Department of Radiation Oncology, The First Medical Center of PLA General Hospital, Beijing, 100853, China.
Department of Radiotherapy, Beijing Geriatric Hospital, Beijing, 100095, China.
BMC Cancer. 2024 Aug 1;24(1):936. doi: 10.1186/s12885-024-12710-y.
To evaluate the dosimetric characteristics of ZAP-X stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) for single brain metastasis by comparing with two mature SRS platforms.
Thirteen patients with single brain metastasis treated with CyberKnife (CK) G4 were selected retrospectively. The prescription dose for the planning target volume (PTV) was 18-24 Gy for 1-3 fractions. The PTV volume ranged from 0.44 to 11.52 cc.Treatment plans of thirteen patients were replanned using the ZAP-X plan system and the Gamma Knife (GK) ICON plan system with the same prescription dose and organs at risk (OARs) constraints. The prescription dose of PTV was normalized to 70% for both ZAP-X and CK, while it was 50% for GK. The dosimetric parameters of three groups included the plan characteristics (CI, GI, GSI, beams, MUs, treatment time), PTV (D, D, D, D, D, Coverage), brain tissue (volume of 100%-10% prescription dose irradiation V-V, D) and other OARs (D, D),all of these were compared and evaluated. All data were read and analyzed with MIM Maestro. One-way ANOVA or a multisample Friedman rank sum test was performed, where p < 0.05 indicated significant differences.
The CI of GK was significantly lower than that of ZAP-X and CK. Regarding the mean value, ZAP-X had a lower GI and higher GSI, but there was no significant difference among the three groups. The MUs of ZAP-X were significantly lower than those of CK, and the mean value of the treatment time of ZAP-X was significantly shorter than that of CK. For PTV, the D, D, and target coverage of CK were higher, while the mean of D of GK was significantly lower than that of CK and ZAP-X. For brain tissue, ZAP-X showed a smaller volume from V to V; the statistical results of V and V showed a difference between ZAP-X and GK, while the V and V showed a significant difference between ZAP-X and the other two groups; V and D indicated that GK was better. Excluding the D of the brainstem, right optic nerve and optic chiasm, the mean value of all other OARs was less than 1 Gy. For the brainstem, GK and ZAP-X had better protection, especially at the maximum dose.
For the SRS treating single brain metastasis, all three treatment devices, ZAP-X system, CyberKnife G4 system, and GammaKnife system, could meet clinical treatment requirements. The newly platform ZAP-X could provide a high-quality plan equivalent to or even better than CyberKnife and Gamma Knife, with ZAP-X presenting a certain dose advantage, especially with a more conformal dose distribution and better protection for brain tissue. As the ZAP-X systems get continuous improvements and upgrades, they may become a new SRS platform for the treatment of brain metastasis.
通过与两种成熟的立体定向放射外科(SRS)平台比较,评估 ZAP-X 立体定向放射外科治疗单个脑转移瘤的剂量学特征。
回顾性选择 13 例接受 CyberKnife(CK)G4 治疗的单个脑转移患者。计划靶区(PTV)的处方剂量为 18-24Gy,分为 1-3 个部分。PTV 体积为 0.44 至 11.52cc。使用 ZAP-X 计划系统和 Gamma Knife(GK)ICON 计划系统,对 13 例患者的治疗计划进行了重新规划,采用相同的处方剂量和危及器官(OAR)限制。将 PTV 的处方剂量归一化为 ZAP-X 和 CK 的 70%,而 GK 为 50%。三组的剂量学参数包括计划特征(CI、GI、GSI、光束、MU、治疗时间)、PTV(D、D、D、D、D、覆盖范围)、脑实质(100%-10%处方剂量照射的体积 V-V、D)和其他 OAR(D、D),对所有数据进行了比较和评估。所有数据均使用 MIM Maestro 进行读取和分析。采用单因素方差分析或多样本 Friedman 秩和检验,p<0.05 表示差异有统计学意义。
GK 的 CI 明显低于 ZAP-X 和 CK。关于平均值,ZAP-X 的 GI 较低,GSI 较高,但三组之间无显著性差异。ZAP-X 的 MU 明显低于 CK,ZAP-X 的治疗时间平均值明显短于 CK。对于 PTV,CK 的 D、D 和靶区覆盖率较高,而 GK 的 D 平均值明显低于 CK 和 ZAP-X。对于脑实质,ZAP-X 的 V 至 V 体积较小;V 和 V 的统计结果显示 ZAP-X 与 GK 之间存在差异,而 V 和 V 显示 ZAP-X 与其他两组之间存在显著差异;V 和 D 表明 GK 更好。除脑干、右侧视神经和视交叉的 D 外,所有其他 OAR 的平均值均小于 1Gy。对于脑干,GK 和 ZAP-X 具有更好的保护作用,尤其是在最大剂量时。
对于治疗单个脑转移的 SRS,ZAP-X 系统、CyberKnife G4 系统和 GammaKnife 系统这三种治疗设备都能满足临床治疗要求。新型平台 ZAP-X 可提供高质量的计划,与 CyberKnife 和 Gamma Knife 相当,甚至更好,ZAP-X 具有一定的剂量优势,尤其是具有更适形的剂量分布和更好的脑保护作用。随着 ZAP-X 系统的不断改进和升级,它可能成为治疗脑转移的一种新的 SRS 平台。