clearly acceptable, resulting in a higher acceptability than the d-plans. The j-plan was considered superior in 14 (82.4%) cases, of equal quality for 1 (5.9%) and inferior to the d-plan for only 2 (11.8%) of the cases. The reviewers concluded that JulianA achieves more conformal dose distributions for the 15 (88.2%) cases where the j-plans were at least as good as the d-plans. Conclusions: The results show that the JulianA is ready to be used as a clinical quality assurance tool and research platform at our institute. While these results are encouraging, further research is needed to reduce the number of spots further and introduce robustness considerations into the optimisation algorithm in order to employ it on a daily basis for patient treatment.