Cargando…

Breast Conserving Treatment for Breast Cancer: Dosimetric Comparison of Sequential versus Simultaneous Integrated Photon Boost

Background. Breast conserving surgery followed by whole breast irradiation is widely accepted as standard of care for early breast cancer. Addition of a boost dose to the initial tumor area further reduces local recurrences. We investigated the dosimetric benefits of a simultaneously integrated boos...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Van Parijs, Hilde, Reynders, Truus, Heuninckx, Karina, Verellen, Dirk, Storme, Guy, De Ridder, Mark
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Hindawi Publishing Corporation 2014
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4137720/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25162031
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2014/827475
_version_ 1782331151407382528
author Van Parijs, Hilde
Reynders, Truus
Heuninckx, Karina
Verellen, Dirk
Storme, Guy
De Ridder, Mark
author_facet Van Parijs, Hilde
Reynders, Truus
Heuninckx, Karina
Verellen, Dirk
Storme, Guy
De Ridder, Mark
author_sort Van Parijs, Hilde
collection PubMed
description Background. Breast conserving surgery followed by whole breast irradiation is widely accepted as standard of care for early breast cancer. Addition of a boost dose to the initial tumor area further reduces local recurrences. We investigated the dosimetric benefits of a simultaneously integrated boost (SIB) compared to a sequential boost to hypofractionate the boost volume, while maintaining normofractionation on the breast. Methods. For 10 patients 4 treatment plans were deployed, 1 with a sequential photon boost, and 3 with different SIB techniques: on a conventional linear accelerator, helical TomoTherapy, and static TomoDirect. Dosimetric comparison was performed. Results. PTV-coverage was good in all techniques. Conformity was better with all SIB techniques compared to sequential boost (P = 0.0001). There was less dose spilling to the ipsilateral breast outside the PTVboost (P = 0.04). The dose to the organs at risk (OAR) was not influenced by SIB compared to sequential boost. Helical TomoTherapy showed a higher mean dose to the contralateral breast, but less than 5 Gy for each patient. Conclusions. SIB showed less dose spilling within the breast and equal dose to OAR compared to sequential boost. Both helical TomoTherapy and the conventional technique delivered acceptable dosimetry. SIB seems a safe alternative and can be implemented in clinical routine.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4137720
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2014
publisher Hindawi Publishing Corporation
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-41377202014-08-26 Breast Conserving Treatment for Breast Cancer: Dosimetric Comparison of Sequential versus Simultaneous Integrated Photon Boost Van Parijs, Hilde Reynders, Truus Heuninckx, Karina Verellen, Dirk Storme, Guy De Ridder, Mark Biomed Res Int Clinical Study Background. Breast conserving surgery followed by whole breast irradiation is widely accepted as standard of care for early breast cancer. Addition of a boost dose to the initial tumor area further reduces local recurrences. We investigated the dosimetric benefits of a simultaneously integrated boost (SIB) compared to a sequential boost to hypofractionate the boost volume, while maintaining normofractionation on the breast. Methods. For 10 patients 4 treatment plans were deployed, 1 with a sequential photon boost, and 3 with different SIB techniques: on a conventional linear accelerator, helical TomoTherapy, and static TomoDirect. Dosimetric comparison was performed. Results. PTV-coverage was good in all techniques. Conformity was better with all SIB techniques compared to sequential boost (P = 0.0001). There was less dose spilling to the ipsilateral breast outside the PTVboost (P = 0.04). The dose to the organs at risk (OAR) was not influenced by SIB compared to sequential boost. Helical TomoTherapy showed a higher mean dose to the contralateral breast, but less than 5 Gy for each patient. Conclusions. SIB showed less dose spilling within the breast and equal dose to OAR compared to sequential boost. Both helical TomoTherapy and the conventional technique delivered acceptable dosimetry. SIB seems a safe alternative and can be implemented in clinical routine. Hindawi Publishing Corporation 2014 2014-08-04 /pmc/articles/PMC4137720/ /pubmed/25162031 http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2014/827475 Text en Copyright © 2014 Hilde Van Parijs et al. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Clinical Study
Van Parijs, Hilde
Reynders, Truus
Heuninckx, Karina
Verellen, Dirk
Storme, Guy
De Ridder, Mark
Breast Conserving Treatment for Breast Cancer: Dosimetric Comparison of Sequential versus Simultaneous Integrated Photon Boost
title Breast Conserving Treatment for Breast Cancer: Dosimetric Comparison of Sequential versus Simultaneous Integrated Photon Boost
title_full Breast Conserving Treatment for Breast Cancer: Dosimetric Comparison of Sequential versus Simultaneous Integrated Photon Boost
title_fullStr Breast Conserving Treatment for Breast Cancer: Dosimetric Comparison of Sequential versus Simultaneous Integrated Photon Boost
title_full_unstemmed Breast Conserving Treatment for Breast Cancer: Dosimetric Comparison of Sequential versus Simultaneous Integrated Photon Boost
title_short Breast Conserving Treatment for Breast Cancer: Dosimetric Comparison of Sequential versus Simultaneous Integrated Photon Boost
title_sort breast conserving treatment for breast cancer: dosimetric comparison of sequential versus simultaneous integrated photon boost
topic Clinical Study
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4137720/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25162031
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2014/827475
work_keys_str_mv AT vanparijshilde breastconservingtreatmentforbreastcancerdosimetriccomparisonofsequentialversussimultaneousintegratedphotonboost
AT reynderstruus breastconservingtreatmentforbreastcancerdosimetriccomparisonofsequentialversussimultaneousintegratedphotonboost
AT heuninckxkarina breastconservingtreatmentforbreastcancerdosimetriccomparisonofsequentialversussimultaneousintegratedphotonboost
AT verellendirk breastconservingtreatmentforbreastcancerdosimetriccomparisonofsequentialversussimultaneousintegratedphotonboost
AT stormeguy breastconservingtreatmentforbreastcancerdosimetriccomparisonofsequentialversussimultaneousintegratedphotonboost
AT deriddermark breastconservingtreatmentforbreastcancerdosimetriccomparisonofsequentialversussimultaneousintegratedphotonboost