首页> 外文期刊>Journal of experimental & clinical cancer research : >Comparison of conventional and CT-based planning for intracavitary brachytherapy for cervical cancer: target volume coverage and organs at risk doses
【24h】

Comparison of conventional and CT-based planning for intracavitary brachytherapy for cervical cancer: target volume coverage and organs at risk doses

机译:常规和基于CT的宫颈癌腔内近距离治疗规划的比较:目标体积覆盖范围和处于危险剂量的器官

获取原文
           

摘要

Background To compare intracavitary brachytherapy (ICBT) planning methods for cervical cancer, based on either orthogonal radiographs (conventional plan) or CT sections (CT plan); the comparison focused on target volume coverage and dose volume analysis of organs at risk (OARs), by representing point doses defined by the International Commission on Radiation Units and Measurement (ICRU) and dose volume histograms (DVHs) from 3D planning. Methods We analyzed the dosimetric data for 62 conventional and CT-based ICBT plans. The gross tumor volume (GTV), clinical target volume (CTV) and organs at risk (OAR)s were contoured on the CT-plan. Point A and ICRU 38 rectal and bladder points were defined on reconstructed CT images. Results Patients were categorized on the basis of whether the >95% isodose line of the point-A prescription dose encompassed the CTV (group 1, n = 24) or not (group 2, n = 38). The mean GTV and CTV (8.1 cc and 20.6 cc) were smaller in group 1 than in group 2 (24.7 cc and 48.4 cc) (P 0.001). The mean percentage of GTV and CTV coverage with the 7 Gy isodose was 93.1% and 88.2% for all patients, and decreased with increasing tumor size and stage. The mean D2 and D5 rectum doses were 1.66 and 1.42 times higher than the corresponding ICRU point doses and the mean D2 and D5 bladder doses were 1.51 and 1.28 times higher. The differences between the ICRU dose and the D2 and D5 doses were significantly higher in group 2 than in group 1 for the bladder, but not for the rectum. Conclusion The CT-plan is superior to the conventional plan in target volume coverage and appropriate evaluation of OARs, as the conventional plan overestimates tumor doses and underestimates OAR doses.
机译:背景基于正交X光片(常规计划)或CT切片(CT计划),比较宫颈癌腔内近距离放射治疗(ICBT)计划方法;通过代表国际放射单位和测量委员会(ICRU)定义的点剂量和3D规划中的剂量体积直方图(DVH),比较着重于目标体积覆盖率和高风险器官的剂量体积分析(OAR)。方法我们分析了62种常规和基于CT的ICBT计划的剂量数据。在CT计划中画出了总肿瘤体积(GTV),临床目标体积(CTV)和高危器官(OAR)。在重建的CT图像上定义了A点和ICRU 38直肠和膀胱点。结果根据A点处方剂量的> 95%的等剂量线是否包括CTV(第1组,n = 24)(第2组,n = 38)对患者进行了分类。第一组的平均GTV和CTV(8.1 cc和20.6 cc)小于第二组的(24.7 cc和48.4 cc)(P 0.001)。对于所有患者,使用7 Gy等剂量的GTV和CTV的平均覆盖率分别为93.1%和88.2%,并且随着肿瘤大小和分期的增加而降低。平均D2和D5直肠剂量比相应的ICRU点剂量高1.66和1.42倍,平均D2和D5膀胱剂量高1.51和1.28倍。第2组的ICRU剂量与D2和D5剂量之间的差异在膀胱方面比第1组明显更高,但对于直肠则没有。结论CT计划在目标体积覆盖率和OAR的适当评估方面优于常规计划,因为常规计划高估了肿瘤剂量而低估了OAR剂量。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号