Goggin L M, Descovich M, McGuinness C, Shiao S, Pouliot J, Park C
Department of Radiation Oncology, University of California San Francisco, CA, USA
Department of Radiation Oncology, University of California San Francisco, CA, USA.
Technol Cancer Res Treat. 2016 Jun;15(3):437-45. doi: 10.1177/1533034615601280. Epub 2015 Sep 2.
Accelerated partial breast irradiation is an attractive alternative to conventional whole breast radiotherapy for selected patients. Recently, CyberKnife has emerged as a possible alternative to conventional techniques for accelerated partial breast irradiation. In this retrospective study, we present a dosimetric comparison between 3-dimensional conformal radiotherapy plans and CyberKnife plans using circular (Iris) and multi-leaf collimators. Nine patients who had undergone breast-conserving surgery followed by whole breast radiation were included in this retrospective study. The CyberKnife planning target volume (PTV) was defined as the lumpectomy cavity + 10 mm + 2 mm with prescription dose of 30 Gy in 5 fractions. Two sets of 3-dimensional conformal radiotherapy plans were created, one used the same definitions as described for CyberKnife and the second used the RTOG-0413 definition of the PTV: lumpectomy cavity + 15 mm + 10 mm with prescription dose of 38.5 Gy in 10 fractions. Using both PTV definitions allowed us to compare the dose delivery capabilities of each technology and to evaluate the advantage of CyberKnife tracking. For the dosimetric comparison using the same PTV margins, CyberKnife and 3-dimensional plans resulted in similar tumor coverage and dose to critical structures, with the exception of the lung V5%, which was significantly smaller for 3-dimensional conformal radiotherapy, 6.2% when compared to 39.4% for CyberKnife-Iris and 17.9% for CyberKnife-multi-leaf collimator. When the inability of 3-dimensional conformal radiotherapy to track motion is considered, the result increased to 25.6%. Both CyberKnife-Iris and CyberKnife-multi-leaf collimator plans demonstrated significantly lower average ipsilateral breast V50% (25.5% and 24.2%, respectively) than 3-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (56.2%). The CyberKnife plans were more conformal but less homogeneous than the 3-dimensional conformal radiotherapy plans. Approximately 50% shorter treatment times and 50% lower number of delivered monitor units (MU) were achievable with CyberKnife-multi-leaf collimator than with CyberKnife-Iris. The CyberKnife-multi-leaf collimator treatment times were comparable to 3-dimensional conformal radiotherapy, however, the number of MU delivered was approximately 2.5 times larger. The suitability of 10 + 2 mm margins warrants further investigation.
对于部分选定患者而言,加速局部乳腺照射是传统全乳放疗的一种有吸引力的替代方案。最近,射波刀已成为加速局部乳腺照射传统技术的一种可能替代方案。在这项回顾性研究中,我们展示了使用圆形(虹膜)准直器和多叶准直器的三维适形放疗计划与射波刀计划之间的剂量学比较。九名接受了保乳手术并随后进行全乳放疗的患者被纳入这项回顾性研究。射波刀计划靶区(PTV)定义为肿块切除腔 + 10毫米 + 2毫米,处方剂量为30 Gy,分5次给予。创建了两组三维适形放疗计划,一组使用与射波刀相同的定义,另一组使用RTOG - 0413的PTV定义:肿块切除腔 + 15毫米 + 10毫米,处方剂量为38.5 Gy,分10次给予。使用这两种PTV定义使我们能够比较每种技术的剂量传递能力,并评估射波刀跟踪的优势。对于使用相同PTV边界的剂量学比较,射波刀和三维计划在肿瘤覆盖和对关键结构的剂量方面结果相似,但肺V5%除外,三维适形放疗的肺V5%明显更小,为6.2%,而射波刀 - 虹膜准直器为39.4%,射波刀 - 多叶准直器为17.9%。当考虑到三维适形放疗无法跟踪运动时,该结果增至25.6%。射波刀 - 虹膜准直器和射波刀 - 多叶准直器计划的同侧乳腺平均V50%均显著低于三维适形放疗(分别为25.5%和24.2%,而三维适形放疗为56.2%)。射波刀计划比三维适形放疗计划更适形但均匀性更差。与射波刀 - 虹膜准直器相比,使用射波刀 - 多叶准直器可实现的治疗时间缩短约50%,输出的监测单位(MU)数量减少约50%。射波刀 - 多叶准直器的治疗时间与三维适形放疗相当,然而,输出的MU数量大约大2.5倍。10 + 2毫米边界的适用性值得进一步研究。