国际肿瘤学杂志 ›› 2026, Vol. 53 ›› Issue (9): 521-526.doi: 10.3760/cma.j.cn371439-20260211-00084

• 论著 • 上一篇    下一篇

胸段食管癌碳离子与光子放疗的剂量学比较

王振立1, 张耀文1, 郭逸潇2, 路玉昆1, 黄骁1, 孙晓东1, 王银亮1, 郑安平1, 李亚洲2()   

  1. 1 安阳市肿瘤医院放射治疗中心, 河南科技大学附属安阳市肿瘤医院,河南省食管癌精准防治医学重点实验室,安阳市肿瘤精准放疗重点实验室, 安阳 455000
    2 甘肃省人民医院放疗中心, 兰州 730000
  • 收稿日期:2026-02-11 出版日期:2026-09-08 发布日期:2026-08-25
  • 通讯作者: 李亚洲,Email:asial18@163.com
  • 作者简介:第一联系人:

    王振立:研究实施、论文撰写;张耀文、孙晓东、郑安平:研究方案指导、统计分析指导、论文修改;郭逸潇、路玉昆、黄骁:临床病例筛选、影像及放疗计划资料收集、论文修改;王银亮:论文修改;李亚洲:研究思路提出、研究设计与技术路线指导、论文修改

  • 基金资助:
    安阳市重大科技专项(2023A02SF010)

Dosimetric comparison of carbon ion and photon radiotherapy for thoracic esophageal cancer

Wang Zhenli1, Zhang Yaowen1, Guo Yixiao2, Lu Yukun1, Huang Xiao1, Sun Xiaodong1, Wang Yinliang1, Zheng Anping1, Li Yazhou2()   

  1. 1 Radiotherapy Center, Anyang Tumor Hospital,Anyang Tumor Hospital Affiliated to Henan University of Science and Technology,Henan Key Laboratory of Precision Prevention and Treatment of Esophageal Cancer,Anyang Key Laboratory of Precision Radiotherapy for Cancer, Anyang 455000, China
    2 Radiotherapy Center, Gansu Provincial Hospital, Lanzhou 730000, China
  • Received:2026-02-11 Online:2026-09-08 Published:2026-08-25
  • Contact: Li Yazhou,Email:asial18@163.com
  • Supported by:
    Major Science and Technology Special Project of Anyang City of China(2023A02SF010)

摘要:

目的 比较碳离子放疗(CIRT)计划和光子放疗[调强放疗(IMRT)、容积旋转调强放疗(VMAT)]计划在胸段食管癌患者治疗中的剂量学差异及特点。方法 选取2024年3月至2025年2月于甘肃省人民医院和安阳市肿瘤医院接受放疗的胸段食管癌患者46例作为研究对象,其中采用IMRT 19例、VMAT 27例。将所有患者CT图像导入CIRT计划系统CIPlan 2.0,在相同病例资料基础上制作CIRT计划,并在满足临床要求的前提下,比较CIRT、IMRT、VMAT 3种计划的靶区及危及器官剂量学参数差异。结果 靶区剂量学方面,IMRT、VMAT、CIRT 3种放疗计划计划靶区(PTV)的D2%分别为(55.50±1.75)、(55.38±1.75)、(57.38±0.63)Gy,D98%分别为50.26(50.04,50.88)、49.65(49.21,50.37)、49.96(49.26,50.62)Gy,平均剂量(Avg)分别为52.79(52.06,53.64)、52.90(52.32,53.35)、53.30(53.22,53.36)Gy,适形指数(CI)分别为0.69(0.65,0.75)、0.75(0.65,0.83)、0.78(0.74,0.82),均匀性指数(HI)分别为0.10±0.03、0.12±0.04、0.14±0.02,差异均有统计学意义(F=32.93,P<0.001;H=9.39,P=0.009;H=9.90,P=0.007;H=10.94,P=0.004;F=15.03,P<0.001);与IMRT相比,VMAT D98%降低、HI升高,CIRT D2%、CI、HI均升高(均P<0.05);与VMAT相比,CIRT D2%、Avg、CI、HI均升高(均P<0.05)。危及器官剂量学方面,IMRT、VMAT、CIRT 3种放疗计划全肺V5分别为(34.26±14.13)%、(37.47±11.35)%、(5.79±2.72)%,V10分别为(23.56±10.18)%、(26.26±8.52)%、(4.63±2.14)%,V15分别为(17.75±8.32)%、(18.36±6.57)%、(3.95±1.88)%,V20分别为(12.55±5.91)%、(12.14±4.86)%、(3.12±1.65)%,V30分别为(4.34±1.89)%、(4.77±2.51)%、(1.80±1.01)%,差异均有统计学意义(F=130.32,P<0.001;F=109.76,P<0.001;F=81.31,P<0.001;F=63.40,P<0.001;F=29.52,P<0.001);与IMRT、VMAT相比,CIRT V5、V10、V15、V20、V30均降低(均P<0.05)。3种放疗计划脊髓Dmax分别为33.13(28.02,37.39)、35.07(31.90,38.73)、7.13(5.42,17.84)Gy,心脏V30分别为10.19(0.00,20.31)%、10.47(0.21,20.85)%、1.88(0.00,4.77)%,心脏V40分别为3.82(0.00,7.85)%、2.53(0.00,4.34)%、0.90(0.00,2.15)%,差异均有统计学意义(H=68.38,P<0.001;H=10.83,P=0.004;H=7.92,P=0.019);与IMRT、VMAT相比,CIRT脊髓Dmax,心脏V30、V40均降低(均P<0.05)。结论 对于胸段食管癌放疗患者,CIRT较IMRT、VMAT在危及器官保护方面具有明显的剂量学优势,其可在保证靶区剂量覆盖的同时,显著降低肺、心脏及脊髓受量。IMRT在靶区剂量均匀性方面表现较好,而CIRT在靶区适形性方面更具优势。

关键词: 食管肿瘤, 放射疗法, 放射治疗剂量

Abstract:

Objective To compare the dosimetric differences and characteristics between carbon ion radiotherapy (CIRT) plans and photon radiotherapy plans [intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) and volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT)] in patients with thoracic esophageal cancer. Methods A total of 46 patients with thoracic esophageal cancer who received radiotherapy at Gansu Provincial Hospital and Anyang Tumor Hospital from March 2024 to February 2025 were enrolled,including 19 treated with IMRT and 27 with VMAT. The CT images of all patients were imported into the CIRT planning system CIPlan 2.0,and CIRT plans were generated based on the same patient data. Under the premise of meeting clinical requirements,the dosimetric parameters differences of the target volume and organs at risk were compared among the CIRT,IMRT,and VMAT plans. Results For target dose parameters,the D2% values of the planning target volume (PTV) in the IMRT,VMAT,CIRT plans were (55.50±1.75),(55.38±1.75),(57.38±0.63) Gy,respectively; the D98% values were 50.26 (50.04,50.88),49.65 (49.21,50.37),49.96 (49.26,50.62) Gy,respectively; the average dose (Avg) values were 52.79 (52.06,53.64),52.90 (52.32,53.35),53.30 (53.22,53.36) Gy,respectively; the conformity index (CI) values were 0.69 (0.65,0.75),0.75 (0.65,0.83),0.78 (0.74,0.82),respectively; and the homogeneity index (HI) values were 0.10±0.03,0.12±0.04,0.14±0.02,respectively,with statistically significant differences (F=32.93,P<0.001; H=9.39,P=0.009; H=9.90,P=0.007; H=10.94,P=0.004; F=15.03,P<0.001). Compared with IMRT,VMAT showed a lower D98% and a higher HI,CIRT showed higher D2%,CI,and HI (all P<0.05). Compared with VMAT,CIRT showed higher D2%,Avg,CI,and HI (all P<0.05). For organs at risk,the whole-lung V5 values in the IMRT,VMAT,CIRT plans were (34.26±14.13)%,(37.47±11.35)%,(5.79±2.72)%,respectively; the V10 values were (23.56±10.18)%,(26.26±8.52)%,(4.63±2.14)%,respectively; the V15 values were (17.75±8.32)%,(18.36±6.57)%,(3.95±1.88)%,respectively; the V20 values were (12.55±5.91)%,(12.14±4.86)%,(3.12±1.65)%,respectively; and the V30 values were (4.34±1.89)%,(4.77±2.51)%,(1.80±1.01)%,respectively,with statistically significant differences (F=130.32,P<0.001; F=109.76,P<0.001; F=81.31,P<0.001; F=63.40,P<0.001; F=29.52,P<0.001). Compared with IMRT and VMAT,CIRT showed lower V5,V10,V15,V20,V30 values (all P<0.05). The spinal cord Dmax in the IMRT,VMAT,and CIRT plans were 33.13 (28.02,37.39),35.07 (31.90,38.73),7.13 (5.42,17.84) Gy,respectively. The heart V30 values were 10.19 (0.00,20.31)%,10.47 (0.21,20.85)%,1.88 (0.00,4.77)%,respectively,and the heart V40 values were 3.82 (0.00,7.85)%,2.53 (0.00,4.34)%,0.90 (0.00,2.15)%,respectively,with statistically significant differences (H=68.38,P<0.001; H=10.83,P=0.004; H=7.92,P=0.019). Compared with IMRT and VMAT,CIRT showed lower spinal cord Dmax,heart V30,and heart V40 (all P<0.05). Conclusions For patients with thoracic esophageal cancer undergoing radiotherapy,CIRT has clear dosimetric advantages over IMRT and VMAT in protecting organs at risk. It can significantly reduce the doses to the lungs,heart,and spinal cord while maintaining adequate target dose coverage. IMRT shows better dose homogeneity within the target volume,whereas CIRT demonstrates superior target conformity.

Key words: Esophageal neoplasms, Radiotherapy, Radiotherapy dosage