Point: Brachytherapy for accelerated partial breast irradiation

Accelerated partial-breast irradiation using intensity-modulated proton radiotherapy: do uncertainties outweigh potential benefits?

OBJECTIVE

Passive scattering proton beam (PSPB) radiotherapy for accelerated partial-breast irradiation (APBI) provides superior dosimetry for APBI three-dimensional conformal photon radiotherapy (3DCRT). Here we examine the potential incremental benefit of intensity-modulated proton radiotherapy (IMPT) for APBI and compare its dosimetry with PSPB and 3DCRT.

METHODS

Two theoretical IMPT plans, TANGENT_PAIR and TANGENT_ENFACE, were created for 11 patients previously treated with 3DCRT APBI and were compared with PSPB and 3DCRT plans for the same CT data sets. The impact of range, motion and set-up uncertainties as well as scanned spot mismatching between fields of IMPT plans was evaluated.

RESULTS

IMPT plans for APBI were significantly better regarding breast skin sparing (p<0.005) and other normal tissue sparing than 3DCRT plans (p<0.01) with comparable target coverage (p=ns). IMPT plans were statistically better than PSPB plans regarding breast skin (p<0.002) and non-target breast (p<0.007) in higher dose regions but worse or comparable in lower dose regions. IMPT plans using TANGENT_ENFACE were superior to that using TANGENT_PAIR in terms of target coverage (p<0.003) and normal tissue sparing (p<0.05) in low-dose regions. IMPT uncertainties were demonstrated for multiple causes. Qualitative comparison of dose-volume histogram confidence intervals for IMPT suggests that numeric gains may be offset by IMPT uncertainties.

CONCLUSION

Using current clinical dosimetry, PSPB provides excellent dosimetry compared with 3DCRT with fewer uncertainties compared with IMPT.

ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE

As currently delivered in the clinic, PSPB planning for APBI provides as good or better dosimetry than IMPT with less uncertainty.

Partial breast irradiation techniques in early breast cancer

Whole breast irradiation represents an integral part of combined breast-conserving treatment of early breast cancer. A new concept includes replacing traditionally fractionated whole breast postoperative radiotherapy by accelerated partial breast irradiation. The latter involves a variety of techniques and may be applied intraoperatively or shortly after the surgery. The intraoperative techniques include photon or electron external beam irradiation and interstitial high dose rate (HDR) brachytherapy, whereas the postoperative techniques comprise interstitial brachytherapy, be it HDR, pulse dose rate (PDR) or low dose rate (LDR), intracavitary brachytherapy and external beam radiotherapy using electrons, photons or protons. This article presents accelerated partial breast irradiation techniques, ongoing phase III trials evaluating their value and recommendations for clinical practice.

External-beam accelerated partial breast irradiation using multiple proton beam configurations

PURPOSE

To explore multiple proton beam configurations for optimizing dosimetry and minimizing uncertainties for accelerated partial breast irradiation (APBI) and to compare the dosimetry of proton with that of photon radiotherapy for treatment of the same clinical volumes.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Proton treatment plans were created for 11 sequential patients treated with three-dimensional radiotherapy (3DCRT) photon APBI using passive scattering proton beams (PSPB) and were compared with clinically treated 3DCRT photon plans. Monte Carlo calculations were used to verify the accuracy of the proton dose calculation from the treatment planning system. The impact of range, motion, and setup uncertainty was evaluated with tangential vs. en face beams.

RESULTS

Compared with 3DCRT photons, the absolute reduction of the mean of V100 (the volume receiving 100% of prescription dose), V90, V75, V50, and V20 for normal breast using protons are 3.4%, 8.6%, 11.8%, 17.9%, and 23.6%, respectively. For breast skin, with the similar V90 as 3DCRT photons, the proton plan significantly reduced V75, V50, V30, and V10. The proton plan also significantly reduced the dose to the lung and heart. Dose distributions from Monte Carlo simulations demonstrated minimal deviation from the treatment planning system. The tangential beam configuration showed significantly less dose fluctuation in the chest wall region but was more vulnerable to respiratory motion than that for the en face beams. Worst-case analysis demonstrated the robustness of designed proton beams with range and patient setup uncertainties.

CONCLUSIONS

APBI using multiple proton beams spares significantly more normal tissue, including nontarget breast and breast skin, than 3DCRT using photons. It is robust, considering the range and patient setup uncertainties.