PURPOSE: To compare dose distribution and normal tissue sparing in partial-breast treatment using three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3D-CRT) vs. intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT). METHODS AND MATERIALS: Sixty-three patients with Tis-1N0M0 breast cancer were treated on a Phase II prospective accelerated partial-breast IMRT protocol at two facilities between April 2004 and January 2006. Fifty-six patients had data sets sufficient to adequately contour all structures. These cases were subsequently replanned with 3D-CRT techniques using the same contours, to compare the dose distribution patterns of 3D-CRT vs. IMRT. RESULTS: The average planning target volume (PTV) to ipsilateral breast (IB) ratio was 24% (range, 7-58%). The average volume of IB receiving 25%, 50%, 75%, and 100% of the prescribed dose was 4.0%, 5.0%, 5.5%, and 10.5% less with IMRT than with 3D (p < 0.01). The dose reduction to normal breast was further improved in the subset of patients whose PTV to IB ratio was >25%, and in patients with contoured breast volume <750 cm(3). No difference was detected in delivery to the lumpectomy cavity or clinical target volume. The PTV volume receiving 95% of the dose was higher in the 3D conformal plans (p < 0.01), but no significant difference was observed in the PTV volume receiving 90% (p = 0.17). The irradiated heart and lung volumes were small with both techniques but also favored IMRT. CONCLUSIONS: In T1N0 patients treated with external beam partial-breast radiotherapy, IMRT improves normal tissue sparing in the ipsilateral breast compared with 3DRT, without compromising dose delivery to the lumpectomy cavity and clinical target volume.
PURPOSE: To compare dose distribution and normal tissue sparing in partial-breast treatment using three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3D-CRT) vs. intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT). METHODS AND MATERIALS: Sixty-three patients with Tis-1N0M0 breast cancer were treated on a Phase II prospective accelerated partial-breast IMRT protocol at two facilities between April 2004 and January 2006. Fifty-six patients had data sets sufficient to adequately contour all structures. These cases were subsequently replanned with 3D-CRT techniques using the same contours, to compare the dose distribution patterns of 3D-CRT vs. IMRT. RESULTS: The average planning target volume (PTV) to ipsilateral breast (IB) ratio was 24% (range, 7-58%). The average volume of IB receiving 25%, 50%, 75%, and 100% of the prescribed dose was 4.0%, 5.0%, 5.5%, and 10.5% less with IMRT than with 3D (p < 0.01). The dose reduction to normal breast was further improved in the subset of patients whose PTV to IB ratio was >25%, and in patients with contoured breast volume <750 cm(3). No difference was detected in delivery to the lumpectomy cavity or clinical target volume. The PTV volume receiving 95% of the dose was higher in the 3D conformal plans (p < 0.01), but no significant difference was observed in the PTV volume receiving 90% (p = 0.17). The irradiated heart and lung volumes were small with both techniques but also favored IMRT. CONCLUSIONS: In T1N0 patients treated with external beam partial-breast radiotherapy, IMRT improves normal tissue sparing in the ipsilateral breast compared with 3DRT, without compromising dose delivery to the lumpectomy cavity and clinical target volume.
Authors: Claire M B Holloway; Alexandra Easson; Jaime Escallon; Wey Liang Leong; May Lynn Quan; Michael Reedjik; Frances C Wright; David R McCready Journal: Can J Surg Date: 2010-08 Impact factor: 2.089
Authors: Xiaochun Wang; Richard A Amos; Xiaodong Zhang; Phillip J Taddei; Wendy A Woodward; Karen E Hoffman; Tse Kuan Yu; Welela Tereffe; Julia Oh; George H Perkins; Mohammad Salehpour; Sean X Zhang; Tzou Liang Sun; Michael Gillin; Thomas A Buchholz; Eric A Strom Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2010-08-12 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Reshma Jagsi; Merav A Ben-David; Jean M Moran; Robin B Marsh; Kent A Griffith; James A Hayman; Lori J Pierce Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2010-01-01 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Rachel Y Lei; Charles E Leonard; Kathryn T Howell; Phyllis L Henkenberns; Timothy K Johnson; Tracy L Hobart; Shannon P Fryman; Jane M Kercher; Jodi L Widner; Terese Kaske; Dennis L Carter Journal: Breast Cancer Res Treat Date: 2013-07-04 Impact factor: 4.872
Authors: X Wang; X Zhang; X Li; R A Amos; S F Shaitelman; K Hoffman; R Howell; M Salehpour; S X Zhang; T L Sun; B Smith; W Tereffe; G H Perkins; T A Buchholz; E A Strom; W A Woodward Journal: Br J Radiol Date: 2013-05-31 Impact factor: 3.039
Authors: Rachel Y Lei; Charles E Leonard; Kathryn T Howell; Phyllis L Henkenberns; Timothy K Johnson; Tracy L Hobart; Jane M Kercher; Jodi L Widner; Terese Kaske; Lora D Barke; Dennis L Carter Journal: Front Oncol Date: 2014-06-19 Impact factor: 6.244