We apply a new hardware and software platform called the Hamiltonian Engine for Radiotherapy Optimization (HERO) to the problem of Intensity-Modulated Radiation Therapy (IMRT) treatment planning. HERO solves large general-form binary optimization problems by decomposing them into sub-problems and approximating them using a quadratic pseudo-boolean function. Optimizing the resulting function becomes a quadratic unconstrained binary optimization (QUBO) problem, which has been widely studied and has numerous applications in various fields. A Quantum Annealer (QA) approach has been previously investigated to solve QUBO problems, including IMRT optimization. However, the QA can only accommodate a small number of variables and requires several hours to obtain optimized plans. HERO acts as an optimizer for QUBO problems, which not only addresses these shortcomings but also relies solely on conventional hardware design while operating at room temperature. We evaluate HERO on seven prostate IMRT cases with clinical objectives, each using approximately 6000 beamlets. Our method was compared to the commercial treatment planning software, Eclipse, for both time-to-solution and plan quality. HERO solves most cases in about 30 seconds, with significantly lower objective function scores than Eclipse. The results indicate that HERO is promising for radiation therapy optimization problems. Additionally, HERO has the potential to be applied to Volumetric-Modulated Arc Therapy (VMAT) and other complex types of treatment planning.
We apply a new hardware and software platform called the Hamiltonian Engine for Radiotherapy Optimization (HERO) to the problem of Intensity-Modulated Radiation Therapy (IMRT) treatment planning. HERO solves large general-form binary optimization problems by decomposing them into sub-problems and approximating them using a quadratic pseudo-boolean function. Optimizing the resulting function becomes a quadratic unconstrained binary optimization (QUBO) problem, which has been widely studied and has numerous applications in various fields. A Quantum Annealer (QA) approach has been previously investigated to solve QUBO problems, including IMRT optimization. However, the QA can only accommodate a small number of variables and requires several hours to obtain optimized plans. HERO acts as an optimizer for QUBO problems, which not only addresses these shortcomings but also relies solely on conventional hardware design while operating at room temperature. We evaluate HERO on seven prostate IMRT cases with clinical objectives, each using approximately 6000 beamlets. Our method was compared to the commercial treatment planning software, Eclipse, for both time-to-solution and plan quality. HERO solves most cases in about 30 seconds, with significantly lower objective function scores than Eclipse. The results indicate that HERO is promising for radiation therapy optimization problems. Additionally, HERO has the potential to be applied to Volumetric-Modulated Arc Therapy (VMAT) and other complex types of treatment planning.
BACKGROUND: Quantum computing (QC) is emerging as a transformative tool for solving complex optimization problems across various fields, including biomedical applications. While classical optimization methods are well-established, they frequently face limitations when applied to complex and large-scale problems in radiotherapy planning. PURPOSE: This study aims to explore the implementation and evaluate the effectiveness of quantum optimization methods, specifically quantum annealing and the quantum approximate optimization algorithm (QAOA), in radiotherapy planning. In particular, we employ an Ising Hamiltonian formulation of the cost function, empirically implementing it on annealing-based quantum hardware and for the first time on circuit-based one. METHODS: We formulated a simplified radiotherapy optimization problem and solved it using quantum annealing on a D-Wave quantum annealer. Subsequently, we adapted this optimization problem for the QAOA framework and implemented it on IBM Quantum circuit-model hardware. Comparative analyses were conducted between classical and quantum methods and implementations, highlighting QC's potential advantages and limitations in specific optimization contexts. To demonstrate that the Hamiltonian formulation is valid and practically usable, we first tested it in simplified proof-of-principle examples and then extended it to a more clinically relevant bilateral prostate proton plan. In this new example, dose parameters were extracted directly from a commercial treatment planning system (RayStation) and incorporated into the Hamiltonian optimization workflow. Both one-qubit-per-voxel and two-qubits-per-voxel encodings were evaluated to illustrate scalability. Additionally, we discussed scalability considerations, practical challenges, and future research directions necessary for integrating quantum algorithms into routine clinical radiation therapy practices. RESULTS: To our knowledge, this study presents the first demonstration of using QC circuit-model hardware for radiotherapy planning optimization. The quantum annealing approach successfully determined the optimal solution. Convergence was achieved after 20 iterations on a quantum simulator (noise free) and after 100 iterations on actual quantum hardware (due to inherent hardware noise). In the bilateral prostate proton plan derived from realistic data, the Hamiltonian-based optimization assigned higher dose to the prostate relative to surrounding organs-at-risk, confirming the feasibility of applying QC optimization directly to clinically sourced parameters. CONCLUSIONS: Quantum optimization techniques demonstrate potential advantages over classical methods, particularly in complex optimization scenarios relevant to radiation therapy. The formulation of a Hamiltonian cost function, its validation on real quantum hardware, and its application to realistic data collectively represent a first concrete step toward QC-based treatment planning optimization in medical physics. Future research should focus on addressing scalability, overcoming practical implementation challenges, and advancing the development of scalable, fault-tolerant quantum systems suitable for clinical integration.
Optimization methods are critical to radiation therapy. A new technology, quantum annealing (QA), employs novel hardware and software techniques to address various discrete optimization problems in many fields. We report on the first application of quantum annealing to the process of beamlet intensity optimization for IMRT. We apply recently-developed hardware which natively exploits quantum mechanical effects for improved optimization. The new algorithm, called QA, is most similar to simulated annealing, but relies on natural processes to directly minimize a system's free energy. A simple quantum system is slowly evolved into a classical system representing the objective function. If the evolution is sufficiently slow, there are probabilistic guarantees that a global minimum will be located. To apply QA to IMRT-type optimization, two prostate cases were considered. A reduced number of beamlets were employed, due to the current QA hardware limitations. The beamlet dose matrices were computed using CERR and an objective function was defined based on typical clinical constraints, including dose-volume objectives, which result in a complex non-convex search space. The objective function was discretized and the QA method was compared to two standard optimization methods, simulated annealing and Tabu search, run on a conventional computing cluster. Based on several runs, the average final objective function value achieved by the QA was 16.9 for the first patient, compared with 10.0 for Tabu and 6.7 for the simulated annealing (SA) method. For the second patient, the values were 70.7 for the QA, 120.0 for Tabu and 22.9 for the SA. The QA algorithm required 27-38% of the time required by the other two methods. In this first application of hardware-enabled QA to IMRT optimization, its performance is comparable to Tabu search, but less effective than the SA in terms of final objective function values. However, its speed was 3-4 times faster than the other two methods. This initial experiment suggests that more research into QA-based heuristics may offer significant speedup over conventional clinical optimization methods, as quantum annealing hardware scales to larger sizes.
Modern radiation oncology depends heavily on computational algorithms for inverse treatment planning, Monte Carlo dose simulations, and real-time image guidance. Classical computing architectures face critical scaling bottlenecks as clinical techniques advance toward ultra-high-resolution volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) and adaptive radiotherapy. This paper explores the transformation of radiotherapy by integration of quantum computing for handling complex planning problems. Quantum computing in radiation oncology promises drastic reduction in planning time by leveraging quantum algorithms for optimization and dose estimation. Preliminary.
The very first successful application of tensor network methods (TNMs) to the solution of the dose optimization in Intensity Modulated Radiation Therapy (IMRT) is considered. This technique provides a method to modulate the local beam intensities, dividing the beam into smaller beamlets. This allows to reduce the radiation toxicity for healthy organs and deal with irregular and inhomogeneous tumors. Plan's goals are encoded as mathematical constraints into a cost function expressing the distance between the prescribed and delivered dose. Aim of the optimization is to minimize the function associating to each beamlet the optimal weight xj. In this thesis a classical quadratic cost function is mapped into an Insing-like Hamiltonian, where the beamlets weights are described by a system of long-range interacting qubits. The aim of the work is to solve the dose optimization problem using a binary tree tensor network (bTTN) to find the Hamiltonian's groundstate and to show the applicability of TNM to the IMRT dose optimization problem.
We present a novel application of Tensor Network methods in cancer treatment as a potential tool to solve the dose optimization problem in radiotherapy. In particular, the intensity-modulated radiation therapy technique-that allows treating irregular and inhomogeneous tumors while reducing the radiation toxicity on healthy organs-is based on the optimization problem of the beamlets intensities that shall result in a maximal delivery of the therapy dose to cancer while avoiding the organs at risk of being damaged by the radiation. The resulting optimization problem is expressed as a cost function to be optimized. Here, we map the cost function into an Ising-like Hamiltonian, describing a system of long-range interacting qubits. Finally, we solve the dose optimization problem by finding the ground-state of the Hamiltonian using a Tree Tensor Network algorithm. In particular, we present an anatomical scenario exemplifying a prostate cancer treatment. A similar approach can be applied to future hybrid classical-quantum algorithms, paving the way for the use of quantum technologies in future medical treatments.
Purpose: We report on the first application of quantum annealing (QA) to the process of beamlet intensity optimization for IMRT. QA is a new technology, which employs novel hardware and software techniques to address various discrete optimization problems in many fields. Methods: We apply the D‐Wave Inc. proprietary hardware, which natively exploits quantum mechanical effects for improved optimization. The new QA algorithm, running on this hardware, is most similar to simulated annealing, but relies on natural processes to directly minimize the free energy of a system. A simple quantum system is slowly evolved into a classical system, representing the objective function. To apply QA to IMRT‐type optimization, two prostate cases were considered. A reduced number of beamlets were employed, due to the current QA hardware limitation of ∼500 binary variables. The beamlet dose matrices were computed using CERR, and an objective function was defined based on typical clinical constraints, including dose‐volume objectives. The objective function was discretized, and the QA method was compared to two standard optimization Methods: simulated annealing and Tabu search, run on a conventional computing cluster. Results: Based on several runs, the average final objective function value achieved by the QA was 16.9 for the first patient, compared with 10.0 for Tabu and 6.7 for the SA. For the second patient, the values were 70.7 for the QA, 120.0 for Tabu, and 22.9 for the SA. The QA algorithm required 27–38% of the time required by the other two methods. Conclusion: In terms of objective function value, the QA performance was similar to Tabu but less effective than the SA. However, its speed was 3–4 times faster than the other two methods. This initial experiment suggests that QA‐based heuristics may offer significant speedup over conventional clinical optimization methods, as quantum annealing hardware scales to larger sizes.