Serra Marcello, De Martino Fortuna, Savino Federica, D'Alesio Valentina, Arrichiello Cecilia, Quarto Maria, Loffredo Filomena, Di Franco Rossella, Borzillo Valentina, Muto Matteo, Ametrano Gianluca, Muto Paolo
Istituto Nazionale Tumori-IRCCS-Fondazione G. Pascale, 80131 Napoli, Italy.
Dipartimento di Scienze Biomediche Avanzate, Università degli Studi di Napoli Federico II, 80131 Napoli, Italy.
Life (Basel). 2022 May 10;12(5):711. doi: 10.3390/life12050711.
In recent years, stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) has gained popularity among clinical methods for the treatment of medium and low risk prostate cancer (PCa), mainly as an alternative to surgery. The hypo-fractionated regimen allows the administration of high doses of radiation in a small number of fractions; such a fractionation is possible by exploiting the different intrinsic prostate radiosensitivity compared with the surrounding healthy tissues. In addition, SBRT treatment guaranteed a better quality of life compared with surgery, avoiding risks, aftermaths, and possible complications. At present, most stereotactic prostate treatments are performed with the CyberKnife (CK) system, which is an accelerator exclusively dedicated for stereotaxis and it is not widely spread in every radiotherapy centre like a classic linear accelerator (LINAC). To be fair, a stereotactic treatment is achievable also by using a LINAC through Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy (VMAT), but some precautions must be taken. The aim of this work is to carry out a dosimetric comparison between these two methodologies. In order to pursue such a goal, two groups of patients were selected at Instituto Nazionale Tumori-IRCCS Fondazione G. Pascale: the first group consisting of ten patients previously treated with a SBRT performed with CK; the second one was composed of ten patients who received a hypo-fractionated VMAT treatment and replanned in VMAT-SBRT flattening filter free mode (FFF). The two SBRT techniques were rescaled at the same target coverage and compared by normal tissue sparing, dose distribution parameters and delivery time. All organs at risk (OAR) constraints were achieved by both platforms. CK exhibits higher performances in terms of dose delivery; nevertheless, the general satisfying dosimetric results and the significantly shorter delivery time make VMAT-FFF an attractive and reasonable alternative SBRT technique for the treatment of localized prostate cancer.
近年来,立体定向体部放射治疗(SBRT)在中低风险前列腺癌(PCa)的临床治疗方法中越来越受欢迎,主要作为手术的替代方案。大分割方案允许在少数几次分割中给予高剂量辐射;通过利用前列腺与周围健康组织不同的内在放射敏感性,这种分割是可行的。此外,与手术相比,SBRT治疗保证了更好的生活质量,避免了风险、后遗症和可能的并发症。目前,大多数立体定向前列腺治疗是使用射波刀(CK)系统进行的,该系统是专门用于立体定向的加速器,不像传统直线加速器(LINAC)那样在每个放疗中心广泛普及。公平地说,通过容积调强弧形放疗(VMAT)使用LINAC也可以实现立体定向治疗,但必须采取一些预防措施。这项工作的目的是对这两种方法进行剂量学比较。为了实现这一目标,在意大利国家肿瘤研究所-IRCCS帕斯卡尔基金会挑选了两组患者:第一组由10名先前接受过CK进行的SBRT治疗的患者组成;第二组由10名接受过大分割VMAT治疗并在VMAT-SBRT无均整器模式(FFF)下重新计划的患者组成。将两种SBRT技术调整到相同的靶区覆盖范围,并通过正常组织保护、剂量分布参数和照射时间进行比较。两个平台都达到了所有危及器官(OAR)的限制。CK在剂量输送方面表现出更高的性能;然而,总体令人满意的剂量学结果和显著更短的照射时间使VMAT-FFF成为治疗局限性前列腺癌的一种有吸引力且合理的替代SBRT技术。