Dataset Information

A treatment planning comparison of contemporary photon-based radiation techniques for breast cancer.

ABSTRACT:

Background and purpose

Adjuvant radiation therapy (RT) of the whole breast (WB) is still the standard treatment for early breast cancer. A variety of radiation techniques is currently available according to different delivery strategies. This study aims to provide a comparison of six treatment planning strategies commonly adopted for breast-conserving adjuvant RT and to use the Pareto concept in an attempt to assess the degree of plan optimization.

Materials and methods

Two groups of six left- and five right-sided cases with different dose prescriptions were involved (22 patients in total). Field-in-Field (FiF), two and four Fields static-IMRT (sIMRT-2f and sIMRT-4f), Volumetric-Modulated-Arc-Therapy (VMAT), Helical Tomotherapy (HT) and Static-Angles Tomotherapy (TomoDirect™ - TD) were planned. Dose volume constraints were taken from the RTOG protocol 1005. Pareto fronts were built for a selected case to evaluate the reliability of the plan optimization process.

Results

The best target dose coverage was observed for TD able to improve significantly (p?ConclusionsOverall, TD provided significantly better results in terms of target coverage and dose sparing of ipsilateral lung with respect to all other evaluated techniques. It also significantly minimized dose to contralateral breast together with FiF. Pareto front analysis confirmed the reliability of the optimization for a selected case.

SUBMITTER: Zeverino M

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7807600 | biostudies-literature | 2018 Jul

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

A treatment planning comparison of contemporary photon-based radiation techniques for breast cancer.

Zeverino Michele M Petersson Kristoffer K Kyroudi Archonteia A Jeanneret-Sozzi Wendy W Bourhis Jean J Bochud Francois F Moeckli Raphael R

Physics and imaging in radiation oncology 20180701

<h4>Background and purpose</h4>Adjuvant radiation therapy (RT) of the whole breast (WB) is still the standard treatment for early breast cancer. A variety of radiation techniques is currently available according to different delivery strategies. This study aims to provide a comparison of six treatment planning strategies commonly adopted for breast-conserving adjuvant RT and to use the Pareto concept in an attempt to assess the degree of plan optimization.<h4>Materials and methods</h4>Two groups ...[more]

PMID: 33458403

Similar Datasets

Project description:PurposeTo assess the impact of two multileaf collimator (MLC) systems (2.5 and 5 mm leaf widths) on three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy, intensity-modulated radiotherapy, and dynamic conformal arc techniques for stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) of liver and lung lesions.MethodsTwenty-nine SBRT plans of primary liver (n=11) and lung (n=18) tumors were the basis of this study. Five-millimeter leaf width 120-leaf Varian Millennium (M120) MLC-based plans served as reference, and were designed using static conformal beams (3DCRT), sliding-window intensity-modulated beams (IMRT), or dynamic conformal arcs (DCA). Reference plans were either re-optimized or recomputed, with identical planning parameters, for a 2.5-mm width 120-leaf BrainLAB/Varian high-definition (HD120) MLC system. Dose computation was based on the anisotropic analytical algorithm (AAA, Varian Medical Systems) with tissue heterogeneity taken into account. Each plan was normalized such that 100% of the prescription dose covered 95% of the planning target volume (PTV). Isodose distributions and dose-volume histograms (DVHs) were computed and plans were evaluated with respect to target coverage criteria, normal tissue sparing criteria, as well as treatment efficiency.ResultsDosimetric differences achieved using M120 and the HD120 MLC planning were generally small. Dose conformality improved in 51.7%, 62.1% and 55.2% of the IMRT, 3DCRT and DCA cases, respectively, with use of the HD120 MLC system. Dose heterogeneity increased in 75.9%, 51.7%, and 55.2% of the IMRT, 3DCRT and DCA cases, respectively, with use of the HD120 MLC system. DVH curves demonstrated a decreased volume of normal tissue irradiated to the lower (90%, 50% and 25%) isodose levels with the HD120 MLC.ConclusionData derived from the present comparative assessment suggest dosimetric merit of the high definition MLC system over the millennium MLC system. However, the clinical significance of these results warrants further investigation in order to determine whether the observed dosimetric advantages translate into outcome improvements.

Project description:The aim of this study was to estimate the radiation-related secondary cancer risks in organs during the treatment of breast cancer with different radiotherapy techniques, such as three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3D-CRT), intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT), and volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT). The treatment plans for 26 patients with breast cancer who received whole-breast irradiation at a dose of 50?Gy included tangential field 3D-CRT with hard-wedges (W-TF), tangential field IMRT (2F-IMRT), multiple field IMRT (6F-IMRT), and double partial arcs (VMAT). Patients were divided into three groups according to the distance between the contralateral breast (CB) and the body of the sternum. Setup error was simulated by moving the isocenter, and the dose distribution was then recalculated without changing the field fluency distribution. Based on the linear-exponential, the plateau, and the full mechanistic dose-response models, the organ equivalent dose and excess absolute risk were calculated from dose-volume histograms to estimate the secondary cancer risks in organs. Compared with 3D-CRT, IMRT and VMAT showed excellent results regarding tumor conformity and homogeneity; however, the low dose volume to organs was considerably higher in 6F-IMRT and VMAT. Secondary cancer risks for 2F-IMRT were comparable or slightly lower than for W-TF, but considerably lower than for 6F-IMRT or VMAT. After setup error simulation, there was a small increase in secondary cancer risk for 2F-IMRT and an increase of 159% and 318% for 6F-IMRT and VMAT, respectively, compared with W-TF. Although these results were obtained in most patients, they did not necessarily apply to every individual. The secondary cancer risks in the CB decreased significantly in correlation with increased distance for all alternative techniques, although they were higher in VMAT and lower in 2F-IMRT regardless of the distance. After setup error simulation, the increased changes in secondary cancer risks in the CB were comparable between 2F-IMRT, 6F-IMRT, and VMAT, suggesting that the secondary cancer risks in the CB mainly depend on radiotherapy techniques and distance, although the effect of setup error cannot be ignored. In the contralateral lung (CL), the secondary cancer risks were almost independent from distance and depended mainly on radiotherapy techniques; they were rarely affected by setup error. VMAT was associated with a higher secondary cancer risk in the CL. For the ipsilateral lung (IL), the secondary cancer risks were higher than those in other organs because the IL receives high doses to achieve tumor control, and they were relatively lower in VMAT. This warrants special consideration when estimating the secondary cancer risk to the IL. The study results suggested that the optimal radiotherapy method for breast cancer should be determined on an individual basis and according to the balance between secondary cancer risks related to anatomic diversity and setup error, which can prevent blind selection of techniques.

Project description:Multigene expression signatures provide a molecular subdivision of early breast cancer associated with patient outcome. A gap remains in the validation of such signatures in clinical treatment groups of patients within population-based cohorts of unselected primary breast cancer representing contemporary disease stages and current treatments. A cohort of 3520 resectable breast cancers with RNA sequencing data included in the population-based SCAN-B initiative (ClinicalTrials.gov ID NCT02306096) were selected from a healthcare background population of 8587 patients diagnosed within the years 2010-2015. RNA profiles were classified according to 19 reported gene signatures including both gene expression subtypes (e.g. PAM50, IC10, CIT) and risk predictors (e.g. Oncotype DX, 70-gene, ROR). Classifications were analyzed in nine adjuvant clinical assessment groups: TNBC-ACT (adjuvant chemotherapy, n?=?239), TNBC-untreated (n?=?82), HER2+/ER- with anti-HER2+ ACT treatment (n?=?110), HER2+/ER+ with anti-HER2?+?ACT?+ endocrine treatment (n?=?239), ER+/HER2-/LN- with endocrine treatment (n?=?1113), ER+/HER2-/LN- with endocrine?+?ACT treatment (n?=?243), ER+/HER2-/LN+ with endocrine treatment (n?=?423), ER+/HER2-/LN+ with endocrine?+?ACT treatment (n?=?433), and ER+/HER2-/LN- untreated (n?=?200). Gene signature classification (e.g., proportion low-, high-risk) was generally well aligned with stratification based on current immunohistochemistry-based clinical practice. Most signatures did not provide any further risk stratification in TNBC and HER2+/ER- disease. Risk classifier agreement (low-, medium/intermediate-, high-risk groups) in ER+ assessment groups was on average 50-60% with occasional pair-wise comparisons having <30% agreement. Disregarding the intermediate-risk groups, the exact agreement between low- and high-risk groups was on average ~80-95%, for risk prediction signatures across all assessment groups. Outcome analyses were restricted to assessment groups of TNBC-ACT and endocrine treated ER+/HER2-/LN- and ER+/HER2-/LN+ cases. For ER+/HER2- disease, gene signatures appear to contribute additional prognostic value even at a relatively short follow-up time. Less apparent prognostic value was observed in the other groups for the tested signatures. The current study supports the usage of gene expression signatures in specific clinical treatment groups within population-based breast cancer. It also stresses the need of further development to reach higher consensus in individual patient classifications, especially for intermediate-risk patients, and the targeting of patients where current gene signatures and prognostic variables provide little support in clinical decision-making.

Project description:BackgroundThe Halcyon is a new machine from the Varian company. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the dosimetry of the Halcyon in treatment of bilateral breast cancer with volumetric modulated arc therapy.MethodsOn CT images of 10 patients with bilateral breast cancer, four Halcyon plans with different setup fields were generated, and dosimetric comparisons using Bonferroni's multiple comparisons test were conducted among the four plans. Whole and partial arc plans on the Trilogy and the Halcyon, referred to as T-4arc, T-8arc, H-4arc and H-8arc, were designed. The prescription dose was 50 Gy in 2-Gy fractions. All plans were designed with the Eclipse version 15.5 treatment planning system. The dosimetric differences between whole and partial arc plans in the same accelerator were compared using the Mann-Whitney U test. The better Halcyon plan was selected for the further dosimetric comparison of the plan quality and delivery efficiency between the Trilogy and the Halcyon.ResultsHalcyon plans with high-quality megavoltage cone beam CT setup fields increased the Dmean, D2 and V107 of the planning target volume (PTV) and the V5 and Dmean of the heart, left ventricle (LV) and lungs compared with other Halcyon setup plans. The mean dose and low dose volume of the heart, lungs and liver were significantly decreased in T-8arc plans compared to T-4arc plans. In terms of the V5, V20, V30, V40 and Dmean of the heart, the V20, V30, V40 and Dmean of the LV, the V30, V40, Dmax and Dmean of the left anterior descending artery (LAD), and the V5 and V40 of lungs, H-8arc was significantly higher than H-4arc (p < 0.05). Compared with the Trilogy's plans, the Halcyon's plans reduced the high-dose volume of the heart and LV but increased the mean dose of the heart. For the dose of the LAD and the V20 and V30 of lungs, there was no significant difference between the two accelerators. Compared with the Trilogy, plans on the Halcyon significantly increased the skin dose but also significantly reduced the delivery time.ConclusionFor the Halcyon, the whole-arc plans have more dosimetric advantages than partial-arc plans in bilateral breast cancer radiotherapy. Although the mean dose of the heart and the skin dose are increased, the doses of the cardiac substructure and other OARs are comparable to the Trilogy, and the delivery time is significantly reduced.

Dataset Information

A treatment planning comparison of contemporary photon-based radiation techniques for breast cancer.

Background and purpose

Materials and methods

Results

Publications

A treatment planning comparison of contemporary photon-based radiation techniques for breast cancer.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure