Dosimetric Comparison of IMRT Versus 3DCRT for Post-mastectomy Chest Wall Irradiation: An Analytical Observational Study

T. Tali, Fiza Amin, Javaid Ahmad, Aijaz Ahmad Khan
{"title":"Dosimetric Comparison of IMRT Versus 3DCRT for Post-mastectomy Chest Wall Irradiation: An Analytical Observational Study","authors":"T. Tali, Fiza Amin, Javaid Ahmad, Aijaz Ahmad Khan","doi":"10.31557/apjcc.2022.7.4.669-673","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Purpose: To compare the dose distribution of three-dimensional conformal radiation therapy (3DCRT) with intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) for post-mastectomy radiotherapy (PMRT) to left chest wall. Materials and Methods: 30 post-MRM female breast cancer patients with histologically confirmed infiltrating ductal carcinoma of unilateral left breast without evidence of distant metastasis or second malignancy were found eligible during January 2017 to December 2021. All patients received 45 Gy in 20 fractions. Planning target volume (PTV) parameters -D2, D98, Dmean, V95, and V107—homogeneity index (HI), and conformity index (CI) were compared. The mean doses of lung and heart, percentage volume of ipsilateral lung receiving 5 Gy (V5), 20 Gy (V20), and 49 Gy (V49) and that of heart receiving 5 Gy (V5), 25 Gy (V25), and 42 Gy (V42) were extracted from dose-volume histograms and compared. Results: PTV parameters were comparable between the two groups. CI was significantly improved with IMRT (1.118 vs. 1.224, p < 0.04) but HI was similar (0.0951 vs. 0.0962, p = 0.125) compared to 3DCRT. IMRT in comparison to 3DCRT significantly reduced the high-dose volumes of lung (V20, 24.52% vs. 29.62%; V49, 3.56% vs. 6.42%; p < 0.001) and heart (V25, 5.89% vs. 8.24%; V42, 1.64% vs. 6.12%; p < 0.001); mean dose of lung and heart (10.21 vs. 11.96 Gy and 3.86 vs. 7.42 Gy, respectively; p < 0.001).Conclusions: For left sided breast cancer, IMRT significantly improves the conformity of plan and reduce the mean dose and high-dose volumes of ipsilateral lung and heart compared to 3DCRT, but 3DCRT is superior in terms of low-dose volume. ","PeriodicalId":436394,"journal":{"name":"Asian Pacific Journal of Cancer Care","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-11-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Asian Pacific Journal of Cancer Care","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.31557/apjcc.2022.7.4.669-673","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: To compare the dose distribution of three-dimensional conformal radiation therapy (3DCRT) with intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) for post-mastectomy radiotherapy (PMRT) to left chest wall. Materials and Methods: 30 post-MRM female breast cancer patients with histologically confirmed infiltrating ductal carcinoma of unilateral left breast without evidence of distant metastasis or second malignancy were found eligible during January 2017 to December 2021. All patients received 45 Gy in 20 fractions. Planning target volume (PTV) parameters -D2, D98, Dmean, V95, and V107—homogeneity index (HI), and conformity index (CI) were compared. The mean doses of lung and heart, percentage volume of ipsilateral lung receiving 5 Gy (V5), 20 Gy (V20), and 49 Gy (V49) and that of heart receiving 5 Gy (V5), 25 Gy (V25), and 42 Gy (V42) were extracted from dose-volume histograms and compared. Results: PTV parameters were comparable between the two groups. CI was significantly improved with IMRT (1.118 vs. 1.224, p < 0.04) but HI was similar (0.0951 vs. 0.0962, p = 0.125) compared to 3DCRT. IMRT in comparison to 3DCRT significantly reduced the high-dose volumes of lung (V20, 24.52% vs. 29.62%; V49, 3.56% vs. 6.42%; p < 0.001) and heart (V25, 5.89% vs. 8.24%; V42, 1.64% vs. 6.12%; p < 0.001); mean dose of lung and heart (10.21 vs. 11.96 Gy and 3.86 vs. 7.42 Gy, respectively; p < 0.001).Conclusions: For left sided breast cancer, IMRT significantly improves the conformity of plan and reduce the mean dose and high-dose volumes of ipsilateral lung and heart compared to 3DCRT, but 3DCRT is superior in terms of low-dose volume. 
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
乳房切除术后胸壁放射的IMRT与3DCRT剂量学比较:一项分析性观察研究
目的:比较乳腺切除术后左胸壁放射治疗(PMRT)三维适形放射治疗(3DCRT)与调强放射治疗(IMRT)的剂量分布。材料与方法:2017年1月至2021年12月,经组织学证实为单侧左乳浸润性导管癌的女性乳腺癌患者30例,无远处转移或第二恶性肿瘤证据。所有患者分20次接受45 Gy的放疗。比较规划目标体积(PTV)参数d2、D98、Dmean、V95、v107的均匀性指数(HI)和符合性指数(CI)。从剂量-体积直方图中提取肺和心脏的平均剂量,同侧肺接受5 Gy (V5)、20 Gy (V20)、49 Gy (V49)的百分比体积,心脏接受5 Gy (V5)、25 Gy (V25)、42 Gy (V42)的百分比体积,并进行比较。结果:两组间PTV参数具有可比性。IMRT组CI显著提高(1.118 vs. 1.224, p < 0.04), HI与3DCRT组相似(0.0951 vs. 0.0962, p = 0.125)。与3DCRT相比,IMRT显著降低了肺高剂量体积(V20, 24.52% vs. 29.62%;V49, 3.56% vs. 6.42%;p < 0.001)和心脏(V25, 5.89% vs. 8.24%;V42, 1.64% vs. 6.12%;P < 0.001);肺和心脏的平均剂量分别为10.21 Gy vs. 11.96 Gy和3.86 Gy vs. 7.42 Gy;P < 0.001)。结论:对于左侧乳腺癌,IMRT较3DCRT明显提高了计划符合性,降低了同侧肺和心脏的平均剂量和高剂量体积,但在低剂量体积方面3DCRT更优。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Clinico-epidemiological Profile and Outcome of Testicular Germ Cell Tumors: A Retrospective Study from a Tertiary Cancer Centre of North-East India Epitheloid Haemangioma of Spine - A Rare Case Report and Review of Literature Clinicopathological Spectrum of Thyroid Swelling: A Single Institutional Prospective Study from Northeast India Clinico-epidemiological Profile of Primary Brain Tumours in North-Eastern Region of India:A Retrospective Single Institution Study Beyond Limits: A Case of Progressive Leiomyosarcoma of the Mandible
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1