ABSTRACT
Research in the field of local and locoregional breast cancer radiotherapy aims to maintain excellent oncological outcomes while reducing treatment-related toxicity. Adaptive radiotherapy (ART) considers variations in target and organs at risk (OARs) anatomy occurring during the treatment course and integrates these in re-optimized treatment plans. Exploiting ART routinely in clinic may result in smaller target volumes and better OAR sparing, which may lead to reduction of acute as well as late toxicities. In this review MR-guided and CT-guided ART for breast cancer patients according to different clinical scenarios (neoadjuvant and adjuvant partial breast irradiation, whole breast, chest wall and regional nodal irradiation) are reviewed and their advantages as well as challenging aspects discussed.
ABSTRACT
AIMS: To evaluate how common radiation therapy techniques perform in the setting of the new European Society for Radiotherapy and Oncology-Advisory Committee in Radiation Oncology Practice (ESTRO-ACROP) delineation recommendations for immediate breast reconstruction (IBR). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Seven Danish radiation therapy centres and six international European centres participated in this project. Two breast cancer cases (one left-sided and one right-sided) with a retropectoral implant were chosen for radiation therapy planning using deep-inspiration breath-hold. Target volumes were delineated according to ESTRO-ACROP delineation recommendations. The centres were asked to plan the cases using any radiation therapy technique according to the Danish Breast Cancer Group plan objectives. RESULTS: In total, 35 treatment plans were collected. Half of the submitted plans, for both the left-sided and the right-sided case, used the field-in-field (FiF) technique (nine for each), a quarter used volumetric arc radiation therapy (VMAT; five for right-sided, four for left-sided) and the remaining quarter was a mix of inverse intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT), helicoidal therapy and hybrid (combined open fields and VMAT) techniques. Mean clinical target volume doses were in the range 99-102% of the prescribed dose. The median FiF mean heart dose (MHD) for right-sided radiation therapy was 1 Gy (range 0.8-3.7) and 5.2 Gy for left-sided radiation therapy (range 2.2-6.5). For right-sided radiation therapy, the median VMAT MHD was 3.42 Gy, for IMRT was 2.3 Gy and for helicoidal therapy was 5.1 Gy. For left-sided radiation therapy, the median VMAT MHD was 6.3 Gy, for IMRT was 7.8 Gy and for helicoidal therapy was 7.3 Gy. CONCLUSIONS: Different radiation therapy techniques could be used to plan radiation therapy in the setting of IBR. FiF provided good coverage with acceptable organ at risk doses. The best dose distribution results as a trade-off between the objectives of target volume coverage and high-dose organ at risk inclusion. The radiation therapy technique affects the interplay between these objectives.
