Purpose To test if a RapidPlan DVH estimation model and its training plans can be improved interactively through a closed‐loop evolution process. Methods and materials Eighty‐one manual plans (P 0 ) that were used to configure an initial rectal RapidPlan model (M 0 ) were reoptimized using M 0 (closed‐loop), yielding 81 P 1 plans. The 75 improved P 1 (P 1+ ) and the remaining 6 P 0 were used to configure model M 1 . The 81 training plans were reoptimized again using M 1 , producing 23 P 2 plans that were superior to both their P 0 and P 1 forms (P 2+ ). Hence, the knowledge base of model M 2 composed of 6 P 0 , 52 P 1+ , and 23 P 2+ . Models were tested dosimetrically on 30 VMAT validation cases (P v ) that were not used for training, yielding P v (M 0 ), P v (M 1 ), and P v (M 2 ) respectively. The 30 P v were also optimized by M 2_new as trained by the library of M 2 and 30 P v (M 0 ). Results Based on comparable target dose coverage, the first closed‐loop reoptimization significantly ( P < 0.01) reduced the 81 training plans’ mean dose to femoral head, urinary bladder, and small bowel by 2.65 Gy/15.63%, 2.06 Gy/8.11%, and 1.47 Gy/6.31% respectively, which were further reduced significantly ( P < 0.01) in the second closed‐loop reoptimization by 0.04 Gy/0.28%, 0.18 Gy/0.77%, 0.22 Gy/1.01% respectively. However, open‐loop VMAT validations displayed more complex and intertwined plan quality changes: mean dose to urinary bladder and small bowel decreased monotonically using M 1 (by 0.34 Gy/1.47%, 0.25 Gy/1.13%) and M 2 (by 0.36 Gy/1.56%, 0.30 Gy/1.36%) than using M 0 . However, mean dose to femoral head increased by 0.81 Gy/6.64% (M 1 ) and 0.91 Gy/7.46% (M 2 ) than using M 0 . The overfitting problem was relieved by applying model M 2_new . Conclusions The RapidPlan model and its constituent plans can improve each other interactively through a closed‐loop evolution process. Incorporating new patients into the original training library can improve the RapidPlan model and the upcoming plans interactively.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Wang et al. (2018) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 4 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: