Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Marchioninistraße 15, 81377, Munich, DE, Germany.
German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Munich, Germany.
Radiat Oncol. 2019 Jun 11;14(1):103. doi: 10.1186/s13014-019-1315-z.
In this dosimetric study, a dedicated planning tool for single isocenter stereotactic radiosurgery for multiple brain metastases using dynamic conformal arc therapy (DCAT) was compared to standard volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT).
Twenty patients with a total of 66 lesions who were treated with the DCAT tool were included in this study. Single fraction doses of 15-20 Gy were prescribed to each lesion. Patients were re-planned using non-coplanar VMAT. Number of monitor units as well as V, V and V were extracted for every plan. Using a density-based clustering algorithm, V and V and the volume receiving half of the prescribed dose were extracted for every lesion. Gradient indices and conformity indices were calculated. The correlation of the target sphericity, a measure of how closely the shape of the target PTV resembles a sphere, to the difference in V and V between the two techniques was assessed using Spearman's correlation coefficient.
The automated DCAT planning tool performed significantly better in terms of all investigated metrics (p < 0.05), in particular healthy brain sparing (V: median 3.2 cm vs. 4.9 cm), gradient indices (median 5.99 vs. 7.17) and number of monitor units (median 4569 vs. 5840 MU). Differences in conformity indices were minimal (median 0.75 vs. 0.73) but still significant (p < 0.05). A moderate correlation between PTV sphericity and the difference of V and V between the two techniques was found (Spearman's rho = 0.27 and 0.30 for V and V, respectively, p < 0.05).
The dedicated DCAT planning tool performed better than VMAT in terms of healthy brain sparing and treatment efficiency, in particular for nearly spherical lesions. In contrast, VMAT can be superior in cases with irregularly shaped lesions.
在这项剂量学研究中,我们比较了一种专用于单中心立体定向放射外科治疗多个脑转移瘤的动态适形弧形治疗(DCAT)的专用规划工具与标准容积调强弧形治疗(VMAT)。
本研究纳入了 20 名共 66 个病灶的患者,这些患者均接受了 DCAT 工具治疗。每个病灶给予单次 15-20Gy 的剂量。使用非共面 VMAT 对患者进行重新规划。每个计划都提取了机器跳数(MU)以及 V、V 和 V。对于每个病灶,我们使用基于密度的聚类算法提取了 V、V 和接受半剂量的体积。计算梯度指数和适形度指数。使用 Spearman 相关系数评估目标球度与两种技术之间 V 和 V 差异的相关性,目标球度是一种衡量靶区 PTV 形状与球体的接近程度的指标。
自动化的 DCAT 规划工具在所有研究指标上(p<0.05)表现都明显更好,特别是在保护健康脑组织方面(V:中位数 3.2cm 对 4.9cm)、梯度指数(中位数 5.99 对 7.17)和机器跳数(中位数 4569 对 5840 MU)。适形度指数的差异较小(中位数 0.75 对 0.73),但仍有统计学意义(p<0.05)。PTV 球度与两种技术之间 V 和 V 的差异之间存在中度相关性(Spearman 相关系数分别为 0.27 和 0.30,p<0.05)。
专用的 DCAT 规划工具在保护健康脑组织和治疗效率方面优于 VMAT,尤其是对于接近球形的病灶。相比之下,VMAT 在形状不规则的病灶中可能更具优势。