Wang Yong, Huang Fujing, Han Wenmin, Qian Jianjun, Zhao Peifeng, Chen Liesong, Zhu Yaqun, Tian Ye, Sun Yanze
Department of Radiotherapy Oncology, the Second Affiliated Hospital of Soochow University, Institute of Radiotherapy Oncology, Soochow University, Suzhou Key Laboratory for Radiation Oncology, Suzhou, 215004, China.
Affiliated Hospital, Shandong University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Jinan, 250014, China.
Radiat Oncol. 2025 Mar 27;20(1):44. doi: 10.1186/s13014-025-02625-8.
To explore the feasibility and advantages of the visualized thermosensitive color-changing personalized bolus in post-mastectomy radiotherapy (PMRT).
Forty PMRT patients (June 2023-June 2024) were randomized into two groups. Group A (experimental group, 20 patients) underwent two CT scans: A (without compensator) and A (with the visualized thermosensitive color-changing personalized bolus), followed by treatment with the thermosensitive color-changing personalized bolus. Group B (control group, 20 patients) also underwent two CT scans: B (without bolus) and B (with a conventional commercial bolus), followed by treatment with the commercial bolus. Treatment plans were generated for virtual bolus (A-Plan, B-Plan) and real bolus (A-Plan, B-Plan). A-Plan (A-Plan applied to thermosensitive bolus treatment) and B-Plan (B-Plan applied to commercial bolus treatment) were compared to evaluate dosimetric differences in target volumes, organs at risk (OARs), and skin toxicity.
In Group A, A-Plan and A-Plan showed no significant differences in OAR doses (e.g., ipsilateral lung, heart, contralateral breast, skin D/D) or target metrics (V, D, homogeneity index (HI), conformity index (CI), monitor units (MU)). A-Plan compared to A-Plan had minor differences in target coverage (94.05% vs. 95.14%), HI (0.148 vs. 0.147), and CI (0.83 vs. 0.84). In Group B, B-Plan had significantly reduced target coverage (89.9% vs. 95%), homogeneity (0.153 vs. 0.136), and conformity (0.817 vs. 0.810) compared to B-Plan, attributed to air gaps from the commercial bolus. The thermosensitive color-changing personalized bolus had better skin adherence, significantly reduced air cavity volumes (3833 mm³ vs. 21498 mm³), and maintained equivalent dosimetric performance to virtual boluses. Skin toxicity was Grade I in all patients without differences between groups.
The visualized thermosensitive color-changing personalized bolus demonstrated superior skin adherence, smaller air gaps, and better positional reproducibility compared to commercial boluses. Its dosimetric performance was consistent with virtual bolus plans, ensuring target coverage and OAR protection without increased skin toxicity. These findings support its clinical application in PMRT.
探讨可视化热敏变色个性化填充物在乳腺癌改良根治术后放疗(PMRT)中的可行性和优势。
将40例PMRT患者(2023年6月至2024年6月)随机分为两组。A组(实验组,20例患者)进行两次CT扫描:A(无补偿器)和A(使用可视化热敏变色个性化填充物),随后使用热敏变色个性化填充物进行治疗。B组(对照组,20例患者)也进行两次CT扫描:B(无填充物)和B(使用传统商用填充物),随后使用商用填充物进行治疗。针对虚拟填充物(A计划、B计划)和实际填充物(A计划、B计划)生成治疗计划。比较A计划(应用于热敏填充物治疗的A计划)和B计划(应用于商用填充物治疗的B计划),以评估靶区体积、危及器官(OARs)和皮肤毒性方面的剂量学差异。
在A组中,A计划和A计划在OAR剂量(如患侧肺、心脏、对侧乳腺、皮肤D/D)或靶区指标(V、D、均匀性指数(HI)、适形指数(CI)、监测单位(MU))方面无显著差异。与A计划相比,A计划在靶区覆盖(94.05%对95.14%)、HI(0.148对0.147)和CI(0.83对0.84)方面有微小差异。在B组中,与B计划相比,B计划的靶区覆盖(89.9%对95%)、均匀性(0.153对0.136)和适形性(0.817对0.810)显著降低,这归因于商用填充物产生的气隙。热敏变色个性化填充物具有更好的皮肤贴合性,气腔体积显著减小(3833mm³对21498mm³),并且与虚拟填充物保持相当的剂量学性能。所有患者的皮肤毒性均为I级,两组之间无差异。
与商用填充物相比,可视化热敏变色个性化填充物表现出更好的皮肤贴合性、更小的气隙和更好的位置重复性。其剂量学性能与虚拟填充物计划一致,确保靶区覆盖和对OAR的保护,且不增加皮肤毒性。这些发现支持其在PMRT中的临床应用。