4.6 Article

Mathematical optimization of high dose-rate brachytherapy-derivation of a linear penalty model from a dose-volume model

Journal

PHYSICS IN MEDICINE AND BIOLOGY
Volume 63, Issue 6, Pages -

Publisher

IOP PUBLISHING LTD
DOI: 10.1088/1361-6560/aaab83

Keywords

high dose-rate brachytherapy; mathematical optimization; linear penalty model; dose-volume histogram; dwell time optimization; linear programming; dosimetric index

Funding

  1. Swedish Research Council [VR-NT 2015-04543]
  2. Swedish Cancer Foundation [CAN 2015/618]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

High dose-rate brachytherapy is a method for cancer treatment where the radiation source is placed within the body, inside or close to a tumour. For dose planning, mathematical optimization techniques are being used in practice and the most common approach is to use a linear model which penalizes deviations from specified dose limits for the tumour and for nearby organs. This linear penalty model is easy to solve, but its weakness lies in the poor correlation of its objective value and the dose-volume objectives that are used clinically to evaluate dose distributions. Furthermore, the model contains parameters that have no clear clinical interpretation. Another approach for dose planning is to solve mixed-integer optimization models with explicit dose-volume constraints which include parameters that directly correspond to dose-volume objectives, and which are therefore tangible. The two mentioned models take the overall goals for dose planning into account in fundamentally different ways. We show that there is, however, a mathematical relationship between them by deriving a linear penalty model from a dose-volume model. This relationship has not been established before and improves the understanding of the linear penalty model. In particular, the parameters of the linear penalty model can be interpreted as dual variables in the dose-volume model.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available