International Journal of Radiation Oncology * Biology * Physics
Volume 65, Issue 2 , Pages 340-346, 1 June 2006

Dosimetric comparison of two different three-dimensional conformal external beam accelerated partial breast irradiation techniques

This study was presented at the Forty Seventh Annual Meeting of the American Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology (ASTRO), October 16–20, 2005, Denver, CO.

  • Kevin R. Kozak, M.D., Ph.D.
  • ,
  • Karen P. Doppke, M.S.
  • ,
  • Angela Katz, M.D.
  • ,
  • Alphonse G. Taghian, M.D., Ph.D.

      Affiliations

    • Corresponding Author InformationReprint requests to: Alphonse G. Taghian, M.D., Ph.D., Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, 100 Blossom Street, COX-3, Boston, MA 02114. Tel: (617) 726-6050; Fax: (617) 726-3603

Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA

Received 21 November 2005; received in revised form 17 December 2005; accepted 19 December 2005.

Purpose: We compare the dosimetry of two techniques for three-dimensional, conformal, external beam, accelerated partial breast irradiation (3D-CPBI) in the supine position.

Methods and Materials: Sixteen patients with Stage I breast cancer had PBI treatment plans generated using the multiple, noncoplanar photon field technique and the three-field, mixed-modality technique. Planning target volumes (PTVs; lumpectomy site plus 1.5–2.0 cm margin) and total dose (32 Gy) were held constant to facilitate dosimetric comparisons. Plans were optimized for conformality and PTV coverage.

Results: Mixed-modality plans employed fewer fields than multiple, noncoplanar photon field plans (mean 3.2 vs. 4.1). Both techniques provided comparable PTV coverage and in all cases, 95% of the PTV received 90% of the prescribed dose. Volumes of ipsilateral breast receiving greater than 16 Gy were similar; however, the mean volume of ipsilateral breast receiving 8 Gy was significantly lower for mixed-modality plans (58% vs. 66%). No differences in the volumes of ipsilateral lung or heart receiving greater than 5 Gy were observed, however, the mixed-modality technique delivered 2.5 Gy to larger volumes of these organs.

Conclusions: Both techniques for supine position, 3D-CPBI provides excellent normal tissue sparing with adequate PTV coverage. The multiple, noncoplanar photon field technique exposes smaller volumes of ipsilateral lung and heart to low dose radiation at the expense of increased plan complexity and larger irradiated breast volumes.

Keywords:  Breast cancer , Partial breast irradiation , 3D-conformal , External beam , Comparison

To access this article, please choose from the options below

Login to an existing account or Register a new account.

  • Purchase this article for 30.00 USD (You must login/register to purchase this article)

    Online access for 24 hours. The PDF version can be downloaded as your permanent record.

  • Subscribe to this title

    Get unlimited online access to this article and all other articles in this title 24/7 for one year.

  • Claim access now

    For current subscribers with Society Membership or Account Number.

  • Visit SciVerse ScienceDirect to see if you have access via your institution.
 

 Supported in part by a grant from Massachusetts Department of Public Health, the Massachusetts General Hospital Cancer Center, the Susan and Michael Schechter Research Fund, Jane Mailloux Research Fund and the NCI/AVON supplement to NCI SPORE award, P50 CA89393, entitled “Dana-Farber SPORE in Breast Cancer.”

PII: S0360-3016(06)00113-1

doi:10.1016/j.ijrobp.2005.12.053

International Journal of Radiation Oncology * Biology * Physics
Volume 65, Issue 2 , Pages 340-346, 1 June 2006