A Dosimetric Study Comparing Different Radiotherapy Planning Techniques With and Without Deep Inspiratory Breath Hold for Breast Cancer.
ABC
DIBH
IMRT
LAD
VMAT
active breath coordinator
deep inspiration breath hold
intensity modulated radiation therapy
left anterior descending coronary artery
volumetric modulated arc therapy
Journal
Cancer management and research
ISSN: 1179-1322
Titre abrégé: Cancer Manag Res
Pays: New Zealand
ID NLM: 101512700
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2022
2022
Historique:
received:
21
07
2022
accepted:
24
11
2022
entrez:
5
1
2023
pubmed:
6
1
2023
medline:
6
1
2023
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
To analyze whether deep inspiratory breath hold (DIBH) would be dosimetrically beneficial irrespective of radiotherapy planning techniques for patients with left breast cancers requiring adjuvant radiotherapy. Planning CT scans were taken in free-breathing (FB) as well as deep-inspiration breath hold (DIBH) for patients requiring adjuvant radiotherapy for left breast cancers. After registration, three radiotherapy plans - 3D-conformal radiotherapy (3DCRT), intensity modulated RT (IMRT), and volumetric modulated arc-therapy (VMAT) - were generated for both FB and DIBH scans for each patient. The dose-volume parameters were collected from the dose-volume histogram and analyzed. A paired The study was conducted on thirteen patients. The mean dose of the left lung was reduced with DIBH by 32%, 24%, and 6% (8.6 Gy, 6.6 Gy, and 6.4 Gy) with 3DCRT, IMRT, and VMAT, respectively. The mean heart dose was reduced by 3.3 Gy (2.2 vs 5.5 Gy), 2.2 Gy (7.5 vs 9.7 Gy), and 1.2 Gy (5.8 vs 7 Gy) with 3DCRT, IMRT, and VMAT with DIBH. Similarly, the left anterior descending artery (LAD) mean dose was relatively reduced by 80%, 34%, and 20% when compared with the FB scans for 3DCRT, IMRT, and VMAT respectively, with max dose in the 3DCRT plan. DIBH appears to have maximum benefit in achieving a better sparing of organs-at-risk for patients being considered for 3DCRT, and to a lesser extent with even IMRT and VMAT techniques.
Identifiants
pubmed: 36601278
doi: 10.2147/CMAR.S381316
pii: 381316
pmc: PMC9807273
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
3581-3587Informations de copyright
© 2022 S Nair et al.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
The authors have no relevant conflict of interest to disclose for the present study.
Références
Anticancer Res. 2021 Mar;41(3):1529-1538
pubmed: 33788746
Cancers (Basel). 2022 Jul 18;14(14):
pubmed: 35884538
Sci Rep. 2021 Feb 2;11(1):2790
pubmed: 33531527
Pract Radiat Oncol. 2014 Mar-Apr;4(2):123-129
pubmed: 24890353
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2010 Dec 1;78(5):1345-51
pubmed: 20207496
J Cancer Res Ther. 2017 Jan-Mar;13(1):56-61
pubmed: 28508834
Tech Innov Patient Support Radiat Oncol. 2021 Mar 01;17:25-31
pubmed: 33681484
J Thorac Oncol. 2021 Feb;16(2):216-227
pubmed: 33278607
Cureus. 2022 Mar 28;14(3):e23568
pubmed: 35494897
J Med Radiat Sci. 2015 Mar;62(1):74-81
pubmed: 26229670
Front Oncol. 2018 Apr 04;8:87
pubmed: 29670854
Br J Radiol. 2011 Nov;84(1007):967-96
pubmed: 22011829
Sci Rep. 2019 Mar 13;9(1):4384
pubmed: 30867519
Breast Cancer Res. 2020 Jan 22;22(1):10
pubmed: 31969169
Cancer Rep (Hoboken). 2021 Oct;4(5):e1376
pubmed: 33797199
Medicine (Baltimore). 2019 May;98(19):e15510
pubmed: 31083193
Strahlenther Onkol. 2008 Jul;184(7):354-8
pubmed: 19016033
Adv Radiat Oncol. 2019 Jan 30;4(2):246-252
pubmed: 31011669
Open Access Maced J Med Sci. 2017 Sep 17;5(6):736-739
pubmed: 29123573
Pract Radiat Oncol. 2018 May - Jun;8(3):e79-e86
pubmed: 28888675
Br J Radiol. 2019 Sep;92(1101):20190150
pubmed: 31265316