AIM: Our aim was to improve dose distribution to the left breast and to determine the dose received by the ipsilateral lung, heart, contralateral lung and contralateral breast during primary left-sided breast irradiation by using intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) techniques compared to conventional tangential techniques (CTT). At the same time, different beams of IMRT plans were compared to each other in respect to CI, HI and organs at risk (OAR) dose. BACKGROUND: Conventional early breast cancer treatment consists of lumpectomy followed by whole breast radiation therapy. CTT is a traditional method used for whole breast radiotherapy and includes standard wedged tangents (two opposed wedged tangential photon beams). The IMRT technique has been widely used for many treatment sites, allowing both improved sparing of normal tissues and more conformal dose distributions. IMRT is a new technique for whole breast radiotherapy. IMRT is used to improve conformity and homogeneity and used to reduce OAR doses. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Thirty patients with left-sided breast carcinoma were treated between 2005 and 2008 using 6, 18 or mixed 6/18 MV photons for primary breast irradiation following breast conserving surgery (BCS). The clinical target volume [CTV] was contoured as a target volume and the contralateral breast, ipsilateral lung, contralateral lung and heart tissues as organs at risk (OAR). IMRT with seven beams (IMRT7), nine beams (IMRT9) and 11 beams (IMRT11) plans were developed and compared with CTT and among each other. The conformity index (CI), homogeneity index (HI), and doses to OAR were compared to each other. RESULTS: ALL OF IMRT PLANS SIGNIFICANTLY IMPROVED CI (CTT: 0.76; IMRT7: 0.84; IMRT9: 0.84; IMRT11: 0.85), HI (CTT: 1.16; IMRT7: 1.12; IMRT9: 1.11; IMRT11: 1.11), volume of the ipsilateral lung receiving more than 20 Gy (>V20 Gy) (CTT: 14.6; IMRT7: 9.08; IMRT9: 8.10; IMRT11: 8.60), and volume of the heart receiving more than 30 Gy (>V30 Gy) (CTT: 6.7; IMRT7: 4.04; IMRT9: 2.80; IMRT11: 2.98) compared to CTT. All IMRT plans were found to significantly decrease >V20 Gy and >V30 Gy volumes compared to conformal plans. But IMRT plans increased the volume of OAR receiving low dose radiotherapy: volume of contralateral lung receiving 5 and 10 Gy (CTT: 0.0-0.0; IMRT7: 19.0-0.7; IMRT9: 17.2-0.66; IMRT11: 18.7-0.58, respectively) and volume of contralateral breast receiving 10 Gy (CTT: 0.03; IMRT7: 0.38; IMRT9: 0.60; IMRT11: 0.68). The differences among IMRT plans with increased number of beams were not statistically significant. CONCLUSION: IMRT significantly improved conformity and homogeneity index for plans. Heart and lung volumes receiving high doses were decreased, but OAR receiving low doses was increased.
AIM: Our aim was to improve dose distribution to the left breast and to determine the dose received by the ipsilateral lung, heart, contralateral lung and contralateral breast during primary left-sided breast irradiation by using intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) techniques compared to conventional tangential techniques (CTT). At the same time, different beams of IMRT plans were compared to each other in respect to CI, HI and organs at risk (OAR) dose. BACKGROUND: Conventional early breast cancer treatment consists of lumpectomy followed by whole breast radiation therapy. CTT is a traditional method used for whole breast radiotherapy and includes standard wedged tangents (two opposed wedged tangential photon beams). The IMRT technique has been widely used for many treatment sites, allowing both improved sparing of normal tissues and more conformal dose distributions. IMRT is a new technique for whole breast radiotherapy. IMRT is used to improve conformity and homogeneity and used to reduce OAR doses. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Thirty patients with left-sided breast carcinoma were treated between 2005 and 2008 using 6, 18 or mixed 6/18 MV photons for primary breast irradiation following breast conserving surgery (BCS). The clinical target volume [CTV] was contoured as a target volume and the contralateral breast, ipsilateral lung, contralateral lung and heart tissues as organs at risk (OAR). IMRT with seven beams (IMRT7), nine beams (IMRT9) and 11 beams (IMRT11) plans were developed and compared with CTT and among each other. The conformity index (CI), homogeneity index (HI), and doses to OAR were compared to each other. RESULTS: ALL OF IMRT PLANS SIGNIFICANTLY IMPROVED CI (CTT: 0.76; IMRT7: 0.84; IMRT9: 0.84; IMRT11: 0.85), HI (CTT: 1.16; IMRT7: 1.12; IMRT9: 1.11; IMRT11: 1.11), volume of the ipsilateral lung receiving more than 20 Gy (>V20 Gy) (CTT: 14.6; IMRT7: 9.08; IMRT9: 8.10; IMRT11: 8.60), and volume of the heart receiving more than 30 Gy (>V30 Gy) (CTT: 6.7; IMRT7: 4.04; IMRT9: 2.80; IMRT11: 2.98) compared to CTT. All IMRT plans were found to significantly decrease >V20 Gy and >V30 Gy volumes compared to conformal plans. But IMRT plans increased the volume of OAR receiving low dose radiotherapy: volume of contralateral lung receiving 5 and 10 Gy (CTT: 0.0-0.0; IMRT7: 19.0-0.7; IMRT9: 17.2-0.66; IMRT11: 18.7-0.58, respectively) and volume of contralateral breast receiving 10 Gy (CTT: 0.03; IMRT7: 0.38; IMRT9: 0.60; IMRT11: 0.68). The differences among IMRT plans with increased number of beams were not statistically significant. CONCLUSION: IMRT significantly improved conformity and homogeneity index for plans. Heart and lung volumes receiving high doses were decreased, but OAR receiving low doses was increased.
Entities:
Keywords:
Breast cancer; Conventional techniques comparison; IMRT; Left breast; Whole breast radiotherapy
Authors: A Fogliata; G Nicolini; M Alber; M Asell; B Dobler; M El-Haddad; B Hårdemark; U Jelen; A Kania; M Larsson; F Lohr; T Munger; E Negri; C Rodrigues; L Cozzi Journal: Radiother Oncol Date: 2005-09 Impact factor: 6.280
Authors: Andrew Fong; Regina Bromley; Mardi Beat; Din Vien; Jude Dineley; Graeme Morgan Journal: J Med Imaging Radiat Oncol Date: 2009-02 Impact factor: 1.735
Authors: Tony C S Woo; Jean-Philippe Pignol; Eileen Rakovitch; Toni Vu; Deanna Hicks; Peter O'Brien; Kathleen Pritchard Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2006-02-02 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: L L Kestin; M B Sharpe; R C Frazier; F A Vicini; D Yan; R C Matter; A A Martinez; J W Wong Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2000-12-01 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Candace R Correa; Indra J Das; Harold I Litt; Victor Ferrari; Wei-Ting Hwang; Lawrence J Solin; Eleanor E Harris Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2008-03-12 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Manuel Algara; Meritxell Arenas; Dolores De Las Peñas Eloisa Bayo; Julia Muñoz; José Antonio Carceller; Juan Salinas; Ferran Moreno; Francisco Martínez; Ezequiel González; Angel Montero Journal: Rep Pract Oncol Radiother Date: 2012-04-17