Reported plan quality improvements with autoplanning of radiotherapy of the prostate and seminal vesicles are poor. A system for automated multi-criterial planning has been validated for this treatment in a large international multi-center study. The system is configured with training plans using a mechanism that strives for quality improvements relative to those plans. Each of the four participating centers included thirty manually generated clinical Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy prostate plans (manVMAT). Ten plans were used for autoplanning training. The other twenty were compared with an automatically generated plan (autoVMAT). Plan evaluations considered dosimetric plan parameters and blinded side-by-side plan comparisons by clinicians. With equivalent Planning Target Volume (PTV) V95%, D2%, D98%, and dose homogeneity autoVMAT was overall superior for rectum with median differences of 3.4 Gy (p < 0.001) in Dmean, 4.0% (p < 0.001) in V60Gy, and 1.5% (p = 0.001) in V75Gy, and for bladder Dmean (0.9 Gy, p < 0.001). Also the clinicians' plan comparisons pointed at an overall preference for autoVMAT. Advantages of autoVMAT were highly treatment center- and patient-specific with overall ranges for differences in rectum Dmean and V60Gy of [-4,12] Gy and [-2,15]%, respectively. Observed advantages of autoplanning were clinically relevant and larger than reported in the literature. The latter is likely related to the multi-criterial nature of the applied autoplanning algorithm, with for each center a dedicated configuration that aims at plan improvements relative to its (clinical) training plans. Large variations among patients in differences between manVMAT and autoVMAT point at inconsistencies in manual planning.

Objectives:To evaluate the effective dose and image quality of horizontal CBCT in comparison with multislice spiral CT (MSCT) in scans of the head, cervical spine, ear and dental arches.Methods:A head and neck Alderson-Rando® phantom (The Phantom Laboratory, Salem, NY) equipped with 74 thermoluminescence dosemeters was exposed according to 5 different scans in CBCT and 4 different scans in MSCT. Spatial and contrast resolutions, in terms of modulation transfer function and contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR), were measured to obtain a quantitative assessment of image quality.Results:The CBCT effective dose was 248, 249, 361, 565 and 688 µSv in the cervical spine, head, ear, dental arches with small field of view and dental arches with medium field of view, respectively. The MSCT effective dose was 3409, 1892, 660 and 812 µSv in the cervical spine, head, ear and dental arches, respectively. The modulation transfer function was 0.895 vs 0.347, 0.895 vs 0.275, 0.875 vs 0.342 and 0.961 vs 0.352 for CBCT vs MSCT in ...