...
首页> 外文期刊>International Journal of Radiation Oncology, Biology, Physics >Treatment planning for lung cancer: traditional homogeneous point-dose prescription compared with heterogeneity-corrected dose-volume prescription.
【24h】

Treatment planning for lung cancer: traditional homogeneous point-dose prescription compared with heterogeneity-corrected dose-volume prescription.

机译:肺癌的治疗计划:传统的均质点剂量处方与异质性校正剂量容积处方比较。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

PURPOSE: To quantify the differences in doses to target volumes and critical thoracic structures calculated by traditional homogeneous point-dose prescription and heterogeneity-corrected volume-dose prescription. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Between 1998 and 2001, 30 patients with inoperable Stage I/II non-small-cell lung cancer underwent radiation treatment planning at our institution. A commercially available convolution/superposition- based algorithm was used. Three treatment plans were calculated for each patient using identical beam geometries: one plan was generated by traditional homogeneous point-dose prescription, a second by the traditional method with heterogeneity correction, and a third by heterogeneity-corrected volume-dose prescription that would cover 95% of the planned target volume (PTV). Target volume coverage, isocenter dose, and dose uniformity in the second and third plans were compared. RESULTS: The PTV, clinical target volume (CTV), and isocenter calculated by the heterogeneity-corrected volume-dose method were equivalent to those calculated by the traditional homogeneous point-dose method with heterogeneity correction. The fraction of the PTV covered by heterogeneity-corrected volume-dose prescription was significantly greater than the fraction covered by traditional homogeneous point-dose prescription with heterogeneity correction (p = 0.05). The dose prescribed using the traditional method would have been delivered to less than 90% of the PTV in 14 of 30 patients. There was no significant difference in the maximum and minimum doses to the PTV, the CTV, or the isocenter calculated by the traditional homogeneous method with heterogeneity correction and the heterogeneity-corrected volume-dose method. There was also no significant difference in the planned volume of lung receiving greater than 20 Gy as calculated by these two methods. CONCLUSION: When compared with traditional homogeneous radiation treatment planning, heterogeneity-corrected methods produce equivalent PTV, CTV, and isocenter doses while providing superior PTV coverage.
机译:目的:量化由传统的均质点剂量处方和异质性校正的体积剂量处方计算出的目标体积和关键胸腔结构的剂量差异。方法和材料:1998年至2001年,我们机构对30例不能手术的I / II期非小细胞肺癌患者进行了放射治疗计划。使用了市售的基于卷积/叠加的算法。使用相同的射束几何形状为每位患者计算了三个治疗计划:一个计划是通过传统的均质点剂量处方生成的,第二个计划是通过具有异质性校正的传统方法生成的,而第三个计划是通过异质性校正的体积剂量处方生成的,涵盖了95个计划目标数量(PTV)的百分比。比较了第二个和第三个计划中的目标体积覆盖率,等中心剂量和剂量均匀性。结果:异质校正体积-剂量方法计算的PTV,临床目标体积(CTV)和等中心点与采用异质校正的传统均质点剂量方法计算的结果相同。经异质性校正的体积剂量处方覆盖的PTV的比例显着大于具有异质性校正的传统均质点剂量处方覆盖的PTV的比例(p = 0.05)。使用传统方法开出的剂量将在30名患者中的14名患者中提供给PTV的不到90%。 PTV,CTV或等中心点的最大剂量和最小剂量之间的差异不显着,该剂量是通过使用均质性校正和均质性校正的体积剂量法的传统均质方法计算得出的。通过这两种方法计算得出的接受大于20 Gy的肺计划肺容量也没有显着差异。结论:与传统的均匀放射治疗计划相比,经异质性校正的方法可产生等效的PTV,CTV和等中心剂量,同时提供出色的PTV覆盖范围。

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