A comprehensive comparison of IMRT and VMAT plan quality for prostate cancer treatment.
A comprehensive comparison of IMRT and VMAT plan quality for prostate cancer treatment.
复制标题
DOI：
10.1016/j.ijrobp.2011.09.015
复制
发表时间：
2012-07-15
影响因子：
7
通讯作者：
Zhang, Xiaodong
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Quan, Enzhuo M.;Li, Xiaoqiang;Li, Yupeng;Wang, Xiaochun;Kudchadker, Rajat J.;Johnson, Jennifer L.;Kuban, Deborah A.;Lee, Andrew K.;Zhang, Xiaodong
关键词：
我们对容积调制弧形疗法 (VMAT) 和调强放射疗法 (IMRT) 治疗前列腺癌的计划质量进行了全面的比较研究。随机选择了在我们机构接受治疗的 11 名前列腺癌患者参加本研究。对于每位患者，检查了 VMAT 计划和一系列使用越来越多射束（8、12、16、20 和 24 射束）的 IMRT 计划。所有计划都是使用我们内部开发的自动逆规划（AIP）算法生成的。用于治疗患者的现有 8 射束临床 IMRT 计划被用作参考计划。对于每位患者，所有 AIP 生成的计划都经过优化，以实现与参考计划相同水平的计划目标体积 (PTV) 覆盖范围。通过测量每种类型计划的危险器官（尤其是直肠）的平均剂量和剂量体积统计数据来评估计划质量。对于相同的 PTV 覆盖范围，AIP 生成的 VMAT 计划在直肠保留方面的计划质量明显优于 8 射束临床和 AIP 生成的 IMRT 计划 (p < 0.0001)。然而，随着 IMRT 中使用的射束数量的增加，IMRT 和 VMAT 计划在所有剂量指标上的差异减小。当 IMRT 中的射束数量增加到一定数量（研究的患者组为 12 至 24 个）时，IMRT 计划质量与 VMAT 相似或优于 VMAT。卓越的 VMAT 计划质量比 8 射束 IMRT 计划多出约 30% 的监测单元，但交付时间仍不到 3 分钟。考虑到与 IMRT 相比，VMAT 具有优越的计划质量以及交付效率，VMAT 可能是治疗前列腺癌的首选方式。
We performed a comprehensive comparative study of the plan quality between volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) and intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) for the treatment of prostate cancer. Eleven patients with prostate cancer treated at our institution were randomly selected for this study. For each patient, a VMAT plan and a series of IMRT plans using an increasing number of beams (8, 12, 16, 20, and 24 beams) were examined. All plans were generated using our in-house-developed automatic inverse planning (AIP) algorithm. An existing 8-beam clinical IMRT plan, which was used to treat the patient, was used as the reference plan. For each patient, all AIP-generated plans were optimized to achieve the same level of planning target volume (PTV) coverage as the reference plan. Plan quality was evaluated by measuring mean dose to and dose-volume statistics of the organs-at-risk, especially the rectum, from each type of plan. For the same PTV coverage, the AIP-generated VMAT plans had significantly better plan quality in terms of rectum sparing than the 8-beam clinical and AIP-generated IMRT plans (p < 0.0001). However, the differences between the IMRT and VMAT plans in all the dosimetric indices decreased as the number of beams used in IMRT increased. IMRT plan quality was similar or superior to that of VMAT when the number of beams in IMRT was increased to a certain number, which ranged from 12 to 24 for the set of patients studied. The superior VMAT plan quality resulted in approximately 30% more monitor units than the 8-beam IMRT plans, but the delivery time was still less than 3 minutes. Considering the superior plan quality as well as the delivery efficiency of VMAT compared with that of IMRT, VMAT may be the preferred modality for treating prostate cancer.
登录
查看更多内容
影响因子：
5.7
作者：
Cozzi, Luca;Dinshaw, Ketayun Ardeshir;Fogliata, Antonella
通讯作者：
Fogliata, Antonella
影响因子：
5.7
作者：
Clivio, Alessandro;Fogliata, Antonella;Cozzi, Luca
通讯作者：
Cozzi, Luca
DOI：
10.1016/j.ijrobp.2009.09.053
发表时间：
2010-07-01
影响因子：
7
作者：
Scorsetti, Marta;Bignardi, Mario;Santoro, Armando
通讯作者：
Santoro, Armando
DOI：
10.1016/j.ijrobp.2009.03.013
发表时间：
2010-03-15
影响因子：
7
作者：
Shaffer, Richard;Nichol, Alan M.;Otto, Karl
通讯作者：
Otto, Karl
DOI：
10.1016/j.ijrobp.2008.12.033
发表时间：
2009-05-01
影响因子：
7
作者：
Verbakel, Wilko F. A. R.;Cuijpers, Johan P.;Senan, Suresh
通讯作者：
Senan, Suresh