Dose received by the sentinel node volume during tangential radiation therapy to the breast

Radiation dose to the low axilla in patients treated for early-stage breast cancer by locoregional intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT)

PURPOSE

To determine the dose received by the low axilla during locoregional radiotherapy (RT) for early-stage breast cancer and to assess the impact of the treatment technique (three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3D-CRT) or rotational IMRT (VMAT) or helical tomotherapy (HT).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The dosimetric study was performed on patients receiving normofractionated (NFRT - 50Gy in 25 fractions) or hypofractionated (HFRT - 40Gy in 15 fractions) locoregional radiotherapy (breast or chest wall and internal mammary, supraclavicular and infraclavicular nodes±axillary nodes) by 3D-CRT or VMAT or HT at the Institut Curie Paris. Patients treated by breast-conserving surgery received a boost dose of 16Gy and 10Gy to the tumour bed, respectively.

RESULTS

Sixty-eight patients treated by RT from February 2017 to January 2019 were studied. The mean dose received by the low axilla when it was not part of the target volume was 30.8Gy, 41.0Gy and 44.4Gy by 3D-CRT, VMAT and HT, respectively for NFRT and 24.2Gy, 33.0Gy and 34.9Gy, respectively, for HFRT. With NFRT, 4.1% of the axilla received 95% (V95) of the prescribed dose by 3D-CRT compared to 24.5% and 33.6% by VMAT and HT, respectively; with HFRT, V95 was 3.9%, 19.5% and 24.1%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

The axilla receives a non-negligible dose during locoregional radiotherapy; this dose is greater when VMAT or HT are used. Prospective studies must be conducted to assess the impact of this axillary dose in terms of morbidity, which currently remains unknown.

Axillary coverage by whole breast irradiation in 1 to 2 positive sentinel lymph nodes in breast cancer patients

PURPOSE

To evaluate the dosimetric coverage of axillary levels I, II, and III obtained with standard whole breast irradiation in 1 to 2 positive sentinel lymph nodes (SLNs) patients not submitted to axillary lymph nodes dissection (ALND), and to compare the lymph nodes areas coverage obtained with 3D conformal radiation therapy, intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT), and volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT).

METHODS

Patients with 1 to 2 positive SLNs undergoing breast-conserving therapy, without ALND, were included in the analysis. For each patient, 3 treatment plans were performed: a 3D conventional tangential plan, a static IMRT plan, and a volumetric IMRT, designed to encompass the entire breast parenchyma. The volumes of axillary levels I, II, and III receiving 90% and 95% (V90, V95) of the whole breast prescribed dose were evaluated. Dose-volume histograms were compared by means of the Friedman test.

RESULTS

Ten patients were enrolled. All defined breast volumes received >95% of the prescribed dose with the 3 techniques. Median V95 for axillary level I was 26.4% (range 4.7%-61.3%) for 3D plans, 8.6% (range 0.64%-19.1%) for static IMRT plans, and 2.6% (range 0.4%-4.7%) for volumetric IMRT plans (p<0.001). Median V95 for axillary level II was 5.4% (range 0%-14.6%), 1.9% (range 0%-15%), and 2.6% (range 0.4%-4.7%) for 3D, static IMRT, and volumetric IMRT, respectively (p<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Results of our analysis showed that standard 3D tangential whole breast irradiation failed to deliver a therapeutic dose to axillary levels I and II. The coverage was even lower using static and volumetric IMRT techniques.

The standard tangential fields used for breast irradiation do not allow optimal coverage and dose distribution in axillary levels I-II and the sentinel node area

BACKGROUND

Recent data from ACOSOG Z0011 and NSABP B32 trials suggested no need for axillary lymph node dissection (ALND) in patients with micrometastatic involvement of the sentinel lymph node (SLN). The low rate of axillary recurrence was attributed to the axilla coverage by the tangential fields (TgFs) irradiation and systemic therapy. This study aimed to evaluate dose distribution and coverage of the axilla levels I-II and the SLN area.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

One hundred and nine patients were analyzed according to three groups: group 1 (50 Gy; n = 18), group 2 (60 Gy; n = 34) and group 3 (66 Gy; n = 57). Patients were treated using the standard (STgF; n = 22) or high (HTgF; n = 87) TgF.

RESULTS

The median doses delivered to level I using HTgF versus STgF were 33 and 20 Gy (P = 0.0001). The mean dose delivered to the SLN area was only 28 Gy. Additionally, the SLN area was totally included in the HTgF in 1 out of 12 patients who had intraoperative clip placement in the SNL area.

CONCLUSIONS

TgFs provide a limited coverage of the axilla and the SNLB area. This information should be considered when only TgFs are planned to target the axilla in patients with a positive SLN without ALND. Standardization of locoregional radiotherapy in this situation is urgently needed.

Coverage of axillary lymph nodes with high tangential fields in breast radiotherapy

The aim of this study is to evaluate the coverage of axillary nodal volumes with high tangent fields (HTF) in breast radiotherapy and to determine the utility of customised blocking. The treatment plans of 30 consecutive patients with early breast cancer were evaluated. The prescription dose was 50 Gy to the whole breast. Axillary level I-II lymph node volumes were delineated and the cranial border of the tangential fields was set just below the humeral head to create HTF. Dose-volume histograms (DVH) were used to calculate the doses received by axillary nodal volumes. In a second planning set, HTF were modified with multileaf collimators (MLC-HTF) to obtain an adequate dose coverage of axillary nodes. The mean doses of the axillary nodes, the ipsilateral lung and heart were compared between the two plans (HTF vs MLC-HTF) using a paired sample t-test. The doses received by 95% of the breast volumes were not significantly different for the two plans. The doses received by 95% of the level I and II axillary volumes were 16.79 Gy and 11.59 Gy, respectively, for HTF, increasing to 47.2 Gy and 45.03 Gy, respectively, for MLC-HTF. Mean lung doses and per cent volume of the ipsilateral lung receiving 20 Gy (V20) were also increased from 6.47 Gy and 10.47%, respectively, for HTF, to 9.56 Gy and 16.77%, respectively, for MLC-HTF. Our results suggest that HTF do not adequately cover the level I and II axillary lymph node regions. Modification of HTF with MLC is necessary to obtain an adequate coverage of axillary levels without compromising healthy tissue in the majority of the patients.