Inverse treatment planning for spinal robotic radiosurgery: an international multi-institutional benchmark trial

Abstract

Stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) is the accurate, conformal delivery of high-dose radiation to well-defined targets while minimizing normal structure doses via steep dose gradients. While inverse treatment planning (ITP) with computerized optimization algorithms are routine, many aspects of the planning process remain user-dependent. We performed an international, multi-institutional benchmark trial to study planning variability and to analyze preferable ITP practice for spinal robotic radiosurgery. 10 SRS treatment plans were generated for a complex-shaped spinal metastasis with 21 Gy in 3 fractions and tight constraints for spinal cord (V14Gy < 2 cc, V18Gy < 0.1 cc) and target (coverage > 95%). The resulting plans were rated on a scale from 1 to 4 (excellent-poor) in five categories (constraint compliance, optimization goals, low-dose regions, ITP complexity, and clinical acceptability) by a blinded review panel. Additionally, the plans were mathemati-cally rated based on plan indices (critical structure and target doses, conformity, monitor units, normal tissue complication probability, and treatment time) and compared to the human rankings. The treatment plans and the reviewers' rankings varied substantially among the participating centers. The average mean overall rank was 2.4 (1.2-4.0) and 8/10 plans were rated excellent in at least one category by at least one reviewer. The mathematical rankings agreed with the mean overall human rankings in 9/10 cases pointing toward the possibility for sole mathematical plan quality comparison. The final rankings revealed that a plan with a well-balanced trade-off among all planning objectives was preferred for treatment by most par-ticipants, reviewers, and the mathematical ranking system. Furthermore, this plan was generated with simple planning techniques. Our multi-institutional planning study found wide variability in ITP approaches for spinal robotic radiosurgery. The participants', reviewers', and mathematical match on preferable treatment plans and ITP techniques indicate that agreement on treatment planning and plan quality can be reached for spinal robotic radiosurgery.

Figure 1

Axial, sagittal, and coronal view of the planning target volume (red), spinal cord (yellow), and kidneys (purple) for the spinal benchmark case.

Figure 2

Examples of final treatment plans: (a) Case 2 with good conformity, but low coverage (clinically acceptable); (b) Case 4 with good conformity, but high spinal cord dose (clinically not acceptable); (c) Case 8 with low monitor units and treatment time, but high spinal cord dose and low conformity;(d) Case 10 with balanced trade‐off between spinal cord doses, coverage, conformity, and monitor units.