| Literature DB >> 24596517 |
Mehmet Hakan Dogan1, Seyit Burhanedtin Zincircioglu1, Mahmut Aydinol2.
Abstract
In breast cancer radiotherapy, the internal mammary lymphatic chain is treated in the target volume in a group of patients with high risk criteria. There are a number of different techniques in breast radiotherapy because of the variability of the anatomic region, structures and risk criteria in the irradiation field. When irradiating the target volume we also consider homogeneity of dose distribution and minimizing the dose to critical structures such as the heart and lung. In this study, we have evaluated the dose distribution of different radiotherapy techniques in twelve patients with left breast cancer who had breast conserving surgery or mastectomy. A two-dimensional computerized planning system (2-DCPS) was used for each patient to compare wide-field, oblique photon-electron, perpendicular photon-electron and oblique-electron techniques in terms of dose homogeneities in the target volume, the doses received by the heart and lung, and the coverage of the internal mammary chain. Critical structures were irradiated with acceptable dose percentages besides the internal mammary chain with both wide-field, photon-electron and oblique-electron techniques. The wide-field technique was easy to perform and exposed the heart to a smaller radiation dose than photon-electron techniques. The oblique electron techniques provide a minimal radiation dose to critical structures. In oblique electron techniques, if the internal mammary chain was not covered in the target volume, the heart dose was minimized. In conclusion, we suggest using oblique-electron techniques in breast irradiation where the internal mammary is in the target volume.Entities:
Keywords: breast cancer; computer-assisted; radiotherapy planning and techniques
Year: 2013 PMID: 24596517 PMCID: PMC3934063 DOI: 10.5114/wo.2013.35277
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Contemp Oncol (Pozn) ISSN: 1428-2526
Fig. 1Treatment areas on the patient's surface. In all three techniques, SSD technique was used so that the localization of the reference point remained the same in all set-ups. A) In WA technique, the edge of the internal tangential areas was opened more broadly including MI. B) In PE technique, the internal and external tangential areas of the breast were treated. The edges of the oblique or vertical electron areas opened for MI were combined with the edge of the internal tangential area. C) In OE technique where MI is included in the target volume, the lateral point region was taken in parallel with the oblique electron area and the external tangential area. D) In OE technique where MI is not included in the target area, the lateral point region was taken in parallel with the oblique electron area and the external tangential area
Fig. 2Dose distribution in the WAT in a spared breast. The left breast, left lung, heart and MI contours are indicated. Different equivalent dose curves are shown
Fig. 3Dose distribution in the OPET in a spared breast. The left breast, left lung, heart and MI contours are indicated. Different equivalent dose curves are shown
Fig. 5Dose distribution in the OE(mi+) technique in a spared breast. The left breast, left lung, heart and MI contours are indicated. Different equivalent dose curves are shown
When 45 Gy PTV is targeted, total dose percentage of the left breast and irradiated volume percentages for different reference doses
| Technique | Volume percentages for reference doses | Total dose; | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| ||||
| 45 Gy | 50 Gy | 53.5 Gy | ||
| VPET | 95.5 ±2.0 | 55.4 ±1.5 | 12.2 ±0.3 | 101; NS |
| WAT | 94.7 ±1.3 | 55.9 ±0.8 | 6.3 ±0.1 | 101.6; NS |
| OPET | 96.1 ±1.9 | 55.7 ±1.3 | 11.5 ±0.2 | 101.5; NS |
| OE(mi+) | 95.8 ±1.7 | 56.3 ±1.0 | 12.0 ±0.2 | 101.6; NS |
| OE(mi–) | 95.1 ±2.4 | 55.5 ±1.2 | 11.7 ±0.3 | 101.5; NS |
VPET – vertical photon-electron technique; WAT – wide area technique; OPET – oblique photon-electron technique; OE(mi+) – technique where mammaria interna area is included in the irradiated left breast volume; OE(mi–) – technique where mammaria interna area is included in the irradiated left breast volume; SD – standard deviation; NS – not significant.
Data are given as percentage ± standard deviation. No statistically significant difference was found between the groups.
When 45 Gy PTV is targeted, total dose percentage of mammaria interna and irradiated volume percentages for different reference doses
| Technique | Volume percentages for reference doses | Total dose; | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| |||||
| 40 Gy | 45 GY | 50 Gy | 52.5 Gy | ||
| WAT | 98.3 ±2.3 | 92.1 ±2.1 | 50.3 ±1.1 | 25.8 ±0.6 | 100.2; < 0.05 |
| OPET | 80.0 ±2.7 | 34.9 ±1.2 | 2.8 ±0.4 | 0.69 ±0.02 | 85.5; NS |
| VPET | 84.8 ±2.5 | 36.7 ±1.1 | 3.6 ±0.1 | 0.90 ±0.03 | 90.8; NS |
| OE(mi+) | 82.1 ±2.7 | 37.3 ±1.1 | 3.3 ±0.1 | 0.80 ±0.02 | 88.1; NS |
VPET – vertical photon-electron technique; WAT – wide area technique; OPET – oblique photon-electron technique; OE(mi+) – technique where mammaria interna area is included in the irradiated left breast volume; SD – standard deviation; NS – not significant.
Data are given as percentage ± standard deviation. The difference between WA and PE and OE techniques was found to be statistically significant (p < 0.05).
When 45 Gy PTV was targeted, total dose percentage of the left lung and the irradiated volume percentages for different reference doses
| Technique | Volume percentages for reference doses | Total dose; | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| ||||
| 20 Gy | 30 Gy | 40 Gy | ||
| VPET | 12.0 ±4.9 | 11.4 ±4.5 | 10 ±3.9 | 12; NS |
| WAT | 12.5 ±4.3 | 11 ±3.8 | 10 ±3.6 | 14; NS |
| OPET | 19.0 ±3.6 | 18 ±3.5 | 16 ±3.4 | 19.7; < 0.05 |
| OE(mi+) | 6.4 ±3.4 | 6.2 ±3.3 | 5.4 ±2.8 | 6.6; < 0.05 |
| OE(mi–) | 7.1 ±3.6 | 6.8 ±3.5 | 6.0 ±3.1 | 7.3; < 0.05 |
VPET – vertical photon-electron technique; WAT – wide area technique; OPET – oblique photon-electron technique; OE(mi+) – technique where mammaria interna area is included in the irradiated left breast volume; OE(mi–) – technique where mammaria interna area is included in the irradiated left breast volume; SD – standard deviation; NS – not significant.
The data are given as percentage ± standard deviation. A statistically significant difference was found between oblique PE and OE techniques and the other techniques.
When 45 Gy PRV was targeted, total dose percentage of the heart and their radiated volume percentages for differrent reference doses
| Technique | Volume percentages for reference doses | Total dose; | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| ||||
| 20 Gy | 30 Gy | 40 Gy | ||
| VPET | 24.2 ±2.6 | 11.7 ±2.0 | 6.0 ±1.0 | 29.2; < 0.05 |
| WAT | 9.7 ±2.8 | 8.8 ±2.5 | 7.1 ±2.0 | 17.8; < 0.05 |
| OPET | 19.8 ±5.8 | 19.8 ±2.7 | 4.3 ±1.2 | 23.8; < 0.05 |
| OE(mi+) | 7.4 ±2.8 | 7.4 ±1.3 | 1.6 ±0.5 | 8.9; NS |
| OE(mi–) | 6.2 ±2.5 | 6.2 ±1.0 | 1.6 ±0.7 | 7.4; NS |
VPET – vertical photon-electron technique; WAT – wide area technique; OPET – oblique photon-electron technique; OE(mi+) – technique where mammaria interna area is included in the irradiated left breast volume; OE(mi–) – technique where mammaria interna area is included in the irradiated left breast volume; SD – standard deviation; NS – not significant.
The data are given as percentage ± standard deviation. The difference between PE, OE and WA techniques was found to be statistically significant (p < 0.05).