Kramer B A, Wazer D E, Engler M J, Tsai J S, Ling M N
Department of Radiation Oncology, Tufts University School of Medicine, New England Medical Center, Boston, Massachusetts 02111, USA.
Radiat Oncol Investig. 1998;6(1):18-25. doi: 10.1002/(SICI)1520-6823(1998)6:1<18::AID-ROI3>3.0.CO;2-L.
To compare the dosimetry achievable with an intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMR) system to that of stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) for an irregularly shaped moderate size target. A treatment plan was selected from 109 single fraction SRS cases having had multiple non-coplanar arc therapy using a 6 MV linear accelerator fitted with circular tertiary collimators 1.00 to 4.00 cm in diameter at isocenter. The CT scan with delineated regions of interest was then entered into an IMR treatment planning system and optimized dose distributions, using a back projection technique for dynamic multileaf collimator delivery, were generated with a stimulated annealing algorithm. Dose volume histograms (DVH), homogeneity indices (HI), conformity indices (CI), minimum and maximum doses to surrounding highly sensitive intracranial structures, as well as the volume of tissue treated to > 80, 50, and 20% of the prescription dose from the IMR plan were then compared to those from the single isocenter SRS plan used and a hypothetical three isocenter SRS plan. For an irregularly shaped target, the IMR plan produced a HI of 1.08 and CI of 1.50 compared to 1.75 and 4.41, respectively, for the single isocenter SRS plan (SRS1) and 3.33 and 3.43 for the triple isocenter SRS plan (SRS3). The maximum and minimum doses to surrounding critical structures were less with the IMR plan in comparison to both SRS plans. However, the volume of non-target tissue treated to > 80, 50, and 20% of the prescription dose with the IMR plan was 137, 170, and 163%, respectively, of that treated with the SRS1 plan and 85, 100, and 123% of the volume when compared to SRS3 plan. The IMR system provided more conformal target doses than were provided by the single isocenter or three isocenter SRS plans. IMR delivered less dose to critical normal tissues and provided increased homogeneity within the target volume for a moderate size irregularly shaped target, at the cost of a larger penumbra.
为比较强度调制放射治疗(IMR)系统与立体定向放射外科(SRS)系统对不规则形状中等大小靶区的剂量测定情况。从109例单次分割SRS病例中选取一个治疗计划,这些病例使用配备等中心处直径为1.00至4.00 cm圆形三级准直器的6 MV直线加速器进行了多次非共面弧形治疗。然后将带有勾画感兴趣区域的CT扫描图像输入IMR治疗计划系统,并使用动态多叶准直器投送的反投影技术,通过模拟退火算法生成优化的剂量分布。随后将IMR计划的剂量体积直方图(DVH)、均匀性指数(HI)、适形指数(CI)、对周围高敏颅内结构的最小和最大剂量,以及接受超过处方剂量80%、50%和20%的组织体积,与所使用的单等中心SRS计划及假设的三等中心SRS计划的相应指标进行比较。对于不规则形状的靶区,IMR计划产生的HI为1.08,CI为1.50,而单等中心SRS计划(SRS1)的HI和CI分别为1.75和4.41,三等中心SRS计划(SRS3)的HI和CI分别为3.33和3.43。与两个SRS计划相比,IMR计划对周围关键结构的最大和最小剂量更低。然而,IMR计划中接受超过处方剂量80%、50%和20%的非靶区组织体积,分别是SRS1计划的137%、170%和163%,与SRS3计划相比分别是其体积的85%、100%和123%。IMR系统提供的靶区剂量比单等中心或三等中心SRS计划更适形。对于中等大小不规则形状的靶区,IMR向关键正常组织输送较少剂量,并在靶区内提供了更高的均匀性,但代价是半影更大。