• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

评价使用实验设计(DoE)对容积调强弧形治疗中各种射野配置进行优化工作流程。

Evaluation of optimization workflow using design of experiment (DoE) for various field configurations in volumetric-modulated arc therapy.

机构信息

Department of Radiation Oncology, Hiroshima University Hospital, Japan.

Department of Radiation Oncology, Hiroshima University Hospital, Japan.

出版信息

Phys Med. 2018 Oct;54:34-41. doi: 10.1016/j.ejmp.2018.09.010. Epub 2018 Sep 27.

DOI:10.1016/j.ejmp.2018.09.010
PMID:30337008
Abstract

PURPOSE

In volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT), field configurations such as couch or arc angles are defined manually or using a template. A field configuration is reselected through trial-and-error in the case of undesirable resultant planning. To efficiently plan for desirable quality, configurations should be assessed before dose calculation. Design of experiments (DoE) is an optimization technique that efficiently reveals the influence of inputs on outputs. We developed an original tool using DoE to determine the field configuration selection and evaluated the efficacy of this workflow for clinical practice.

METHODS

Computed-tomography scans of 17 patients and target structures were acquired retrospectively from a brain tumor treated using a dual-arc VMAT plan. The configurations of the couch, arc, collimator angles, field sizes, and beam energy were determined using DoE. The resultant dose distributions obtained using the DoE-selected configuration were compared with the clinical plan.

RESULTS

The averaged differences between the DoE and clinical plan for 17 patients of doses to 50% of the planning target volume (PTV-D50%), Brain-D60%, Brain-D30%, Brain stem-D1%, Left eye-D1%, Right eye-D1%, Optic nerve-D1%, and Chiasm-D1% were 0.2 ± 0.5%, -1.0 ± 4.6%, 1.7 ± 3.5%, -2.5 ± 6.7%, -0.2 ± 4.9%, -1.2 ± 3.6%, -2.8 ± 7.3%, and -2.1 ± 5.7%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Our optimization workflow obtained using DoE for various field configurations provided the same or slightly superior plan quality compared with that created by experts. This process is feasible for clinical practice and will efficiently improve treatment quality while removing the influence of the planner's experience.

摘要

目的

在容积旋转调强放疗(VMAT)中,床面或旋转角度等射野参数通常由手动或模板定义。在计划结果不理想的情况下,需要通过反复尝试来重新选择射野参数。为了高效地制定理想的治疗计划,在剂量计算之前应评估射野参数。实验设计(DoE)是一种优化技术,可高效地揭示输入对输出的影响。我们开发了一种原始工具,使用 DoE 来确定射野参数选择,并评估该工作流程在临床实践中的效果。

方法

回顾性地获取了 17 例接受双弧 VMAT 计划治疗的脑肿瘤患者的计算机断层扫描(CT)图像和靶区结构。使用 DoE 确定床面、旋转角度、准直器角度、射野大小和射束能量的参数配置。将使用 DoE 选择的配置获得的剂量分布与临床计划进行比较。

结果

17 例患者的计划靶区(PTV)50%等剂量线(PTV-D50%)、脑 60%等剂量线(Brain-D60%)、脑 30%等剂量线(Brain-D30%)、脑干 1%等剂量线(Brain stem-D1%)、左眼 1%等剂量线(Left eye-D1%)、右眼 1%等剂量线(Right eye-D1%)、视神经 1%等剂量线(Optic nerve-D1%)和视交叉 1%等剂量线(Chiasm-D1%)的剂量,DoE 组与临床计划组之间的平均差异分别为 0.2±0.5%、-1.0±4.6%、1.7±3.5%、-2.5±6.7%、-0.2±4.9%、-1.2±3.6%、-2.8±7.3%和-2.1±5.7%。

结论

与专家制定的计划相比,我们使用 DoE 为各种射野参数配置优化得到的计划在质量上相同或略有提高。该过程可用于临床实践,将高效地提高治疗质量,同时消除规划师经验的影响。

相似文献

1
Evaluation of optimization workflow using design of experiment (DoE) for various field configurations in volumetric-modulated arc therapy.评价使用实验设计(DoE)对容积调强弧形治疗中各种射野配置进行优化工作流程。
Phys Med. 2018 Oct;54:34-41. doi: 10.1016/j.ejmp.2018.09.010. Epub 2018 Sep 27.
2
A comprehensive formulation for volumetric modulated arc therapy planning.容积调强弧形治疗计划的综合方案。
Med Phys. 2016 Jul;43(7):4263. doi: 10.1118/1.4953832.
3
Treatment planning for radiotherapy with very high-energy electron beams and comparison of VHEE and VMAT plans.超高能电子束放射治疗的治疗计划以及超高能电子束与容积调强弧形治疗计划的比较。
Med Phys. 2015 May;42(5):2615-25. doi: 10.1118/1.4918923.
4
Dosimetric comparison of hybrid volumetric-modulated arc therapy, volumetric-modulated arc therapy, and intensity-modulated radiation therapy for left-sided early breast cancer.左侧早期乳腺癌的混合容积调强弧形放疗、容积调强弧形放疗和调强放射治疗的剂量学比较
Med Dosim. 2015 Autumn;40(3):262-7. doi: 10.1016/j.meddos.2015.05.003. Epub 2015 Jun 23.
5
Analysis of direct clinical consequences of MLC positional errors in volumetric-modulated arc therapy using 3D dosimetry system.使用三维剂量测定系统分析容积调强弧形放疗中多叶准直器位置误差的直接临床后果。
J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2015 Sep 8;16(5):296–305. doi: 10.1120/jacmp.v16i5.5515.
6
Simultaneous beam geometry and intensity map optimization in intensity-modulated radiation therapy.调强放射治疗中射束几何形状与强度图的同步优化
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2006 Jan 1;64(1):301-20. doi: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2005.08.023. Epub 2005 Nov 14.
7
Skin dose differences between intensity-modulated radiation therapy and volumetric-modulated arc therapy and between boost and integrated treatment regimens for treating head and neck and other cancer sites in patients.调强放射治疗与容积调强弧形治疗之间以及患者头颈部和其他癌症部位的推量治疗与综合治疗方案之间的皮肤剂量差异。
Med Dosim. 2016 Spring;41(1):80-6. doi: 10.1016/j.meddos.2015.09.001. Epub 2016 Jan 4.
8
Relative plan robustness of step-and-shoot vs rotational intensity-modulated radiotherapy on repeat computed tomographic simulation for weight loss in head and neck cancer.头颈部癌体重减轻患者在重复计算机断层扫描模拟时,静态调强放疗与旋转调强放疗的相对计划稳健性
Med Dosim. 2016 Summer;41(2):154-8. doi: 10.1016/j.meddos.2016.01.001. Epub 2016 Mar 15.
9
Incorporating geometric ray tracing to generate initial conditions for intensity modulated arc therapy optimization.结合几何光线追踪以生成调强弧形放射治疗优化的初始条件。
Med Phys. 2008 Jul;35(7):3137-50. doi: 10.1118/1.2937650.
10
Volumetric-modulated arc therapy vs conventional fixed-field intensity-modulated radiotherapy in a whole-ventricular irradiation: a planning comparison study.容积调强弧形治疗与传统固定野调强放射治疗在全心室照射中的应用:一项计划对比研究。
Med Dosim. 2013 Summer;38(2):204-8. doi: 10.1016/j.meddos.2013.01.004. Epub 2013 Mar 21.

引用本文的文献

1
A longitudinal evaluation of improvements in treatment plan quality for lung cancer with volumetric modulated arc therapy.容积调强弧形放疗对肺癌治疗计划质量改善的纵向评估。
J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2020 Jun;21(6):33-43. doi: 10.1002/acm2.12863. Epub 2020 Apr 1.