PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to demonstrate feasibility and analyze dosimetric differences in prone and supine position breast cancer radiotherapy in women with large or pendulous breast. METHODS: Ten post-lumpectomy breast cancer patients underwent supine and prone computed tomography-based treatment plan. On each data set, the whole breast, the ipsilateral lung and the heart were outlined. Multisegment tangential-fields plans were generated for each position. Target coverage, homogeneity, overdosage outside breast and organ at risk sparing were analyzed and compared for supine and prone position. RESULTS: Coverage and dose homogeneity of the PTV measured by D 90 and V(95)% were similar for both plans although breast maximum dose was higher in the supine plan (p = 0.017). Prone position reduced the percentage of ipsilateral lung receiving 20 Gy (V(20Gy)) from 26.5 to 2.9 % (p = 0.007), medium lung dose, as well as the percentage of the heart receiving 35 Gy heart (V(35Gy)) from 3.4 to 1.2 % (p = 0.038). Overdosage of areas outside breast PTV was also consistently reduced with prone position (p = 0.012). In addition, average number of segments and monitor units needed was reduced in prone position. CONCLUSIONS: Prone position in large breast women appears to favor normal tissue sparing in breast radiotherapy as compared to supine position, without diminishing the target coverage.
PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to demonstrate feasibility and analyze dosimetric differences in prone and supine position breast cancer radiotherapy in women with large or pendulous breast. METHODS: Ten post-lumpectomy breast cancerpatients underwent supine and prone computed tomography-based treatment plan. On each data set, the whole breast, the ipsilateral lung and the heart were outlined. Multisegment tangential-fields plans were generated for each position. Target coverage, homogeneity, overdosage outside breast and organ at risk sparing were analyzed and compared for supine and prone position. RESULTS: Coverage and dose homogeneity of the PTV measured by D 90 and V(95)% were similar for both plans although breast maximum dose was higher in the supine plan (p = 0.017). Prone position reduced the percentage of ipsilateral lung receiving 20 Gy (V(20Gy)) from 26.5 to 2.9 % (p = 0.007), medium lung dose, as well as the percentage of the heart receiving 35 Gy heart (V(35Gy)) from 3.4 to 1.2 % (p = 0.038). Overdosage of areas outside breast PTV was also consistently reduced with prone position (p = 0.012). In addition, average number of segments and monitor units needed was reduced in prone position. CONCLUSIONS: Prone position in large breast women appears to favor normal tissue sparing in breast radiotherapy as compared to supine position, without diminishing the target coverage.
Authors: Silvia C Formenti; Minh Tam Truong; Judith D Goldberg; Vandana Mukhi; Barry Rosenstein; Daniel Roses; Richard Shapiro; Amber Guth; J Keith Dewyngaert Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2004-10-01 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Y Belkacémi; J Gligorov; M Ozsahin; H Marsiglia; B De Lafontan; H Laharie-Mineur; L Aimard; E-C Antoine; B Cutuli; M Namer; D Azria Journal: Ann Oncol Date: 2008-03-15 Impact factor: 32.976
Authors: Mary C Pinder; Zhigang Duan; James S Goodwin; Gabriel N Hortobagyi; Sharon H Giordano Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2007-07-30 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: U Veronesi; R Saccozzi; M Del Vecchio; A Banfi; C Clemente; M De Lena; G Gallus; M Greco; A Luini; E Marubini; G Muscolino; F Rilke; B Salvadori; A Zecchini; R Zucali Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 1981-07-02 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: J Keith DeWyngaert; Gabor Jozsef; James Mitchell; Barry Rosenstein; Silvia C Formenti Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2007-07-15 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: S Darby; P McGale; C Correa; C Taylor; R Arriagada; M Clarke; D Cutter; C Davies; M Ewertz; J Godwin; R Gray; L Pierce; T Whelan; Y Wang; R Peto Journal: Lancet Date: 2011-10-19 Impact factor: 79.321