PURPOSE: To study breast radiotherapy in the prone vs. supine positions through dosimetry and clinical implementation. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Conformal radiotherapy plans in 61 patients requiring only breast irradiation were developed for both the prone and supine positions. After evaluation of the of the first 20 plan pairs, the patients were irradiated in the prone or supine position in a randomized fashion. These cases were analyzed for repositioning accuracy and skin reactions related to treatment position and patient characteristics. RESULTS: The planning target volume covered with 47.5-53.5 Gy in the prone vs. the supine position was 85.1% +/- 4.2% vs. 89.2 +/- 2.2%, respectively (p < 0.0001). Radiation exposure of the ipsilateral lung, expressed in terms of the mean lung dose and the V(20Gy), was dramatically lower in the prone vs. supine position (p < 0.0001), but the doses to the heart did not differ. There was no difference in the need to correct positioning during radiotherapy, but the extent of displacement was significantly higher in the prone vs. supine position (p = 0.021). The repositioning accuracy in the prone position exhibited an improvement over time and did not depend on any patient-related parameters. Significantly more radiodermatitis of Grade 1-2 developed following prone vs. supine irradiation (p = 0.025). CONCLUSIONS:Conformal breast radiotherapy is feasible in the prone position. Its primary advantage is the substantially lower radiation dose to the ipsilateral lung. The higher dose inhomogeneity and increased rate of Grade 1-2 skin toxicity, however, may be of concern.
RCT Entities:
PURPOSE: To study breast radiotherapy in the prone vs. supine positions through dosimetry and clinical implementation. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Conformal radiotherapy plans in 61 patients requiring only breast irradiation were developed for both the prone and supine positions. After evaluation of the of the first 20 plan pairs, the patients were irradiated in the prone or supine position in a randomized fashion. These cases were analyzed for repositioning accuracy and skin reactions related to treatment position and patient characteristics. RESULTS: The planning target volume covered with 47.5-53.5 Gy in the prone vs. the supine position was 85.1% +/- 4.2% vs. 89.2 +/- 2.2%, respectively (p < 0.0001). Radiation exposure of the ipsilateral lung, expressed in terms of the mean lung dose and the V(20Gy), was dramatically lower in the prone vs. supine position (p < 0.0001), but the doses to the heart did not differ. There was no difference in the need to correct positioning during radiotherapy, but the extent of displacement was significantly higher in the prone vs. supine position (p = 0.021). The repositioning accuracy in the prone position exhibited an improvement over time and did not depend on any patient-related parameters. Significantly more radiodermatitis of Grade 1-2 developed following prone vs. supine irradiation (p = 0.025). CONCLUSIONS: Conformal breast radiotherapy is feasible in the prone position. Its primary advantage is the substantially lower radiation dose to the ipsilateral lung. The higher dose inhomogeneity and increased rate of Grade 1-2 skin toxicity, however, may be of concern.
Authors: Thomas Mulliez; Akos Gulyban; Tom Vercauteren; Annick van Greveling; Bruno Speleers; Wilfried De Neve; Liv Veldeman Journal: Strahlenther Onkol Date: 2016-02-10 Impact factor: 3.621
Authors: John Ng; Igor Shuryak; Yanguang Xu; K S Clifford Chao; David J Brenner; Ryan J Burri Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2012-01-13 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Csaba Polgár; Zsuzsanna Kahán; Olivera Ivanov; Martin Chorváth; Andrea Ligačová; András Csejtei; Gabriella Gábor; László Landherr; László Mangel; Árpád Mayer; János Fodor Journal: Pathol Oncol Res Date: 2022-06-23 Impact factor: 2.874
Authors: Thomas Mulliez; Bruno Speleers; Indira Madani; Werner De Gersem; Liv Veldeman; Wilfried De Neve Journal: Radiat Oncol Date: 2013-06-24 Impact factor: 3.481