头颈部放疗急性食管炎等效均匀剂量及正常组织并发症概率:对剂量计算准确性的敏感性

IF 0.4 4区 医学 Q4 RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING International Journal of Radiation Research Pub Date : 2022-04-01 DOI:10.52547/ijrr.20.2.28
M. Mosleh-Shirazi, A. Sheikholeslami, E. Fathipour, M. Mohammadianpanah, M. Ansari, S. Karbasi, S. H. Hamedi, N. Khanjani, M. Sasani, P. Jafari, R. Fardid
{"title":"头颈部放疗急性食管炎等效均匀剂量及正常组织并发症概率:对剂量计算准确性的敏感性","authors":"M. Mosleh-Shirazi, A. Sheikholeslami, E. Fathipour, M. Mohammadianpanah, M. Ansari, S. Karbasi, S. H. Hamedi, N. Khanjani, M. Sasani, P. Jafari, R. Fardid","doi":"10.52547/ijrr.20.2.28","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background : To quantify the influence of photon dose - calculation algorithm selection on the cervical esophagus (CE) dose indices and the derived equivalent uniform dose (EUD) and normal - tissue complication probability (NTCP) for acute esophagitis in patients with head - and - neck cancer (HNC). Materials and Methods : The Fast Photon Effective Path (FPEP) and Collapsed - Cone Convolution Superposition (CCCS) algorithms on the Prowess Panther treatment planning system were compared for 30 patients (six tumor sites). The Lyman - Kutcher - Burmann (LKB) model was used to calculate the EUDs and NTCPs. Results : On average, the more simplistic FPEP algorithm overestimated the mean dose to CE planning organ - at - risk volumes (PRVs) by 2.0% (p = 0.003). The average absolute difference in mean dose was 2.7% and the maximum difference was 9.3%. The V 5Gy , V 10Gy , V 15Gy , V 20Gy , V 25Gy and V 30Gy values were significantly higher with FPEP, while the point - dose and D 2cc hot spots were similar. In turn, the dose differences led to an underestimation of the LKB - model prediction of the EUD by 1.4% (p = 0.297). The mean absolute difference in EUD was 4.5% and the maximum difference was 15.3%. In the 14 - 50 Gy mean dose range, the resulting NTCPs with FPEP were lower on average by 2.6% than CCCS (p = 0.041). Conclusions : In the group of HNC patients considered in this study, the EUD and NTCP for acute esophagitis showed to be moderately sensitive to the choice of dose - calculation algorithm. Despite an overestimated mean dose by the simpler algorithm, the NTCP underestimation, which can be large in some patients, is of clinical concern.","PeriodicalId":48815,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Radiation Research","volume":"10 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2022-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Equivalent uniform dose and normal tissue complication probability of acute esophagitis in head-and-neck radiotherapy: Sensitivity to dose calculation accuracy\",\"authors\":\"M. Mosleh-Shirazi, A. Sheikholeslami, E. Fathipour, M. Mohammadianpanah, M. Ansari, S. Karbasi, S. H. Hamedi, N. Khanjani, M. Sasani, P. Jafari, R. Fardid\",\"doi\":\"10.52547/ijrr.20.2.28\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Background : To quantify the influence of photon dose - calculation algorithm selection on the cervical esophagus (CE) dose indices and the derived equivalent uniform dose (EUD) and normal - tissue complication probability (NTCP) for acute esophagitis in patients with head - and - neck cancer (HNC). Materials and Methods : The Fast Photon Effective Path (FPEP) and Collapsed - Cone Convolution Superposition (CCCS) algorithms on the Prowess Panther treatment planning system were compared for 30 patients (six tumor sites). The Lyman - Kutcher - Burmann (LKB) model was used to calculate the EUDs and NTCPs. Results : On average, the more simplistic FPEP algorithm overestimated the mean dose to CE planning organ - at - risk volumes (PRVs) by 2.0% (p = 0.003). The average absolute difference in mean dose was 2.7% and the maximum difference was 9.3%. The V 5Gy , V 10Gy , V 15Gy , V 20Gy , V 25Gy and V 30Gy values were significantly higher with FPEP, while the point - dose and D 2cc hot spots were similar. In turn, the dose differences led to an underestimation of the LKB - model prediction of the EUD by 1.4% (p = 0.297). The mean absolute difference in EUD was 4.5% and the maximum difference was 15.3%. In the 14 - 50 Gy mean dose range, the resulting NTCPs with FPEP were lower on average by 2.6% than CCCS (p = 0.041). Conclusions : In the group of HNC patients considered in this study, the EUD and NTCP for acute esophagitis showed to be moderately sensitive to the choice of dose - calculation algorithm. Despite an overestimated mean dose by the simpler algorithm, the NTCP underestimation, which can be large in some patients, is of clinical concern.\",\"PeriodicalId\":48815,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Radiation Research\",\"volume\":\"10 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-04-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Radiation Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.52547/ijrr.20.2.28\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Radiation Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.52547/ijrr.20.2.28","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:量化光子剂量计算算法选择对头颈癌(HNC)急性食管炎患者颈部食管(CE)剂量指标及衍生等效均匀剂量(EUD)和正常组织并发症概率(NTCP)的影响。材料与方法:对30例患者(6个肿瘤部位)的治疗计划系统上的快速光子有效路径(FPEP)和塌锥卷积叠加(CCCS)算法进行比较。采用Lyman - Kutcher - Burmann (LKB)模型计算eud和ntcp。结果:较简单的FPEP算法平均高估CE计划器官危险体积(PRVs)平均剂量2.0% (p = 0.003)。平均剂量的平均绝对差为2.7%,最大差为9.3%。FPEP对v5gy、v10gy、v15gy、v20gy、v25gy和v30gy的辐照值均显著升高,而点剂量和d2cc热点相似。反过来,剂量差异导致LKB -模型对EUD的预测低估1.4% (p = 0.297)。EUD的平均绝对差异为4.5%,最大差异为15.3%。在14 ~ 50 Gy的平均剂量范围内,FPEP产生的ntcp比CCCS平均低2.6% (p = 0.041)。结论:在本研究考虑的HNC患者组中,急性食管炎的EUD和NTCP对剂量计算算法的选择具有中等敏感性。尽管通过简单的算法高估了平均剂量,但NTCP的低估在一些患者中可能很大,这是临床关注的问题。
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
Equivalent uniform dose and normal tissue complication probability of acute esophagitis in head-and-neck radiotherapy: Sensitivity to dose calculation accuracy
Background : To quantify the influence of photon dose - calculation algorithm selection on the cervical esophagus (CE) dose indices and the derived equivalent uniform dose (EUD) and normal - tissue complication probability (NTCP) for acute esophagitis in patients with head - and - neck cancer (HNC). Materials and Methods : The Fast Photon Effective Path (FPEP) and Collapsed - Cone Convolution Superposition (CCCS) algorithms on the Prowess Panther treatment planning system were compared for 30 patients (six tumor sites). The Lyman - Kutcher - Burmann (LKB) model was used to calculate the EUDs and NTCPs. Results : On average, the more simplistic FPEP algorithm overestimated the mean dose to CE planning organ - at - risk volumes (PRVs) by 2.0% (p = 0.003). The average absolute difference in mean dose was 2.7% and the maximum difference was 9.3%. The V 5Gy , V 10Gy , V 15Gy , V 20Gy , V 25Gy and V 30Gy values were significantly higher with FPEP, while the point - dose and D 2cc hot spots were similar. In turn, the dose differences led to an underestimation of the LKB - model prediction of the EUD by 1.4% (p = 0.297). The mean absolute difference in EUD was 4.5% and the maximum difference was 15.3%. In the 14 - 50 Gy mean dose range, the resulting NTCPs with FPEP were lower on average by 2.6% than CCCS (p = 0.041). Conclusions : In the group of HNC patients considered in this study, the EUD and NTCP for acute esophagitis showed to be moderately sensitive to the choice of dose - calculation algorithm. Despite an overestimated mean dose by the simpler algorithm, the NTCP underestimation, which can be large in some patients, is of clinical concern.
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
International Journal of Radiation Research
International Journal of Radiation Research RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING-
CiteScore
1.10
自引率
33.30%
发文量
42
期刊介绍: International Journal of Radiation Research (IJRR) publishes original scientific research and clinical investigations related to radiation oncology, radiation biology, and Medical and health physics. The clinical studies submitted for publication include experimental studies of combined modality treatment, especially chemoradiotherapy approaches, and relevant innovations in hyperthermia, brachytherapy, high LET irradiation, nuclear medicine, dosimetry, tumor imaging, radiation treatment planning, radiosensitizers, and radioprotectors. All manuscripts must pass stringent peer-review and only papers that are rated of high scientific quality are accepted.
期刊最新文献
Comparison of clinical value and diagnostic rate between barium meal radiography and spectral CT scan in the diagnosis and treatment of gastric cancer and benign gastric tumor Hepatoprotective effects of the mixed decoction of Inula cappa and Serissa japonica in acute liver injury mouse model Natural radioactivity analysis and radiological impact assessment from a coal power plant Neuroprotective effect of polyethylene Glycol (PEG-3350) on radiation-induced brain injury via membrane stabilization The role of stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) in the treatment of recurrent / progressive lung lesions after primary treatment
×
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