Michael J Cross1, Gail S Lebovic2, Joseph Ross3, Scott Jones3, Arnold Smith3, Steven Harms4. 1. Breast Treatment Associates, Fayetteville, AR, USA. mjcross@breasttreatment.com. 2. School of Oncoplastic Surgery, Frisco, TX, USA. 3. Highlands Oncology Group, Fayetteville, AR, USA. 4. Breast Center of Northwest Arkansas, Fayetteville, AR, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Techniques for accurately delineating the tumor bed after breast-conserving surgery (BCS) can be challenging. As a result, the accuracy, and efficiency of radiation treatment (RT) planning can be negatively impacted. Surgically placed clips or the post-surgical seroma are commonly used to determine target volume; however, these methods can lead to a high degree of uncertainty and variability. A novel 3-dimensional bioabsorbable marker was used during BCS and assessed for its impact on RT planning. METHODS: One hundred and ten implants were sutured to the margins of the tumor bed excision site in 108 patients undergoing BCS. Routine CT imaging of the breast tissue was performed for RT planning, and the marker was assessed for visibility and utility in target delineation. RT regimens, target volumes and associated treatment costs were analyzed. RESULTS: In all patients, the marker was easily visible and in 95.7 % of cases, it proved useful for RT planning. 36.8 % of patients received conventional whole breast irradiation plus boost, 56.6 % received hypo-fractionation plus boost, and 6.6 % received accelerated partial breast irradiation. A shift toward increased use of hypo-fractionated regimens was noted over the three year period of this study. There were no device-related complications or cancer recurrences in this group of patients. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrated the use of a novel 3-dimensional marker as a safe and effective method for delineating the tumor bed with a significant utility for RT planning. With routine use of the device, an increased use of hypofractionation with a resultant 25 % cost savings was noted.
BACKGROUND: Techniques for accurately delineating the tumor bed after breast-conserving surgery (BCS) can be challenging. As a result, the accuracy, and efficiency of radiation treatment (RT) planning can be negatively impacted. Surgically placed clips or the post-surgical seroma are commonly used to determine target volume; however, these methods can lead to a high degree of uncertainty and variability. A novel 3-dimensional bioabsorbable marker was used during BCS and assessed for its impact on RT planning. METHODS: One hundred and ten implants were sutured to the margins of the tumor bed excision site in 108 patients undergoing BCS. Routine CT imaging of the breast tissue was performed for RT planning, and the marker was assessed for visibility and utility in target delineation. RT regimens, target volumes and associated treatment costs were analyzed. RESULTS: In all patients, the marker was easily visible and in 95.7 % of cases, it proved useful for RT planning. 36.8 % of patients received conventional whole breast irradiation plus boost, 56.6 % received hypo-fractionation plus boost, and 6.6 % received accelerated partial breast irradiation. A shift toward increased use of hypo-fractionated regimens was noted over the three year period of this study. There were no device-related complications or cancer recurrences in this group of patients. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrated the use of a novel 3-dimensional marker as a safe and effective method for delineating the tumor bed with a significant utility for RT planning. With routine use of the device, an increased use of hypofractionation with a resultant 25 % cost savings was noted.
Authors: Jaroslaw T Hepel; Suzanne B Evans; Jessica R Hiatt; Lori Lyn Price; Thomas DiPetrillo; David E Wazer; Stephanie G MacAusland Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2008-12-10 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Lori J Pierce; Kent A Griffith; James A Hayman; Kathye R Douglas; Allen S Lichter Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2005-04-01 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: C Polgár; T Major; A Somogyi; Z Takácsi-Nagy; L C Mangel; G Forrai; Z Sulyok; J Fodor; G Németh Journal: Strahlenther Onkol Date: 2000-03 Impact factor: 3.621
Authors: Csaba Polgár; János Fodor; Tibor Major; Zoltán Takácsi-Nagy; Miklós Kásler; Josef Hammer; Erik Van Limbergen; György Németh Journal: Strahlenther Onkol Date: 2002-11 Impact factor: 3.621
Authors: Anna-Maria Roth; Daniela Kauer-Dorner; Alexandra Resch; Andreas Schmid; Marc Thill; Peter Niehoff; Corinna Melchert; Daniel Berger; György Kovács Journal: Brachytherapy Date: 2014 Jul-Aug Impact factor: 2.362
Authors: C E Coles; C B Wilson; J Cumming; J R Benson; P Forouhi; J S Wilkinson; R Jena; G C Wishart Journal: Eur J Surg Oncol Date: 2008-10-19 Impact factor: 4.424
Authors: Cary S Kaufman; Michael J Cross; Julie L Barone; Nayana S Dekhne; Kiran Devisetty; Joshua T Dilworth; David A Edmonson; Firas G Eladoumikdachi; Jennifer S Gass; William H Hall; Robert L Hong; Robert R Kuske; Brandon J Patton; Carol Perelson; Rogsbert F Phillips; Arnold B Smith; Linda A Smith; Lorraine Tafra; Gail S Lebovic Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2020-11-21 Impact factor: 5.344