Koh Wei Yang Calvin, Tan Hong Qi, Ng Yan Yee, Lin Yen Hwa, Ang Khong Wei, Lew Wen Siang, Lee James Cheow Lei, Park Sung Yong
Division of Physics and Applied Physics, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore.
Division of Radiation Oncology, National Cancer Centre Singapore, Singapore.
Adv Radiat Oncol. 2021 Nov 11;7(2):100844. doi: 10.1016/j.adro.2021.100844. eCollection 2022 Mar-Apr.
Relative biological effectiveness (RBE) uncertainties have been a concern for treatment planning in proton therapy, particularly for treatment sites that are near organs at risk (OARs). In such a clinical situation, the utilization of variable RBE models is preferred over constant RBE model of 1.1. The problem, however, lies in the exact choice of RBE model, especially when current RBE models are plagued with a host of uncertainties. This paper aims to determine the influence of RBE models on treatment planning, specifically to improve the understanding of the influence of the RBE models with regard to the passing and failing of treatment plans. This can be achieved by studying the RBE-weighted dose uncertainties across RBE models for OARs in cases where the target volume overlaps the OARs. Multi-field optimization (MFO) and single-field optimization (SFO) plans were compared in order to recommend which technique was more effective in eliminating the variations between RBE models.
Fifteen brain tumor patients were selected based on their profile where their target volume overlaps with both the brain stem and the optic chiasm. In this study, 6 RBE models were analyzed to determine the RBE-weighted dose uncertainties. Both MFO and SFO planning techniques were adopted for the treatment planning of each patient. RBE-weighted dose uncertainties in the OARs are calculated assuming of 3 Gy and 8 Gy. Statistical analysis was used to ascertain the differences in RBE-weighted dose uncertainties between MFO and SFO planning. Additionally, further investigation of the linear energy transfer (LET) distribution was conducted to determine the relationship between LET distribution and RBE-weighted dose uncertainties.
The results showed no strong indication on which planning technique would be the best for achieving treatment planning constraints. MFO and SFO showed significant differences ( <.05) in the RBE-weighted dose uncertainties in the OAR. In both clinical target volume (CTV)-brain stem and CTV-chiasm overlap region, 10 of 15 patients showed a lower median RBE-weighted dose uncertainty in MFO planning compared with SFO planning. In the LET analysis, 8 patients (optic chiasm) and 13 patients (brain stem) showed a lower mean LET in MFO planning compared with SFO planning. It was also observed that lesser RBE-weighted dose uncertainties were present with MFO planning compared with SFO planning technique.
Calculations of the RBE-weighted dose uncertainties based on 6 RBE models and 2 different revealed that MFO planning is a better option as opposed to SFO planning for cases of overlapping brain tumor with OARs in eliminating RBE-weighted dose uncertainties. Incorporation of RBE models failed to dictate the passing or failing of a treatment plan. To eliminate RBE-weighted dose uncertainties in OARs, the MFO planning technique is recommended for brain tumor when CTV and OARs overlap.
相对生物效应(RBE)的不确定性一直是质子治疗治疗计划中的一个问题,特别是对于靠近危及器官(OAR)的治疗部位。在这种临床情况下,使用可变RBE模型比恒定RBE模型(1.1)更可取。然而,问题在于RBE模型的精确选择,尤其是当当前的RBE模型存在诸多不确定性时。本文旨在确定RBE模型对治疗计划的影响,特别是为了更好地理解RBE模型对治疗计划通过或未通过的影响。这可以通过研究在靶体积与OAR重叠的情况下,不同RBE模型对OAR的RBE加权剂量不确定性来实现。比较了多野优化(MFO)和单野优化(SFO)计划,以推荐哪种技术在消除RBE模型之间的差异方面更有效。
根据靶体积与脑干和视交叉均重叠的情况,选择了15例脑肿瘤患者。在本研究中,分析了6种RBE模型以确定RBE加权剂量不确定性。对每位患者的治疗计划均采用了MFO和SFO规划技术。假设剂量为3 Gy和8 Gy,计算OAR中的RBE加权剂量不确定性。采用统计分析来确定MFO和SFO规划之间RBE加权剂量不确定性的差异。此外,还对线性能量传递(LET)分布进行了进一步研究,以确定LET分布与RBE加权剂量不确定性之间的关系。
结果没有明确表明哪种规划技术最适合实现治疗计划的限制。MFO和SFO在OAR的RBE加权剂量不确定性方面存在显著差异(P<0.05)。在临床靶体积(CTV)-脑干和CTV-视交叉重叠区域,15例患者中有10例在MFO规划中的RBE加权剂量不确定性中位数低于SFO规划。在LET分析中,与SFO规划相比,8例患者(视交叉)和13例患者(脑干)在MFO规划中的平均LET较低。还观察到,与SFO规划技术相比,MFO规划中的RBE加权剂量不确定性较小。
基于6种RBE模型和2种不同剂量计算的RBE加权剂量不确定性表明,对于脑肿瘤与OAR重叠的情况,在消除RBE加权剂量不确定性方面,MFO规划是比SFO规划更好的选择。纳入RBE模型并不能决定治疗计划的通过或未通过。为了消除OAR中的RBE加权剂量不确定性,当CTV和OAR重叠时,建议对脑肿瘤采用MFO规划技术。