Tomida Masashi, Kamomae Takeshi, Suzuki Junji, Ohashi Yoichi, Itoh Yoshiyuki, Oguchi Hiroshi, Okuda Takahito
Department of Radiology, Toyota Memorial Hospital, Toyota, Japan.
Department of Radiological and Medical Laboratory Sciences, Nagoya University Graduate School of Medicine, Nagoya, Japan.
J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2017 Sep;18(5):124-133. doi: 10.1002/acm2.12128. Epub 2017 Jul 10.
Stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) using recently introduced multileaf collimators (MLC) is preferred over circular collimators in the treatment of localized prostate cancer. The objective of this study was to assess the clinical usefulness of MLCs in prostate SBRT by comparing the effectiveness of treatment plans using fixed collimators, variable collimators, and MLCs and by ensuring delivery quality assurance (DQA) for each. For each patient who underwent conventional radiation therapy for localized prostate cancer, mock SBRT plans were created using a fixed collimator, a variable collimator, and an MLC. The total MUs, treatment times, and dose-volume histograms of the planning target volumes and organs at risk for each treatment plan were compared. For DQA, a phantom with a radiochromic film or an ionization chamber was irradiated in each plan. We performed gamma-index analysis to evaluate the consistency between the measured and calculated doses. The MLC-based plans had an ~27% lower average total MU than the plans involving other collimators. Moreover, the average estimated treatment time for the MLC plan was 31% and 20% shorter than that for the fixed and variable collimator plans respectively. The gamma-index passing rate in the DQA using film measurements was slightly lower for the MLC than for the other collimators. The DQA results acquired using the ionization chamber showed that the discrepancies between the measured and calculated doses were within 3% in all cases. The results reinforce the usefulness of MLCs in robotic radiosurgery for prostrate SBRT treatment planning; most notably, the total MU and treatment time were both reduced compared to the cases using other types of collimators. Moreover, although the DQA results based on film dosimetry yielded a slightly lower gamma-index passing rate for the MLC than for the other collimators, the MLC accuracy was determined to be sufficient for clinical use.
在局部前列腺癌的治疗中,使用最近推出的多叶准直器(MLC)的立体定向体部放射治疗(SBRT)比圆形准直器更受青睐。本研究的目的是通过比较使用固定准直器、可变准直器和MLC的治疗计划的有效性,并确保每种准直器的剂量输送质量保证(DQA),来评估MLC在前列腺SBRT中的临床实用性。对于每一位接受局部前列腺癌常规放射治疗的患者,使用固定准直器、可变准直器和MLC创建模拟SBRT计划。比较每个治疗计划的总监测单位(MU)、治疗时间以及计划靶体积和危及器官的剂量体积直方图。对于DQA,在每个计划中对带有放射变色胶片或电离室的模体进行照射。我们进行了γ指数分析,以评估测量剂量与计算剂量之间的一致性。基于MLC的计划的平均总MU比涉及其他准直器的计划低约27%。此外,MLC计划的平均估计治疗时间分别比固定准直器计划和可变准直器计划短31%和20%。使用胶片测量进行DQA时,MLC的γ指数通过率略低于其他准直器。使用电离室获得的DQA结果表明,在所有情况下,测量剂量与计算剂量之间的差异均在3%以内。这些结果强化了MLC在前列腺SBRT治疗计划的机器人放射外科中的实用性;最值得注意的是,与使用其他类型准直器的情况相比,总MU和治疗时间均有所减少。此外,尽管基于胶片剂量测定的DQA结果显示MLC的γ指数通过率略低于其他准直器,但MLC的准确性被确定足以用于临床。