Machine learning models to predict the delivered positions of Elekta multileaf collimator leaves for volumetric modulated arc therapy. Issue 8 (7th June 2022)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Sivabhaskar, Sruthi; Li, Ruiqi; Roy, Arkajyoti; Kirby, Neil; Fakhreddine, Mohamad; Papanikolaou, Nikos
• Is Part Of: Journal of applied clinical medical physics. Volume 23:Issue 8(2022)
• Page Start: n/a
• Page End: n/a
• Publication Date: 2022-06-07
• Subjects: Elekta -- log files -- machine learning -- MLC positional deviations -- VMAT; Medical physics -- Periodicals; Clinical medicine -- Periodicals; Health Physics; Clinical Medicine; Electronic journals; Periodicals; Periodicals; Fulltext; Internet Resources; 610.153
• DOI: 10.1002/acm2.13667
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1526-9914

Abstract

Abstract: Purpose: Accurate positioning of multileaf collimator (MLC) leaves during volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) is essential for accurate treatment delivery. We developed a linear regression, support vector machine, random forest, extreme gradient boosting (XGBoost), and an artificial neural network (ANN) for predicting the delivered leaf positions for VMAT plans. Methods: For this study, 160 MLC log files from 80 VMAT plans were obtained from a single institution treated on 3 Elekta Versa HD linear accelerators. The gravity vector, X 1 and X 2 jaw positions, leaf gap, leaf position, leaf velocity, and leaf acceleration were extracted and used as model inputs. The models were trained using 70% of the log files and tested on the remaining 30%. Mean absolute error (MAE), root mean square error (RMSE), the coefficient of determination R 2, and fitted line plots showing the relationship between delivered and predicted leaf positions were used to evaluate model performance. Results: The models achieved the following errors: linear regression (MAE = 0.158 mm, RMSE = 0.225 mm), support vector machine (MAE = 0.141 mm, RMSE = 0.199 mm), random forest (MAE = 0.161 mm, RMSE = 0.229 mm), XGBoost (MAE = 0.185 mm, RMSE = 0.273 mm), and ANN (MAE = 0.361 mm, RMSE = 0.521 mm). A significant correlation between a plan's gamma passing rate (GPR) and the prediction errors of linear regression, support vector machine, and random forest is seen ( p < 0.045). Conclusions: We examined various models to predict the delivered MLC positions for VMAT plans treated with Elekta linacs. Linear regression, support vector machine, random forest, and XGBoost achieved lower errors than ANN. Models that can accurately predict the individual leaf positions during treatment can help identify leaves that are deviating from the planned position, which can improve a plan's GPR.