Résumé
Objective To investigate the difference in normal tissue complication probability (NTCP) of lower cranial nerves (LCNs) between target volumes recommended by Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) and China in intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) for T1-2 nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC),and to provide the evidence of dose-volume effect for the protection of LCNs in IMRT for NPC.Methods A total of 20 patients with T1-2 NPC who were treated from 2013 to 2015 were enrolled,and LCNs were delineated on CT images.Target volume delineation and treatment plan designing were performed according to the method recommended by RTOG0225 (RTOG target volume delineation method) or the Chinese Working Committee for Clinical Staging of NPC in 2010 (Chinese target volume delineation method),and the differences in the dose to LCNs and NTCP were calculated.Results In the RTOG and Chinese methods for target volume delineation,Dmax to the left and right LCNs was 7 450±273 cGy/7294±309 cGy and 7 361± 160 cGy/7 190±395 cGy,respectively (P=0.018 and 0.042),Dmean was 6735±285 cGy/6 660±333 cGy and 6 446±429 cGy/6 299±467 cGy,respectively (both P=0.000),and the NTCP was 60％±10％/57％±13％ and 51％±15％/45％±17％,respectively (both P=0.000).Conclusions It is feasible to precisely delineate target volume with the LCNs as a routine OAR and predict NTCP in IMRT for T1-2 NPC.The NTCP of the LCNs is closely associated with target volume dose and irradiated volume.The dose to the LCNs and NTCP determined by the Chinese target volume delineation method are significantly lower than those determined by the RTOG method.
Résumé
Objective To assess the differences in delineation of organs at risk (OAR) and dosimetry between junior and senior physicians during intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) for nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC) and to evaluate the role of specific training in reducing the differences.Methods Sixteen patients newly diagnosed with NPC were selected in the study.The OAR was delineated separately by three junior physicians and three senior physicians,and the geometric and dosimetric differences were assessed relative to the reference OAR.Delineation was performed again for the two OARs with the biggest difference after specific training in the two groups of physicians,and the differences were evaluated again.The difference was determined by paired t test.Results The maximum dose differences (Dmax) of OAR in the junior and senior physicians were (2.33 ± 12.06) ％ (-48.06％-137.82％) and (0.09 ± 4.72) ％ (-49.54％-42.96％),respectively (P =0.039),and the difference in the optic chiasm was the greatest ((5.85 ± 19.63) ％ ∶ (1.36 ± 4.64) ％,P =0.042).The mean dose differences (Dmean) of OAR in the junior and senior physicians were (3.10 ± 8.07)％ (-46.76％-59.76％) and (-0.93 ± 2.03) ％ (-45.54％-35.69％),respectively (P =0.021),and the difference in the parotid gland was the greatest ((13.23 ± 13.39) ％ ∶ (3.20 ± 6.71) ％,P =0.002).In the secondary delineation after training,the Dmax of the optic chiasm in the junior and senior physicians was (1.68 ± 3.34)％ and (1.50 ± 1.87) ％,respectively (P =0.841),and the difference in junior physicians was reduced significantly compared with before training ((1.68 ± 3.34) ％ ∶ (5.85 ± 19.63) ％,P =0.048) ; the Dmean of the parotid gland in the junior and senior physicians was (2.46 ± 3.06) ％ and (1.35 ± 3.00) ％,respectively (P =0.2 7 4),significantly reduced compared with before training ((2.46 ± 3.0 6) ％ ∶ (13.23 ± 13.39)％,P=0.002; (1.35 ± 3.00)％ ∶ (3.20 ± 6.71) ％,P =0.033).Conclusions The differences in delineation of OAR lead to dose uncertainties during IMRT for NPC,and specific training can improve the accuracy of delineation.