Imaging dose in breast radiotherapy: does breast size affect the dose to the organs at risk and the risk of secondary cancer to the contralateral breast?

Retrospective Study on Left-Sided Breast Radiotherapy: Dosimetric Results and Correlation with Physical Factors for Free Breathing and Breath Hold Irradiation Techniques

Objectives: In breast radiotherapy, the proximity of the target to sensitive structures together with the uncertainty introduced by respiratory movement, make this treatment one of the most studied to increase its effectiveness. Dosimetric and physical variables play an important role and the study of their correlation and impact on treatment is fundamental. This retrospective study aims to highlight the dosimetric differences of 2 different clinical data sets of patients receiving left-sided breast irradiation in free breathing (FB) or breath hold (BH). Methods: A total of 155 left breast carcinoma patients receiving whole-breast irradiation in FB (73 patients) and BH (82 patients) were enrolled in this study. The dosimetric parameters of the target, heart, left and right lung and right breast were evaluated and compared, and possible correlations were studied in both groups. Results: No significant difference (P > .05) was found in the target dosimetry; a clear advantage in BH for both high and low doses received by the heart, with reductions of the dosimetric parameters between 27.1% and 100% (P < .003); for the left lung reductions decreased with increasing dose (-22.4% and -13.4% for doses of 5 and 20 Gy, respectively, P < .003). Conclusion: Significant correlations for BH treatments were registered between the volumes of the target and left lung, and the dosimetric parameters of the heart and left lung. BH treatment brings significant dosimetric advantages to organs at risk for a wide range of patients with different anatomy, target volumes and lung capacity, with additional benefits for small-sized breasts and important lung capacity.

Impact of Positioning Errors on the Dosimetry of Breath-Hold-Based Volumetric Arc Modulated and Tangential Field-in-Field Left-Sided Breast Treatments

Heart diseases and cardiovascular events are well-known side effects in left-sided breast irradiation. Deep inspiration breath hold (BH) combined with fast delivery techniques such as volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) or tangential field-in-field (TFiF) can serve as a valuable solution to reduce the dose to the heart. This study aims to compare the impact of positioning errors in VMAT and TFiF plans for BH left-sided breast treatments. Fifteen left-sided breast patients treated in BH with TFiF technique were included in this retrospective study. For each patient, a second plan with VMAT technique was optimized. Eighteen setup variations were introduced in each of these VMAT and TFiF reference plans, shifting the isocenter along six different directions by 3, 5, and 10 mm. A total of 540 perturbed plans, 270 for each technique, were recalculated and analyzed. The dose distributions on the target and organs at risk obtained in the different perturbed scenarios were compared with the reference scenarios, using as dosimetric endpoints the dose-volume histograms (DVH). The results were compared using the Wilcoxon test. Comparable plan quality was obtained for the reference VMAT and TFiF plans, except for low doses to organs at risk for which higher values (p < 0.05) were obtained for VMAT plans. For TFiF plans, perturbations of the isocenter position of 3, 5, or 10 mm produced mean deviations of the target DVH dosimetric parameters up to -0.5, -1.0, and -5.2%, respectively; VMAT plans were more sensitive to positioning errors resulting in mean deviations up to -0.5, -4.9, and -13.9%, respectively, for the same magnitude of the above mentioned perturbations. For organs at risk, only perturbations along the left, posterior, and inferior directions resulted in dose increase with a maximum deviation of +2% in the DVH dosimetric parameters. A notable exception were low doses to the left lung and heart for 10 mm isocenter shifts for which the mean differences ranged between +2.7 and +4.1%. Objective information on how external stresses affect the dosimetry of the treatment is the first step towards personalized radiotherapy.

Imaging dose of megavoltage computed tomography (MVCT) for treatment verification in the tomotherapy of breast cancer

Aim

The purpose of this study was to investigate whether significant difference exists on radiation dose delivered to organs at risks in megavoltage computed tomography (MVCT) verification using three predefined scanning modes, namely fine (2 mm), normal (4 mm) and coarse (6 mm). This will provide information for the imaging protocol of tomotherapy for the left breast.

Materials and methods

Organ doses were measured using thermoluminescent dosimeters (TLD-100) placed within a female Rando phantom for MVCT imaging. Kruskal–Wallis test was conducted with p<0·05 to evaluate the significant difference between the three MVCT scanning modes.

Results

Statistically significant difference existed in organ absorbed dose between different scan mode selections (p<0·001). Relative to the normal scan selection (4 mm), the absorbed dose to the organs of interests can be scaled down by 0·7 and scaled up by 2·1 for coarse (6 mm) and fine scans (2 mm) respectively.

Conclusions

Optimisation of imaging protocols is of paramount importance to keep the radiation exposure ‘as low as reasonably achievable’. The recommendation of undergoing daily coarse mode for MVCT verification in breast tomotherapy not only mitigates the radiation exposure to normal tissues, but also trims the scan-acquisition time.

Comparison of setup accuracy of three different image assessment methods for tangential breast radiotherapy

Introduction

To compare the differences in setup errors measured with electronic portal image (EPI) and cone‐beam computed tomography (CBCT) in patients undergoing tangential breast radiotherapy (RT). Relationship between setup errors, body mass index (BMI) and breast size was assessed.

Methods

Twenty‐five patients undergoing postoperative RT to the breast were consented for this study. Weekly CBCT scans were acquired and retrospectively registered to the planning CT in three dimensions, first using bony anatomy for bony registration (CBCT‐B) and again using breast tissue outline for soft tissue registration (CBCT‐S). Digitally reconstructed radiographs (DRR) generated from CBCT to simulate EPI were compared to the planning DRR using bony anatomy in the V (parallel to the cranio‐caudal axis) and U (perpendicular to V) planes. The systematic (Σ) and random (σ) errors were calculated and correlated with BMI and breast size.

Results

The systematic and random errors for EPI (Σ_V = 3.7 mm, Σ_U = 2.8 mm and σ_V = 2.9 mm, σ_U = 2.5) and CBCT‐B (Σ_V = 3.5 mm, Σ_U = 3.4 mm and σ_V = 2.8 mm, σ_U = 2.8) were of similar magnitude in the V and U planes. Similarly, the differences in setup errors for CBCT‐B and CBCT‐S in three dimensions were less than 1 mm. Only CBCT‐S setup error correlated with BMI and breast size.

Conclusions

CBCT and EPI show insignificant variation in their ability to detect setup error. These findings suggest no significant differences that would make one modality considered superior over the other and EPI should remain the standard of care for most patients. However, there is a correlation with breast size, BMI and setup error as detected by CBCT‐S, justifying the use of CBCT‐S for larger patients.