Chuan Li1, Jia-Fu Lin2, Hui Ling Yeh1. 1. Department of Radiation Oncology, Taichung Veterans General Hospital, Taichung, Taiwan. 2. Department of Radiation Physics, Taichung Veterans General Hospital, Taichung, Taiwan.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: The aim of this study is to evaluate the characteristics of the dosimetry and the skin dose of interstitial brachytherapy by the use of the free-hand implantation technique toward the treatment of early breast cancer. MATERIALS & METHODS: Seventeen patients diagnosed with early breast cancer were selected for the study. The implantation of the catheters for postoperative interstitial brachytherapy was performed using the free-hand technique. The total tumor dose to the tumor cavity plus 2 cm margin was 3400 cGy, twice daily for 10 fractions in 5 days. The dosage to the target and the organ at risk (OAR) were recorded for analysis. The skin dose of the patient and the phantom were measured with Gafchromic film (EBT3) and the results were compared with the skin dose calculated by the brachytherapy treatment planning system. RESULTS: The median conformal index is 94% (range 89%-99%), and the median homogeneity index is 71%. The median skin dose measured from the skin of the patients was 20.1% lower than the skin dose calculated from the treatment planning system and consistent with the phantom surface measurement experiment. There were no grade 3 or above acute toxicity recorded. CONCLUSIONS: Interstitial brachytherapy by the use of the free-hand implantation technique for early breast cancer is feasible and avoids the need for a second surgical intervention. The calculated skin dose was overestimated by at least 20%. The results of this study may help in building a modification model for the prediction of skin toxicity in any future study.
INTRODUCTION: The aim of this study is to evaluate the characteristics of the dosimetry and the skin dose of interstitial brachytherapy by the use of the free-hand implantation technique toward the treatment of early breast cancer. MATERIALS & METHODS: Seventeen patients diagnosed with early breast cancer were selected for the study. The implantation of the catheters for postoperative interstitial brachytherapy was performed using the free-hand technique. The total tumor dose to the tumor cavity plus 2 cm margin was 3400 cGy, twice daily for 10 fractions in 5 days. The dosage to the target and the organ at risk (OAR) were recorded for analysis. The skin dose of the patient and the phantom were measured with Gafchromic film (EBT3) and the results were compared with the skin dose calculated by the brachytherapy treatment planning system. RESULTS: The median conformal index is 94% (range 89%-99%), and the median homogeneity index is 71%. The median skin dose measured from the skin of the patients was 20.1% lower than the skin dose calculated from the treatment planning system and consistent with the phantom surface measurement experiment. There were no grade 3 or above acute toxicity recorded. CONCLUSIONS: Interstitial brachytherapy by the use of the free-hand implantation technique for early breast cancer is feasible and avoids the need for a second surgical intervention. The calculated skin dose was overestimated by at least 20%. The results of this study may help in building a modification model for the prediction of skin toxicity in any future study.
Authors: Mark J Rivard; Bert M Coursey; Larry A DeWerd; William F Hanson; M Saiful Huq; Geoffrey S Ibbott; Michael G Mitch; Ravinder Nath; Jeffrey F Williamson Journal: Med Phys Date: 2004-03 Impact factor: 4.071
Authors: M Clarke; R Collins; S Darby; C Davies; P Elphinstone; V Evans; J Godwin; R Gray; C Hicks; S James; E MacKinnon; P McGale; T McHugh; R Peto; C Taylor; Y Wang Journal: Lancet Date: 2005-12-17 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Carolyn Taylor; Candace Correa; Frances K Duane; Marianne C Aznar; Stewart J Anderson; Jonas Bergh; David Dodwell; Marianne Ewertz; Richard Gray; Reshma Jagsi; Lori Pierce; Kathleen I Pritchard; Sandra Swain; Zhe Wang; Yaochen Wang; Tim Whelan; Richard Peto; Paul McGale Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2017-03-20 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Julie A Raffi; Stephen D Davis; Cliff G Hammer; John A Micka; Keith A Kunugi; Jana E Musgrove; John W Winston; Terresa J Ricci-Ott; Larry A DeWerd Journal: Med Phys Date: 2010-06 Impact factor: 4.071
Authors: Vratislav Strnad; Oliver J Ott; Guido Hildebrandt; Daniela Kauer-Dorner; Hellen Knauerhase; Tibor Major; Jaroslaw Lyczek; Jose Luis Guinot; Jürgen Dunst; Cristina Gutierrez Miguelez; Pavel Slampa; Michael Allgäuer; Kristina Lössl; Bülent Polat; György Kovács; Arnt-René Fischedick; Thomas G Wendt; Rainer Fietkau; Marion Hindemith; Alexandra Resch; Anna Kulik; Leo Arribas; Peter Niehoff; Fernando Guedea; Annika Schlamann; Richard Pötter; Christine Gall; Martina Malzer; Wolfgang Uter; Csaba Polgár Journal: Lancet Date: 2015-10-19 Impact factor: 79.321
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
Authors: Christian Kirisits; Mark J Rivard; Dimos Baltas; Facundo Ballester; Marisol De Brabandere; Rob van der Laarse; Yury Niatsetski; Panagiotis Papagiannis; Taran Paulsen Hellebust; Jose Perez-Calatayud; Kari Tanderup; Jack L M Venselaar; Frank-André Siebert Journal: Radiother Oncol Date: 2013-11-30 Impact factor: 6.280
Authors: Sahar Sheikholeslami; Hasan Ali Nedaie; Mahdi Sadeghi; Hosein Pourbeigy; Sohrab Shahzadi; Mehdi Zehtabian; Mohsen Hasani; Ali S Meigooni Journal: J Appl Clin Med Phys Date: 2016-07-08 Impact factor: 2.102