Secondary cancer risk after whole-breast radiation therapy: field-in-field versus intensity modulated radiation therapy versus volumetric modulated arc therapy

Radiation Therapy for Stage IIA/B Seminoma: Modeling Secondary Cancer Risk for Protons and VMAT versus 3D Photons

Radiation therapy (RT) is an effective treatment for stage IIA and select stage IIB seminomas. However, given the long life expectancy of seminoma patients, there are concerns about the risk of secondary cancers from RT. This study assessed differences in secondary cancer risk for stage II seminoma patients following proton pencil-beam scanning (PBS) and photon VMAT, compared to 3D conformal photon RT. Ten seminoma patients, five with a IIA staging who received 30 GyRBE and five with a IIB staging who received 36 GyRBE, had three RT plans generated. Doses to organs at risk (OAR) were evaluated, and secondary cancer risks were calculated as the Excess Absolute Risk (EAR) and Lifetime Attributable Risk (LAR). PBS reduced the mean OAR dose by 60% on average compared to 3D, and reduced the EAR and LAR for all OAR, with the greatest reductions seen for the bowel, liver, and stomach. VMAT reduced high doses but increased the low-dose bath, leading to an increased EAR and LAR for some OAR. PBS provided superior dosimetric sparing of OAR compared to 3D and VMAT in stage II seminoma cases, with models demonstrating that this may reduce secondary cancer risk. Therefore, proton therapy shows the potential to reduce acute and late side effects of RT for this population.

Risk evaluation of secondary malignancies after radiotherapy of breast cancer in light of the continuous development of planning techniques

Secondary cancer risk is a significant concern for women treated with breast radiation therapy due to improved long-term survival rates. We evaluated the potential of new advanced automated planning algorithms together with hybrid techniques to minimize the excess absolute risk (EAR) for secondary cancer in various organs after radiation treatment for early staged breast cancer. Using CT data set of 25 patients, we generated 4 different radiation treatment plans of different complexity, including 3-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3D-CRT), field-in-field (FinF), hybrid-IMRT (HMRT) and automated hybrid-VMAT (HVMAT) techniques. The organ-equivalent dose (OED) was calculated from differential dose-volume histograms on the basis of the "linear-exponential," "plateau," and "full mechanistic" dose-response models and was used to evaluate the EAR for secondary cancer in the contralateral breast (CB), contralateral lung (CL), and ipsilateral lung (IL). Statistical comparisons of data were performed by a Kruskal-Wallis analysis of variance. The planning objectives were fulfilled with all the planning techniques for both target coverage and organs-at-risk sparing. The differences in EAR for CB, CL and IL secondary tumor induction were not significant among the 4 techniques. For the CB and CL, the mean absolute difference did not reach 1 case of 10000 patient-years. For the IL, the mean absolute difference was up to 5 cases of 10,000 patient-years. In conclusion, the automated HVMAT technique allows an EAR reduction at the level of well-consolidated tangential 3D-CRT or FinF techniques, keeping all the HVMAT dosimetric improvements unchanged. On the basis of this analysis, the adoption of the HVMAT technique poses no increase in EAR and could be considered safe also for younger patients.

Hybrid planning techniques for early-stage left-sided breast cancer: dose distribution analysis and estimation of projected secondary cancer-relative risk

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to evaluate three techniques of irradiation of left-sided breast cancer patients, three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3D-CRT), hybrid Intensity-Modulated Radiotherapy (h-IMRT), and hybrid Volumetric-Modulated Arc Therapy (h-VMAT, h-ARC), in terms of dose distribution in the planning target volume (PTV) and organs at risk (OARs). The second aim was to estimate the projected relative risk of radiation-induced secondary cancers for hybrid techniques.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Three treatment plans were prepared in 3D-CRT, h-IMRT, and h-VMAT techniques for each of the 40 patients, who underwent CT simulation in deep inspiration breath-hold (DIBH). For hybrid techniques, plans were created by combining 3D-CRT and dynamic fields with an 80%/20% dose ratio for 3D-CRT and IMRT or VMAT. Cumulative dose-volume histograms were used to compare dose distributions within the PTV and OARs (heart, left anterior descending coronary artery [LAD], left and right lung [LL, RL], right breast [RB]). Projected risk ratios for secondary cancers were estimated relative to 3D-CRT using the organ equivalent dose (OED) concept for the Schneider's linear exponential, plateau, and full mechanistic dose-response model.

RESULTS

All plans fulfilled the PTV criterium: V95%≥95%. Compared to 3D-CRT, both hybrid techniques showed significantly better target coverage (PTV: V95%>98%, p < 0.001), and the best conformality was achieved by h-ARC plans (CI: 1.18 ± 0.09, p < 0.001). Compared to 3D-CRT and h-ARC, h-IMRT increased the average sum of monitor units (MU) over 129.9% (p < 0.001). H-ARC increased the mean dose of contralateral organs and the LL V5Gy parameter (p < 0.001). Both hybrid techniques significantly reduced the Dmax of the heart by 5 Gy. Compared to h-IMRT, h-ARC increased secondary cancer projected relative risk ratios for LL, RL, and RB by 18, 152, and 81%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The results confirmed that both hybrid techniques provide better target quality and OARs sparing than 3D-CRT. Hybrid VMAT delivers less MU compared to hybrid IMRT but may increase the risk of radiation-induced secondary malignancies.

Planning System-dependent Recommendations of Intensity-modulated Technique for Breast Radiotherapy: A Literature Review-based Adaptation and Institutional Dosimetric Experience from a Large-volume Tertiary Cancer Care Hospital

This article aims to identify, through a literature review, the best intensity-modulated technique (IMRT)/volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) for the breast/chest wall (Br/CW) as a function of the treatment planning system (TPS) and present the institutional dosimetric data for the same. A PubMed search was conducted following intensity-modulated irradiation techniques (IMRT) presented in the study: field-in-field (FiF), tangential IMRT (t-IMRT), multi-field IMRT, tangential VMAT (t-VMAT), half-arc VMAT (HA-VMAT), and large arc VMAT (LA-VMAT). The literature with at least one arm VMAT is included in this study. A total of 370 articles were identified between 2010 and 2022, out of which 19 articles were found to be unique. These articles were classified in terms of the TPS used: Eclipse (9), Monaco (6), RayStation (2), Pinnacle (1), and one unidentified TPS. Based on the literature review, dosimetric attributes, and second cancer risk analysis (SCRA), t-IMRT was found to be the most preferable technique in Eclipse, Pinnacle, and RayStation TPS. However, for Monaco TPS, t-VMAT (approximately 30° tangential arc) offers better dose coverage with lower organ-at-risk (OAR) doses. In terms of OAR doses and SCRA, LA-VMAT (≥210°) and HA-VMAT (180°) are avoidable techniques in any TPS, and FiF should be preferred over these two techniques. In our present institution, which uses the Eclipse TPS, data for 300 patients treated with t-IMRT were collected. The data included beam angle, monitor unit [MU], target coverage (D95% and V105% [cc]), and analysis of the maximum (%), and mean dose (%) of the OAR. t-IMRT utilizes two medial and three lateral tangential beams placed at a spread of approximately 10° and 20°, respectively. The results showed a D95% of 96.3 ± 1.2% and a V105% of 4.9 ± 7.0 cc. The mean doses to the heart and ipsilateral lung were 10.1 ± 20.9% and 11.4 ± 10.2%, respectively. The mean MU was 1282.7 ± 453.4. Based on the findings, the most preferred intensity-modulated technique for Eclipse, Pinnacle, and RayStation is t-IMRT, while for Monaco, it is t-VMAT. The data from the Eclipse planning system demonstrate a satisfactory dosimetric outcome for t-IMRT. However, the use of VMAT techniques employing an arc angle between 180° and 210° or higher is strongly discouraged.

Three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3D-CRT) vs. volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) in deep inspiration breath-hold (DIBH) technique in left-sided breast cancer patients-comparative analysis of dose distribution and estimation of projected secondary cancer risk

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to compare two techniques of irradiation of left-sided breast cancer patients who underwent breast-conserving surgery, three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy technique (3D-CRT) and volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT), in terms of dose distribution in the planning target volume (PTV) and organs at risk (OARs). The second aim of the study was estimation of the projected risk of radiation-induced secondary cancer for both radiotherapy techniques.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

For 25 patients who underwent CT simulation in deep inspiration breath-hold (DIBH), three treatment plans were generated: one using a three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy technique and two using volumetric modulated arc therapy. First VMAT-DIBH geometry consisted of three partial arcs (ARC-DIBH 3A) and second consisted of four partial arcs (ARC-DIBH 4A). Cumulative dose-volume histograms (DVHs) were used to compare dose distributions within the PTV and OARs (heart, left anterior descending coronary artery [LAD], ipsilateral and contralateral lung [IL, CL], and contralateral breast [CB]). Normal tissue complication probabilities (NTCPs) and organ equivalent doses (OEDs) were calculated using the differential DVHs. Excess absolute risks (EARs) for second cancers were estimated using Schneider's full mechanistic dose-response model.

RESULTS

All plans fulfilled the criterium for PTV V95% ≥ 95%. The PTV coverage, homogeneity, and conformity indices were significantly better for VMAT-DIBH. VMAT showed a significantly increased mean dose and V5Gy for all OARs, but reduced LAD D_max by 15 Gy. For IL, CL, and CB, the 3D-CRT DIBH method achieved the lowest values of EAR: 28.38 per 10,000 PYs, 2.55 per 10,000 PYs, and 4.48 per 10,000 PYs (p < 0.001), compared to 40.29 per 10,000 PYs, 15.62 per 10,000 PYs, and 23.44 per 10,000 PYs for ARC-DIBH 3A plans and 41.12 per 10,000 PYs, 15.59 per 10,000 PYs, and 22.73 per 10,000 PYs for ARC-DIBH 4A plans. Both techniques provided negligibly low NTCPs for all OARs.

CONCLUSION

The study shows that VMAT-DIBH provides better OAR sparing against high doses. However, the large low-dose-bath (≤ 5 Gy) is still a concern due to the fact that a larger volume of normal tissues exposed to lower doses may increase a radiation-induced risk of secondary cancer.

The use of Hybrid Techniques in Whole-Breast Radiotherapy: A Systematic Review

Objectives The development of new techniques in radiotherapy (RT) provides a better planned target volume (PTV) dose distribution while further improving the protection of organs at risk (OARs). The study aims to present the dosimetric results of studies using hybrid techniques in whole-breast radiotherapy (WBRT). Methods: This systematic literature review was conducted by scanning the relevant literature in PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines. Among the parameters are dose values for PTV and OARs beam contribute ratios, the value of monitors, and treatment times for different RT techniques. Initially, 586 articles were identified; 196 duplicate articles were removed leaving 391 articles for screening. Three-hundred and thirty-seven irrelevant articles were excluded, leaving 54 studies assessed for eligibility. A total of 22 articles met the search criteria to evaluate dosimetric results of hybrid and other RT techniques in WBRT. Results: According to the dosimetric data of the studies, hybrid intensity-modulated RT (H-IMRT) and hybrid volumetric-modulated arc therapy (H-VMAT) techniques give dosimetrically advantageous results in WBRT compared to other RT techniques. Conclusion: Hybrid techniques using appropriate beams contribute value and show great promise in improving dosimetric results in WBRT. However, there is a need for new studies showing the long-term clinical results of hybrid RT.

Assessment of Field-in-Field, 3-Field, and 4-Field Treatment Planning Methods for Radiotherapy of Gastro-Esophageal Junction Cancer

Background

Gastro-esophageal (GE) junction cancer is the fastest-growing tumor, particularly in the United States (US).

Objective

This study aimed to compare dosimetric and radiobiological factors among field-in-field (FIF), three-field (3F), and four-field box (4FB) radiotherapy planning techniques for gastro-esophageal junction cancer.

Material and Methods

In this experimental study, thirty patients with GE junction cancer were evaluated, and three planning techniques (field-in-field (FIF), three-field (3F), and four-field box (4FB)) were performed for each patient for a 6-MV photon beam. Dose distribution in the target volume, the monitor units (MUs) required, and the dose delivered to organs at risk (OARs) were compared for these techniques using the paired-sample t-test.

Results

A significant difference was measured between the FIF and 3F techniques with respect to conformity index (CI), dose homogeneity index (HI), and tumor control probability (TCP) for the target organ, as well as the D_mean for the heart, kidneys, and liver. For the spinal cord, the FIF technique showed a slight reduction in the maximum dose compared to the other two techniques. In addition, the V_{20 Gy} of the lungs and the normal tissue complication probability (NTCP) of all OARs were reduced with FIF method.

Conclusion

The FIF technique showed better performance for treating patients with gastro-esophageal junction tumors, in terms of dose homogeneity in the target, conformity of the radiation field with the target volume, TCP, less dose to healthy organs, and fewer MU.

Volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT): a review of clinical outcomes—what is the clinical evidence for the most effective implementation?

Modern conformal radiation therapy using techniques such as modulation, image guidance and motion management have changed the face of radiotherapy today offering superior conformity, efficiency, and reproducibility to clinics worldwide. This review assesses the impact of these advanced radiotherapy techniques on patient toxicity and survival rates reported from January 2017 to September 2020. The main aims are to establish if dosimetric and efficiency gains correlate with improved survival and reduced toxicities and to answer the question ‘What is the clinical evidence for the most effective implementation of VMAT?’. Compared with 3DCRT, improvements have been reported with VMAT in prostate, locally advanced cervical carcinoma and various head and neck applications, leading to the shift in technology to VMAT. Other sites such as thoracic neoplasms and nasopharyngeal carcinomas have observed some improvement with VMAT although not in line with improved dosimetric measures, and the burden of toxicity and the incidence of cancer related deaths remain high, signaling the need to further mitigate toxicity and increase survival. As technological advancement continues, large randomised long-term clinical trials are required to determine the way-forward and offer site-specific recommendations. These studies are usually expensive and time consuming, therefore utilising pooled real-world data in a prospective nature can be an alternative solution to comprehensively assess the efficacy of modern radiotherapy techniques.

Comparison of Breast Cancer Radiotherapy Techniques Regarding Secondary Cancer Risk and Normal Tissue Complication Probability - Modelling and Measurements Using a 3D-Printed Phantom

Background

Radiotherapy after breast-conserving therapy is a standard postoperative treatment of breast cancer, which can be carried out with a variety of irradiation techniques. The treatment planning must take into consideration detrimental effects on the neighbouring organs at risk-the lung, the heart, and the contralateral breast, which can include both short- and long-term effects represented by the normal tissue complication probability and secondary cancer risk.

Patients and Methods

In this planning study, we investigate intensity-modulated (IMRT) and three-dimensional conformal (3D-CRT) radiotherapy techniques including sequential or simultaneously integrated boosts as well as interstitial multicatheter brachytherapy boost techniques of 38 patients with breast-conserving surgery retrospectively. We furthermore develop a 3D-printed breast phantom add-on to allow for catheter placement and to measure the out-of-field dose using thermoluminescent dosimeters placed inside an anthropomorphic phantom. Finally, we estimate normal tissue complication probabilities using the Lyman-Kutcher-Burman model and secondary cancer risks using the linear non-threshold model (out-of-field) and the model by Schneider et al. (in-field).

Results

The results depend on the combination of primary whole-breast irradiation and boost technique. The normal tissue complication probabilities for various endpoints are of the following order: 1%-2% (symptomatic pneumonitis, ipsilateral lung), 2%-3% (symptomatic pneumonitis, whole lung), and 1%-2% (radiation pneumonitis grade ≥ 2, whole lung). The additional relative risk of ischemic heart disease ranges from +25% to +35%. In-field secondary cancer risk of the ipsilateral lung in left-sided treatment is around 50 per 10,000 person-years for 20 years after exposure at age 55. Out-of-field estimation of secondary cancer risk results in approximately 5 per 10,000 person-years each for the contralateral lung and breast.

Conclusions

In general, 3D-CRT shows the best risk reduction in contrast to IMRT. Regarding the boost concepts, brachytherapy is the most effective method in order to minimise normal tissue complication probability and secondary cancer risk compared to teletherapy boost concepts. Hence, the 3D-CRT technique in combination with an interstitial multicatheter brachytherapy boost is most suitable in terms of risk avoidance for treating breast cancer with techniques including boost concepts.

Dose to contralateral breast from whole breast irradiation by automated tangential IMRT planning: comparison of flattening-filter and flattening-filter-free modes

Background

The most common secondary cancer is contralateral breast (CLB) cancer after whole breast irradiation (WBI). The aim of this study was to quantify the reduction of CLB dose in tangential intensity modulated radiotherapy (t-IMRT) for WBI using flattening-filter-free (FFF) beams.

Materials and methods

We generated automated planning of 20 young breast cancer patients with limited user interaction. Dose-volume histograms of the planning target volume (PTV), ipsilateral lung, heart, and CLB were calculated. The dose of PTV, the most medial CLB point, and the CLB point below the nipple was measured using an ionization chamber inserted in a slab phantom. We compared the two t-IMRT plans generated by FFF beams and flattening-filter (FF) beams.

Results

All plans were clinically acceptable. There was no difference in the conformal index, the homogeneity for FFF was significantly worse. For the ipsilateral lung, the maximum dose (D_max) was significantly higher; however, V₂₀ showed a tendency to be lower in the FFF plan. No differences were found in the D_max and V₃₀ to the heart of the left breast cancer. FF planning showed significantly lower D_max and mean dose to the CLB. In contrast to the calculation results, the measured dose of the most medial CLB point and the CLB point below the nipple were significantly lower in FFF mode than in FF mode, with mean reductions of 21.1% and 20%, respectively.

Conclusions

T-IMRT planning using FFF reduced the measured out-of-field dose of the most medial CLB point and the CLB point below the nipple.

Auxiliary Structures-Assisted Radiotherapy Improvement for Advanced Left Breast Cancer

Background

To improve the quality of plan for the radiation treatment of advanced left breast cancer by introducing the auxiliary structures (ASs) which are used to spare the regions with no intact delineated structures adjacent to the target volume.

Methods

CT data from 20 patients with left-sided advanced breast cancer were selected. An AS designated as A1 was created to spare the regions of the aorta, pulmonary artery, superior vena ava, and contralateral tissue of the upper chest and neck, and another, designated as A2, was created in the regions of the cardia and fundus of the stomach, left liver lobe, and splenic flexure of the colon. IMRT and VMAT plans were created for cases with and without the use of the AS dose constraints in plan optimization. Dosimetric parameters of the target and organs at risk (OARs) were compared between the separated groups.

Results

With the use of AS dose constraints, both the IMRT and VMAT plans were clinically acceptable and deliverable, even showing a slight improvement in dose distribution of both the target and OARs compared with the AS-unused plans. The ASs significantly realized the dose sparing for the regions and brought a better conformity index (p < 0.05) and homogeneity index (p < 0.05) in VMAT plans. In addition, the volume receiving at least 20 Gy (V₂₀) for the heart (p < 0.05), V₄₀ for the left lung (p < 0.05), and V₄₀ for the axillary-lateral thoracic vessel juncture region (p < 0.05) were all lower in VMAT plans.

Conclusion

The use of the defined AS dose constraints in plan optimization was effective in sparing the indicated regions, improving the target dose distribution, and sparing OARs for advanced left breast cancer radiotherapy, especially those that utilize VMAT plans.

Dosimetric Comparison of Whole Breast Radiotherapy Using Field-in-Field and Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy Techniques in Left-Sided Breast Cancer Patients

Introduction

The radiotherapy of left-sided breast cancers is challenging because of neighboring critical organs, posing an increased risk of complications. Various radiation delivery techniques have been used to deliver the desired dose of radiation to the target area while keeping the doses to nearby structures within constraints.

The main aim of this study is to quantify doses delivered to the organs at risk (OARs) including heart, left lung, spinal cord, and contralateral breast, and to the planning target volume (PTV) using Field-in-Field (FIF) and Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy (VMAT).

Patients and methods

A retrospective review of 15 left-sided breast cancer patients was done. All the patients underwent breast-conserving surgery and adjuvant radiation. For every patient, two different radiation treatment plans were formulated and compared for the PTV coverage and doses to OARs, including heart, ipsilateral lung, spinal cord, and contralateral breast.

The radiation treatment techniques utilized for this purpose were FIF and VMAT. The homogeneity index (HI), and conformity index (CI) required for the treatment planning were also calculated. Data was analyzed using Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (IBM Corp., Armonk, USA). An Independent T-test was used for statistical analysis.

Results

The mean age was 41 years and the majority of them were stage II. Total nine patients were given 4005centi Gray (cGy) in 15 fractions (fr) followed by 10Gy boost, hence receiving a total dose of 5005cGy in 20fr. While remaining six patients were given a total dose 4005cGy in 15fr without any boost.

All patients were hypofractionated and the dose was delivered at a rate of 267cGy per fr. The FIF technique utilized in breast cancer radiation significantly reduced the mean doses to OARs: mean heart dose (3.81cGy), ipsilateral lung dose (V16- 15cGy), mean contralateral breast dose (0.03cGy), and maximum spinal cord dose (0.18cGy); as compared to VMAT technique which delivered comparatively higher doses: mean heart dose (8.85cGy), ipsilateral lung dose (V16- 19.82cGy), mean contralateral breast dose (4.59cGy), and maximum spinal cord dose (7.14cGy).

There was a significant mean difference between doses of OARs and all p-values were statistically significant (p<0.005). Moreover, the FIF technique also improves the dose distribution of PTV in terms of dose homogeneity. However, the conformity index is more enhanced with VMAT as opposed to FIF.

Conclusion

The FIF technique is more advantageous than the VMAT planning technique because it provides better dose distribution in terms of PTV coverage and significantly lower doses to OARs in radiotherapy to left-sided breast cancer.

Hybrid volumetric-modulated arc therapy for postoperative breast cancer including regional lymph nodes: the advantage of dosimetric data and safety of toxicities

To improve the homogeneity and conformity of the irradiation dose for postoperative breast cancer including regional lymph nodes, we planned Hybrid volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT), which combines conventional tangential field mainly for the chest area and VMAT mainly for the supraclavicular area and marginal zone. In this study, we compared the dosimetric impact between traditional 3D conformal radiotherapy (3DCRT) and Hybrid VMAT and observed toxicities following Hybrid VMAT. A total of 70 patients indicated between October 2016 and December 2017 were included. The prescribed dose was 50 Gy/25 fractions. For the dosimetric impact, 3DCRT and Hybrid VMAT plans were compared in each patient with respect to the dosimetric parameters. Toxicities were followed using the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 4.0. The median follow-up duration was 319 days. For the dosimetric impact, the homogeneity index (HI) and conformity index (CI) of PTV were significantly improved in the Hybrid VMAT plan compared with that in the 3DCRT plan (HI, 0.15 ± 0.07 in Hybrid VMAT vs 0.41 ± 0.19 in 3DCRT, P < 0.001; CI, 1.61 ± 0.44 in Hybrid VMAT vs 2.10 ± 0.56 in 3DCRT, P < 0.001). The mean irradiated ipsilateral lung dose was not significantly different in both plans (12.0 ± 2.4 Gy in Hybrid VMAT vs 11.8 ± 2.8 Gy in 3DCRT, P < 0.533). Regarding toxicity, there were no patients who developed ≥grade 3 acute toxicity and ≥grade 2 pneumonitis during the follow-up. Hybrid VMAT for postoperative breast cancer including regional lymph nodes was a reasonable technique that improved the homogeneity and conformity of the irradiation dose to the planning target volume while keeping the irradiation dose to organs at risk to a minimum.

Secondary cancer risk after radiation therapy for breast cancer with different radiotherapy techniques

The aim of this study was to estimate the radiation-related secondary cancer risks in organs during the treatment of breast cancer with different radiotherapy techniques, such as three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3D-CRT), intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT), and volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT). The treatment plans for 26 patients with breast cancer who received whole-breast irradiation at a dose of 50 Gy included tangential field 3D-CRT with hard-wedges (W-TF), tangential field IMRT (2F-IMRT), multiple field IMRT (6F-IMRT), and double partial arcs (VMAT). Patients were divided into three groups according to the distance between the contralateral breast (CB) and the body of the sternum. Setup error was simulated by moving the isocenter, and the dose distribution was then recalculated without changing the field fluency distribution. Based on the linear-exponential, the plateau, and the full mechanistic dose-response models, the organ equivalent dose and excess absolute risk were calculated from dose-volume histograms to estimate the secondary cancer risks in organs. Compared with 3D-CRT, IMRT and VMAT showed excellent results regarding tumor conformity and homogeneity; however, the low dose volume to organs was considerably higher in 6F-IMRT and VMAT. Secondary cancer risks for 2F-IMRT were comparable or slightly lower than for W-TF, but considerably lower than for 6F-IMRT or VMAT. After setup error simulation, there was a small increase in secondary cancer risk for 2F-IMRT and an increase of 159% and 318% for 6F-IMRT and VMAT, respectively, compared with W-TF. Although these results were obtained in most patients, they did not necessarily apply to every individual. The secondary cancer risks in the CB decreased significantly in correlation with increased distance for all alternative techniques, although they were higher in VMAT and lower in 2F-IMRT regardless of the distance. After setup error simulation, the increased changes in secondary cancer risks in the CB were comparable between 2F-IMRT, 6F-IMRT, and VMAT, suggesting that the secondary cancer risks in the CB mainly depend on radiotherapy techniques and distance, although the effect of setup error cannot be ignored. In the contralateral lung (CL), the secondary cancer risks were almost independent from distance and depended mainly on radiotherapy techniques; they were rarely affected by setup error. VMAT was associated with a higher secondary cancer risk in the CL. For the ipsilateral lung (IL), the secondary cancer risks were higher than those in other organs because the IL receives high doses to achieve tumor control, and they were relatively lower in VMAT. This warrants special consideration when estimating the secondary cancer risk to the IL. The study results suggested that the optimal radiotherapy method for breast cancer should be determined on an individual basis and according to the balance between secondary cancer risks related to anatomic diversity and setup error, which can prevent blind selection of techniques.