鼻咽癌三维适型调强放疗靶区勾画的研究进展

鼻咽癌是东南亚和中国南方最常见的恶性肿瘤之一,放射治疗是鼻咽癌的首选治疗方法,也是主要的治疗手段。三维适型调强放疗（IMRT）在3D适形放疗（3D-CRT）的基础上利用同步推量等放射技术,使剂量分布与靶区尽可能一致。故IMRT较3D-CRT具有良好的靶区适形及对正常组织良好的保护等特点,研究结果显示,鼻咽癌行调强放疗等综合治疗后,其局部PFS可超过90%,且较明显地提高了生存患者特别是长期生存患者治疗后的生存质量［1］。尽管目前鼻咽癌使用IMRT已经明显地提高了肿瘤的局控率及生活质量,但局部复发及转移仍是失败的主要形式［2］,放疗疗效除与肿瘤的生物学行为有关外,也与靶区勾画的准确程度及放疗技术的有效应用紧密相关,本文就鼻咽癌调强放疗技术及相应靶区勾画的进展综述如下。     

腮腺癌术后高危复发区放疗的不同治疗计划剂量学比较

目的 探讨腮腺癌术后高危复发区用何种照射方法可以更有效的使靶区剂量均匀及更好的保护危及器官.方法 对8例腮腺癌术后患者设计治疗计划,处方剂量为95%计划靶区(PTV)60 Gy/30次.对常规放疗、二维适形放疗(2D-CRT)、三维适形放疗(3D-CRT)和调强放疗(IMRT)等放射治疗技术的腮腺癌术后靶区进行放疗计划设计,分析比较各种治疗计划靶区适形度和在保护危及器官等方面的优劣.结果 在2D-CRT时,以计算点深度取3.5 cm,电子线能量采取12 MeV及X射线/电子射线(X/E)剂量比为1∶2时靶区的适形度和均匀度较好,危及器官的受量较低.与2D-CRT比较,常规放疗照射野能够较好地包括CT断层图像上勾画的靶区.与2D-CRT及3D-CRT相比,IMRT计划有最好的靶区适形度及均匀度,同时对危及器官有较好的保护作用.结论 X射线与电子线混合线束照射时,剂量计算点深度取3.5 cm左右、电子线能量采取12 MeV及X/E剂量比为1∶2时,靶区的适形度和均匀度较好,对正常组织的保护较好,但具体患者最好用计划系统来选择以上指标.常规放疗按解剖标志确定的照射野能够较好地包括三维靶区.IMRT计划的靶区适形度及均匀度最好,并且危及器官受量较低,在腮腺癌术后放射治疗中IMRT技术是值得推广并普及的放射治疗技术.     

胃癌D2根治术后调强放疗与三维适形放疗的剂量学比较及临床疗效分析

近年来,大量临床研究证实了胃癌D2根治术同步放化疗可以提高生存率,减少复发[1-2].近年来开展的调强适形放疗可以改善靶区的剂量分布和减少正常组织的受照剂量,近期的研究表明,胃癌应用调强放射治疗相对常规治疗有明显的剂量学优势[34],可以在给予靶区相似剂量照射的同时减少正常组织的照射剂量.本研究通过胃癌根治术后调强放疗(IMRT)与三维适形放射治疗(3D-CRT)计划进行比较研究,分析各个计划中计划靶区(PTV)、肾脏、肝脏、脊髓的剂量分布,并报告IMRT联合同期化疗的临床疗效.     

直肠癌术后三种不同放疗计划的剂量学比较

目的 探讨直肠癌术后螺旋断层放疗(HT)、静态调强放疗(IMRT)及三维适形放疗(3D-CRT)的剂量学特点,为临床选择直肠癌术后放疗方法提供依据.方法 回顾性选取10例Ⅱ、Ⅲ期中低位直肠癌切除术(Dixon手术)后患者,在其CT定位图像上勾画靶区及危及器官,并进行HT、IMRT及3D-CRT计划设计.要求至少95％的PTV达到处方剂量为50 Gy.结果 3种治疗计划均能满足处方剂量要求;除3D-CRT计划外,HT计划与IMRT计划均能较好地满足各危及器官剂量限制要求.HT、IMRT、3D-CRT计划的适形度指数CI分别为0.86、0.82和0.62(F=206.81,P＜0.001),剂量均匀性指数(HI)分别为0.001、0.157和0.205(x2 =15.8,P＜0.001).3D-CRT计划骨盆V50、膀胱V40、小肠V50、股骨头D5明显高于IMRT与HT计划(P＜0.05),而后两者差别无统计学意义.HT计划小肠V15大于IMRT计划与3D-CRT计划(71.1％ vs.63.3％、67.7％),差异无统计学意义.结论 HT、IM RT及3D-CRT3种治疗计划均可满足直肠癌靶区处方剂量要求.HT计划适形度和均匀性最好,其次为IMRT计划,3D-CRT计划最差.HT计划满足所有危及器官的剂量限制,对正常组织的保护略优于IMRT计划.3D-CRT计划简便、实用性强,但对危及器官的保护较差.     

胸中段食管癌适形调强放疗和三维适形放疗方案的应用探讨

目的比较胸中段食管癌适形调强放疗(IMRT)和三维适形放疗(3D-CRT)两种不同技术中计划靶区(PTV)及正常组织的受量。方法对52例ⅡB-Ⅳ期胸中段食管癌患者用同一放疗计划系统分别设计IMRT和3D-CRT根治性放疗计划,应用剂量体积直方图(DVH)比较两种方法中计划靶区和正常组织受量并且计算计划靶区适形指数(CI)和剂量不均匀指数(HI)。结果 IMRT方法的PTV适形度优于3D-CRT;脊髓剂量的最大值低于3D-CRT,但无统计学差异;心脏接受V25和V40的体积百分比低于3D-CRT;IMRT显著降低了肺部V10和V20的有效体积,但其肺部的V5大于3D-CRT。结论在可接受的放射性损伤的基础上,IMRT技术较3D-CRT能够提高行根治性放疗的ⅡB-Ⅳ期胸中段食管癌患者靶区剂量,靶区适形度高,但可使肺组织受到更大容积的低剂量照射。     

基于3D ResSE-Unet的智能靶区勾画在乳腺癌术后放疗中的应用研究

目的评估基于3D ResSE-Unet的智能靶区勾画在乳腺癌术后辅助放疗靶区勾画中应用的有效性及可行性。方法选取2018年9月至2022年6月在广西医科大学第四附属医院肿瘤诊疗中心治疗的乳腺癌术后辅助放疗病例974例, 其中全乳切除术后614例, 保乳术后360例。分别设置:训练集874例, 用于建立基于3D ResSE-Unet智能靶区勾画模型;验证集40例, 用于配比评估人工智能乳腺癌放疗靶区设计临床应用的可行性及有效性;测试集60例, 用于测试智能靶区的准确性。比较智能靶区勾画模型的戴斯相似系数(DSC), 95%豪斯多夫距离(HD95), 平均表面距离(ASD)。结果该智能勾画模型精确度较高, 全乳切除术后的临床靶区CTVcw的DSC均>0.80, 保乳术后的临床靶区CTVb的DSC均>0.88。保乳术后临床靶区CTVb与全乳切除术后临床靶区CTVcw相比, 保乳术后CTVb具有更高的DSC(0.91±0.03vs.0.83±0.05, t=7.11,P<0.05);而两种靶区的HD95值[(7.56±3.42)vs.(8.77±5.89)mm ]及ASD值[...     

CT与MRI融合技术在前列腺癌放疗计划中的应用

通常前列腺癌靶区勾画及放疗计划设计都是在CT图像上进行,而MRI能够多平面成像,且T2加权图像有很好的软组织分辨率,能较CT提供更多的前列腺内部结构信息以及更好的确定前列腺边界、肿瘤的范围,可以观察前列腺被膜有无破坏、突破以及精囊是否受侵,以上特点使得MRI在前列腺癌放射治疗靶区勾画中有着重要的作用[1].本研究利用计划系统中的图像融合技术实现CT与MRI图像融合,探讨融合图像在前列腺癌靶区勾画中的作用,评价其在3D-CRT和IMRT计划中对周围器官保护的影响.     

固定野调强放疗对局部晚期肺癌放射性肺炎的影响

放射性肺炎(RP)是胸部放射治疗最主要的剂量限制性不良反应.三维适形放疗(3D-CRT)能够使靶区剂量分布与靶区形状保持一致,靶区周围危及器官暴露体积减少,有可能使患者生存获益[1].固定野调强放疗(IMRT)较3D-CRT进一步提高靶区的剂量学参数,满足靶区剂量分布的需要,更好地避免对危及器官的照射,有助于提升靶区剂量[2-3],即IMRT降低高剂量区参数(如双肺V20和V30)的同时可能会增加低剂量区参数(如双肺V5).早期研究发现V20和V30与RP发生风险相关[4],近年来发现V5与RP也具有显著相关性[5].本研究以3D-CRT为比较,回顾分析了IMRT对RP发生率的影响.     

三维适形、逆向调强和旋转调强放疗技术治疗胸段食管癌的剂量学比较

目的 比较胸段食管癌3种放疗技术( 3D-CRT、IMRT、RapidArc)的剂量学特点,并分析3种技术的优劣及应用特点.方法 15例胸段食管癌患者入组,依据CT图像,勾画靶区,针对患者的同一套CT图像的相同靶区分别制定3D-CRT、5野IMRT(IMRT5)、7野IMRT( IMRT7)、9野IMRT(IMRT9)、单弧Arc( Arc1)、双弧Arc( Arc2)共6套计划.PTV处方剂量为40 Gy分20次4周+19.6 Gy分14次7d.结果 3D-CRT计划各项靶区剂量学参数明显差于IMRT计划及RapidArc计划(t=5.77、3.52,P＜0.05),6套计划的PTV V95(％)分别为:3D-CRT (91.55 ±2.90),IMRT5(96.66±1.05),IMRT7 (96.87±1.23),IMRT (96.81±1.16),Arcl (94.98±1.41),Arc2 (95.93±1.32).RapidArc计划的靶区适形度(CI)最好(t=3.76,10.01,P＜0.05),IMRT计划的靶区均匀性(HI)最好(t =3.93、3.37,P＜0.05).危及器官参数RapidArc与IMRT各计划之间差异无统计学意义.3D-CRT和RapidArc计划的机器跳数明显少于IMRT计划,差异高达75％.结论 对于胸段食管癌患者,采用IMRT或RapidArc技术可以在保护正常组织的同时,涵盖临床必需的治疗靶区.3D-CRT计划对降低正常组织低剂量散射区方面优势明显.RapidArc计划靶区剂量学参数与IMRT计划比较未见明显优势.     

PET/CT对合并肺不张非小细胞肺癌治疗方案制定和放疗靶区勾画的影响

目的 观察PET/CT对合并肺不张NSCLC治疗方案制定和放疗靶区勾画的影响.方法 对拟行根治性3D-CRT的36例伴有不同程度肺不张的NSCLC患者行PET/CT扫描,观察PET/CT对其临床分期的影响,及由此带来的治疗方案的改变;再以CT图像和PET/CT融合图像分别勾画靶区,对两者进行比较.结果 PET/CT使18例(50.0％,18/36)患者的临床分期发生改变.11例(30.6％,11/36)因PET/CT发现远处转移,临床分期升为Ⅳ期,从而更改了治疗方案,其中3例由根治性放疗改为姑息性放疗,7例由放疗改为化疗,1例转为最佳支持治疗.25例行根治性3D-CRT的患者中,21例放疗靶区均有不同程度改变,其中靶区增大7例,减小12例,靶区位置移动2例;3例患者在3D-CRT的基础上增加锁骨上区常规放疗.3例姑息性放疗患者中,2例靶区减小,1例靶区增大.结论 PET/CT通过提高合并肺不张的NSCLC临床分期的准确性,辅助制定更加合理的治疗方案;通过有效检测出区域转移灶和转移淋巴结,降低靶区遗漏的可能;较CT更准确区分肿瘤与不张肺组织,提高了靶区勾画的准确性.     

Treatment of pancreatic cancer tumors with intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) using the volume at risk approach (VARA): employing dose-volume histogram (DVH) and normal tissue complication probability (NTCP) to evaluate small bowel toxicity.

The emergent use of a combined modality approach (chemotherapy and radiation) in pancreatic cancer is associated with increased gastrointestinal toxicity. Intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) has the potential to deliver adequate dose to the tumor volume while decreasing the dose to critical structures such as the small bowel. We evaluated the influence of IMRT with inverse treatment planning on the dose-volume histograms (DVHs) of normal tissue compared to standard 3-dimensional conformal radiation treatment (3D-CRT) in patients with pancreatic cancer. Between July 1999 and May 2001, 10 randomly selected patients with adenocarcinoma of the pancreatic head were planned simultaneously with 3D-CRT and inverse-planned IMRT using the volume at risk approach (VaRA) and compared for various dosimetric parameters. DVH and normal tissue complication probability (NTCP) were calculated using IMRT and 3D-CRT plans. The aim of the treatment plan was to deliver 61.2 Gy to the gross tumor volume (GTV) and 45 Gy to the clinical treatment volume (CTV) while maintaining critical normal tissues to below specified tolerances. IMRT plans were more conformal than 3D-CRT plans. The average dose delivered to one third of the small bowel was lower with the IMRT plan compared to 3D-CRT. The IMRT plan resulted in one third of the small bowel receiving 30.2+/-12.9 Gy vs. 38.5+/-14.2 Gy with 3D-CRT (p = 0.006). The median volume of small bowel that received greater than either 50 or 60 Gy was reduced with IMRT. The median volume of small bowel exceeding 50 Gy was 19.2+/-11.2% (range 3% to 45%) compared to 31.4+/-21.3 (range 7% to 70%) for 3D-CRT (p = 0.048). The median volume of small bowel that received greater than 60 Gy was 12.5+/-4.8% for IMRT compared to 19.8+/-18.6% for 3D-CRT (p = 0.034). The VaRA approach employing IMRT techniques resulted in a lower dose per volume of small bowel that exceeded 60 Gy. We used the Lyman-Kutcher models to compare the probability of small bowel injury employing IMRT compared to 3D-CRT. The BIOPLAN model predicted a small bowel complication probability of 9.3+/-6% with IMRT compared to 24.4+/-18.9% with 3D-CRT delivery of dose (p = 0.021). IMRT with an inverse treatment plan has the potential to significantly improve radiation therapy of pancreatic cancers by reducing normal tissue dose, and simultaneously allow escalation of dose to further enhance locoregional control.     

A dosimetric evaluation of dose escalation for the radical treatment of locally advanced vulvar cancer by intensity-modulated radiation therapy

The purpose of this planning study was to determine whether intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) reduces the radiation dose to organs at risk (OAR) when compared with 3D conventional radiation therapy (3D-CRT) in patients with vulvar cancer treated by irradiation. This study also investigated the use of sequential IMRT boost (seq-IMRT) and simultaneous integrated boost (SIB-IMRT) for dose escalation in the treatment of locally advanced vulvar cancer. Five vulvar cancer patients treated in the postoperative setting and 5 patients treated with definitive intent (def-group) were evaluated. For the postoperative group, 3D-CRT and IMRT plans to a total dose (TD) of 45 Gy were generated. For the def-group, 4 plans were generated: a 3D-CRT and an IMRT plan to a TD of 56.4 Gy, a SIB-IMRT plan to a TD of 56 Gy, and a SIB-IMRT with dose escalation (SIB-IMRT-esc): TD of 67.2 Gy. Mean dose and dose-volume histograms were compared using Student's t-test. IMRT significantly (all p < 0.05) reduced the D_mean, V30, and V40 for all OAR in the adjuvant setting. The V45 was also significantly reduced for all OAR except the bladder. For patients treated in the def-group, all IMRT techniques significantly reduced the D_mean, V40, and V45 for all OAR. The mean femur doses with SIB-IMRT and SIB-IMRT-esc were 47% and 49% lower compared with 3D-CRT. SIB-IMRT-esc reduced the doses to the OAR compared with seq-3D-CRT but increased the D_max. for the small bowel, rectum, and bladder. IMRT reduces the dose to the OAR compared with 3D-CRT in patients with vulvar cancer receiving irradiation to a volume covering the vulvar region and nodal areas without compromising the dosimetric coverage of the target volume. IMRT for vulvar cancer is feasible and an attractive option for dose escalation studies.     

High-dose radiotherapy in inoperable nonsmall cell lung cancer: Comparison of volumetric modulated arc therapy,dynamic IMRT and 3D conformal radiotherapy

Conformal 3D radiotherapy (3D-CRT) combined with chemotherapy for inoperable non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) to the preferable high dose is often not achievable because of dose-limiting organs. This reduces the probability of regional tumor control. Therefore, the surplus value of using intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) techniques, specifically volumetric modulated arc therapy (RapidArc [RA]) and dynamic IMRT (d-IMRT) has been investigated. RA and d-IMRT plans were compared with 3D-CRT treatment plans for 20 patients eligible for concurrent high-dose chemoradiotherapy, in whom a dose of 60 Gy was not achievable. Comparison of dose delivery in the target volume and organs at risk was carried out by evaluating 3D dose distributions and dose-volume histograms. Quality of the dose distribution was assessed using the inhomogeneity and conformity index. For most patients, a higher dose to the target volume can be delivered using RA or d-IMRT; in 15% of the patients a dose ≥60 Gy was possible. Both IMRT techniques result in a better conformity of the dose (p < 0.001). There are no significant differences in homogeneity of dose in the target volume. IMRT techniques for NSCLC patients allow higher dose to the target volume, thus improving regional tumor control.     

Three-dimensional gamma analysis of dose distributions in individual structures for IMRT dose verification

Our purpose in this study was to implement three-dimensional (3D) gamma analysis for structures of interest such as the planning target volume (PTV) or clinical target volume (CTV), and organs at risk (OARs) for intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) dose verification. IMRT dose distributions for prostate and head and neck (HN) cancer patients were calculated with an analytical anisotropic algorithm in an Eclipse (Varian Medical Systems) treatment planning system (TPS) and by Monte Carlo (MC) simulation. The MC dose distributions were calculated with EGSnrc/BEAMnrc and DOSXYZnrc user codes under conditions identical to those for the TPS. The prescribed doses were 76 Gy/38 fractions with five-field IMRT for the prostate and 33 Gy/17 fractions with seven-field IMRT for the HN. TPS dose distributions were verified by the gamma passing rates for the whole calculated volume, PTV or CTV, and OARs by use of 3D gamma analysis with reference to MC dose distributions. The acceptance criteria for the 3D gamma analysis were 3/3 and 2 %/2 mm for a dose difference and a distance to agreement. The gamma passing rates in PTV and OARs for the prostate IMRT plan were close to 100 %. For the HN IMRT plan, the passing rates of 2 %/2 mm in CTV and OARs were substantially lower because inhomogeneous tissues such as bone and air in the HN are included in the calculation area. 3D gamma analysis for individual structures is useful for IMRT dose verification.     

调强适形照射技术对前列腺癌放射治疗剂量学的意义

目的 :通过三维放射治疗计划系统分别采用不同照射技术设计 ,以探讨调强适形放射治疗技术 (IMRT)的最佳剂量分布。方法 :选取一前列腺癌病例 ,对其分别进行常规、适形和调强适形三种放射治疗计划的设计 ,利用剂量体积曲线图 (DVH)等方法评价不同技术对肿瘤靶区和正常组织受照剂量的结果 ,治疗剂量为 3 0Gy。结果 :在得到相同处方剂量的前提下 ,直肠和膀胱受照剂量 >2 0Gy的体积百分比 ,常规计划照射分别为 82 %和 85 % ;适形计划照射分别为 68%和3 5 % ;而调强适形计划照射则均为 3 2 %。结论 :虽然三种放射治疗技术均能满足肿瘤靶区的剂量学要求 ,但对正常组织的受照剂量则有很大的差异 ,IMRT剂量分布对正常组织的保护有明显的优势。     

Volumetric modulated arc radiotherapy for esophageal cancer

A treatment planning study was performed to evaluate the performance of volumetric arc modulation with RapidArc (RA) against 3D conformal radiation therapy (3D-CRT) and conventional intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) techniques for esophageal cancer. Computed tomgraphy scans of 10 patients were included in the study. 3D-CRT, 4-field IMRT, and single-arc and double-arc RA plans were generated with the aim to spare organs at risk (OAR) and healthy tissue while enforcing highly conformal target coverage. The planning objective was to deliver 54 Gy to the planning target volume (PTV) in 30 fractions. Plans were evaluated based on target conformity and dose-volume histograms of organs at risk (lung, spinal cord, and heart). The monitor unit (MU) and treatment delivery time were also evaluated to measure the treatment efficiency. The IMRT plan improves target conformity and spares OAR when compared with 3D-CRT. Target conformity improved with RA plans compared with IMRT. The mean lung dose was similar in all techniques. However, RA plans showed a reduction in the volume of the lung irradiated at V_20Gy and V_30Gy dose levels (range, 4.62–17.98%) compared with IMRT plans. The mean dose and D_35% of heart for the RA plans were better than the IMRT by 0.5–5.8%. Mean V_10Gy and integral dose to healthy tissue were almost similar in all techniques. But RA plans resulted in a reduced low-level dose bath (15–20 Gy) in the range of 14–16% compared with IMRT plans. The average MU needed to deliver the prescribed dose by RA technique was reduced by 20–25% compared with IMRT technique. The preliminary study on RA for esophageal cancers showed improvements in sparing OAR and healthy tissue with reduced beam-on time, whereas only double-arc RA offered improved target coverage compared with IMRT and 3D-CRT plans.     

A Pelvic Phantom for Modeling Internal Organ Motions

A pelvic phantom was developed for use in testing image-guided radiation therapy (IGRT) and adaptive applications in radiation therapy (ART) with simulating the anterior-posterior internal organ motions during prostate radiotherapy. Measurements could be done with an ionization chamber (IC) in the simulated prostate. The rectum was simulated by air-equivalent material (AEM). The volume superior to the IC placement was considered as the bladder. The extension of AEM volume could be varied. The vertical position of the IC placement could be shifted by ±1 cm to simulate the prostate motion parallel to the changes in bladder volume. The reality of the simulation was inspected. Three-millimeter-slice-increment computed tomography (CT) scans were taken for irradiation planning. The structure set was adapted to the phantom from a treated patient. Planning target volume was delineated according to the RTOG 0126 study. IMRT and 3D conformal radiation therapy (3D-CRT) plans were made. Prostate motion and rectum volume changes were simulated in the phantom. IC displacement was corrected by phantom shifting. The delivered dose was measured with IC in 7 cases using intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) and 3D-CRT fractions, and single square-shaped beams: anteroposterior (AP), posteroanterior (PA), and lateral (LAT). Variations from the calculated doses were slightly below 1% at IMRT and around 1% at 3D-CRT; below 4.5% at square AP beam; up to 9% at square PA beam; and around 0.5% at square LAT beam. Other authors have already shown that by using planning systems and ultrasonic and cone beam CT guidance, correction of organ motions in a real patient during prostate cancer IGRT does not have a significant dosimetric effect. The inspection of our phantom—as described here—ended with similar results. Our team suggested that our model is sufficiently realistic and can be used for IGRT and ART testing.     

Postoperative Radiotherapy for Prostate Cancer

PURPOSE: To determine the extent of target motion in postprostatectomy radiotherapy (RT) and the value of intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) compared to three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3D-CRT). PATIENTS AND METHODS: 20 patients underwent CT scans in supine position with both a full bladder (FB) and an empty bladder (EB) before RT and at three dates during the RT series. Displacements of the CTV (clinical target volume) center of mass and the posterior border were determined. 3D-CRT and IMRT treatment plans were compared regarding homogeneity, conformity, and dose to organs at risk. RESULTS: In the superior-inferior direction, larger displacements were found for EB compared to FB scans; anterior-posterior and right-left displacements were similar. With an initial rectum volume of < 115 cm(3), 90% of displacements at the posterior border were within a margin of 6 mm. The non-target volume irradiated in the high-dose area doubled in 3D-CRT versus IMRT plans (80 cm(3) vs. 38 cm(3) encompassed by the 95% isodose). Bladder dose was significantly lower with IMRT, but no advantage was found for the integral rectal dose. An adequate bladder filling was paramount to reduce the dose to the bladder. CONCLUSION: Postprostatectomy RT can be recommended with FB due to an improved CTV position consistency and a lower dose to the bladder. With improved non-target tissue and bladder volume sparing, IMRT is an option for dose escalation. However, this analysis did not find an advantage concerning the integral rectal dose with IMRT versus 3D-CRT.