1
|
Kim DW, Hong CS, Son J, Kim SY, Park YI, Chung M, Chung WK, Han MC, Kim J, Kim H, Kim JS. Dosimetric analysis of six whole-breast irradiation techniques in supine and prone positions. Sci Rep 2024; 14:14347. [PMID: 38907042 PMCID: PMC11192744 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-024-65461-y] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/27/2023] [Accepted: 06/20/2024] [Indexed: 06/23/2024] Open
Abstract
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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Dong Wook Kim
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Yonsei Cancer Center, Heavy Ion Therapy Research Institute, Yonsei University College of Medicine, 50-1, Yonsei-Ro, Seodaemun-Gu, Seoul, South Korea, 03722
| | - Chae-Seon Hong
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Yonsei Cancer Center, Heavy Ion Therapy Research Institute, Yonsei University College of Medicine, 50-1, Yonsei-Ro, Seodaemun-Gu, Seoul, South Korea, 03722.
| | - Junyoung Son
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Yongin Severance Hospital, Yongin, South Korea
| | - Se Young Kim
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Yonsei Cancer Center, Seoul, South Korea
| | - Ye-In Park
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Yonsei Cancer Center, Heavy Ion Therapy Research Institute, Yonsei University College of Medicine, 50-1, Yonsei-Ro, Seodaemun-Gu, Seoul, South Korea, 03722
| | - Mijoo Chung
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Changwon Hanmaeum Hospital, Hanyang University College of Medicine, Changwon, South Korea
| | - Weon Kuu Chung
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Kyung Hee University Hospital at Gangdong, Seoul, South Korea
| | - Min Cheol Han
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Yonsei Cancer Center, Heavy Ion Therapy Research Institute, Yonsei University College of Medicine, 50-1, Yonsei-Ro, Seodaemun-Gu, Seoul, South Korea, 03722
| | - Jihun Kim
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Gangnam Severance Hospital, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, South Korea
| | - Hojin Kim
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Yonsei Cancer Center, Heavy Ion Therapy Research Institute, Yonsei University College of Medicine, 50-1, Yonsei-Ro, Seodaemun-Gu, Seoul, South Korea, 03722
| | - Jin Sung Kim
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Yonsei Cancer Center, Heavy Ion Therapy Research Institute, Yonsei University College of Medicine, 50-1, Yonsei-Ro, Seodaemun-Gu, Seoul, South Korea, 03722.
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Bonaccorsi SG, Tessonnier T, Hoeltgen L, Meixner E, Harrabi S, Hörner-Rieber J, Haberer T, Abdollahi A, Debus J, Mairani A. Exploring Helium Ions' Potential for Post-Mastectomy Left-Sided Breast Cancer Radiotherapy. Cancers (Basel) 2024; 16:410. [PMID: 38254899 PMCID: PMC10814201 DOI: 10.3390/cancers16020410] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/16/2023] [Revised: 01/04/2024] [Accepted: 01/11/2024] [Indexed: 01/24/2024] Open
Abstract
Proton therapy presents a promising modality for treating left-sided breast cancer due to its unique dose distribution. Helium ions provide increased conformality thanks to a reduced lateral scattering. Consequently, the potential clinical benefit of both techniques was explored. An explorative treatment planning study involving ten patients, previously treated with VMAT (Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy) for 50 Gy in 25 fractions for locally advanced, node-positive breast cancer, was carried out using proton pencil beam therapy with a fixed relative biological effectiveness (RBE) of 1.1 and helium therapy with a variable RBE described by the mMKM (modified microdosimetric kinetic model). Results indicated that target coverage was improved with particle therapy for both the clinical target volume and especially the internal mammary lymph nodes compared to VMAT. Median dose value analysis revealed that proton and helium plans provided lower dose on the left anterior descending artery (LAD), heart, lungs and right breast than VMAT. Notably, helium therapy exhibited improved ipsilateral lung sparing over protons. Employing NTCP models as available in the literature, helium therapy showed a lower probability of grade ≤ 2 radiation pneumonitis (22% for photons, 5% for protons and 2% for helium ions), while both proton and helium ions reduce the probability of major coronary events with respect to VMAT.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Thomas Tessonnier
- Heidelberg Ion-Beam Therapy Center (HIT), Heidelberg University Hospital, 69120 Heidelberg, Germany
- Division of Molecular and Translational Radiation Oncology, National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), Heidelberg University Hospital, 69120 Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Line Hoeltgen
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, 69120 Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Eva Meixner
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, 69120 Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Semi Harrabi
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, 69120 Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Juliane Hörner-Rieber
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, 69120 Heidelberg, Germany
- Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO), German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), 69120 Heidelberg, Germany
- Clinical Cooperation Unit Radiation Oncology, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), 69120 Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Thomas Haberer
- Heidelberg Ion-Beam Therapy Center (HIT), Heidelberg University Hospital, 69120 Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Amir Abdollahi
- Heidelberg Ion-Beam Therapy Center (HIT), Heidelberg University Hospital, 69120 Heidelberg, Germany
- Division of Molecular and Translational Radiation Oncology, National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), Heidelberg University Hospital, 69120 Heidelberg, Germany
- Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO), German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), 69120 Heidelberg, Germany
- German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), 69120 Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Jürgen Debus
- Heidelberg Ion-Beam Therapy Center (HIT), Heidelberg University Hospital, 69120 Heidelberg, Germany
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, 69120 Heidelberg, Germany
- Clinical Cooperation Unit Radiation Oncology, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), 69120 Heidelberg, Germany
- German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), 69120 Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Andrea Mairani
- Heidelberg Ion-Beam Therapy Center (HIT), Heidelberg University Hospital, 69120 Heidelberg, Germany
- Division of Molecular and Translational Radiation Oncology, National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), Heidelberg University Hospital, 69120 Heidelberg, Germany
- Centro Nazionale di Adroterapia Oncologica (CNAO), 27100 Pavia, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Attili A, Scifoni E, Tommasino F. Modelling the HPRT-gene mutation induction of particle beams: systematic in vitro data collection, analysis and microdosimetric kinetic model implementation. Phys Med Biol 2022; 67. [DOI: 10.1088/1361-6560/ac8c80] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/13/2022] [Accepted: 08/24/2022] [Indexed: 11/11/2022]
Abstract
Abstract
Objective. Since the early years, particle therapy treatments have been associated with concerns for late toxicities, especially secondary cancer risk (SCR). Nowadays, this concern is related to patients for whom long-term survival is expected (e.g. breast cancer, lymphoma, paediatrics). In the aim to contribute to this research, we present a dedicated statistical and modelling analysis aiming at improving our understanding of the RBE for mutation induction (
RBE
M
˜
) for different particle species. Approach. We built a new database based on a systematic collection of RBE data for mutation assays of the gene encoding for the purine salvage enzyme hypoxanthine-guanine phosphoribosyltransferase from literature (105 entries, distributed among 3 cell lines and 16 particle species). The data were employed to perform statistical and modelling analysis. For the latter, we adapted the microdosimetric kinetic model (MKM) to describe the mutagenesis in analogy to lethal lesion induction. Main results. Correlation analysis between RBE for survival (RBES) and
RBE
M
˜
reveals significant correlation between these two quantities (ρ = 0.86, p < 0.05). The correlation gets stronger when looking at subsets of data based on cell line and particle species. We also show that the MKM can be successfully employed to describe
RBE
M
˜
,
obtaining comparably good agreement with the experimental data. Remarkably, to improve the agreement with experimental data the MKM requires, consistently in all the analysed cases, a reduced domain size for the description of mutation induction compared to that adopted for survival. Significance. We were able to show that RBES and
RBE
M
˜
are strongly related quantities. We also showed for the first time that the MKM could be successfully applied to the description of mutation induction, representing an endpoint different from the more traditional cell killing. In analogy to the RBES,
RBE
M
˜
can be implemented into treatment planning system evaluations.
Collapse
|
4
|
Stowe HB, Andruska ND, Reynoso F, Thomas M, Bergom C. Heart Sparing Radiotherapy Techniques in Breast Cancer: A Focus on Deep Inspiration Breath Hold. BREAST CANCER: TARGETS AND THERAPY 2022; 14:175-186. [PMID: 35899145 PMCID: PMC9309321 DOI: 10.2147/bctt.s282799] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/28/2022] [Accepted: 06/04/2022] [Indexed: 11/23/2022]
Abstract
Adjuvant radiation therapy is a critical component of breast cancer management. However, when breast cancer patients receive incidental radiation to the heart, there is an increased risk of cardiac disease and mortality. This is most common for patients with left-sided breast cancers and those receiving nodal irradiation as part of treatment. The overall risk of cardiac toxicity increases 4–16% with each Gray increase in mean heart radiation dose, with data suggesting that no lower limit exists which would eliminate cardiac risk entirely. Radiation techniques have improved over time, leading to lower cardiac radiation exposure than in the past. This decline is expected to reduce the incidence of radiation-induced heart dysfunction in patients. Deep inspiration breath hold (DIBH) is one such technique that was developed to reduce the risk of cardiac death and coronary events. DIBH is a non-invasive approach that capitalizes on the natural physiology of the respiratory cycle to increase the distance between the heart and the therapeutic target throughout the course of radiation therapy. DIBH has been shown to decrease the mean incidental radiation doses to the heart and left anterior descending coronary artery by approximately 20–70%. In this review, we summarize different techniques for DIBH and discuss recent data on this technique.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Hayley B Stowe
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis, St. Louis, MO, USA
| | - Neal D Andruska
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis, St. Louis, MO, USA
| | - Francisco Reynoso
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis, St. Louis, MO, USA
| | - Maria Thomas
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis, St. Louis, MO, USA
| | - Carmen Bergom
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis, St. Louis, MO, USA
- Cardio-Oncology Center of Excellence, Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis, St. Louis, MO, USA
- Alvin J. Siteman Center, Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis, St. Louis, MO, USA
- Correspondence: Carmen Bergom, Department of Radiation Oncology, Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis, St. Louis, MO, USA, Email
| |
Collapse
|