Main Session
Sep 29
PQA 05 - Physics

3130 - Quantum-Inspired Optimization for Beam Angle Selection in Proton Therapy

12:30pm - 01:45pm ET
Poster Hall - Exhibit Hall A
Screen: 30
POSTER

Presenter(s)

Nimita Shinde, PhD Headshot
Nimita Shinde, PhD - University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center at Dallas, Dallas, TX

N. Shinde1, Y. Zhu2, H. Shen3, and H. Gao4; 1University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX, 2Harbin Insititute of Technology, Harbin, China, 3University of Michigan-Shanghai Jiao Tong University Joint Institute, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai, China, 4Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX

Purpose/Objective(s): Beam angle optimization (BAO) plays a pivotal role in radiation therapy (RT) treatment planning, especially in proton therapy, where minor changes in beam orientation can significantly influence plan quality. BAO can be formulated as a mixed-integer programming (MIP) problem and is computationally challenging (NP-hard) due to the combinatorial explosion of the search space. Traditional optimization techniques often struggle with scalability and computational burden. In this study, we propose QC-BAO, a quantum-inspired optimization framework designed to efficiently solve the MIP formulation of BAO.

Materials/Methods: The BAO problem is formulated as an MIP model that includes binary decision variables for beam angle selection and continuous variables for proton spot intensity optimization. The proposed QC-BAO framework integrates iterative convex relaxation with an alternating direction method of multipliers (ADMM) scheme. A quantum-inspired optimization strategy is employed to address the binary decision subproblem, while classical optimization methods are used to optimize the continuous spot intensity variables.

Results: Computational evaluations were performed on clinical cases to compare QC-BAO with institute-standard (IS) beam configurations and two heuristic approaches: GS-BAO and AG-BAO [1]. QC-BAO achieved superior or comparable treatment plan quality relative to clinical and heuristic methods. Specifically, QC-BAO consistently improved the conformity index (CI) for target coverage while reducing both mean and maximum doses to organs-at-risk (OARs). For example, in the lung case, QC-BAO obtained a CI of 0.89, compared to 0.89 (IS), 0.76 (GS-BAO), and 0.86 (AG-BAO), while reducing the mean lung dose to 2.78 Gy versus 3.36 Gy (IS), 4.80 Gy (GS-BAO), and 3.03 Gy (AG-BAO). Furthermore, QC-BAO yielded the lowest objective function values across all evaluated cases.

Conclusion: The findings highlight the promise of quantum-inspired optimization techniques for improving BAO in proton therapy. QC-BAO enhances both plan quality and optimization performance, supporting the potential clinical adoption of quantum-accelerated methodologies in RT treatment planning.

References:

[1] Shen H, Zhang G, Lin Y, Rotondo RL, Long Y, Gao H. Beam angle optimization for proton therapy via group-sparsity based angle generation method. Medical Physics. 2023;50(6):3258-3273. doi:https://doi.org/10.1002/mp.16392

Table 1: Comparison of objective function values and runtimes. The best (lowest) objective values are highlighted in bold.

Test case

Quantity

IS

GS-BAO

AG-BAO

Classical MIP

QC-BAO

HN

Time (secs)

40.73

289.35

8035.57

159.13

149.2±1.31

Obj fn val

4.42

3.94

3.44

3.93

3.39±0.08

Abdomen

Time (secs)

57.00

533.77

9610.17

484.69

656.89±6.58

Obj fn val

0.33

0.16

0.14

0.20

0.14±0.01

Lung

Time (secs)

140.98

599.48

14657.95

349.07

620.74±2.11

Obj fn val

7.50

12.53

7.22

7.60

6.81±0.14