Jiang Chen-Jun, Ho Yick-Wing, Lok Ka-Hei, Lu Yeow-Yuen, Zhu Chun-Ran, Cheng Harry Chi-Yuen
Department of Diagnostic Radiology, LKS Faculty of Medicine, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong Island, Hong Kong SAR, China.
The Union Oncology Centre, Kowloon, Hong Kong SAR, China.
Sci Rep. 2025 Mar 17;15(1):9118. doi: 10.1038/s41598-025-93502-7.
This paper presents a clinical comparison of the target dose, normal tissue complication probability (NTCP), and plan quality between volumetric modulated conformal arc therapy (VMAT) against dynamic conformal arc therapy (DCAT) techniques to facilitate clinical decision-making in multiple brain metastases (MBM) treatment. A total of 11 cases having 33 lesions were recruited at the Union Oncology Centre, Union Hospital, Hong Kong SAR. With CT images available, all plans were optimized using both HyperArc (HA) and Brainlab Elements Multiple Brain Metastases (Elements MBM). Target coverage, normal tissue sparing, and dose distribution were compared pairwise between VMAT and DCAT. Results showed that the plans generated using both techniques achieved adequate target coverage to meet up with the oncologist's prescription. With similar levels of NTCP, the normal brain received low doses of radiation using both techniques and the risk of brain necrosis was kept equally low. This indicated that VMAT and DCAT produced similar high-quality treatment plans with low risks of brain necrosis. Meanwhile, VMAT showed better homogeneity which could potentially be more useful for large targets, while DCAT showed better target conformity especially for targets smaller than 1 cc. In general, both HA and Elements MBM demonstrated ability to generate high-quality clinical plans.
本文对容积调强弧形放疗(VMAT)和动态适形弧形放疗(DCAT)技术在多脑转移瘤(MBM)治疗中的靶区剂量、正常组织并发症概率(NTCP)和计划质量进行了临床比较,以促进临床决策。香港特别行政区联合医院联合肿瘤中心共招募了11例有33个病灶的患者。利用CT图像,所有计划均使用HyperArc(HA)和Brainlab Elements Multiple Brain Metastases(Elements MBM)进行优化。对VMAT和DCAT的靶区覆盖、正常组织保护和剂量分布进行了两两比较。结果显示,两种技术生成的计划均实现了足够的靶区覆盖,以满足肿瘤学家的处方要求。在NTCP水平相似的情况下,两种技术对正常脑组织的辐射剂量都很低,脑坏死风险同样很低。这表明VMAT和DCAT产生了类似的高质量治疗计划,脑坏死风险较低。同时,VMAT显示出更好的均匀性,这可能对大靶区更有用,而DCAT显示出更好的靶区适形性,尤其是对于小于1 cc的靶区。总体而言,HA和Elements MBM都显示出生成高质量临床计划的能力。