论文标题

每日CT扫描和基于EPID的体内剂量测定法的临床相关的在线患者质量检查解决方案:直肠癌的可行研究

A clinically relevant online patient QA solution with daily CT scans and EPID-based in vivo dosimetry: A feasible study on rectal cancer

论文作者

Chen, Liyuan, Zhang, Zhiyuan, Yu, Lei, Peng, Jiyou, Feng, Bin, Zhao, Jun, Liu, Yanfang, Xia, Fan, Zhang, Zhen, Hu, Weigang, Wang, Jiazhou

论文摘要

自适应放射疗法(ART)可以保护有风险的器官(OAR),同时保持对目标的高剂量覆盖范围。但是,仍然缺乏有效的在线患者质量检查方法。我们旨在使用日常CT扫描和电子门户影像学设备(EPID)的体内剂量计为ART开发临床相关的在线患者质量保证(QA)解决方案。包括10例直肠癌患者在我们中心。收集患者的每日CT扫描和门户图像以产生重建的3D剂量分布。临床医生或自动分割算法对这些每日CT扫描的靶标和桨轮廓进行了重新接种,然后计算了剂量量指数,并确定了这些指数对其原始计划的偏差百分比。这种偏差被认为是临床相关患者QA的度量。使用QA度量分布的95%间隔获得公差水平。这些偏差可以进一步分为解剖学相关或交付的相关指标,以进行错误源分析。最后,我们的QA解决方案对另外六名临床患者进行了验证。在直肠癌中,PTVΔD95(%)的QA度量的下部和上部公差为[-3.11%,2.35%],PTVΔD2(%)为[-0.78%,3.23%]。在验证中,PTVΔD95(%)的68%和PTVΔD2({%)的79%在QA指标的公差范围内。通过将四个或更多的不耐受性质量检查指标作为动作级别,在验证患者数据集中有5个分数(18%)具有四个或更多耐受性的QA指标。在线患者质量检查解决方案使用每日CT扫描和基于EPID的体内剂量测定法在临床上是可行的。错误分析的来源有可能区分错误和指导艺术以进行未来治疗。

Adaptive radiation therapy (ART) could protect organs at risk (OARs) while maintain high dose coverage to targets. However, there still lack efficient online patient QA methods. We aim to develop a clinically relevant online patient quality assurance (QA) solution for ART using daily CT scans and electronic portal imaging device (EPID)-based in vivo dosimetry. Ten patients with rectal cancer at our center were included. Patients' daily CT scans and portal images were collected to generate reconstructed 3D dose distributions. Contours of targets and OARs were recontoured on these daily CT scans by a clinician or an auto-segmentation algorithm, then dose-volume indices were calculated, and the percent deviation of these indices to their original plans were determined. This deviation was regarded as the metric for clinically relevant patient QA. The tolerance level was obtained using a 95% interval of the QA metric distribution. These deviations could be further divided into anatomically relevant or delivery relevant indicators for error source analysis. Finally, our QA solution was validated on an additional six clinical patients. In rectal cancer, the lower and upper tolerance of the QA metric for PTV ΔD95 (%) were [-3.11%, 2.35%], and for PTV ΔD2 (%) were [-0.78%, 3.23%]. In validation, the 68% for PTV ΔD95 (%) and the 79% for PTV ΔD2 ({%)of the 28 fractions are within tolerances of the QA metrics. By using four or more out-of-tolerance QA metrics as an action level, there were 5 fractions (18%) have four or more out-of-tolerance QA metrics in validation patient dataset. The online patient QA solution using daily CT scans and EPID-based in vivo dosimetry is clinically feasible. Source of error analysis has the potential for distinguishing sources of error and guiding ART for future treatments.

扫码加入交流群

加入微信交流群

微信交流群二维码

扫码加入学术交流群,获取更多资源