Comparison of organ doses for patients undergoing balloon brachytherapy of the breast with HDR 192Ir or electronic sources using monte carlo simulations in a heterogeneous human phantom.

PURPOSE: Accelerated partial breast irradiation via interstitial balloon brachytherapy is a fast and effective treatment method for certain early stage breast cancers. The radiation can be delivered using a conventional high-dose rate (HDR) 192Ir gamma-emitting source or a novel electronic brachytherapy (eBx) source which uses lower energy x rays that do not penetrate as far within the patient. A previous study [A. Dickler, M. C. Kirk, N. Seif, K. Griem, K. Dowlatshahi, D. Francescatti, and R. A. Abrams, "A dosimetric comparison of MammoSite high-dose-rate brachytherapy and Xoft Axxent electronic brachytherapy," Brachytherapy 6, 164-168 (2007)] showed that the target dose is similar for HDR 192Ir and eBx. This study compares these sources based on the dose received by healthy organs and tissues away from the treatment site.
METHODS: A virtual patient with left breast cancer was represented by a whole-body, tissue-heterogeneous female voxel phantom. Monte Carlo methods were used to calculate the dose to healthy organs in a virtual patient undergoing balloon brachytherapy of the left breast with HDR 192Ir or eBx sources. The dose-volume histograms for a few organs which received large doses were also calculated. Additional simulations were performed with all tissues in the phantom defined as water to study the effect of tissue inhomogeneities.
RESULTS: For both HDR 192Ir and eBx, the largest mean organ doses were received by the ribs, thymus gland, left lung, heart, and sternum which were close to the brachytherapy source in the left breast, eBx yielded mean healthy organ doses that were more than a factor of approximately 1.4 smaller than for HDR 192Ir for all organs considered, except for the three closest ribs. Excluding these ribs, the average and median dose-reduction factors were approximately 28 and approximately 11, respectively. The volume distribution of doses in nearby soft tissue organs that were outside the PTV were also improved with eBx. However, the maximum dose to the closest rib with the eBx source was 5.4 times greater than that of the HDR 192Ir source. The ratio of tissue-to-water maximum rib dose for the eBx source was approximately 5.
CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study indicate that eBx may offer lower toxicity to most healthy tissues, except nearby bone. TG-43 methods have a tendency to underestimate dose to bone, especially the ribs. Clinical studies evaluating the negative health effects caused by irradiating healthy organs are needed so that physicians can better understand when HDR 192Ir or eBx might best benefit a patient.