前列腺癌 TomoTherapy 和 IMRT 计划的剂量学和放射生物学比较

IF 2.8 3区 物理与天体物理 Q3 CHEMISTRY, PHYSICAL Radiation Physics and Chemistry Pub Date : 2024-10-30 DOI:10.1016/j.radphyschem.2024.112356
Amin Pourfarshid, Asghar Mesbahi, Mohammad Mohammadzadeh, Mikaeil Molazadeh, Ahad Zeinali
{"title":"前列腺癌 TomoTherapy 和 IMRT 计划的剂量学和放射生物学比较","authors":"Amin Pourfarshid, Asghar Mesbahi, Mohammad Mohammadzadeh, Mikaeil Molazadeh, Ahad Zeinali","doi":"10.1016/j.radphyschem.2024.112356","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The purpose of this study was to investigate the dosimetric and radiobiological parameters of IMRT and TomoTherapy techniques to determine the best technique for the treatment of prostate cancer. Dynamic IMRT and Helical TomoTherapy (HT) radiotherapy techniques were used for the treatment planning of 10 patients with prostate cancer. Tumor Control Probability (TCP) and Normal Tissue Complication Probability (NTCP) based on Lyman-Kutcher-Burman (LKB) and Relative Seriality (RS) models as radiobiological parameters in addition to the multiple dosimetrics including Equivalent Uniform Dose (EUD), Heterogeneity Index (HI), and Conformity Index (CI) were evaluated. The mean NTCP value based on the LKB model for the IMRT method was higher than that for the HT method by approximately 4.62% for the bladder and 4.89% for the rectum, respectively. Similarly, in the RS model, the average NTCP values for IMRT were approximately 4.14% and 12.78% for the bladder and rectum, higher than the HT. The mean values of the HI and CI indices in IMRT were obtained as 0.06 ± 0.01 and 1.13 ± 0.08, respectively. With the HT technique, the index values were equal to 0.04 ± 0.01 and 1.09 ± 0.05, respectively. The mean doses to the rectum and right/left femoral heads were 13.19%, 11.32%, and 10.90% higher in IMRT than in HT, respectively. However, the mean dose to the bladder tissue was 17.13% higher in HT than in IMRT. Our study demonstrated that HT plans were superior to IMRT plans in terms of estimated NTCP using radiobiological models (LKB and RS) for healthily tissues. Except for the higher treatment duration, while having a desired and uniform dose distribution to the tumor, the TomoTherapy technique leads to preservation of healthy organs.","PeriodicalId":20861,"journal":{"name":"Radiation Physics and Chemistry","volume":"225 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Dosimetric and radiobiological comparison of TomoTherapy and IMRT plans for prostate cancer\",\"authors\":\"Amin Pourfarshid, Asghar Mesbahi, Mohammad Mohammadzadeh, Mikaeil Molazadeh, Ahad Zeinali\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.radphyschem.2024.112356\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The purpose of this study was to investigate the dosimetric and radiobiological parameters of IMRT and TomoTherapy techniques to determine the best technique for the treatment of prostate cancer. Dynamic IMRT and Helical TomoTherapy (HT) radiotherapy techniques were used for the treatment planning of 10 patients with prostate cancer. Tumor Control Probability (TCP) and Normal Tissue Complication Probability (NTCP) based on Lyman-Kutcher-Burman (LKB) and Relative Seriality (RS) models as radiobiological parameters in addition to the multiple dosimetrics including Equivalent Uniform Dose (EUD), Heterogeneity Index (HI), and Conformity Index (CI) were evaluated. The mean NTCP value based on the LKB model for the IMRT method was higher than that for the HT method by approximately 4.62% for the bladder and 4.89% for the rectum, respectively. Similarly, in the RS model, the average NTCP values for IMRT were approximately 4.14% and 12.78% for the bladder and rectum, higher than the HT. The mean values of the HI and CI indices in IMRT were obtained as 0.06 ± 0.01 and 1.13 ± 0.08, respectively. With the HT technique, the index values were equal to 0.04 ± 0.01 and 1.09 ± 0.05, respectively. The mean doses to the rectum and right/left femoral heads were 13.19%, 11.32%, and 10.90% higher in IMRT than in HT, respectively. However, the mean dose to the bladder tissue was 17.13% higher in HT than in IMRT. Our study demonstrated that HT plans were superior to IMRT plans in terms of estimated NTCP using radiobiological models (LKB and RS) for healthily tissues. Except for the higher treatment duration, while having a desired and uniform dose distribution to the tumor, the TomoTherapy technique leads to preservation of healthy organs.\",\"PeriodicalId\":20861,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Radiation Physics and Chemistry\",\"volume\":\"225 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Radiation Physics and Chemistry\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"92\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.radphyschem.2024.112356\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"物理与天体物理\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"CHEMISTRY, PHYSICAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Radiation Physics and Chemistry","FirstCategoryId":"92","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.radphyschem.2024.112356","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"物理与天体物理","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CHEMISTRY, PHYSICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本研究的目的是调查 IMRT 和断层放射治疗技术的剂量学和放射生物学参数,以确定治疗前列腺癌的最佳技术。研究采用动态 IMRT 和螺旋断层放射治疗(HT)技术为 10 名前列腺癌患者制定治疗计划。除了等效均匀剂量(EUD)、异质性指数(HI)和一致性指数(CI)等多种剂量学参数外,还评估了基于莱曼-库彻-伯曼(LKB)和相对序列性(RS)模型的肿瘤控制概率(TCP)和正常组织并发症概率(NTCP)等放射生物学参数。基于 LKB 模型的 IMRT 方法的平均 NTCP 值在膀胱和直肠分别比 HT 方法高出约 4.62% 和 4.89%。同样,在 RS 模型中,IMRT 的膀胱和直肠平均 NTCP 值分别比 HT 高出约 4.14% 和 12.78%。IMRT 的 HI 和 CI 指数平均值分别为 0.06 ± 0.01 和 1.13 ± 0.08。而 HT 技术的指数值分别为 0.04 ± 0.01 和 1.09 ± 0.05。直肠和右/左股骨头的平均剂量在IMRT中分别比在HT中高13.19%、11.32%和10.90%。但是,HT 对膀胱组织的平均剂量比 IMRT 高 17.13%。我们的研究表明,就使用放射生物学模型(LKB 和 RS)对健康组织进行估计的 NTCP 而言,HT 方案优于 IMRT 方案。除了治疗时间较长之外,TomoTherapy 技术在对肿瘤进行理想和均匀剂量分布的同时,还能保护健康器官。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Dosimetric and radiobiological comparison of TomoTherapy and IMRT plans for prostate cancer
The purpose of this study was to investigate the dosimetric and radiobiological parameters of IMRT and TomoTherapy techniques to determine the best technique for the treatment of prostate cancer. Dynamic IMRT and Helical TomoTherapy (HT) radiotherapy techniques were used for the treatment planning of 10 patients with prostate cancer. Tumor Control Probability (TCP) and Normal Tissue Complication Probability (NTCP) based on Lyman-Kutcher-Burman (LKB) and Relative Seriality (RS) models as radiobiological parameters in addition to the multiple dosimetrics including Equivalent Uniform Dose (EUD), Heterogeneity Index (HI), and Conformity Index (CI) were evaluated. The mean NTCP value based on the LKB model for the IMRT method was higher than that for the HT method by approximately 4.62% for the bladder and 4.89% for the rectum, respectively. Similarly, in the RS model, the average NTCP values for IMRT were approximately 4.14% and 12.78% for the bladder and rectum, higher than the HT. The mean values of the HI and CI indices in IMRT were obtained as 0.06 ± 0.01 and 1.13 ± 0.08, respectively. With the HT technique, the index values were equal to 0.04 ± 0.01 and 1.09 ± 0.05, respectively. The mean doses to the rectum and right/left femoral heads were 13.19%, 11.32%, and 10.90% higher in IMRT than in HT, respectively. However, the mean dose to the bladder tissue was 17.13% higher in HT than in IMRT. Our study demonstrated that HT plans were superior to IMRT plans in terms of estimated NTCP using radiobiological models (LKB and RS) for healthily tissues. Except for the higher treatment duration, while having a desired and uniform dose distribution to the tumor, the TomoTherapy technique leads to preservation of healthy organs.
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
Radiation Physics and Chemistry
Radiation Physics and Chemistry 化学-核科学技术
CiteScore
5.60
自引率
17.20%
发文量
574
审稿时长
12 weeks
期刊介绍: Radiation Physics and Chemistry is a multidisciplinary journal that provides a medium for publication of substantial and original papers, reviews, and short communications which focus on research and developments involving ionizing radiation in radiation physics, radiation chemistry and radiation processing. The journal aims to publish papers with significance to an international audience, containing substantial novelty and scientific impact. The Editors reserve the rights to reject, with or without external review, papers that do not meet these criteria. This could include papers that are very similar to previous publications, only with changed target substrates, employed materials, analyzed sites and experimental methods, report results without presenting new insights and/or hypothesis testing, or do not focus on the radiation effects.
期刊最新文献
Effective natural rubber vulcanization using electron beam irradiation and DFT driven cross-linking agents Origins of Gamma-induced darkening of BaSO4 Simulation of peak properties in thermoluminescence dosimeters with the potential stimulation of all electron traps Screening the effect of ionizing radiation on microbiological quality, sensory acceptability and shelf life extension of lean fish fillets Simulation of displacement damage in Si & SiO2 caused by protons
×
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