  Radiotherapy inverse planning often requires planners to modify parameters in
the treatment planning system's objective function to produce clinically
acceptable plans. Due to the manual steps in this process, plan quality can
vary depending on the planning time available and the planner's skills. This
study investigates two hyperparameter-tuning methods for automated inverse
planning. Because this framework does not train a model on previously-optimized
plans, it can be readily adapted to practice pattern changes, and plan quality
is not limited by that of a training cohort. We selected 10 patients who
received lung SBRT using manually-generated clinical plans. We used random
sampling (RS) and Bayesian optimization (BO) to tune parameters using
linear-quadratic utility functions based on 11 clinical goals. Normalizing all
plans to have PTV D95 equal to 48 Gy, we compared plan quality for the
automatically-generated and manually-generated plans. We also investigated the
impact of iteration count on the automatically-generated plans, comparing
planning time and plan utility for RS and BO plans with and without stopping
criteria. Without stopping criteria, the median planning time was 1.9 and 2.3
hours for RS and BO plans. The OAR doses in the RS and BO plans had a median
percent difference (MPD) of 48.7% and 60.4% below clinical dose limits and an
MPD of 2.8% and 3.3% below clinical plan doses. With stopping criteria, the
utility decreased by an MPD of 5.3% and 3.9% for RS and BO plans, but the
median planning time was reduced to 0.5 and 0.7 hours, and the OAR doses still
had an MPD of 42.9% and 49.7% below clinical dose limits and an MPD of 0.3% and
1.8% below clinical plan doses. This study demonstrates that
hyperparameter-tuning approaches to automated inverse planning can reduce
active planning time with plan quality that is similar to or better than
manually-generated plans.
