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...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
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 |