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
. 2020 Mar 17;15(1):67.
doi: 10.1186/s13014-020-1468-9.

Automated Hypofractionated IMRT treatment planning for early-stage breast Cancer

Affiliations

Automated Hypofractionated IMRT treatment planning for early-stage breast Cancer

Ting-Chun Lin et al. Radiat Oncol. .

Abstract

Background: Hypofractionated whole-breast irradiation is a standard adjuvant therapy for early-stage breast cancer. This study evaluates the plan quality and efficacy of an in-house-developed automated radiotherapy treatment planning algorithm for hypofractionated whole-breast radiotherapy.

Methods: A cohort of 99 node-negative left-sided breast cancer patients completed hypofractionated whole-breast irradiation with six-field IMRT for 42.56 Gy in 16 daily fractions from year 2016 to 2018 at a tertiary center were re-planned with an in-house-developed algorithm. The automated plan-generating C#-based program is developed in a Varian ESAPI research mode. The dose-volume histogram (DVH) and other dosimetric parameters of the automated and manual plans were directly compared.

Results: The average time for generating an autoplan was 5 to 6 min, while the manual planning time ranged from 1 to 1.5 h. There was only a small difference in both the gantry angles and the collimator angles between the autoplans and the manual plans (ranging from 2.2 to 5.3 degrees). Autoplans and manual plans performed similarly well in hotspot volume and PTV coverage, with the autoplans performing slightly better in the ipsilateral-lung-sparing dose parameters but were inferior in contralateral-breast-sparing. The autoplan dosimetric quality did not vary with different breast sizes, but for manual plans, there was worse ipsilateral-lung-sparing (V4Gy) in larger or medium-sized breasts than in smaller breasts. Autoplans were generally superior than manual plans in CI (1.24 ± 0.06 vs. 1.30 ± 0.09, p < 0.01) and MU (1010 ± 46 vs. 1205 ± 187, p < 0.01).

Conclusions: Our study presents a well-designed standardized fully automated planning algorithm for optimized whole-breast radiotherapy treatment plan generation. A large cohort of 99 patients were re-planned and retrospectively analyzed. The automated plans demonstrated similar or even better dosimetric quality and efficacy in comparison with the manual plans. Our result suggested that the autoplanning algorithm has great clinical applicability potential.

Keywords: Automation; Autoplanning; Early-stage; Hypofractionation; IMRT; Left-sided breast cancer; Treatment planning; Whole-breast irradiation.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
A representative CT axial view demonstrating beam arrangement and planning auxiliary structure (left panel) and beam’s-eye-view (right panel). Upper row: manual plan. Lower row: autoplan
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
The schematic diagram of an autoplan. Detailed description is in the Methods and Materials section
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Dose distributions in three representative patients with different breast sizes. Row (a) represents large breast size, row (b) medium breast size, and row (c) small breast size. Left column shows the dose distributions of autoplan, and right column the manual plan. All plans prescribed 42.56 Gy in 16 fractions. Isodose lines were drawn with different colors
Fig. 4
Fig. 4
Mean DVH curves with 95% confidence interval (shaded area) for the PTV, ipsilateral lung, heart and contralateral breast for autoplans (solid red lines) and manual plans (dashed green lines)

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Guo F, Kuo Y, Berenson AB. Breast Cancer incidence by stage before and after change in screening guidelines. Am J Prev Med. 2019;56:100–108. doi: 10.1016/j.amepre.2018.08.018. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Lin R, Tripuraneni P. Radiation therapy in early-stage invasive breast Cancer. Indian J Surg Oncol. 2011;2:101–111. doi: 10.1007/s13193-011-0048-8. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Yarnold J, Bentzen SM, Coles C, Haviland J. Hypofractionated whole-breast radiotherapy for women with early breast Cancer: myths and realities. Int J Radiat Oncol. 2011;79:1–9. doi: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2010.08.035. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Quantitative Analyses of Normal Tissue Effects in the Clinic (QUANTEC): An Introduction to the Scientific Issues - International Journal of Radiation Oncology • Biology • Physics. Available at: https://www.redjournal.org/article/S0360-3016(09)03300-8/fulltext. Accessed 11 May 2019. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Rudra S, Al-Hallaq HA, Feng C, Chmura SJ, Hasan Y. Effect of RTOG breast/chest wall guidelines on dose-volume histogram parameters. J Appl Clin Med Phys Am Coll Med Phys. 2014;15:4547. - PMC - PubMed