曹菁璟,曹 璐,单书灿.多发性脑转移瘤立体定向放疗不同放疗技术剂量学研究[J].肿瘤学杂志,2025,31(5):409-418.
多发性脑转移瘤立体定向放疗不同放疗技术剂量学研究
Dosimetric Study of Stereotactic Radiotherapy for Multiple Brain Metastases Using Different Techniques
投稿时间:2024-12-19  
DOI:10.11735/j.issn.1671-170X.2025.05.B006
中文关键词:  脑转移瘤  立体定向放射治疗  单中心非共面弧形调强放射治疗  螺旋断层放射治疗  剂量学
英文关键词:brain metastases  stereotactic radiotherapy  HyperArc  helical tomotherapy  dosimetric
基金项目:上海市卫生健康委员会卫生行业临床研究专项(20224Y0025)
作者单位
曹菁璟 上海交通大学医学院附属瑞金医院 上海市质子治疗转化研究重点实验室 
曹 璐 上海交通大学医学院附属瑞金医院 上海市质子治疗转化研究重点实验室 
单书灿 上海交通大学医学院附属瑞金医院 上海市质子治疗转化研究重点实验室 
摘要点击次数: 9
全文下载次数: 6
中文摘要:
      摘 要:[目的] 分析不同放疗技术在多发性脑转移瘤立体定向放射治疗(stereotactic radiotherapy,SRT)中的剂量学差异。[方法] 回顾性分析上海交通大学医学院附属瑞金医院2022年4月至9月多发性脑转移瘤10例病例,处方剂量35 Gy/5 f,分别采用容积弧形调强放射治疗技术(volumetric modulated arc therapy,VMAT),单中心非共面弧形调强放射治疗技术(HyperArc,HA),螺旋断层放射治疗(helical tomotherapy,HT)技术生成4种计划:VMAT,HA,使用1.0 cm射野宽度的HT(helical tomotherapy,1.0 cm field width,HT-1.0)和使用2.5射野宽度的HT(helical tomotherapy,2.5cm field width,HT-2.5)计划,比较4种计划的靶区适形性指数(conformal index,CI)、均匀性指数(homogeneity index,HI)、剂量梯度跌落指数(gradient index,GI),以及危及器官(organ at risk,OAR)包括脑干、左右晶体、左右视神经的最大剂量Dmax,脑平均剂量Dmean以及脑剂量体积V5Gy,V8Gy,V10Gy,V12Gy,V15Gy,V20Gy,V25Gy,V30Gy,并统计出束时间。探究靶区体积和靶区间距对各技术间脑剂量学参数差异的影响。[结果] VMAT和HA计划的CI无统计学差异(0.928±0.015 vs 0.928±0.008,P=0.980),均高于HT计划[HT-1.0:0.885±0.046;HT-2.5:0.863(0.832,0.880),P均<0.05];HI也无统计学差异(0.311±0.043 vs 0.307±0.071,P=0.804),均低于HT计划(HT-1.0:0.373±0.053;HT-2.5:0.404±0.055,P均<0.05)。HA计划的 GI最优(3.172±0.465),依次为VMAT[3.775(3.587,4.194)]、HT-1.0 [4.250(4.000,4.711)]和HT-2.5(5.185±0.686)。HA计划的脑Dmean为四种计划中最低[(432.790±199.845) cGy] vs VMAT [434.900(336.850,534.600) cGy,HT-1.0(464.300±208.453) cGy,HT-2.5(545.400±242.035) cGy,P均<0.05]。对于脑剂量体积V5Gy、V8Gy、V10Gy、V12Gy、V15Gy、V20Gy、V25Gy、V30Gy,HA和HT-1.0计划的V5Gy近似(P=0.069),优于VMAT和HT-2.5计划(P均<0.05);HA计划在V8Gy~V30Gy均为最低,VMAT计划从V15Gy开始优于HT-1.0,HT-2.5在所有剂量段脑受照体积最高。靶区间距对各技术间的差异影响不大。随靶区体积增加,HA与VMAT计划在V5Gy、V8Gy上差异减小,VMAT相对HT-1.0计划在V15Gy以上的优势减弱,HT-1.0与HT-2.5计划在V5Gy、V8Gy和V25Gy上差异减小。HA,VMAT,HT-2.5,HT-1.0计划出束时间依次增加。[结论] 对于多发性脑转移瘤SRT,HA技术相比较VMAT和HT技术在适形性、均匀性、剂量梯度跌落、对脑的保护和治疗效率方面均表现更好。VMAT技术与HT-1.0技术在放射性脑坏死相关风险因素上表现近似,但前者治疗时间大幅缩短。
英文摘要:
      Abstract: [Objective] To conduct a dosimetric study on stereotactic radiotherapy(SRT) for multiple brain metastases with different techniques. [Methods] Ten patients with multiple brain metastases underwent stereotactic radiotherapy with a prescribed dose of 35 Gy in 5 fractions in Ruijin Hospital, Shanghai Jiaotong University School of Medicine, from April to September 2022. Four treatment plans were generated: volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT), HyperArc (HA), helical tomotherapy (HT) with a 1.0 cm field width (HT-1.0), and HT with a 2.5 cm field width (HT-2.5). The conformity index (CI), homogeneity index (HI), and gradient index(GI) of the planning target volume(PTV), Dmax of organs at risk(OAR) (brainstem, lens, and optic nerves), Dmean and dose volumes (V5Gy, V8Gy, V10Gy, V12Gy, V15Gy, V20Gy, V25Gy, V30Gy) of brain, beam-on time were recorded and compared among different techniques. Additionally, the effect of target volume and inter-target distance on the differences in brain-related dosimetric parameters was analyzed in the various techniques. [Results] There was no significant difference in CI between VMAT and HA (0.928±0.015 vs 0.928±0.008, P=0.980), both of which were better than the HT groups[HT-1.0: 0.885±0.046; HT-2.5: 0.863(0.832, 0.880), all P<0.05]. There was also no significant difference in HI between VMAT and HA(0.311±0.043 vs 0.307±0.071, P=0.804), both of which were lower than that of the HT groups (HT-1.0: 0.373±0.053;HT-2.5: 0.404±0.055, all P<0.05). GI was optimal for the HA plan(3.172±0.465), followed by VMAT [3.775(3.587, 4.194)], HT-1.0 [4.250(4.000, 4.711)] and HT-2.5(5.185±0.686). The Dmean of brain in HA plan was the lowest among the four plans [(432.790±199.845) cGy] vs VMAT [434.900 (336.850, 534.600) cGy, HT-1.0 (464.300±208.453) cGy, HT-2.5(545.400±242.035) cGy, all P<0.05]. Regarding the dose volumes V5Gy, V8Gy, V10Gy, V12Gy, V15Gy, V20Gy, V25Gy, V30Gy of brain, HA and HT-1.0 showed similar V5Gy values (P=0.069), both superior to VMAT and HT-2.5(all P<0.05). HA had the lowest values from V8Gy to V30Gy. VMAT demonstrated advantages over HT-1.0 starting from V15Gy. HT-2.5 had the highest irradiated brain volume across all dose levels. The distance between targets has no impact on the differences among various radiotherapy techniques. As target volume increased, the differences between HA and VMAT at V5Gy and V8Gy decreased. The advantage of VMAT over HT-1.0 decreased for doses above 15 Gy. Differences between HT-1.0 and HT-2.5 reduced at V5Gy, V8Gy, and V25Gy. Beam-on times increased in the sequence of HA, VMAT, HT-2.5, and HT-1.0. [Conclusion] For stereotactic radiotherapy in treatment of multiple brain metastases, the HA technique outperforms VMAT and HT techniques in conformity, homogeneity, dose gradient fall-off, brain protection, and treatment efficiency. VMAT and HT-1.0 exhibit comparable risks related to brain necrosis, but the former significantly reduces treatment time.
在线阅读   查看全文  查看/发表评论  下载PDF阅读器