Àá½Ã¸¸ ±â´Ù·Á ÁÖ¼¼¿ä. ·ÎµùÁßÀÔ´Ï´Ù.

´ëµ¿¸Æ¸²ÇÁÀý Á¾¾ç¿¡ ´ëÇÑ ¼¼±âÁ¶Àý¹æ»ç¼±Ä¡·á, ¾ç¼ºÀÚÄ¡·á, ¾ç¼ºÀÚȸÀüÄ¡·áÀÇ ¼±·® ºñ±³Æò°¡

¹æ»ç¼±±â¼ú°úÇÐ 2014³â 37±Ç 4È£ p.331 ~ 339
±èÁ¤ÈÆ,
¼Ò¼Ó »ó¼¼Á¤º¸
±èÁ¤ÈÆ ( Kim Jung-Hoon ) - °Ç¾ç´ëÇб³º´¿ø ¹æ»ç¼±Á¾¾çÇаú

Abstract

ÇöÀç »ó¿ëÈ­µÇ¾î ÀÖ´Â ¾ç¼ºÀÚÄ¡·áÀÇ Ä¡·á°èȹÀåºñ¸¦ ÀÌ¿ëÇÏ¿© ¹æ»ç¼±È¸ÀüÁ¶»ç¿Í °°Àº Ä¡·á°èȹÀ» ¾ç¼ºÀÚÄ¡·á¿¡ »ç¿ëÇÏ¿© ´ëµ¿¸Æ ÁÖÀ§ ¸²ÇÁÀý Á¾¾ç¿¡ ´ëÇØ ¾ç¼ºÀÚȸÀüÄ¡·á¿Í ¾ç¼ºÀÚÄ¡·á, ¼¼±âÁ¶Àý¹æ»ç¼±Ä¡·á¸¦ ÀÌ¿ëÇÏ¿© ¼±·® Æò°¡¸¦ ÇÏ¿´´Ù. ´ëµ¿¸ÆÁÖÀ§ ¸²ÇÁÀý Á¾¾ç ȯÀÚ 9¸íÀ» ´ë»óÀ¸·Î ¾ç¼ºÀÚȸÀüÄ¡·á, ¾ç¼ºÀÚÄ¡·á, ¼¼±âÁ¶Àý¹æ»ç¼±Ä¡·áÀÇ ¹æ»ç¼±Ä¡·á°èȹÀ» ¼¼¿ö °¢°¢ÀÇ ¼±·® üÀû È÷½ºÅä±×·¥À» ÀÌ¿ëÇÏ¿© ¼±·® Æò°¡¸¦ ÇÏ¿´´Ù. ¾ç¼ºÀÚȸÀüÄ¡·áÀÇ Ä¡·á°èȹ¹æ¹ýÀ¸·Î´Â 250~120±îÁö 5µµ °£°ÝÀ¸·Î 48°³ÀÇ ºöÀ» »ç¿ëÇÏ¿´À¸¸ç, ¾ç¼ºÀÚÄ¡·á¿Í ¼¼±âÁ¶Àý¹æ»ç¼±Ä¡·á´Â °¢°¢ 2~3, 4~5°³ÀÇ ºöÀ» »ç¿ëÇÏ¿´´Ù. ¸ðµç ¹æ»ç¼± Ä¡·á°èȹ ½Ã½ºÅÛÀº Eclipse planning system(Varian Medical system, Inc., Palo Alto, CA, USA)À» »ç¿ëÇÏ¿´À¸¸ç, ¾ç¼ºÀÚȸÀüÄ¡·á´Â ¾ÆÁ÷ °³¹ßÀÌ ¾ÈµÈ Ä¡·áÀåÄ¡À̹ǷΠġ·á°èȹ¹æ¹ý¿¡¼­ ±â°èÀû, ¹°¸®ÀûÀÎ ¿ä¼Ò¸¦ ¾ç¼ºÀÚÄ¡·á°èȹ°ú µ¿ÀÏÇÏ°Ô ½ÃÇàÇÏ¿´´Ù. ¼±·®ºÐ¼®¹æ¹ýÀ¸·Î´Â Á¤»óÀå±â(°£, ½ÅÀå, ¼ÒÀå, À§, ½ÊÀÌÁöÀå)¿Í Á¾¾çÀÇ ¼±·® üÀû È÷½ºÅä±×·¥(dose-volume histogram: DVH)À» ÀÌ¿ëÇÏ¿© »ý¹°ÇÐÀû ÀÎÀÚÀÎ normal tissue complication probabilities(NTCP), organ equivalent dose(OED)¿Í mean dose¸¦ °¢°¢ÀÇ Ä¡·á°èȹ¹æ¹ýÀ» ºñ±³ ºÐ¼® Æò°¡ÇÏ¿´´Ù. ±× °á°ú ¾ç¼ºÀÚȸÀüÄ¡·á°¡ º¹ºÎ¿¡ À§Ä¡ÇÑ small bowel, duodenum, stomachÀÇ º¼·ý 90%°¡ ¹Þ´Â ¼±·®¿¡¼­ÀÇ °á°ú´Â ´Ù¸¥ Ä¡·á°èȹ¿¡ ºñÇØ ³ôÀº °á°ú¸¦ ³ªÅ¸³»°í ÀÖ´Ù. NTCPÀÇ °á°ú¿¡¼­ ¾ç¼ºÀÚȸÀüÄ¡·á°¡ liver¸¦ Á¦¿ÜÇÑ ³ª¸ÓÁö Àå±â¿¡¼­ °¡Àå ³·Àº °á°ú¸¦ º¸¿©ÁÖ°í ÀÖ´Ù. ÇÏÁö¸¸ º¹ºÎ¿¡ À§Ä¡ÇÑ Á¤»óÀå±â¿¡ ¹Þ´Â ¼±·®ÀÌ ´Ù¸¥ Ä¡·á°èȹ¿¡ ºñÇØ ³ô¾Æ Ä¡·á°èȹ ½Ã ÁÖÀ§°¡ ¿äÇϸç, ¹°¸®Àû, ±â°èÀûÀÎ ¿ä¼Ò´Â ¾ç¼ºÀÚÄ¡·á¿Í µ¿ÀÏÇÏ´Ù´Â ÀüÁ¦Á¶°ÇÀ¸·Î ¾ç¼ºÀÚȸÀüÄ¡·á¿Í À¯»çÇÑ Àåºñ°¡ Á¦ÀÛµÇ¾î »ó¿ëÈ­ µÇ¾úÀ» ¶§¿¡ º» ¿¬±¸ÀÇ °á°ú¿Í´Â ´Ù¸¦ °Å¶ó »ç·áµÈ´Ù. Çö½ÇÀûÀ¸·Î ¾ÆÁ÷ ºÒ°¡´ÉÇÑ Ä¡·á¹æ¹ýÀÌÁö¸¸ ¾ÕÀ¸·Î Ãß°¡ÀûÀÎ ¾ç¼ºÀÚȸÀüÄ¡·áÀÇ ¿¬±¸¿Í ±â¼ú°³¹ßÀÌ µÇ¾î »ó¿ëÈ­°¡ µÇ¸é ±âÁ¸ÀÇ Æ¯¼ö¹æ»ç¼±Ä¡·áÀÎ ¼¼±âÁ¶Àý¹æ»ç¼±Ä¡·á, ¾ç¼ºÀÚÄ¡·á, ¼¼±âÁ¶ÀýȸÀüÄ¡·áº¸´Ù È¿°úÀûÀÌ°í ¾ÈÀüÇÑ Ä¡·á¹æ¹ýÀÌ µÉ °Å¶ó°í »ç·áµÈ´Ù.

o test feasibility of proton arc therapy (PAT) in the treatment of para-aortic lymph node tumor and
compare its dosimetric properties with advanced radiotherapy techniques such as intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) and conventional 3D conformal proton beam therapy (PBT). The treatment plans for para-aortic lymph node tumor were planned for 9 patients treated at our institution using IMRT, PBT, and PAT. Feasibility test and dosimetric evaluation were based on comparisons of dose volume histograms (DVHs) which reveal mean dose, D30%, D60%, D90%, V30%, V60%, V90%, organ equivalent doses (OEDs), normal tissue complication probability (NTCP), homogeneity index (HI) and conformity index (CI). The average doses delivered by PAT to the liver, kidney, small bowel, duodenum, stomach were 7.6%, 3%, 17.3%, 26.7%, and 14.4%, of the prescription dose (PD), respectively, which is higher than the doses delivered by IMRT (0.4%, 7.2%, 14.2%, 15.9%, and 12.8%, respectively) and PBT (4.9%, 0.5%, 14.12%, 16.1% 9.9%, respectively). The average homogeneity index and conformity index of tumor using PAT were 12.1 and 1.21, respectively which were much better than IMRT (21.5 and 1.47, respectively) and comparable to PBT (13.1 and 1.23, respectively). The result shows that both NTCP and OED of PAT are generally lower than IMRT and PBT. This study demonstrates that PAT is better in target conformity and homogeneity than IMRT and PBT but worse than IMRT and PBT for most of dosimetric factor which indicate that PAT is not recommended
for the treatment of para-aortic lymph node tumor.

Ű¿öµå

¾ç¼ºÀÚÄ¡·á; ¾ç¼ºÀÚȸÀüÄ¡·á; ¼¼±âÁ¶Àý¹æ»ç¼±Ä¡·á
intensity modulated radiation; proton beam therapy; proton arc therapy

¿ø¹® ¹× ¸µÅ©¾Æ¿ô Á¤º¸

 

µîÀçÀú³Î Á¤º¸

KCI