Nichols Geoffrey P, Fontenot Jonas D, Gibbons John P, Sanders Mary Ella
Department of Physics and Astronomy, Louisiana State University and Agricultural & Mechanical College, Baton Rouge, LA, USA.
Radiat Oncol. 2014 Feb 26;9:66. doi: 10.1186/1748-717X-9-66.
To examine the feasibility of volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) for post mastectomy radiotherapy (PMRT).
Fifteen PMRT patients previously treated at our clinic with helical tomotherapy (HT) were identified for the study. Planning target volumes (PTV) included the chest wall and regional lymph nodes. A systematic approach to constructing VMAT that met the clinical goals was devised. VMAT plans were then constructed for each patient and compared with HT plans with which they had been treated. The resulting plans were compared on the basis of PTV coverage; dose homogeneity index (DHI) and conformity index (CI); dose to organs at risk (OAR); tumor control probability (TCP), normal tissue complication probability (NTCP) and secondary cancer complication probability (SCCP); and treatment delivery time. Differences were tested for significance using the paired Student's t-test.
Both modalities produced clinically acceptable PMRT plans. VMAT plans showed better CI (p<0.01) and better OAR sparing at low doses than HT plans, particularly at doses less than 5 Gy. On the other hand, HT plans showed better DHI (p<0.01) and showed better OAR sparing at higher doses. Both modalities achieved nearly 100% tumor control probability and approximately 1% NTCP in the lungs and heart. VMAT showed lower SCCP than HT (p<0.01), though both plans showed higher SCCP values than conventional mixed beam (electron-photon) plans reported by our group previously. VMAT plans required 66.2% less time to deliver than HT.
Both VMAT and HT provide acceptable treatment plans for PMRT. Both techniques are currently utilized at our institution.
探讨容积调强弧形放疗(VMAT)用于乳房切除术后放疗(PMRT)的可行性。
本研究纳入了15例此前在我院接受螺旋断层放疗(HT)的PMRT患者。计划靶区(PTV)包括胸壁和区域淋巴结。设计了一种满足临床目标的VMAT构建系统方法。然后为每位患者构建VMAT计划,并与他们之前接受治疗的HT计划进行比较。根据PTV覆盖情况、剂量均匀性指数(DHI)和适形指数(CI)、危及器官(OAR)的剂量、肿瘤控制概率(TCP)、正常组织并发症概率(NTCP)和继发癌并发症概率(SCCP)以及治疗实施时间对所得计划进行比较。使用配对t检验对差异进行显著性检验。
两种放疗方式均产生了临床可接受的PMRT计划。VMAT计划在低剂量时显示出比HT计划更好的CI(p<0.01)和更好的OAR保护,特别是在剂量小于5 Gy时。另一方面,HT计划在高剂量时显示出更好的DHI(p<0.01)和更好的OAR保护。两种放疗方式在肺部和心脏的肿瘤控制概率均接近100%,NTCP约为1%。VMAT的SCCP低于HT(p<0.01),不过两种计划的SCCP值均高于我们团队之前报道的传统混合束(电子-光子)计划。VMAT计划的实施时间比HT少66.2%。
VMAT和HT均为PMRT提供了可接受的治疗计划。目前我院同时使用这两种技术。