乳腺癌术后胸壁切线野与容积弧形调强技术的剂量学比较

目的:分析比较乳腺癌术后胸壁辅助放疗采用容积弧形调强技术与传统的胸壁切线野的剂量学差异。方法:随机选择需要放射治疗的乳腺癌患者10例,左右侧各5例,采用Eclipse计划系统为每位患者分别设计传统的胸壁切线野与容积弧形调强两套放射治疗计划,处方剂量均为DT50Gy/25次。用剂量体积直方图(DVH)比较靶区、心脏和肺受照射剂量和体积等参数的差异。结果:2种技术均能满足胸壁靶区剂量分布要求。与常规切线野相比,容积弧形调强技术使左侧乳腺癌患者的心脏平均V30由15.87%减少到1.58%(P=0.00),心脏平均V10由22.41%增加到37.82%(P=0.00);左肺平均V20由25.72%减少到11.35%(P=0.00),左肺平均V30由22.79%减少到4.23%(P=0.00)。右侧乳腺癌患者右肺平均V20由28.23%减少到13.55%(P=0.00),右肺平均V30由25.31%减少到5.77%(P=0.00),右肺平均V10由33.26%增加到42.08%(P=0.01)。无论左、右侧乳腺癌,容积弧形调强技术对于身体的低剂量照射范围均大于传统切线野。结论:乳腺癌术后胸壁辅助放疗采用容积弧形调强技术相对于传统的胸壁切线野,能明显减少心脏和肺的高剂量受照体积,却增加了低剂量区范围。     

容积旋转调强放疗与固定野调强放疗在巨块型宫颈癌根治性放疗中的 剂量学比较

目的:比较容积旋转调强放疗(VMAT)与7野固定野调强放疗(7IMRT)在中晚期巨块型宫颈癌放射治疗中的剂量学差异。方法:选取24例局部肿瘤大于4 cm的中晚期宫颈癌患者,对同个CT图像分别制作VAMT计划和7IMRT计划。比较两种计划的靶区适型性指数(CI)、均匀性指数(HI)、正常组织的剂量学差异、机器跳数(MU)及治疗时间。结果:采用VMAT放疗技术的肿瘤靶区CI为0.912±0.008,与IMRT相当（0.911±0.006）（P=0.426）,而VMAT的HI为1.092±0.034,优于IMRT（1.10±0.034）（P=0.001）。VAMT技术膀胱的V30、V40,直肠的V30、V45,肠管的V30、V40、V45,脊髓V20、V30、V35、Dmax均优于7IMRT,且差异有统计学意义,但肠管的V10VAMT高于IMRT,差异有统计学意义;双侧股骨头剂量分布差异无统计学意义。VMAT 技术MU较7IMＲT 减少59.8%,平均治疗时间减少 78.76%。结论:VAMT是巨块型宫颈癌患者根治性放疗的较好选择之一。     

保乳术后全乳照射 VMAT 与 IMRT 的计量学比较

目的：比较保乳术后全乳照射 VMAT 与静态 IMRT 的剂量学差异,探索 VMAT 的可行性。方法：2014年－2015年入组乳腺癌患者10例,左侧、右侧乳腺癌各5例。用 Varian Eclipse 计划系统分别设计双弧VMAT 和5野 IMRT 计划,PTV 处方剂量50Gy 分25次,用 Delta 4进行剂量验证。配对 t 检验比较两组计划PTV、OAR 受量、机器跳数及有效治疗时间。结果：两组计划均能满足临床剂量学要求。 VMAT 与 IMRT相比CI 值分别为（1．01±0．1）和（1．36±0．2）（P ＜0．05）;HI 值分别为（0．124±0．01）和（0．173±0．02）（P ＜0．05）;心脏 V20、V30、Dmean增高（P ＝0．041、0．012、0．002）;肺 V20－V30无明显统计学差异,但是增加了患侧肺的 V5（58．2±3．5）％ vs （51．4±4．2）％（P ＜0．05）;机器跳数分别为（452±98）和（786±32）（P ＜0．05）;有效治疗时间（2．5±0．89）min 和（15±1．78）min（P ＜0．05）。结论：在靶区覆盖率相似前提下,VMAT 可降低部分 OAR 受量,并能改善 CI 值、减少机器跳数、缩短有效治疗时间。Synergy 平台上的 VMAT 计划剂量稳定可靠。     

直肠癌术前五野静态调强和容积弧形调强放疗剂量学的比较研究

目的 探讨直肠癌术前五野静态调强（5F-IMRT）和容积弧形调强（VMAT）放疗计划的剂量学特点。方法 应用CMS monaco治疗计划系统分别对23例术前同期放化疗的直肠癌患者行5F-IMRT和 VMAT放疗计划设计,比较两种放疗技术的靶区剂量分布特点以及小肠、膀胱、双侧股骨头等正常组织的受照射剂量及体积。结果 5F-IMRT计划的适形指数（CI）为0.810±0.043,VMAT计划的CI为0.822±0.062,两者均能很好满足95％等剂量曲线对100％ PTV体积的完全覆盖;5F-IMRT计划中GTV、CTV和PTV的均匀指数（HI）分别为1.052±0.019、1.063±0.016、1.075±0.020,VMAT计划分别为1.037±0.008、1.047±0.008、1.072±0.018,差异均无统计学意义。5F-IMRT和VMAT计划中重要的危及器官如小肠、膀胱和股骨头等的关键剂量评价指标（D₅、D_min、D_mean和D_max）差异均无统计学意义（P＞0.05）。小肠、膀胱和股骨头等受照射体积的关键评价指标（V20、V₃₀、V₄₀和V₅₀）在两种放疗计划中差异均无统计学意义（P＞0.05）。结论 5F-IMRT和VMAT计划靶区的剂量分布均较理想,对小肠、膀胱、双侧股骨头等正常组织均有很好的保护作用。     

左侧乳腺癌保乳术后3种放疗技术在同步推量中的剂量学研究

目的 探讨左侧乳腺癌保乳术后半弧容积动态旋转调强(VMAT)放疗、切线弧VMAT放疗和逆向调强放疗(IMRT)3种放疗技术在同步推量中的剂量学差异.方法 选取10例左侧乳腺癌保乳术后患者,使用MONACO 5.1计划系统,分别采用半弧VMAT、切线弧VMAT和IMRT三种放疗技术,处方剂量均为计划靶区(PTV)50 Gy/25 f、计划肿瘤靶区(PGTV)60 Gy/25 f,评估3种计划靶区剂量适形度指数(CI)、均匀性指数(HI)以及周围正常组织器官的受照剂量.结果 半弧VMAT的PGTV靶区CI优于IMRT(P﹤0.05).切线弧VMAT放疗技术较IMRT放疗技术降低了左侧乳腺癌保乳术后患者患侧肺组织V10的照射范围(P=0.04).切线弧VMAT放疗技术较半弧VMAT放疗技术降低了左侧乳腺癌保乳术后患者健侧肺组织V5(P﹤0.001)、V10(P=0.04)、心脏的V10(P=0.01)、Dmean(P=0.01)及健侧乳腺组织V5(P﹤0.01)的剂量范围.而IMRT放疗技术降低了左侧乳腺癌保乳术后患者健侧肺组织V5、V10的剂量范围(P﹤0.05).结论 对于左侧乳腺癌保乳术后患者的同步推量放疗,VMAT放疗技术尤其是半弧VMAT放疗技术具有更好的靶区适形性;切线弧VMAT放疗技术可以降低周围大部分正常组织器官的照射剂量.     

Dosimetric comparison of intensity modulated radiotherapy techniques and standard wedged tangents for whole breast radiotherapy*

Prior to introducing intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) for whole breast radiotherapy (WBRT) into our department we undertook a comparison of the dose parameters of several IMRT techniques and standard wedged tangents (SWT). Our aim was to improve the dose distribution to the breast and to decrease the dose to organs at risk (OAR): heart, lung and contralateral breast (Contra Br). Treatment plans for 20 women (10 right‐sided and 10 left‐sided) previously treated with SWT for WBRT were used to compare (a) SWT; (b) electronic compensators IMRT (E‐IMRT); (c) tangential beam IMRT (T‐IMRT); (d) coplanar multi‐field IMRT (CP‐IMRT); and (e) non‐coplanar multi‐field IMRT (NCP‐IMRT). Plans for the breast were compared for (i) dose homogeneity (DH); (ii) conformity index (CI); (iii) mean dose; (iv) maximum dose; (v) minimum dose; and dose to OAR were calculated (vi) heart; (vii) lung and (viii) Contra Br. Compared with SWT, all plans except CP‐IMRT gave improvement in at least two of the seven parameters evaluated. T‐IMRT and NCP‐IMRT resulted in significant improvement in all parameters except DH and both gave significant reduction in doses to OAR. As on initial evaluation NCP‐IMRT is likely to be too time consuming to introduce on a large scale, T‐IMRT is the preferred technique for WBRT for use in our department.     

Volumetric modulated arc therapy and breath-hold in image-guided locoregional left-sided breast irradiation

Purpose

To investigate the effects of using volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) and/or voluntary moderate deep inspiration breath-hold (vmDIBH) in the radiation therapy (RT) of left-sided breast cancer including the regional lymph nodes.

Materials and methods

For 13 patients, four treatment combinations were compared; 3D-conformal RT (i.e., forward IMRT) in free-breathing 3D-CRT(FB), 3D-CRT(vmDIBH), 2 partial arcs VMAT(FB), and VMAT(vmDIBH). Prescribed dose was 42.56 Gy in 16 fractions. For 10 additional patients, 3D-CRT and VMAT in vmDIBH only were also compared.

Results

Dose conformity, PTV coverage, ipsilateral and total lung doses were significantly better for VMAT plans compared to 3D-CRT. Mean heart dose (D_mean,heart) reduction in 3D-CRT(vmDIBH) was between 0.9 and 8.6 Gy, depending on initial D_mean,heart (in 3D-CRT(FB) plans). VMAT(vmDIBH) reduced the D_mean,heart further when D_mean,heart was still >3.2 Gy in 3D-CRT(vmDIBH). Mean contralateral breast dose was higher for VMAT plans (2.7 Gy) compared to 3DCRT plans (0.7 Gy).

Conclusions

VMAT and 3D-CRT(vmDIBH) significantly reduced heart dose for patients treated with locoregional RT of left-sided breast cancer. When D_mean,heart exceeded 3.2 Gy in 3D-CRT(vmDIBH) plans, VMAT(vmDIBH) resulted in a cumulative heart dose reduction. VMAT also provided better target coverage and reduced ipsilateral lung dose, at the expense of a small increase in the dose to the contralateral breast.     

宫颈癌术后盆腔容积调强弧形治疗与固定野调强放疗计划的剂量学研究

目的 研究宫颈癌术后患者应用固定野调强放疗(FF-IMRT)和容积调强弧形治疗(VIMAT)计划剂量学差异。方法 选择 13例宫颈癌术后调强放疗患者CT模拟定位并勾画靶区及危及器官,对同一CT图像设计FF-IMRT计划和VIMAT计划,评估计划靶体积(PTV)及危及器官的剂量学参数。两种计划参数比较用配对t检验。结果 与FF-IMRT计划相比,VIMAT计划PTV的95%覆盖度增加(t=9.84,P=0.000)、110%覆盖度降低(t=－3.72,P=0.003)、最大剂量(D_max)降低(t=－3.51,P=0.005)、适形指数变差(t=5.93,P=0.000),但PTV105%覆盖度、平均剂量(D_mean)、不均匀指数均相似(t=－0.02、－0.60、1.13,P=0.842、0.560、0.283);膀胱 V₃₀降低约10%(t=－4.99,P=0.000)、D_mean降低1.4 Gy (t=－3.65,P=0.004)、D_max降低1.5 Gy (t=－18.03,P=0.000),直肠 V₄₀降低约10%(t=－2.99,P=0.012),D_mean降低0.6 Gy (t=－2.98,P=0.013)、D_max降低0.8 Gy (t=－4.05,P=0.002),小肠 V₄₀降低最多(10%)(t=－4.74,P=0.001)、D_max降低0.8 Gy (t=－9.45,P=0.000),骨髓 V₅₀降低最多(16%)(t=－4.04,P=0.002)、D_mean降低1.9 Gy (t=－16.21,P=0.000),左、右股骨头 D₅和马尾神经 D_max分别降低1.6、2.7 Gy和1.5 Gy (t=－2.89、－6.22、－4.80,P=0.015、0.000、0.001);机器跳数减少57%(t=－40.54,P=0.000)。结论 宫颈癌患者采用VIMAT技术可获得等同于或优FF-IMRT计划的剂量分布,机器数量明显降低,但其疗效还需进一步临床评估。     

IMRT、VMAT和混合IMRT技术在颅脑多发转移瘤同步加量放疗中的剂量学研究

目的 比较颅脑多发转移瘤同步加量放疗中不同照射技术对靶区和OAR剂量学差异,为其临床放疗技术选择提供数据参考。方法 随机选取本院行全脑同步加量放疗的10例颅脑多发转移瘤患者的定位影像数据,分别设计动态IMRT、双弧VMAT和混合IMRT (Hybrid-IMRT)计划,Hybrid-IMRT计划在适形计划基础上分别进行3野、4野固定野逆向调强叠加优化。行双尾配对Wilcoxon符号秩和检验法比较3类放疗计划在靶区剂量(CI、HI)、OAR受量(D_mean、D_max))的剂量学差异和机器跳数、执行时间方面的差异。结果 VMAT计划颅脑转移灶靶区CI优于IMRT、Hybrid-IMRT计划(P=0.04、0.00),HI差异无统计学意义(P>0.05);IMRT与Hybrid-IMRTCI、HI差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05)。Hybrid-IMRT两种计划中的眼晶状体、眼球受量均低于动态IMRT (P均=0.00),而脑干和视神经的受量在3种技术中均相近(P>0.05)。在机器跳数和执行时间方面VMAT相似文献   

基于VMAT的乳腺癌保乳术后全乳混合调强技术的建立与评价

目的 建立基于VMAT的乳腺癌保乳术后全乳混合调强技术并评价其临床应用价值。方法 选取10例乳腺癌保乳术后患者,分别基于固定角度IMRT的混合调强技术和基于VMAT的混合调强技术设计两组放疗计划。第1组仅以全乳作为放疗靶区,处方剂量50 Gy分25次完成;第2组以全乳及瘤床同步加量区为放疗靶区,处方剂量全乳50 Gy、瘤床同步加量区60 Gy,分25次同步完成。分别比较两组计划的剂量学参数及计划执行效率。配对t检验差异。结果 与基于固定角度IMRT的混合调强技术相比,基于VMAT的混合调强技术未能提高单纯全乳照射者靶区CI、HI值(P=0.866、0.056),反而全面增加了OAR受量和调强野机器跳数(P=0.000~0.050和P=0.002);但对全乳加瘤床同步加量照射患者,能减少肺受量、脊髓受量、调强野机器跳数、计划执行时间(P=0.004、0.001、0.000、0.000)。结论 对全乳加瘤床同步加量照射患者,基于VMAT的混合调强技术能更好保护OAR,提高计划执行效率,具有较高的临床应用潜力。     

Multibeam inverse intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) for whole breast irradiation: a single center experience in China

Purpose

To present the clinical experience in our cancer center with multibeam inverse intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) for early stage breast cancer (BC) patients with whole breast irradiation (WBI).

Methods

We retrospectively analyzed 622 patients with Stage 0 to III BC treated from 2008 to 2011 with wide local excision and WBI, using an inverse IMRT technique. All of the patients were prescribed a total dose of 50 Gy to the whole breast in 2-Gy fractions, followed by a tumor bed boost of 10 Gy in 5 fractions using an electron beam.

Results

Of all of the patients, 132 (21.2%) received whole breast plus regional lymph node (RLN) irradiation. 438 of 622 patients had records of acute skin toxicity based on common terminology criteria (CTC) for adverse events. Two hundred eighty (64%) patients had Grade 0/1 toxicity, 153 (35%) had Grade 2 and only 4 patients experienced grade 3 toxicity. Seventy patients (16%) had moist desquamation. Univariate analysis revealed that breast planning target volume was the only predictive factor for Grade ≥2 acute dermatitis (P = 0.002). After 4 years, 170 patients reported cosmetic results by self-assessment, of whom 151 (89%) patients reported good/excellent cosmetic results, and 17 (11%) patients reported fair assessments. For invasive cancer, the four-year rate of freedom from locoregional recurrence survival was 98.3%. Regarding carcinoma in situ, no patients experienced recurrence.

Conclusion

BC patients who underwent conservative surgery followed by inverse IMRT plan exhibited acceptable acute toxicities and clinical outcomes. Longer follow-up is needed.     

Dosimetric comparison of bone marrow-sparing intensity-modulated radiotherapy versus conventional techniques for treatment of cervical cancer

PURPOSE: To compare bone marrow-sparing intensity-modulated pelvic radiotherapy (BMS-IMRT) with conventional (four-field box and anteroposterior-posteroanterior [AP-PA]) techniques in the treatment of cervical cancer. METHODS AND MATERIALS: The data from 7 cervical cancer patients treated with concurrent chemotherapy and IMRT without BMS were analyzed and compared with data using four-field box and AP-PA techniques. All plans were normalized to cover the planning target volume with the 99% isodose line. The clinical target volume consisted of the pelvic and presacral lymph nodes, uterus and cervix, upper vagina, and parametrial tissue. Normal tissues included bowel, bladder, and pelvic bone marrow (PBM), which comprised the lumbosacral spine and ilium and the ischium, pubis, and proximal femora (lower pelvis bone marrow). Dose-volume histograms for the planning target volume and normal tissues were compared for BMS-IMRT vs. four-field box and AP-PA plans. RESULTS: BMS-IMRT was superior to the four-field box technique in reducing the dose to the PBM, small bowel, rectum, and bladder. Compared with AP-PA plans, BMS-IMRT reduced the PBM volume receiving a dose >16.4 Gy. BMS-IMRT reduced the volume of ilium, lower pelvis bone marrow, and bowel receiving a dose >27.7, >18.7, and >21.1 Gy, respectively, but increased dose below these thresholds compared with the AP-PA plans. BMS-IMRT reduced the volume of lumbosacral spine bone marrow, rectum, small bowel, and bladder at all dose levels in all 7 patients. CONCLUSION: BMS-IMRT reduced irradiation of PBM compared with the four-field box technique. Compared with the AP-PA technique, BMS-IMRT reduced lumbosacral spine bone marrow irradiation and reduced the volume of PBM irradiated to high doses. Therefore BMS-IMRT might reduce acute hematologic toxicity compared with conventional techniques.     

Dosimetric comparison of moderate deep inspiration breath-hold and free-breathing intensity-modulated radiotherapy for left-sided breast cancer

PurposeThis study determined the dosimetric comparison of moderate deep inspiration breath-hold using active breathing control and free-breathing intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) after breast-conserving surgery for left-sided breast cancer.Patients and methodsThirty-one patients were enrolled. One free breathe and two moderate deep inspiration breath-hold images were obtained. A field-in-field-IMRT free-breathing plan and two field-in-field-IMRT moderate deep inspiration breath-holding plans were compared in the dosimetry to target volume coverage of the glandular breast tissue and organs at risks for each patient.ResultsThe breath-holding time under moderate deep inspiration extended significantly after breathing training (P < 0.05). There was no significant difference between the free-breathing and moderate deep inspiration breath-holding in the target volume coverage. The volume of the ipsilateral lung in the free-breathing technique were significantly smaller than the moderate deep inspiration breath-holding techniques (P < 0.05); however, there was no significant difference between the two moderate deep inspiration breath-holding plans. There were no significant differences in target volume coverage between the three plans for the field-in-field-IMRT (all P > 0.05). The dose to ipsilateral lung, coronary artery and heart in the field-in-field-IMRT were significantly lower for the free-breathing plan than for the two moderate deep inspiration breath-holding plans (all P < 0.05); however, there was no significant difference between the two moderate deep inspiration breath-holding plans.ConclusionThe whole-breast field-in-field-IMRT under moderate deep inspiration breath-hold with active breathing control after breast-conserving surgery in left-sided breast cancer can reduce the irradiation volume and dose to organs at risks. There are no significant differences between various moderate deep inspiration breath-holding states in the dosimetry of irradiation to the field-in-field-IMRT target volume coverage and organs at risks.     

直肠癌旋转容积调强与固定野动态调强的剂量学比较

目的:比较旋转容积调强(VMAT)与固定野动态调强(dIMRT)在直肠癌放疗计划中的剂量学差异.方法:8例直肠癌患者利用瓦里安计划系统(Eclipse 8.6)分别进行VMAT和dIMRT放射治疗计划设计.利用剂量体积直方图来比较两种计划中靶区和危及器官的剂量学差异.结果:与dIMRT相比,VMAT靶区适合度指数(CI)、靶区剂量均匀性指数(HI)均更接近1,Dmin为(43.403±0.486)Gy,更接近处方剂量,差异有统计学意义,P＜0.05.在VMAT计划中小肠的D30％、D50％和Dmean分别为(25.918±1.216)、(22.340士3.784)和(23.547±2.863) Gy,低于dIMRT计划的(28.073±3.114)、(24.172±2.540)和(25.257±1.374) Gy,P值分别为0.00、0.01和0.00;膀胱的D30％为(35.380±2.734) Gy,较dIMRT的(30.123±2.209) Gy偏高,P=0.00,但仍远低于剂量限值;股骨头的D5％和Dmean分别为(31.344±3.556)和(20.179±3.017) Gy,显著高于dIMRT计划的(26.731±2.828)和(17.459±3.279) Gy,P值均为0.00.VMAT总MU减少52.7％,治疗时间仅为dIMRT的1/4.结论:VMAT计划可以达到或优于dIMRT计划的靶区剂量分布,能更好地降低部分危及器官的受照剂量,并且具有较少总MU、总治疗时间的优势,减少了治疗中不确定性因素的影响及患者不适感.     

宫颈癌术后容积旋转调强与三维适形调强放疗技术的剂量学差异

目的:比较宫颈癌术后放疗中旋转调强放射治疗(VMAT)与三维适形调强放疗(IMRT)的剂量学差异。方法:随机选取 20 例宫颈癌术后患者,在Eclipse计划系统中分别对每例患者进行容积旋转调强和7野固定野调强放疗(7IMRT)计划设计,比较两种技术的靶区的适形指数、危及器官的受照剂量、机器跳数和治疗时间的差异。结果:VMAT 技术靶区的平均剂量为52.05 Gy,高于 7IMRT技术的51.46 Gy(P＜0.05),靶区的均匀性指数与适形度优于7IMRT 技术,机器跳数和治疗时间 VMAT 比7IMRT明显减少,差异有统计学意义。小肠、膀胱的V30、V50 、Dmean较7IMRT降低,差异有统计学意义;但直肠和股骨头的保护性上,两种放疗技术差异无统计学意义。结论:VMAT技术较IMRT技术可得到更好的靶区剂量分布,危及器官也能得到更好的保护,治疗时间明显缩短,值得在临床中开展应用。     

Dosimetric comparison of different intensity-modulated radiotherapy techniques for whole-breast irradiation of right-breast cancer

PurposeThis study compared the dosimetric parameters of field-in-field forward intensity-modulated radiotherapy (FIF-IMRT) and fixed-field inversely optimized intensity-modulated radiotherapy (FFIO-IMRT) for the whole-breast irradiation of patients undergoing right-breast lumpectomy.Material and methodsA total of 30 patients with pT1-2N0M0 right-breast invasive ductal carcinoma were enrolled in this study. Two different treatment plans, i.e., FIF-IMRT and FFIO-IMRT, were designed for each patient. The dosimetric parameters of the two treatment plans were compared including ipsilateral lung and heart, conformity index (CI), and the homogeneity index (HI) of the planning target volume (PTV).ResultsFixed-field inversely optimized intensity-modulated radiotherapy was found to significantly improve CI (83.302% vs. 60.146%) and HI (11.837% vs. 19.280%), and significantly reduced V₂₅ (18.038% vs. 19.653%) and V₃₀ (15.790% vs. 18.492%) of the ipsilateral lung. It also significantly increased V₅ (69.791% vs. 32.615%) of the ipsilateral lung and V₅ (61.579% vs. 3.829%), V₁₀ (14.130% vs. 0.381%), V₂₀ (1.843% vs. 0.051%), and D_mean (5.211 Gy vs. 1.870 Gy) of the heart.ConclusionRegardless of improving the conformity and homogeneity of PTV and reducing the ipsilateral lung irradiation volume at high doses, FFIO-IMRT significantly raised the ipsilateral lung irradiated volume at low doses, as well as the irradiation volume and mean radiation doses to the heart. This limits its use in patients with early-stage right breast cancer.     

胸壁和区域淋巴引流区整体调强放疗在乳腺癌改良根治术后的应用研究北大核心

目的:评价胸壁和区域淋巴引流区整体调强放疗与分段三维适形放疗两种方法在乳腺癌改良根治术后患者中的疗效差异。方法:回顾性分析两种放疗模式在311例乳腺癌改良根治术患者中的疗效差异,采用Kaplan-Meier法计算无疾病生存(disease free survival,DFS)率及总体生存率(overall survival,OS),Cox回归分析影响预后的单因素及多因素。基于CTCAE 4.0(Common Toxicity Criteria for Adverse Events)准则评估两种放疗技术的晚期副反应差异。结果:纳入的311例患者中,有195例接受了整体调强放疗,116例接受传统三维适形放疗。整体调强放疗组和分段三维适形放疗组5年DFS分别为88.7%和78.8%(P=0.013),5年OS分别为93.8%和89.4%(P=0.280)。单因素分析显示,T、N分期、分化程度、内乳淋巴结照射及放疗方式是影响乳腺癌改良根治术后患者DFS的预后因素,T分期、分化程度是OS的预后因素。多因素分析显示,分化程度、内乳淋巴结照射及放疗方式是影响患者DFS的独立预后因素,分化程度、内乳淋巴结照射是影响患者OS的独立预后因素。两种放疗方式常见的晚期副反应无明显差异。结论:胸壁和区域淋巴引流区整体化调强放疗可降低乳腺癌改良根治术后患者的复发率,且毒副反应可耐受。     

食管癌VMAT与IMRT剂量比较的Meta分析

目的 对食管癌VMAT与IMRT靶区和OAR剂量比较行Meta分析。方法 文献检索纳入相关研究,分析靶区和OAR剂量参数、机器跳数及治疗时间。结果 17项研究的323病例纳入Meta分析。VMAT计划中GTV的D_mean、在总剂量≤50.4 Gy时PTV的D_mean和在总剂量>50.4 Gy时PTV的D_max优于IMRT (P=0.009、0.043、0.039)。心脏D_mean、V₃₀、V₄₀,脊髓D_max,肺V₅、V₁₀、D_mean差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05);VMAT计划中肺的V₁₅、V₂₀、V₃₀优于IMRT计划(P=0.001、0.000、0.023)。VMAT计划中单次照射1.8、2.0 Gy的机器跳数较IMRT计划分别减少275.4、134.2 MU (P=0.000、0.022);VMAT计划中单次照射1.8、2.0 Gy的TT比IMRT计划分别缩短323.5、193.7 s (P=0.000、0.009)。结论 VMAT计划能显著减少TT和机器跳数、提高设备使用率,降低肺受照剂量和RP发生风险。VMAT与IMRT相比在照射总剂量≤50.4 Gy时除PTV的D_mean和GTV的D_mean、D_max外,靶区其他剂量参数均无明显优势。对脊髓和心脏保护VMAT也无明显优势。