两种放疗计划技术治疗同步双侧乳腺癌的定量和剂量学分析

IF 0.7 Q4 RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING Polish Journal of Medical Physics and Engineering Pub Date : 2021-09-01 DOI:10.2478/pjmpe-2021-0024
Ö. Mermut, Aysun Ata, D. Trabulus
{"title":"两种放疗计划技术治疗同步双侧乳腺癌的定量和剂量学分析","authors":"Ö. Mermut, Aysun Ata, D. Trabulus","doi":"10.2478/pjmpe-2021-0024","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Objective: We compared mono-isocenter and dual-isocenter plans in synchronous bilateral breast cancer (SBBC), which is defined as tumours occurring simultaneously in both breasts, and evaluated the effects of these differences in plans on organs-at-risk (OARs). Materials and methods: We evaluated 10 women with early stage, nod negative (Tis-2N0M0) SBBC. The treatment dose was determined to be 50 Gy. We used mean dose and VXGy to evaluate the OARs. To evaluate the effectiveness of treatment plans, Homogeneity index (HI), conformity index (CI) and sigma index (SI) and monitor units (MU) of monoisocenter (MIT) and dual-isocenter (DIT) plans were compared. During bilateral breast planning, for the single-centre plan, the isocenter was placed at the center of both breasts at a depth of 3-4 cm. For the two-center plan, dual-isocenters were placed on the right and left breasts. Results: No significant difference between the techniques in terms of the scope of the target volume was observed. Statistically significant results were not achieved in MIT and DIT plans for OARs. Upon comparing MIT and DIT, the right-side monitor unit (MU) value in DIT (p = 0.011) was statistically significantly lower than that in MIT. Upon comparing right-left side MIT and DIT, the MU value (p = 0.028) was significantly lower in DIT than MIT. Conclusion: SBBC irradiation is more complex than unilateral breast radiotherapy. No significant difference between both techniques and OARs was observed. However, we recommend MIT as a priority technique due to the ability to protect OARs, ease of administration during treatment, and the fact that the patient stays in the treatment unit for a shorter period of time.","PeriodicalId":53955,"journal":{"name":"Polish Journal of Medical Physics and Engineering","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2021-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Quantitative and dosimetric analysis for treating synchronous bilateral breast cancer using two radiotherapy planning techniques\",\"authors\":\"Ö. Mermut, Aysun Ata, D. Trabulus\",\"doi\":\"10.2478/pjmpe-2021-0024\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract Objective: We compared mono-isocenter and dual-isocenter plans in synchronous bilateral breast cancer (SBBC), which is defined as tumours occurring simultaneously in both breasts, and evaluated the effects of these differences in plans on organs-at-risk (OARs). Materials and methods: We evaluated 10 women with early stage, nod negative (Tis-2N0M0) SBBC. The treatment dose was determined to be 50 Gy. We used mean dose and VXGy to evaluate the OARs. To evaluate the effectiveness of treatment plans, Homogeneity index (HI), conformity index (CI) and sigma index (SI) and monitor units (MU) of monoisocenter (MIT) and dual-isocenter (DIT) plans were compared. During bilateral breast planning, for the single-centre plan, the isocenter was placed at the center of both breasts at a depth of 3-4 cm. For the two-center plan, dual-isocenters were placed on the right and left breasts. Results: No significant difference between the techniques in terms of the scope of the target volume was observed. Statistically significant results were not achieved in MIT and DIT plans for OARs. Upon comparing MIT and DIT, the right-side monitor unit (MU) value in DIT (p = 0.011) was statistically significantly lower than that in MIT. Upon comparing right-left side MIT and DIT, the MU value (p = 0.028) was significantly lower in DIT than MIT. Conclusion: SBBC irradiation is more complex than unilateral breast radiotherapy. No significant difference between both techniques and OARs was observed. However, we recommend MIT as a priority technique due to the ability to protect OARs, ease of administration during treatment, and the fact that the patient stays in the treatment unit for a shorter period of time.\",\"PeriodicalId\":53955,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Polish Journal of Medical Physics and Engineering\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Polish Journal of Medical Physics and Engineering\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2478/pjmpe-2021-0024\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"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":"Polish Journal of Medical Physics and Engineering","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2478/pjmpe-2021-0024","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"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: 1

摘要

摘要目的:我们比较了同步双侧乳腺癌(SBBC)的单等中心和双等中心方案,SBBC被定义为同时发生在双侧乳房的肿瘤,并评估这些方案差异对危险器官(OARs)的影响。材料与方法:对10例早期淋巴结阴性(Tis-2N0M0) SBBC患者进行评估。治疗剂量为50戈瑞。我们用平均剂量和VXGy评价OARs。为评价治疗方案的有效性,比较单等中心(MIT)和双等中心(DIT)方案的均匀性指数(HI)、符合性指数(CI)、适格指数(SI)和监护单位(MU)。在双侧乳房计划时,对于单中心计划,将等中心放置在双侧乳房的中心,深度为3-4 cm。对于双中心方案,双等中心放置在左右乳房上。结果:两种方法在靶体积范围上无明显差异。在OARs的MIT和DIT计划中没有取得统计学上显著的结果。MIT与DIT比较,DIT组右侧监护单位(MU)值(p = 0.011)显著低于MIT组(p = 0.011)。比较左、右侧MIT与DIT, DIT的MU值显著低于MIT (p = 0.028)。结论:SBBC放疗比单侧乳腺放疗更为复杂。两种技术与OARs之间无显著差异。然而,我们推荐MIT作为优先技术,因为它能够保护桨叶,在治疗过程中易于给药,而且患者在治疗单位停留的时间较短。
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
Quantitative and dosimetric analysis for treating synchronous bilateral breast cancer using two radiotherapy planning techniques
Abstract Objective: We compared mono-isocenter and dual-isocenter plans in synchronous bilateral breast cancer (SBBC), which is defined as tumours occurring simultaneously in both breasts, and evaluated the effects of these differences in plans on organs-at-risk (OARs). Materials and methods: We evaluated 10 women with early stage, nod negative (Tis-2N0M0) SBBC. The treatment dose was determined to be 50 Gy. We used mean dose and VXGy to evaluate the OARs. To evaluate the effectiveness of treatment plans, Homogeneity index (HI), conformity index (CI) and sigma index (SI) and monitor units (MU) of monoisocenter (MIT) and dual-isocenter (DIT) plans were compared. During bilateral breast planning, for the single-centre plan, the isocenter was placed at the center of both breasts at a depth of 3-4 cm. For the two-center plan, dual-isocenters were placed on the right and left breasts. Results: No significant difference between the techniques in terms of the scope of the target volume was observed. Statistically significant results were not achieved in MIT and DIT plans for OARs. Upon comparing MIT and DIT, the right-side monitor unit (MU) value in DIT (p = 0.011) was statistically significantly lower than that in MIT. Upon comparing right-left side MIT and DIT, the MU value (p = 0.028) was significantly lower in DIT than MIT. Conclusion: SBBC irradiation is more complex than unilateral breast radiotherapy. No significant difference between both techniques and OARs was observed. However, we recommend MIT as a priority technique due to the ability to protect OARs, ease of administration during treatment, and the fact that the patient stays in the treatment unit for a shorter period of time.
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
Polish Journal of Medical Physics and Engineering
Polish Journal of Medical Physics and Engineering RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING-
CiteScore
1.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
19
期刊介绍: Polish Journal of Medical Physics and Engineering (PJMPE) (Online ISSN: 1898-0309; Print ISSN: 1425-4689) is an official publication of the Polish Society of Medical Physics. It is a peer-reviewed, open access scientific journal with no publication fees. The issues are published quarterly online. The Journal publishes original contribution in medical physics and biomedical engineering.
期刊最新文献
Parametrization of subsegmental infarcts using high spatial resolution 2DSTE and synthetic ultrasonic data Automated differential diagnostics of respiratory diseases using an electronic stethoscope Evaluating the impact of anatomical changes on dose distributions in head and neck cancer Comparing eDQE and eNEQ metrics – is there an alternative approach to assessing image quality in digital mammography? Vascular stiffness in cold pressor test hyper-reactors
×
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