PURPOSE: Several recent series evaluating external beam accelerated partial breast irradiation (PBI) have reported adverse cosmetic outcomes, possibly related to large volumes of normal tissue receiving near-prescription doses. We hypothesized that delivery of external beam PBI in a single fraction to the preoperative tumor volume would be feasible and result in a decreased dose to the uninvolved breast compared with institutional postoperative PBI historical controls. METHODS AND MATERIALS: A total of 17 patients with unifocal Stage T1 breast cancer were identified. Contrast-enhanced subtraction magnetic resonance images were loaded into an Eclipse treatment planning system and used to define the target volumes. A "virtual plan" was created using four photon beams in a noncoplanar beam arrangement and optimized to deliver 15 Gy to the planning target volume. RESULTS: The median breast volume was 1,713 cm(3) (range: 1,014-2,140), and the median clinical target volume was 44 cm(3) (range: 26-73). In all cases, 100% of the prescription dose covered 95% of the clinical target volume. The median conformity index was 0.86 (range: 0.70-1.12). The median percentage of the ipsilateral breast volume receiving 100% and 50% of the prescribed dose was 3.8% (range: 2.2-6.9) and 13.3% (range: 7.5-20.8) compared with 18% (range: 3-42) and 53% (range: 24-65) in the institutional historical controls treated with postoperative external beam PBI (p = .002). The median maximum skin dose was 9 Gy. The median dose to 1 and 10 cm(3) of skin was 6.7 and 4.9 Gy. The doses to the heart and ipsilateral lung were negligible. CONCLUSION: Preoperative PBI resulted in a substantial reduction in ipsilateral breast tissue dose compared with postoperative PBI. The skin dose appeared reasonable, given the small volumes. A prospective Phase I trial evaluating this technique is ongoing.
PURPOSE: Several recent series evaluating external beam accelerated partial breast irradiation (PBI) have reported adverse cosmetic outcomes, possibly related to large volumes of normal tissue receiving near-prescription doses. We hypothesized that delivery of external beam PBI in a single fraction to the preoperative tumor volume would be feasible and result in a decreased dose to the uninvolved breast compared with institutional postoperative PBI historical controls. METHODS AND MATERIALS: A total of 17 patients with unifocal Stage T1 breast cancer were identified. Contrast-enhanced subtraction magnetic resonance images were loaded into an Eclipse treatment planning system and used to define the target volumes. A "virtual plan" was created using four photon beams in a noncoplanar beam arrangement and optimized to deliver 15 Gy to the planning target volume. RESULTS: The median breast volume was 1,713 cm(3) (range: 1,014-2,140), and the median clinical target volume was 44 cm(3) (range: 26-73). In all cases, 100% of the prescription dose covered 95% of the clinical target volume. The median conformity index was 0.86 (range: 0.70-1.12). The median percentage of the ipsilateral breast volume receiving 100% and 50% of the prescribed dose was 3.8% (range: 2.2-6.9) and 13.3% (range: 7.5-20.8) compared with 18% (range: 3-42) and 53% (range: 24-65) in the institutional historical controls treated with postoperative external beam PBI (p = .002). The median maximum skin dose was 9 Gy. The median dose to 1 and 10 cm(3) of skin was 6.7 and 4.9 Gy. The doses to the heart and ipsilateral lung were negligible. CONCLUSION: Preoperative PBI resulted in a substantial reduction in ipsilateral breast tissue dose compared with postoperative PBI. The skin dose appeared reasonable, given the small volumes. A prospective Phase I trial evaluating this technique is ongoing.
Authors: Cedric X Yu; Xinyu Shao; Jin Zhang; William Regine; Mike Zheng; Ying S Yu; Jianchun Deng; Zhengcheng Duan Journal: Med Phys Date: 2013-05 Impact factor: 4.071
Authors: D Tiberi; P Vavassis; D Nguyen; M C Guilbert; A Simon-Cloutier; P Dubé; M K Gervais; L Sideris; G Leblanc; T Hijal; M P Dufresne; M Yassa Journal: Curr Oncol Date: 2020-06-01 Impact factor: 3.677
Authors: Janet K Horton; Sharareh Siamakpour-Reihani; Chen-Ting Lee; Ying Zhou; Wei Chen; Joseph Geradts; Diane R Fels; Peter Hoang; Kathleen A Ashcraft; Jeff Groth; Hsiu-Ni Kung; Mark W Dewhirst; Jen-Tsan A Chi Journal: Radiat Res Date: 2015-10-21 Impact factor: 2.841
Authors: Mariska D DEN Hartogh; Marielle E P Philippens; Iris E VAN Dam; Catharina E Kleynen; Robbert J H A Tersteeg; Alexis N T J Kotte; Marco VAN Vulpen; Bram VAN Asselen; Desirée H J G VAN DEN Bongard Journal: Oncol Lett Date: 2015-09-14 Impact factor: 2.967
Authors: Mariska D den Hartogh; Marielle E P Philippens; Iris E van Dam; Catharina E Kleynen; Robbert J H A Tersteeg; Ruud M Pijnappel; Alexis N T J Kotte; Helena M Verkooijen; Maurice A A J van den Bosch; Marco van Vulpen; Bram van Asselen; Hjg Desirée van den Bongard Journal: Radiat Oncol Date: 2014-02-26 Impact factor: 3.481