Abstract

Background and purposesThis study compared VMAT and IMRT plans for intact breast radiotherapy for left sided breast cancer and evaluated the irradiated dose of planning target volume and OARs, especially focusing on heart and coronary artery.Materials and methodsEleven patients with left sided breast cancer whose breast was relatively smaller (the mean volumes is 296 cc) treated with breast-conserving surgery were prescribed radiotherapy of 50 Gy in 25 fractions using two or four-field step and shoot IMRT (2 or 4-F IMRT), and one or two-arc VMAT (1 or 2-arc VMAT). The 10 Gy electron boost to the tumor bed after delivery of 50 Gy was not included in the analysis. Multiple planning parameters for the PTV and the PRV-OARs were measured and analyzed.ResultsTreatment plans generated using VMAT had better PTV homogeneity than the IMRT plans. For the PRV-OARs, the 1-arc VMAT had significantly higher Dmean and V5 for left lung and heart, and showed worse Dmean for liver, esophagus, spinal cord, contralateral lung and breast. In contrast, the 2-arc VMAT and the 2-F or 4-F IMRT plans showed better results for the PRV-OARs than the 1-arc VMAT. However, for the heart and coronary artery, the 1-arc VMAT showed better V20 and V40 compared with the other plans. Moreover, the 2 F-IMRT had specially advantage on V5 and V20 for heart and V5 for coronary arteries, the 2-F IMRT also showed a greater MU and treatment times. Using the table of quality score to evaluate the plans, we found that 2-F IMRT had the highest scores of 13, followed by the 2-arc VMAT plan (10 points) and 1-arc VMAT plan (8 points), and finally the 4-F IMRT plan (6 points). Moreover, when a dose comparison for heart minus coronary artery was calculated, the V20 and V40 for the rest of heart in all plans were very small and closed, indicating the dose to the coronary artery contributed dramatically to the high dose volumes for the entire heart.ConclusionsCompared to other plans, the 2-F IMRT plan with fewer monitor units and shorter delivery time is an appropriate technique for left sided breast cancer, which achieved good PTV coverage and sparing of organs at risk besides for the heart and coronary artery.

Highlights

  • Breast cancer is the most common cancer among women

  • Using the table of quality score to evaluate the plans, we found that 2-F intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) had the highest scores of 13, followed by the 2-arc volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) plan (10 points) and 1-arc VMAT plan (8 points), and the 4-F IMRT plan (6 points)

  • Compared to other plans, the 2-F IMRT plan with fewer monitor units and shorter delivery time is an appropriate technique for left sided breast cancer, which achieved good Planning Target Volume (PTV) coverage and sparing of organs at risk besides for the heart and coronary artery

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Breast cancer is the most common cancer among women. About 1.2 million women are newly diagnosed with breast cancer each year in the world, and 500,000 women die of it each year. PORT has been shown to substantially reduce the rate of local relapse and improve long-term survival [3] but at the cost of morbidity to the heart [4], lung [5] and a risk of secondary breast cancer [6]. Among these Organs at Risk (OARs), the heart is one of the most important, in particular in relation to radiotherapy for left-sided breast cancer where cardiac dose has been associated with increased cardiac mortality [7, 8]. This study compared VMAT and IMRT plans for intact breast radiotherapy for left sided breast cancer and evaluated the irradiated dose of planning target volume and OARs, especially focusing on heart and coronary artery

Methods
Results
Conclusion
Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.