+ Site Statistics
References:
54,258,434
Abstracts:
29,560,870
PMIDs:
28,072,757
+ Search Articles
+ PDF Full Text Service
How our service works
Request PDF Full Text
+ Follow Us
Follow on Facebook
Follow on Twitter
Follow on LinkedIn
+ Subscribe to Site Feeds
Most Shared
PDF Full Text
+ Translate
+ Recently Requested

Breast-conserving radiotherapy with simultaneous integrated boost; field-in-field three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy versus inverse intensity-modulated radiotherapy - A dosimetric comparison: Do we need intensity-modulated radiotherapy?



Breast-conserving radiotherapy with simultaneous integrated boost; field-in-field three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy versus inverse intensity-modulated radiotherapy - A dosimetric comparison: Do we need intensity-modulated radiotherapy?



South Asian Journal of Cancer 7(3): 163-166



To examine the feasibility of improving breast-conserving radiotherapy with simultaneous integrated boost (SIB) and analyzing the efficiency of forward versus inverse intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) techniques in providing the same. Three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3DCRT) field-in-field (FIF) plans with simultaneous and sequential boost and IMRT SIB plans were generated for the datasets of 20 patients who had undergone breast-conserving surgery. The 3 plans were compared dosimetrically for efficiency in terms of planning target volume (PTV) coverage (PTV 95%), homogeneity and conformity, dose delivered to ipsilateral/contralateral lungs (I/L: V10, V20, C/L: Vmean, V5), heart and contralateral breast (Vmean, V30 for heart and Vmean, V1, V5 for C/L breast). The FIF 3DCRT plan with SIB (PLAN B) was more homogeneous than the classical technique with sequential boost (PLAN A). There were less hot spots in terms of Dmax (63.7 ± 1.3) versus Dmax (68.9 ± 1), P < 0.001 and boost V107%, B (0.3 ± 0.7) versus A (3.5 ± 5.99), P = 0.001. The IMRT SIB (PLAN C) did not provide any significant dosimetric advantage over the 3DCRT SIB technique. IMRT SIB plan C was associated with increased dose to contralateral lung in-terms of V5 (10.35 +/- 18.23) vs. (1.13 +/- 4.24), P = 0.04 and Vmean (2.12 ± 2.18) versus Vmean (0.595 ± 0.89), P = 0.008. There was 3-fold greater exposure in terms of Monitor Unit (MU) (1024.9 ± 298.32 versus 281.05 ± 20.23, P < 0.001) and treatment delivery time. FIF 3DCRT SIB provides a dosimetrically acceptable and technically feasible alternative to the classical 3DCRT plan with sequential boost for breast-conserving radiotherapy. It reduces treatment time by 2 weeks. IMRT SIB does not appear to have any dosimetric advantage; it is associated with significantly higher doses to contralateral lung and heart and radiation exposure in terms of MU.

Please choose payment method:






(PDF emailed within 1 workday: $29.90)

Accession: 052548698

Download citation: RISBibTeXText

PMID: 30112330


Related references

Hybrid intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) simultaneous integrated boost (SIB) technique versus three-dimensional (3D) conformal radiotherapy with SIB for breast radiotherapy: a planning comparison. Journal of RadioTherapy in Practice 15(02): 131-142, 2016

Poster Dosimetric Comparison of Three Dimensional Conformal Radiotherapy With Intensity Modulated Radiotherapy & Bone Marrow Sparing Intensity Modulated Radiotherapy in Preoperative Radiation of Locally Advanced Carcinoma Rectum. European Journal of Cancer 47: S407-S408, 2011

Volumetric-modulated arc radiotherapy for pancreatic malignancies: dosimetric comparison with sliding-window intensity-modulated radiotherapy and 3-dimensional conformal radiotherapy. Medical Dosimetry 39(3): 256-260, 2015

Simultaneous integrated boost radiotherapy for bilateral breast: a treatment planning and dosimetric comparison for volumetric modulated arc and fixed field intensity modulated therapy. Radiation Oncology 4: 27, 2009

Simultaneous integrated boost intensity-modulated radiotherapy versus 3-dimensional conformal radiotherapy in preoperative concurrent chemoradiotherapy for locally advanced rectal cancer. Radiation Oncology Journal 35(3): 208-216, 2017

Dosimetric Comparison between Single and Dual Arc-Volumetric Modulated Arc Radiotherapy and Intensity Modulated Radiotherapy for Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma Using a Simultaneous Integrated Boost Technique. Asian Pacific Journal of Cancer Prevention 18(5): 1395-1402, 2017

Dosimetric Comparison Of Field In Field Intensity Modulated Radiotherapy Technique With Conformal Radiotherapy Techniques In Breast Cancer. Radiotherapy and Oncology 92: S201-S202, 2009

Dosimetric comparison of field in field intensity-modulated radiotherapy technique with conformal radiotherapy techniques in breast cancer. Japanese Journal of Radiology 28(4): 283-289, 2010

Dosimetric comparison of anterior posterior-posterior anterior 2-field three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy, 4-field three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy and "forward" plan intensity modulated radiotherapy techniques in female lymphoma patients irradiated to neck and mediastinum. Journal of Cancer Research and Therapeutics 14(6): 1389-1396, 2018

Whole breast and excision cavity radiotherapy plan comparison: Conformal radiotherapy with sequential boost versus intensity-modulated radiation therapy with a simultaneously integrated boost. Journal of Medical Radiation Sciences 60(1): 16-24, 2013

Radiotherapy for esophageal cancer using simultaneous integrated boost techniques: dosimetric comparison of helical TomoTherapy, Volumetric-modulated Arc Therapy (RapidArc) and dynamic intensity-modulated radiotherapy. Technology in Cancer Research and Treatment 12(6): 485-491, 2014

Clinical and dosimetric study of radiotherapy for glioblastoma: three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy versus intensity-modulated radiotherapy. Journal of Neuro-Oncology 137(2): 429-438, 2018

Dosimetric comparison of standard three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy followed by intensity-modulated radiotherapy boost schedule (sequential IMRT plan) with simultaneous integrated boost-IMRT (SIB IMRT) treatment plan in patients with localized carcinoma prostate. Indian Journal of Urology 28(3): 300-306, 2012

Three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy, static intensity-modulated and helical intensity-modulated radiotherapy in glioblastoma. Dosimetric comparison in patients with overlap between target volumes and organs at risk. Tumori 100(3): 272-277, 2014

Dosimetric comparison of three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy, intensity modulated radiotherapy, and helical tomotherapy for lung stereotactic body radiotherapy. Journal of Medical Physics 40(4): 190-197, 2016