Feasibility study of automatic uARC planning for esophageal cancer using simultaneous integrated boost radiotherapy
10.3760/cma.j.cn113030-20220728-00260
- VernacularTitle:自动uARC计划在食管癌同步推量放疗中的可行性研究
- Author:
Hengpo LIANG
1
;
Jinzhu TAO
;
Qian HAN
Author Information
1. 河南省人民医院 郑州大学人民医院肿瘤中心，郑州 450003
- Keywords:
Esophageal neoplasms;
Simultaneous integrated boost;
Auto-planning;
Dosimetry;
Normal tissue complication probability
- From:
Chinese Journal of Radiation Oncology
2023;32(7):612-619
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
Objective:To compare dosimetric and radiobiological parameters between automatic and manual uARC plans in the treatment of esophageal cancer patients, aiming to provide reference for clinical application.Methods:High-quality uARC plans of 100 patients with esophageal cancer were selected, and the mean values of the dosimetric parameters in the target area and organs at risk (OAR) were counted, and the goal table of uRT-TPOIS intelligent plan was established. Automatic and manual uARC plans were generated with UIH (United Imaging) treatment planning system (TPS) for 21 esophageal cancer patients. The differences in mean dose (D mean), approximate minimum (D 98%) and maximum (D 2%) dose of planning target volume (PTV), homogeneity index (HI) and conformity index (CI), dose of OAR, mean planning time, monitor unit (MU), tumor control probability (TCP) and normal tissue complication probability (NTCP) were compared between automatic and manual uARC plans. Normally distributed data between two groups were compared by paired t-test, and non-normally distributed data were assessed by nonparametric Wilcoxon test. Results:The D 98% (PTV 60 Gy: P<0.001, PTV 54 Gy: P=0.001) , CI (PTV 60 Gy: P<0.001, PTV 54 Gy: P=0.002) and target volume of area covered by prescription dose (V 54 Gy: P<0.001) of the automatic uARC plans were better than those of manual uARC plans (all P<0.05). There was no significant difference in D mean or HI between the two plans [PTV 54 Gy (59.32±1.87) Gy vs. (59.13±1.64) Gy, (0.19±0.02) vs. (0.18±0.02), all P>0.05]. The D mean and D max of spinal cord of the automatic plan were better than those of the manual plan [(13.22±4.27) Gy vs. (13.75±4.44) Gy, P=0.020 and (36.99±1.67) Gy vs. (38.14±1.31) Gy, P=0.011]. There was no significant difference in the mean dose of V 20 Gy of the lung between two plans ( P>0.05), whereas the mean doses of V 5 Gy and V 10 Gy of the lung of the manual plan were less than those of the automatic plan ( both P<0. 001). Automatic uARC plan had a significantly shorter mean planning time than manual uARC plan [(11.79±1.71) min vs. (53.36±8.23) min, P<0.001]. MU did not significantly differ between two plans [(762.84±74.83) MU vs. (767.41±80.63) MU, P>0.05]. The TCP of the automatic plan was higher than that of the manual plan (PTV 60 Gy 89.15%±0.49% vs. 86.75%±6.46%, P=0.004 and PTV 54 Gy 79.79%±3.48% vs. 77.51%±5.04%, P=0.006). However, manual plan had a lower NTCP of the lung than automatic uARC plan (0.46%±0.40% vs. 0.35%±0.32%, P<0.001). There was no significant difference in NTCP of heart and spinal cord between two plans (all P>0.05). Conclusion:It is feasible to generate automatic uARC plan with uRT-TPOIS TPS for esophageal cancer patients, which can increase the target CI and shorten the plan design time.
