Department of Medical Physics, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Technol Cancer Res Treat. 2012 Jun;11(3):211-20. doi: 10.7785/tcrt.2012.500289. Epub 2012 Mar 1.
The objective of this study was to determine if volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) offers advantages over intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) for complex brain gliomas and evaluate the role of an additional partial arc. Twelve patients with glioma involving critical organs at risk (OAR) were selected [six low grade brainstem glioma (BG) and six glioblastoma (GB) cases]. BGs were prescribed 54 Gy/30 fractions (frx), and GB treated to 50 Gy/30 frx to a lower dose PTV (PTV50) with a simultaneous integrated boost delivering a total dose of 60 Gy/30 frx to a higher dose PTV (PTV60). VMAT was planned with a single arc (VMAT1) and with an additional coplanar partial arc spanning 90° (VMAT2). We observed VMATI improving the PTV equivalent uniform dose (EUD) for BG cases (p=0.027), improving the V95 for the PTV50 in GB cases (p=0.026) and resulting in more conformal GB plans (p=0.008) as compare to IMRT. However, for the GB PTV60, IMRT achieved favorable V95 over VMAT1 and VMAT2 (0.0046 and 0.008, respectively). The GB total integral dose (ID) was significantly lower with VMAT1 and VMAT2 (p=0.049 and p=0.006, respectively). Both VMAT1 and VMAT2 reduced the ID, however, only at the 5 Gy threshold for BG cases (p=0.011 and 0.005, respectively). VMAT achieved a lower spinal cord maximum dose and EUD for BG cases and higher optic nerve doses, otherwise no significant differences were observed. VMAT1 yielded the fastest treatment times and least MU. We conclude that VMAT offers faster treatment delivery for complex brain tumors while maintaining similar dosimetric qualities to IMRT. Selective dosimetric advantages in terms of spinal cord sparing and lowering the ID are observed favoring the use of an additional coplanar partial arc.
本研究旨在确定容积旋转调强放疗(VMAT)是否比强度调制放疗(IMRT)在治疗复杂脑胶质瘤方面具有优势,并评估附加部分弧的作用。选择了 12 例涉及危及器官(OAR)的胶质瘤患者[6 例低级别脑桥胶质瘤(BG)和 6 例胶质母细胞瘤(GB)病例]。BG 患者处方 54 Gy/30 分次(frx),GB 患者治疗至 50 Gy/30 frx,较低剂量 PTV(PTV50)采用同步整合增敏,总剂量为 60 Gy/30 frx 至较高剂量 PTV(PTV60)。VMAT 采用单一弧(VMAT1)和附加共面部分弧(VMAT2)进行规划,该部分弧跨越 90°。我们观察到 VMATI 改善了 BG 病例的 PTV 等效均匀剂量(EUD)(p=0.027),改善了 GB 病例 PTV50 的 V95(p=0.026),并使 GB 计划更加适形(p=0.008),与 IMRT 相比。然而,对于 GB PTV60,IMRT 实现了优于 VMAT1 和 VMAT2 的 V95(分别为 0.0046 和 0.008)。VMAT1 和 VMAT2 的总积分剂量(ID)明显低于 IMRT(p=0.049 和 p=0.006)。VMAT1 和 VMAT2 均降低了 ID,但仅在 BG 病例的 5 Gy 阈值时(p=0.011 和 p=0.005)。VMAT 使 BG 病例的脊髓最大剂量和 EUD 降低,视神经剂量升高,否则未观察到显著差异。VMAT1 产生的治疗时间最短,MU 最少。我们得出结论,VMAT 在保持与 IMRT 相似的剂量学质量的同时,为复杂脑肿瘤提供了更快的治疗输送。在脊髓保护和降低 ID 方面观察到选择性剂量学优势,有利于使用附加共面部分弧。