Reducing the Risk of Secondary Lung Cancer in Treatment Planning of Accelerated Partial Breast Irradiation

Critical Evaluation of Secondary Cancer Risk After Breast Radiation Therapy with Hybrid Radiotherapy Techniques

Background

As hybrid radiotherapy technique can effectively balance dose distribution between targets and organs, it is necessary to evaluate the late effects related to radiotherapy. The aim of the study was to calculate and provide individual estimates of the risks for hybrid radiotherapy techniques in breast cancer patients.

Methods

Whole-breast irradiation was performed in 43 breast cancer patients by using 3D conformal, intensity-modulated and hybrid techniques. The excess absolute risk (EAR), lifetime attributable risk (LAR) and normal tissue complication probability (NTCP) were calculated to estimate risks in organs. The risk variability in contralateral breast was assessed by using the patient's anatomic parameters.

Results

Compared with IMRT and FinF, hybrid techniques achieved satisfactory dose distribution and comparable or lower estimated risks in organs. The LAR was estimated to be up to 0.549% for contralateral lung with advantages of tangential techniques over H-VMAT. For ipsilateral lung, the LAR was estimated to be up to 9.021%, but lower in H-VMAT and FinF without significant difference. The risk of thyroid was negligible in overall estimation. For contralateral breast, the LAR was estimated to be up to 0.865% with advantages of MH-IMRT and H-VMAT over TF-IMRT. The fraction of individual variability could be explained by using anatomic parameters of minimum breast distance (MBD) and minimum target concave angle (θ_MTCA). NTCP for all analyzed endpoints was significantly higher in TF-IMRT relative to FinF and hybrid techniques, while TH-IMRT and H-VMAT were presenting lower toxicity risk. However, MH-IMRT presented a higher probability of toxicity in lung. For most cases, H-VMAT demonstrated a benefit for contralateral breast, heart and lung sparing.

Conclusion

The optimal treatment should be performed individually according to anatomic parameters and balances between EAR and NTCP. Individual assessment may assist in achieving optimal balances between targets and organs as well as supporting clinical decision-making processes.

Five Fraction External Beam Partial Breast Irradiation: A User's Guide

OBJECTIVE

Mature follow up from multiple randomized trials have demonstrated the safety and efficacy of external beam partial breast irradiation (PBI) for appropriately selected patients with early stage breast cancer. Despite this evidence, external beam PBI remains underutilized. In this user guide we outline patient selection, workflow, and address possible challenges to aid in implementation of evidence-based external beam PBI.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Review of the current guidelines for PBI suitability, surgical considerations, treatment technique, simulation, contouring, and treatment planning, citing the latest published literature to support PBI utilization.

RESULTS

Prospective data supports the use of 30 Gy in 5 fractions delivered with intensity modulated radiation therapy on a daily or every other day basis for a significant proportion of early stage breast cancer patients. The surgical cavity must be clearly visualized on treatment planning scan, recommend 3-5 weeks post-operatively, and the recommended clinical target volume expansion on the surgical cavity is 0.5-1.0 cm. A planning target volume expansion, based on motion management and image guidance, of 0.5-1.0 cm should be used. Organ at risk dose constraints of heart V3Gy ≤10% and contralateral breast Dmax ≤1 Gy are often achievable.

CONCLUSIONS

Five fraction external beam PBI is a highly effective treatment with very limited toxicity for patients with early stage breast cancer following breast conserving surgery. Commonly utilized intensity modulated treatment planning techniques with plan delivery on standard linear accelerators results significant normal tissue sparing and makes implementation feasible at most radiation oncology centers.

Estimation of Annual Secondary Lung Cancer Deaths Using Various Adjuvant Breast Radiotherapy Techniques for Early-Stage Cancers

Purpose

Secondary lung cancer (SLC) can offset the benefit of adjuvant breast radiotherapy (RT), and risks compound sharply after 25 to 30 years. We hypothesized that SLC risk is mainly an issue for early-stage breast cancer, and that lives could be saved using different RT techniques.

Patients and Methods

The SEER database was used to extract breast patient age, stage survival, and radiotherapy utilization over time and per stage and to assess the factors associated with increased SLC risk with a multivariable competing risk Cox model. The number of SLC was calculated using the BEIR model modified with patient survival, age, and use of RT from the SEER database. Stage distribution and number of new breast cancer cases were obtained from the NAACCR. Mean lung dose for various irradiation techniques was obtained from measurement or literature.

Results

Out of the 765,697 non-metastatic breast cancers in the SEER database from 1988 to 2012, 49.8% received RT. RT significantly increased the SLC risk for longer follow-up (HR=1.58), early stage including DCIS, stage I and IIA (HR = 1.11), and younger age (HR=1.061) (all p<0.001). More advanced stages did not have significantly increased risk. In 2019, 104,743 early-stage breast patients received radiotherapy, and an estimated 3,413 will develop SLC (3.25%) leading to an excess of 2,900 deaths (2.77%). VMAT would reduce this mortality by 9.9%, hypofractionation 26 Gy in five fractions by 38.8%, a prone technique by 70.3%, 3D-CRT APBI by 43.3%, HDR brachytherapy by 71.1%, LDR by 80.7%, and robotic 4π APBI by 85.2%.

Conclusions

SLC after breast RT remains a clinically significant issue for early-stage breast cancers. This mortality could be significantly reduced using a prone technique or APBI.

Plan comparison of prostate stereotactic radiotherapy in spacer implant patients

In prostate stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT), hydrogel spacers are increasingly used. This study aimed to perform a dosimetry comparison of treatment plans using CyberKnife (CK), commonly used for prostate SBRT, Helical TomoTherapy (HT), and TrueBeam (TB) in patients with hydrogel spacer implantations. The data of 20 patients who received hydrogel spacer implantation for prostate SBRT were retrospectively analyzed. The prescription dose was 36.25 Gy in five fractions to 95% of the planning target volume (PTV; D95). The conformity index (CI), gradient index (GI), homogeneity index (HI), and dose‐volume histogram (DVH) were analyzed for the three modalities, using the same PTV margins. The monitor unit (MU) and the beam‐on‐time (BOT) values were subsequently compared. The CI of TB (0.93 ± 0.02) was significantly superior to those of CK (0.82 ± 0.03, p < 0.01) and HT (0.86 ± 0.03, p < 0.01). Similarly, the GI value of TB (3.59 ± 0.12) was significantly better than those of CK (4.31 ± 0.43, p < 0.01) and HT (4.52 ± 0.24, p < 0.01). The median doses to the bladder did not differ between the CK and TB (V18.1 Gy: 16.5% ± 4.5% vs. 15.8% ± 4.4%, p = 1.00), but were significantly higher for HT (V18.1 Gy: 33.2% ± 7.3%, p < 0.01 vs. CK, p < 0.01 vs. TB). The median rectal dose was significantly lower for TB (V18.1 Gy: 5.6% ± 4.5%) than for CK (V18.1 Gy: 11.2% ± 6.7%, p < 0.01) and HT (20.2% ± 8.3%, p < 0.01). TB had the shortest BOT (2.6 min; CK: 17.4 min, HT: 6.9 min). TB could create treatment plans dosimetrically comparable to those of CK when using the same margins, in patients with hydrogel spacers.