Suppr超能文献

调强放射治疗(IMRT)和容积调强弧形治疗(VMAT)射束特性检查及与治疗前质量保证结果的对比评估。

Examination of the properties of IMRT and VMAT beams and evaluation against pre-treatment quality assurance results.

作者信息

Crowe S B, Kairn T, Middlebrook N, Sutherland B, Hill B, Kenny J, Langton C M, Trapp J V

机构信息

Royal Brisbane and Women's Hospital, Butterfield Street, Herston QLD 4006, Herston, Australia. Queensland University of Technology, 2 George Street, Brisbane QLD 4000, Australia.

出版信息

Phys Med Biol. 2015 Mar 21;60(6):2587-601. doi: 10.1088/0031-9155/60/6/2587. Epub 2015 Mar 12.

Abstract

This study aimed to provide a detailed evaluation and comparison of a range of modulated beam evaluation metrics, in terms of their correlation with QA testing results and their variation between treatment sites, for a large number of treatments. Ten metrics including the modulation index (MI), fluence map complexity, modulation complexity score (MCS), mean aperture displacement (MAD) and small aperture score (SAS) were evaluated for 546 beams from 122 intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) and volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) treatment plans targeting the anus, rectum, endometrium, brain, head and neck and prostate. The calculated sets of metrics were evaluated in terms of their relationships to each other and their correlation with the results of electronic portal imaging based quality assurance (QA) evaluations of the treatment beams. Evaluation of the MI, MAD and SAS suggested that beams used in treatments of the anus, rectum, head and neck were more complex than the prostate and brain treatment beams. Seven of the ten beam complexity metrics were found to be strongly correlated with the results from QA testing of the IMRT beams (p < 0.00008). For example, values of SAS (with multileaf collimator apertures narrower than 10 mm defined as 'small') less than 0.2 also identified QA passing IMRT beams with 100% specificity. However, few of the metrics are correlated with the results from QA testing of the VMAT beams, whether they were evaluated as whole 360° arcs or as 60° sub-arcs. Select evaluation of beam complexity metrics (at least MI, MCS and SAS) is therefore recommended, as an intermediate step in the IMRT QA chain. Such evaluation may also be useful as a means of periodically reviewing VMAT planning or optimiser performance.

摘要

本研究旨在针对大量治疗,就一系列调制束评估指标与质量保证(QA)测试结果的相关性及其在不同治疗部位之间的变化,提供详细的评估和比较。针对来自122个调强放射治疗(IMRT)和容积调强弧形治疗(VMAT)治疗计划的546束射束,评估了十个指标,包括调制指数(MI)、注量图复杂度、调制复杂度评分(MCS)、平均孔径位移(MAD)和小孔径评分(SAS),这些治疗计划针对肛门、直肠、子宫内膜、脑、头颈部和前列腺。根据这些指标集相互之间的关系以及它们与基于电子射野成像的治疗射束质量保证(QA)评估结果的相关性进行评估。对MI、MAD和SAS的评估表明,用于肛门、直肠、头颈部治疗的射束比用于前列腺和脑部治疗的射束更复杂。发现十个射束复杂度指标中的七个与IMRT射束的QA测试结果密切相关(p < 0.00008)。例如,SAS值(将多叶准直器孔径小于10 mm定义为“小”)小于0.2时,也能100%特异性地识别通过QA测试的IMRT射束。然而,几乎没有指标与VMAT射束的QA测试结果相关,无论它们是作为完整的360°弧还是60°子弧进行评估。因此,建议选择评估射束复杂度指标(至少MI、MCS和SAS),作为IMRT QA流程中的中间步骤。这种评估也可能有助于定期审查VMAT计划或优化器性能。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验