首页 | 本学科首页   官方微博 | 高级检索  
     


Image-guided volumetric modulated arc therapy for breast cancer: a feasibility study and plan comparison with three-dimensional conformal and intensity-modulated radiotherapy
Authors:H Badakhshi  D Kaul  J Nadobny  B Wille  J Sehouli  V Budach
Affiliation:1.Department of Radiation Oncology, Charité School of Medicine and University Hospital Berlin, Berlin, Germany;2.Department of Medical Physics, Charité School of Medicine and University Hospital Berlin, Berlin, Germany;3.Department of Gynecology, Charité School of Medicine and University Hospital Berlin, Berlin, Germany
Abstract:

Objective:

To test the feasibility of volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) in breast cancer and to compare it with three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3D-CRT) as conventional tangential field radiotheraphy (conTFRT).

Methods:

12 patients (Stage I, 8: 6 left breast cancer and 2 right breast cancer; Stage II, 4: 2 on each side). Three plans were calculated for each case after breast-conserving surgery. Breast was treated with 50 Gy in four patients with supraclavicular lymph node inclusion, and in eight patients without the node inclusion. Multiple indices and dose parameters were measured.

Results:

V95% was not achieved by any modality. Heterogeneity index: 0.16 (VMAT), 0.13 [intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT)] and 0.14 (conTFRT). Conformity index: 1.06 (VMAT), 1.15 (IMRT) and 1.69 (conTFRT). For both indices, IMRT was more effective than VMAT (p=0.009, p=0.002). Dmean and V20 for ipsilateral lung were lower for IMRT than VMAT (p=0.0001, p=0.003). Dmean, V2 and V5 of contralateral lung were lower for IMRT than VMAT (p>0.0001, p=0.005). Mean dose and V5 to the heart were lower for IMRT than for VMAT (p=0.015, p=0.002).

Conclusion:

The hypothesis of equivalence of VMAT to IMRT was not confirmed for planning target volume parameter or dose distribution to organs at risk. VMAT was inferior to IMRT and 3D-CRT with regard to dose distribution to organs at risk, especially at the low dose level.

Advances in knowledge:

New technology VMAT is not superior to IMRT or conventional radiotherapy in breast cancer in any aspect.In Western countries, one in every eight females is diagnosed with breast cancer. Breast-conserving surgery with post-operative radiotherapy (RT) is the primary therapeutic strategy for Stages I and II of breast cancer. Systemic therapy is also part of the primary therapeutic strategy in most patients with Stage I and II breast cancer. RT substantially reduces the rate of local relapse and improves long-term survival [1]. However, RT is suggested to be associated with morbidity of the heart [2,3], lung [4,5], subcutaneous tissue and skin [6] and a risk of secondary malignancies [79].A large body of available data regarding the potential toxicity of RT was published between 1980 and the end of 1990 [1]. Special clinical interest has been focused on acute and mostly transient lung and skin toxicity, axillary problems and late cardiac events, in addition to the risk of secondary malignancies. This period was characterised by RT delivery using a fluoroscopic technique with two-dimensional planning followed by three-dimensional (3D) conformal techniques with two conventional tangential field radiotherapy (conTFRT) fields. conTFRT encompassed the whole breast, skin, minor ipsilateral lung volume, a part of the axillary region at Level 1 and a part of the heart in the case of left-sided cancer [1012]. These areas have been sites for local toxicity, because RT principles, and thus homogeneous photon flux across treatment fields, remained unchanged.Intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) has been implemented in the past decade, permitting variation of fluence modulation across fields and allowing optimal dose administration according to an individual''s anatomy. IMRT results in improved avoidance of critical structures such as the heart, skin, axillary region and lung, while facilitating necessary tumour volume coverage [13,14]. Clinical data on IMRT show an improvement in dose homogeneity within the irradiated breast and sparing of the heart and lung [1417]. However, a disadvantage of IMRT over conTFRT is the long treatment duration owing to the higher number of fields and monitor units (MUs) involved. In addition, although IMRT reduces the volume of the heart and ipsilateral lung that receive high doses, it is associated with an increase in overall low-dose radiation. Despite the available clinical data, the wider use and specific indications for IMRT for breast cancer have not been established.In volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT), technical extension of conventional fixed-field IMRT, an optimised dose distribution is possible with a single gantry rotation. Studies have shown that VMAT reduces the number of MUs and treatment delivery time [1822], with similar or better planning target volume (PTV) coverage and sparing of organs at risk (OARs) than IMRT. Reports on VMAT for breast cancer are few and mainly concern planning comparisons [20,2328] and very preliminary clinical data [29].The RapidArc® system (Varian Medical Systems, Palo Alto, CA) has recently been introduced in our department. Accordingly, we have begun examining the potential of RapidArc VMAT for breast cancer treatment in a prospective clinical setting to adequately evaluate dosimetric parameters, treatment planning and clinical implications as well the disadvantages.The present study aimed to compare the use of RapidArc VMAT with IMRT and conTFRT for breast cancer therapy. We hypothesised that the use of RapidArc under routine clinical circumstances would be equivalent to or better than IMRT and conTFRT in terms of PTV coverage and OAR sparing, while reducing both treatment time and MUs.
Keywords:
设为首页 | 免责声明 | 关于勤云 | 加入收藏

Copyright©北京勤云科技发展有限公司  京ICP备09084417号