Kruszyna-Mochalska Marta, Skrobala Agnieszka, Romanski Piotr, Ryczkowski Adam, Suchorska Wiktoria, Kulcenty Katarzyna, Piotrowski Igor, Borowicz Dorota, Graczyk Kinga, Matuszak Natalia, Malicki Julian
Electroradiology Department, Poznan University of Medical Sciences, 61-866 Poznan, Poland.
Medical Physics Department, Greater Poland Cancer Centre, 61-866 Poznan, Poland.
Life (Basel). 2022 Apr 23;12(5):628. doi: 10.3390/life12050628.
The aim of the study was to determine the influence of a key treatment plan and beam parameters on overall dose distribution and on doses in organs laying in further distance from the target during prostate SBRT. Multiple representative treatment plans (n = 12) for TrueBeam and CyberKnife were prepared and evaluated. Nontarget doses were measured with anionization chamber, in a quasi-humanoid phantom at four sites corresponding to the intestines, right lung, thyroid, and head. The following parameters were modified: radiotherapy technique, presence or not of a flattening filter, degree of modulation, and use or not of jaw tracking function for TrueBeam and beam orientation set-up, optimization techniques, and number of MUs for CyberKnife. After usual optimization doses in intestines (near the target) were 0.73% and 0.76%, in head (farthest from target) 0.05% and 0.19% for TrueBeam and CyberKnife, respectively. For TrueBeam the highest peripheral (head, thyroid, lung) doses occurred for the VMAT with the flattening filter while the lowest for 3DCRT. For CyberKnife the highest doses were for gantry with caudal direction beams blocked (gantry close to OARs) while the lowest was the low modulated VOLO optimization technique. The easiest method to reduce peripheral doses was to combine FFF with jaw tracking and reducing monitor units at TrueBeam and to avoid gantry position close to OARs together with reduction of monitor units at CyberKnife, respectively. The presented strategies allowed to significantly reduce out-of-field and nontarget doses during prostate radiotherapy delivered with TrueBeam and CyberKnife. A different approach was required to reduce peripheral doses because of the difference in dose delivery techniques: non-coplanar using CyberKnife and coplanar using TrueBeam, respectively.
本研究的目的是确定在前列腺立体定向体部放疗(SBRT)期间,关键治疗计划和射束参数对总体剂量分布以及对距靶区较远器官剂量的影响。针对TrueBeam和射波刀(CyberKnife)准备并评估了多个代表性治疗计划(n = 12)。使用电离室在类人模体的四个对应于肠道、右肺、甲状腺和头部的部位测量非靶区剂量。对以下参数进行了修改:放疗技术、是否存在均整器、调制程度,以及TrueBeam的颌部跟踪功能的使用与否、射波刀的射束方向设置、优化技术和监测单位(MU)数量。常规优化后,TrueBeam和射波刀在肠道(靠近靶区)的剂量分别为0.73%和0.76%,在头部(距靶区最远)的剂量分别为0.05%和0.19%。对于TrueBeam,带有均整器的容积调强弧形放疗(VMAT)外周(头部、甲状腺、肺部)剂量最高,而三维适形放疗(3DCRT)最低。对于射波刀,尾向射束被阻挡时(机架靠近危及器官)的机架角度外周剂量最高,而低调制容积优化(VOLO)技术最低。降低外周剂量最简单的方法分别是TrueBeam将FFF与颌部跟踪相结合并减少监测单位,以及射波刀避免机架位置靠近危及器官并减少监测单位。所提出的策略能够显著降低使用TrueBeam和射波刀进行前列腺放疗期间的野外和非靶区剂量。由于剂量输送技术的差异,需要采用不同的方法来降低外周剂量:射波刀采用非共面,TrueBeam采用共面。