左侧乳房自动治疗计划在平坦无滤光剂光子束中的有效性。

IF 0.7 Q4 RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING
Journal of Medical Physics Pub Date : 2024-10-01 Epub Date: 2024-12-18 DOI:10.4103/jmp.jmp_95_24
Prasit Tansangworn, Nichakan Chatchumnan, Kitwadee Saksornchai, Sakda Kingkaew, Mananchaya Vimolnoch, Puntiwa Oonsiri, Sornjarod Oonsiri
{"title":"左侧乳房自动治疗计划在平坦无滤光剂光子束中的有效性。","authors":"Prasit Tansangworn, Nichakan Chatchumnan, Kitwadee Saksornchai, Sakda Kingkaew, Mananchaya Vimolnoch, Puntiwa Oonsiri, Sornjarod Oonsiri","doi":"10.4103/jmp.jmp_95_24","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Electronic compensator is a time-consuming technique for breast cancer radiation treatment planning, consequently, this presents challenges for the development of automated treatment planning for the treatment plan. Thus, this study aimed to investigate the use of automated treatment planning software for the left breast.</p><p><strong>Subjects and methods: </strong>Thirty-eight patients with left-sided breast cancer without locoregional nodes were treated with a prescribed dose of 42.4 Gy in 16 fractions. Treatment planning was performed using electronic compensators. In addition, automated treatment planning techniques were utilized, which involved automated plan generation. This facilitated the comparison of dosimetric parameters: target volume (D<sub>max</sub>, homogeneity index [HI], and conformity index [CI]), organs at risk, plan parameters, and quality assurance.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The automated treatment planning exerted lower D<sub>max</sub> of PTV_Eval compared to electronic compensator techniques, that is, 43.4 ± 1.1 Gy and 43.9 ± 1.1 Gy, respectively (<i>P</i> < 0.05). Similarly, the HI of automated treatment planning was lower than other techniques, 0.10 ± 0.04 and 0.08 ± 0.03, respectively (<i>P</i> < 0.05). However, there were no significant differences in the CI or organs at risk between the two techniques (<i>P</i> = 0.11). In plan parameters, automated treatment planning required lower monitor units compared to the electronic compensator techniques, i.e., 534.3 ± 47.4 and 724.5 ± 117.9, respectively (<i>P</i> < 0.05). Furthermore, the automated treatment planning significantly reduced treatment time compared to electronic compensator techniques, that is, 2.3 ± 0.5 and 41.8 ± 15.1 min, respectively (<i>P</i> < 0.05).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Automated treatment planning improved the treatment plan homogeneity, reduced hotspots, enhanced treatment planning efficiency, and reduced treatment planning time and doses comparable to those of normal organs.</p>","PeriodicalId":51719,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Medical Physics","volume":"49 4","pages":"701-705"},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11801100/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Effectiveness of Automated Treatment Planning for Left-sided Breast in Flattening Filter-free Photon Beams.\",\"authors\":\"Prasit Tansangworn, Nichakan Chatchumnan, Kitwadee Saksornchai, Sakda Kingkaew, Mananchaya Vimolnoch, Puntiwa Oonsiri, Sornjarod Oonsiri\",\"doi\":\"10.4103/jmp.jmp_95_24\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Electronic compensator is a time-consuming technique for breast cancer radiation treatment planning, consequently, this presents challenges for the development of automated treatment planning for the treatment plan. Thus, this study aimed to investigate the use of automated treatment planning software for the left breast.</p><p><strong>Subjects and methods: </strong>Thirty-eight patients with left-sided breast cancer without locoregional nodes were treated with a prescribed dose of 42.4 Gy in 16 fractions. Treatment planning was performed using electronic compensators. In addition, automated treatment planning techniques were utilized, which involved automated plan generation. This facilitated the comparison of dosimetric parameters: target volume (D<sub>max</sub>, homogeneity index [HI], and conformity index [CI]), organs at risk, plan parameters, and quality assurance.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The automated treatment planning exerted lower D<sub>max</sub> of PTV_Eval compared to electronic compensator techniques, that is, 43.4 ± 1.1 Gy and 43.9 ± 1.1 Gy, respectively (<i>P</i> < 0.05). Similarly, the HI of automated treatment planning was lower than other techniques, 0.10 ± 0.04 and 0.08 ± 0.03, respectively (<i>P</i> < 0.05). However, there were no significant differences in the CI or organs at risk between the two techniques (<i>P</i> = 0.11). In plan parameters, automated treatment planning required lower monitor units compared to the electronic compensator techniques, i.e., 534.3 ± 47.4 and 724.5 ± 117.9, respectively (<i>P</i> < 0.05). Furthermore, the automated treatment planning significantly reduced treatment time compared to electronic compensator techniques, that is, 2.3 ± 0.5 and 41.8 ± 15.1 min, respectively (<i>P</i> < 0.05).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Automated treatment planning improved the treatment plan homogeneity, reduced hotspots, enhanced treatment planning efficiency, and reduced treatment planning time and doses comparable to those of normal organs.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":51719,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Medical Physics\",\"volume\":\"49 4\",\"pages\":\"701-705\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11801100/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Medical Physics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4103/jmp.jmp_95_24\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/12/18 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Medical Physics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/jmp.jmp_95_24","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/12/18 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:电子补偿器在乳腺癌放射治疗计划中是一项耗时的技术,因此,这对治疗计划的自动化治疗计划的发展提出了挑战。因此,本研究旨在探讨左乳自动治疗计划软件的使用。研究对象和方法:38例无局部淋巴结的左侧乳腺癌患者采用42.4 Gy的处方剂量,分16组进行治疗。使用电子补偿器进行治疗计划。此外,采用自动化治疗计划技术,包括自动计划生成。这便于比较剂量学参数:靶体积(Dmax,均匀性指数[HI]和一致性指数[CI])、危险器官、计划参数和质量保证。结果:与电子补偿器技术相比,自动治疗方案对PTV_Eval的Dmax值较低,分别为43.4±1.1 Gy和43.9±1.1 Gy (P < 0.05)。同样,自动化治疗计划的HI低于其他技术,分别为0.10±0.04和0.08±0.03 (P < 0.05)。然而,两种技术在CI或危险器官方面没有显著差异(P = 0.11)。在计划参数方面,与电子补偿器技术相比,自动化治疗计划所需的监护单位较低,分别为534.3±47.4和724.5±117.9 (P < 0.05)。此外,与电子补偿器技术相比,自动化治疗计划显著缩短了治疗时间,分别为2.3±0.5 min和41.8±15.1 min (P < 0.05)。结论:自动化治疗计划提高了治疗计划的同质性,减少了热点,提高了治疗计划效率,减少了与正常器官相当的治疗计划时间和剂量。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Effectiveness of Automated Treatment Planning for Left-sided Breast in Flattening Filter-free Photon Beams.

Purpose: Electronic compensator is a time-consuming technique for breast cancer radiation treatment planning, consequently, this presents challenges for the development of automated treatment planning for the treatment plan. Thus, this study aimed to investigate the use of automated treatment planning software for the left breast.

Subjects and methods: Thirty-eight patients with left-sided breast cancer without locoregional nodes were treated with a prescribed dose of 42.4 Gy in 16 fractions. Treatment planning was performed using electronic compensators. In addition, automated treatment planning techniques were utilized, which involved automated plan generation. This facilitated the comparison of dosimetric parameters: target volume (Dmax, homogeneity index [HI], and conformity index [CI]), organs at risk, plan parameters, and quality assurance.

Results: The automated treatment planning exerted lower Dmax of PTV_Eval compared to electronic compensator techniques, that is, 43.4 ± 1.1 Gy and 43.9 ± 1.1 Gy, respectively (P < 0.05). Similarly, the HI of automated treatment planning was lower than other techniques, 0.10 ± 0.04 and 0.08 ± 0.03, respectively (P < 0.05). However, there were no significant differences in the CI or organs at risk between the two techniques (P = 0.11). In plan parameters, automated treatment planning required lower monitor units compared to the electronic compensator techniques, i.e., 534.3 ± 47.4 and 724.5 ± 117.9, respectively (P < 0.05). Furthermore, the automated treatment planning significantly reduced treatment time compared to electronic compensator techniques, that is, 2.3 ± 0.5 and 41.8 ± 15.1 min, respectively (P < 0.05).

Conclusions: Automated treatment planning improved the treatment plan homogeneity, reduced hotspots, enhanced treatment planning efficiency, and reduced treatment planning time and doses comparable to those of normal organs.

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
Journal of Medical Physics
Journal of Medical Physics RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING-
CiteScore
1.10
自引率
11.10%
发文量
55
审稿时长
30 weeks
期刊介绍: JOURNAL OF MEDICAL PHYSICS is the official journal of Association of Medical Physicists of India (AMPI). The association has been bringing out a quarterly publication since 1976. Till the end of 1993, it was known as Medical Physics Bulletin, which then became Journal of Medical Physics. The main objective of the Journal is to serve as a vehicle of communication to highlight all aspects of the practice of medical radiation physics. The areas covered include all aspects of the application of radiation physics to biological sciences, radiotherapy, radiodiagnosis, nuclear medicine, dosimetry and radiation protection. Papers / manuscripts dealing with the aspects of physics related to cancer therapy / radiobiology also fall within the scope of the journal.
×
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