Planning Hybrid Intensity Modulated Radiation Therapy for Whole-breast Irradiation

Hybrid Treatment Planning for Chest Wall Irradiation Utilizing Three-Dimensional Conformal Radiotherapy (3DCRT), Intensity-Modulated Radiation Therapy (IMRT), and Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy (VMAT): A Systematic Review

Novel hybrid approaches for chest wall irradiation show promising outcomes regarding target coverage and sparing organs at risk (OARs). In this systematic review, we compared hybrid volumetric modulated arc therapy (H-VMAT) or hybrid intensity-modulated radiotherapy (H-IMRT) techniques with non-hybrid techniques, such as three-dimensional conformal radiation therapy (3DCRT), field-in-field (FIF), intensity-modulated arc therapy (IMRT), and volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT), for breast cancer patients with mastectomy. Our focus was the plan quality and dose distribution to the OARs. Using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) checklist, we performed a systematic review and quality appraisal of primary studies evaluating hybrid therapy to the chest wall and the OARs. An extensive online search of PubMed and Scopus databases was conducted using appropriate keywords. The dose to the OARs (lung, heart, and contralateral breast), planning target volume (PTV), homogeneity index (HI), and conformity index (CI) were extracted. The data were then tabulated and compared for the outcomes between modalities among the studies. Nine studies that met the search criteria were selected to evaluate the PTV coverage and dosimetric results of hybrid and non-hybrid techniques. In terms of 95% PTV coverage, among nine reviewed studies, the largest difference between the two techniques was between VMAT (47.6 Gy) and H-VMAT (48.4 Gy); for the conformity index, the largest difference was noted between 3DCRT (0.58) and H-VMAT (0.79). In both cases, differences were statistically significant (P < 0.005). Two studies showed dose homogeneity improvement within the treatment target in H-VMAT (0.15 and 0.07) compared with 3DCRT (0.41 and 0.12), with a P value of <0.001. Two studies did not report on the homogeneity index, and three others observed no statistical difference. Regarding OARs, in the comparison of H-VMAT and VMAT, the largest significant change was in the volume receiving 5 Gy (V5Gy) of the ipsilateral lung and the V10Gy of the contralateral lung. For the ipsilateral lung, V5Gy was 90.7% with VMAT versus 51.45% with H-VMAT. For the contralateral lung, V10Gy was 54.9% with VMAT versus 50.5% with H-VMAT. In six studies, the mean dose of the contralateral breast was lower in hybrid techniques than in single modalities: VMAT (4.2%, 6.0%, 1.9%, 7.1%, 4.57%) versus H-VMAT (1.4%, 3.4%, 1.8%, 3.5%, 2.34%) and IMRT (9.1%) versus H-IMRT (4.69%). Although most studies did not report on monitor units and treatment time, those that included them showed that hybrids had lower monitor units and shorter treatment times. Hybrid techniques in radiotherapy, such as combining two modalities, can indeed facilitate lower doses to OARs for patients with a high risk of toxicities. Prospective clinical studies are needed to determine the outcomes of breast cancer treated with hybrid techniques.

A dosimetric comparative study following RTOG and ESTRO contouring guidelines for breast radiation therapy

PURPOSE

To compare the dosimetric parameters considering the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) and European Society for Radiotherapy and Oncology (ESTRO) guidelines for breast cancer radiotherapy. Two radiotherapy techniques, intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) and volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT), were considered.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Twenty-eight patients with left-sided medially-located TanyN2M0 tumors were contoured based on RTOG and ESTRO guidelines. 9-field IMRT, 10-field IMRT, 11-field IMRT, and VMAT treatment plans were applied as radiotherapy (RT) techniques for both contouring sets. The dosimetric parameters of the RT plans were extracted and compared.

RESULTS

Comparing dose-volume histogram (DVH) parameters, equivalent uniform dose (EUD), and normal tissue complication probability (NTCP) of OARs across the contouring guidelines and considering each RT technique showed that the only significant differences were higher Dmax, Dmean, V30, and V45, EUD, and NTCP of the thyroid in all treatment modalities when the RTOG guideline had been adopted. Using the VMAT technique, PTV's EUD and the tumor control probability (TCP) were considerably higher when the ESTRO guideline was adopted. Moreover, the conformity index (CI) of VMAT plans was significantly higher when the ESTRO guideline was used.

CONCLUSION

Unless having higher doses to thyroid when the RTOG guideline was adopted, the doses to other organs-at-risk (OAR) were similar between the two considering guidelines. Moreover, except for higher EUD, TCP, and CI for VMAT when the ESTRO guideline was used, no other significant differences were obtained between dosimetric parameters of target volumes considering the RT techniques and contouring guidelines.

Critical Evaluation of Secondary Cancer Risk After Breast Radiation Therapy with Hybrid Radiotherapy Techniques

Background

As hybrid radiotherapy technique can effectively balance dose distribution between targets and organs, it is necessary to evaluate the late effects related to radiotherapy. The aim of the study was to calculate and provide individual estimates of the risks for hybrid radiotherapy techniques in breast cancer patients.

Methods

Whole-breast irradiation was performed in 43 breast cancer patients by using 3D conformal, intensity-modulated and hybrid techniques. The excess absolute risk (EAR), lifetime attributable risk (LAR) and normal tissue complication probability (NTCP) were calculated to estimate risks in organs. The risk variability in contralateral breast was assessed by using the patient's anatomic parameters.

Results

Compared with IMRT and FinF, hybrid techniques achieved satisfactory dose distribution and comparable or lower estimated risks in organs. The LAR was estimated to be up to 0.549% for contralateral lung with advantages of tangential techniques over H-VMAT. For ipsilateral lung, the LAR was estimated to be up to 9.021%, but lower in H-VMAT and FinF without significant difference. The risk of thyroid was negligible in overall estimation. For contralateral breast, the LAR was estimated to be up to 0.865% with advantages of MH-IMRT and H-VMAT over TF-IMRT. The fraction of individual variability could be explained by using anatomic parameters of minimum breast distance (MBD) and minimum target concave angle (θ_MTCA). NTCP for all analyzed endpoints was significantly higher in TF-IMRT relative to FinF and hybrid techniques, while TH-IMRT and H-VMAT were presenting lower toxicity risk. However, MH-IMRT presented a higher probability of toxicity in lung. For most cases, H-VMAT demonstrated a benefit for contralateral breast, heart and lung sparing.

Conclusion

The optimal treatment should be performed individually according to anatomic parameters and balances between EAR and NTCP. Individual assessment may assist in achieving optimal balances between targets and organs as well as supporting clinical decision-making processes.

Improved treatment robustness of postoperative breast cancer radiotherapy including supraclavicular nodes

A combination of a three-dimensional conformal radiation therapy (3D-CRT) plan with a dose gradient of the chest wall area and a volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) plan of the supraclavicular area might improve the dose distribution robustness in the junction. To investigate the impact of patient motion on the dose distribution, hybrid 3D-CRT and VMAT plans were recalculated by shifting the isocenter of the VMAT plan. Compared to the nominal plan, the target D_98% for high- vs low-dose gradients decreased by 24% vs 12%. Hybrid VMAT with a low-dose gradient 3D-CRT plan was found to be robust towards patient motion.

Fluence map analyzer reduces low dose volume in locally advanced post mastectomy breast cancer patients

Multi-leaf collimator dose leakage in intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) plans causes higher low dose volume which increases the long-term risks of radiotherapy. We have developed Fluence Map Analyzer (FMA) program that suggests the ideal field geometry to reduce low dose volume in locally advanced breast cancer IMRT plans. In this comparative experimental study, FMA has been applied to standard IMRT plans (STD-IMRT) of randomly selected 15 left and 15 right-sided locally advanced breast cancer patients. All patients underwent a modified radical mastectomy. The chest wall, IMN, axillary, and supraclavicular lymph nodes are included in planning target volume (PTV). The heart, lungs, contralateral breast, and medulla spinalis were delineated as organs at risk (OARs). Two sets of plans, namely STD-IMRT and FMA-IMRT, were generated for each patient. The dosimetric analysis was performed using dose-volume histogram (DVH) and standard evaluation parameters of PTV and OARs. No differences could be observed among the two techniques for PTV coverage. However, FMA-IMRT plans achieved significantly lower V5volumes and mean doses of the heart, lungs, contralateral breast, and body contours. FMA-IMRT used a smaller number of sub-fields and fewer monitor units (MU). FMA automizes the field geometry determination process for locally advanced breast cancer IMRT planning while reducing low dose volume significantly.

Comparative Effectiveness Analysis of 3D-Conformal Radiation Therapy Versus Intensity Modulated Radiation Therapy (IMRT) in a Prospective Multicenter Cohort of Patients With Breast Cancer

PURPOSE

Simple intensity modulation of radiation therapy reduces acute toxicity compared with 2-dimensional techniques in adjuvant breast cancer treatment, but it remains unknown whether more complex or inverse-planned intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) offers an advantage over forward-planned, 3-dimensional conformal radiation therapy (3DCRT).

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Using prospective data regarding patients receiving adjuvant whole breast radiation therapy without nodal irradiation at 23 institutions from 2011 to 2018, we compared the incidence of acute toxicity (moderate-severe pain or moist desquamation) in patients receiving 3DCRT versus IMRT (either inverse planned or, if forward-planned, using ≥5 segments per gantry angle). We evaluated associations between technique and toxicity using multivariable models with inverse-probability-of-treatment weighting, adjusting for treatment facility as a random effect.

RESULTS

Of 1185 patients treated with 3DCRT and conventional fractionation, 650 (54.9%) experienced acute toxicity; of 774 treated with highly segmented forward-planned IMRT, 458 (59.2%) did; and of 580 treated with inverse-planned IMRT, 245 (42.2%) did. Of 1296 patients treated with hypofractionation and 3DCRT, 432 (33.3%) experienced acute toxicity; of 709 treated with highly segmented forward-planned IMRT, 227 (32.0%) did; and of 623 treated with inverse-planned IMRT, 164 (26.3%) did. On multivariable analysis with inverse-probability-of-treatment weighting, the odds ratio for acute toxicity after inverse-planned IMRT versus 3DCRT was 0.64 (95% confidence interval, 0.45-0.91) with conventional fractionation and 0.41 (95% confidence interval, 0.26-0.65) with hypofractionation.

CONCLUSIONS

This large, prospective, multicenter comparative effectiveness study found a significant benefit from inverse-planned IMRT compared with 3DCRT in reducing acute toxicity of breast radiation therapy. Future research should identify the dosimetric differences that mediate this association and evaluate cost-effectiveness.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of radiotherapy techniques for whole breast irradiation

Background

The current standard of care (SOC) for whole breast radiotherapy (WBRT) in the US is conventional tangential photon fields. Advanced WBRT techniques may provide similar tumor control and better normal tissue sparing, but it is controversial whether the medical benefits of an advanced technology are significant enough to justify its higher cost.

Objective

To analyze the cost-effectiveness of six advanced WBRT techniques compared with SOC.

Methods

We developed a Markov model to simulate health states for one cohort of women (65-year-old) with early-stage breast cancer over 15 years after WBRT. The cost effectiveness analyses of field-in-field (FIF), hybrid intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT), full IMRT, standard volumetric modulated arc therapy (STD-VMAT), multiple arc VMAT (MA-VMAT), non-coplanar VMAT (NC-VMAT) compared with SOC were performed with both tumor control and radiogenic side effects considered. Transition probabilities and utilities for each health state were obtained from literature. Costs incurred by payers were adopted from literature and Medicare data. Quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) were calculated. One-way sensitivity analyses and probabilistic sensitivity analyses (PSA) were performed to evaluate the impact of uncertainties on the final results.

Results

FIF has the lowest ICER value of 1,511 $/QALY. The one-way analyses show that the cost-effectiveness of advanced WBRT techniques is most sensitive to the probability of developing contralateral breast cancer. PSAs show that SOC is more cost effective than almost all advanced WBRT techniques at a willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of 50,000 $/QALY, while FIF, hybrid IMRT and MA-VMAT are more cost-effective than SOC with a probability of 59.2%, 72.3% and 72.6% at a WTP threshold of 100,000 $/QALY, respectively.

Conclusions

FIF might be the most cost-effective option for WBRT patients at a WTP threshold of 50,000 $/QALY, while hybrid IMRT and MA-VMAT might be the most cost-effective options at a WTP threshold of 100,000 $/QALY.

Proton pencil beam scanning reduces secondary cancer risk in breast cancer patients with internal mammary chain involvement compared to photon radiotherapy

Purpose

Proton pencil beam scanning (PBS) represents an interesting option for the treatment of breast cancer (BC) patients with nodal involvement. Here we compare tangential 3D-CRT and VMAT to PBS proton therapy (PT) in terms of secondary cancer risk (SCR) for the lungs and for contralateral breast.

Methods

Five BC patients including supraclavicular (SVC) nodes in the target (Group 1) and five including SVC plus internal-mammary-nodes (IMNs, Group 2) were considered. The Group 1 patients were planned by PT versus tangential 3D-CRT in free-breathing (FB). The Group 2 patients were planned by PT versus VMAT considering both FB and deep-inspiration breath hold (DIBH) irradiation. The prescription dose to the target volume was 50 Gy (2 Gy/fraction). A constant RBE = 1.1 was assumed for PT. The SCR was evaluated with the excess absolute risk (EAR) formalism, considering also the age dependence. A cumulative EAR was finally computed.

Results

According to the linear, linear-exponential and linear-plateau dose response model, the cumulative EAR for Group 1 patients after PT was equal to 45 ± 10, 17 ± 3 and 15 ± 3, respectively. The corresponding relative increase for tangential 3D-CRT was equal to a factor 2.1 ± 0.5, 2.1 ± 0.4 and 2.3 ± 0.4. Group 2 patients showed a cumulative EAR after PT in FB equal to 65 ± 3, 21 ± 1 and 20 ± 1, according to the different models; the relative risk obtained with VMAT increased by a factor 3.5 ± 0.2, 5.2 ± 0.3 and 5.1 ± 0.3. Similar values emerge from DIBH plans. Contrary to photon radiotherapy, PT appears to be not sensitive to the age dependence due to the very low delivered dose.

Conclusions

PBS PT is associated to significant SCR reduction in BC patients compared to photon radiotherapy. The benefits are maximized for young patients with both SVC and IMNs involvement. When combined with the improved sparing of the heart, this might contribute to the establishment of effective patient-selection criteria for proton BC treatments.

Hybrid volumetric-modulated arc therapy for postoperative breast cancer including regional lymph nodes: the advantage of dosimetric data and safety of toxicities

To improve the homogeneity and conformity of the irradiation dose for postoperative breast cancer including regional lymph nodes, we planned Hybrid volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT), which combines conventional tangential field mainly for the chest area and VMAT mainly for the supraclavicular area and marginal zone. In this study, we compared the dosimetric impact between traditional 3D conformal radiotherapy (3DCRT) and Hybrid VMAT and observed toxicities following Hybrid VMAT. A total of 70 patients indicated between October 2016 and December 2017 were included. The prescribed dose was 50 Gy/25 fractions. For the dosimetric impact, 3DCRT and Hybrid VMAT plans were compared in each patient with respect to the dosimetric parameters. Toxicities were followed using the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 4.0. The median follow-up duration was 319 days. For the dosimetric impact, the homogeneity index (HI) and conformity index (CI) of PTV were significantly improved in the Hybrid VMAT plan compared with that in the 3DCRT plan (HI, 0.15 ± 0.07 in Hybrid VMAT vs 0.41 ± 0.19 in 3DCRT, P < 0.001; CI, 1.61 ± 0.44 in Hybrid VMAT vs 2.10 ± 0.56 in 3DCRT, P < 0.001). The mean irradiated ipsilateral lung dose was not significantly different in both plans (12.0 ± 2.4 Gy in Hybrid VMAT vs 11.8 ± 2.8 Gy in 3DCRT, P < 0.533). Regarding toxicity, there were no patients who developed ≥grade 3 acute toxicity and ≥grade 2 pneumonitis during the follow-up. Hybrid VMAT for postoperative breast cancer including regional lymph nodes was a reasonable technique that improved the homogeneity and conformity of the irradiation dose to the planning target volume while keeping the irradiation dose to organs at risk to a minimum.

Comparison of conventional and advanced radiotherapy techniques for left-sided breast cancer after breast conserving surgery

Whole breast radiotherapy (WBRT) after breast conserving surgery is the standard treatment to prevent recurrence and metastasis of early stage breast cancer. This study aims to compare seven WBRT techniques including conventional tangential, field-in-field (FIF), hybrid intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT), IMRT, standard volumetric modulated arc therapy (STD-VMAT), noncoplanar VMAT (NC-VMAT), and multiple arc VMAT (MA-VMAT). Fifteen patients who were previously diagnosed with left-sided early stage breast cancer and treated in our clinic were selected for this study. WBRT plans were created for these patients and were evaluated based on target coverage and normal tissue toxicities. All techniques produced clinically acceptable WBRT plans. STD-VMAT delivered the lowest mean dose (1.1 ± 0.3 Gy) and the lowest maximum dose (7.3 ± 4.9 Gy) to contralateral breast, and the second lowest lifetime attributable risk (LAR) (4.1 ± 1.4%) of secondary contralateral breast cancer. MA-VMAT delivered the lowest mean dose to lungs (4.9 ± 0.9 Gy) and heart (5.5 ± 1.2 Gy), exhibited the lowest LAR (1.7 ± 0.3%) of secondary lung cancer, normal tissue complication probability (NTCP) (1.2 ± 0.2%) of pneumonitis, risk of coronary events (RCE) (10.3 ± 2.7%), and LAR (3.9 ± 1.3%) of secondary contralateral breast cancer. NC-VMAT plans provided the most conformal target coverage, the lowest maximum lung dose (46.2 ± 4.1 Gy) and heart dose (41.1 ± 5.4 Gy), and the second lowest LAR (1.8 ± 0.4%) of secondary lung cancer and RCE (10.5 ± 2.8%). MA-VMAT and NC-VMAT could be the preferred techniques for early stage breast cancer patients after breast conserving surgery.

Dosimetric and clinical advantages of adapting the DIBH technique to hybrid solitary dynamic portal radiotherapy for left-sided chest-wall plus regional nodal irradiation

To evaluate the dosimetric and clinical advantages of using deep-inspiration breath-hold (DIBH) technique in hybrid solitary dynamic portal radiotherapy (hSDPRT) for left-sided chest-wall plus regional nodal irradiation and to demonstrate a simplified strategy for preclinical commissioning and calibration of DIBH-gating technique. Fifteen patients with left-sided breast cancer who underwent postmastectomy radiotherapy using hSDPRT were retrospectively evaluated. Two sets of planning-CT images were acquired for each patient, one with free/normal breathing and the other with DIBH. The hSDPRT plans were computed to deliver about 85% of the prescribed dose using static open fields and 15% of dose using a less complex solitary dynamic field. The dosimetric differences between the paired samples were compared using the Wilcoxon signed-rank test. For clinical commissioning of gated treatments, a respiratory simulator equipped with a microcontroller was programmed to simulate free-breathing and DIBH-patterns using a custom-developed android application. While both the hSDPRT plans displayed identical target coverage on both the image-sets, the DIBH technique resulted in statistically significant differences in various dose-volume metrics of heart, left-anterior-descending artery, and ipsilateral-lung structures. The hSDPRT plan with DIBH entails reduced total monitor unit (354.9 ± 13.6 MU) and breath-hold time ranging from 2.9 ± 0.3 to 13.7 ± 0.8 seconds/field, along with an acceptable impact on overall machine throughput. DIBH is a feasible method to effectively address the delivery uncertainty and produce substantial sparing of heart and lung when combined with hSDPRT. Streamlined procedures for commissioning and calibration of DIBH-gating technique are essential for more efficient clinical practice.

Automated planning of whole breast irradiation using hybrid IMRT improves efficiency and quality

Purpose

To develop an automated workflow for whole breast irradiation treatment planning using hybrid intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) approach and to demonstrate that this workflow can improve planning quality and efficiency when compared to manual planning.

Methods

The auto planning framework was built based on scripting with MIM and Pinnacle systems. MIM workflows were developed to automatically segment normal structures and targets, identify landmarks for beam placement, select beam energies, and set beam configurations. Pinnacle scripts were generated from the MIM workflow to create hybrid IMRT plans automatically. Each hybrid IMRT plan included two prescriptions: a three‐dimensional (3D) prescription consisted of two open tangent beams, and an IMRT prescription consisted of two step‐and‐shoot IMRT beams. The 3D prescription delivered a full prescription dose to the maximum dose point, and the IMRT prescription was optimized to deliver a uniform dose to the entire breast while sparing dose to the normal structures. For 30 patients, the auto plans were compared with clinically accepted manual plans using the paired sample t‐test.

Results

The auto planning process took approximately 8 min to complete. The mean dice coefficients between auto‐segmentation and manual contours were 0.98, 0.94 and 0.88 for the lungs, heart, and PTVeval_Breast, respectively. The MUs of the auto plans was on average 13% higher than that of the manual plans. Auto planning improved plan quality significantly: percentage volume receiving 95% of the prescription dose (V95%) of the PTVeval_Breast increased from 91.5% to 93.2% (P = 0.001), V105% of the PTVeval_Breast decreased from 7.2% to 1.2% (P = 0.013), V20Gy of the ipsilateral lung decreased from 13.1% to 10.4% (P = 0.001) and mean heart dose for left‐sided breast patients decreased from 1.2 Gy to 0.9 Gy (P < 0.001).

Conclusion

An automated treatment planning process can make the planning process efficient with improved plan quality.

Hybrid volumetric modulated arc therapy for whole breast irradiation: a dosimetric comparison of different arc designs

PURPOSE

To find an optimal arc design for hybrid volumetric modulated arc therapy (H-VMAT), a combination of conventional 3DCRT and VMAT plans for left-sided whole breast radiation therapy.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

A total of 26 left-sided early-stage breast cancer patients were selected for this study. To find the superior plan, H-VMAT with three different arc designs including, two partial arcs (2A), four partial arcs (4A) and four tangential arcs (TA) were created for each study case by combining 3DCRT and VMAT with 75% 3DCRT/25% VMAT dose proportion of prescription dose.

RESULTS

All H-VMAT plans achieved the expected target coverage. A higher conformity index and homogeneity index were achieved for 2A and 4A H-VMAT plans and significantly differ from TA H-VMAT (p < 0.003). The heart and ipsilateral lung dose parameters were comparable among all plans except heart V_40Gy which was significantly less in 4A H-VMAT plan (p < 0.05). The contralateral lung, contralateral breast, spinal cord, normal tissue doses and MU were significantly less in TA H-VMAT (p < 0.03). The beam-on time was significantly less in 2A H-VMAT (p < 0.0001).

CONCLUSION

2A and 4A H-VMAT techniques are effective in improving the PTV dosimetric parameters as well as reducing the OAR doses. Further, 2A H-VMAT delivers less MU and beam-on time compared to 4A H-VMAT.

Hybrid volumetric modulated arc therapy for chest wall irradiation: For a good plan, get the right mixture

PURPOSE

To find the optimal dose weighting for hybrid volumetric modulated arc therapy (H-VMAT), a combination of conventional 3DCRT and VMAT plans for left sided chest wall and supraclavicular radiation therapy.

METHODS & MATERIALS

20 left-sided breast cancer patients who received adjuvant radiotherapy were considered for this study. To find the optimal weighting, 5 H-VMAT plans were generated for each study case by combining different dose proportions of 3DCRT and VMAT plans including: 90% 3DCRT/10% VMAT, 80% 3DCRT/20% VMAT, 70% 3DCRT/30% VMAT, 60% 3DCRT/40% VMAT, 50% 3DCRT/50% VMAT. Further field-in-field, optimal H-VMAT and VMAT alone plans were compared.

RESULTS

All H-VMAT plans achieved the expected target coverage. A higher conformity index was achieved for 50% 3DCRT/50% VMAT plan, while better homogeneity index was achieved for 80% 3DCRT/20% VMAT plan. Mean and low doses were less in 90% 3DCRT/10% VMAT plan. Compared with other proportions, 80% 3DCRT/20% VMAT and 70% 3DCRT/30% VMAT weighted H-VMAT plans achieved balanced results for PTVs and OARs.

CONCLUSION

The optimal dose mixture for H-VMAT technique is 70% to 80% for 3DCRT and 20% to 30% for VMAT. The optimal H-VMAT achieved balanced results for the PTVs and OARs compared with field-in-field and VMAT alone plans.

Sparing dysphagia/aspiration related structures using novel hybrid volumetric modulated arc therapy

PURPOSE

Studies using split field IMRT to spare dysphagia/aspiration related structures (DARS) have raised concern regarding dose uncertainty at matchline. This study explores the utility of hybrid VMAT in sparing the DARS and assesses matchline dose uncertainty in postoperative oral cavity cancer patients and compares it with VMAT.

METHODS & MATERIALS

Ten postoperative oral cavity cancer patients were planned with h-VMAT and VMAT using the same planning CT dataset. PTV and DARS were contoured using standard delineation guidelines. In h-VMAT 80% of the neck dose was planned using AP/PA technique and then VMAT optimization was done for the total PTV by keeping the corresponding AP/PA plan as the base dose. Planning goal for PTV was V_95%≥95% and for DARS, adequate sparing. Plans and dose volume histograms were analyzed using dosimetric indices. Absolute point and portal dose measurements were done for h-VMAT plans to verify dose at the matchline.

RESULTS

Coverage in both the techniques was comparable. Significant differences were observed in mean doses to DARS (Larynx: 24.36±2.51 versus 16.88±2.41Gy; p<0.0006, Pharyngeal constrictors: 25.16±2.41 versus 21.2±2.1Gy; p<0.005, Esophageal inlet: 18.71±2 versus 12.06±0.79Gy; p<0.0002) favoring h-VMAT. Total MU in both the techniques was comparable. Average percentage variations in point dose measurements in h-VMAT done at +3.5 and -3.5 positions were (1.47±1.48 and 2.28±1.35%) respectively. Average gamma agreement for portal dose measured was 97.07%.

CONCLUSION

h-VMAT achieves better sparing of DARS with no matchline dose uncertainty. Since these patients have swallowing dysfunction post-operatively, attempts should be made to spare these critical structures as much as possible.

Model-based approach for quantitative estimates of skin, heart, and lung toxicity risk for left-side photon and proton irradiation after breast-conserving surgery

BACKGROUND

Proton beam therapy represents a promising modality for left-side breast cancer (BC) treatment, but concerns have been raised about skin toxicity and poor cosmesis. The aim of this study is to apply skin normal tissue complication probability (NTCP) model for intensity modulated proton therapy (IMPT) optimization in left-side BC.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Ten left-side BC patients undergoing photon irradiation after breast-conserving surgery were randomly selected from our clinical database. Intensity modulated photon (IMRT) and IMPT plans were calculated with iso-tumor-coverage criteria and according to RTOG 1005 guidelines. Proton plans were computed with and without skin optimization. Published NTCP models were employed to estimate the risk of different toxicity endpoints for skin, lung, heart and its substructures.

RESULTS

Acute skin NTCP evaluation suggests a lower toxicity level with IMPT compared to IMRT when the skin is included in proton optimization strategy (0.1% versus 1.7%, p < 0.001). Dosimetric results show that, with the same level of tumor coverage, IMPT attains significant heart and lung dose sparing compared with IMRT. By NTCP model-based analysis, an overall reduction in the cardiopulmonary toxicity risk prediction can be observed for all IMPT compared to IMRT plans: the relative risk reduction from protons varies between 0.1 and 0.7 depending on the considered toxicity endpoint.

CONCLUSIONS

Our analysis suggests that IMPT might be safely applied without increasing the risk of severe acute radiation induced skin toxicity. The quantitative risk estimates also support the potential clinical benefits of IMPT for left-side BC irradiation due to lower risk of cardiac and pulmonary morbidity. The applied approach might be relevant on the long term for the setup of cost-effectiveness evaluation strategies based on NTCP predictions.

Intensity-modulated radiation therapy for early-stage breast cancer: is it ready for prime time?

Whole breast external beam radiotherapy (WBEBRT) is commonly used as an essential arm in the treatment management of women with early-stage breast cancer. Dosimetry planning for conventional WBEBRT typically involves a pair of tangential fields. Advancement in radiation technology and techniques has the potential to improve treatment outcomes with clinically meaningful long-term benefits. However, this advancement must be balanced with safety and improved efficacy. Intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) is an advanced technique that shows promise in improving the planning process and radiation delivery. Early data on utilizing IMRT for WBEBRT demonstrate more homogenous dose distribution with reduction in organs at risk doses. This translates to toxicities reduction. The two common descriptors for IMRT are forward-planning "fields in field" and inverse planning. Unlike IMRT for other organs, the aim of IMRT for breast planning is to achieve dose homogeneity and not organ conformality. The aim of this paper was to evaluate whether IMRT is ready for prime time based on these three points: 1) workload impact, 2) the clinical impact on the patient's quality of life, and 3) the appropriateness and applicability to clinical practice.

Hybrid intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) simultaneous integrated boost (SIB) technique versus three-dimensional (3D) conformal radiotherapy with SIB for breast radiotherapy: a planning comparison

Aim

This study aims to compare conventional simultaneous integrated boost (SIB) planning technique with a hybrid SIB intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) technique with varying open tangent to IMRT field dose ratios. Furthermore, we investigated which of the dose ratios proves the most favourable as a class solution across a sample.

Methods

In total, 15 patients with conventional SIB treatment plans were re-planned with hybrid SIB IMRT technique using three differing open field:IMRT dose ratios, that is, 80:20, 70:30 and 60:40. Plans were compared using dosimetric comparison of organs at risk (OARs) and homogeneity and conformity indexes across target structures.

Results

All hybrid plans reduced dose maximums and showed a reduction of high doses to both lungs but increased lower doses, that is, V5, with similar results discovered for the heart. Contralateral breast dose was shown to decrease V5 and V1 measures by hybrid arms, whereas increasing the V2. Left anterior descending artery dose and non-irradiated structures were reduced by all hybrid arms. The homogeneity and conformity increased across all hybrid arms. Qualitative assessment of all plans also favoured hybrid plans.

Findings

Hybrid plans produced superior dose conformity, homogeneity, reduced dose maximums and showed an improvement in most OAR parameters. The 70:30 hybrid technique exhibited greater benefits as a class solution to the sample than conventional plans due to superior dose conformity and homogeneity to target volumes.

A three-field monoisocentric inverse breast treatment planning technique without half-beam blocking

The purpose of this study was to introduce a three‐field monoisocentric inverse treatment planning method without half‐beam blocks for breast cancer radiation treatments. Three‐field monoisocentric breast treatment planning with half‐beam blocks limits the tangential field length to 20 cm. A dual‐isocenter approach accommodates patients with larger breasts, but prolongs treatment time and may introduce dose uncertainty at the matching plane due to daily setup variations. We developed a novel monoisocentric, three‐field treatment planning method without half‐beam blocking. The new beam‐matching method utilizes the full field size with a single isocenter. Furthermore, an open/IMRT hybrid inverse optimization method was employed to improve dose uniformity and coverage. Geometric beam matching was achieved by rotating the couch, collimator, and gantry together. Formulae for three‐field geometric matching were derived and implemented in Pinnacle scripts. This monoisocentric technique can be used for patients with larger breast size. The new method has no constraints on the length of tangential fields. Compared with the dual‐isocenter method, it can significantly reduce patient setup time and uncertainties.

PACS number: 87.55.D‐

Intensity modulated radiotherapy and 3D conformal radiotherapy for whole breast irradiation: a comparative dosimetric study and introduction of a novel qualitative index for plan evaluation, the normal tissue index

INTRODUCTION

We report on a retrospective dosimetric study, comparing 3D conformal radiotherapy (3DCRT) and hybrid intensity modulated radiotherapy (hIMRT). We evaluated plans based on their planning target volume coverage, dose homogeneity, dose to organs at risk (OARs) and exposure of normal tissue to radiation. The Homogeneity Index (HI) was used to assess the dose homogeneity in the target region, and we describe a new index, the normal tissue index (NTI), to assess the dose in the normal tissue inside the tangent treatment portal.

METHODS

Plans were generated for 25 early-stage breast cancer patients, using a hIMRT technique. These were compared with the 3DCRT plans of the treatment previously received by the patients. Plan quality was evaluated using the HI, NTI and dose to OARs.

RESULTS

The hIMRT technique was significantly more homogenous than the 3DCRT technique, while maintaining target coverage. The hIMRT technique was also superior at minimising the amount of tissue receiving D 105% and above (P < 0.0001). The ipsilateral lung and contralateral breast maximum were significantly lower in the hIMRT plans (P < 0.05 and P < 0.005), but the 3DCRT technique achieved a lower mean heart dose in left-sided breast cancer patients (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Hybrid intensity modulated radiotherapy plans achieved improved dose homogeneity compared to the 3DCRT plans and superior outcome with regard to dose to normal tissues. We propose that the addition of both HI and NTI in evaluating the quality of intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) breast plans provides clinically relevant comparators which more accurately reflect the new paradigm of treatment goals and outcomes in the era of breast IMRT.

Australian survey on current practices for breast radiotherapy

INTRODUCTION

Detailed, published surveys specific to Australian breast radiotherapy practice were last conducted in 2002. More recent international surveys specific to breast radiotherapy practice include a European survey conducted in 2008/2009 and a Spanish survey conducted in 2009. Radiotherapy techniques continue to evolve, and the utilisation of new techniques, such as intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT), is increasing. This survey aimed to determine current breast radiotherapy practices across Australia.

METHOD

An online survey was completed by 50 of the 69 Australian radiation therapy treatment centres.

RESULTS

Supine tangential beam whole breast irradiation remains the standard of care for breast radiotherapy in Australia. A growing number of institutions are exploring prone positioning and IMRT utilisation. This survey demonstrated a wide variation in the benchmarks used to limit and report organ at risk doses, prescribed dose regimen, and post-mastectomy bolus practices. This survey also indicated, when compared with international literature, that there may be less interest in or uptake of external beam partial breast irradiation, prone positioning, simultaneous integrated boost and breath hold techniques. These are areas where further review and research may be warranted to ensure Australian patients are receiving the best care possible based on the best evidence available.

CONCLUSION

This survey provides insight into the current radiotherapy practice for breast cancer in Australia.

Deep inspiration breath-hold (DIBH) radiotherapy in left-sided breast cancer: Dosimetrical comparison and clinical feasibility in 20 patients

BACKGROUND

Adjuvant radiotherapy after breast-conserving surgery (BCS) for breast cancer (BC) is a well-established indication. The risk of ischaemic heart disease after radiotherapy for BC increases linearly with the heart mean dose with no apparent threshold. Radiotherapy to the left breast in deep inspiration breath-hold (DIBH) reduces the dose to the heart. A new linac system with an integrated surface scanner (SS) for DIBH treatments was recently installed in our department. We tested it for potential benefits, safety, patients' acceptance/compliance and associated additional workload.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Twenty consecutive patients following BCS for breast carcinoma of the left side were enrolled in our institutional DIBH protocol. We compared dose to the heart and ipsilateral lung (IL) between plans in DIBH and free breathing (FB) using standard defined parameters: mean dose, maximal dose to a volume of 2 cm(3) (D2 cm (3)), volume receiving ≥ 5 Gy (V5), 10 Gy (V10), 15 Gy (V15) and 20 Gy (V20). Comparison of median calculated dose values was performed using a two-tailed Wilcoxon signed rank test.

RESULTS

DIBH was associated with a statistically significant reduction (p < 0.001) in all studied parameters for the heart and the IL. In 16 of 20 patients the heart D2 cm (3) was less than 42 Gy in DIBH. In FB the heart D2 cm (3) was ≥ 42 Gy in 17 of 20 patients. The median daily treatment time was 9 min.

CONCLUSION

Radiotherapy of the left breast in DIBH using a SS could easily be incorporated into daily routine and is associated with significant dose reduction to the heart and IL.

Bi-tangential hybrid IMRT for sparing the shoulder in whole breast irradiation

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

A bi-tangential technique is proposed to reduce undesired doses to the shoulder produced by standard tangential irradiation.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A total of 6 patients affected by shoulder pain and reduced functional capacity after whole-breast irradiation were retrospectively analysed. The standard tangential plan used for treatment was compared with (1) a single bi-tangential plan where, to spare the shoulder, the lateral open tangent was split into two half-beams at isocentre, with the superior portion rotated by 10-20° medially with respect to the standard lateral beam; (2) a double bi-tangential plan, where both the tangential open beams were split. The planning target volume (PTV) coverage and the dose to the portion of muscles and axilla included in the standard tangential beams were compared.

RESULTS

PTV95 % of standard plan (91.9 ± 3.8) was not significantly different from single bi-tangential plan (91.8 ± 3.4); a small but significant (p < 0.01) decrease was observed with the double bi-tangential plan (90.1 ± 3.7). A marked dose reduction to the muscle was produced by the single bi-tangential plan around 30-40 Gy. The application of the double bi-tangential technique further reduced the volume receiving around 20 Gy, but did not markedly affect the higher doses. The dose to the axilla was reduced both in the single and the double bi-tangential plans.

CONCLUSION

The single bi-tangential technique would have been able to reduce the dose to shoulder and axilla, without compromising target coverage. This simple technique is valuable for irradiation after axillary lymph node dissection or in patients without dissection due to negative or low-volume sentinel lymph node disease.

Template-based breast IMRT planning for increased workload efficiency

Background

To be less resource intensive, we developed a template-based breast IMRT technique (TB-IMRT). This study aims to compare resources and dose distribution between TB-IMRT and conventional breast radiation (CBR).

Methods

Twenty patients with early stage breast cancer were planned using CBR and TB-IMRT. Time to plan, coverage of volumes, dose to critical structures and treatment times were evaluated for CBR and TB-IMRT. Two sided-paired t tests were used.

Results

TB-IMRT planning time was less than CBR (14.0 vs 39.0 min, p < 0.001). Fifteen patients with CBR needed 18 MV, and 11 of these were planned successfully with TB-IMRT using 6 MV. TB-IMRT provided better homogeneity index (0.096 vs 0.124, p < 0.001) and conformity index (0.68 vs 0.59, p = 0.003). Dose to critical structures were comparable between TB-IMRT and CBR, and treatment times were also similar (6.0 vs 7.8 min, p = 0.13).

Conclusions

TB- IMRT provides reduction of planning time and minimizes the use of high energy beams, while providing similar treatment times and equal plans compared to CBR. This technique permits efficient use of resources with a low learning curve, and can be done with existing equipment and personnel.