Cargando…

Dosimetric comparison of VMAT with integrated skin flash to 3D field‐in‐field tangents for left breast irradiation

Volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) has been implemented for left breast irradiation to reduce prescription dose to the heart and improve dose homogeneity across the targeted breast. Our in‐house method requires application of a bolus during the optimization process with a target outside of the...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Bogue, Jonathan, Wan, Jui, Lavey, Robert S., Parsai, E. Ishmael
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6371015/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30653831
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/acm2.12527
_version_ 1783394476616581120
author Bogue, Jonathan
Wan, Jui
Lavey, Robert S.
Parsai, E. Ishmael
author_facet Bogue, Jonathan
Wan, Jui
Lavey, Robert S.
Parsai, E. Ishmael
author_sort Bogue, Jonathan
collection PubMed
description Volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) has been implemented for left breast irradiation to reduce prescription dose to the heart and improve dose homogeneity across the targeted breast. Our in‐house method requires application of a bolus during the optimization process with a target outside of the body, then removing the bolus during the final calculation in order to incorporate skin flash in VMAT plans. To quantify the dosimetric trade‐offs between traditional 3D field‐in‐field tangents and VMAT with integrated skin flash for these patients, we compared nine consecutive patients who recently received radiation to their entire left breast but not their regional lymphatics. Tangent plans used non‐divergent tangents of mixed energies and VMAT plans utilized four 6 MV arcs of roughly 260°. Mean dose to the heart, contralateral lung, and contralateral breast and their volume receiving 5%, 10%, and 20% of the prescription dose were higher in all nine VMAT plans than in the static tangential beam plans. For all critical structures, the mean VMAT DVH was higher in the low‐dose region and crossed the 3D field‐in‐field DVH between 23.13% and 34.18% of the prescription dose (984.75‐1454.70 cGy). However, the volume of the contralateral breast and heart receiving the prescription dose was slightly lower in the VMAT plans, but not statistically significant. VMAT provided superior homogeneity, with a mean homogeneity index of 9.41 ± 1.64 compared to 11.05 ± 1.82 for 3D tangents. Results indicate that VMAT spares the heart, contralateral lung, and contralateral breast from prescription dose at the cost of increasing their mean and low‐dose volume and delivers a more homogenous dose distribution to the breast. For these reasons, VMAT is selectively applied at the request of the physician for left breast radiation without respiratory gating to spare the heart from prescription dose in cases of poor anatomical geometry.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6371015
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-63710152019-02-21 Dosimetric comparison of VMAT with integrated skin flash to 3D field‐in‐field tangents for left breast irradiation Bogue, Jonathan Wan, Jui Lavey, Robert S. Parsai, E. Ishmael J Appl Clin Med Phys Radiation Oncology Physics Volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) has been implemented for left breast irradiation to reduce prescription dose to the heart and improve dose homogeneity across the targeted breast. Our in‐house method requires application of a bolus during the optimization process with a target outside of the body, then removing the bolus during the final calculation in order to incorporate skin flash in VMAT plans. To quantify the dosimetric trade‐offs between traditional 3D field‐in‐field tangents and VMAT with integrated skin flash for these patients, we compared nine consecutive patients who recently received radiation to their entire left breast but not their regional lymphatics. Tangent plans used non‐divergent tangents of mixed energies and VMAT plans utilized four 6 MV arcs of roughly 260°. Mean dose to the heart, contralateral lung, and contralateral breast and their volume receiving 5%, 10%, and 20% of the prescription dose were higher in all nine VMAT plans than in the static tangential beam plans. For all critical structures, the mean VMAT DVH was higher in the low‐dose region and crossed the 3D field‐in‐field DVH between 23.13% and 34.18% of the prescription dose (984.75‐1454.70 cGy). However, the volume of the contralateral breast and heart receiving the prescription dose was slightly lower in the VMAT plans, but not statistically significant. VMAT provided superior homogeneity, with a mean homogeneity index of 9.41 ± 1.64 compared to 11.05 ± 1.82 for 3D tangents. Results indicate that VMAT spares the heart, contralateral lung, and contralateral breast from prescription dose at the cost of increasing their mean and low‐dose volume and delivers a more homogenous dose distribution to the breast. For these reasons, VMAT is selectively applied at the request of the physician for left breast radiation without respiratory gating to spare the heart from prescription dose in cases of poor anatomical geometry. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2019-01-17 /pmc/articles/PMC6371015/ /pubmed/30653831 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/acm2.12527 Text en © 2019 The Authors. Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of American Association of Physicists in Medicine. This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Radiation Oncology Physics
Bogue, Jonathan
Wan, Jui
Lavey, Robert S.
Parsai, E. Ishmael
Dosimetric comparison of VMAT with integrated skin flash to 3D field‐in‐field tangents for left breast irradiation
title Dosimetric comparison of VMAT with integrated skin flash to 3D field‐in‐field tangents for left breast irradiation
title_full Dosimetric comparison of VMAT with integrated skin flash to 3D field‐in‐field tangents for left breast irradiation
title_fullStr Dosimetric comparison of VMAT with integrated skin flash to 3D field‐in‐field tangents for left breast irradiation
title_full_unstemmed Dosimetric comparison of VMAT with integrated skin flash to 3D field‐in‐field tangents for left breast irradiation
title_short Dosimetric comparison of VMAT with integrated skin flash to 3D field‐in‐field tangents for left breast irradiation
title_sort dosimetric comparison of vmat with integrated skin flash to 3d field‐in‐field tangents for left breast irradiation
topic Radiation Oncology Physics
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6371015/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30653831
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/acm2.12527
work_keys_str_mv AT boguejonathan dosimetriccomparisonofvmatwithintegratedskinflashto3dfieldinfieldtangentsforleftbreastirradiation
AT wanjui dosimetriccomparisonofvmatwithintegratedskinflashto3dfieldinfieldtangentsforleftbreastirradiation
AT laveyroberts dosimetriccomparisonofvmatwithintegratedskinflashto3dfieldinfieldtangentsforleftbreastirradiation
AT parsaieishmael dosimetriccomparisonofvmatwithintegratedskinflashto3dfieldinfieldtangentsforleftbreastirradiation