Abstract:Purpose: Prior AI-based dose prediction studies in photon and proton therapy often neglect underlying physics, limiting their generalizability to handle outlier clinical cases, especially for pencil beam scanning proton therapy (PBSPT). Our aim is to design a physics-aware and generalizable AI-based PBSPT dose prediction method that has the underlying physics considered to achieve high generalizability to properly handle the outlier clinical cases. Methods and Materials: This study analyzed PBSPT plans of 103 prostate and 78 lung cancer patients from our institution,with each case comprising CT images, structure sets, and plan doses from our Monte-Carlo dose engine (serving as the ground truth). Three methods were evaluated in the ablation study: the ROI-based method, the beam mask and sliding window method, and the noisy probing dose method. Twelve cases with uncommon beam angles or prescription doses tested the methods' generalizability to rare treatment planning scenarios. Performance evaluation used DVH indices, 3D Gamma passing rates (3%/2mm/10%), and dice coefficients for dose agreement. Results: The noisy probing dose method showed improved agreement of DVH indices, 3D Gamma passing rates, and dice coefficients compared to the conventional methods for the testing cases. The noisy probing dose method showed better generalizability in the 6 outlier cases than the ROI-based and beam mask-based methods with 3D Gamma passing rates (for prostate cancer, targets: 89.32%$\pm$1.45% vs. 93.48%$\pm$1.51% vs. 96.79%$\pm$0.83%, OARs: 85.87%$\pm$1.73% vs. 91.15%$\pm$1.13% vs. 94.29%$\pm$1.01%). The dose predictions were completed within 0.3 seconds. Conclusions: We've devised a novel noisy probing dose method for PBSPT dose prediction in prostate and lung cancer patients. With more physics included, it enhances the generalizability of dose prediction in handling outlier clinical cases.
Abstract:Purpose: To introduce the concept of using large language models (LLMs) to re-label structure names in accordance with the American Association of Physicists in Medicine (AAPM) Task Group (TG)-263 standard, and to establish a benchmark for future studies to reference. Methods and Materials: The Generative Pre-trained Transformer (GPT)-4 application programming interface (API) was implemented as a Digital Imaging and Communications in Medicine (DICOM) storage server, which upon receiving a structure set DICOM file, prompts GPT-4 to re-label the structure names of both target volumes and normal tissues according to the AAPM TG-263. Three disease sites, prostate, head and neck, and thorax were selected for evaluation. For each disease site category, 150 patients were randomly selected for manually tuning the instructions prompt (in batches of 50) and 50 patients were randomly selected for evaluation. Structure names that were considered were those that were most likely to be relevant for studies utilizing structure contours for many patients. Results: The overall re-labeling accuracy of both target volumes and normal tissues for prostate, head and neck, and thorax cases was 96.0%, 98.5%, and 96.9% respectively. Re-labeling of target volumes was less accurate on average except for prostate - 100%, 93.1%, and 91.1% respectively. Conclusions: Given the accuracy of GPT-4 in re-labeling structure names of both target volumes and normal tissues as presented in this work, LLMs are poised to be the preferred method for standardizing structure names in radiation oncology, especially considering the rapid advancements in LLM capabilities that are likely to continue.