[1]姚凯宁,王若曦,岳海振,等.AAA和PDIP算法在非均整模式容积调强放射治疗剂量预测方面的差异[J].中国医学物理学杂志,2020,37(4):419-425.[doi:DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1005-202X.2020.04.005]
　YAO Kaining,WANG Ruoxi,YUE Haizhen,et al.Differences between anisotropic analytical algorithm and portal dose image prediction algorithm in dose prediction in volumetric modulated arc therapy using flattening filter free beams[J].Chinese Journal of Medical Physics,2020,37(4):419-425.[doi:DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1005-202X.2020.04.005]
点击复制

AAA和PDIP算法在非均整模式容积调强放射治疗剂量预测方面的差异()
分享到：

《中国医学物理学杂志》[ISSN:1005-202X/CN:44-1351/R]

卷:
37
期数:
2020年第4期
页码:
419-425
栏目:
医学放射物理
出版日期:
2020-04-29

文章信息/Info

Title:
Differences between anisotropic analytical algorithm and portal dose image prediction algorithm in dose prediction in volumetric modulated arc therapy using flattening filter free beams
文章编号:
1005-202X（2020）04-0419-07
作者:
姚凯宁; 王若曦; 岳海振; 王美娇; 蒲亦晨; 吴昊
北京大学肿瘤医院暨北京市肿瘤防治研究所放疗科，恶性肿瘤发病机制及转化研究教育部重点实验室， 北京 100142
Author(s):
YAO Kaining;  WANG Ruoxi;  YUE Haizhen;  WANG Meijiao;  PU Yichen;  WU Hao
Key Laboratory of Carcinogenesis and Translational Research (Ministry of Education/Beijing), Department of Radiotherapy, Peking University Cancer Hospital & Institute, Beijing 100142, China
关键词:
容积调强放射治疗; 非均整模式; 射野剂量图像预测算法; 各项异性算法; 电子射野影像系统; 复杂系数
Keywords:
Keywords: volumetric modulated arc therapy;  flattening filter free;  portal dose image prediction algorithm;  anisotropic analytical algorithm;  electronic portal imaging device;  complexity metric
分类号:
R811.1；R815
DOI:
DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1005-202X.2020.04.005
文献标志码:
A
摘要:
【摘要】目的：探究各项异性算法（AAA）和射野剂量图像预测（PDIP）算法在非均整模式（FFF）容积调强放射治疗计划治疗前验证γ分析中的差异以及计划复杂程度对这种差异的影响，为临床上基于电子射野影像系统（EPID）的剂量预测算法的选择提供依据。方法：选取能量为6 MV FFF的两种测试野和16例头颈部肿瘤治疗计划，利用PDIP和AAA两种算法分别生成预测数据并与EPID实测数据进行γ分析，统计两种算法在不同γ评判标准下的通过率并计算通过率差异（Delta γ）。计算上述病例每个射野的复杂系数，分析不同标准下两种算法的Delta γ与复杂系数的相关性；利用γmean、γsd、γ1和γ通过率共同描述γ分布，并分析其与复杂系数间的相关性。结果：当评判标准为3%/3 mm或2%/2 mm时，不同算法下测试射野的Delta γ较小。当评判标准为1%/1 mm，不同开野的Delta γ变化明显：射野较小时，PDIP算法的通过率低于AAA；当射野增大到（10×10） cm2时，通过率基本一致；当射野继续增大时，PDIP算法的通过率逐渐高于AAA。全部射野的通过率与评判标准的关系类似：在3%/3 mm标准下，两种算法的结果基本一致；随着标准的提高，两种算法的通过率逐渐下降，二者之间的差异也逐渐明显。复杂系数与Delta γ、γmean、γsd和γ1为正相关，与γ通过率为负相关。结论：PDIP算法对于有机械臂支撑的EPID的剂量预测更准确；AAA则适用于无机械臂支撑的EPID或机械臂反散射影响较小的射野。当计划复杂程度或评判标准提高时，两种算法的差异也增大。计划复杂程度对FFF计划验证结果的影响是负面的。上述结果提示临床应针对性地选择计划验证工具来确保治疗的安全有效。
Abstract:
Abstract: Objective To explore the difference between anisotropic analytical algorithm (AAA) and portal dose image prediction (PDIP) algorithm in γ analysis for the pre-treatment verification of volumetric modulated arc therapy using flattening filter free (FFF) beams and to investigate the effects of plan complexity on the difference for providing a basis for the selection of dose prediction algorithm based on electronic portal imaging device (EPID). Methods Two test fields and 16 head and neck treatment plans using 6 MV FFF were selected. AAA and PDIP algorithm were used to generate predicted data, and a γ analysis between predicted data and the data measured by EPID was conducted. The Delta γ of the two algorithms under different γ criteria were analyzed. The complexity metric (CM) of each field in the above cases was calculated, and the correlation between Delta γ and CM under different γ criteria was investigated. Finally, the γ distribution was described by γmean, γsd, γ1 and γ passing rates, and their correlations with CM were discussed. Results For the test field under the criterion of 3%/3 mm or 2%/2 mm, the Delta γ of two algorithms was small. When the criterion was 1%/1 mm, there was significant difference in Delta γ for different open fields. The passing rate of PDIP algorithm was lower than that of AAA when the field was smaller than (10×10) cm2; and the passing rates of two algorithms was basically the same when the field was (10×10) cm2; with the further enlargement of field, the passing rate of PDIP algorithm was significantly higher than that of AAA. The relationship between the passing rates of all fields and evaluation criteria was similar. Under the criterion of 3%/ 3 mm, there was trivial difference in the passing rate of two algorithms. As the criterion increases, the passing rates of two algorithms were gradually decreased and the difference between them become obvious. The CM was positively correlated with Delta γ, γmean, γsd, γ1, and negatively related with γ passing rate. Conclusion PDIP algorithm has a higher accuracy for dose prediction based on EPID with arm support, while AAA is suitable for dose prediction based on EPID without arm support or field with less backscattering effect. When plan complexity or evaluation criterion increases, the difference between two algorithms increases. The plan complexity has a negative effect on FFF plan verification. An appropriate plan verification tool should be adopted to ensure the safe and effective treatment in clinic.

相似文献/References:

[1]唐慧敏,龚学余,杨振,等.先进外照射光子剂量算法和各向异性分析算法在乳腺癌胸壁放疗中的剂量学差异[J].中国医学物理学杂志,2015,32(06):882.[doi:doi:10.3969/j.issn.1005-202X.2015.06.026]
　[J].Chinese Journal of Medical Physics,2015,32(4):882.[doi:doi:10.3969/j.issn.1005-202X.2015.06.026]
[2]刘卓伦,张艺宝,岳海振,等.医用直线加速器中心轴绝对剂量输出长期稳定性对比分析[J].中国医学物理学杂志,2016,33(1):1.[doi:DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1005-202X.2016.01.001]
　[J].Chinese Journal of Medical Physics,2016,33(4):1.[doi:DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1005-202X.2016.01.001]
[3]岳海振,张艺宝,胡俏俏,等.PTW 1000SRS与729矩阵在非均整模式下剂量验证对比[J].中国医学物理学杂志,2016,33(1):19.[doi:DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1005-202X.2016.01.005]
　[J].Chinese Journal of Medical Physics,2016,33(4):19.[doi:DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1005-202X.2016.01.005]
[4]岳海振,张艺宝,刘卓伦,等. 直线加速器均整和非均整模式下射线质和射野输出因子的蒙特卡罗模拟与实测值比较[J].中国医学物理学杂志,2016,33(6):548.[doi:DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1005-202X.2016.06.002]
　[J].Chinese Journal of Medical Physics,2016,33(4):548.[doi:DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1005-202X.2016.06.002]
[5]吴丽丽,张基永,黄宝添,等. 非均整模式光子线在乳腺癌调强放疗的剂量学评估[J].中国医学物理学杂志,2017,34(11):1086.[doi:DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1005-202X.2017.11.002]
　WU Lili,ZHANG Jiyong,HUANG Baotian,et al. Evaluation of intensity-modulated radiotherapy using flattening filter free photon beams for patients with breast cancer[J].Chinese Journal of Medical Physics,2017,34(4):1086.[doi:DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1005-202X.2017.11.002]
[6]王占宇,谭军文,龙雨松,等. 非均整与均整模式下宫颈癌容积旋转调强放疗计划的剂量学比较[J].中国医学物理学杂志,2017,34(11):1110.[doi:DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1005-202X.2017.11.007]
　WANG Zhanyu,TAN Junwen,LONG Yusong,et al. Dosimetric comparison of VMAT plans in different modes for cervical cancer: flatting filter free vs flattening filter[J].Chinese Journal of Medical Physics,2017,34(4):1110.[doi:DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1005-202X.2017.11.007]
[7]岳海振,张艺宝,张健,等. 基于蒙特卡罗方法的光子束均整与非均整模式能谱对比分析[J].中国医学物理学杂志,2018,35(6):633.[doi:DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1005-202X.2018.06.003]
　YUE Haizhen,ZHANG Yibao,ZHANG Jian,et al. Comparison analysis of energy spectra between flattened and flattening-filter-free Monte Carlo models for photon beam[J].Chinese Journal of Medical Physics,2018,35(4):633.[doi:DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1005-202X.2018.06.003]
[8]刘书朋,陈伟思,侯明扬,等. 电子射野影像系统在调强剂量验证中的应用[J].中国医学物理学杂志,2018,35(7):776.[doi:DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1005-202X.2018.07.007]
　LIU Shupeng,CHEN Weisi,HOU Mingyang,et al. Application of electronic portal imaging device in dose verification of intensity-modulated radiotherapy[J].Chinese Journal of Medical Physics,2018,35(4):776.[doi:DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1005-202X.2018.07.007]
[9]韩俊杰,陈立新,朱金汉,等.Varian Edge均整和非均整模式下6 MV和10 MV光子线能谱研究[J].中国医学物理学杂志,2018,35(9):997.[doi:DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1005-202X.2018.09.002]
　HAN Junjie,CHEN Lixin,ZHU Jinhan,et al.Energy spectra of 6 and 10 MV flattened and flattening filter-free photon beams from Varian Edge[J].Chinese Journal of Medical Physics,2018,35(4):997.[doi:DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1005-202X.2018.09.002]
[10]王涛,程秀艳,郭跃信. ArcCheck的剂量学特性测量及其对VMAT计划的验证[J].中国医学物理学杂志,2019,36(3):277.[doi:DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1005-202X.2019.03.006]
　WANG Tao,CHENG Xiuyan,GUO Yuexin. Measurement of the dosimetric characteristics of ArcCheck and its application in VMAT plan verification[J].Chinese Journal of Medical Physics,2019,36(4):277.[doi:DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1005-202X.2019.03.006]

备注/Memo

备注/Memo:
【收稿日期】2019-11-11 【基金项目】北京市自然科学基金（1202009）；北京市属医院科研培育计划项目（PX2019042）；中央高校基本科研业务费/北京大学临床医学+X 青年专项（PKU2020LCXQ019） 【作者简介】姚凯宁，硕士研究生，研究方向：放射治疗物理学，E-mail:?kainingyao@163.com 【通信作者】吴昊，高级工程师，研究方向：医学物理，E-mail: hao.wu@bjcancer.org
更新日期/Last Update: 2020-04-29