Ebrahimi Saba, Lim Gino, Liu Amy, Lin Steven H, Ellsworth Susannah G, Grassberger Clemens, Mohan Radhe, Cao Wenhua
Department of Industrial Engineering, University of Houston, Houston, TX, USA.
Department of Radiation Physics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA.
Int J Part Ther. 2021 Apr 7;8(2):17-27. doi: 10.14338/IJPT-20-00086. eCollection 2021 Fall.
To assess possible differences in radiation-induced lymphocyte depletion for esophageal cancer patients being treated with the following 3 treatment modalities: intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT), passive scattering proton therapy (PSPT), and intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT).
We used 2 prediction models to estimate lymphocyte depletion based on dose distributions. Model I used a piecewise linear relationship between lymphocyte survival and voxel-by-voxel dose. Model II assumes that lymphocytes deplete exponentially as a function of total delivered dose. The models can be fitted using the weekly absolute lymphocyte counts measurements collected throughout treatment. We randomly selected 45 esophageal cancer patients treated with IMRT, PSPT, or IMPT at our institution (15 per modality) to demonstrate the fitness of the 2 models. A different group of 10 esophageal cancer patients who had received PSPT were included in this study of in silico simulations of multiple modalities. One IMRT and one IMPT plan were created, using our standards of practice for each modality, as competing plans to the existing PSPT plan for each patient. We fitted the models by PSPT plans used in treatment and predicted absolute lymphocyte counts for IMRT and IMPT plans.
Model validation on each modality group of patients showed good agreement between measured and predicted absolute lymphocyte counts nadirs with mean squared errors from 0.003 to 0.023 among the modalities and models. In the simulation study of IMRT and IMPT on the 10 PSPT patients, the average predicted absolute lymphocyte count (ALC) nadirs were 0.27, 0.35, and 0.37 K/μL after IMRT, PSPT, and IMPT treatments using Model I, respectively, and 0.14, 0.22, and 0.33 K/μL using Model II.
Proton plans carried a lower predicted risk of lymphopenia after the treatment course than did photon plans. Moreover, IMPT plans outperformed PSPT in terms of predicted lymphocyte preservation.
评估接受以下三种治疗方式的食管癌患者在辐射诱导淋巴细胞耗竭方面的可能差异:调强放射治疗(IMRT)、被动散射质子治疗(PSPT)和调强质子治疗(IMPT)。
我们使用2种预测模型,基于剂量分布估计淋巴细胞耗竭情况。模型I使用淋巴细胞存活率与逐像素剂量之间的分段线性关系。模型II假设淋巴细胞作为总传递剂量的函数呈指数级耗竭。这些模型可以使用整个治疗过程中收集的每周绝对淋巴细胞计数测量值进行拟合。我们在我们机构随机选择了45例接受IMRT、PSPT或IMPT治疗的食管癌患者(每种治疗方式15例),以证明这2种模型的适用性。另一组10例接受过PSPT的食管癌患者被纳入这项多种治疗方式的计算机模拟研究。按照我们每种治疗方式的实践标准,为每位患者创建了一个IMRT计划和一个IMPT计划,作为现有PSPT计划的竞争计划。我们通过治疗中使用的PSPT计划对模型进行拟合,并预测IMRT和IMPT计划的绝对淋巴细胞计数。
对各治疗方式组患者的模型验证表明,测量的和预测的绝对淋巴细胞计数最低点之间具有良好的一致性,各治疗方式和模型的均方误差在0.003至0.023之间。在对10例接受PSPT治疗的患者进行的IMRT和IMPT模拟研究中,使用模型I时,IMRT、PSPT和IMPT治疗后的平均预测绝对淋巴细胞计数(ALC)最低点分别为0.27、0.35和0.37K/μL,使用模型II时分别为0.14、0.22和0.33K/μL。
质子治疗计划在治疗过程后预测的淋巴细胞减少风险低于光子治疗计划。此外,在预测的淋巴细胞保留方面,IMPT计划优于PSPT。