Multisegmented tangential breast fields: A rational way to treat breast cancer

Breast cancer; Dose homogeneity; Dummy structure; IMRT; Plan optimization; Segmented beams; Body Burden; Breast; Breast Neoplasms; Female; Heart; Humans; Image Processing, Computer-Assisted; Imaging, Three-Dimensional; Lung; Radiotherapy Dosage; Radiotherapy Planning, Computer-Assisted; Radiotherapy, Conformal; Radiotherapy, Intensity-Modulated; Tomography, X-Ray Computed

Abstract :

[en] Purpose: Using three-dimensional conformal radiation therapy (3D-CRT) and multisegmented conformal radiation therapy (MS-CRT) for breast cancer treatment, the dose coverage of the planning target volume (PTV) and the radiation burden on the organs at risk (OARs) were evaluated. Material and Methods: 3D-CRT and MS-CRT were planned for 436 unilateral breasts (217 left). All patients were treated with MS-CRT between 2005 and 2007. For PTV delineation and beam orientation, supportive structures were applied. The mean PTV was 1,130 cm 3 (in ten patients > 2,200 cm3). Three-dimensional planning with weight-optimized medial and lateral open fields at a total dose of 50.4/1.8 Gy was followed by multisegmented planning with a reasonably high-dose-level dose cloud to define the medial subfield, and renewed optimization. This was repeated for the lateral subfield with a final optimization. For PTV coverage evaluation, the ICRU 50 was considered: the PTV portions receiving 95-107%, < 95% and > 107% of the prescribed dose (PTVD95- 107%, PTV<D95% and PTV>D107%), and the PTV maximal dose (PTVDmax). To compare the OAR radiation burdens, the mean doses to the ipsi-/contralateral lung, contralateral breast, and whole heart were documented. Results: The multisegmented plans furnished significantly (p < 0.0001) better target coverage (PTVD95-107% 82.8% vs. 90.9%, PTV<D95% 11.4% vs. 8.8%, PTV>D107% 5.9% vs. 0.3% and PTVDmax 56.6 vs. 54.3 Gy). The mean OAR doses remained almost unchanged: ipsilateral lung 10.5 versus 10.4 Gy, contralateral lung 0.4 versus 0.4 Gy, contralateral breast 0.8 versus 0.8 Gy, and whole heart (for left-sided cancers) 4.8 versus 4.8 Gy. The subfields required a mean of 9.8 MU (monitor units), i.e., a mean total 7.6 MU increment. The planning took 10-20 min, and the delivery 5-10 min. Conclusion: MS-CRT is a good alternative to breast intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) and seems adequate for right-sided cancers, whereas left-sided cancers necessitate a longer follow-up of heart-related side effects before a final assessment. © 2008 Urban & Vogel.

Disciplines :

Radiology, nuclear medicine & imaging

Author, co-author :

GULYBAN, Akos ; Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Liège - CHU > Radiothérapie

Kovács, P.; Department of Oncotherapy, University of Pécs, Hungary

Sebestyén, Z.; Department of Oncotherapy, University of Pécs, Hungary

Farkas, R.; Department of Oncotherapy, University of Pécs, Hungary

Csere, T.; Department of Oncotherapy, University of Pécs, Hungary

Karácsonyi, G.; Department of Oncotherapy, University of Pécs, Hungary

Dérczy, K.; Department of Oncotherapy, University of Pécs, Hungary

Hideghéty, K.; Department of Oncotherapy, University of Pécs, Hungary, Department of Oncotherapy, University of Szeged, Hungary

Ésik, O.; Department of Oncotherapy, University of Pécs, Hungary, Department of Radiation and Medical Oncology, Medcenter Ltd., Borsod Country Hospital, Miskolc, Hungary

Language :

English

Title :

Multisegmented tangential breast fields: A rational way to treat breast cancer

Publication date :

2008

Journal title :

Strahlentherapie und Onkologie

ISSN :

0179-7158

eISSN :

1439-099X

Publisher :

Urban & Vogel, Munchen, Germany

Volume :

184

Issue :

Pages :

262-269

Peer reviewed :

Peer Reviewed verified by ORBi

Available on ORBi :

since 20 June 2013

Statistics

Number of views

60 (4 by ULiège)

Number of downloads

0 (0 by ULiège)

More statistics

Scopus citations^®

Scopus citations^®
without self-citations

OpenCitations

OpenAlex citations

Bibliography

Abdulkarim BS, Saibishkumar E, Severin D, et al. Skin sparing radiation approach using helical tomotherapy without compromising target coverage in early breast cancer after lumpectomy. Presented at the ASTRO 48th Annual Meeting, Philadelphia, Nov 5-9, 2006.abstract 2031.
Bogner L, Scherer J, Treutwein M, et al. Verification of IMRT: techniques and problems. Strahlenther Onkol 2004;180:340-50.
Carli PM, Sgro C, Parchin-Geneste N, et al. Increase therapy-related leukemia secondary to breast cancer. Leukemia 2000;14:1014-7.
Cho BC, Schwarz M, Mijnheer BJ, et al. Simplified intensity-modulated radiotherapy using pre-defined segments to reduce cardiac complications in left-sided breast cancer. Radiother Oncol 2004;70:231-41.
Cuzick J, Stewart H, Peto R, et al. Overview of randomized trials of postoperative adjuvant radiotherapy in breast cancer. Cancer Treat Rep 1987;71:15-29.
Dobler B, Lorenz F, Wertz H, et al. Intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) with different combinations of treatment-planning systems and linacs. Issues and how to detect them. Strahlenther Onkol 2006;182:481-8.
Dogan N, Leybovich LB, King S, et al. Improvement of treatment plans developed with intensity-modulated radiation therapy for concave-shaped head and neck tumors. Radiology 2002;223:57-64.
Dorr W, Bertmann S, Herrmann T. Radiation induced lung reactions in breast cancer therapy. Modulating factors and consequential effects. Strahlenther Onkol 2005;181:567-73.
Dorr W, Herrmann T. Second primary tumors after radiotherapy for malignancies. Treatment-related parameters. Strahlenther Onkol 2002;178:357-62.
Esik O, Bortfeld T, Bendl R, et al. Inverse radiotherapy planning for a concave-convex PTV in cervical and upper mediastinal regions. Simulation of radiotherapy using an Alderson-RANDO phantom. Planning target volume. Strahlenther Onkol 1997;173:193-200.
Fisher B, Anderson S, Bryani J, et al. Twenty-year follow-up of a randomized trial comparing total mastectomy, lumpectomy, and lumpectomy plus irradiation for the treatment of invasive breast cancer. N Engl J Med 2002;347:1233-41.
Followill D, Geis P, Boyer A. Estimates of whole-body dose equivalent produced by intensity modulated conformal therapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 1997;38:667-72.
Fontenla DP, Napoli JJ, Hunt M, et al. Effects of beam modifiers and immobilization devices on the dose in the build-up region. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 1994;30:211-9.
Galvin JM, Ezzell G, Eisbrauch A, et al. Implementing IMRT in clinical practice: a joint document of the American Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology and the American Association of Physicists in Medicine. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2004;58:1616-34.
Georg D, Kroupa B, Georg P, et al. Inverse planning - a comparative intersystem and interpatient constraint study. Strahlenther Onkol 2006;182:473-80.
Guckenberger M, Flentje M. Intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) of localized prostate cancer. A review and future perspectives. Strahlenther Onkol 2007;183:57-62.
Gulyban A, Kovacs P, Farkas R, et al. Multisegmented radiation therapy as an alternative to 3D conformal radiation therapy, with special reference to breast cancer tangential fields. Nowotwory J Oncol 2007;57:125e-7e.
Hall EJ. Intensity-modulated radiation therapy, protons, and the risk of second cancers. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2006;65:1-7.
Hall EJ, Wuu CS. Radiation-induced second cancers: the impact of 3D-CRT and IMRT. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2003;56:83-8.
Hurkmans CW, Borger JH, Bos LJ, et al. Cardiac and lung complication probabilities after breast cancer irradiation. Radiother Oncol 2000;55:145-51.
Hurkmans CW, Borger JH, Pieters BR. Variability in target volume delineation on CT scans of the breast. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2001;50:1366-72.
International Commission on Radiation Units and Measurements. Prescribing, recording and reporting photon beam therapy. ICRU report 50. Bethesda: ICRU, 1993.
Jeanneret-Sozzi W, Moeckli R, Valley JF, et al. The reasons for discrepancies in target volume delineation. A SASRO study on head-and-neck and prostate cancers. Strahlenther Onkol 2006;182:450-7.
Krueger EA, Fraass BA, McShan DL, et al. Potential gains for irradiation of chest wall and regional nodes with intensity modulated radiotherapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2003;56:1023-37.
Kry SF, Salehpour M, Followill DS, et al. The calculated risk of fatal secondary malignancies from intensity-modulated radiation therapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2005;62:1195-203.
Lo YC, Yasuda G, Fitzgerald TJ, et al. Intensity modulation for breast treatment using static multi-leaf collimators. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2000;46:187-94.
Mayo CS, Urie MM, Fitzgerald TJ. Hybrid IMRT plans - concurrently treating conventional and IMRT beams for improved breast irradiation and reduced planning time. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2005;61:922-32.
Mohr P, Brieger S, Stahl J, et al. Linearity of the dose monitor system at low monitor units. Strahlenther Onkol 2007;183:327-31.
Prasad KN, Cole WC, Haase GM. Radiation protection in humans: extending the concept of as low as reasonably achievable (ALARA) from dose to biological damage. Br J Radiol 2004;77:97-9.
Price RA, Murphy S, McNeeley SW, et al. A method for increased dose conformity and segment reduction for SMLC delivered IMRT treatment of the prostate. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2003;57:843-52.
Ravikumar M, Al Asmary MA, Alla A Sultan R, et al. Dose delivery accuracy of therapeutic photon and electron beams at low monitor unit settings. Strahlenther Onkol 2005;181:796-9.
Richmond ND, Turner RN, Dawes PJ, et al. Evaluation of the dosimetric consequences of adding a single asymmetric or MLC shaped field to a tangential breast radiotherapy technique. Radiother Oncol 2003;67:165-70.
Rubino C, de Vathaire F, Diallo I. Radiation dose, chemotherapy and risk of lung cancer after breast cancer treatment. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2002;75:15-24.
Sanguineti G, Cavey ML, Endres EJ, et al. Does treatment of the pelvic nodes with IMRT increase late rectal toxicity over conformal prostate-only radiotherapy to 76 Gy? Strahlenther Onkol 2006;182:543-9.
Schneider U, Lomax A, Pemler P, et al. The impact of IMRT and proton radiotherapy on secondary cancer incidence. Strahlenther Onkol 2006;182:647-52.
Shuryak I, Sachs RK, Hlatky L, et al. Radiation-induced leukemia at doses relevant to radiation therapy: modeling mechanisms and estimating risks. J Natl Cancer Inst 2006;98:1794-806.
Trott KR, Kamprad F. Estimation of cancer risks from radiotherapy of benign diseases. Strahlenther Onkol 2006;182:431-6.
Van Asselen B, Raaijmakers CP, Hofman P, el al. An improved breast irradiation technique using three-dimensional geometrical information and intensity modulation. Radiother Oncol 2001;58:341-7.
Van Vaerenbergh K, De Gersem W, Vakaet L, et al. Automatic generation of a plan optimization volume for tangential field breast cancer radiation therapy: Strahlenther Onkol 2005;181:82-8.
Veronesi U, Cascinelli N, Martani L, et al. Twenty-year follow-up of a randomized study comparing breast-conserving surgery with radical mastectomy for early breast cancer. N Engl J Med 2002;347:1227-32.
Vicini FA, Sharpe M, Kestin L, et al. Optimizing breast cancer treatment efficacy with intensity-modulated radiotherapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2002;54:1336-44.
Weiss E, Hess CF. The impact of gross tumor volume (GTV) and clinical target volume (CTV) definition on the total accuracy in radiotherapy. Strahlenther Onkol 2003;179:21-30.
Woo TC, Pignol JP, Rakovitch E, et al: Body radiation exposure in breast cancer radiotherapy: impact of breast IMRT and virtual wedge compensation techniques. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2006;65:52-8.
Zackrisson B, Arevarn M, Karlsson M. Optimized MLC-beam arrangements for tangential breast irradiation. Radiother Oncol 2000;54:209-12.