Adaptive Dose Optimization Algorithm for LED-based Photodynamic Therapy Based on Deep Reinforcement Learning
Main Article Content
Abstract
Current photodynamic therapy fails. Not occasionally-systematically. We measured optical coefficients across 1,847 lesions: peripheral zones exhibit μs' ≈ 20 cm⁻¹ while necrotic zones μs' ≈ 0.8 cm⁻¹, a 25-fold discontinuity that renders uniform protocols obsolete. Drug clearance varies threefold. One patient metabolizes protoporphyrin IX in two hours; another requires six. Oxygen maps tell an equally chaotic story-partial pressures crash from 95 mmHg to anoxic thresholds within minutes, creating dead zones where photochemistry simply stops. We built a system that adapts. Deep reinforcement learning processes 384 physiological signals in real-time, adjusting power density and fractionation schedules every 100 milliseconds. The architecture splits decision-making: one network learns patient baselines, another computes action advantages. This dueling structure stabilizes training on sparse clinical data, where 62.5% of treatments historically achieved only partial or no response. Results contradict decades of conservative practice. Phototoxicity decreased from 18.3% to 7.6%, a relative risk reduction of 58% (95% CI: 49-66%). Complete responses jumped from 37.8% to 58.7%-not through gentler treatment, but through aggressive, precisely-timed interventions the algorithm discovered autonomously. A paradox emerged: lower doses for superficial lesions, intense protocols for deep tumors, opposite to clinical intuition. The system runs on standard GPUs. No specialized hardware. Forty-seven prospective patients confirmed what retrospective analysis suggested: adaptive control fundamentally outperforms fixed protocols.
Article Details
Section
How to Cite
References
1. X. Wu, W. Huang, X. Wu, S. Wu, and J. Huang, "Classification of thermal image of clinical burn based on incremental rein-forcement learning," Neural Computing and Applications, vol. 34, no. 5, pp. 3457-3470, 2022, doi: 10.1007/s00521-021-05772-7.
2. R. B. Saager, D. J. Cuccia, S. Saggese, K. M. Kelly, and A. J. Durkin, "A light emitting diode (LED) based spatial frequency do-main imaging system for optimization of photodynamic therapy of nonmelanoma skin cancer: quantitative reflectance im-aging," Lasers in surgery and medicine, vol. 45, no. 4, pp. 207-215, 2013.
3. S. Nath, E. Korot, D. J. Fu, G. Zhang, K. Mishra, A. Y. Lee, and P. A. Keane, "Reinforcement learning in ophthalmology: poten-tial applications and challenges to implementation," The Lancet Digital Health, vol. 4, no. 9, pp. e692-e697, 2022, doi: 10.1016/s2589-7500(22)00128-5.
4. L. Tirand, T. Bastogne, D. Bechet, M. Linder, N. Thomas, C. Frochot, and M. Barberi-Heyob, "Response surface methodology: an extensive potential to optimize in vivo photodynamic therapy conditions," International Journal of Radiation Oncology* Biol-ogy* Physics, vol. 75, no. 1, pp. 244-252, 2009, doi: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2009.04.004.
5. A. B. Walter, J. Simpson, J. L. Jenkins, E. P. Skaar, and E. D. Jansen, "Optimization of optical parameters for improved photo-dynamic therapy of Staphylococcus aureus using endogenous coproporphyrin III," Photodiagnosis and photodynamic therapy, vol. 29, p. 101624, 2020, doi: 10.1016/j.pdpdt.2019.101624.
6. K. Lalitha, T. R. Saravanan, N. Mohankumar, G. Geethamahalakshmi, M. X. Suresh, and S. Murugan, "Reinforcement Learn-ing for Patient-Centric Lighting Management System in Healthcare Sector," In 2024 8th International Conference on I-SMAC (IoT in Social, Mobile, Analytics and Cloud)(I-SMAC), October, 2024, pp. 1740-1746.
7. C. Shen, Y. Gonzalez, P. Klages, N. Qin, H. Jung, L. Chen, and X. Jia, "Intelligent inverse treatment planning via deep rein-forcement learning, a proof-of-principle study in high dose-rate brachytherapy for cervical cancer," Physics in Medicine & Bi-ology, vol. 64, no. 11, p. 115013, 2019 doi: 10.1088/1361-6560/ab18bf.
8. M. Z. Yildiz, A. F. Kamanli, G. G. Eskiler, and H. Tabakoğlu, "O,", Pala, M. A., & Özdemir, A. E. (2024). Development of a novel laboratory photodynamic therapy device: automated multi-mode LED system for optimum well-plate irradiation. La-sers in Medical Science, vol. 39, no. 1, p. 131, 2024.
9. H. Zheng, J. Zhu, W. Xie, and J. Zhong, "Reinforcement learning assisted oxygen therapy for COVID-19 patients under inten-sive care," BMC medical informatics and decision making, vol. 21, no. 1, p. 350, 2021, doi: 10.1186/s12911-021-01712-6.
10. E. N. de Gálvez, P. F. Pascual, J. A. Arjona, J. R. de Andrés Díaz, M. N. de Gálvez, S. P. Mohamed, and M. V. de Gálvez Aran-da, "Proposal and operational evaluation of a device for external and internal photodynamic therapy treatments," Photodiag-nosis and Photodynamic Therapy, vol. 51, p. 104440, 2025.
11. A. A. Yassine, L. Lilge, and V. Betz, "Optimizing interstitial photodynamic therapy planning with reinforcement learn-ing-based diffuser placement," IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering, vol. 68, no. 5, pp. 1668-1679, 2021.
12. L. S. Amaral, E. B. Azevedo, and J. R. Perussi, "The response surface methodology speeds up the search for optimal parame-ters in the photoinactivation of E," coli by photodynamic therapy. Photodiagnosis and Photodynamic Therapy, vol. 22, pp. 26-33, 2018.
13. S. Y. Heo, J. Kim, P. Gutruf, A Banks, P. Wei, R. Pielak, and J. A. Rogers, "Wireless, battery-free, flexible, miniaturized dosim-eters monitor exposure to solar radiation and to light for phototherapy," Science translational medicine, vol. 10, no. 470, p. eaau1643, 2018, doi: 10.1126/scitranslmed.aau1643.
14. Y. Cai, T. Chai, W. Nguyen, J. Liu, E. Xiao, X. Ran, and X. Chen, "Phototherapy in cancer treatment: strategies and challenges," Signal Transduction and Targeted Therapy, vol. 10, no. 1, p. 115, 2025, doi: 10.1038/s41392-025-02140-y.
15. V. K. Bhutani, B. K. Cline, K. M. Donaldson, and H. J. Vreman, "The need to implement effective phototherapy in re-source-constrained settings," In Seminars in perinatology, June, 2011, pp. 192-197, doi: 10.1053/j.semperi.2011.02.015.