三维适形与调强放疗技术在胃癌术后放疗中的剂量学比较

目的比较胃癌放疗中三维适形放疗(3DCRT)和调强放疗(IMRT)技术的剂量学差异,为临床应用提供参考。方法采用3DCRT治疗的5例胃癌术后患者,放疗时使用了主动呼吸门控技术,以减少呼吸引起的器官运动。IMRT计划采用7个共面等间距野,仅用于剂量学比较。患者靶区设定的处方剂量为至少95%计划靶体积(PTV)接受45.00 Gy,至少99%PTV接受42.75 Gy。根据积分剂量体积直方图(DVH)比较PTV受量和相关正常器官的受量差异和剂量分布。结果与IMRT相比3DCRT的剂量均匀性和适形度略差,但两者在PTV受量上剂量相似。对左、右肾受15 Gy剂量的体积百分比(V_(15))而言,3DCRT好于IMRT;从正常肝的平均受量及V_(30)上看,IMRT稍优于优势;在脊髓的受量上两者相似。结论3DCRT技术在主动呼吸门控辅助下,PTV和部分正常器官的受量上可接近或者达到采用相等野数的IMRT的结果。     

三种照射技术在髓母细胞瘤放射治疗中的剂量学分析

目的 探讨调强放射治疗(Intensity modulated radiation therapy,IMRT)、容积调强弧形放疗(Volumetric modulated arc therapy,VMAT)和螺旋断层放射治疗(Helical tomotherapy,TOMO)在髓母细胞瘤放射治疗中的剂量学差异。方法 选取10例髓母细胞瘤儿童患者,设计出IMRT(等分5野)、VMAT(双弧)、TOMO三组放疗计划。分析三种计划靶区的适形指数(CI)、均匀指数(HI)、1.07倍处方剂量线所包含的靶区体积(V₁₀₇)、靶区内最大剂量点剂量值(D_max)、危及器官(OAR)受量情况、机器跳数和治疗时间。结果 对于全脑全脊髓放疗,TOMO组计划靶区PTV的CI、HI、V₁₀₇、D_max和OAR受量都优于VMAT组和IMRT(5野)组计划(P＜0.05);TOMO组计划机器跳数最多(P＜0.05),且其治疗时间最长(P＜0.05);TOMO组可以一次完成全脑全脊髓照射,避免了VMAT和IMRT(5野)治疗时人为移床误差。结论 在髓母细胞瘤放射治疗中,TOMO组在剂量分布上优于VMAT组和IMRT(5野)组,但其治疗时机器跳数和治疗时间明显增加,它对临床上的影响有待于进一步观察与研究。     

胃癌术后IMRT与常规对穿及适形照射剂量学的比较

目的比较胃癌术后常规放射治疗与适形及调强（IMRT）治疗技术在同一处方剂量（45 Gy）时的剂量分布特点,为临床提供参考。方法选取9例胃癌术后患者,在CT图像序列上勾画出临床靶区（CTV）,CTV外放1 cm定义为计划靶区PTV,对PTV分别用常规两野对穿、适形5野及5野调强照射技术进行计划设计。所有方案处方剂量均为45 Gy,要求95%体积PTV接受45 Gy剂量,IMRT与适形计划采用优化以保证≥95%的PTV接受45 Gy的处方剂量,99%的PTV接受42.75 Gy。根据剂量体积直方图（DVH）比较PTV受量和正常器官的受量差异和剂量分布,并计算正常组织并发症概率（NTCP）。结果IMRT能够产生优于常规及适形的靶区剂量分布,均匀性及适形度明显优于常规对穿照射。IMRT的左肾受23 Gy剂量的体积百分比（V23）明显低于常规及适形技术,从脊髓剂量来看,IMRT的脊髓最大剂量为（39.3＋2.3）,小于40 Gy,明显优于常规前后对穿及适形照射技术,并相应减少脊髓的NTCP值。结论IMRT相对于常规对穿照射及适形照射具有明显的靶区剂量分布优势,可以减少肾脏、脊髓等正常组织器官的照射体积百分比及NTCP值。     

非小细胞肺癌放射治疗不同模式的剂量学分析

目的分析常规放射治疗计划、三维适形放射治疗(3DCRT)计划和调强适形放射治疗(IMRT)计划治疗非小细胞肺癌(NSCLC)的疗效,评估3DCRT和IMRT与常规治疗的优越性。方法对经病理证实的50例中晚期NSCLC(Ⅲ～Ⅳ期)患者进行回顾性分析,计划靶区处方剂量66Gy,利用治疗计划系统(TPS)对每例患者分别设计常规、3DCRT和IMRT三种放疗计划,通过剂量体积直方图,比较三种计划对肿瘤靶区和正常组织器官的剂量分布。结果 (1)靶区适行度:处方剂量为66Gy时,三维适形放射治疗和调强适形放射治疗达此剂量的计划靶区(PTV)体积和95%PTV体积下的照射剂量均高于常规治疗,同时,调强适形放射治疗均高于三维适形放射治疗。(2)除全肺V20的IMRT检测外,3DCRT和IMRT治疗的肺受剂量均比常规治疗高。在全肺V5和全肺V10检测中,3DCRT比IMRT剂量低,其余检测中3DCRT比IMRT剂量高。(3)三种计划脊髓最大受照剂量均<45Gy。脊髓,食管及心脏受照剂量3DCRT均较常规放疗低,并且差异均有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论 (1)3DCRT和IMRT较常规放射治疗明显提高了靶区的照射剂量和靶区的准确性,从而在相同处方剂量情况下提高了治疗肿瘤的控制率。(2)3DCRT和IMRT与常规放疗比较,对肺的保护性存在一定的局限性。(3)3DCRT和IMRT在一定程度上可降低正常组织受照剂量和并发症的发生概率,减少正常组织的放射损伤。(4)IMRT在靶区剂量分布上明显优于常规放射治疗和3DCRT,同时能在一定程度上更好的保护正常组织。     

胃癌术后放疗方式对肾脏剂量学影响的比较研究

目的:比较胃癌术后三维适形放疗(3D-CRT)与调强适形放疗(IMRT)对肾脏剂量学的分布影响.方法:选择9例根治术后的进展期胃癌患者,应用Pinnacal三维计划系统(TPS)分别为每例患者设计4野3D-CRT和5、7野IMRT,所有计划给予处方剂量95％的计划靶体积(PTV)＞45 Gy; IMRT同时要求99％的PTV体积＞42.75 Gy.应用等剂量曲线及剂量体积直方图(DVH)比较各个计划之间靶区剂量的分布和肾脏的剂量受量差异.结果:4野3D-CRT和5、7野IMRT的靶区V45分别为0.96±0.03、0.95±0.02和0.95±0.02.所有计划靶区均满足处方剂量,与4野3D-CRT相比,IMRT明显提高靶区的剂量的均匀性(HI)和适形度(CI),并且降低双侧肾脏18 Gy的剂量体积百分比(V18),但在低剂量(10 Gy)体积百分比(V10)3种放射方式之间差异无统计学意义,P＞0.05.5和7野IMRT之间不论在靶区剂量分布还是危及器官的剂量受量上均差异无统计学意义,P＞0.05.结论:与3D-CRT比较,IMRT明显提高靶区均匀性,降低肾脏剂量受量和剂量体积百分比,但在V10上3种计划间差异无统计学意义.     

直肠癌术后辅助性放疗不同照射技术的剂量学研究

目的通过比较常规放疗（CRT）、三维适形放疗（3DCRT）和调强放疗（IMRT）技术照射小肠、膀胱、股骨头体积．剂量关系，探讨直肠癌术后适形放疗理想的计划模式。方法统一规定直肠癌术后辅助性放疗的临床肿瘤体积（CTV）范围，设定PTV为CTV外扩1cm。应用三维治疗计划系统对既往三野照射模式进行剂量学评估。在规定PTV至少达到95％处方剂量前提下，比较具体病例CRT、3DCRT和IMRT技术下小肠、膀胱、股骨头受照射体积．剂量关系。结果（1）既往术后常规治疗模式的优点是膀胱、小肠受照剂量低，缺点是靶区涵盖度差。（2）等剂量线中高剂量区所包括的正常组织器官体积，IMRT〈3DCRT〈新计划的CRT。（3）3DCRT等剂量线的高剂量区所包括小肠、膀胱的体积百分比在3个野与5个野照射技术中基本相同，7个野技术反而使膀胱和小肠的照射剂量增加。IMRT静态调强技术等剂量线高剂量区所包括小肠、膀胱的体积分别以7、9个野最低。结论直肠癌术后辅助放疗若采用常规模式，可造成靶区剂量不足；在采用3DCRT技术时3—5个野技术较为合适，采用IMRT静态调强技术时7个野较为合适。IMRT技术与其他技术相比具有明显剂量学优势，尤其有利于膀胱的保护。     

食管癌螺旋断层放疗及三维适形调强放疗计划剂量学研究

目的 近年来放射治疗设备不断更新,放疗技术持续发展,肿瘤放疗方式有了更多的选择.本研究通过评估食管癌的螺旋断层放疗(tomotherapy, TOMO)及三维适形调强放疗(intensity modulation radiation therapy, IMRT)的剂量学特性,为临床上食管癌放疗方式的选择提供依据.方法 选取2014-07-13-2015-02-25浙江省肿瘤医院胸部肿瘤放疗科10例食管癌患者,勾画靶区及正常器官后,分别传输至Raystation及TOMO计划系统,给予肿瘤原发灶(PGTV)61.6 Gy/28次,计划靶区(PTV)56.0 Gy/28次,根据RTOG 1106标准限制危及器官(organs at risk, OAR)剂量.分别对靶区的剂量体积直方图(dose volume histogram, DVH)、均匀性指数(homogeneity index, HI)、适形性指数(conformal index CI)和OAR(肺、心脏、脊髓)受照最大剂量及平均剂量进行评估.结果 两种计划都能满足处方剂量要求和危及器官受量限制.TOMO计划中PGTV的中位均匀性指数(HI)为0.057 5,优于IMRT计划的0.073 5, P=0.047.TOMO计划中PTV的中位适形性指数(CI)为0.785,优于IMRT计划的0.682 5, P=0.009.TOMO计划中PGTV的中位最大剂量Dmax为64.9 Gy,明显低于IMRT计划的66.5 Gy, P=0.005;TOMO计划中PTV的中位最大剂量Dmax为64.1 Gy,明显低于IMRT计划的64.9 Gy, P=0.028. TOMO计划的中位总的肺剂量为10.8 Gy,低于IMRT计划的11.9 Gy, P=0.005.TOMO计划的中位总的心脏剂量为22.6 Gy,明显低于IMRT计划的24.3 Gy, P=0.028. TOMO计划的中位脊髓最大剂量为40.2 Gy,明显低于IMRT计划的41.7 Gy, P=0.007.结论 食管癌放疗中TOMO放疗计划对比IMRT放疗计划,具有更好的靶区覆盖适形性及剂量分布均匀性,同时明显减少双肺、心脏及脊髓的受照剂量.     

子宫颈癌术后盆腔不同体外照射方法的剂量学研究

目的 比较常规放疗(CRT)、三维适形放疗(3DCRT)及调强放疗(IMRT)方法在子宫颈癌靶体积剂量覆盖及危及器官(OAR)保护方面的差异,探讨子宫颈癌患者术后盆腔体外照射的合理方法.方法 对10例子宫颈癌术后患者进行模拟CT增强扫描,在计划系统内勾画临床靶体积(CTV),CTV均匀外扩1.0 cm生成计划靶体积(PTV),同时勾画小肠、直肠、膀胱、骨髓、卵巢及股骨头作为OAR.进而设计出CRT、3DCRT及IMRT的3种治疗计划,对CRT要求参考点达到处方剂量45 Gy,对3DCRT及IMRT要求95%的PTV达45 Gy.应用等剂量曲线及剂量体积直方图对3种计划的CTV及OAR的剂量分布进行比较.结果 CRT计划中CTV达45 Gy的平均体积显著低于3DCRT、IMRT计划(Q=8.27、8.37,P值均＜0.01),而3DCRT和IMRT计划之间相似(Q=0.10,P＞0.05).3DCRT和IMRT计划中小肠达30、45 Gy的体积明显低于CRT.IMRT计划中直肠、膀胱达30、45 Gy的体积均显著低于CRT,而3DCRT中仅直肠、膀胱达45 Gy的体积显著低于CRT.3DCRT和IMRT使骨髓达30、45 Gy剂量的体积明显低于CRT.4例卵巢移位者中2例在3DCRT及IMRT计划中,另2例在3种计划中卵巢平均受量全部超过300 cGy.结论 IMRT和3DCRT在提高靶体积内剂量及其均匀度,以及保护小肠、直肠和膀胱方面较CRT具备明显优势,以IMRT为最佳.在高剂量范围内,IMRT和3DCRT对骨髓的保护优势确定.对于移位悬吊的卵巢,IMRT、3DCRT及CRT均不能对其形成有效保护.     

胸中段食管癌三维适形放疗、调强放疗及旋转调强放疗的剂量学研究

 目的　研究胸中段食管癌三维适形放疗（3DCRT）、调强放疗（IMRT）、旋转调强放疗（IMAT）3种放疗计划的剂量差异。方法　选取胸中段食管癌患者15例,以Varian Eclipse 8.6计划系统分别设计3DCRT、IMRT、IMAT 3种放疗计划,其中3DCRT采用5～8个共面射野,IMRT采用7个共面射野,IMAT采用2个弧度。比较3种计划的剂量学差异。结果　IMRT、IMRT的靶区均匀指数（HI）、适形指数（CI）、95 % 计划靶体积（PTV）体积剂量均优于3DCRT,全肺V5、V20、V35、心脏V30受照剂量低于3DCRT（t＝2.531,P＜0.05）,而在全肺V10、V15、V25、V30、全肺平均、心脏平均、脊髓Dmax剂量之间三者的差异均无统计学意义（t＝1.325,P＞0.05）。结论　IMAT与IMRT在胸中段食管癌放疗靶区体积剂量覆盖和危及器官保护方面相似,二者均优于3DCRT。IMAT的机器跳数和照射时间均少于IMRT。     

子宫颈癌术后盆腔转移三维适形与调强放疗剂量学对比研究

目的 比较三维适形放疗(3DCRT)和调强放疗(IMRT)在子宫颈癌术后盆腔转移病灶靶区(PTY)剂量覆盖和危及器官(OAR)保护方面的差异,探讨子宫颈癌术后盆腔转移病灶的最佳治疗方案.方法 选择10例子宫颈癌根治术后盆腔转移患者,行CT模拟定位后将数据上传至Varian三维计划系统,勾画靶区,进行放疗计划设计后做下列研究:3DCRT计划与IMRT计划对计划靶区PTV的影响及比较;3DCRT计划与IMRT计划中危及器官受最比较分析.结果 采用95%可信区间,CTV至PTV的外放边界定为1 cm.3DCRT计划中3、4、5和6个射野下PTV适形指数分别为0.46、0.67、0.68、0.68,4个以上射野数日的增加不再显著改善靶区分布和减少正常组织受照射体积百分比.IMRT计划中5、7、9、11和13个射野下PTV适形指数分别为0.75、0.83、0.84、0.85、0.85,9个以上射野数目增加不再显著改善靶区分布和减少正常组织受照体积百分比.比较OAR最高照射剂量,IMRT计划中小肠脊髓的最高照射剂量低于3DCRT,直肠膀胱及股骨头的最大剂量差异无统计学意义.结论 子宫颈癌术后盆腔转移放疗者3DCRT以4个射野数计划为优,IMRT以9个射野数计划为优.高剂量范围内IMRT较3DCRT对脊髓及小肠的保护作用明显,IMRT较3DCRT减少了高剂量区直肠、膀胱的受照体积,从而有望减少OAR放射治疗并发症的发生概率.

Abstract：

Objective To compare the differences of target-volume(PTV) coverage and organ at risk (OAR) protection between three dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3DCRT) and intensity-modulated radiotherapy(IMRT) for patients with pelvis metastasis of cervical cancer underwent radical hysterectomy and pelvic lymphadenectomy. To explore the optimal treatment methods for pelvis metastasis of cervical cancer.Methods 10 patients with pelvis metastasis of cervical cancer underwent radical hysterectomy and pelvic lymphadenectomy were selected for this study. The images scanned by CT were transferred to treatment planning system to generate 3DCRT and IMRT plans. The impacts of 3DCRT on PTV were compared with those of IMRT. Isodose line and dose volume histograms(DVH) were used to evaluate to the dose-distribution in PTV and OAR. Results For 95 % confidence interval, the margin from CTV to PTV was 1 cm. Conformal indexs (CIs) of PTV for 3, 4, 5 and 6 fields 3DCRT were 0.46, 0.67, 0.68 and 0.68, respectively. When beyond 4 fields, the advantage of adding fields was not significant. CIs of PTV for 5, 7, 9, 11 and 13 fields IMRT were 0.75, 0.83 0.84, 0.85 and 0.85, respectively. When beyond 9 fields, the advantage of adding fields was not significant. The maximum dose of the bowl and spine cord in IMRT plans were lower than that in the 3DCRT plans (P <0.05). Maximum dose of OAR had no significant differences (includingt the bone, recttum and bladder) between IMRT and 3DCRT plans. Conclusion For patients with pelvis metastasis of cervical cancer after radical surgery, 4 fields planning in 3DCRT and 9 fields planning in IMRT are feasible. At high dose levels, the IMRT plans can more significantly protect the bowl and spine cord and decrease the radiation volume of colorectal and urinary bladder at risk than 3DCRT, so IMRT may potentially diminish probability of the normal tissue complications.     

非小细胞肺癌 3~5个脑转移瘤优选调强放疗的可行性研究

目的 探讨调强放疗(IMRT)技术治疗非小细胞肺癌 3~5个脑转移瘤的优势。     

ABC辅助下RapidArc放疗原发性肝癌的可行性研究

目的 通过比较3种呼吸状态下三维适形放疗(3DCRT)、传统调强放疗(IMRT)、旋转调强放疗(瓦里安公司的为RapidArc,RA)计划,探讨主动呼吸控制(ABC)辅助RA放疗原发性肝癌(HCC)的可行性。方法 选取12例HCC患者,依次完成ABC辅助下平静吸气末屏气(EIH)、平静呼气末屏气(EEH)、自由呼吸(FB)下CT模拟定位。对各呼吸状态下计划靶体积制定3DCRT、IMRT、RA (3个135°弧)计划,比较3种计划间、RA计划不同呼吸状态间的剂量学差异。结果 12例患者FB计划靶体积均大于EEH、EIH (160.8、89.5、83.1 cm³,F=6.63,P=0.004)。RA计划的适形指数和均匀性指数优于IMRT、3DCRT (0.92、0.90、0.77,F=72.55,P=0.000;0.90、0.89、0.84,F= 125.49,P=0.000)。3DCRT计划中正常肝V₂₀、V₃₀、V₄₀高于 IMRT、RA (24%、20%、19%,F=3.56,P=0.032;13%、10%、10%,F=5.74,P=0.004;8%、5%、6%,F=3.72,P=0.027)。FB RA计划的正常肝脏平均受量、V₁₀、V₂₀、V₃₀、V₄₀均高于EEH和EIH (13.46、10.25、9.48 Gy,F=3.63,P=0.038;46%、35%、32%,F=2.96,P=0.066;24%、16%、16%,F=3.69,P=0.036;13%、8%、8%,F=4.28,P=0.022;8%、5%、5%,F=2.39,P=0.108)。EEH下RA的十二指肠5 cm³体积所受剂量低于 FB 与 EIH (8.78、19.35 Gy与11.67 Gy,F=1.56,P=0.224)。3DCRT、IMRT、RA机器跳数平均为254.06、626.33、550.28 MU (F=147.35,P=0.000),治疗时间平均为135、540、130 s (F=62.83,P=0.000)。结论 ABC辅助下3个135°弧的RapidArc技术可在保证靶区准确基础上用较少治疗时间及机器跳数完成适形指数和均匀性优于IMRT计划的剂量传输,更好保护正常肝脏。     

Integral Dose in Three-dimensional Conformal Radiotherapy, Intensity-modulated Radiotherapy and Helical Tomotherapy

AimsTo evaluate the integral dose to organs at risk (OARs), normal tissue and the whole body in three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3DCRT), intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) and helical tomotherapy for whole pelvic radiotherapy (WPRT) in postoperative endometrial cancer patients.Materials and methodsWe selected 10 patients with endometrial cancer undergoing postoperative WPRT. Plans of 6MV-3DCRT, 18MV-3DCRT, 6MV-IMRT, 18MV-IMRT and helical tomotherapy were developed for each patient. The integral doses to OARs, normal tissue and the whole body were compared.ResultsCompared with 3DCRT, both IMRT and helical tomotherapy significantly improved dose conformity and the integral doses to OARs (8.8–29.9%, P < 0.05). Compared with 6MV-3DCRT, IMRT resulted in 13.2 and 11.0% lower integral doses to normal tissue and the whole body, respectively (P = 0.00), whereas no significant difference was found with helical tomotherapy. Compared directly with IMRT, helical tomotherapy reduced the integral doses to the rectum and bladder. However, the integral doses to normal tissue were 13.9 and 17.1% higher than 6MV-IMRT and 18MV-IMRT plans, respectively (P = 0.00); the integral doses to pelvic bones also slightly increased with helical tomotherapy. The use of 18MV resulted in 5.8 and 2.7% lower integral doses to normal tissue and 4.8 and 2.1% lower integral doses to the whole body in the 3DCRT and IMRT plans, respectively (P = 0.00).ConclusionsResults show that IMRT and helical tomotherapy offer better conformity and lower integral doses to OARs for postoperative WPRT of endometrial cancers compared with 3DCRT. The integral doses to normal tissue and the whole body were significantly lower with IMRT, whereas no significant difference was found with helical tomotherapy compared with 6MV-3DCRT. Compared directly with IMRT, helical tomotherapy further reduced the integral doses to the rectum and bladder, at the expense of a slightly higher integral dose to pelvic bones and normal tissue. The use of 18MV improved the integral doses to normal tissue and the whole body in both 3DCRT and IMRT.     

Dosimetric comparison of left-sided whole breast irradiation with 3DCRT, forward-planned IMRT, inverse-planned IMRT, helical tomotherapy, and topotherapy

Background and purpose

To compare left-sided whole breast conventional and intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) treatment planning techniques.

Materials and methods

Treatment plans were created for 10 consecutive patients. Three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3DCRT), forward-planned IMRT (for-IMRT), and inverse-planned IMRT (inv-IMRT) used two tangent beams. For-IMRT utilized up to four segments per beam. For helical tomotherapy (HT) plans, beamlet entrance and/or exit to critical structures was blocked. Topotherapy plans, which used static gantry angles with simultaneous couch translation and inverse-planned intensity modulation, used two tangent beams. Plans were normalized to 50 Gy to 95% of the retracted PTV.

Results

Target max doses were reduced with for-IMRT compared to 3DCRT, which were further reduced with HT, topotherapy, and inv-IMRT. HT resulted in lowest heart and ipsilateral lung max doses, but had higher mean doses. Inv-IMRT and topotherapy reduced ipsilateral lung mean and max doses compared to 3DCRT and for-IMRT.

Conclusions

All modalities evaluated provide adequate coverage of the intact breast. HT, topotherapy, and inv-IMRT can reduce high doses to the target and normal tissues, although HT results in increased low doses to large volume of normal tissue. For-IMRT improves target homogeneity compared with 3DCRT, but to a lesser degree than the inverse-planned modalities.     

Feasibility of using intensity-modulated radiotherapy to improve lung sparing in treatment planning for distal esophageal cancer.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: To evaluate the feasibility whether intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) can be used to reduce doses to normal lung than three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3 DCRT) in treating distal esophageal malignancies. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Ten patient cases with cancer of the distal esophagus were selected for a retrospective treatment-planning study. IMRT plans using four, seven, and nine beams (4B, 7B, and 9B) were developed for each patient and compared with the 3 DCRT plan used clinically. IMRT and 3 DCRT plans were evaluated with respect to PTV coverage and dose-volumes to irradiated normal structures, with statistical comparison made between the two types of plans using the Wilcoxon matched-pair signed-rank test. RESULTS: IMRT plans (4B, 7B, 9B) reduced total lung volume treated above 10 Gy (V(10)), 20 Gy (V(20)), mean lung dose (MLD), biological effective volume (V(eff)), and lung integral dose (P<0.05). The median absolute improvement with IMRT over 3DCRT was approximately 10% for V(10), 5% for V(20), and 2.5 Gy for MLD. IMRT improved the PTV heterogeneity (P<0.05), yet conformity was better with 7B-9B IMRT plans. No clinically meaningful differences were observed with respect to the irradiated volumes of spinal cord, heart, liver, or total body integral doses. CONCLUSIONS: Dose-volume of exposed normal lung can be reduced with IMRT, though clinical investigations are warranted to assess IMRT treatment outcome of esophagus cancers.     

颈段食管癌质子治疗与调强放疗计划对比研究

目的 比较质子治疗(PT)与X线调强放疗(IMRT)在颈段食管癌治疗中的剂量分布.方法 选取10例颈段食管癌患者CT图像,每例制定1个X线IMRT计划(7个野)与2个PT计划(PT1为前后对穿2个野,PT2为两前斜加后3个野).使用等剂量分布及剂量体积直方图进行计划间比较.结果 IMRT与PT1、PT2计划的计划靶体积(PTV)95%等剂量面适形指数分别为1.43与1.52、1.43(F=3.62,P<0.01),平均剂量分别为64.4 Gy与65.0、63.6 Gy(F=12.06,P<0.01);PTV周围正常组织平均剂量分别为20.7 Gy与10.5、10.6 Gy(F=77.60,P<0.01),全肺的为12.1 Gy与7.3、8.4 Gy(F:15.87,P<0.01),脊髓最大剂量分别为41.4 Gy与34.9、35.0 Gy(F=11.74,P<0.01).结论 3个计划均能满足覆盖靶区要求,但PT可明显降低肿瘤周围正常组织剂量,这为PT剂量提升或合并使用同期化疗提供了可能.PT计划中前后对穿2个野也可满足临床要求.

Abstract：

Objective To compare the dosimetric difference of proton therapy(PT)and X-ray intensity-modulated radiotherapy(IMRT)for cervical esophageal cancer.Methods The treatment planning of 10 patients with cervical esophageal cancer were selected for this study.One IMRT plan and 2 PT plans (PT1 plan:two opposed AP-PA beams;PT2 plan:two anterior-oblique beams and one posterior beam)were constructed for each patient.The isodose distribution and statistical data extracted from dose volume histograms were used for dose plan comparison.Results The conformal index(CI95%,defined as the ratio between the volume receiving at least 95%of the prescribed dose and the volume of PTV)of IMRT,PT1 and PT2 was 1.43,1.52 and 1.43(F=3.62,P<0.01),respectively.And the mean dose of PTV was 64.4 Gy,65.0 Gy and 63.6 Gy(F=12.06,P<0.01);the mean dose in normal tissue outside of PTV was 20.7 Gy,10.5 Gy and 10.6 Gy(F=77.60,P<0.01),in whole lung was 12.1 Gy,7.3 Gy and 8.4 Gy (F=15.87,P<0.01);the maximum dose in spinal cord was 41.4 Gy,34.9 Gy and 35.0 Gy(F=11.74,P<0.01),respectively.Conclusions Ail plans full file the requirements for PTV,however.PT plans can reduce radiation dose in surrounding normal significantly.The possibility is provided to escalate PT dose in PTV or to combine more aggressive chemotherapy.The PT1 plan full fills the clinical requirements.     

复发、转移子宫颈癌调强放疗和三维适形放疗的比较

 目的　比较调强放疗（IMRT）和三维适形放疗（3DCRT）治疗复发、转移子宫颈癌的疗效、剂量学及毒副作用。方法　回顾性分析治疗后复发转移子宫颈癌62例,其中IMRT组29例,3DCRT组33例,均行直线加速器6 MV X线放疗,单次剂量1.8～2.2 Gy,每周5次,共18～33次,处方剂量40～60 Gy,中位剂量52.8 Gy。同时对IMRT组的患者设计行3DCRT,给予相同的处方剂量,比较危及器官（OAR）受照射剂量。结果　IMRT组膀胱和小肠的最高剂量分别为（4642.71±805.53）cGy和（4240.36±572.51）cGy,低于3DCRT组的（5057.53±1998.03） cGy和（5953.99±1180.81）cGy（P＜0.05);IMRT计划中PTV的最高剂量（5245.68±365.26）cGy高于3DCRT的最高剂量（4801.27±346.25）cGy,差异具有统计学意义（P＜0.05）。IMRT组1、2、3年生存率分别为65.5 %(19／29)、42.1 %(8／19)、25.0 %（2／8）,中位生存时间为19个月,28例死亡病例中,21例死于肿瘤进展,7例死于远处转移;3DCRT组：1、2、3年生存率分别为60.6 %（20／33）、35.0 %（7／20）、14.3 %(1／7),中位生存时间为17个月,32例死亡病例中,24例死于肿瘤进展,8例死于远处转移。IMRT组和3DCRT组比较,1、2、3年生存率差异无统计学意义（均P＞0.05）。IMRT组的不良反应的发生率明显低于3DCRT组,尤其是Ⅰ级和Ⅱ级,IMRT组为24.1 %（7／29）,3DCRT组为33.5 %（11／33）。结论　IMRI对于复发转移子宫颈癌疗效较3DCRT更好,可以在提高肿瘤剂量的同时减少正常组织的受照体积和剂量,减少不良反应的发生。     

简化调强技术在宫颈癌外照射中应用的剂量学研究

目的 通过比较宫颈痛盆腔三维适形放疗(3DCRT)、简化调强放疗(sIMRT)和调强放疗(IMRT)技术靶庆剂量分布均匀度、适形度,危及器官受照体积、剂量,以及实施治疗时间的影响,探讨sIMRT用于宫颈癌放疗的可行性.方法 10例常规体外和腔内放疗的Ⅱb～Ⅲb宫颈癌患者,放疗前行CT扫描并勾画靶区,临床靶体积(CTV)包括子宫、宫颈、阴道等原发肿瘤区域及髂总、髂外、髂内、闭孔、骶前淋巴结等区域和其周围组织,计划靶体积(PTV)以CTV为基础外放前向10 mm、余各方向5 mm形成PTV.处方剂最95%PTV 45 Gy(1.8 Gy/次,共25次),通过分析剂量体积直方图、适形指数、均匀指数和实施治疗时间,比较3种治疗技术的优缺点.结果 3种治疗计划PTV剂最分布的均匀度3DCRT最好,而IMRT与sIMRT相似;剂量分布的适形度sIMRT逊于IMRT而强于3DCRT.对膀胱的保护IMRT明显优于sIMRT,而sIMRT优于3DCRT;对小肠的保护sIMRT显著优于3DCRT,而IMRT并不比sIMRT具有更多优势;对直肠的保护sIMRT优于3DCRT,而逊于IMRT,IMRT的优点主要体现在高剂昔区.实际占机时间3DCRT约4 min,sIMRT约10 min,IMRT约18 min.结论 sIMRT可减轻工作人员劳动强度,缩短治疗时间,简化验证程序.sIMRT适用于宫颈癌放疗且是一种性价比较高的放疗技术.     

Helical tomotherapy for parotid gland tumors

PURPOSE: To investigate helical tomotherapy (HT) intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) as a postoperative treatment for parotid gland tumors. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Helical tomotherapy plans were developed for 4 patients previously treated with segmental multileaf collimator (SMLC) IMRT. A primary planning target volume (PTV64) and two secondary PTVs (PTV60, PTV54) were defined. The clinical goals from the SMLC plans were applied as closely as possible to the HT planning. The SMLC plans included bolus, whereas HT plans did not. RESULTS: In general, the HT plans showed better target coverage and target dose homogeneity. The minimum doses to the desired coverage volume were greater, on average, in the HT plans for all the targets. Minimum PTV doses were larger, on average, in the HT plans by 4.6 Gy (p = 0.03), 4.8 Gy (p = 0.06), and 4.9 Gy (p = 0.06) for PTV64, PTV60, and PTV54, respectively. Maximum PTV doses were smaller, on average, by 2.9 Gy (p = 0.23), 3.2 Gy (p = 0.02), and 3.6 Gy (p = 0.03) for PTV64, PTV60, and PTV54, respectively. Average dose homogeneity index was statistically smaller in the HT plans, and conformity index was larger for PTV64 in 3 patients. Tumor control probabilities were higher for 3 of the 4 patients. Sparing of normal structures was comparable for the two techniques. There were no significant differences between the normal tissue complication probabilities for the HT and SMLC plans. CONCLUSIONS: Helical tomotherapy treatment plans were comparable to or slightly better than SMLC plans. Helical tomotherapy is an effective alternative to SMLC IMRT for treatment of parotid tumors.