Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2007 Nov 1;69(3):918-24.
doi: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2007.06.060.

Is multibeam IMRT better than standard treatment for patients with left-sided breast cancer?

Affiliations

Is multibeam IMRT better than standard treatment for patients with left-sided breast cancer?

Wayne A Beckham et al. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. .

Abstract

Purpose: When treatment intent is to include breast and internal mammary lymph nodes (IMNs) in the clinical target volume (CTV), a significant volume of the heart may receive radiation, which may result in late morbidity. The value of conformal intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) to avoid heart dose was studied.

Methods and materials: Breast, IMNs, and normal tissues were contoured for 30 consecutive patients previously treated with RT after lumpectomy for left-sided breast cancer. Eleven-beam, conformal, inverse-planned IMRT plans were developed and compared with best standard plans. Conformity Index (CI), Homogeneity Index (HI), and doses to normal tissues were compared.

Results: Intensity-modulated RT significantly improved (two-sided paired t test) HI (0.95 vs. 0.74), CI (0.91 vs. 0.48), volume of the heart receiving more than 30 Gy (V30-heart) (1.7% vs. 12.5%), and volume of lung receiving more than 20-Gy (V20-left lung) (17.1% vs. 26.6%), all p < 0.001. The mean Healthy Tissue Volume (HTV = CT set - PTV) dose was similar between IMRT and best standard plans (6.0 and 6.9 Gy, respectively), but IMRT increased the volume of normal tissues receiving low-dose RT: V5-right lung (13.7% vs. 2.0%), V5-right breast (29.2% vs. 7.9%), and V5-HTV (31.7% vs. 23.6%), all p < 0.001. IMRT plans were generated in less than 60 min and treatment delivered in approximately 20 min, suggesting that this technique is clinically applicable.

Conclusions: IMRT significantly improved conformity and homogeneity for plans when the breast + IMNs were in the CTV. Heart and lung volume receiving high doses were decreased, but more healthy tissue received low doses. A simple algorithm based on amount of heart included in the standard plan showed limited ability to predict the benefit from IMRT.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

Cited by

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources