Medical Faculty, Department of Radiation Oncology, CyberKnife Center and Radiation Reference Center of the GHSG, University of Cologne, Kerpener Str. 52, 50937 Köln, Cologne, Germany.
Medical Faculty, Department of Hematology and Oncology, University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany.
Radiat Oncol. 2018 Jul 3;13(1):122. doi: 10.1186/s13014-018-1066-2.
The benefits of proton therapy in the treatment of patients with Hodgkin lymphoma (HL) are controversially discussed. Therefore we compared intensitiy modulated proton therapy (IMPT) with intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT), in the form of volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) in patients with Hodgkin lymphoma (HL), through a comparative treatment planning study.
Radiation plans for 21 patients with Hodgkin Lymphoma (HL) were computed for IMPT and deep inspiration breath hold (DIBH) VMAT. Plans were optimized and computed assuming deep inspiration breath holding conditions. Dosimetric comparison on standard metrics from dose volume histograms was performed to appraise the relative merits of the two techniques, while proton plan robustness was assessed by re-computing the dose distribution of each plan by varying the Hounsfield Units to stopping power calibration by applying a ± 3 and 4% error.
DIBH-VMAT and IMPT both provided excellent coverage, conformity and heterogeneity of the clinical target volume (CTV) and planning target volume (PTV). IMPT reduced mean doses to the breasts, lungs, heart and normal tissue by 38-83%. IMPT significantly reduced mean doses to the heart to < 5 Gy despite bulky mediastinal disease and decreased breast doses in female patients to < 1 Gy. Despite the simulated 3 and 4% miscalibration errors, no remarkable or measurable impact was observed on the organs at risk (OARs).
This is the first comparison between DIBH-VMAT and IMPT in HL treatment. We could demonstrate statistically significant decreases in all dose/volume metrics of the OARs. Regardless of the planning paradigm used, range uncertainties can substantially under dose the PTV, while perhaps not leading to clinically significant deterioration of CTV coverage. With the geometry applied no impact was observed for OARs, suggesting IMPT as a superior technique for potentially reducing future health risks for HL patients.
质子治疗在霍奇金淋巴瘤(HL)治疗中的益处存在争议。因此,我们通过比较治疗计划研究,比较了调强质子治疗(IMPT)与容积调强弧形治疗(VMAT)形式的调强放疗(IMRT)在霍奇金淋巴瘤(HL)患者中的应用。
为 21 例霍奇金淋巴瘤(HL)患者计算了 IMPT 和深吸气屏气(DIBH)VMAT 的放射治疗计划。在假设深吸气屏气条件下对计划进行了优化和计算。通过剂量体积直方图上的标准指标进行剂量学比较,以评估两种技术的相对优势,同时通过将每个计划的剂量分布重新计算,将体素的亨氏单位值变化为停止功率校准值,并应用±3%和 4%的误差,来评估质子计划的稳健性。
DIBH-VMAT 和 IMPT 均为临床靶区(CTV)和计划靶区(PTV)提供了极好的覆盖、一致性和不均匀性。IMPT 可使乳房、肺、心脏和正常组织的平均剂量降低 38-83%。尽管纵隔疾病体积较大,但 IMPT 仍可显著降低心脏的平均剂量至<5Gy,并使女性患者的乳房剂量降低至<1Gy。尽管存在模拟的 3%和 4%的校准误差,但对危及器官(OARs)没有观察到明显或可测量的影响。
这是首次在 HL 治疗中比较 DIBH-VMAT 和 IMPT。我们可以证明,OARs 的所有剂量/体积指标均有统计学意义的降低。无论使用哪种计划模式,范围不确定性都可能使 PTV 剂量不足,而不会导致 CTV 覆盖的临床显著恶化。对于所应用的几何形状,OARs 没有观察到影响,这表明 IMPT 是一种潜在的降低 HL 患者未来健康风险的优越技术。