scholarly journals A Retrospective Analysis of Dose Distribution and Toxicity in Patients with Left Breast Cancer Treated with Adjuvant Intensity-Modulated Radiotherapy: Comparison with Three-Dimensional Conformal Radiotherapy

2020 ◽  
Vol Volume 12 ◽  
pp. 9173-9182
Author(s):  
Chia-Hsin Chen ◽  
Ching-Chuan Hsieh ◽  
Chih-Shen Chang ◽  
Miao-Fen Chen
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Retrospective Analysis ◽  
Dose Distribution ◽  
Three Dimensional ◽  
Intensity Modulated Radiotherapy ◽  
Conformal Radiotherapy ◽  
Left Breast ◽  
Intensity Modulated ◽  
Three Dimensional Conformal Radiotherapy

Intensity-modulated radiotherapy versus three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy during deep inspiratory breath hold for left-sided whole-breast irradiation: a comparative analysis

2015 ◽  
Vol 15 (1) ◽  
pp. 99-106
Author(s):  
D. M. Trifiletti ◽  
K. Wijesooriya ◽  
G. Moyer ◽  
D. Lain ◽  
C. Geesey ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Organs At Risk ◽  
Three Dimensional ◽  
Intensity Modulated Radiotherapy ◽  
Conformal Radiotherapy ◽  
Left Breast ◽  
Breath Hold ◽  
Breast Irradiation ◽  
Intensity Modulated ◽  
Three Dimensional Conformal Radiotherapy

AbstractAimDeep inspiratory breath hold (DIBH) during left-breast irradiation helps to minimise cardiac irradiation by physically separating the heart from the left breast. The dose to organs-at-risk in intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) and opposed tangent three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3DCRT) during DIBH in patients with left-sided breast cancer was compared.Materials and methodsA total of 20 consecutive patients with left-sided breast cancer had a computed tomography scan utilising DIBH. Mean volumes of the heart, left anterior descending coronary artery, total lung and right breast receiving 5–95% of the prescription dose were calculated.ResultsTarget volume homogeneity was improved with IMRT and average mean dose to target was higher for 3DCRT (51·03 Gy) compared with IMRT (50·47 Gy, p<0·01). The average mean dose to the heart was lower with 3DCRT (87 versus 77 cGy, p<0·01). The average mean dose to the contralateral breast was also lower with 3DCRT (19 versus 17 cGy, p<0·01). Less monitor units (MUs) were required with 3DCRT with an average difference of 225 MU/fraction (p<0·01).FindingsUnder DIBH, absolute differences between 3DCRT and IMRT were minimal. 3DCRT under DIBH provided excellent dosimetric results in most patients with left-sided breast cancer without the need for IMRT.

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

2015 ◽  
Vol 15 (1) ◽  
pp. 30-37 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mehlam Kausar ◽  
Om Prakash Gurjar ◽  
Priyusha Bagdare ◽  
Krishna Lal Gupta ◽  
Virendra Bhandari ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Chest Wall ◽  
Three Dimensional ◽  
Intensity Modulated Radiotherapy ◽  
Conformal Radiotherapy ◽  
Breast Cancer Patients ◽  
Intensity Modulated ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Three Dimensional Conformal Radiotherapy

AbstractBackgroundFor chest wall irradiation in breast cancer patients, three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3DCRT) and intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) have made tremendous changes in treatment delivery.PurposeThe purpose of this study is to compare the dosimetric parameters in IMRT and 3DCRT plans.Materials and methodsIMRT 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.ResultsPTV 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.ConclusionAdequate 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.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document