目的:比较放疗肿瘤学组(RTOG)和欧洲放疗和肿瘤学会(ESTRO)乳腺癌放疗指南的剂量学参数。两种放疗技术,强度调制放射治疗(IMRT)和体积调制电弧治疗(VMAT),被考虑。
方法:根据RTOG和ESTRO指南,对28例左侧内侧定位的TanyN2M0肿瘤患者进行轮廓分析。9场IMRT,10场IMRT,11场IMRT,和VMAT治疗计划作为放射治疗(RT)技术应用于两个轮廓集。提取并比较RT计划的剂量学参数。
结果:比较剂量-体积直方图(DVH)参数,等效均匀剂量(EUD),和OAR的正常组织并发症概率(NTCP)在轮廓指南中,并考虑每种RT技术表明,唯一的显着差异是更高的Dmax,Dmean,V30和V45,EUD,采用RTOG指南时,所有治疗方式中甲状腺的NTCP。使用VMAT技术,当采用ESTRO指南时,PTV的EUD和肿瘤控制概率(TCP)明显更高。此外,当使用ESTRO指南时,VMAT计划的符合性指数(CI)显著较高.
结论:除非在采用RTOG指南时对甲状腺的剂量更高,在两个考虑的指南中,其他高危器官(OAR)的剂量相似.此外,除了更高的EUD,TCP,使用ESTRO指南时,VMAT的CI,考虑RT技术和轮廓指南,目标体积的剂量学参数之间没有其他显著差异.
OBJECTIVE: To compare the dosimetric parameters considering the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (
RTOG) and European Society for Radiotherapy and Oncology (ESTRO) guidelines for breast cancer radiotherapy. Two radiotherapy techniques, intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) and volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT), were considered.
METHODS: Twenty-eight patients with left-sided medially-located TanyN2M0 tumors were contoured based on
RTOG and ESTRO guidelines. 9-field IMRT, 10-field IMRT, 11-field IMRT, and VMAT treatment plans were applied as radiotherapy (RT) techniques for both contouring sets. The dosimetric parameters of the RT plans were extracted and compared.
RESULTS: Comparing dose-volume histogram (DVH) parameters, equivalent uniform dose (EUD), and normal tissue complication probability (NTCP) of OARs across the contouring guidelines and considering each RT technique showed that the only significant differences were higher Dmax, Dmean, V30, and V45, EUD, and NTCP of the thyroid in all treatment modalities when the
RTOG guideline had been adopted. Using the VMAT technique, PTV\'s EUD and the tumor control probability (TCP) were considerably higher when the ESTRO guideline was adopted. Moreover, the conformity index (CI) of VMAT plans was significantly higher when the ESTRO guideline was used.
CONCLUSIONS: Unless having higher doses to thyroid when the
RTOG guideline was adopted, the doses to other organs-at-risk (OAR) were similar between the two considering guidelines. Moreover, except for higher EUD, TCP, and CI for VMAT when the ESTRO guideline was used, no other significant differences were obtained between dosimetric parameters of target volumes considering the RT techniques and contouring guidelines.