Cargando…

Comparison of volumetric modulated arc therapy and intensity-modulated radiotherapy for left-sided whole-breast irradiation using automated planning

BACKGROUND: Published treatment technique comparisons for postoperative left-sided whole breast irradiation (WBI) with deep-inspiration breath-hold (DIBH) are scarce, small, and inconclusive. In this study, fully automated multi-criterial plan optimization, generating a single high-quality, Pareto-o...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Redapi, L., Rossi, L., Marrazzo, L., Penninkhof, J. J., Pallotta, S., Heijmen, B.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8863712/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34351452
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00066-021-01817-x
_version_ 1784655289909248000
author Redapi, L.
Rossi, L.
Marrazzo, L.
Penninkhof, J. J.
Pallotta, S.
Heijmen, B.
author_facet Redapi, L.
Rossi, L.
Marrazzo, L.
Penninkhof, J. J.
Pallotta, S.
Heijmen, B.
author_sort Redapi, L.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Published treatment technique comparisons for postoperative left-sided whole breast irradiation (WBI) with deep-inspiration breath-hold (DIBH) are scarce, small, and inconclusive. In this study, fully automated multi-criterial plan optimization, generating a single high-quality, Pareto-optimal plan per patient and treatment technique, was used to compare for a large patient cohort 1) intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) with two tangential fields and 2) volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) with two small tangential subarcs. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Forty-eight randomly selected patients recently treated with DIBH and 16 × 2.66 Gy were included. The optimizer was configured for the clinical planning protocol. Comparisons between IMRT and VMAT included dosimetric plan parameters, estimated excess relative risks (ERR) for toxicities, delivery times, MUs, and deliverability accuracy at a linac. RESULTS: The automatically generated IMRT and VMAT plans applied in this study were similar or higher in quality than the manually generated clinical plans. For equal PTVin V95% (98.4 ± 0.9%), VMAT had significant advantages compared to IMRT regarding breast dose homogeneity and doses in heart and ipsilateral lung, at the cost of some minor deteriorations for contralateral breast (few cases with larger deteriorations) and lung. Conformality improved from 1.38 to 1.18 (p < 0.001). With VMAT, ERR for major coronary events and ipsilateral lung tumors were reduced by 3% (range: −1–12%) and 16% (range: −3–38%), respectively. MUs and delivery times were higher for VMAT. There were no statistical differences in γ passing rates. CONCLUSION: For WBI in conservative therapy of left-sided breast patients treated with DIBH, VMAT with two tangential subarcs was generally dosimetrically superior to IMRT with two tangential static fields. Results need confirmation by robustness analyses.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8863712
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Springer Berlin Heidelberg
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-88637122022-03-02 Comparison of volumetric modulated arc therapy and intensity-modulated radiotherapy for left-sided whole-breast irradiation using automated planning Redapi, L. Rossi, L. Marrazzo, L. Penninkhof, J. J. Pallotta, S. Heijmen, B. Strahlenther Onkol Original Article BACKGROUND: Published treatment technique comparisons for postoperative left-sided whole breast irradiation (WBI) with deep-inspiration breath-hold (DIBH) are scarce, small, and inconclusive. In this study, fully automated multi-criterial plan optimization, generating a single high-quality, Pareto-optimal plan per patient and treatment technique, was used to compare for a large patient cohort 1) intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) with two tangential fields and 2) volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) with two small tangential subarcs. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Forty-eight randomly selected patients recently treated with DIBH and 16 × 2.66 Gy were included. The optimizer was configured for the clinical planning protocol. Comparisons between IMRT and VMAT included dosimetric plan parameters, estimated excess relative risks (ERR) for toxicities, delivery times, MUs, and deliverability accuracy at a linac. RESULTS: The automatically generated IMRT and VMAT plans applied in this study were similar or higher in quality than the manually generated clinical plans. For equal PTVin V95% (98.4 ± 0.9%), VMAT had significant advantages compared to IMRT regarding breast dose homogeneity and doses in heart and ipsilateral lung, at the cost of some minor deteriorations for contralateral breast (few cases with larger deteriorations) and lung. Conformality improved from 1.38 to 1.18 (p < 0.001). With VMAT, ERR for major coronary events and ipsilateral lung tumors were reduced by 3% (range: −1–12%) and 16% (range: −3–38%), respectively. MUs and delivery times were higher for VMAT. There were no statistical differences in γ passing rates. CONCLUSION: For WBI in conservative therapy of left-sided breast patients treated with DIBH, VMAT with two tangential subarcs was generally dosimetrically superior to IMRT with two tangential static fields. Results need confirmation by robustness analyses. Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2021-08-05 2022 /pmc/articles/PMC8863712/ /pubmed/34351452 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00066-021-01817-x Text en © The Author(s) 2021 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) .
spellingShingle Original Article
Redapi, L.
Rossi, L.
Marrazzo, L.
Penninkhof, J. J.
Pallotta, S.
Heijmen, B.
Comparison of volumetric modulated arc therapy and intensity-modulated radiotherapy for left-sided whole-breast irradiation using automated planning
title Comparison of volumetric modulated arc therapy and intensity-modulated radiotherapy for left-sided whole-breast irradiation using automated planning
title_full Comparison of volumetric modulated arc therapy and intensity-modulated radiotherapy for left-sided whole-breast irradiation using automated planning
title_fullStr Comparison of volumetric modulated arc therapy and intensity-modulated radiotherapy for left-sided whole-breast irradiation using automated planning
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of volumetric modulated arc therapy and intensity-modulated radiotherapy for left-sided whole-breast irradiation using automated planning
title_short Comparison of volumetric modulated arc therapy and intensity-modulated radiotherapy for left-sided whole-breast irradiation using automated planning
title_sort comparison of volumetric modulated arc therapy and intensity-modulated radiotherapy for left-sided whole-breast irradiation using automated planning
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8863712/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34351452
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00066-021-01817-x
work_keys_str_mv AT redapil comparisonofvolumetricmodulatedarctherapyandintensitymodulatedradiotherapyforleftsidedwholebreastirradiationusingautomatedplanning
AT rossil comparisonofvolumetricmodulatedarctherapyandintensitymodulatedradiotherapyforleftsidedwholebreastirradiationusingautomatedplanning
AT marrazzol comparisonofvolumetricmodulatedarctherapyandintensitymodulatedradiotherapyforleftsidedwholebreastirradiationusingautomatedplanning
AT penninkhofjj comparisonofvolumetricmodulatedarctherapyandintensitymodulatedradiotherapyforleftsidedwholebreastirradiationusingautomatedplanning
AT pallottas comparisonofvolumetricmodulatedarctherapyandintensitymodulatedradiotherapyforleftsidedwholebreastirradiationusingautomatedplanning
AT heijmenb comparisonofvolumetricmodulatedarctherapyandintensitymodulatedradiotherapyforleftsidedwholebreastirradiationusingautomatedplanning