[Dosimetric analysis of different optimization algorithms for three-dimensional brachytherapy for gynecologic tumors].

Q3 Medicine
B Ling, L Chen, J Zhang, X Cao, W Ye, Y Ouyang, F Chi, Z Ding
{"title":"[Dosimetric analysis of different optimization algorithms for three-dimensional brachytherapy for gynecologic tumors].","authors":"B Ling, L Chen, J Zhang, X Cao, W Ye, Y Ouyang, F Chi, Z Ding","doi":"10.12122/j.issn.1673-4254.2024.04.20","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To investigate the dosimetric difference between manual and inverse optimization in 3-dimensional (3D) brachytherapy for gynecologic tumors.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This retrospective study was conducted among a total of 110 patients with gynecologic tumors undergoing intracavitary combined with interstitial brachytherapy or interstitial brachytherapy. Based on the original images, the brachytherapy plans were optimized for each patient using Gro, IPSA1, IPSA2 (with increased volumetric dose limits on the basis of IPSA1) and HIPO algorithms. The dose-volume histogram (DVH) parameters of the clinical target volume (CTV) including V<sub>200</sub>, V<sub>150</sub>, V<sub>100</sub>, D<sub>90</sub>, D<sub>98</sub> and CI, and the dosimetric parameters D<sub>2cc</sub>, D<sub>1cc</sub>, and D<sub>0.1cc</sub> for the bladder, rectum, and sigmoid colon were compared among the 4 plans.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Among the 4 plans, Gro optimization took the longest time, followed by HIPO, IPSA2 and IPSA1 optimization. The mean D<sub>90</sub>, D<sub>98</sub>, and V<sub>100</sub> of HIPO plans were significantly higher than those of Gro and IPSA plans, and D<sub>90</sub> and V<sub>100</sub> of IPSA1, IPSA2 and HIPO plans were higher than those of Gro plans (<i>P</i> < 0.05), but the CI of the 4 plans were similar (<i>P</i> > 0.05). For the organs at risk (OARs), the HIPO plan had the lowest D<sub>2cc</sub> of the bladder and rectum; the bladder absorbed dose of Gro plans were significantly greater than those of IPSA1 and HIPO (<i>P</i> < 0.05). The D<sub>2cc</sub> and D<sub>1cc</sub> of the rectum in IPSA1, IPSA2 and HIPO plans were better than Gro (<i>P</i> < 0.05). The D<sub>2cc</sub> and D<sub>1cc</sub> of the sigmoid colon did not differ significantly among the 4 plans.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Among the 4 algorithms, the HIPO algorithm can better improve dose coverage of the target and lower the radiation dose of the OARs, and is thus recommended for the initial plan optimization. Clinically, the combination of manual optimization can achieve more individualized dose distribution of the plan.</p>","PeriodicalId":18962,"journal":{"name":"Nan fang yi ke da xue xue bao = Journal of Southern Medical University","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11073936/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Nan fang yi ke da xue xue bao = Journal of Southern Medical University","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.12122/j.issn.1673-4254.2024.04.20","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: To investigate the dosimetric difference between manual and inverse optimization in 3-dimensional (3D) brachytherapy for gynecologic tumors.

Methods: This retrospective study was conducted among a total of 110 patients with gynecologic tumors undergoing intracavitary combined with interstitial brachytherapy or interstitial brachytherapy. Based on the original images, the brachytherapy plans were optimized for each patient using Gro, IPSA1, IPSA2 (with increased volumetric dose limits on the basis of IPSA1) and HIPO algorithms. The dose-volume histogram (DVH) parameters of the clinical target volume (CTV) including V200, V150, V100, D90, D98 and CI, and the dosimetric parameters D2cc, D1cc, and D0.1cc for the bladder, rectum, and sigmoid colon were compared among the 4 plans.

Results: Among the 4 plans, Gro optimization took the longest time, followed by HIPO, IPSA2 and IPSA1 optimization. The mean D90, D98, and V100 of HIPO plans were significantly higher than those of Gro and IPSA plans, and D90 and V100 of IPSA1, IPSA2 and HIPO plans were higher than those of Gro plans (P < 0.05), but the CI of the 4 plans were similar (P > 0.05). For the organs at risk (OARs), the HIPO plan had the lowest D2cc of the bladder and rectum; the bladder absorbed dose of Gro plans were significantly greater than those of IPSA1 and HIPO (P < 0.05). The D2cc and D1cc of the rectum in IPSA1, IPSA2 and HIPO plans were better than Gro (P < 0.05). The D2cc and D1cc of the sigmoid colon did not differ significantly among the 4 plans.

Conclusion: Among the 4 algorithms, the HIPO algorithm can better improve dose coverage of the target and lower the radiation dose of the OARs, and is thus recommended for the initial plan optimization. Clinically, the combination of manual optimization can achieve more individualized dose distribution of the plan.

[妇科肿瘤三维近距离放射治疗不同优化算法的剂量学分析]。
目的研究妇科肿瘤三维(3D)近距离放射治疗中手动和反向优化的剂量学差异:这项回顾性研究的对象是110名接受腔内联合间质近距离治疗或间质近距离治疗的妇科肿瘤患者。根据原始图像,使用 Gro、IPSA1、IPSA2(在 IPSA1 的基础上增加了容积剂量限制)和 HIPO 算法对每位患者的近距离治疗计划进行了优化。比较了 4 种方案的临床靶体积(CTV)剂量-体积直方图(DVH)参数,包括 V200、V150、V100、D90、D98 和 CI,以及膀胱、直肠和乙状结肠的剂量学参数 D2cc、D1cc 和 D0.1cc:在 4 种方案中,Gro 优化耗时最长,其次是 HIPO、IPSA2 和 IPSA1 优化。HIPO方案的平均D90、D98和V100明显高于Gro和IPSA方案,IPSA1、IPSA2和HIPO方案的D90和V100高于Gro方案(P<0.05),但4种方案的CI相似(P>0.05)。在危险器官(OARs)方面,HIPO方案的膀胱和直肠D2cc最低;Gro方案的膀胱吸收剂量明显高于IPSA1和HIPO方案(P<0.05)。IPSA1、IPSA2 和 HIPO 方案的直肠 D2cc 和 D1cc 均优于 Gro 方案(P < 0.05)。4种方案中乙状结肠的D2cc和D1cc没有明显差异:在4种算法中,HIPO算法能更好地提高靶点的剂量覆盖率,降低OAR的辐射剂量,因此推荐用于初始计划优化。临床上,结合人工优化可以实现更个性化的计划剂量分布。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
208
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信