ESTRO 2022 - Abstract Book

S577

Abstract book

ESTRO 2022

Results For the ten patients, a total of 154 adaptive MRgRT fractions were available for evaluation. On average (range) method 1 fulfilled 73.8% (67.7-79.3%) of the dosimetric criteria (cf. figure 1). For method 2, the mean relative adherence to the dosimetric criteria was 74.1% (69.2-79.3%). The two methods yielded no significant differences.

Conclusion This study compared automatic online plan optimization with a set of baseline plan constraints to a complete re- optimization. Regarding dosimetric plan criteria, no significant differences between the two approaches were found. Therefore, daily plan adaptation with a set of pre-defined planning constraints does not compromise plan quality even though anatomical variations may occur.

Mini-Oral: 16: RTT treatment planning, OAR & target definitions

MO-0643 PlanQA: a tool for treatment planning education through quantitative and qualitative analysis

A. Vaniqui 1 , C. Meevisser-Dijcks 1 , P. Simons 1 , B. Hanbeukers 1 , M. de Rooy 1 , R. Canters 1 , W. van Elmpt 1

1 Department of Radiation Oncology (MAASTRO), GROW School for Oncology, Maastricht University Medical Centre+, Maastricht, The Netherlands

Purpose or Objective