Department of Radiation Oncology, Wayne State University, Detroit, Michigan 48201, USA.
J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2010 May 28;11(3):3187. doi: 10.1120/jacmp.v11i3.3187.
Dose distributions in HN-IMRT are complex and may be sensitive to the treatment uncertainties. The goals of this study were to evaluate: 1) dose differences between plan and actual delivery and implications on margin requirement for HN-IMRT with rigid setup errors; 2) dose distribution complexity on setup error sensitivity; and 3) agreement between average dose and cumulative dose in fractionated radiotherapy. Rigid setup errors for HN-IMRT patients were measured using cone-beam CT (CBCT) for 30 patients and 896 fractions. These were applied to plans for 12HN patients who underwent simultaneous integrated boost (SIB) IMRT treatment. Dose distributions were recalculated at each fraction and summed into cumulative dose. Measured setup errors were scaled by factors of 2-4 to investigate margin adequacy. Two plans, direct machine parameter optimization (DMPO) and fluence only (FO), were available for each patient to represent plans of different complexity. Normalized dosimetric indices, conformity index (CI) and conformation number (CN) were used in the evaluation. It was found that current 5 mm margins are more than adequate to compensate for rigid setup errors, and that standard margin recipes overestimate margins for rigid setup error in SIB HN-IMRT because of differences in acceptance criteria used in margin evaluation. The CTV-to-PTV margins can be effectively reduced to 1.9 mm and 1.5 mm for CTV1 and CTV2. Plans of higher complexity and sharper dose gradients are more sensitive to setup error and require larger margins. The CI and CN are not recommended for cumulative dose evaluation because of inconsistent definition of target volumes used. For fractionated radiotherapy in HN-IMRT, the average fractional dose does not represent the true cumulative dose received by the patient through voxel-by-voxel summation, primarily due to the setup error characteristics, where the random component is larger than systematic and different target regions get underdosed at each fraction.
HN-IMRT 的剂量分布复杂,可能对治疗不确定性敏感。本研究的目的是评估:1)计划与实际剂量差异以及刚性摆位误差对 HN-IMRT 边缘需求的影响;2)摆位误差敏感性对剂量分布复杂性的影响;3)分割放疗中平均剂量与累积剂量的一致性。对 30 名患者和 896 个分次的 HN-IMRT 患者使用锥形束 CT(CBCT)测量刚性摆位误差。这些误差应用于 12 名接受同步整合 boost(SIB)IMRT 治疗的 HN 患者的计划中。在每个分次重新计算剂量分布,并将其相加得到累积剂量。将测量的摆位误差按 2-4 倍的比例缩放,以研究边缘的充足性。对于每位患者,有两种计划,直接机器参数优化(DMPO)和仅通量(FO),以代表不同复杂性的计划。归一化剂量学指标,适形指数(CI)和适形性指数(CN)用于评估。结果表明,目前 5mm 边缘足以补偿刚性摆位误差,而 SIB HN-IMRT 中的刚性摆位误差标准边缘配方过高,因为在边缘评估中使用的接受标准不同。CTV1 和 CTV2 的 CTV-PTV 边缘可有效减少至 1.9mm 和 1.5mm。复杂性和剂量梯度更高的计划对摆位误差更敏感,需要更大的边缘。由于用于定义靶区的不一致,CI 和 CN 不建议用于累积剂量评估。对于 HN-IMRT 的分割放疗,平均分次剂量不能代表患者通过体素求和实际收到的累积剂量,主要是由于摆位误差的特征,其中随机成分大于系统误差,并且不同的靶区在每个分次中剂量不足。