Optimization of dose distribution with multi-leaf collimator using field-in-field technique for parallel opposing tangential beams of breast cancers

Minimizing clearance issues with prone breast patients on Varian linear accelerators through isocenter placement

The prone position is frequently used for breast irradiation in an effort to minimize dose to normal tissue and reduce skin toxicities. Immobilization required for prone breast irradiation can cause collision issues with the linear accelerator, disrupting treatment and negatively affecting the patient experience. The purpose of this retrospective study was to determine if an isocenter location guideline could be developed to prevent collisions with the prone breast immobilization device and gantry head, while still creating a clinically acceptable treatment plan. Clearance isocenter guidelines were established by measuring clearance between the Civco Horizon breast board and Varian linear accelerator. Fourteen patients with known clearance issues at a single institution were selected for this study and re-planned using clearance isocenter guidelines. Collision plans were compared to clearance plans created within the established clearance threshold through the institutions breast treatment guidelines based on arm II of the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) 1005 recommendations. Researchers in this study demonstrated clinical relevance by establishing that a clearance isocenter location guideline can be developed to prevent collisions with the prone breast immobilization and gantry head, while still creating a clinically acceptable treatment plan.

Field-in-field breast planning for a jawless, double-stack MLC LINAC using flattening-filter-free beams

BACKGROUND

This study intends to develop an efficient field-in-field (FiF) planning technique with the Eclipse treatment planning system (TPS) to determine the feasibility of using the Halcyon treatment delivery system for 3D treatment of breast cancer.

METHODS

Ten treatment plans were prepared on the Halcyon treatment planning system and compared to the same patients' clinically delivered TrueBeam plans which used flattened 6 MV and 10 MV beams. Patients selected for this study were treated via simple, tangential breast irradiation and did not receive radiotherapy of the supraclavicular or internal mammary lymph nodes. Planning target volumes (PTV) volumes ranged from 519 cc to 1211 cc with a mean target volume of 877 cc. Several planning techniques involving collimator, gantry rotation, and number of FiF segments were investigated as well as the use of the dynamically flattened beam (DFB) - a predefined MLC pattern that is designed to provide a flattened beam profile at 10 cm depth on a standard water phantom. For comparison, the clinically delivered TrueBeam plans remained unaltered except for normalization of the target coverage to more readily compare the two treatment delivery techniques.

RESULTS

Using the physician defined PTV, normalized such that 98% of the volume was covered by 95% of the prescribed dose, the Halcyon plans were deemed clinically acceptable and comparable to the TrueBeam plans by the radiation oncologist. Resulting average global maximum doses in the test patients were identical between the TrueBeam and Halcyon plans (108% of Rx) and a mean PTV dose of 102.5% vs 101.6%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

From this study a practical and efficient planning method for delivering 3D conformal breast radiotherapy using the Halcyon linear accelerator has been developed. When normalized to the clinically desired coverage, hot spots were maintained to acceptable levels and overall plan quality was comparable to plans delivered on conventional C-arm LINACs.

Current Therapeutic Approaches to DCIS

Treatment for ductal carcinoma in-situ (DCIS) has historically been extrapolated from studies of invasive breast cancer. Accepted local therapy approaches range from small local excisions, with or without radiation, to bilateral mastectomies. Systemic treatment with endocrine therapy is often recommended for hormone positive patients. With improvements in imaging, pathologic review, and treatment techniques in the modern era, combined with new information regarding tumor biology, the management of DCIS is rapidly evolving. A multidisciplinary approach to treatment is now more important than ever, with a shift towards de-escalating therapy to reduce treatment related toxicity. This review focuses on nuances of clinical management of DCIS in the modern era, highlighting key differences between DCIS as compared to invasive breast cancer. The American Cancer Society (ACS) currently recommends beginning screening with annual mammograms for women age 45, with the option to start at age 40. As treatment of DCIS has not been shown to impact survival, the USPSTF has more conservative screening recommendations of biennial mammograms from age 50-74. Unlike invasive breast cancer, DCIS is almost exclusively diagnosed by mammographic detection, and lymph node evaluation is not recommended. Pathologic review of biopsy specimens should follow the guidelines of the College of American Pathologists. Surgical management options include breast conservation, mastectomy, or possibly nipple sparing mastectomy, with upfront sentinel lymph node evaluation in the case of mastectomy. Radiation therapy is generally recommended as a component of breast conserving therapy for patients with DCIS, though in some low risk patients, there is trial data to suggest that adjuvant radiation may be omitted. Techniques for minimizing radiation toxicity should always be emphasized. Endocrine therapy is offered to women with hormone positive DCIS who have undergone lumpectomy for risk reduction, and has the benefit of decreasing incidence of events in both the ipsilateral and contralateral breast. More recent studies have explored use of targeted treatments such as trastuzumab in DCIS for HER2 overexpression. Future directions include tailoring therapy based on patient characteristics and tumor biology. With so many different options for treatment, it is also critical to engage in a discussion with the patient to arrive at a treatment decision that balances patient preferences for disease control versus treatment toxicity, financial toxicity, cosmesis, and quality of life.

Dosimetric Comparison of Irregular Surface Compensator and Field-in-Field for Whole Breast Radiotherapy

PURPOSE

The purpose of the present study was to evaluate the dosimetric benefits of the irregular surface compensator (ISC) technique for whole breast radiotherapy compared with the field-in-field (FIF) technique.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Radiotherapy was planned using both techniques in 50 breast cancer patients (25 left sided and 25 right sided). The Eclipse treatment planning system (Varian Medical Systems) was used for dose calculations. For the FIF technique, subfields were added to the main fields to reduce hot and cold regions; for the ISC technique, the fluence editor application was used to extend the optimal fluence. Planning target volume dose, dose homogeneity index (DHI), maximum dose, ipsilateral lung, and heart doses for the left breast irradiation and monitor unit (MU) counts required for treatment were compared between the two techniques.

RESULTS

Compared with the FIF technique, the ISC technique significantly decreased DHI values and volumes receiving >105% of the prescription dose, and increased volumes receiving >95% of the dose and MU count (P < 0.01 for all comparisons). For the heart and ipsilateral lung, the FIF technique significantly reduced volumes receiving >5 Gy compared with the ISC technique (P < 0.01); however, volumes receiving >10, 20, and 30 Gy and the values of a mean dose did not differ significantly between the techniques (P > 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

The ISC technique is preferred over the FIF technique.

Usefulness of the dual energy field-in-field technique in breast tangential radiotherapy

PURPOSE

In the field-in-field (FIF) technique in breast tangential radiotherapy, the energy of the subfield is usually the same as the energy of the main field. However, some studies have applied 10-18 MV to subfields in patients with large breasts. We compared two FIF plans in 66 breast cancer patients: in one, the energy of the subfield was the same as that of the main field (the mono energy plan); in the other, it was higher (the dual energy plan).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The photon energy of the subfield was 6 MV in the mono energy plan and 10 MV in the dual energy plan. The percentage of the planning target volume (PTV) receiving at least 105, 100, and 95% of the prescribed dose (V105, V100, and V95, respectively) was calculated, as were the maximum and mean doses delivered to the PTV (Dmax and Dmean, respectively). Clinical target volumes (CTVs) and the thickness of the breast between the chest wall and skin surface at the level of the nipple were measured.

RESULTS

V95% was significantly higher in the dual energy plan than in the mono energy plan in patients with CTVs or breast thickness in the highest quartile. There were no significant differences in the other parameters of the two plans in these patients.

CONCLUSION

These findings demonstrate the usefulness of the dual energy FIF technique in patients with large breasts receiving breast tangential radiotherapy.

Dosimetric analysis of intensity-modulated radiotherapy and three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy for chest wall irradiation in breast cancer patients

Background

For chest wall irradiation in breast cancer patients, three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3DCRT) and intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) have made tremendous changes in treatment delivery.

Purpose

The purpose of this study is to compare the dosimetric parameters in IMRT and 3DCRT plans.

Materials and methods

IMRT and 3DCRT plans were generated for 25 randomly selected postmastectomy breast cancer patients. The prescribed dose (PD) was 50 Gray (Gy) in 25 fractions (#) at the rate of 2 Gy/# with 5#/week. Dose volume histogram was evaluated for planning target volume (PTV) coverage and dose to organs at risk (OARs). All the dosimetric parameters were compared using unpaired student’s t-test.

Results

PTV coverage was significantly better in IMRT, although the 90% of PTV was well covered by 90% of PD in all plans by both the techniques. Homogeneity index and conformity index were better in IMRT. V5 Gy and Dmean of contralateral lung, contralateral breast and heart (right side chest wall cases) were found to be lesser in 3DCRT compared with that in IMRT. However, there was no significant difference in V20 Gy of ipsilateral lung and V25 Gy of heart (left side chest wall cases) in all the plans by both the techniques.

Conclusion

Adequate target coverage was achieved by both the techniques, however, dose to OARs were lesser in 3DCRT plans as compared with that in IMRT plans. Thus, it can be concluded that 3DCRT is as efficient as IMRT for the chest wall irradiation.

Evaluation of the field-in-field technique with lung blocks for breast tangential radiotherapy

Several studies have reported the advantages of the field-in-field (FIF) technique in breast radiotherapy, including dose reduction in the lungs by using lung field blocks. We evaluated the FIF technique with lung blocks for breast tangential radiotherapy. Sixteen patients underwent free breathing (FB) computed tomography (CT), followed by two CT procedures performed during breath hold after light inhalation (IN) and light exhalation (EX). Three radiotherapy plans were created using the FIF technique based on the FB-CT images: one without lung blocks (LB0) and two with lung blocks whose monitor units (MUs) were 5 (LB5) and 10 (LB10), respectively. These plans were copied to the IN-CT and EX-CT images. V20Gy, V30Gy, and V40Gy of the ipsilateral lung and V100%, V95%, and the mean dose (Dmean) to the planning target volume (PTV) were analyzed. The extent of changes in these parameters on the IN-plan and EX-plan compared with the FB-plan was evaluated. V20Gy, V30Gy, and V40Gy were significantly smaller for FB-LB5 and FB-LB10 than for FB-LB0; similar results were obtained for the IN-plan and EX-plan. V100%, V95%, and Dmean were also significant smaller for FB-LB5 and FB-LB10 than for FB-LB0. The extent of changes in V20Gy, V30Gy, and V40Gy on the IN-plan and EX-plan compared with the FB-plan was not statistically significant. Lung blocks were useful for dose reduction in the lung and a simultaneous PTV decrease. This technique should not be applied in the general population.

Novel 10-fraction Breast Irradiation in Prone and Supine Position: Technical, Dosimetric and Clinical Evaluation

Background

The aim of this study was to evaluate retrospectively the planned dose distribution and acute toxicity of adjuvant hypofractionated whole breast radiotherapy (RT) delivered in the prone vs. supine position.

Methods

Twenty-four patients were enrolled; 12 underwent adjuvant RT with a supine setup and 12 with a prone setup. We included patients according to breast volume (≥500 mL), disease stage (≤pT2/pN1), and clinical/biological features. Patients received a regimen of 35 Gy in 10 fractions for 2.5 weeks, and a concomitant boost of 3/4 Gy in 1 fraction/week. Target coverage was assessed by volume, V90, V95, V100, V103 and V105. Heart, LADCA and ipsilateral lung doses were evaluated according to volume, maximum dose, mean dose, V14, V10 and V5. We evaluated acute skin toxicity during RT, at the end of treatment, and after 1 month according to RTOG scales.

Results

Radiobiological equivalence was warranted with satisfactory BED values: considering α/β = 4 for breast cancer, the 10-fraction schedule equaled 74 or 77 Gy depending on the boost dose (3 Gy vs. 4 Gy, respectively). Toxicity was low and similar for supine and prone treatments. Dose sparing was significant in the ipsilateral lung in the prone position (median Dmax: 28.7 Gy vs. 38.4 Gy; median Dmean: 0.8 Gy vs. 6.3 Gy; median V14:0.6% vs. 13.5%; median V5: 0 vs. 19.3%, p<0.001).

Conclusions

This novel 10-fraction schedule is feasible and well tolerated; the prone position allows better saving of OARs, with a statistically significant value for the ipsilateral lung.

Determination of the optimal method for the field-in-field technique in breast tangential radiotherapy

Several studies have reported the usefulness of the field-in-field (FIF) technique in breast radiotherapy. However, the methods for the FIF technique used in these studies vary. These methods were classified into three categories. We simulated a radiotherapy plan with each method and analyzed the outcomes. In the first method, a pair of subfields was added to each main field: the single pair of subfields method (SSM). In the second method, three pairs of subfields were added to each main field: the multiple pairs of subfields method (MSM). In the third method, subfields were alternately added: the alternate subfields method (ASM). A total of 51 patients were enrolled in this study. The maximum dose to the planning target volume (PTV) (Dmax) and the volumes of the PTV receiving 100% of the prescription dose (V100%) were calculated. The thickness of the breast between the chest wall and skin surface was measured, and patients were divided into two groups according to the median. In the overall series, the average V100% with ASM (60.3%) was significantly higher than with SSM (52.6%) and MSM (48.7%). In the thin breast group as well, the average V100% with ASM (57.3%) and SSM (54.2%) was significantly higher than that with MSM (43.3%). In the thick breast group, the average V100% with ASM (63.4%) was significantly higher than that with SSM (51.0%) and MSM (54.4%). ASM resulted in better dose distribution, regardless of the breast size. Moreover, planning for ASM required a relatively short time. ASM was considered the most preferred method.

Forward-planned intensity modulated radiation therapy using a cobalt source: A dosimetric study in breast cancer

This analysis evaluates the feasibility and dosimetric results of a simplified intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) treatment using a cobalt-therapy unit for post-operative breast cancer. Fourteen patients were included. Three plans per patient were produced by a cobalt-60 source: A standard plan with two wedged tangential beams, a standard tangential plan optimized without the use of wedges and a plan based on the forward-planned “field-in-field” IMRT technique (Co-FinF) where the dose on each of the two tangential beams was split into two different segments and the two segments weight was determined with an iterative process. For comparison purposes, a 6-MV photon standard wedged tangential treatment plan was generated. D_mean, D_98%, D_2%, V_95%, V_107%, homogeneity, and conformity indices were chosen as parameters for comparison. Co-FinF technique improved the planning target volume dose homogeneity compared to other cobalt-based techniques and reduced maximum doses (D_2%) and high-dose volume (V_110%). Moreover, it showed a better lung and heart dose sparing with respect to the standard approach. The higher dose homogeneity may encourage the adoption of accelerated-hypofractionated treatments also with the cobalt sources. This approach can promote the spread of breast conservative treatment in developing countries.

Improvement of dose distribution with irregular surface compensator in whole breast radiotherapy

Aim of this study was to compare the dosimetric aspects of whole breast radiotherapy (WBRT) between an irregular surface compensator (ISC) and a conventional tangential field technique using physical wedges. Treatment plans were produced for 20 patients. The Eclipse treatment planning system (Varian Medical Systems) was used for the dose calculation: For the physical wedge technique, the wedge angle was selected to provide the best dose homogeneity; for the ISC technique, the fluence editor application was used to extend the optimal fluence. These two treatment plans were compared in terms of doses in the planning target volume, the dose homogeneity index, the maximum dose, ipsilateral lung and heart doses for left breast irradiation, and the monitor unit counts required for treatment. Compared with the physical wedge technique, the ISC technique significantly reduced the dose homogeneity index, the maximum dose, the volumes received at 105% of the prescription dose, as well as reducing both the ipsilateral lung and heart doses (P < 0.01 for all comparisons). However, the monitor unit counts were not significantly different between the techniques (P > 0.05). Thus, the ISC technique for WBRT enables significantly better dose distribution in the planning target volume.

Dosimetric comparison of intensity modulated radiotherapy isocentric field plans and field in field (FIF) forward plans in the treatment of breast cancer

The present study is aimed at comparing the planning and delivery efficiency between three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3D-CRT), field-in-field, forward planned, intensity modulated radiotherapy (FIF-FP-IMRT), and inverse planned intensity modulated radiotherapy (IP-IMRT). Treatment plans of 20 patients with left-sided breast cancer, 10 post-mastectomy treated to a prescribed dose of 45 Gy to the chest wall in 20 fractions, and 10 post-breast-conserving surgery to a prescribed dose of 50 Gy to the whole breast in 25 fractions, with 3D-CRT were selected. The FiF-FP-IMRT plans were created by combining two open fields with three to four segments in two tangential beam directions. Eight different beam directions were chosen to create IP-IMRT plans and were inversely optimized. The homogeneity of dose to planning target volume (PTV) and the dose delivered to heart and contralateral breast were compared among the techniques in all the 20 patients. All the three radiotherapy techniques achieved comparable radiation dose delivery to PTV-95% of the prescribed dose covering > 95% of the breast PTV. The mean volume of PTV receiving 105% (V₁₀₅) of the prescribed dose was 1.7% (range 0-6.8%) for IP-IMRT, 1.9% for FP-IMRT, and 3.7% for 3D-CRT. The homogeneity and conformity indices (HI and CI) were similar for 3D-CRT and FP-IMRT, whereas the IP-IMRT plans had better conformity index at the cost of less homogeneity. The 3D-CRT and FiF-FP-IMRT plans achieved similar sparing of critical organs. The low-dose volumes (V_5Gy) in the heart and lungs were larger in IP-IMRT than in the other techniques. The value of the mean dose to the ipsilateral lung was higher for IP-IMRT than the values for with FiF-FP-IMRT and 3D-CRT. In the current study, the relative volume of contralateral breast receiving low doses (0.01, 0.6, 1, and 2Gy) was significantly lower for the FiF-FP-IMRT and 3D-CRT plans than for the IP-IMRT plan. Compared with 3D-CRT and IP-IMRT, FiF-FP-IMRT proved to be a simple and efficient planning technique for breast irradiation. It provided dosimetric advantages, significantly reducing the size of the hot spot and minimally improving the coverage of the target volume. In addition, it was felt that FiF-FP-IMRT required less planning time and easy field placements.

Optimizing of the tangential technique and supraclavicular fields in 3 dimensional conformal radiation therapy for breast cancer

Radiotherapy plays an essential role in the management of breast cancer. Three-dimensional conformal radiation therapy (3D-CRT) is applied based on 3D image information of anatomy of patients. In 3D-CRT for breast cancer one of the common techniques is tangential technique. In this project, various parameters of tangential and supraclavicular fields are optimized. This project has been done on computed tomography images of 100 patients in Isfahan Milad Hospital. All patients have been simulated and all the important organs have been contoured by radiation oncologist. Two techniques in supraclavicular region are evaluated including: 1-A single field (Anterior Posterior [AP]) with a dose of 200 cGy per fraction with 6 MV energy. This is a common technique. 2-Two parallel opposed fields (AP-Posterior Anterior [PA]). The dose of AP was 150 cGy with 6 MV energy and PA 50 cGy with 18 MV. In the second part of the project, the tangential fields has been optimized with change of normalization point in five points: (1) Isocenter (Confluence of rotation gantry axis and collimator axis) (2) Middle of thickest part of breast or middle of inter field distance (IFD) (3) Border between the lung and chest wall (4) Physician's choice (5) Between IFD and isocenter. Dose distributions have been compared for all patients in different methods of supraclavicular and tangential field. In parallel opposed fields average lung dose was 4% more than a single field and the maximum received heart dose was 21.5% less than a single field. The average dose of planning tumor volume (PTV) in method 2 is 2% more than method 1. In general AP-PA method because of a better coverage of PTV is suggested. In optimization of the tangential field all methods have similar coverage of PTV. Each method has spatial advantages and disadvantages. If it is important for the physician to reduce the dose received by the lung and heart, fifth method is suggested since in this method average and maximum received dose to heart and lung have been reduced few percent in comparison to other methods. If a better coverage of PTV is important for the physician second method can be an optimized method. In this method, average and maximum received dose to PTV have been increased few percent in comparisons of physician's choice method and three other methods. In optimizing of supraclavicular field AP-PA method due to better coverage of PTV is suggested. In optimizing of tangential all methods are similar. Each method has special advantages and disadvantages. The physicians can change the depth of the normalization point in the breast to get the desired average dose.

Topical hyaluronic acid vs. standard of care for the prevention of radiation dermatitis after adjuvant radiotherapy for breast cancer: single-blind randomized phase III clinical trial

PURPOSE

To determine the efficacy of an emulsion containing hyaluronic acid to reduce the development of ≥ Grade 2 radiation dermatitis after adjuvant breast radiation compared with best supportive care.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Women with breast cancer who had undergone lumpectomy and were to receive whole-breast radiotherapy to 50 Gy with a 10- to 16-Gy surgical bed boost were enrolled in a prospective randomized trial to compare the effectiveness of a hyaluronic acid-based gel (RadiaPlex) and a petrolatum-based gel (Aquaphor) for preventing the development of dermatitis. Each patient was randomly assigned to use hyaluronic acid gel on the medial half or the lateral half of the irradiated breast and to use the control gel on the other half. Dermatitis was graded weekly according to the Common Terminology Criteria v3.0 by the treating physician, who was blinded as to which gel was used on which area of the breast. The primary endpoint was development of ≥ Grade 2 dermatitis.

RESULTS

The study closed early on the basis of a recommendation from the Data and Safety Monitoring Board after 74 of the planned 92 patients were enrolled. Breast skin treated with the hyaluronic acid gel developed a significantly higher rate of ≥ Grade 2 dermatitis than did skin treated with petrolatum gel: 61.5% (40/65) vs. 47.7% (31/65) (p = 0.027). Only one patient developed Grade 3 dermatitis using either gel. A higher proportion of patients had worse dermatitis in the breast segment treated with hyaluronic acid gel than in that treated with petrolatum gel at the end of radiotherapy (42% vs. 14%, p = 0.003).

CONCLUSION

We found no benefit from the use of a topical hyaluronic acid-based gel for reducing the development of ≥ Grade 2 dermatitis after adjuvant radiotherapy for breast cancer. Additional studies are needed to determine the efficacy of hyaluronic acid-based gel in controlling radiation dermatitis symptoms after they develop.