Literature DB >> 17157944

Multileaf field-in-field forward-planned intensity-modulated dose compensation for whole-breast irradiation is associated with reduced contralateral breast dose: a phantom model comparison.

Yerko O Borghero1, Mohammad Salehpour, Marsha D McNeese, Marilyn Stovall, Susan A Smith, Jennifer Johnson, George H Perkins, Eric A Strom, Julia L Oh, Steven M Kirsner, Wendy A Woodward, Tse-Kuan Yu, Thomas A Buchholz.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Static multileaf collimated field-in-field forward-planned intensity-modulated radiation treatment (FiF-IMRT) has been shown to improve dose homogeneity compared to conventional wedged fields. However, a direct comparison of the scattered dose to the contralateral breast resulting from wedged and FiF-IMRT plans remains to be documented.
METHODS: The contralateral scattered breast dose was measured in a custom-designed anthropomorphic breast phantom in which 108 thermoluminescent dosimeters (TLDs) were volumetrically placed every 1-2cm. The target phantom breast was treated to a dose of 50Gy using three dose compensation techniques: No medial wedge and a 30-degree lateral wedge (M0-L30), 15-degree lateral and medial wedges (M15-L15), and FiF-IMRT. TLD measurements were compared using analysis of variance.
RESULTS: For FiF-IMRT, the mean doses to the medial and lateral quadrants of the contralateral breast were 112cGy (range 65-226cGy) and 40cGy (range 18-91 cGy), respectively. The contralateral breast doses with FiF-IMRT were on average 65% and 82% of the doses obtained with the M15-L15 and M0-L30 techniques, respectively (p<0.001). Compared to the M15-L15 technique, the maximum dose reduction obtained with FiF-IMRT was 115cGy (range 13-115cGy).
CONCLUSIONS: The dose to the contralateral breast is significantly reduced with FiF-IMRT compared to wedge-compensated techniques. Although long-term follow-up is needed to establish the clinical relevance of this finding, these results, along with the previously reported improvement in ipsilateral dose homogeneity, support the use of FiF-IMRT if resources permit.

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 17157944     DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2006.10.011

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Radiother Oncol        ISSN: 0167-8140            Impact factor:   6.280


  18 in total

1.  Dosimetric comparison of the field-in-field technique and tangential wedged beams for breast irradiation.

Authors:  Cem Onal; Aydan Sonmez; Gungor Arslan; Ezgi Oymak; Ayse Kotek; Esma Efe; Serhat Sonmez; Yemliha Dolek
Journal:  Jpn J Radiol       Date:  2011-12-21       Impact factor: 2.374

2.  Usefulness of the dual energy field-in-field technique in breast tangential radiotherapy.

Authors:  Hidekazu Tanaka; Yuichi Kajiura; Masashi Kitahara; Katsuya Matsuyama; Masaya Kawaguchi; Takahiro Yamaguchi; Sunaho Okada; Masayuki Kanematsu
Journal:  Radiol Med       Date:  2015-12-11       Impact factor: 3.469

3.  Comparison between intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) and 3D tangential beams technique used in patients with early-stage breast cancer who received breast-conserving therapy.

Authors:  Beata Sas-Korczyńska; Anna Sladowska; Bożena Rozwadowska-Bogusz; Sonia Dyczek; Jan Lesiak; Anna Kokoszka; Stanisław Korzeniowski
Journal:  Rep Pract Oncol Radiother       Date:  2010-08-04

4.  Automatic segmentation of whole breast using atlas approach and deformable image registration.

Authors:  Valerie K Reed; Wendy A Woodward; Lifei Zhang; Eric A Strom; George H Perkins; Welela Tereffe; Julia L Oh; T Kuan Yu; Isabelle Bedrosian; Gary J Whitman; Thomas A Buchholz; Lei Dong
Journal:  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys       Date:  2008-09-17       Impact factor: 7.038

5.  Comparison between the four-field box and field-in-field techniques for conformal radiotherapy of the esophagus using dose-volume histograms and normal tissue complication probabilities.

Authors:  Farzaneh Allaveisi; Amir Nami Moghadam
Journal:  Jpn J Radiol       Date:  2017-04-18       Impact factor: 2.374

6.  Topical hyaluronic acid vs. standard of care for the prevention of radiation dermatitis after adjuvant radiotherapy for breast cancer: single-blind randomized phase III clinical trial.

Authors:  Chelsea Pinnix; George H Perkins; Eric A Strom; Welela Tereffe; Wendy Woodward; Julia L Oh; Lisa Arriaga; Mark F Munsell; Patrick Kelly; Karen E Hoffman; Benjamin D Smith; Thomas A Buchholz; T Kuan Yu
Journal:  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys       Date:  2011-12-14       Impact factor: 7.038

7.  Radiation therapy in early-stage invasive breast cancer.

Authors:  Ray Lin; Prabhakar Tripuraneni
Journal:  Indian J Surg Oncol       Date:  2011-05-06

8.  Automated hybrid volumetric modulated arc therapy (HVMAT) for whole-breast irradiation with simultaneous integrated boost to lumpectomy area : A treatment planning study.

Authors:  Savino Cilla; Carmela Romano; Gabriella Macchia; Mariangela Boccardi; Livia P De Vivo; Vittoria E Morabito; Milly Buwenge; Lidia Strigari; Luca Indovina; Vincenzo Valentini; Francesco Deodato; Alessio G Morganti
Journal:  Strahlenther Onkol       Date:  2021-11-12       Impact factor: 3.621

9.  Dose to the contralateral breast from radiotherapy and risk of second primary breast cancer in the WECARE study.

Authors:  Marilyn Stovall; Susan A Smith; Bryan M Langholz; John D Boice; Roy E Shore; Michael Andersson; Thomas A Buchholz; Marinela Capanu; Leslie Bernstein; Charles F Lynch; Kathleen E Malone; Hoda Anton-Culver; Robert W Haile; Barry S Rosenstein; Anne S Reiner; Duncan C Thomas; Jonine L Bernstein
Journal:  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys       Date:  2008-06-14       Impact factor: 7.038

10.  Review of breast conservation therapy: then and now.

Authors:  Susan Hoover; Elizabeth Bloom; Sunil Patel
Journal:  ISRN Oncol       Date:  2011-09-12
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.