Vlachaki Maria T, Teslow Terrance N, Amosson Chad, Uy Nathan W, Ahmad Salahuddin
Department of Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Houston, TX, USA.
Med Dosim. 2005 Summer;30(2):69-75. doi: 10.1016/j.meddos.2005.01.002.
This study was undertaken to compare prostate and normal tissue dosimetry in prostate cancer patients treated with intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) and conventional 3-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3DCRT) using an endorectal balloon for prostate immobilization. Ten prostate cancer patients were studied using both IMRT and conventional 3DCRT at Houston Veterans Affairs Medical Center. For IMRT, the prescription was 70 Gy at 2 Gy/fraction at the 83.4% isodose line, allowing no more than 15% of the rectum and 33% of the bladder to receive above 68 and 65 Gy, respectively. For conventional 3DCRT, a 6-field arrangement with lateral and oblique fields was used to deliver 76 Gy at 2Gy/fraction, ensuring complete tumor coverage by the 72-Gy isodose line. Mean doses for prostate and seminal vesicles were 75.10 and 75.11 Gy, respectively, for IMRT and 75.40 and 75.02 Gy, respectively, for 3DCRT (p > 0.218). 3DCRT delivered significantly higher doses to 33%, 50%, and 66% volumes of rectum by 3.55, 6.64, and 10.18 Gy, respectively (p < 0.002), and upper rectum by 7.26, 9.86, and 9.16 Gy, respectively (p < 0.007). 3DCRT also delivered higher doses to femur volumes of 33% and 50% by 9.38 and 10.19 Gy, respectively, (p < 0.001). Insignificant differences in tumor control probability (TCP) values between IMRT and 3DCRT were calculated for prostate (p = 0.320) and seminal vesicles (p = 0.289). Compared to 3DCRT, IMRT resulted in significantly reduced normal tissue complication probability (NTCP) only for upper rectum (p = 0.025) and femurs (p = 0.021). This study demonstrates that IMRT achieves superior normal tissue avoidance, especially for rectum and femurs compared to 3DCRT, with comparable target dose escalation.
本研究旨在比较使用直肠内气囊固定前列腺的强度调制放射治疗(IMRT)和传统三维适形放射治疗(3DCRT)的前列腺癌患者的前列腺和正常组织剂量学。在休斯顿退伍军人事务医疗中心,对10例前列腺癌患者进行了IMRT和传统3DCRT研究。对于IMRT,处方剂量为在83.4%等剂量线处70 Gy,分2 Gy/次给予,直肠接受超过68 Gy的部分不超过15%,膀胱接受超过65 Gy的部分不超过33%。对于传统3DCRT,采用六野布置,包括侧野和斜野,分2 Gy/次给予76 Gy,确保72 Gy等剂量线完全覆盖肿瘤。IMRT时前列腺和精囊的平均剂量分别为75.10和75.11 Gy,3DCRT时分别为75.40和75.02 Gy(p>0.218)。3DCRT分别使直肠33%、50%和66%体积的剂量显著增加3.55、6.64和10.18 Gy(p<0.002),使直肠上段剂量分别增加7.26、9.86和9.16 Gy(p<0.007)。3DCRT还分别使股骨33%和50%体积的剂量增加9.38和10.19 Gy(p<0.001)。计算得出IMRT和3DCRT在前列腺(p=0.320)和精囊(p=0.289)的肿瘤控制概率(TCP)值无显著差异。与3DCRT相比,IMRT仅使直肠上段(p=0.025)和股骨(p=0.021)的正常组织并发症概率(NTCP)显著降低。本研究表明,与3DCRT相比,IMRT在正常组织保护方面表现更优,尤其是对直肠和股骨,且靶区剂量提升相当。