保乳术后固定野动态调强与容积调强放疗的剂量学比较

目的 比较早期乳腺癌保乳术后固定野动态调强与容积调强放疗治疗靶区和危及器官的剂量学差异.方法 20例左侧乳腺癌患者(均女性,24～75岁)保乳术后接受放疗,在同一患者CT影像上分别进行2野共面动态调强和容积调强(RapidArc)两种治疗计划设计.在剂量-体积直方图中读取两种计划的靶区剂量分布参数,心脏、双侧肺及对侧乳腺受照剂量和体积,对各参数的均数进行比较;并比较两者平均机器跳数和平均治疗时间的差异.结果 RapidArc较IMRT计划CTV V95%增加了0.65%(t=5.16,P=0.001),V105%下降了10.96%(t=-2.05,P=0.055),V110%下降了1.48%(t=-1.33,P=0.197).RapidArc计划的适形指数(CI)和均匀性指数(HI)均优于IMRT治疗计划,分别为0.88±0.02 vs 0.74±0.03(t=18.54,P＜0.001),1.11±0.01 Vs 1.12±0.02(t=-2.44,P=0.025).两种计划中左肺V20和Dmax比较差异无统计学意义,但在RapidArc计划中V10、V5、Dmix、Dmean明显增高,V5增高了接近30%.心脏V30和Dmax在两计划中无明显差异,而RapidArc计划的V10增加了18%,V5增加50%.RapidArc计划的右乳V5和右肺V5较IMRT分别增加了9.33%(t=9.31,P＜0.001)和3.04%(t=5.64,P＜0.001).RapidArc和IMRT平均机器跳数分别是608和437 MU(t=10.86,P＜0.001),平均治疗时间111.3和103.6 s(t=3.57,P=0.002).结论 早期乳腺癌保乳术后全乳腺RapidAre放疗与2野动态调强放疗相比,能明显改善靶区剂量分布均匀性.对于危及器官,高剂量区两种治疗计划之间无明显差异,低剂量区RapidArc的照射范围明显增加.与2野动态调强相比,RapidArc放疗机器跳数增加,治疗时间延长.

Abstract：

Objective To compare the dosimetric difference between volumetric are modulation with RapidArc and fixed field dynamic IMRT for breast cancer radiotherapy after breast-conserving surgery.Methods Twenty patients with early left-sided breast cancer received radiotherapy after breast-conserving surgery.After target definition,treatment planning was performed by RapidAre and two fixed fields dynamic IMRT respectively on the same CT scan.The target dose distribution,homogeneity of the breast,and the irradiation dose and volume for the lungs,heart,and eontralateral breast were read in the dosevolume histogram (DVH) and compared between RapidAre and IMRT.The treatment delivery time and monitor units were also compared.Results In comparison with the IMRT planning,the homogeneity of clinical target volume (CTV) ,the volume proportion of 95% prescribed dose (V95%) was significantly higher by 0.65% in RapidAre (t =5.16,P = 0.001) ,and the V105% and V110% were lower by 10.96% and 1.48 % respectively,however,without statistical significance (t =-2.05 ,P =0.055 and t =-1.33 ,P =0.197).The conformal index of planning target volume (PTV) by the Rap~dAre planning was (0.88±0.02),significantly higher than that by the IMRT planning [(0.74±0.03),t = 18.54,P < 0.001].The homogeneity index (HI) of PTV by the RapidArc planning was 1.11±0.01,significantly lower than that by the IMRT planning (1.12±0.02,t =-2.44,P =0.02).There were no significant differences in the maximum dose (Dmax) and V20 for the ipsilateral lung between the RapidArc and IMRT planning,but the values of V10,V5 ,Dmin and Dmean by RapidArc planning were all significantly higher than those by the IMRT planning (all P < 0.01).The values of max dose and V30 for the heart were similar by both techniques,but the values of V10 and V5 by the RapidArc planning were significantly higher (by 18% and 50% ,respectively).The V5 of the contralateral breast and lung by the RapidArc planning were increased by 9.33% and 3.04% respectively compared to the IMRT planning.The mean MU of the RapidArc was 608 MU,significantly higher than that by the IMRT planning (437 MU,t = 10.86,P < 0.001).The treatment time by the RapidArc planning was 111.3 s,significantly longer than that by IMRT planning (103.6 s,t = 3.57,P = 0.002).Conclusions The RapidArc planning improves the dose distribution of CTV and homogeneity of PTV for breast cancer radiotherapy after breast-conserving surgery.However,it significantly enlarges the volume of normal tissues irradiated in low dose areas,prolongs the treatment delivery time,and increases the MU value in comparison with IMRT.     

基于MRI图像的自动勾画技术在宫颈癌放疗中的应用研究

目的:研究AccuLearning和AccuContour软件在宫颈癌患者MRI图像上进行模型构建和自动勾画的可行性和准确性.方法:随机选取某院放疗科的40例宫颈癌患者,并随机选取其中30例宫颈癌患者的MRI图像,在Accu-Learning中按照推荐参数进行模型训练、验证和测试,统计训练模型和测试病例的平均相似性系数...     

基于最优自动勾画的放疗计划剂量学评估

目的 从计算和测量层面评价MimMaestro最优自动勾画结果导致OAR受量误差。方法 利用240例鼻咽癌、乳腺癌和直肠癌数据建立Mim模板库完成76例相应部位CT数据OAR自动勾画,并从中各选出1例与原手工勾画结构最接近的“最优”病例。评价依据包括CI、适形均距(MDC)、体积差(Dv%)、相似系数(DICE)、敏感指数(Se. Idx)、包容指数(Inc. Idx)。基于自动勾画的OAR分别设计放疗计划使其表观DVH满足临床需求,然后评价该计划在计算与测量层面导致真实OAR受量的误差。配对t检验(正态分布)或秩和检验(非正态分布)差异。结果 76例自动分割与人工勾画结果不同(P<0.05),其中最优病例各器官DICE值为0.43~0.98,DICE>0.70的占73%(16/22)。由此导致OAR受量误差的理论值为(-1.15±15.94)%,95% CI为-8.21%~5.92%(平均剂量)和(-6.53±21.13)%,95% CI为-15.90%~2.84%(最大点剂量);实测值为(-2.43±24.52)%,95% CI为-13.30%~8.44%(平均剂量)和(-3.38±20.87)%,95% CI为-12.63%~5.87%(最大点剂量)。结论 在缺乏人工干预情况下,即使基于最优自动分割结果的放疗计划也无法直接满足临床需求。     

局部进展期鼻咽癌快速旋转调强与固定野动态调强放疗的剂量学比较

目的 比较快速旋转调强与固定野动态调强放疗技术在局部进展期鼻咽癌治疗中的剂量学差异.方法 选取10例局部进展期鼻咽癌患者,采用两种治疗技术设计同步推量调强放疗计划.在满足95%计划靶体积达60 Gy情况下,比较两种计划的剂量体积直方图、靶区和危及器官剂量、机器跳数、治疗时间.结果 快速旋转调强与固定野动态调强放疗计划在局部进展期鼻咽癌治疗剂量学上无差异.快速旋转调强计划比固定野动态调强放疗技术的靶区平均剂量略升高,最大、最小剂量无差异,脑干、下颌骨及整个治疗区域正常组织受量降低,腮腺、视神经、晶体等危及器官剂量无差异.快速旋转调强计划比固定野动态调强放疗计划的总机器跳数平均减少了57%(589.5 MU:1381.0 MU),每次治疗时间平均减少了70%(2.33 min:7.82 min).结论 两种放疗技术的治疗计划剂量分布基本一致,均能满足临床治疗需要.快速旋转调强放疗每次治疗时间明显缩短,其总机器跳数的降低减少了正常组织受照剂量.     

铅门跟随技术与铅门固定技术在直肠癌术前调强放疗中的剂量学比较

目的 研究固定射野动态调强放疗铅门跟随技术与铅门固定技术在直肠癌术前调强放疗中的剂量学差异.方法 采用两种治疗技术对10例直肠癌术前患者设计治疗计划.在95%体积的计划靶区(PTV)和计划肿瘤区(PGTV)满足处方剂量的前提下,尽量降低危及器官的剂量.比较两组治疗计划的剂量-体积直方图,评估靶区及危及器官的剂量分布.分别将两组治疗计划用电离室矩阵2D-Array 729和OCTAVIUS(PTW)模体进行剂量验证.结果 两组计划的靶区均达到临床处方剂量的要求.PTV和PGTV的最大剂量与平均剂量差异无统计学意义.铅门跟随动态调强计划中全身的V₅、V₁₀、V₂₀、V₃₀、V₄₀、D_mean以及双侧股骨头、膀胱、小肠的V₁₀、V₂₀、V₃₀和D_mean均低于铅门固定动态调强计划的相应值,差异有统计学意义(t=-2.32~12.24,P<0.05);双侧股骨头、膀胱、小肠的V₄₀以及D_max差异无统计学意义.采用γ-2D分析两组计划的通过率,两组计划均通过剂量验证.结论 直肠癌术前放疗患者采用固定射野动态调强放疗铅门跟随技术与铅门固定技术两种技术,其靶区和危及器官受量均能满足临床治疗要求,而铅门跟随技术能够更好地降低正常组织和危及器官的低剂量照射.     

利用VMAT模型基于知识IMRT计划半自动优化

目的 利用RapidPlan系统评估VMAT模型用于基于知识优化固定野动态IMRT计划可行性及剂量学特点。方法 ①利用81例优质直肠癌术前同步推量VMAT计划训练DVH预测模型并进行统计学验证;②复制经临床确认的10例相同处方IMRT计划,保持布野及能量等参数不变,用上述模型自动生成新的优化参数及各野动态MLC序列;③利用相同剂量计算方法计算原计划及新计划的绝对剂量以排除版本间差异;④将计划归一至相近靶区剂量覆盖后对各剂量学参数行统计学分析。结果 在相似靶区剂量均匀性及覆盖率基础上,RapidPlan计划显著且大幅减低了膀胱受量[D_50%降低9.01 Gy (P=0.000),D_mean降低8.08 Gy (P=0.005)]和股骨头受量[D_50%降低4.20 Gy (P=0.000),D_mean降低3.84 Gy (P=0.005)],但平均总跳数也显著高于原计划[(1211±99) MU比(771±79) MU,P=0.000]且劈野数更多。基于知识的半自动优化导致高剂量热区明显增加,但D_2%相近(52.54 Gy∶52.71 Gy,P=0.239)。结论 VMAT模型可用于基于知识IMRT半自动优化以提高效率并改善OAR保护,但高剂量热区需进一步人工干预。     

基于蒙特卡罗方法的光子束均整与非均整模式能谱对比分析

目的:对比分析6 MV光子束均整与非均整模式在空气和标准水模中特定深度处的能谱分布。 方法:利用BEAMnrc程序建立美国Varian公司TrueBeam加速器均整和非均整模式的机头模型,分别计算（40×40） cm2照射野下空气和标准水模中SSD=110 cm深度处的相空间文件,并利用BEAMDP程序对射野内不同区域的能谱分布进行对比分析。 结果:空气中（40×40） cm2射野内SSD=110 cm深度处,均整模式能谱分布低能部分随着统计区域增大而增大,与非均整模式分布规律相反;在标准水模体中Depth=10 cm深度处,有无反散的情况下两种模式的能谱分布相差较大,主要在小于0.511 MeV的区域;射野内不同位置的能谱分布均整模式在离轴方向低能部分逐渐减少,而非均整模式分布情况相反;相对于电子和正电子来说,相同射野内光子对能谱分布影响较大。 结论:该研究为医用直线加速器临床剂量学数据的测量和校正提供依据。     

快速旋转调强与固定射野动态调强在直肠癌术前放疗中的剂量学比较

目的 比较快速旋转调强(RapidArc)与固定射野动态调强(dIMRT)两种放射治疗技术在直肠癌术前放疗中的剂量学差异.方法 采用两种治疗技术对10例Ⅱ、Ⅲ期直肠癌术前患者设计同步加量治疗计划.处方剂量为GTV 50.6 Gy,分22次;PTV41.8 Gy,分22次,危及器官限量参考临床常规要求.在95%体积的PTV达到处方剂量前提下,比较两种计划的剂量体积直方(DVH)图、靶区和危及器官剂量、靶区剂量适形度、剂量分布均匀性、机器跳数以及治疗时间.结果 RapidArc计划中,GTV和PTV的靶区剂量适形度较高(t=7.643、8.226,P＜0.05);而靶区剂量均匀性略低于dIMRT(t=-10.065、-4.235,P＜0.05).RapidArc计划中大、小肠的平均受量显著低于dIMRT计划(t=2.781,P＜0.05).膀胱平均受照剂量略低于dIMRT,股骨头的平均受量略高于dIMRT,但差异无统计学意义.RapidArc计划机器跳数减少48.5%,平均治疗时间节省79.5%.结论 RapidArc与dIMRT计划在直肠癌术前放射治疗的剂量学上无明显差异.RapidArc每次治疗时间明显缩短,减少了治疗期间患者非主观运动引起的误差,总的机器跳数降低,减少了正常组织照射.

Abstract：

Objective To compare the dosimetric difference between RapidArc and fixed gantry angle dynamic intensity modulated radiotherapy (dIMRT) in developing the pre-operative radiotherapy for rectal cancer patients.Methods Two techniques,RapidArc and dIMRT,were used respectively to develop the synchronous intensity modulated plans for 10 stage Ⅱ and Ⅲ rectal cancer patients at the dose of gross tumor volume (GTV) of 50.6 Gy divided into 22 fractions and planning target volume (PTV) of 41.8 Gy divided into 22 fractions.Both plans satisfied the condition of 95% of PTV covered by 41.8 Gy.The dose-volume histogram data,isodose distribution,monitor units,and treatment time were compared.Results The two kinds of dose volume histogram (DVH) developed by these two techniques were almost the same.The conformal indexes of GTV and PTV by RapidArc were better than those by dIMRT (t =7.643,8.226 ,P < 0.05),while the homogeneity of target volume by dIMRT was better (t =-10.065,-4.235 ,P <0.05).The dose of rectum and small bowel planned by RapidArc was significantly lower than that by dIMRT (t =2.781 ,P <0.05).There were no significant differences in the mean doses of bladder and femoral head between these two techniques.The mean monitor units of RapidArc was 475.5,fewer by 48.5% in comparison with that by the dIMRT (924.6).The treatment mean time by RapidArc was 1.2min,shorter by 79.5% in comparison with that by dIMRT (5.58 min).Conclusions There is no significant dosimetric difference between the two plans of RapidArc and dIMRT.Compared with dIMRT,RapidArc achieves equal target coverage and organs at risk(OAR) sparing while using fewer monitor units and less time during radiotherapy for patient with rectal cancer.     

中心型肺癌快速旋转调强与固定射野动态调强放疗的剂量学比较

目的 比较快速旋转调强(RapidArc)与固定射野动态调强(dIMRT)两种调强放疗技术在中心型肺癌治疗计划中的剂量学差异。方法 利用瓦里安(Varian)计划系统(Eclipse 8.6)随机选取10例已行dIMRT治疗的中心型肺癌患者,采用容积调强(volumetric modulated arc therapy,VMAT)治疗技术设计RapidArc调强放疗计划。在满足靶区处方剂量要求(95%体积的PTV达到66 Gy)的情况下,通过剂量体积直方图DVH评价和比较两种类型治疗计划的PTV最大剂量 D_max、最小剂量 D _min和平均剂量 D_mean以及适形指数CI,危及器官的脊髓最大剂量 D _max,双肺的 V₅、V ₁₀、 V₂₀、 V₃₀,心脏 V₃₀,食管 V₅₀、V₆₀和平均剂量 D_mean,并比较两种治疗计划的总机器跳数(MU)和治疗时间。结果 在中心型肺癌治疗计划中,与dIMRT相比较,RapidArc靶区的 D _max、 D_min和 D_mean略有升高,但统计学差异无意义( P >0.05), 适形指数CI优于dIMRT,且差异具有统计学意义(t=-4.968,P=0.001)。双肺的 V₅、V₁₀有所上升, V₂₀、 V₃₀有所下降;心脏 V₃₀受照射体积也有不同程度降低,差异均具有统计学意义。RapidArc总MU减少32%,治疗时间为dIMRT的1/3。结论 两种治疗技术所设计的治疗计划剂量分布均能满足临床治疗需要。RapidArc靶区适形度更高,实际治疗时间明显缩短,同时MU的降低减少了治疗区域正常组织的不必要照射。     

瓦里安Portal Dosimetry和PTW 1500矩阵在HalcyonTM治疗计划剂量验证的对比研究

目的 比较Portal Dosimetry（PD）和PTW OCTAVIUS 1500矩阵结合Octagonal模体（Oct1500）两种剂量验证方式在Halcyon^TM加速器治疗计划剂量验证中的表现。方法 选取在Halcyon^TM做临床试验的20例入组患者,包括22个IMRT/VMAT治疗计划和74个辐射野,分别采用两种验证方式和多种γ 2D评估策略进行剂量验证,对比验证方式及评估策略之间的验证结果,为Halcyon^TM治疗计划验证方式和评价策略的选择提供数据支持。结果 Oct1500方式74个辐射野和22个治疗计划γ 2D通过率分别为95.26±3.59、95.01±3.62（局部剂量）、99.05±1.35、98.57±1.96（最大剂量）,两种评估策略之间差异有统计学意义（Z=-7.220、-4.108,P<0.05）;PD方式为84.11±1.35（1 mm/1%）、99.07±1.35（2 mm/2%）、99.86±1.35（3 mm/3%）,3种评估策略之间差异有统计学意义（Z=-7.475、-7.475、-6.906,P<0.05）;74个辐射野全局剂量、3 mm/3%的评价策略两种验证方式之间差异有统计学意义（Z=-5.072,P<0.05）。结论 两种剂量验证方式均可用于Halcyon^TM治疗计划剂量验证;PD方式在验证效率和由空间分辨率所致的剂量验证精度方面优于Oct1500。推荐使用2 mm/2%（PD）和全局剂量、3 mm/3%（Oct1500）评估策略。