Progress in Medical Physics (한국의학물리학회지:의학물리)

Korean Society of Medical Physics (한국의학물리학회)
권호 표지

Dose Distribution of Intensity Modulated Radiation Therapy in Prostate Cancer

전립선암에서 세기조절방사선치료의 선량분포 특성

  • Kim, Sung-Kyu (Department of Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology, College of Medicine, Yeungnam University) ;
  • Choi, Ji-Hoon (Department of Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology, College of Medicine, Yeungnam University) ;
  • Yun, Sang-Mo (Department of Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology, College of Medicine, Yeungnam University)
  • 김성규 (영남대학교 의과대학 방사선종양학교실) ;
  • 최지훈 (영남대학교 의과대학 방사선종양학교실) ;
  • 윤상모 (영남대학교 의과대학 방사선종양학교실)
  • Received : 2010.08.10
  • Accepted : 2010.09.14
  • Published : 2010.09.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

The aim of this study was to compare the dose distribution of intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) with 3 dimensional conformal radiation therapy (3DCRT) in prostate cancer. The IMRT plan and the 3DCRT plan used the 9 fields technique, respectively. In IMRT, tumor dose was a total dose of 66 Gy at 2.0 Gy per day, 5 days a week for 5 weeks. All cases were following the dose volume histogram (DVH) constraints. The maximum and minimum tumor dose constraints were 6,700 cGy and 6,500 cGy, respectively. The rectum dose constraints were <35% over 50 Gy. The bladder dose constraints were <35% over 40 Gy. The femur head dose constraints were <15% over 20 Gy. Tumor dose in the 3DCRT were 66 Gy. In IMRT, the maximum dose of PTV was 104.4% and minimum dose was 89.5% for given dose. In 3DCRT, the maximum dose of PTV was 105.3% and minimum dose was 85.5% for given dose. The rectum dose was 34.0% over 50 Gy in IMRT compared with 63.3% in 3DCRT. The bladder dose was 30.1% over 40 Gy in IMRT compared with 30.6% in 3DCRT. The right femur head dose was 9.5% over 20 Gy in IMRT compared with 17.5% in 3DCRT. The left femur head dose was 10.6% over 20 Gy in IMRT compared with 18.3% in 3 DCRT. The dose of critical organs (rectum, bladder, and femur head) in IMRT showed to reduce than dose of 3DCRT. The rectum dose over 50 Gy in IMRT was reduced 29.3% than 3DCRT. The bladder dose over 40 Gy in IMRT was similar to 3DCRT. The femur head dose over 20 Gy in IMRT was reduced about 7~8% than 3DCRT.

전립선암에서 세기조절방사선치료와 입체조형방사선치료의 선량분포 특성을 비교하였다. 세기조절방사선치료에서는 치료계획표적용적에 200 cGy를 33회 조사하여 6,600 cGy가 조사되도록 하였다. 세기조절방사선치료에서는 PTV의 최대선량이 104.4%이었으며, 최소선량이 89.5%였으며, 삼차원입체조형치료에서는 PTV의 최대선량이 105.3%이었으며, 최소선량이 85.5%을 나타내었다. 100%에 대한 CI는 세기조절방사선치료에서 1.02였으며, 삼차원입체조형치료에서는 0.97을 나타내었다. 중요장기 직장에 대해서 세기조절방사선치료에서는 5,000 cGy 이상이 34.0%였으며, 삼차원입체조형치료에서는 63.3%였고, 방광에 대해서 세기조절방사선치료에서는 4,000 cGy 이상이 30.1%였으며, 삼차원입체조형치료에서는 30.6%였고, 오른쪽 대퇴골두부에 대해서 세기조절방사선치료에서는 2,000 cGy 이상이 9.5%였으며, 삼차원입체조형치료에서는 17.5%였고, 왼쪽 대퇴골두부에 대해서 세기조절방사선치료에서는 2,000 cGy 이상이 10.6%였으며, 삼차원입체조형치료에서는 18.3%을 나타내었다. 삼차원입체조형치료와 세기조절방사선치료의 비교에서 세기조절방사선치료가 삼차원입체조형치료에 비해 PTV의 선량분포에서는 5%의 정도 선량분포의 이득이 있었으며, 직장 선량에 대해서는 5,000 cGy 이상 선량에서 29.3%의 감소가 있었고, 방광 선량에 대해서는 거의 비슷한 분포를 나타내었고, 오른쪽 대퇴골두부의 선량에서는 8.0%, 왼쪽 대퇴골두부의 선량에서는 7.7%의 선량 이득을 나타내었다.

Keywords

References

  1. Perez CA, Brady LW: Priciples and Practice of Radiation Oncology: Carcinoma of the Prostate 4th. edit. Lippincott Co, Philadelphia, (2004) pp. 1694
  2. 통계청 대한민국 암 등록 현황 통계자료. 대전. (2008)
  3. Pasteau O: Traitement du cancer de la prostate par le radium. Rev de Mal de la Nutriion: 363 (1911)
  4. Caulk JR: Carcinoma of the prostate. J Urol 37:832 (1937) https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-5347(17)72090-3
  5. Flocks RH: Interstitial irradiation therapy with a solution of Au 198 as part of combination therapy for prostatic carcinoma. J Nucl Med 5:691-705 (1964)
  6. Wallner K, Roy J, Harrison L: Tumor control and morbidity following transperineal I-125 implantation for stage T1-T2 prostate carcinoma. J Clin Oncol 14:449-453 (1996) https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.1996.14.2.449
  7. Park SW, Oh DH, Bae HS, Cho BC, Park JH, Han SH: Application of intensity modulated radiation therapy(IMRT) in prostate cancer. J Korean Soc for Thera Radiol & Oncol 20:68-72 (2000)
  8. Feuvret L, Noel G Mazeron JJ, Bey P: Conformity index: a review. J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 64:333-342 (2006) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrobp.2005.09.028
  9. Wuu CS, Xu Y: Three-dimensional dose verification for intensity modulated radiation therapy using optical CT based polymer gel dosimetry. Med Phys 33:1412-1419 (2006) https://doi.org/10.1118/1.2188820
  10. Palta JR, Mackie TR, editors. Intensity-Modulated Radiation Therapy: The State of the Art: IMRT for prostate cancer. 1st ed. Medical Physics Publishing, Wisconsin (2003), pp. 626.
  11. Daemaley DP, Khoo VS, Norma AR: Comparison of radiation side-effects of conformal and conventional radiotherapy in prostate cancer: a randomised trial. Lancet 353:267-272 (1999) https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(98)05180-0
  12. Nutting C, Deamaley DP, Webb S: Intensity modulated radiation therapy: a clinical review. British J Radiol 869:459-469 (2000)
  13. Price R, Hanks E, McNeeley SW, Horwitz EM, Pinover WH: Advantages of using noncoplanar vs axial beam arrangements when treating prostate cancer with intensity-modulated radiation therapy and the step-and shoot delivery method. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 53:236-243 (2002) https://doi.org/10.1016/S0360-3016(02)02736-0
  14. Pollack A, Zagars GK, Starkschall G, et al: Prostate cancer radiation dose response: Results of the MD Anderson phase III randomized trial. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 53:1097-1105 (2002) https://doi.org/10.1016/S0360-3016(02)02829-8
  15. Price R, Murphy S, McNeeley SW: A method for increased dose corformity and segment reduction for SMLC delivered IMRT treatment of the prostate. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 57:843-852 (2003) https://doi.org/10.1016/S0360-3016(03)00711-9