BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Accelerated partial breast irradiation (APBI) may benefit from the MR-Linac for target definition, patient setup, and motion monitoring. In this planning study, we investigated whether prone or supine position is dosimetrically beneficial for APBI on an MR-Linac and we evaluated patient comfort. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twenty-patients (9 postoperative, 11 preoperative) with a DCIS or breast tumor <3 cm underwent 1.5 T MRI in prone and supine position. The tumor or tumor bed was delineated as GTV and a 2 cm CTV-margin and 0.5 cm PTV-margin were added. 1.5 T MR-Linac treatment plans (5 × 5.2 Gy) with 11 beams were created for both positions in each patient. We evaluated the number of plans that achieved the planning constraints and performed a dosimetric comparison between prone and supine position using the Wilcoxon signed-rank test (p-value <0.01 for significance). Patient experience during scanning was evaluated with a questionnaire. RESULTS: All 40 plans met the target coverage and OAR constraints, regardless of position. Heart Dmean was not significantly different (1.07 vs. 0.79 Gy, p-value: 0.027). V5Gy to the ipsilateral lung (4.4% vs. 9.8% median, p-value 0.009) and estimated delivery time (362 vs. 392 s, p-value: 0.003) were significantly lower for prone position. PTV coverage and dose to other OAR were comparable between positions. The majority of patients (13/20) preferred supine position. CONCLUSION: APBI on the MR-Linac is dosimetrically feasible in prone and supine position. Mean heart dose was similar in both positions. Ipsilateral lung V5Gy was lower in prone position.
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Accelerated partial breast irradiation (APBI) may benefit from the MR-Linac for target definition, patient setup, and motion monitoring. In this planning study, we investigated whether prone or supine position is dosimetrically beneficial for APBI on an MR-Linac and we evaluated patient comfort. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twenty-patients (9 postoperative, 11 preoperative) with a DCIS or breast tumor <3 cm underwent 1.5 T MRI in prone and supine position. The tumor or tumor bed was delineated as GTV and a 2 cm CTV-margin and 0.5 cm PTV-margin were added. 1.5 T MR-Linac treatment plans (5 × 5.2 Gy) with 11 beams were created for both positions in each patient. We evaluated the number of plans that achieved the planning constraints and performed a dosimetric comparison between prone and supine position using the Wilcoxon signed-rank test (p-value <0.01 for significance). Patient experience during scanning was evaluated with a questionnaire. RESULTS: All 40 plans met the target coverage and OAR constraints, regardless of position. Heart Dmean was not significantly different (1.07 vs. 0.79 Gy, p-value: 0.027). V5Gy to the ipsilateral lung (4.4% vs. 9.8% median, p-value 0.009) and estimated delivery time (362 vs. 392 s, p-value: 0.003) were significantly lower for prone position. PTV coverage and dose to other OAR were comparable between positions. The majority of patients (13/20) preferred supine position. CONCLUSION: APBI on the MR-Linac is dosimetrically feasible in prone and supine position. Mean heart dose was similar in both positions. Ipsilateral lung V5Gy was lower in prone position.
Authors: Maureen L Groot Koerkamp; H J G Desirée van den Bongard; Marielle E P Philippens; Femke van der Leij; Stefano Mandija; Antonetta C Houweling Journal: Phys Imaging Radiat Oncol Date: 2022-07-05