Prog Med Phys.  2013 Dec;24(4):284-289. 10.14316/pmp.2013.24.4.284.

A Dosimetric Comparision of IMRT and VMAT in Synchronous Bilateral Breast Cancer

• Kim SJ
• Youn SM
• Kim SK

• KMID: 1910571
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.14316/pmp.2013.24.4.284

Abstract

A study was performed comparing dosimetric characteristics of volumetric modulated arc and intensity modulated radiatio therapy on patients with bilateral breast cancer. For 5 patients, 3 plans were made for each patient; IMRT beams 8 and 12 of the beam intensity modulated radiation therapy, volumetric modulated arc therapy plan. The average PTVs volumes and D98 for 12-IMRT were 51.04+/-0.57 Gy (right), 50.80+/-1.07 Gy (left), 42.94+/-16.16 Gy (right), 42.56+/-2.09 Gy (left). HI (D5~D95) and CI90,95, even 12-IMRT has shown excellent results. In OAR, 3 plans showed excellent results. But the lowest dose of 12-IMRT. 12-IMRT achieved similar PTV coverage and sparing of organs at risk than 8-IMRT and VMAT.

Keyword

Bilateral breast cancer; IMRT; VMAT

MeSH Terms

Breast Neoplasms*
Breast*
Humans
Organs at Risk
Radiotherapy, Intensity-Modulated

Figure

• 

  Fig. 1. The image shows Target definition on axis slice of the CT data set in the study. Blue: Light-blue contour, Planning Target Volume (PTV), Red: Light-red contour, Clinical Target Volume (CTV).

• 

  Fig. 2. The graph shows the (a) D5∼D95 (HI) (b) CI90, CI95 of total PTV.

• 

  Fig. 3. The graph shows the V90, V95, V105, V110 for (a) right side and (b) left side % volume of PTV.

Reference

1. Fisher B, Anderson S, Redmond CK, et al. Reanalysis and results after 12 years of followup in a randomized clinical trial comparing total mastectomy with lumpectomy with or without irradiation in the treatment of breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 333(22):1456–1461. 1995.

2. Fogliataa A, Nicolinia G, Alberb M, et al. IMRT for breast. A planning study. Radiother Oncol. 76(3):300–310. 2005.

3. Nicolini G, Clivio A, Fogliata A, et al. Simultaneous integrated boost radiotherapy for bilateral breast: a treatment planning and dosimetric comparison for volumetric modulated arc and fixed field intensity modulated therapy. Rad Oncol. 4(1):27. 2009.

4. Intensity Modulated Radiation Therapy Collaborative Working Group. Intensity modulated radiotherapy: current status and issues of interest. Int J Radiation Oncology Biol Phys. 51(4):880–917. 2001.

5. Otto K. Volumetric modulated arc therapy: IMRT in a single gantry arc. Med Phys. 35(1):310–317. 2008.

6. Semenenko VA, Reitzet B, et al. Evaluation of a commercial biologically based IMRT treatment planning system. Med Phys. 35(12):5851–5860. 2008.

7. Lafond C, Gassa F, Odin C, et al. Comparison between two treatment planning systems for volumetric modulated arc therapy optimization for prostate cancer. Eur J Med Phys. 30(1):1–8. 2013.

8. Martha MM, Di Y, Inga G, Alvaro M. Clinical applications of volumetric modulated arc therapy. Int J Radiation Oncology Biol Phys. 77(2):608–616. 2010.

9. Clivio A, Fogliata A, Franzetti-Pellanda A, et al. Volumetricmodulated arc radiotherapy for carcinomas of the anal canal: A treatment planning comparison with fixed field IMRT. Radiother Oncol. 92(1):118–124. 2009.

10. Verbakel WF, Cuijpers JP, Hoffmans D, et al. Volumetric intensity-modulated arc therapy vs. conventional IMRT in headandneck cancer: a comparative planning and dosimetric study. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 74(1):252–259. 2009.