Abe Kota, Kadoya Noriyuki, Sato Shinya, Hashimoto Shimpei, Nakajima Yujiro, Miyasaka Yuya, Ito Kengo, Umezawa Rei, Yamamoto Takaya, Takahashi Noriyoshi, Takeda Ken, Jingu Keiichi
Department of Radiation Oncology, Tohoku University Graduate School of Medicine, 1-1 Seiryo-machi, Aoba-ku, Sendai, 980-8574, Japan.
Department of Radiation Oncology, Tokyo Metropolitan Cancer and Infectious Diseases Center Komagome Hospital, 3-18-22, Honkomagome, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo, 113-8677, Japan.
J Radiat Res. 2018 Mar 1;59(2):198-206. doi: 10.1093/jrr/rrx081.
We evaluated the impact of model-based dose calculation algorithms (MBDCAs) on high-dose-rate brachytherapy (HDR-BT) treatment planning for patients with cervical cancer. Seven patients with cervical cancer treated using HDR-BT were studied. Tandem and ovoid applicators were used in four patients, a vaginal cylinder in one, and interstitial needles in the remaining two patients. MBDCAs were applied to the Advanced Collapsed cone Engine (ACE; Elekta, Stockholm, Sweden). All plans, which were originally calculated using TG-43, were re-calculated using both ACE and Monte Carlo (MC) simulations. Air was used as the rectal material. The mean difference in the rectum D2cm3 between ACErec-air and MCrec-air was 8.60 ± 4.64%, whereas that in the bladder D2cm3 was -2.80 ± 1.21%. Conversely, in the small group analysis (n = 4) using water instead of air as the rectal material, the mean difference in the rectum D2cm3 between TG-43 and ACErec-air was 11.87 ± 2.65%, whereas that between TG-43 and ACErec-water was 0.81 ± 2.04%, indicating that the use of water as the rectal material reduced the difference in D2cm3 between TG-43 and ACE. Our results suggested that the differences in the dose-volume histogram (DVH) parameters of TG-43 and ACE were large for the rectum when considerable air (gas) volume was present in it, and that this difference was reduced when the air (gas) volume was reduced. Also, ACE exhibited better dose calculation accuracy than that of TG-43 in this situation. Thus, ACE may be able to calculate the dose more accurately than TG-43 for HDR-BT in treating cervical cancers, particularly for patients with considerable air (gas) volume in the rectum.
我们评估了基于模型的剂量计算算法(MBDCAs)对宫颈癌患者高剂量率近距离放射治疗(HDR-BT)治疗计划的影响。研究了7例接受HDR-BT治疗的宫颈癌患者。4例患者使用了串联和卵圆形施源器,1例使用了阴道柱状施源器,其余2例患者使用了组织间插植针。MBDCAs应用于高级坍缩圆锥引擎(ACE;医科达公司,瑞典斯德哥尔摩)。所有最初使用TG-43计算的计划,均使用ACE和蒙特卡罗(MC)模拟重新计算。将空气用作直肠材料。ACErec-air与MCrec-air之间直肠D2cm3的平均差异为8.60±4.64%,而膀胱D2cm3的平均差异为-2.80±1.21%。相反,在以水代替空气作为直肠材料的小组分析(n = 4)中,TG-43与ACErec-air之间直肠D2cm3的平均差异为11.87±2.65%,而TG-43与ACErec-water之间的平均差异为0.81±2.04%,这表明使用水作为直肠材料减少了TG-43与ACE之间D2cm3的差异。我们的结果表明,当直肠中存在大量空气(气体)时,TG-43和ACE的剂量体积直方图(DVH)参数在直肠方面差异很大,而当空气(气体)体积减少时,这种差异会减小。此外,在这种情况下,ACE表现出比TG-43更好的剂量计算准确性。因此,对于宫颈癌的HDR-BT治疗,ACE可能比TG-43能更准确地计算剂量,特别是对于直肠中存在大量空气(气体)的患者。