External-beam partial breast irradiation in a supine versus prone position after breast-conserving surgery for Chinese breast cancer patients

Dosimetric analysis of six whole-breast irradiation techniques in supine and prone positions

In breast cancer radiation therapy, minimizing radiation-related risks and toxicity is vital for improving life expectancy. Tailoring radiotherapy techniques and treatment positions can reduce radiation doses to normal organs and mitigate treatment-related toxicity. This study entailed a dosimetric comparison of six different external beam whole-breast irradiation techniques in both supine and prone positions. We selected fourteen breast cancer patients, generating six treatment plans in both positions per patient. We assessed target coverage and organs at risk (OAR) doses to evaluate the impact of treatment techniques and positions. Excess absolute risk was calculated to estimate potential secondary cancer risk in the contralateral breast, ipsilateral lung, and contralateral lung. Additionally, we analyzed the distance between the target volume and OARs (heart and ipsilateral lung) while considering the treatment position. The results indicate that prone positioning lowers lung exposure in X-ray radiotherapy. However, particle beam therapies (PBTs) significantly reduce the dose to the heart and ipsilateral lung regardless of the patient's position. Notably, negligible differences were observed between arc-delivery and static-delivery PBTs in terms of target conformity and OAR sparing. This study provides critical dosimetric evidence to facilitate informed decision-making regarding treatment techniques and positions.

Target volumes comparison between postoperative simulation magnetic resonance imaging and preoperative diagnostic magnetic resonance imaging for prone breast radiotherapy after breast-conserving surgery

BACKGROUND

This study investigated the differences in target volumes between preoperative magnetic resonance imaging (MRIpre) and postoperative MRI (MRIpost) for breast radiotherapy after breast-conserving surgery (BCS) using deformable image registration (DIR).

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Seventeen eligible patients who underwent whole-breast irradiation in the prone position after BCS were enrolled. On MRIpre, the gross tumor volume (GTV) was delineated as GTVpre, which was then expanded by 10 mm to represent the preoperative lumpectomy cavity (LC), denoted as LCpre. The LC was expanded to the clinical target volume (CTV) and planning target volume (PTV) on the MRIpre and MRIpost, denoted as CTVpre, CTVpost, PTVpre, and PTVpost, respectively. The MIM software system was used to register the MRIpre and MRIpost using DIR. Differences were evaluated regarding target volume, distance between the centers of mass (dCOM), conformity index (CI), and degree of inclusion (DI). The relationship between CILC /CIPTV and the clinical factors was also assessed.

RESULTS

Significant differences were observed in LC and PTV volumes between MRIpre and MRIpost (p < 0.0001). LCpre was 0.85 cm3 larger than LCpost, while PTVpre was 29.38 cm3 smaller than PTVpost. The dCOM between LCpre and LCpost was 1.371 cm, while that between PTVpre and PTVpost reduced to 1.348 cm. There were statistically significant increases in CI and DI for LCpost-LCpre and PTVpost-PTVpre (CI = 0.221, 0.470; DI = 0.472, 0.635). No obvious linear correlations (p > 0.05) were found between CI and GTV, primary tumor volume-to-breast volume ratio, distance from the primary tumor to the nipple and chest wall, and body mass index.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite using DIR technology, the spatial correspondence of target volumes between MRIpre and MRIpost was suboptimal. Therefore, relying solely on preoperative diagnostic MRI with DIR for postoperative LC delineation is not recommended.

Planning study: prone versus supine position for stereotactic body radiotherapy in prostate by CyberKnife

This study aimed to clarify the differences in radiotherapy dose characteristics and delivery efficiency between the supine and prone positions in patients with prostate cancer using the CyberKnife. The planning computed tomography (CT) and delineations of the prone position were obtained by rotating the supine CT images with delineations of 180° using image processing software. The optimization parameters for planning target volume (PTV) and organs at risk (OARs) were based on the prone position. The optimization parameters determined for the prone position were applied to the supine position for optimization and dose calculation. The dosimetric characteristics of the PTV and OARs, and delivery efficiency were compared between the two different patient positions. The plans in the prone position resulted in better PTV conformity index (nCI), rectum V90%, V80%, V75%, V50% and bladder V50%. A significant difference was observed in treatment time and depth along the central axis (dCAX) between the two plans. The mean treatment time per fraction and dCAX for the supine and prone positions were 20.9 ± 1.7 min versus 19.8 ± 1.3 min (P = 0.019) and 151.1 ± 33.6 mm versus 233.2 ± 8.8 mm (P < 0.001), respectively. In this study the prone position was found to improve dosimetric characteristics and delivery efficiency compared with the supine position during prostate cancer treatment with the CyberKnife.

Comparative analysis of dosimetry and predictive somatotype parameters of prone and supine whole-breast irradiation among Chinese women after breast-conserving surgery

Purpose

Finding a better treatment position (prone or supine) for whole-breast irradiation for Chinese female patients diagnosed with breast cancer by identify the associations between predictive somatotype parameters and dosimetric gains.

Materials and methods

Two volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) plans were deployed for whole-breast irradiation in supine and prone position with a total dose of 50 Gy in 25 fractions. Dose-volume parameters were compared and analysed both in the target volume and organs at risk, and equivalent uniform dose-based figure-of-merit (fEUD) models were further used to quantitatively evaluate the overall merits of the two plans. Body shape parameters, including body mass index (BMI), body surface area (BSA), breast shape, cup size, bust size and chest size, were collected. Anatomic features such as the central heart distance (CHD) were measured on supine CT. Spearman’s correlation analysis, receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis, and the linear regression models were conducted.

Results

Doses to the heart and left anterior descending coronary artery (LADCA) are greater in left-sided breast cancer (BC) patients in the prone position than in the supine position, and the opposite was true for right-sided BC patients (p&lt;0.001). 19 of 63 patients (5 left-sided and 14 right-sided BC) achieved greater benefit from the prone position according to the fEUD score. Right-sided BC patients with a bust size ≥92.25 cm, drop-type breasts and cup size ≥B are very likely to benefit from prone-position radiotherapy. The CHD is significantly positively associated with △fEUD among right-sided BC patients (rho=0.506, p=0.004). Using a cut-off point of 2.215, the CHD had 71.4% sensitivity and 81.2% specificity in predicting a successful prone plan.

Conclusions

Right-sided BC patients had better dosimetric gain in the prone position than left-sided BC patients. The CHD is an especially good and novel predictor that could help to select prone-benefitting right-sided BC patients.

Four irradiation and three positioning techniques for whole-breast radiotherapy: Is sophisticated always better?

PURPOSE

We report on a dosimetrical study of three patient positions (supine, prone dive, and prone crawl) and four irradiation techniques for whole-breast irradiation (WBI): wedged-tangential fields (W-TF), tangential-field intensity-modulated radiotherapy (TF-IMRT), multi-beam IMRT (MB-IMRT), and intensity-modulated arc therapy (IMAT). This is the first study to evaluate prone crawl positioning in WBI and the first study to quantify dosimetrical and anatomical differences with prone dive positioning.

METHODS

We analyzed five datasets with left- and right-sided patients (n = 51). One dataset also included deep-inspiration breath hold (DIBH) data. A total of 252 new treatment plans were composed. Dose-volume parameters and indices of conformity were calculated for the planning target volume (PTV) and organs-at-risk (OARs). Furthermore, anatomical differences among patient positions were quantified to explain dosimetrical differences.

RESULTS

Target coverage was inferior for W-TF and supine position. W-TF proved overall inferior, and IMAT proved foremost effective in supine position. TF-IMRT proved competitive to the more demanding MB-IMRT and IMAT in prone dive, but not in prone crawl position. The lung-sparing effect was overall confirmed for both prone dive and prone crawl positioning and was largest for prone crawl. For the heart, no differences were found between prone dive and supine positioning, whereas prone crawl showed cardiac advantages, although minor compared to the established heart-sparing effect of DIBH. Dose differences for contralateral breast were minor among the patient positions. In prone crawl position, the ipsilateral breast sags deeper and the PTV is further away from the OARs than in prone dive position.

CONCLUSIONS

The prone dive and prone crawl position are valid alternatives to the supine position in WBI, with largest advantages for lung structures. For the heart, differences are small, which establishes the role of DIBH in different patient positions. These results may be of particular interest to radiotherapy centers with limited technical resources.

Prone vs. supine accelerated partial breast irradiation on an MR-Linac: A planning study

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Accelerated partial breast irradiation (APBI) may benefit from the MR-Linac for target definition, patient setup, and motion monitoring. In this planning study, we investigated whether prone or supine position is dosimetrically beneficial for APBI on an MR-Linac and we evaluated patient comfort.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Twenty-patients (9 postoperative, 11 preoperative) with a DCIS or breast tumor <3 cm underwent 1.5 T MRI in prone and supine position. The tumor or tumor bed was delineated as GTV and a 2 cm CTV-margin and 0.5 cm PTV-margin were added. 1.5 T MR-Linac treatment plans (5 × 5.2 Gy) with 11 beams were created for both positions in each patient. We evaluated the number of plans that achieved the planning constraints and performed a dosimetric comparison between prone and supine position using the Wilcoxon signed-rank test (p-value <0.01 for significance). Patient experience during scanning was evaluated with a questionnaire.

RESULTS

All 40 plans met the target coverage and OAR constraints, regardless of position. Heart D_mean was not significantly different (1.07 vs. 0.79 Gy, p-value: 0.027). V5Gy to the ipsilateral lung (4.4% vs. 9.8% median, p-value 0.009) and estimated delivery time (362 vs. 392 s, p-value: 0.003) were significantly lower for prone position. PTV coverage and dose to other OAR were comparable between positions. The majority of patients (13/20) preferred supine position.

CONCLUSION

APBI on the MR-Linac is dosimetrically feasible in prone and supine position. Mean heart dose was similar in both positions. Ipsilateral lung V5Gy was lower in prone position.

Dosimetric effects of supine immobilization devices on the skin in intensity-modulated radiation therapy for breast cancer: a retrospective study

Background

The dose perturbation effect of immobilization devices is often overlooked in intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) for breast cancer (BC). This retrospective study assessed the dosimetric effects of supine immobilization devices on the skin using a commercial treatment planning system.

Methods

Forty women with BC were divided into four groups according to the type of primary surgery: groups A and B included patients with left and right BC, respectively, who received 50 Gy radiotherapy in 25 fractions after radical mastectomy, while groups C and D included patients with left and right BC, respectively, who received breast-conservation surgery (BCS) and 40.05 Gy in 15 fractions as well as a tumor bed simultaneous integrated boost to 45 Gy. A 0.2-cm thick skin contour and two sets of body contours were outlined for each patient. Dose calculations were conducted for the two sets of contours using the same plan. The dose differences were assessed by comparing the dose-volume histogram parameter results and by plan subtraction.

Results

The supine immobilization devices for BC resulted in significantly increased skin doses, which may ultimately lead to skin toxicity. The mean dose increased by approximately 0.5 and 0.45 Gy in groups A and B after radical mastectomy and by 2.7 and 3.25 Gy in groups C and D after BCS; in groups A–D, the percentages of total normal skin volume receiving equal to or greater than 5 Gy (V₅) increased by 0.54, 1.15, 2.67, and 1.94%, respectively, while the V₁₀ increased by 1.27, 1.83, 1.36, and 2.88%; the V₂₀ by 0.85, 1.87, 2.76, and 4.86%; the V₃₀ by 1.3, 1.24, 10.58, and 11.91%; and the V₄₀ by 1.29, 0.65, 10, and 10.51%. The dose encompassing the planning target volume and other organs at risk, showed little distinction between IMRT plans without and with consideration of immobilization devices.

Conclusions

The supine immobilization devices significantly increased the dose to the skin, especially for patients with BCS. Thus, immobilization devices should be included in the external contour to account for dose attenuation and skin dose increment.

Trial registration

This study does not report on interventions in human health care.

Interobserver Variability of Target Volumes Delineated in the Supine and Prone Positions Based on Computed Tomography Images for External-Beam Partial Breast Irradiation After Breast-Conserving Surgery: A Comparative Study

Background: Although the supine position remains the dominant position for external-beam partial breast irradiation (EB-PBI), the advantages of administering EB-PBI in the prone position have been recognized. The interobserver variability between target volumes delineated in the different positions for EB-PBI after breast-conserving surgery needs to be investigated.

Methods: Twenty-seven patients suitable for EB-PBI were enrolled from July 2016 to April 2017. Supine and prone simulation CT images were sequentially acquired for all enrolled patients during free breathing. Five experienced radiotherapists delineated the target volumes for all patients on supine and prone simulation CT images. The selected parameters, including target volumes, the coefficient of variation (COV), the matching degree (MD), and so on, were calculated to analyze the interobserver variability.

Results: Regardless of the patient position, the interobserver variability between tumor bed (TB) and clinical target volume (CTV) measurements in supine and prone positions were statistically significant (F = 31.34, 19.467; 44.000, 41.985; P = 0.000, 0.001; 0.000, 0.001). The interobserver variability of COV_CTV was significantly greater in the supine position than in the prone position (T = 2.64, P = 0.014). Furthermore, the interobserver variabilities of MD_TB and MD_CTV were statistically lower in the supine position than in the prone position (Z = −3.460, −3.195, P = 0.000, 0.001).

Conclusion: When delineating the target volume for EB-PBI, the interobserver variability in the prone position was lower than that in the supine position. Hence, the administration of EB-PBI in the prone position during free breathing is a reasonable option.