Kubo Nobuteru, Kubota Yoshiki, Oike Takahiro, Kawamura Hidemasa, Sakai Makoto, Imamura Ayaka, Komatsu Shuichiro, Miyasaka Yuhei, Sato Hiro, Musha Atsushi, Okano Naoko, Shirai Katsuyuki, Saitoh Jun-Ichi, Chikamatsu Kazuaki, Ohno Tatsuya
Gunma University Heavy Ion Medical Center, Maebashi, Japan.
Department of Radiology, Saitama Medical Center, Jichi Medical University, Omiya-Ku, Japan.
Front Oncol. 2020 Aug 14;10:1396. doi: 10.3389/fonc.2020.01396. eCollection 2020.
Layer-stacking irradiation (LSI) results in the accumulation of multiple small spread-out Bragg peaks along the beam direction. Although the superiority of LSI to conventional passive irradiation (CPI) regarding normal tissue sparing is theoretically evident, the clinical benefit of LSI has not been demonstrated. Here, we compared LSI with CPI using the same treatment planning-computed tomography images used for carbon ion radiotherapy (CIRT). Twenty-one parotid tumors were analyzed. The clinical target volume (CTV) 1 and CTV2 encompassed the parotid grand and the tumor, respectively. CTV1 and CTV2 received 36 Gy (RBE: relative biological effectiveness) in nine fractions and 64 Gy (RBE) in 16 fractions, respectively, using either LSI or CPI. CTV coverage was assessed by DX%, which is the dose covering at least X% of the target volume. Skin dose was assessed by SX, which is the skin surface area receiving at least X Gy (RBE). For CTV1 and CTV2, there were no significant differences in D2% between LSI and CPI. D50% and D98% were slightly higher for CPI; however, the absolute difference between the two methods was <3%. S10-S60 (in increments of 10) were significantly lower for LSI than for CPI ( < 0.001 for all parameters). LSI was associated with a significant trend toward dose reduction at the skin area irradiated with a higher dose by CPI ( < 0.001). LSI achieved better skin sparing than CPI without sacrificing target volume coverage in parotid tumor patients.
层叠照射(LSI)会在射束方向上积累多个小的扩展布拉格峰。尽管从理论上看,LSI在保护正常组织方面优于传统被动照射(CPI),但其临床益处尚未得到证实。在此,我们使用与碳离子放疗(CIRT)相同的治疗计划计算机断层扫描图像,将LSI与CPI进行了比较。分析了21例腮腺肿瘤。临床靶区体积(CTV)1和CTV2分别包含腮腺和肿瘤。使用LSI或CPI时,CTV1和CTV2分别在9次分割中接受36 Gy(相对生物效应:RBE),在16次分割中接受64 Gy(RBE)。CTV覆盖情况通过DX%进行评估,DX%是指覆盖至少X%靶区体积的剂量。皮肤剂量通过SX进行评估,SX是指接受至少X Gy(RBE)的皮肤表面积。对于CTV1和CTV2,LSI与CPI之间的D2%无显著差异。CPI的D50%和D98%略高;然而,两种方法之间的绝对差异<3%。LSI的S10 - S60(以10为增量)显著低于CPI(所有参数均<0.001)。LSI与CPI高剂量照射的皮肤区域剂量降低的显著趋势相关(<0.001)。在腮腺肿瘤患者中,LSI在不牺牲靶区体积覆盖的情况下,比CPI实现了更好的皮肤保护。