SU-E-T-532: Left-Sided Breast Cancer Irradiation Using Volumatric Modulated Arc Therapy: An Evaluation of Multiple Commercial Systems

2015 ◽  
Vol 42 (6Part20) ◽  
pp. 3457-3457
Author(s):  
R Liu ◽  
T Liu ◽  
S Qi
2016 ◽  
Vol 102 (4) ◽  
pp. 335-336 ◽  
Author(s):  
Filippo Alongi ◽  
Niccolò Giaj-Levra ◽  
Alba Fiorentino ◽  
Rosario Mazzola ◽  
Sergio Fersino ◽  
...  

2018 ◽  
Vol 195 (1) ◽  
pp. 13-20 ◽  
Author(s):  
Montserrat Pazos ◽  
Alba Fiorentino ◽  
Aurélie Gaasch ◽  
Stephan Schönecker ◽  
Daniel Reitz ◽  
...  

2018 ◽  
Vol 13 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Pei-Chieh Yu ◽  
Ching-Jung Wu ◽  
Hsin-Hua Nien ◽  
Louis Tak Lui ◽  
Suzun Shaw ◽  
...  

2020 ◽  
Vol 61 (5) ◽  
pp. 747-754
Author(s):  
Yoshiko Doi ◽  
Minoru Nakao ◽  
Hideharu Miura ◽  
Shuichi Ozawa ◽  
Masahiro Kenjo ◽  
...  

ABSTRACT 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.


Author(s):  
Geraldine M. Jacobson ◽  
Lee K. McNeely ◽  
Dennis D. Leavitt ◽  
J. Robert Stewart

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document