Author/Authors :
Haddad, P Radiation Oncology Research Center - Cancer Institute - Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran , Hadjilooei, F Department of Radiation Oncology - Cancer Institute - Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran , Nedaei, H.A Radiation Oncology Research Center - Cancer Institute - Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran , Kalaghchi, B Radiation Oncology Research Center - Cancer Institute - Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran , Amouzgar Hashemi, F Radiation Oncology Research Center - Cancer Institute - Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran , Farhan, F Department of Radiation Oncology - Cancer Institute - Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran , Babaei, M Department of Radiation Oncology - Cancer Institute - Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran , Esfahani, M Department of Radiotherapy Physics - Cancer Institute - Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran , Shahriarian, SH Department of Radiology - Cancer Institute - Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
Abstract :
Background: Breast-conserving surgery (BCS) followed by radiotherapy (RT) is the
standard of care for women with breast cancer. Evidence shows that RT dose to the
heart can result in ischemic heart disease. In this study we compared 3 different RT
techniques were for heart, left anterior descending coronary artery (LAD) and lung
doses in left breast cancer patients after breast-conserving surgery. Materials and
Methods: Three different plans were designed for each patient using conventional
tangential fields, 6+18 MV combination beams, and field-in-field (FIF) technique.
These were compared in terms of doses to the planning target volume (PTV),
ipsilateral lung, heart and LAD. Results: Forty left breast cancer patients were
included in this study. Mean PTV V95% was 95.74% for conventional, 90.45%
for FIF and 87.89% for 6+18 MV combination beams (p<0.05). Mean left lung
dose was 11.22 Gy for FIF, 12.25 Gy for 6+18 MV and 12.95 Gy for
conventional technique (p<0.05). Mean heart dose was 4.52 Gy for FIF, 4.85
Gy for 6+18 MV and 5.13 Gy for conventional technique (p<0.05), and mean
D2% for LAD was 40.06, 43.43 and 45.25 Gy (p<0.01) in FIF, 6+18 MV and
conventional techniques, respectively. Conclusion: These results indicated that
FIF and 6+18 MV combination techniques significantly reduced the doses received
by the heart, LAD and left lung compared to conventional tangential fields, while FIF
was superior to 6+18 MV considering the above-mentioned variables. The lower
doses to the organs at risk were achieved with a small but statistically significant
loss in PTV coverage.
Keywords :
field-in-field technique , tangential fields , coronary artery dose , heart dose , radiotherapy , Left breast cancer