Ling B, Chen L, Zhang J, Cao X, Ye W, Ouyang Y, Chi F, Ding Z
Department of Radiation Medicine, School of Public Health, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou 510515, China.
Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Guangzhou 510060, China.
Nan Fang Yi Ke Da Xue Xue Bao. 2024 Apr 20;44(4):773-779. doi: 10.12122/j.issn.1673-4254.2024.04.20.
To investigate the dosimetric difference between manual and inverse optimization in 3-dimensional (3D) brachytherapy for gynecologic tumors.
This retrospective study was conducted among a total of 110 patients with gynecologic tumors undergoing intracavitary combined with interstitial brachytherapy or interstitial brachytherapy. Based on the original images, the brachytherapy plans were optimized for each patient using Gro, IPSA1, IPSA2 (with increased volumetric dose limits on the basis of IPSA1) and HIPO algorithms. The dose-volume histogram (DVH) parameters of the clinical target volume (CTV) including V, V, V, D, D and CI, and the dosimetric parameters D, D, and D for the bladder, rectum, and sigmoid colon were compared among the 4 plans.
Among the 4 plans, Gro optimization took the longest time, followed by HIPO, IPSA2 and IPSA1 optimization. The mean D, D, and V of HIPO plans were significantly higher than those of Gro and IPSA plans, and D and V of IPSA1, IPSA2 and HIPO plans were higher than those of Gro plans ( < 0.05), but the CI of the 4 plans were similar ( > 0.05). For the organs at risk (OARs), the HIPO plan had the lowest D of the bladder and rectum; the bladder absorbed dose of Gro plans were significantly greater than those of IPSA1 and HIPO ( < 0.05). The D and D of the rectum in IPSA1, IPSA2 and HIPO plans were better than Gro ( < 0.05). The D and D of the sigmoid colon did not differ significantly among the 4 plans.
Among the 4 algorithms, the HIPO algorithm can better improve dose coverage of the target and lower the radiation dose of the OARs, and is thus recommended for the initial plan optimization. Clinically, the combination of manual optimization can achieve more individualized dose distribution of the plan.
探讨妇科肿瘤三维(3D)近距离放射治疗中手动优化与逆向优化之间的剂量学差异。
本回顾性研究共纳入110例接受腔内联合组织间插植近距离放射治疗或组织间插植近距离放射治疗的妇科肿瘤患者。基于原始图像,使用Gro、IPSA1、IPSA2(在IPSA1基础上增加体积剂量限制)和HIPO算法为每位患者优化近距离放射治疗计划。比较4种计划中临床靶区(CTV)的剂量体积直方图(DVH)参数,包括V、V、V、D、D和CI,以及膀胱、直肠和乙状结肠的剂量学参数D、D和D。
在4种计划中,Gro优化耗时最长,其次是HIPO、IPSA2和IPSA1优化。HIPO计划的平均D、D和V显著高于Gro和IPSA计划,IPSA1、IPSA2和HIPO计划的D和V高于Gro计划(<0.05),但4种计划的CI相似(>0.05)。对于危及器官(OARs),HIPO计划的膀胱和直肠D最低;Gro计划的膀胱吸收剂量显著高于IPSA1和HIPO计划(<0.05)。IPSA1、IPSA2和HIPO计划中直肠的D和D优于Gro计划(<0.05)。4种计划中乙状结肠的D和D差异无统计学意义。
在4种算法中,HIPO算法能更好地提高靶区剂量覆盖并降低OARs的辐射剂量,因此推荐用于初始计划优化。临床上,手动优化相结合可实现更个体化的计划剂量分布。