Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrar
Mais filtros

Bases de dados
Ano de publicação
Tipo de documento
País de afiliação
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
Radiat Oncol ; 16(1): 134, 2021 Jul 21.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34289863

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Both patient-specific dose recalculation and γ passing rate analysis are important for the quality assurance (QA) of intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) plans. The aim of this study was to analyse the correlation between the γ passing rates and the volumes of air cavities (Vair) and bony structures (Vbone) in target volume of head and neck cancer. METHODS: Twenty nasopharyngeal carcinoma and twenty nasal natural killer T-cell lymphoma patients were enrolled in this study. Nine-field sliding window IMRT plans were produced and the dose distributions were calculated by anisotropic analytical algorithm (AAA), Acuros XB algorithm (AXB) and SciMoCa based on the Monte Carlo (MC) technique. The dose distributions and γ passing rates of the targets, organs at risk, air cavities and bony structures were compared among the different algorithms. RESULTS: The γ values obtained with AAA and AXB were 95.6 ± 1.9% and 96.2 ± 1.7%, respectively, with 3%/2 mm criteria (p > 0.05). There were significant differences (p < 0.05) in the γ values between AAA and AXB in the air cavities (86.6 ± 9.4% vs. 98.0 ± 1.7%) and bony structures (82.7 ± 13.5% vs. 99.0 ± 1.7%). Using AAA, the γ values were proportional to the natural logarithm of Vair (R2 = 0.674) and inversely proportional to the natural logarithm of Vbone (R2 = 0.816). When the Vair in the targets was smaller than approximately 80 cc or the Vbone in the targets was larger than approximately 6 cc, the γ values of AAA were below 95%. Using AXB, no significant relationship was found between the γ values and Vair or Vbone. CONCLUSION: In clinical head and neck IMRT QA, greater attention should be paid to the effect of Vair and Vbone in the targets on the γ passing rates when using different dose calculation algorithms.


Assuntos
Osso e Ossos/patologia , Neoplasias de Cabeça e Pescoço/patologia , Linfoma Extranodal de Células T-NK/patologia , Carcinoma Nasofaríngeo/patologia , Órgãos em Risco/efeitos da radiação , Planejamento da Radioterapia Assistida por Computador/métodos , Radioterapia de Intensidade Modulada/métodos , Algoritmos , Osso e Ossos/efeitos da radiação , Raios gama , Neoplasias de Cabeça e Pescoço/radioterapia , Humanos , Linfoma Extranodal de Células T-NK/radioterapia , Método de Monte Carlo , Carcinoma Nasofaríngeo/radioterapia , Neoplasias Nasofaríngeas/patologia , Neoplasias Nasofaríngeas/radioterapia , Prognóstico , Dosagem Radioterapêutica
2.
Cancer Manag Res ; 10: 1665-1675, 2018.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29970965

RESUMO

Modern radiotherapy (RT) is being enriched by big digital data and intensive technology. Multimodality image registration, intelligence-guided planning, real-time tracking, image-guided RT (IGRT), and automatic follow-up surveys are the products of the digital era. Enormous digital data are created in the process of treatment, including benefits and risks. Generally, decision making in RT tries to balance these two aspects, which is based on the archival and retrieving of data from various platforms. However, modern risk-based analysis shows that many errors that occur in radiation oncology are due to failures in workflow. These errors can lead to imbalance between benefits and risks. In addition, the exact mechanism and dose-response relationship for radiation-induced malignancy are not well understood. The cancer risk in modern RT workflow continues to be a problem. Therefore, in this review, we develop risk assessments based on our current knowledge of IGRT and provide strategies for cancer risk reduction. Artificial intelligence (AI) such as machine learning is also discussed because big data are transforming RT via AI.

SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA