PURPOSE: Recent studies have demonstrated low regional recurrence rates in early-stage breast cancer omitting axillary lymph node dissection (ALND) in patients who have positive nodes in sentinel lymph node dissection (SLND). This finding has triggered an active discussion about the effect of radiotherapy within this approach. The purpose of this study was to analyze the dose distribution in the axilla in standard tangential radiotherapy (SRT) for breast cancer and the effects on normal tissue exposure when anatomic level I-III axillary lymph node areas are included in the tangential radiotherapy field configuration. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We prospectively analyzed the dosimetric treatment plans from 51 consecutive women with early-stage breast cancer undergoing radiotherapy. We compared and analyzed the SRT and the defined radiotherapy (DRT) methods for each patient. The clinical target volume (CTV) of SRT included the breast tissue without specific contouring of lymph node areas, whereas the CTV of DRT included the level I-III lymph node areas. RESULTS: We evaluated the dose given in SRT covering the axillary lymph node areas of level I-III as contoured in DRT. The mean VD95% of the entire level I-III lymph node area in SRT was 50.28% (range, 37.31-63.24%), VD45 Gy was 70.1% (54.8-85.4%), and VD40 Gy was 83.5% (72.3-94.8%). A significant difference was observed between lung dose and heart toxicity in SRT vs. DRT. The V20 Gy and V30 Gy of the right and the left lung in DRT were significantly higher in DRT than in SRT (p<0.001). The mean heart dose in SRT was significantly lower (3.93 vs. 4.72 Gy, p=0.005). CONCLUSION: We demonstrated a relevant dose exposure of the axilla in SRT that should substantially reduce local recurrences. Furthermore, we demonstrated a significant increase in lung and heart exposure when including the axillary lymph nodes regions in the tangential radiotherapy field set-up.
PURPOSE: Recent studies have demonstrated low regional recurrence rates in early-stage breast cancer omitting axillary lymph node dissection (ALND) in patients who have positive nodes in sentinel lymph node dissection (SLND). This finding has triggered an active discussion about the effect of radiotherapy within this approach. The purpose of this study was to analyze the dose distribution in the axilla in standard tangential radiotherapy (SRT) for breast cancer and the effects on normal tissue exposure when anatomic level I-III axillary lymph node areas are included in the tangential radiotherapy field configuration. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We prospectively analyzed the dosimetric treatment plans from 51 consecutive women with early-stage breast cancer undergoing radiotherapy. We compared and analyzed the SRT and the defined radiotherapy (DRT) methods for each patient. The clinical target volume (CTV) of SRT included the breast tissue without specific contouring of lymph node areas, whereas the CTV of DRT included the level I-III lymph node areas. RESULTS: We evaluated the dose given in SRT covering the axillary lymph node areas of level I-III as contoured in DRT. The mean VD95% of the entire level I-III lymph node area in SRT was 50.28% (range, 37.31-63.24%), VD45 Gy was 70.1% (54.8-85.4%), and VD40 Gy was 83.5% (72.3-94.8%). A significant difference was observed between lung dose and heart toxicity in SRT vs. DRT. The V20 Gy and V30 Gy of the right and the left lung in DRT were significantly higher in DRT than in SRT (p<0.001). The mean heart dose in SRT was significantly lower (3.93 vs. 4.72 Gy, p=0.005). CONCLUSION: We demonstrated a relevant dose exposure of the axilla in SRT that should substantially reduce local recurrences. Furthermore, we demonstrated a significant increase in lung and heart exposure when including the axillary lymph nodes regions in the tangential radiotherapy field set-up.
Authors: R Orecchia; A Huscher; M C Leonardi; R Gennari; V Galimberti; C Garibaldi; E Rondi; L C Bianchi; S Zurrida; S Franzetti Journal: Br J Radiol Date: 2005-01 Impact factor: 3.039
Authors: Viviana Galimberti; Bernard F Cole; Stefano Zurrida; Giuseppe Viale; Alberto Luini; Paolo Veronesi; Paola Baratella; Camelia Chifu; Manuela Sargenti; Mattia Intra; Oreste Gentilini; Mauro G Mastropasqua; Giovanni Mazzarol; Samuele Massarut; Jean-Rémi Garbay; Janez Zgajnar; Hanne Galatius; Angelo Recalcati; David Littlejohn; Monika Bamert; Marco Colleoni; Karen N Price; Meredith M Regan; Aron Goldhirsch; Alan S Coates; Richard D Gelber; Umberto Veronesi Journal: Lancet Oncol Date: 2013-03-11 Impact factor: 41.316
Authors: Mette H Nielsen; Martin Berg; Anders N Pedersen; Karen Andersen; Vladimir Glavicic; Erik H Jakobsen; Ingelise Jensen; Mirjana Josipovic; Ebbe L Lorenzen; Hanne M Nielsen; Lars Stenbygaard; Mette S Thomsen; Susanne Vallentin; Sune Zimmermann; Birgitte V Offersen Journal: Acta Oncol Date: 2013-02-19 Impact factor: 4.089
Authors: John A Olson; Linda M McCall; Peter Beitsch; Pat W Whitworth; Douglas S Reintgen; Peter W Blumencranz; A Marilyn Leitch; Sukamal Saha; Kelly K Hunt; Armando E Giuliano Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2008-07-20 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: D Larson; M Weinstein; I Goldberg; B Silver; A Recht; B Cady; W Silen; J R Harris Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 1986-09 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Joanne S Haviland; J Roger Owen; John A Dewar; Rajiv K Agrawal; Jane Barrett; Peter J Barrett-Lee; H Jane Dobbs; Penelope Hopwood; Pat A Lawton; Brian J Magee; Judith Mills; Sandra Simmons; Mark A Sydenham; Karen Venables; Judith M Bliss; John R Yarnold Journal: Lancet Oncol Date: 2013-09-19 Impact factor: 41.316
Authors: Nils Temme; Robert Michael Hermann; Tanja Hinsche; Jan-Niklas Becker; Mathias Sonnhoff; Alexander Kaltenborn; Ulrich Martin Carl; Hans Christiansen; Lilli Geworski; Mirko Nitsche Journal: J Pers Med Date: 2022-04-18
Authors: David Krug; René Baumann; Wilfried Budach; Jürgen Dunst; Petra Feyer; Rainer Fietkau; Wulf Haase; Wolfgang Harms; Marc D Piroth; Marie-Luise Sautter-Bihl; Felix Sedlmayer; Rainer Souchon; Frederik Wenz; Rolf Sauer Journal: Radiat Oncol Date: 2017-01-23 Impact factor: 3.481