33例Ⅰ期乳腺癌保乳术后不同放射治疗方式的剂量学研究

目的:探讨I期乳腺癌保乳术后三种常见的放射治疗方式在剂量学上的优劣。方法:选择33例接受保乳手术的T1N0M0 I期乳腺癌病例,其中左侧乳腺癌25例,右侧乳腺癌8例,应用三维治疗计划系统(TPS)为每例患者设计常规切线野(CR),三维适形放射治疗野(3D-CRT)以及三维适形调强放射治疗野(IMRT)三种全乳放射治疗计划,处方剂量均为DT50 Gy/25次。用剂量体积直方图(dose volume histograms,DVH)来比较3种计划中计划靶体积(planning targetvolume,PTV)、危及器官(organs at risks,OARs)的剂量学差异。结果:在三种计划靶区覆盖度的比较中,CR计划的PTV接受处方剂量的95%的体积要明显小于3D-CRT和IMRT,三者之间存在统计学差异;在三种计划剂量均匀性的统计中,IMRT明显优于CR和3D-CRT,三者之间存在统计学差异。结论:三维适形调强放射治疗(IMRT)作为一种目前较为先进的放射治疗技术,其在Ⅰ期乳腺癌保乳术后的辅助放射治疗中在靶区覆盖率以及靶区内剂量的均匀性上均体现出了剂量学的优势,并且对于同侧肺以及心脏的照射体积也显著低于常规...     

胸中段食管癌根治性放疗三维适形放疗与调强放疗剂量学比较

目的：比较食管癌根治性放疗三维适形放射治疗（3D-CRT）与调强放射治疗（IMRT）的剂量分布,探讨IMRT在胸中段食管癌放疗的价值。方法：对10例胸中段食管癌病例分别行3D-CRT和IMRT计划设计,应用剂量体积直方图（DVH）比较两种计划靶区剂量、适形度指数（CI）、不均匀度指数（HI）及正常器官受量。结果：在食管癌根治放疗中,IMRT在靶区剂量分布上与3D-CRT各有优劣;IMRT在正常器官的保护上优势明显;肺V5、V10、V20以及全肺平均剂量IMRT均明显优于3D-CRT;心脏V30IMRT低于3D-CRT;脊髓剂量没差别。结论：食管癌根治放疗中IMRT计划在靶区剂量分布上没有明显优势。但可更好保护正常组织。     

鼻咽癌调强适形放射治疗计划与传统计划的比较

目的：对局部晚期鼻咽癌的调强适形放射治疗计划与传统计划进行比较。材料和方法：用计算机治疗计划系统对局部晚期的鼻咽癌患者分别制定调强适形放射治疗（IMRT），三维适形放射治疗（3D-CRT）和双侧对穿野计划，根据剂量适形度，DVH曲线，危及器官所受剂量来对这些计划进行比较。结果：IMRT计划的靶区剂量分布适形度好于其它计划，在CTV覆盖剂量相近的情况下，例如规定大于95%的CTV体积接受60Gy剂量，IMRT计划较好地保护了危及器官，与此同时，IMRT能够给予GTV较高的单次剂量，使95%的GTV体积受到至少68Gy剂量。结论：在局部晚期鼻咽癌的治疗中，与传统方法比，IMRT方法在改善肿瘤靶区高剂量覆盖的同时，也明显地改进了对危及器官的保护，并提高了治疗效率。应该进一步研究规范鼻咽癌的IMRT计划和治疗方法，以便充分发挥这种新技术的临床优势。     

宫颈癌调强放疗和三维适形放疗剂量对比研究

目的:研究宫颈癌调强放疗(IMRT)和三维适形放疗(3D-CRT)时靶区及其周围正常组织受照剂量的差异.材料方法:用拓能公司生产的WiMRT三维适形调强放疗计划系统分别进行6～9个照射角度的3D-CRT和IMRT计划设计,肿瘤量45Gy,计算出正常组织和靶区的剂量—体积直方图以及所需照射的总跳数.用Siemens生产的Primart电子直线加速器(X射线能量6MV,MLC叶片29对)实施放疗计划,测量出10 cm×10cm射野外漏射线和散射线剂量率,估算放疗时正常组织所受辐射剂量随距离的变化关系.结果:照射野数和照射角度一致,IMRT时膀胱、直肠、阴道所受平均剂量分别只有3D-CRT时的19.5％(29.3/150.3)、64.5％(538.0/833.0)和61.0％(1553.6/2546.3),靶区平均受照剂量略高于3D-CRT.IMRT病人正常组织所受散射线和漏射线剂量约为3D-CRT病人的1.5倍.结论:宫颈癌IMRT剂量分布优于3D-CRT.     

个性化选择食管癌放疗技术

目的:针对不同长度和不同体积的食管癌个性化选择放射治疗技术。方法:选择16例不同靶区大小的食管癌患者,分别用Xio计划系统制定一个三维适形(3DCRT)计划、Monaco计划系统制定一个静态调强(IMRT)计划和一个容积旋转调强(VMAT)计划。应用剂量体积直方图和最小显著差异法比较3种治疗计划中靶区、危及器官的剂量学差异并进行数据分析。结果:对于不同大小的靶区,VMAT能较好地控制靶区高剂量在112%处方剂量内,对肺高剂量区、脊髓最大值和心脏剂量的控制均优于其它两种放疗技术。对于头脚方向长度小于13 cm且体积小于200 cc的靶区,3种计划均满足计划要求,且3DCRT的靶区低剂量区面积小于VMAT。对于头脚方向长度大于13 cm且体积大于200 cc的靶区,3DCRT无法满足计划要求,IMRT和VMAT计划可较好地控制肺高剂量区,但低剂量区照射面积稍大。结论:对于头脚方向长度较短、体积较小的靶区,考虑肺低剂量面积,可优先选择3DCRT技术;对于头脚方向长度较长、体积较大的靶区,可选择IMRT技术或尽量控制肺低剂量区的VMAT技术,或比较这两种计划,权衡利弊后再选择放疗方式。     

胸腺瘤术后调强放射治疗和容积弧形调强放射治疗剂量学分析简

目的研究在胸腺瘤术后放射治疗中分别采取调强放射治疗（IMRT）技术和容积弧形调强放射治疗（VMAT）技术的剂量学特点,并进一步指导胸腺瘤的放射治疗计划设计。方法选择2012年9月至2013年2月10例行放射治疗的胸腺瘤术后的患者,其中男性7例,女性3例：年龄38-63岁。中位年龄56岁。分别在治疗计划系统（TPS）上勾画大体肿瘤靶区（GTV）、临床肿瘤靶区（CTV）和计划肿瘤靶区（P11V）。术后胸腺瘤放射治疗处方剂量为5000cGy,分别采取IMRT和VMAT技术设计治疗计划,由TPS得到正常组织、危及器官的受累剂量和靶区与处方剂量分布的一致性,并列表比较。结果IMRT的计划靶区的适形指数（CI）和均匀性指数（HI）分别为0．78和1．11,VMAT计划的CI和HI为O．87和1．07。VMAT相比较IMRT在靶区剂量的适形性和不均匀性均稍优于IMRT（P=0．012,P=0．047）。在并型器官如肺组织的低剂量体积（V5、V10）上,VMAT比IMRT对肺组织产生更大的损伤,分别为69．26％和64．68％（P〈0．05）、47．52％和44．93％（P〈0．05）。对于脊髓的最大剂量．VMAT为20.51Gy,IMRT为31．66Gy;心脏的V40和V50,VMAT和IMRT相应的值为10．64％和15．08％、4．39％和8．15％;食管的最大剂量,VMAT和IMRT相应的值为38．67Gv和44-30Gy。可以看出VMAT在保护正常器官方面均优于IMRT。结论对于肿瘤靶区偏中心、体积较小、压迫正常肺组织较小的患者,采取IMRT的治疗方式可以更好地保护正常和危及器官：但是对于肿瘤靶区体积较大、中心型、压迫正常肺组织较大的患者,采取照射范围较大的VMAT更加有优势。     

调强放射治疗技术用于全脑全脊髓放射治疗的可行性研究

目的在保证剂量均匀的前提下,探索一种新的方法来优化全脑全脊髓放射治疗交界层的剂量分布,简化全脑全脊髓的放射治疗计划。方法选择颅内肿瘤患者6例,其中男性4例,女性2例;年龄5～30岁,平均年龄12.8岁。根据靶区的长度,设定2个或3个等中心,采用调强放射治疗(IMRT)、三维适形放射治疗(3D-CRT)计划设计,进行放射治疗分析。采用均匀性指数(HI)及适形度指数评估两种计划,并通过质量控制系统进行剂量验证。结果全脑全脊髓IMRT计划的HI优于3D-CRT计划(0.09±0.01 vs 0.12±0.02),两者差异有统计学意义(t=3.12,P 0.05);脊髓靶区部分IMRT计划优于3D-CRT计划(0.09±0.02 vs 0.20±0.04。t=6.44,P 0.05)。IMRT计划较3D-CRT计划,在脑脊髓交界处(0.21±0.01 vs 0.36±0.06。t=6.05,P 0.05)、胸腰脊髓段交界处(0.08±0.01 vs 0.40±0.14。t=-26.07,P 0.05),剂量均一性更好。IMRT计划与3D-CRT计划相比,心脏平均受照射剂量(22.63%±4.11%vs 33.78%±7.51%。t=5.21,P 0.05)、食管平均受照剂量(53.53%±6.71%vs 80.24%±8.02%。t=10.02,P 0.05)、甲状腺平均受照剂量(49.28%±5.71%vs 68.82%±9.13%。t=5.31,P 0.05)较低。在甲状腺V75%剂量上,IMRT计划较3D-CRT计划更低(0.72%±0.73%vs 56.01%±29.63%。t=4.63,P 0.05)。结论全脑全脊髓IMRT计划与常规3D-CRT计划相比具有更好的剂量均匀性,特别是交界层的剂量分布改善更为明显。     

早期乳腺癌保乳术后3D-CRT与IMRT的剂量学分布及皮肤损害比较

目的:探讨早期乳腺癌保乳术后适形放疗(3D-CRT)与调强放射治疗(IMRT)剂量学分布的优劣及对皮肤损害的影响。方法:70例接受早期乳腺癌保乳术治疗的乳腺癌患者依据术后放疗方式分为3D-CRT组(n=35)和IMRT组(n=35),处方剂量为50 Gy/25次。观察并计算两组靶区剂量学指标,包括均匀性指数(HI)、适形度指数(CI),并考察靶区D_(95)(95%靶区体积所受剂量)、V_(105)(接受105%处方剂量靶区照射体积,其他类推)、V_(110),评估两组危及器官受量,包括心脏、患侧肺、健侧肺及皮肤V_(30)、V_(40)、V_(45)、V_(50)、D_(mean)等,并判定两组放疗后10个月内皮肤损害情况。结果:两组靶区剂量学指标、危及器官受量比较有统计学意义(P0.05),其中IMRT组HI、CI值均更接近1,D_(95)显著高于3D-CRT组,V_(105)、V_(110)显著低于3D-CRT组(P0.05);与3D-CRT组相比,IMRT组心脏、患侧肺、健侧肺照射剂量、平均剂量均明显较低(P0.05);IMRT组皮肤V_(30)、V_(40)、V_(45)、V_(50)、D_(mean)均明显低于3D-CRT组(P0.05)。两组放射性皮肤损伤分布比较有统计学意义(P0.05),IMRT组放射性皮肤损伤0~1级分布例数明显较多,2~4级分布例数明显较少。结论:与3D-CRT比较,早期乳腺癌保乳术后IMRT有较好的靶区覆盖率,靶区的适形度、剂量均匀性更突出,且对皮肤损害程度更轻。     

简化调强技术在脑转移瘤外照射中应用的剂量学研究

目的：通过比较脑转移瘤三维适形放疗（3D-CRT）、调强放疗（IMRT）和简化调强放疗（sIMRT）技术靶区剂量分布均匀性、适形度,危及器官受照体积、剂量,以及实施治疗的机器跳数,对比三者放疗技术的剂量学差异,探讨sIMRT应用于脑转移瘤治疗的可行性。方法：针对10例脑转移瘤患者分别设计3种放疗计划：三维适形放疗、调强放疗和简化调强放疗。保证靶区和危及器官满足临床要求前提下,分别比较3种计划的靶区剂量分布、靶区均匀指数和适形指数、危及器官受照剂量、机器跳数（MU）等,探讨其剂量学差异。结果：3种照射技术均满足临床要求,靶区（PGTV）均匀指数三者没有差异。靶区（PTV）均匀指数sIMRT逊于IMRT,但与3D-CRT无差异。靶区（PGTV、PTV）适形指数sIMRT逊于IMRT而强于3D-CRT。危及器官的保护例如左、右晶体和脑干,sIMRT优于3D-CRT但与IMRT无区别,对左、右视神经和视交叉的保护,IMRT最好,sIMRT和3D-CRT差异不大。机器跳数（MU）以IMRT最多,sIMRT居中,3D-CRT最少,但3D-CRT二程计划增加照射次数,提示实际治疗时间以sIMRT最优。结论：sIMRT可减轻工作人员劳动强度,缩短治疗时间,节省资源,是一种性价比较高的放疗技术,适用于脑转移瘤放疗。     

颈段胸上段食管癌T形野三种照射技术的剂量学比较

目的：控讨颈段胸上段食管癌T形野照射的最佳放疗模式。方法：26例颈段胸上段食管癌T形野照射的患者采用瓦里安Eclipse三维治疗计划系统（3D—TPS）对3种照射技术即：调强放疗（IMRT）、三维适形放疗（3D—CRT）和常规放疗（Con—RT）进行放射治疗计划设计。规定处方剂量54Gy，95％等剂量线涵盖95％PTV（计划靶体积）。Con—RT利用3D．TPS模拟X线模拟机定位设计，等中心照射，前后T形野36Gy，双侧水平野18Gy，均用剂量体积直方图（DVH）分析PTV靶区各项参数和肺及脊髓受照体积和剂量。结果：（1）PTV靶区等剂量线、剂量不均匀指数（Ⅲ）和适形指数（CI）3种照射技术比较IMRT优于3D—CRT。3D—CRT优于Con-RT（P=0．000）（2）肺和脊髓受照体积和剂量3种照射技术比较IMRT优于Con—RT和3D—CRT虽然某些参数Con—RT稍优于3D—CRT，但大部分参数比较差异无统计学差异。（3）调强技术野数的参数比较．PTV、肺和脊髓的各项参数中，5野，7野和9野大部分参数优于3野．7野与9野比较差异均尢统计学意义（P=0244～0．947）。结论：IMRT技术是颈段胸上段食管癌T形野照射最佳选择，它与其他照射技术相比具有明显剂量学优势，以7野和9野IMRT较适宜。     

Evaluation of dose coverage to target volume and normal tissue sparing in the adjuvant radiotherapy of gastric cancers: 3D-CRT compared with dynamic IMRT

Purpose:

To assess the potential advantage of intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) over 3D-conformal radiotherapy (3D-CRT) planning in postoperative adjuvant radiotherapy for patients with gastric carcinoma.

Methods and materials:

In a retrospective study, for plan comparison, dose distribution was recalculated in 15 patients treated with 3D-CRT on the contoured structures of same CT images using an IMRT technique. 3D-conformal plans with three fields and four-fields were compared with seven-field dynamic IMRT plans. The different plans were compared by analyzing the dose coverage of planning target volume using TV₉₅, D_mean, uniformity index, conformity index and homogeneity index parameters. To assess critical organ sparing, D_mean, D_max, dose to one-third and two-third volumes of the OARs and percentage of volumes receiving more than their tolerance doses were compared.

Results:

The average dose coverage values of PTV with 3F-CRT and 4F-CRT plans were comparable, where as IMRT plans achieved better target coverage(p<0.001) with higher conformity index value of 0.81±0.07 compared to both the 3D-CRT plans. The doses to the liver and bowel reduced significantly (p<0.001) with IMRT plans compared to other 3D-CRT plans. For all OARs the percentage of volumes receiving more than their tolerance doses were reduced with the IMRT plans.

Conclusion:

This study showed that a better target coverage and significant dose reduction to OARs could be achieved with the IMRT plans. The IMRT can be preferred with caution for organ motion. The authors are currently studying organ motion in the upper abdomen to use IMRT for patient treatment.     

肿瘤腹主动脉旁淋巴结转移三维适形和调强放射治疗计划的剂量学比较

目的：比较腹主动脉旁淋巴结肿瘤转移的3D—CRT和IMRT放射治疗计划的剂量学差异。方法：设计常规四野（3D-CRT）和调强放疗（IMRT）计划，通过剂量-体积直方图比较二者的放射物理参数。并评价其应用价值。结果：IMRT计划中靶区最大剂量明显低于3D—CRT计划中的相应值，其靶区适形度也明显占优。同时。IMRT计划中的肾脏高剂量区明显低于3D—CRT计划中的高剂量区，并且其肠道剂量D5、D10、D20、D30和平均剂量均明显低于3D—CRT计划中的相应值，差异有统计学意义。结论：就腹主动脉旁淋巴结肿瘤转移的放射治疗。IMRT技术有效地将肿瘤靶区与周围正常危险器官分割开，从而在提高肿瘤放射剂量的同时最大限度减少危险器官的照射剂量，应该更广泛地应用于临床。     

Dosimetric study using different leaf-width MLCs for treatment planning of dynamic conformal arcs and intensity-modulated radiosurgery

This paper systematically studied the dosimetric difference between a 3 mm micro multileaf collimator (MLC), a 5 mm MLC, and a 10 mm MLC for stereotactic radiosurgery using the Brainscan treatment planning system. Thirty-four cases treated with the dynamic conformal arcs technique and 20 cases treated with the intensity modulated radiosurgery/fractionated radiotherapy (IMRS/ IMRT) technique were retrospectively studied. The conformity index, the percentage target coverage, and the dose-volume histogram (DVH) for organs-at-risk (OARs) were used for dosimetric analysis and comparison for different treatment techniques, target volumes, and treatment sites. For the dynamic conformal arcs technique, there were statistically significant differences in the conformity indices between different leaf-width MLCs. The ratio of the conformity indices between different MLCs depended on the target volume. The average conformity index ratios between the 5 mm MLC and the 3 mm MLC were 1.37+/-0.09, 1.12+/-0.04, 1.08+/-0.02 and 1.04+/-0.01, respectively, for patients with the target volume (V) in groups: (1) V< 1 cm3, (2) 1 cm3 < V< 8 cm3, (3) 8 cm3 < V< 27 cm3, and (4) V> 27 CC. The average conformity index ratios between the 10 and 3 mm MLCs were 2.00+/-0.33, 1.45+/-0.09, 1.28+/-0.09, and 1.18+/-0.05 for patients in these four volume groups, respectively. No statistically significant difference was found for the target coverage among different MLCs. For the IMRS/IMRT technique, the average conformity index and target coverage ratios were 1.01+/-0.05 and 1.00+/-0.02, respectively, between the 5 and 3 mm MLCs, and were 1.04+/-0.07 and 0.97+/-0.02, respectively, between the 10 and 3 mm MLCs. The 3 mm MLC showed slightly better overall OAR DVHs than the 5 and 10 mm MLCs, especially for the cranial site with small-volume OARs defined. The results suggest that for the dynamic conformal arcs technique, the narrower leaf-width MLC provides better dose conformity than the wider leaf-width MLCs. This advantage decreases when the target volume increases. For the IMRS/IMRT technique, the narrower leaf-width MLC could have better sparing of small OARs than the wider leaf-width MLC.     

Energy modulated electron therapy using a few leaf electron collimator in combination with IMRT and 3D-CRT: Monte Carlo-based planning and dosimetric evaluation

Energy modulated electron therapy (EMET) based on Monte Carlo dose calculation is a promising technique that enhances the treatment planning and delivery of superficially located tumors. This study investigated the application of EMET using a novel few-leaf electron collimator (FLEC) in head and neck and breast sites in comparison with three-dimensional conventional radiation therapy (3D-CRT) and intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) techniques. Treatment planning was performed for two parotid cases and one breast case. Four plans were compared for each case: 3D-CRT, IMRT, 3D-CRT in conjunction with EMET (EMET-CRT), and IMRT in conjunction with EMET (EMET-IMRT), all of which were performed and calculated with Monte Carlo techniques. For all patients, dose volume histograms (DVHs) were obtained for all organs of interest and the DVHs were used as a means of comparing the plans. Homogeneity and conformity of dose distributions were calculated, as well as a sparing index that compares the effect of the low isodose lines. In addition, the whole-body dose equivalent (WBDE) was estimated for each plan. Adding EMET delivered with the FLEC to 3D-CRT improves sparing of normal tissues. For the two head and neck cases, the mean dose to the contralateral parotid and brain stem was reduced relative to IMRT by 43% and 84%, and by 57% and 71%, respectively. Improved normal tissue sparing was quantified as an increase in sparing index of 47% and 30% for the head and neck and the breast cases, respectively. Adding EMET to either 3D-CRT or IMRT results in preservation of target conformity and dose homogeneity. When adding EMET to the treatment plan, the WBDE was reduced by between 6% and 19% for 3D-CRT and by between 21% and 33% for IMRT, while WBDE for EMET-CRT was reduced by up to 72% when compared with IMRT. FLEC offers a practical means of delivering modulated electron therapy. Although adding EMET delivered using the FLEC results in perturbation of target conformity when compared to IMRT, it significantly improves normal tissue sparing while offering enhanced target conformity to the 3D-CRT planning. The addition of EMET systematically leads to a reduction in WBDE especially when compared with IMRT.     

逆向3D-CRT与IMRT计划设计方法在非小细胞肺癌放疗中的剂量学比较

目的:分析、比较用于治疗非小细胞肺癌(NSCLC)的逆向三维适形(inverse3D-CRT)和调强适形(intensity modulat-ed radiotherapy,IMRT)计划。方法:随机选择10例NSCLC患者,采用6MV X射线对每例NSCLC进行逆向3D-CRT和3组IMRT的治疗计划设计,处方剂量为60Gy/2Gy/30次。所有计划都使95%靶区体积达到处方剂量要求。并用ADACPinnacle3计划系统提供的卷积/迭加(convolution/superposition)算法对两种放疗计划进行剂量计算,比较靶区及正常肺组织的剂量分布(PTV95/V20比值)以及Dmax-Dmin等指标。结果:3组IMRT放疗计划的PTV95/V20比值分别比逆向3D-CRT增加1.08(P=0.014)、0.72(P=0.089)和0.42(P=0.318)。结论:与3D-CRT放疗技术相比较,IMRT技术在提高靶区适形度的同时降低了正常肺组织的受照体积,可在NSCLC的放疗中推广应用。     

Treatment planning intercomparison for spinal chordomas using intensity-modulated photon radiation therapy (IMRT) and carbon ions

Spinal chordomas cannot be treated with an effective dose using conventional radiation therapy (RT) without exceeding the tolerance dose of the spinal cord while ensuring sufficient target coverage at the same time. In this study we investigate the potential physical advantages of combined photon intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) and raster-scanned carbon ion RT over photon IMRT alone. For a representative patient we generated a carbon ion RT plan and a photon IMRT plan. Additionally, combined plans consisting of both carbon ions and photon IMRT were calculated using ratios of 20:40 GyE, 30:30 GyE and 40:20 GyE. The best target coverage was obtained using carbon ions alone. Using a combination of photon IMRT and carbon ions, the target coverage was better than with photon IMRT alone. Due to the applied dose constraints, the sparing of the spinal cord was comparable for all plans. Using carbon ions alone, the non-target tissue volume irradiated to at least 30 GyE/50.4 GyE was reduced by 72%/84% compared to photon IMRT alone. These advantages were evident even with combined techniques. The actually delivered dose distribution is expected to be more dependent on patient misalignment with carbon ions compared with photon IMRT. A combination of carbon ions and photon IMRT might be preferable in order to profit by the physical advantages of carbon ions while ensuring a safe treatment.     

乳腺癌锁骨上区不同放疗技术甲状腺剂量学比较及其对生存期和淋巴细胞亚群的影响

目的:比较乳腺癌锁骨上区不同放疗技术甲状腺剂量学特点,并对比其对患者生存期和淋巴细胞亚群的影响。方法:71例乳腺癌患者按照根治术后放疗方案分组,接受调强放疗(IMRT)者纳入IMRT组(n=37),接受三维适形放疗(3D-CRT)者纳入3D-CRT组(n=34)。比较两组患者计划靶区(PTV)剂量、甲状腺受量,放疗前后淋巴细胞亚群变化,以及5年无病生存率、总生存率,比较两种放疗技术甲状腺保护作用及其对患者预后的影响。结果:IMRT组Dmean、CI高于3D-CRT组,Dmax、HI低于3D-CRT组,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。IMRT组甲状腺剂量体积V20、V30、V40高于3D-CRT组,Dmin、Dmean也高于3D-CRT组,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。两组放疗后1 d淋巴细胞总数、B淋巴细胞百分比均较放疗前下降,CD3+、CD4+均较放疗前升高,3D-CRT组放疗后1 d淋巴细胞总数、B淋巴细胞百分比、CD3+、CD4+均高于IMRT组,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。IMRT组失访3例、3D-CRT组失访1例,其余患者均获得有效随访,随访时间≥5年。IMRT组5年无病生存率、总生存率分别为47.06%(16/34)、73.53%(25/34),与3D-CRT组的51.52%(17/33)、78.79%(26/33)比较,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论:IMRT的靶区剂量均匀性更佳,但甲状腺受量更高且患者放疗后淋巴细胞亚群变化更为明显;IMRT与3D-CRT对乳腺癌患者远期生存的影响无明显差异。