{"title":"多形性胶质母细胞瘤的超弧治疗方案和体积调节弧治疗方案的剂量学比较。","authors":"Wei-Ju Hong, Hsiu-Wen Ho, Hsiu-Man Lin, Tung Lin, Wan-Hsuan Chow, Ching-Chieh Yang, Li-Ching Lin","doi":"10.21873/invivo.13906","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background/aim: </strong>This study aimed at evaluating the potential benefit of automatic non-coplanar volumetric arc therapy (VMAT) (hyperarc, HA) technique in treating glioblastoma multiforme (GBM).</p><p><strong>Patients and methods: </strong>Twenty-seven patients with GBM who received coplanar VMAT (C-VMAT) were selected in this study. HA and non-coplanar VMAT (NC-VMAT) plans were generated with the same prescriptions and constraints. The Target coverage, organs at risk (OARs) dose, and dosimetric indexes were compared among three plans.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The HA plan demonstrated a reduction in dose to normal tissues while maintaining target coverage, compared to C-VMAT and NC-VMAT. Additionally, HA plans demonstrated higher coverage of the GTV and PTV<sub>60</sub> as well as improved CI from PTV<sub>60</sub> and PTV<sub>46</sub> compared to the other plans. Regarding the dose gradient, HA plans showed a greater dose fall-off, resulting in reduced high-dose and intermediate-dose spillage at PTV<sub>46</sub> The HA also demonstrated a tighter gradient radius at PTV<sub>60</sub> and PTV<sub>46</sub> The HA plan requires fewer MUs than both C-VMAT and NC-VMAT.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The HA plan had better dosimetric results compared to C-VMAT and NC-VMAT. The HA with automatic planning module and auto-delivery treatment also provided high-quality planning and delivery efficacy. These advantages suggest that HA could potentially escalate tumor doses while minimizing toxicity, thereby improving outcomes in GBM patients.</p>","PeriodicalId":13364,"journal":{"name":"In vivo","volume":"39 2","pages":"1009-1021"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11884473/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A Dosimetric Comparison of HyperArc Therapy Planning and Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy Planning in Treating Patients With Glioblastoma Multiforme.\",\"authors\":\"Wei-Ju Hong, Hsiu-Wen Ho, Hsiu-Man Lin, Tung Lin, Wan-Hsuan Chow, Ching-Chieh Yang, Li-Ching Lin\",\"doi\":\"10.21873/invivo.13906\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background/aim: </strong>This study aimed at evaluating the potential benefit of automatic non-coplanar volumetric arc therapy (VMAT) (hyperarc, HA) technique in treating glioblastoma multiforme (GBM).</p><p><strong>Patients and methods: </strong>Twenty-seven patients with GBM who received coplanar VMAT (C-VMAT) were selected in this study. HA and non-coplanar VMAT (NC-VMAT) plans were generated with the same prescriptions and constraints. The Target coverage, organs at risk (OARs) dose, and dosimetric indexes were compared among three plans.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The HA plan demonstrated a reduction in dose to normal tissues while maintaining target coverage, compared to C-VMAT and NC-VMAT. Additionally, HA plans demonstrated higher coverage of the GTV and PTV<sub>60</sub> as well as improved CI from PTV<sub>60</sub> and PTV<sub>46</sub> compared to the other plans. Regarding the dose gradient, HA plans showed a greater dose fall-off, resulting in reduced high-dose and intermediate-dose spillage at PTV<sub>46</sub> The HA also demonstrated a tighter gradient radius at PTV<sub>60</sub> and PTV<sub>46</sub> The HA plan requires fewer MUs than both C-VMAT and NC-VMAT.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The HA plan had better dosimetric results compared to C-VMAT and NC-VMAT. The HA with automatic planning module and auto-delivery treatment also provided high-quality planning and delivery efficacy. These advantages suggest that HA could potentially escalate tumor doses while minimizing toxicity, thereby improving outcomes in GBM patients.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":13364,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"In vivo\",\"volume\":\"39 2\",\"pages\":\"1009-1021\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-03-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11884473/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"In vivo\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.21873/invivo.13906\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"In vivo","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.21873/invivo.13906","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
A Dosimetric Comparison of HyperArc Therapy Planning and Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy Planning in Treating Patients With Glioblastoma Multiforme.
Background/aim: This study aimed at evaluating the potential benefit of automatic non-coplanar volumetric arc therapy (VMAT) (hyperarc, HA) technique in treating glioblastoma multiforme (GBM).
Patients and methods: Twenty-seven patients with GBM who received coplanar VMAT (C-VMAT) were selected in this study. HA and non-coplanar VMAT (NC-VMAT) plans were generated with the same prescriptions and constraints. The Target coverage, organs at risk (OARs) dose, and dosimetric indexes were compared among three plans.
Results: The HA plan demonstrated a reduction in dose to normal tissues while maintaining target coverage, compared to C-VMAT and NC-VMAT. Additionally, HA plans demonstrated higher coverage of the GTV and PTV60 as well as improved CI from PTV60 and PTV46 compared to the other plans. Regarding the dose gradient, HA plans showed a greater dose fall-off, resulting in reduced high-dose and intermediate-dose spillage at PTV46 The HA also demonstrated a tighter gradient radius at PTV60 and PTV46 The HA plan requires fewer MUs than both C-VMAT and NC-VMAT.
Conclusion: The HA plan had better dosimetric results compared to C-VMAT and NC-VMAT. The HA with automatic planning module and auto-delivery treatment also provided high-quality planning and delivery efficacy. These advantages suggest that HA could potentially escalate tumor doses while minimizing toxicity, thereby improving outcomes in GBM patients.
期刊介绍:
IN VIVO is an international peer-reviewed journal designed to bring together original high quality works and reviews on experimental and clinical biomedical research within the frames of physiology, pathology and disease management.
The topics of IN VIVO include: 1. Experimental development and application of new diagnostic and therapeutic procedures; 2. Pharmacological and toxicological evaluation of new drugs, drug combinations and drug delivery systems; 3. Clinical trials; 4. Development and characterization of models of biomedical research; 5. Cancer diagnosis and treatment; 6. Immunotherapy and vaccines; 7. Radiotherapy, Imaging; 8. Tissue engineering, Regenerative medicine; 9. Carcinogenesis.