使用 AAPM TG 119 协议评估调强放射治疗和容积调强弧线治疗的一致性。

IF 1.5 4区 环境科学与生态学 Q3 BIOLOGY Radiation and Environmental Biophysics Pub Date : 2024-11-01 Epub Date: 2024-08-17 DOI:10.1007/s00411-024-01091-2
Dang Thi Minh Tam, Phan Long Ho, Phan Quoc Uy, Nguyen Trung Hieu, Vo Tan Linh, Nguyen Thi Hoa, Nguyen Thi The Lam, Bui Thi Thuy Nga, Truong Huu Thanh, Tran Thien Thanh, Chau Van Tao
{"title":"使用 AAPM TG 119 协议评估调强放射治疗和容积调强弧线治疗的一致性。","authors":"Dang Thi Minh Tam, Phan Long Ho, Phan Quoc Uy, Nguyen Trung Hieu, Vo Tan Linh, Nguyen Thi Hoa, Nguyen Thi The Lam, Bui Thi Thuy Nga, Truong Huu Thanh, Tran Thien Thanh, Chau Van Tao","doi":"10.1007/s00411-024-01091-2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The aim of this work was to evaluate the conformity of intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) and volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT), and verify the accuracy of the planning and delivery system used in this work based on the AAPM TG-119 protocol. The Eclipse 13.6 treatment planning system (TPS) was used to plan the TG-119 test suite, which included four test cases: MultiTarget, Prostate, Head/Neck, and C-Shape for IMRT and VMAT techniques with 6 MV and 10 MV acceleration voltages. The results were assessed and discussed in terms of the TG-119 protocol and the results of previous studies. In addition, point dose and planar dose measurements were done using a semiflex ion chamber and an electronic portal imaging device (EPID), respectively. The planned doses of all test cases met the criteria of the TG-119 protocol, except those for the spinal cord of the C-Shape hard case. There were no significant differences between the treatment planning doses and the doses given in the TG-119 report, with p-values ranging from 0.974 to 1 (p > 0.05). Doses to the target volumes were similar in the IMRT and VMAT plans, but the organs at risk (OARs) doses were different depending on the test case. The planning results showed that IMRT is more conformal than VMAT in certain cases. For the point dose measurements, the confidence limit (CL<sub>point</sub>) of 0.030 and 0.021 were better than the corresponding values of 0.045 and 0.047 given in the TG-119 report for high-dose and low-dose areas, respectively. Regarding the planar dose measurements, the CL<sub>planar</sub> value of 0.38 obtained in this work was lower than that given in the TG-119 report (12.4). It is concluded that the dosimetry measurements performed in this study showed better confidence limits than those provided in the TG 119 report. IMRT remains more conformal in certain circumstances than the more progressive VMAT. When selecting the method of delivering a dose to the patient, several factors must be considered, including the radiotherapy technique, energy, treatment site, and tumour geometry.</p>","PeriodicalId":21002,"journal":{"name":"Radiation and Environmental Biophysics","volume":" ","pages":"557-571"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Evaluation of the conformity of intensity-modulated radiation therapy and volumetric modulated arc therapy using AAPM TG 119 protocol.\",\"authors\":\"Dang Thi Minh Tam, Phan Long Ho, Phan Quoc Uy, Nguyen Trung Hieu, Vo Tan Linh, Nguyen Thi Hoa, Nguyen Thi The Lam, Bui Thi Thuy Nga, Truong Huu Thanh, Tran Thien Thanh, Chau Van Tao\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s00411-024-01091-2\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>The aim of this work was to evaluate the conformity of intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) and volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT), and verify the accuracy of the planning and delivery system used in this work based on the AAPM TG-119 protocol. The Eclipse 13.6 treatment planning system (TPS) was used to plan the TG-119 test suite, which included four test cases: MultiTarget, Prostate, Head/Neck, and C-Shape for IMRT and VMAT techniques with 6 MV and 10 MV acceleration voltages. The results were assessed and discussed in terms of the TG-119 protocol and the results of previous studies. In addition, point dose and planar dose measurements were done using a semiflex ion chamber and an electronic portal imaging device (EPID), respectively. The planned doses of all test cases met the criteria of the TG-119 protocol, except those for the spinal cord of the C-Shape hard case. There were no significant differences between the treatment planning doses and the doses given in the TG-119 report, with p-values ranging from 0.974 to 1 (p > 0.05). Doses to the target volumes were similar in the IMRT and VMAT plans, but the organs at risk (OARs) doses were different depending on the test case. The planning results showed that IMRT is more conformal than VMAT in certain cases. For the point dose measurements, the confidence limit (CL<sub>point</sub>) of 0.030 and 0.021 were better than the corresponding values of 0.045 and 0.047 given in the TG-119 report for high-dose and low-dose areas, respectively. Regarding the planar dose measurements, the CL<sub>planar</sub> value of 0.38 obtained in this work was lower than that given in the TG-119 report (12.4). It is concluded that the dosimetry measurements performed in this study showed better confidence limits than those provided in the TG 119 report. IMRT remains more conformal in certain circumstances than the more progressive VMAT. When selecting the method of delivering a dose to the patient, several factors must be considered, including the radiotherapy technique, energy, treatment site, and tumour geometry.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":21002,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Radiation and Environmental Biophysics\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"557-571\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Radiation and Environmental Biophysics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"93\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00411-024-01091-2\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"环境科学与生态学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/8/17 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"BIOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Radiation and Environmental Biophysics","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00411-024-01091-2","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/8/17 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"BIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

这项工作的目的是评估调强放射治疗(IMRT)和容积调强弧形治疗(VMAT)的一致性,并根据 AAPM TG-119 协议验证在这项工作中使用的计划和传输系统的准确性。Eclipse 13.6 治疗计划系统 (TPS) 被用来计划 TG-119 测试套件,其中包括四个测试案例:多靶点、前列腺、头颈部和 C 形,用于 IMRT 和 VMAT 技术,加速电压分别为 6 MV 和 10 MV。根据 TG-119 协议和之前的研究结果对结果进行了评估和讨论。此外,还分别使用半柔性离子室和电子门成像装置(EPID)进行了点剂量和平面剂量测量。除 C 型硬病例脊髓的计划剂量外,所有试验病例的计划剂量均符合 TG-119 方案的标准。治疗计划剂量与 TG-119 报告中给出的剂量无明显差异,P 值在 0.974 到 1 之间(P > 0.05)。在 IMRT 和 VMAT 计划中,靶体积的剂量相似,但危险器官(OARs)的剂量因测试病例而异。规划结果表明,在某些情况下,IMRT 比 VMAT 更保形。在点剂量测量方面,高剂量区和低剂量区的置信限(CLpoint)分别为 0.030 和 0.021,优于 TG-119 报告中给出的相应值 0.045 和 0.047。在平面剂量测量方面,本研究获得的 CLplanar 值为 0.38,低于 TG-119 报告中给出的 CLplanar 值(12.4)。由此可以得出结论,与 TG 119 报告中提供的可信限相比,本研究中进行的剂量测定显示出更好的可信限。在某些情况下,IMRT 仍比渐进式 VMAT 更保形。在选择向患者提供剂量的方法时,必须考虑多个因素,包括放疗技术、能量、治疗部位和肿瘤几何形状。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Evaluation of the conformity of intensity-modulated radiation therapy and volumetric modulated arc therapy using AAPM TG 119 protocol.

The aim of this work was to evaluate the conformity of intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) and volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT), and verify the accuracy of the planning and delivery system used in this work based on the AAPM TG-119 protocol. The Eclipse 13.6 treatment planning system (TPS) was used to plan the TG-119 test suite, which included four test cases: MultiTarget, Prostate, Head/Neck, and C-Shape for IMRT and VMAT techniques with 6 MV and 10 MV acceleration voltages. The results were assessed and discussed in terms of the TG-119 protocol and the results of previous studies. In addition, point dose and planar dose measurements were done using a semiflex ion chamber and an electronic portal imaging device (EPID), respectively. The planned doses of all test cases met the criteria of the TG-119 protocol, except those for the spinal cord of the C-Shape hard case. There were no significant differences between the treatment planning doses and the doses given in the TG-119 report, with p-values ranging from 0.974 to 1 (p > 0.05). Doses to the target volumes were similar in the IMRT and VMAT plans, but the organs at risk (OARs) doses were different depending on the test case. The planning results showed that IMRT is more conformal than VMAT in certain cases. For the point dose measurements, the confidence limit (CLpoint) of 0.030 and 0.021 were better than the corresponding values of 0.045 and 0.047 given in the TG-119 report for high-dose and low-dose areas, respectively. Regarding the planar dose measurements, the CLplanar value of 0.38 obtained in this work was lower than that given in the TG-119 report (12.4). It is concluded that the dosimetry measurements performed in this study showed better confidence limits than those provided in the TG 119 report. IMRT remains more conformal in certain circumstances than the more progressive VMAT. When selecting the method of delivering a dose to the patient, several factors must be considered, including the radiotherapy technique, energy, treatment site, and tumour geometry.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.00
自引率
5.90%
发文量
53
审稿时长
>36 weeks
期刊介绍: This journal is devoted to fundamental and applied issues in radiation research and biophysics. The topics may include: Biophysics of ionizing radiation: radiation physics and chemistry, radiation dosimetry, radiobiology, radioecology, biophysical foundations of medical applications of radiation, and radiation protection. Biological effects of radiation: experimental or theoretical work on molecular or cellular effects; relevance of biological effects for risk assessment; biological effects of medical applications of radiation; relevance of radiation for biosphere and in space; modelling of ecosystems; modelling of transport processes of substances in biotic systems. Risk assessment: epidemiological studies of cancer and non-cancer effects; quantification of risk including exposures to radiation and confounding factors Contributions to these topics may include theoretical-mathematical and experimental material, as well as description of new techniques relevant for the study of these issues. They can range from complex radiobiological phenomena to issues in health physics and environmental protection.
期刊最新文献
Comment on "The scientific nature of the linear no-threshold (LNT) model used in the system of radiological protection" by A. Wojcik and F. Zölzer. Relationships between protection and operational dosimetric quantities for external exposure to natural background radiation. Analytic and Monte Carlo calculations of dose-mean lineal energy for 1 MeV-1 GeV protons with application to radiation protection quality factor. Evaluating the biological impact of shelters on astronaut health during different solar particle events: a Geant4-DNA simulation study. Estimation of surface doses in the presence of an air gap under a bolus for a 6 MV clinical photon beam - a phantom study.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1