Optimization of collimator angles in dual-arc volumetric modulated arc therapy planning for whole-brain radiotherapy with hippocampus and inner ear sparing.
Optimization of collimator angles in dual-arc volumetric modulated arc therapy planning for whole-brain radiotherapy with hippocampus and inner ear sparing.
复制标题
保留海马和内耳的全脑放疗双弧体积调制弧治疗计划中准直器角度的优化
DOI:
10.1038/s41598-021-98530-7
复制
发表时间:
2021-09-24
影响因子:
4.6
通讯作者:
Wang H
中科院分区:
文献类型:
--
作者:
Sun W;Chen K;Li Y;Xia W;Dong L;Shi Y;Ge C;Yang X;Wang L;Wang H
To optimize the collimator angles in dual-arc volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) plans for whole-brain radiotherapy with hippocampus and inner ear sparing (HIS-WBRT). Two sets of dual-arc VMAT plans were generated for 13 small-cell lung cancer patients: (1) The collimator angles of arcs 1 and 2 (θ1/θ2) were 350°/10°, 350°/30°, 350°/45°, 350°/60°, and 350°/80°, i.e., the intersection angle ofθ1andθ2(Δθ) increased. (2)θ1/θ2were 280°/10°, 300°/30°, 315°/45°, 330°/60°, and 350°/80°, i.e., Δθ= 90°. The conformity index (CI), homogeneity index (HI), monitor units (MUs), and dosimetric parameters of organs-at-risk were analyzed. Quality assurance for Δθ= 90° plans was performed. With Δθincreasing towards 90°, a significant improvement was observed for most parameters. In 350°/80° plans compared with 350°/10° ones,CIandHIwere improved by 1.1% and 25.2%, respectively; MUs were reduced by 16.2%; minimum, maximum, and mean doses (D100%,Dmax, andDmean, respectively) to the hippocampus were reduced by 5.5%, 6.3%, and 5.4%, respectively;Dmeanto the inner ear and eye were reduced by 0.7% and 5.1%, respectively. With Δθkept at 90°, the plan quality was not significantly affected byθ1/θ2combinations. The gamma-index passing rates in 280°/10° and 350°/80° plans were relatively lower compared with the other Δθ= 90° plans. Δθshowed a significant effect on dual-arc VMAT plans for HIS-WBRT. With Δθapproaching 90°, the plan quality exhibited a nearly continuous improvement, whereas with Δθ= 90°, the effect ofθ1/θ2combination was insignificant.
登录
查看更多内容
影响因子:
2.1
作者:
Du W;Johnson JL;Jiang W;Kudchadker RJ
通讯作者:
Kudchadker RJ
影响因子:
3.5
作者:
Kim, Hojin;Li, Ruijiang;Xing, Lei
通讯作者:
Xing, Lei
影响因子:
3.8
作者:
Lyu Q;O'Connor D;Ruan D;Yu V;Nguyen D;Sheng K
通讯作者:
Sheng K
DOI:
10.1186/s13014-015-0544-z
发表时间:
2015-11-19
期刊:
Radiation oncology (London, England)
影响因子:
--
作者:
Li Q;Gu W;Mu J;Yin W;Gao M;Mo J;Pei H
通讯作者:
Pei H
影响因子:
3.6
作者:
Jiang, Aijun;Sun, Weipeng;Yuan, Shuanghu
通讯作者:
Yuan, Shuanghu