Radiation Therapy Planning via Biology-Based Tumor Segmentation

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Current cancer diagnosis and radiation therapy planning face challenges due to the inability of existing PET agents like 18F-FDG to accurately visualize brain tumors and differentiate between tumor cells and inflammation, leading to increased costs and uncertainty in radiation dose distribution, which can result in ineffective treatment and higher patient mortality.

Innovation Solution

An improved radiation therapy planning procedure that involves specifying the absolute grade of cell degeneracy through in-vitro tests, biology-based segmentation of tumor areas, and the use of targeted imaging agents, such as 18F-FMISO-PET, to optimize radiation therapy by determining the absolute radiation dose based on individual tumor characteristics.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Measurement precision

If 18F-FDG PET imaging is used for cancer diagnosis, then glucose metabolism can be visualized, but brain tumors cannot be differentiated from normal tissue due to high normal cell uptake

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvetumor visualization accuracyVSAvoidtumor detection reliability
Core Design Contradiction:
Measurement precisionVSReliability

Solution Approach 1:

The patent applies local quality by selecting different PET imaging agents based on the specific tumor type and location. For brain tumors, alternative agents that do not accumulate in normal brain tissue are chosen, while 18F-FDG remains suitable for other cancer types. This localized adaptation of imaging methodology resolves the contradiction between visualization capability and tissue differentiation.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #3Local quality

2Measurement precision

If highly specific targeted imaging agents are used, then tumor differentiation accuracy improves, but diagnostic costs increase significantly to US $2.000 per patient

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvetumor cell differentiation accuracyVSAvoiddiagnostic cost
Core Design Contradiction:
Measurement precisionVSQuantity of substance

Solution Approach 1:

The patent implements parameter changes by dynamically selecting imaging agents based on tumor characteristics, patient-specific factors, and cost considerations. The system adjusts the choice of radiotracer (e.g., 18F-FDG, 11C-choline, 18F-FLT) according to tumor type, location, and suspected aggressiveness, thereby optimizing the balance between diagnostic precision and cost effectiveness.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

Solution Approach 2:

The patent applies segmentation by dividing tumor diagnosis into distinct categories (e.g., brain tumors vs. other cancers, aggressive vs. non-aggressive tumors) and assigning appropriate imaging agents to each category. This segmented approach allows standard 18F-FDG to be used for common cancers while reserving specialized agents for specific indications, thus controlling overall diagnostic costs.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

3Ease of operation

If standard uniform radiation dose is applied to all tumor areas, then treatment simplicity is maintained, but heterogeneous tumor cell degeneracy leads to treatment failure

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveradiation therapy simplicityVSAvoidtreatment effectiveness
Core Design Contradiction:
Ease of operationVSReliability

Solution Approach 1:

The patent applies local quality in radiation therapy by segmenting the tumor into sub-regions with different radiation sensitivities based on imaging data. Areas with high cell degeneracy receive lower doses while hypoxic or aggressive regions receive higher doses. This localized dose adaptation maintains treatment simplicity through automated segmentation while significantly improving treatment effectiveness.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #3Local quality

Solution Approach 2:

The patent implements feedback by using imaging data (PET, MRI, CT) to continuously monitor tumor characteristics and adjust radiation dose distribution accordingly. The imaging results provide feedback on tumor heterogeneity, which feeds back into the treatment planning system to optimize dose delivery, thereby resolving the contradiction between treatment simplicity and effectiveness.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #23Feedback

4Adaptability or versatility

If trial and error approach is used to select imaging procedures, then patient candidacy can be assessed, but diagnostic time is wasted with fatal consequences

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveimaging procedure selection flexibilityVSAvoiddiagnostic time
Core Design Contradiction:
Adaptability or versatilityVSLoss of time

Solution Approach 1:

The patent applies preliminary action by pre-establishing a decision framework that guides imaging agent selection based on tumor type, location, and suspected characteristics. This preliminary guidance system eliminates the need for trial-and-error approaches by providing advance recommendations on which imaging agents to use, thereby dramatically reducing diagnostic time while maintaining flexibility.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

Solution Approach 2:

The patent implements feedback by using initial imaging results to rapidly guide subsequent imaging decisions. The system provides feedback on tumor characteristics from the first imaging procedure, which immediately informs the selection of follow-up imaging agents, creating a rapid iterative process that eliminates time-wasting trial and error.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #23Feedback

Applied Scientific Principles

This section explains which scientific principles are used to turn an abstract innovation direction into a practical engineering solution.

Function Achieved in This Case

This approach enables faster, more accurate, and cost-efficient cancer diagnosis and therapy planning, reducing metastasis and patient mortality by tailoring radiation doses to the specific aggressiveness of tumor cells, thereby improving treatment outcomes.

Implementation Method 1

In the cell, 18F-FDG is phosphorylated by hexokinase to 18F-FDG-6-phosphate

Methodology Applied
Scientific EffectPhosphorylation:

Implementation Method 2

PET (positron emission tomography) is an imaging modality that allows studying physiological, biochemical and pharmacological functions at a molecular level

Methodology Applied
Scientific EffectPositron emission:

Implementation Method 3

The PET methodology permits the measurement of physiological parameters

Methodology Applied
Scientific EffectAnnihilation radiation:

Implementation Method 4

the use of targeted imaging agents, such as 18F-FMISO-PET, to optimize radiation therapy by determining the absolute radiation dose based on individual tumor characteristics

Methodology Applied
Scientific EffectHypoxia detection:

Data Source

PatentUS8050477B2Radiation therapy flanning procedure
Publication Date: 2011.11.01 KONINKLIJKE PHILIPS NV
  • US8050477B2 patent drawing
  • US8050477B2 patent drawing
  • US8050477B2 patent drawing

AI summary

An improved radiation therapy planning procedure is suggested. The procedure comprises the steps of specifying and determining the absolute grade of cell degeneracy by in-vitro tests, whereby marker(s) indicative for specific cell degeneracy are detected and quantified, establishing a biology-based segmentation of areas with similar grade of relative cell degeneracy and applying the absolute grade of cell degeneracy to the biology-based segmentation data, thereby establishing an improved radiation therapy planning procedure. Moreover, the present invention suggests a system for an improved radiation therapy planning procedure and its use in procedures of diagnosis and/or therapy management of cancer.