Coselmon Martha M, Moran Jean M, Radawski Jeffrey D, Fraass Benedick A
Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan 48109, USA.
Med Phys. 2005 May;32(5):1234-45. doi: 10.1118/1.1895545.
Inverse planned intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) fields can be highly modulated due to the large number of degrees of freedom involved in the inverse planning process. Additional modulation typically results in a more optimal plan, although the clinical rewards may be small or offset by additional delivery complexity and/or increased dose from transmission and leakage. Increasing modulation decreases delivery efficiency, and may lead to plans that are more sensitive to geometrical uncertainties. The purpose of this work is to assess the use of maximum intensity limits in inverse IMRT planning as a simple way to increase delivery efficiency without significantly affecting plan quality. Nine clinical cases (three each for brain, prostate, and head/neck) were used to evaluate advantages and disadvantages of limiting maximum intensity to increase delivery efficiency. IMRT plans were generated using in-house protocol-based constraints and objectives for the brain and head/neck, and RTOG 9406 dose volume objectives in the prostate. Each case was optimized at a series of maximum intensity ratios (the product of the maximum intensity and the number of beams divided by the prescribed dose to the target volume), and evaluated in terms of clinical metrics, dose-volume histograms, monitor units (MU) required per fraction (SMLC and DMLC delivery), and intensity map variation (a measure of the beam modulation). In each site tested, it was possible to reduce total monitor units by constraining the maximum allowed intensity without compromising the clinical acceptability of the plan. Monitor unit reductions up to 38% were observed for SMLC delivery, while reductions up to 29% were achieved for DMLC delivery. In general, complicated geometries saw a smaller reduction in monitor units for both delivery types, although DMLC delivery required significantly more monitor units in all cases. Constraining the maximum intensity in an inverse IMRT plan is a simple way to improve delivery efficiency without compromising plan objectives.
逆向计划调强放射治疗(IMRT)射野由于逆向计划过程中涉及大量自由度,因此可进行高度调制。额外的调制通常会产生更优化的计划,尽管临床获益可能很小,或者会被额外的照射复杂性和/或传输及漏射增加的剂量所抵消。增加调制会降低照射效率,并可能导致计划对几何不确定性更敏感。本研究的目的是评估在逆向IMRT计划中使用最大强度限制作为一种提高照射效率而又不显著影响计划质量的简单方法。使用九个临床病例(脑、前列腺和头颈部各三个)来评估限制最大强度以提高照射效率的优缺点。使用基于内部协议的约束和目标生成脑和头颈部的IMRT计划,并使用前列腺癌的RTOG 9406剂量体积目标。每个病例在一系列最大强度比(最大强度与射束数的乘积除以靶区规定剂量)下进行优化,并根据临床指标、剂量体积直方图、每次分割所需的监测单位(MU)(静态调强放疗和动态调强放疗照射)以及强度图变化(一种射束调制的度量)进行评估。在每个测试部位,通过限制最大允许强度可以减少总监测单位,而不影响计划的临床可接受性。对于静态调强放疗照射,观察到监测单位减少高达38%,而对于动态调强放疗照射,减少高达29%。一般来说,复杂几何形状在两种照射类型中监测单位减少较少,尽管在所有情况下动态调强放疗照射需要显著更多的监测单位。在逆向IMRT计划中限制最大强度是一种提高照射效率而又不影响计划目标的简单方法。