Lohr Frank, Dobler Barbara, Mai Sabine, Hermann Brigitte, Tiefenbacher Uta, Wieland Petra, Steil Volker, Wenz Frederik
Department of Radiation Oncology, Mannheim Medical Center, University of Heidelberg, Germany.
Strahlenther Onkol. 2003 Aug;179(8):557-63. doi: 10.1007/s00066-003-1087-z.
Locoregional relapse is a problem frequently encountered with advanced gastric cancer. Data from the randomized Intergroup trial 116 suggest effectiveness of adjuvant radiochemotherapy, albeit with significant toxicity. The potential of intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) to reduce toxicity by significantly reducing maximum and median doses to organs at risk while still applying sufficient dose to the target volume in the upper abdomen was studied.
For a typical configuration of target volumes and organs, a step-and-shoot IMRT plan (eight beam orientations), developed as a class solution for treatment of tumors in the upper abdomen (Figures 1 to 3), a conventional plan, a combination of the conventional plan with a kidney-sparing boost plan, and a conventional plan with noncoplanar ap and pa fields for improved kidney sparing were compared with respect to coverage of target volume and dose to organs at risk with a dose of 45 Gy delivered as the median dose to the target volume.
When using the conventional three-dimensionally planned box techniques, the right kidney could be kept below tolerance, but median dose to the left kidney amounted to between 14.8 and 26.9 Gy, depending on the plan. IMRT reduced the median dose to the left kidney to 10.5 Gy, while still keeping the dose to the right kidney < 8 Gy. Liver was spared better with IMRT. Dose to the lungs was not significantly different, and dose to the spinal cord was higher (but well below tolerance) with IMRT. The dose distribution within the target volume was less homogeneous than for the conventional plans. With regard to target coverage, > 90% of prescription dose were delivered to > 90% of target volume with IMRT (Table 1).
IMRT has the potential to deliver efficient doses to target volumes in the upper abdomen, while delivering dose to organs at risk in a more advantageous fashion than a conventional technique. For clinical implementation, the possibility of extensive organ motion in the upper abdomen has to be taken into account for treatment planning and patient positioning. The multitude of potential risks related to its application has to be the subject of thorough follow-up and further studies.
局部区域复发是晚期胃癌常见的问题。来自随机分组的国际多中心试验116的数据表明辅助放化疗有效,尽管存在显著毒性。本研究探讨了调强放疗(IMRT)通过显著降低危及器官的最大剂量和中位剂量来减少毒性的潜力,同时仍对上腹部靶区给予足够剂量。
对于典型的靶区和器官配置,将一种为上腹部肿瘤治疗开发的静态调强放疗计划(八个射野方向)(图1至3)作为类解决方案、一个传统计划、传统计划与肾脏保护加量计划的组合以及具有非共面前后野以改善肾脏保护的传统计划进行比较,比较内容包括靶区覆盖情况以及给予危及器官的剂量,靶区中位剂量为45 Gy。
使用传统的三维计划盒技术时,右肾可保持在耐受剂量以下,但左肾的中位剂量根据计划不同在14.8至26.9 Gy之间。调强放疗将左肾的中位剂量降至10.5 Gy,同时仍使右肾剂量<8 Gy。调强放疗对肝脏的保护更好。肺部剂量无显著差异,调强放疗时脊髓剂量较高(但远低于耐受剂量)。靶区内的剂量分布比传统计划的均匀性差。在靶区覆盖方面,调强放疗时>90%的处方剂量给予了>90%的靶区体积(表1)。
调强放疗有潜力对上腹部靶区给予有效剂量,同时以比传统技术更有利的方式对危及器官给予剂量。对于临床应用,在治疗计划和患者定位时必须考虑上腹部器官广泛运动的可能性。与调强放疗应用相关的众多潜在风险必须成为深入随访和进一步研究的主题。