早期原发纵隔B细胞淋巴瘤静态IMRT和VMAT计划比较
조기원발종격B세포림파류정태IMRT화VMAT계화비교
Comparison of static intensity-modulated radiation therapy and volumetric modulated arc therapy in early-stage primary mediastinal B-cell lymphoma
  • 万方数据
    中华放射肿瘤学杂志 중화방사종류학잡지
    Chinese Journal of Radiation Oncology
    2015年 6期 638-643 ,共6页

    徐利明%康明磊%江波%房辉%金晶%王维虎%王淑莲%刘跃平%宋永文%刘清峰%王清鑫%戴建荣%李晔雄

    서리명%강명뢰%강파%방휘%금정%왕유호%왕숙련%류약평%송영문%류청봉%왕청흠%대건영%리엽웅

    原发纵隔B细胞淋巴瘤%静态调强放疗%旋转调强放疗%放疗计划比较 原髮縱隔B細胞淋巴瘤%靜態調彊放療%鏇轉調彊放療%放療計劃比較
    원발종격B세포림파류%정태조강방료%선전조강방료%방료계화비교
    Primary mediastinal large B-cell lymphoma%intensity-modulated radiotherapy%Volumetric-Modulated Arc Therapy%Radiotherapy plan comparison
    目的：通过比较不同静态IMRT和VMAT计划靶区剂量分布与正常组织照射情况，以明确原发纵隔B细胞淋巴瘤（ PMBCL）患者最佳IMRT方式。方法共16例（男女各8例）首程放疗的Ann?ArborⅠ期PMBCL患者纳入研究。 PGTV与PTV分别给予45 Gy与40 Gy。每例患者均设计4种调强计划：静态IMRT （5F?IMRT、7F?IMRT、9F?IMRT）和VMAT计划，评估各计划靶区剂量分布、正常组织照射剂量与计划实施效率。单向方差分析剂量差异。结果5F?、7F?、9F?IMRT、VMAT 的PGTV平均CI值和HI值分别为1．01和1．10、1．01和1．10、1．01和1．10、1．01和1．11（ P＝0．963和0．843），PTV平均CI值和HI值分别为1．04和1．22、1．03和1．19、1．03和1．17、1．08和1．14（P＝0．964和0．969）。正常组织体积剂量参数均相近（ P＝0．192～1．000）。9F?IMRT计划治疗时间和机器跳数明显高于其他静态 IMRT 与 VMAT （ P＝0．000、0．000），其中 VMAT 机器跳数最少（13345．0 MU）、治疗时间最短（5．9 mins ）。结论7F?与9F?IMRT 靶区覆盖度比5F?IMRT 与 VMAT 更好。VMAT在早期PMBCL中较IMRT无剂量学优势，尤其是乳腺低剂量照射范围较大，但实施效率更佳。
    목적：통과비교불동정태IMRT화VMAT계화파구제량분포여정상조직조사정황，이명학원발종격B세포림파류（ PMBCL）환자최가IMRT방식。방법공16례（남녀각8례）수정방료적Ann?ArborⅠ기PMBCL환자납입연구。 PGTV여PTV분별급여45 Gy여40 Gy。매례환자균설계4충조강계화：정태IMRT （5F?IMRT、7F?IMRT、9F?IMRT）화VMAT계화，평고각계화파구제량분포、정상조직조사제량여계화실시효솔。단향방차분석제량차이。결과5F?、7F?、9F?IMRT、VMAT 적PGTV평균CI치화HI치분별위1．01화1．10、1．01화1．10、1．01화1．10、1．01화1．11（ P＝0．963화0．843），PTV평균CI치화HI치분별위1．04화1．22、1．03화1．19、1．03화1．17、1．08화1．14（P＝0．964화0．969）。정상조직체적제량삼수균상근（ P＝0．192～1．000）。9F?IMRT계화치료시간화궤기도수명현고우기타정태 IMRT 여 VMAT （ P＝0．000、0．000），기중 VMAT 궤기도수최소（13345．0 MU）、치료시간최단（5．9 mins ）。결론7F?여9F?IMRT 파구복개도비5F?IMRT 여 VMAT 경호。VMAT재조기PMBCL중교IMRT무제량학우세，우기시유선저제량조사범위교대，단실시효솔경가。
    Objective To compare target dosimetric distribution and normal tissue radiation between different static intensity?modulated radiation therapy ( IMRT) plans and volumetric modulated arc therapy ( VMAT) and to identify the best IMRT plan for patients with primary mediastinal B?cell lymphoma ( PMBCL) . Methods A total of 16 patients ( 8 males and 8 females) with early?stage ( Ann?Arbor stageⅠ) PMBCL were enrolled in this study,with doses of 45 Gy for primary gross tumor volume ( PGTV) and 40 Gy for planning target volume (PTV).Four plans were designed for each patient,consisting of static IMRT (5F?IMRT,7F?IMRT,9F?IMRT) and VMAT,and the target dosimetric distribution,normal tissue radiation dose,and efficiency of each plan were evaluated. The difference of dose was analyzed by analysis of variance. Results The mean conformity index ( CI) and homogeneity index ( HI) for PGTV in 5F?,7F?,9F?IMRT and VMAT were 1. 01 and 1. 10, 1. 01 and 1. 10, 1. 01 and 1. 10, and 1. 01 and 1. 11 ( P= 0. 963 and 0. 843) ,respectively,while these two indices for PTV were 1. 04 and 1. 22,1. 03 and 1. 19,1. 03 and 1. 17, and 1. 08 and 1. 14( P=0. 964 and 0. 969) ,respectively. The parameters of volume and dose were similar on normal tissue ( P= 0. 192?1. 000 ) . The treatment time and number of monitor units in 9F?IMRT were significantly higher than those in other static IMRT plans and VMAT ( P=0. 000,0. 000) ,and among these plans,VMAT had the lowest number of monitor units ( 13 345. 0 MU) and the shortest treatment time ( 5. 9 min) . Conclusions The target volume coverage of 7F?and 9F?IMRT is better than that of 5F?IMRT and VMAT.For early?stage PMBCL,VMAT is not superior to IMRT in terms of dosimetry,especially with a larger area of low?dose radiation to the breast,but it is highly efficient in practice.
    원문보기 원문다운로드 사이트로이동
저자의 최근 논문