A comparison of mixed integer programming and fast simulated annealing for optimizing beam weights in radiation therapy

Mark Langer, S. Morrill, R. Brown, O. Lee, R. Lane

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

38 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Two competing methods for assigning intensities to radiation treatment beams were tested. One method was derived from mixed integer programming and the other was based on simulated annealing. The methods faced a common objective and identical constraints. The goal was to maximize the minimum tumor dose while keeping the dose in required fractions of normal organ volumes below a threshold for damage. The minimum tumor doses of the two methods were compared when all the dose-volume constraints were satisfied. A mixed integer linear program gave a minimum tumor dose that was at least 1.8 Gy higher than that given by simulated annealing in 7 of 19 trials. The difference was ≥5.4 Gy in 4 of 19 trials. In no case was the mixed integer solution one fraction size (1.8 Gy) worse than that of simulated annealing. The better solution provided by the mixed integer program allows tumor dose to increase without violating the dose-volume limits of normal tissues.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)957-964
Number of pages8
JournalMedical Physics
Volume23
Issue number6
DOIs
StatePublished - Jun 1996
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Radiotherapy
Weights and Measures
Neoplasms
Organ Size
Radiation
Therapeutics

Keywords

  • dose-volume limits
  • mixed integer programming
  • optimization
  • radiation therapy planning
  • simulated annealing

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Biophysics

Cite this

A comparison of mixed integer programming and fast simulated annealing for optimizing beam weights in radiation therapy. / Langer, Mark; Morrill, S.; Brown, R.; Lee, O.; Lane, R.

In: Medical Physics, Vol. 23, No. 6, 06.1996, p. 957-964.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{39e0938506994d91ab899e75ecdeb335,
title = "A comparison of mixed integer programming and fast simulated annealing for optimizing beam weights in radiation therapy",
abstract = "Two competing methods for assigning intensities to radiation treatment beams were tested. One method was derived from mixed integer programming and the other was based on simulated annealing. The methods faced a common objective and identical constraints. The goal was to maximize the minimum tumor dose while keeping the dose in required fractions of normal organ volumes below a threshold for damage. The minimum tumor doses of the two methods were compared when all the dose-volume constraints were satisfied. A mixed integer linear program gave a minimum tumor dose that was at least 1.8 Gy higher than that given by simulated annealing in 7 of 19 trials. The difference was ≥5.4 Gy in 4 of 19 trials. In no case was the mixed integer solution one fraction size (1.8 Gy) worse than that of simulated annealing. The better solution provided by the mixed integer program allows tumor dose to increase without violating the dose-volume limits of normal tissues.",
keywords = "dose-volume limits, mixed integer programming, optimization, radiation therapy planning, simulated annealing",
author = "Mark Langer and S. Morrill and R. Brown and O. Lee and R. Lane",
year = "1996",
month = "6",
doi = "10.1118/1.597857",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "23",
pages = "957--964",
journal = "Medical Physics",
issn = "0094-2405",
publisher = "AAPM - American Association of Physicists in Medicine",
number = "6",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - A comparison of mixed integer programming and fast simulated annealing for optimizing beam weights in radiation therapy

AU - Langer, Mark

AU - Morrill, S.

AU - Brown, R.

AU - Lee, O.

AU - Lane, R.

PY - 1996/6

Y1 - 1996/6

N2 - Two competing methods for assigning intensities to radiation treatment beams were tested. One method was derived from mixed integer programming and the other was based on simulated annealing. The methods faced a common objective and identical constraints. The goal was to maximize the minimum tumor dose while keeping the dose in required fractions of normal organ volumes below a threshold for damage. The minimum tumor doses of the two methods were compared when all the dose-volume constraints were satisfied. A mixed integer linear program gave a minimum tumor dose that was at least 1.8 Gy higher than that given by simulated annealing in 7 of 19 trials. The difference was ≥5.4 Gy in 4 of 19 trials. In no case was the mixed integer solution one fraction size (1.8 Gy) worse than that of simulated annealing. The better solution provided by the mixed integer program allows tumor dose to increase without violating the dose-volume limits of normal tissues.

AB - Two competing methods for assigning intensities to radiation treatment beams were tested. One method was derived from mixed integer programming and the other was based on simulated annealing. The methods faced a common objective and identical constraints. The goal was to maximize the minimum tumor dose while keeping the dose in required fractions of normal organ volumes below a threshold for damage. The minimum tumor doses of the two methods were compared when all the dose-volume constraints were satisfied. A mixed integer linear program gave a minimum tumor dose that was at least 1.8 Gy higher than that given by simulated annealing in 7 of 19 trials. The difference was ≥5.4 Gy in 4 of 19 trials. In no case was the mixed integer solution one fraction size (1.8 Gy) worse than that of simulated annealing. The better solution provided by the mixed integer program allows tumor dose to increase without violating the dose-volume limits of normal tissues.

KW - dose-volume limits

KW - mixed integer programming

KW - optimization

KW - radiation therapy planning

KW - simulated annealing

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0029899798&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0029899798&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1118/1.597857

DO - 10.1118/1.597857

M3 - Article

C2 - 8798166

AN - SCOPUS:0029899798

VL - 23

SP - 957

EP - 964

JO - Medical Physics

JF - Medical Physics

SN - 0094-2405

IS - 6

ER -