Jacob Dayee, Lamberto Melissa, DeSouza Lawrence Lana, Mourtada Firas
Department of Radiation Oncology, Helen F Graham Cancer Center and Research Institute, Christiana Care Health System, Newark, DE.
Department of Radiation Oncology, Pinnacle Health System, Harrisburg, PA.
Brachytherapy. 2017 May-Jun;16(3):624-629. doi: 10.1016/j.brachy.2017.02.008. Epub 2017 Mar 29.
To retrospectively compare clinical dosimetry of CT-based tandem-ring treatment plans using a model-based dose calculation algorithm (MBDCA) with the standard TG-43-based dose formalism.
A cohort of 10 cervical cancer cohorts treated using the tandem and ring high-dose-rate applicators were evaluated. The original treatment plans were created using the department CT-based volume optimization clinical standards. All plans originally calculated with TG-43 dose calculation formalism were recalculated using the MBDCA algorithm. The gross target volume and organs at risk (OARs) were contoured on each data set along with significant heterogeneities like air in cavity and high-density plastic tandem and ring components. The patient tissue was modeled as homogenous liquid water. D, D, and D for gross target volume, D, D, and D for bladder, rectum, and sigmoid were extracted from dose-volume histograms for TG-43 and MBDCA calculated plans. Mean absolute difference ± 2σ in the above metrics was calculated for each plan.
Using the manual applicator contouring method, MBDCA plans (n = 10) showed 2.1 ± 1.1% reduction in dose to Point A average, 2.6 ± 0.9% reduction in Target D dose, and 2.1 ± 0.3% dose reduction to OARs. Results from plans using vendor supplied solid applicator models (n = 5) showed 2.2 ± 1.10% reduction in dose to Point A average, 2.7 ± 0.2% reduction in Target D dose, and 2.7 ± 1.0% dose reduction on average to OARs.
For unshielded plastic gynecologic applicators, minimal dosimetric changes (<5%) were found using MBDCA relative to standard TG-43. Use of solid applicator model is more efficient than manual applicator contouring and also yielded similar MBDCA dosimetric results. Currently, TG-186 dose calculations should be reported along TG-43 until we obtain studies with larger cohorts to fully realize the potential of MBDCA dosimetry.
回顾性比较基于模型的剂量计算算法(MBDCA)与基于标准TG-43的剂量形式论的CT引导下串联环治疗计划的临床剂量学。
评估了一组使用串联和环形高剂量率施源器治疗的10例宫颈癌患者。原始治疗计划是根据科室基于CT的体积优化临床标准制定的。所有最初使用TG-43剂量计算形式论计算的计划均使用MBDCA算法重新计算。在每个数据集上勾勒出大体靶体积和危及器官(OARs),以及诸如腔内空气和高密度塑料串联和环形组件等显著的不均匀性。将患者组织建模为均匀的液态水。从TG-43和MBDCA计算计划的剂量体积直方图中提取大体靶体积的D、D和D,膀胱、直肠和乙状结肠的D、D和D。计算每个计划上述指标的平均绝对差±2σ。
使用手动施源器轮廓法,MBDCA计划(n = 10)显示A点平均剂量降低2.1±1.1%,靶区D剂量降低2.6±0.9%,OARs剂量降低2.1±0.3%。使用供应商提供的实体施源器模型的计划(n = 5)结果显示A点平均剂量降低2.2±1.10%,靶区D剂量降低2.7±0.2%,OARs平均剂量降低2.7±1.0%。
对于无屏蔽的塑料妇科施源器,相对于标准TG-43,使用MBDCA发现剂量学变化极小(<5%)。使用实体施源器模型比手动施源器轮廓法更有效,并且也产生了相似的MBDCA剂量学结果。目前,在我们获得更大队列的研究以充分实现MBDCA剂量学的潜力之前,应同时报告TG-186和TG-43的剂量计算结果。