$$\rightleftharpoonup{xx}$$
$$\longleftharp{xx}$$,
$$\longrightharp{xx}$$,
An example Treatment Plan Order created for a head/neck case is shown in Figure 3. Figure 4 shows the dose distribution for an automatically generated VMAT plan for a patient with a base of tongue squamous cell carcinoma7,10. A review by an attending radiation oncologist confirmed that this plan was acceptable for treatment. On average the head/neck VMAT plans take 46 minutes for a 2-arc plan, and we expect to bring this down to less than 30 minutes with a faster dose calculation algorithm and a distributed architecture for the automated contouring step.
Figure 5 shows automatically generated field apertures for a 4-field box treatment for a patient with cervical cancer. Review by an experienced radiation oncologist confirmed the clinical appropriateness of 90-96% of these fields7,11. On average, these plans took 21 minutes.
Once the treatment plan is ready, documentation is automatically created for review by radiation oncologists, technical staff, medical physicists, and radiographers. We have designed an illustrated procedure that leads the user through checks of marked isocenter and body contour identification, consistency of patient orientation/laterality/treatment site, field apertures (for a 4-field box example), and presence of image or dose calculation artifacts12. Each step of the procedure has simple instructions and library examples to which the user can refer. An example of the instructions is shown in Figure 6.
Although the need for physics and radiation oncologist review is well documented, the role of additional staff has not been evaluated. We assessed this by creating plan documents for 16 cervical cancer patients, 12 of which included intentional errors: incorrect isocenter (3 cases), incorrect body contour (3 cases), incorrect CT couch removal (1 case), incorrect field apertures (5 cases), incorrect dose calculation (1 case), and incorrect number of fields (1 case). These plans were then reviewed by 4 volunteers with minimal experience in radiotherapy and no experience in checking plans. The final version of the plan documentation required ~30 minutes of training. On average, plan checks required 8 minutes per plan. The testers were able to find all errors in the body contours, isocenter (based on fiducial markers) and dose calculation artifacts. They were not able to reliably identify small (but clinically important) errors in the field apertures. They were also not able to identify the case that had only 3 fields instead of 4 - an example of an unanticipated error that is not examined with a specific check-list item. In summary, these results indicate that initial checking of some vital features of radiotherapy plans created by automated processes may be assigned to staff with limited radiotherapy experience, allowing any need for remedial action to be identified before physician review. These staff will not, however, find all errors and additional checks by qualified staff (radiation oncologists and physicists) are still a vital part of the radiotherapy planning workflow.

Figure 1. Schematic of the automated treatment planning process. The human icons show the points in the workflow where human intervention is necessary. All other steps are automated. Each automated step in the planning process has a primary algorithm, which is used to create the actual plan, and a secondary algorithm that is used to verify the result of the primary algorithm. If any of the verification checks fail (i.e. fall outside a predetermined criteria), or if the radiation oncologist does not approve the plan, then a manual planning process becomes necessary. Additional quality procedures that are important to the treatment planning process, specifically routine checks by a qualified medical physicist, are not shown here. Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.

Figure 2. Schematic of the RPA from the users' point of view. The radiation oncologist is responsible for completing and approving the Physician's Plan Order. After taking the simulation image of the patient, this is approved by the radiographer or other appropriate staff present. The RPA then automatically starts and creates the radiotherapy treatment plan. The goal of this work is to create each radiotherapy plan, including documentation, within 30 minutes. Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.

Figure 3 An example Treatment Plan Order for a head/neck VMAT plan. The Plan Order shows the patient identifiers (name, MRN, etc.), some general information about the patient, and some treatment specific information. This includes the dose prescription, target coverage and normal tissue constraints.

Figure 4. An example automatically generated head/neck VMAT plan. The shaded regions show the Planning Target Volumes - red, blue and yellow correspond to PTV1 PTV2, and PTV3, respectively. The lines show the isodose distribution of the automatically generated plan.

Figure 5. An example of automatically generated apertures for a 4-field box cervical cancer treatment. AP, PA, left lateral and right lateral fields are shown.

Figure 6. Example of the illustrated instructions designed to aid chart review for radiotherapy plans automatically generated using the RPA. This example page is for the review of the automatically generated body contour. It includes the results of the primary algorithm, some questions for the user, and a library case for the user to review