Kim Yongbok
Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ, USA.
J Contemp Brachytherapy. 2015 Oct;7(5):387-96. doi: 10.5114/jcb.2015.55293. Epub 2015 Oct 29.
To evaluate the dosimetric impact of source-positioning uncertainty in high-dose-rate (HDR) balloon brachytherapy of breast cancer.
For 49 HDR balloon patients, each dwell position of catheter(s) was manually shifted distally (+) and proximally (-) with a magnitude from 1 to 4 mm. Total 392 plans were retrospectively generated and compared to corresponding clinical plans using 7 dosimetric parameters: dose (D95) to 95% of planning target volume for evaluation (PTV_EVAL), and volume covered by 100% and 90% of the prescribed dose (PD) (V100 and V90); skin and rib maximum point dose (Dmax); normal breast tissue volume receiving 150% and 200% of PD (V150 and V200).
PTV_EVAL dosimetry deteriorated with larger average/maximum reduction (from ± 1 mm to ± 4 mm) for larger source position uncertainty (p value < 0.0001): from 1.0%/2.5%, 3.3%/5.9%, 6.3%/10.0% to 9.8%/14.5% for D95; from 1.0%/2.6%, 3.1%/5.7%, 5.8%/8.9% to 8.7%/12.3% for V100; from 0.2%/1.5%, 1.0%/4.0%, 2.7%/6.8% to 5.1%/10.3% for V90. ≥ ± 3 mm shift reduced average D95 to < 95% and average V100 to < 90%. While skin and rib Dmax change was case-specific, its absolute change (∣Δ(Value)∣) showed that larger shift and high dose group had larger variation compared to smaller and lower dose group (p value < 0.0001), respectively. Normal breast tissue V150 variation was case-specific and small. Average ∣Δ(V150)∣ was 0.2 cc for the largest shift (± 4 mm) with maximum < 1.7 cc. V200 was increased with higher elevation for larger shift: from 6.4 cc/9.8 cc, 7.0 cc/10.1 cc, 8.0 cc/11.3 cc to 9.2 cc/ 13.0 cc.
The tolerance of ± 2 mm recommended by AAPM TG 56 is clinically acceptable in most clinical cases. However, special attention should be paid to a case where both skin and rib are located proximally to balloon, and the orientation of balloon catheter(s) is vertical to these critical structures. In this case, sufficient dosimetric planning margins are required.
评估高剂量率(HDR)球囊近距离放射治疗乳腺癌时源定位不确定性对剂量测定的影响。
对于49例接受HDR球囊治疗的患者,将导管的每个驻留位置分别向远侧(+)和近侧(-)手动移动1至4毫米。回顾性生成了总共392个计划,并使用7个剂量测定参数与相应的临床计划进行比较:评估计划靶体积(PTV_EVAL)95%的剂量(D95),以及处方剂量(PD)100%和90%所覆盖的体积(V100和V90);皮肤和肋骨的最大点剂量(Dmax);接受PD 150%和200%的正常乳腺组织体积(V150和V200)。
源位置不确定性越大,PTV_EVAL剂量测定恶化越明显,平均/最大降低幅度越大(从±1毫米到±4毫米)(p值<0.0001):D95分别从1.0%/2.5%、3.3%/5.9%、6.3%/10.0%降至9.8%/14.5%;V100分别从1.0%/2.6%、3.1%/5.7%、5.8%/8.9%降至8.7%/12.3%;V90分别从0.2%/1.5%、1.0%/4.0%、2.7%/6.8%降至5.1%/10.3%。≥±3毫米的移动使平均D95降至<95%,平均V100降至<90%。虽然皮肤和肋骨Dmax的变化因病例而异,但其绝对变化(∣Δ(值)∣)表明,与较小和较低剂量组相比,较大移动和高剂量组的变化分别更大(p值<0.0001)。正常乳腺组织V150的变化因病例而异且较小。最大移动(±4毫米)时平均∣Δ(V150)∣为0.2立方厘米,最大值<1.7立方厘米。对于较大移动,V200随着更高的提升而增加:从6.4立方厘米/9.8立方厘米、7.0立方厘米/10.1立方厘米、8.0立方厘米/11.3立方厘米增至9.2立方厘米/13.0立方厘米。
美国医学物理师协会(AAPM)TG 56推荐的±2毫米容差在大多数临床病例中临床上是可接受的。然而,对于皮肤和肋骨都位于球囊近端且球囊导管方向垂直于这些关键结构的情况应特别注意。在这种情况下,需要足够的剂量测定计划边界。