首页> 外文期刊>Medical dosimetry: official journal of the American Association of Medical Dosimetrists >Volumetric-modulated arc therapy (RapidArc) vs. conventional fixed-field intensity-modulated radiotherapy for 18F-FDG-PET-guided dose escalation in oropharyngeal cancer: A planning study
【24h】

Volumetric-modulated arc therapy (RapidArc) vs. conventional fixed-field intensity-modulated radiotherapy for 18F-FDG-PET-guided dose escalation in oropharyngeal cancer: A planning study

机译:容积调制弧光疗法(RapidArc)与常规固定场强度调制放射疗法对口咽癌18F-FDG-PET指导剂量递增的规划研究

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
       

摘要

Fluorine-18-fluorodeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography (18F-FDG-PET)-guided focal dose escalation in oropharyngeal cancer may potentially improve local control. We evaluated the feasibility of this approach using volumetric-modulated arc therapy (RapidArc) and compared these plans with fixed-field intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) focal dose escalation plans. Materials and methods: An initial study of 20 patients compared RapidArc with fixed-field IMRT using standard dose prescriptions. From this cohort, 10 were included in a dose escalation planning study. Dose escalation was applied to 18F-FDG-PET-positive regions in the primary tumor at dose levels of 5% (DL1), 10% (DL2), and 15% (DL3) above standard radical dose (65 Gy in 30 fractions). Fixed-field IMRT and double-arc RapidArc plans were generated for each dataset. Dose-volume histograms were used for plan evaluation and comparison. The Paddick conformity index (CIPaddick) and monitor units (MU) for each plan were recorded and compared. Both IMRT and RapidArc produced clinically acceptable plans and achieved planning objectives for target volumes. Dose conformity was significantly better in the RapidArc plans, with lower CIPaddick scores in both primary (PTV1) and elective (PTV2) planning target volumes (largest difference in PTV1 at DL3; 0.81 ?? 0.03 [RapidArc] vs. 0.77 ?? 0.07 [IMRT], p = 0.04). Maximum dose constraints for spinal cord and brainstem were not exceeded in both RapidArc and IMRT plans, but mean doses were higher with RapidArc (by 2.7 ?? 1 Gy for spinal cord and 1.9 ?? 1 Gy for brainstem). Contralateral parotid mean dose was lower with RapidArc, which was statistically significant at DL1 (29.0 vs. 29.9 Gy, p = 0.01) and DL2 (29.3 vs. 30.3 Gy, p = 0.03). MU were reduced by 39.8-49.2% with RapidArc (largest difference at DL3, 641 ?? 94 vs. 1261 ?? 118, p 0.01). 18F-FDG-PET-guided focal dose escalation in oropharyngeal cancer is feasible with RapidArc. Compared with conventional fixed-field IMRT, RapidArc can achieve better dose conformity, improve contralateral parotid sparing, and uses fewer MU. ? 2013 American Association of Medical Dosimetrists.
机译:氟18-氟脱氧葡萄糖-正电子发射断层扫描(18F-FDG-PET)指导的口咽癌病灶剂量升级可能会改善局部控制。我们评估了使用体积调制弧光疗法(RapidArc)的这种方法的可行性,并将这些计划与固定场强度调制放射疗法(IMRT)聚焦剂量递增计划进行了比较。材料和方法:一项针对20名患者的初步研究使用标准剂量处方将RapidArc与固定视野IMRT进行了比较。从这一队列中,有10人被纳入剂量递增计划研究中。在原发性肿瘤中以18F-FDG-PET阳性区域进行剂量递增,剂量水平分别比标准自由基剂量高5%(DL1),10%(DL2)和15%(DL3)(30步分65 Gy) 。为每个数据集生成了固定场IMRT和双弧RapidArc计划。剂量-体积直方图用于计划评估和比较。记录并比较每个计划的Paddick合格指数(CIPaddick)和监视单位(MU)。 IMRT和RapidArc均制定了临床可接受的计划并实现了目标量的计划目标。在RapidArc计划中,剂量一致性明显更好,主要(PTV1)和选修(PTV2)计划目标量的CIPaddick得分都较低(DL3时PTV1的最大差异; 0.81≤0.03 [RapidArc]与0.77≤0.07 [ IMRT],p = 0.04)。 RapidArc和IMRT计划均未超过脊髓和脑干的最大剂量限制,但是RapidArc的平均剂量更高(脊髓为2.7 ?? 1 Gy,脑干为1.9 ?? 1 Gy)。 RapidArc的对侧腮腺平均剂量较低,在DL1(29.0 vs. 29.9 Gy,p = 0.01)和DL2(29.3 vs. 30.3 Gy,p = 0.03)时有统计学意义。使用RapidArc可以将MU降低39.8-49.2%(DL3的最大差异,分别为641 ?? 94和1261 ?? 118,p <0.01)。使用RapidArc可以在口咽癌中采用18F-FDG-PET指导的局部剂量剂量递增。与传统的固定场IMRT相比,RapidArc可以实现更好的剂量一致性,改善对侧腮腺保留,并减少MU。 ? 2013美国医学剂量学协会。

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