Deep inspiration breath-hold intensity modulated radiation therapy in a large clinical series of 239 left-sided breast cancer patients: a dosimetric analysis of organs at risk doses and clinical feasibility from a single center experience.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate dose to organs at risk, target coverage and treatment compliance in left-sided breast cancer patients (LSBCP) treated with deep inspiration breath-hold (DIBH) and intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) technique in a contest of daily clinical practice. METHODS: A total of 280 consecutive LSBCP referred for adjuvant radiotherapy were systematically screened for suitability of DIBH technique. 239 were able to comply with the requirement for DIBH. Whole breast or chest wall were irradiated in DIBH, monitored by Varian RPM™ Respiratory Gating System, and two tangential inverse-planned beams with dynamic dose delivery. Dose prescription was 42.4 Gy/16 fractions in 205 patients and 50 Gy/25 fractions in 34. 23 patients received local and nodal treatment. Boost to tumor bed, of 10 Gy/5 fractions was used in 135 patients. Relevant dose metrics for heart, left anterior descending (LAD) coronary artery, lungs, contralateral breast and planning target volume were retrospectively analyzed. RESULTS: The average mean heart dose (MHD) for all patients was 0.94 Gy and mean maximum LAD dose was 13.82 Gy. MHD and LAD maximum dose were significantly higher in patients treated with conventional fractionation whether expressed in absolute dose (1.44 vs 0.85 Gy, p < 0.0005 and 20.78 vs 12.45 Gy, p < 0.0005 respectively) or in equivalent doses of 2 Gy fractionation (0.88 vs 0.52 Gy, p =< 0.0005 and 17.68 vs 10.63 Gy, p = 0.0002 respectively). In 57 patients (23.8%) the maximum LAD dose was >20 Gy. Mean V20 ipsilateral lung dose was 8.5%. Mean doses of contralateral breast and lung were 0.13 Gy and 0.09 Gy respectively. Mean planning target volume V95% coverage was 96.1%. Compliance rate of DIBH technique was 84.5% (239/280). CONCLUSION: DIBH and IMRT in daily clinical practice are feasible in high percentage of unselected patients and allows low levels of irradiation of organs at risk without compromising target coverage. However, despite low MHD a significant proportion of patients receives a maximum LAD dose superior to 20 Gy. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE: The value of MHD used exclusively is not able to describe entirely the risk of late heart toxicity, which can be better evaluated with the joint analysis of the maximum dose to LAD region. The vast majority of LSBCP referred to adjuvant radiotherapy in the setting of routine practice are able to comply with the requirement of DIBH.

Light and shadows of a new technique: is photon total-skin irradiation using helical IMRT feasible, less complex and as toxic as the electrons one?

BACKGROUND: Radiotherapy is one of the standard treatments for cutaneous lymphoma and Total Skin Electrons Beam Irradiation (TSEBI) is generally used to treat diffuse cutaneous lymphoma and some cases of localized disease. Helical IMRT (HI) allows to treat complex target with optimal dose distribution and organ at risk sparing, so helical tomotherapy has been proposed as alternative technique to TSEBI but only one preliminary report has been published. METHODS: Three patients treated (from May 2013 to December 2014) with Helical IMRT, with a total dose between 24 and 30 Gy, were retrospectively evaluated. Data about dosimetric features, response and acute toxicity were registered and analyzed. Planned target coverage was compared with daily in vivo measures and dose calculation based on volumetric images used for set up evaluation as well. RESULTS: The patients had a mean measured surface fraction dose ranging from 1.54 Gy up to 2.0 Gy. A planned target dose ranging from 85 to 120% of prescription doses was obtained. All doses to Organs At Risk were within the required constraints. Particular attention was posed on "whole bone marrow" planned V10Gy, V12Gy and V20Gy values, ranging respectively between 23 and 43%, 20.1 and 38% and 9.8 and 24%. A comparison with the theoretical homologous values obtained with TSEBI has shown much lower values with TSEBI. Even if treatment was given in sequence to the skin of the upper and lower hemi-body, all the patients had anaemia, requiring blood transfusions, leukopenia and thrombocytopenia. CONCLUSION: Based on our limited results TSEBI should still be considered the standard method to treat total skin because of its pattern of acute and late toxicities and the dose distribution. In this particular case the better target coverage obtained with HI can be paid in terms of worse toxicity. Helical IMRT can instead be considered optimal in treating large, convex, cutaneous areas where it is difficult to use multiple electrons fields in relation with the clinical results and the limited and reversible toxicities.

Whole brain radiotherapy with adjuvant or concomitant boost in brain metastasis: dosimetric comparison between helical and volumetric IMRT technique.

BACKGROUND: To compare and evaluate the possible advantages related to the use of VMAT and helical IMRT and two different modalities of boost delivering, adjuvant stereotactic boost (SRS) or simultaneous integrated boost (SIB), in the treatment of brain metastasis (BM) in RPA classes I-II patients. METHODS: Ten patients were treated with helical IMRT, 5 of them with SRS after whole brain radiotherapy (WBRT) and 5 with SIB. MRI co-registration with planning CT was mandatory and prescribed doses were 30 Gy in 10 fractions (fr) for WBRT and 15Gy/1fr or 45Gy/10fr in SRS or SIB, respectively. For each patient, 4 "treatment plans" (VMAT SRS and SIB, helical IMRT SRS and SIB) were calculated and accepted if PTV boost was included in 95 % isodose and dose constraints of the main organs at risk were respected without major deviations. Homogeneity Index (HI), Conformal Index (CI) and Conformal Number (CN) were considered to compare the different plans. Moreover, time of treatment delivery was calculated and considered in the analysis. RESULTS: Volume of brain metastasis ranged between 1.43 and 51.01 cc (mean 12.89 ± 6.37 ml) and 3 patients had double lesions. V95% resulted over 95 % in the average for each kind of technique, but the "target coverage" was inadequate for VMAT planning with two sites. The HI resulted close to the ideal value of zero in all cases; VMAT-SIB, VMAT-SRS, Helical IMRT-SIB and Helical IMRT-SRS showed mean CI of 2.15, 2.10, 2.44 and 1.66, respectively (optimal range: 1.5-2.0). Helical IMRT-SRS was related to the best and reliable finding of CN (0.66). The mean of treatment time was 210 s, 467 s, 440 s, 1598 s, respectively, for VMAT-SIB, VMAT-SRS, Helical IMRT-SIB and Helical IMRT-SRS. CONCLUSIONS: This dosimetric comparison show that helical IMRT obtain better target coverage and respect of CI and CN; VMAT could be acceptable in solitary metastasis. SIB modality can be considered as a good choice for clinical and logistic compliance; literature's preliminary data are confirming also a radiobiological benefit for SIB. Helical IMRT-SRS seems less effective for the long time of treatment compared to other techniques.