Wang Xianliang, Wang Pei, Tang Bin, Kang Shengwei, Hou Qing, Wu Zhangwen, Gou Chengjun, Li Lintao, Orlandini Lucia, Lang Jinyi, Li Jie
Department of Radiation Oncology, Sichuan Cancer Hospital & Institute, School of Medicine, University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, Radiation Oncology Key Laboratory Of Sichuan Province, Chengdu, China.
Key Laboratory of Radiation Physics and Technology, Institute of Nuclear Science and Technology, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
Front Oncol. 2020 Oct 20;10:564580. doi: 10.3389/fonc.2020.564580. eCollection 2020.
To investigate an implementation method and the results of an inverse dose optimization algorithm, Gradient Based Planning Optimization (GBPO), for three-dimensional brachytherapy.
The GBPO used a quadratic objective function, and a dwell time modulation item was added to the objective function to restrict the dwell time variance. We retrospectively studied 4 cervical cancer patients using different applicators and 15 cervical cancer patients using the Fletcher applicator. We assessed the plan quality of GBPO by isodose lines for the patients using different applicators. For the 15 patients using the Fletcher applicator, we utilized dose-volume histogram (DVH) parameters of HR-CTV (D, V) and organs at risk (OARs) (D, D, D) to evaluate the difference between the GBPO plans and the IPSA (Inverse Planning Simulated Annealing) plans, as well as the GBPO plans and the Graphic plans.
For the 4 patients using different applicators, the dose distributions are conformable. For the 15 patients using the Fletcher applicator, when the dwell time modulation factor (DTMF) is less than 20, the dwell time deviation reduces quickly; however, after the DTMF increased to 100, the dwell time deviation has no remarkable change. The difference in dosimetric parameters between the GBPO plans and the IPSA plans is not statistically significant (>0.05). The GBPO plans have a higher D (3.57 ± 0.36, 3.38 ± 0.34; <0.01) and a lower V (55.73 ± 4.06, 57.75 ± 3.79; <0.01) than those of the Graphic plans. The differences in other DVH parameters are negligible between the GBPO plans and the Graphic plans.
The GBPO plans have a comparable quality as the IPSA plans and the Graphic plans for the studied cervical cancer cases. The GBPO algorithm could be integrated into a three-dimensional brachytherapy treatment planning system after studying more sites.
研究一种用于三维近距离放射治疗的逆向剂量优化算法——基于梯度的计划优化(GBPO)的实施方法及结果。
GBPO使用二次目标函数,并在目标函数中添加了驻留时间调制项以限制驻留时间方差。我们回顾性研究了4例使用不同施源器的宫颈癌患者以及15例使用弗莱彻施源器的宫颈癌患者。对于使用不同施源器的患者,我们通过等剂量线评估GBPO的计划质量。对于15例使用弗莱彻施源器的患者,我们利用高危临床靶区(HR-CTV)的剂量体积直方图(DVH)参数(D、V)以及危及器官(OARs)的DVH参数(D、D、D)来评估GBPO计划与逆规划模拟退火(IPSA)计划之间以及GBPO计划与图形计划之间的差异。
对于4例使用不同施源器的患者,剂量分布符合要求。对于15例使用弗莱彻施源器的患者,当驻留时间调制因子(DTMF)小于20时,驻留时间偏差迅速减小;然而,当DTMF增加到100后,驻留时间偏差没有明显变化。GBPO计划与IPSA计划之间的剂量学参数差异无统计学意义(>0.05)。GBPO计划的D值(3.57±0.36,3.38±0.34;<0.01)高于图形计划,V值(55.73±4.06,57.75±3.79;<0.01)低于图形计划。GBPO计划与图形计划之间其他DVH参数的差异可忽略不计。
对于所研究的宫颈癌病例,GBPO计划与IPSA计划和图形计划具有相当的质量。在研究更多部位后,GBPO算法可集成到三维近距离放射治疗治疗计划系统中。