scholarly journals Bilateral Regional Nodal Irradiation using Volumetric Arc Therapy (VMAT): Dosimetric Analysis and Feasibility

Author(s):  
M.B. Bernstein ◽  
K. Walker ◽  
E.F. Gillespie ◽  
B.A. Mueller ◽  
S. Bakhoum ◽  
...  
2013 ◽  
Vol 106 ◽  
pp. S271
Author(s):  
A.R. Alitto ◽  
N. Dinapoli ◽  
V. Frascino ◽  
G.C. Mattiucci ◽  
M. Balducci ◽  
...  

2017 ◽  
Vol 11 ◽  
Author(s):  
Francisco Lozano ◽  
Naipy Perez ◽  
Alejandro Iglesias ◽  
Xiaodong Xu ◽  
Marco A Amendola ◽  
...  

Cancers ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (20) ◽  
pp. 5043
Author(s):  
Pei-Yu Hou ◽  
Chen-Hsi Hsieh ◽  
Le-Jung Wu ◽  
Chen-Xiong Hsu ◽  
Deng-Yu Kuo ◽  
...  

Background: For advanced breast cancer with lymph node involvement, adjuvant radiotherapy (RT) with regional nodal irradiation (RNI) has been indicated to reduce cancer recurrence and mortality. However, an extensive RT volume is associated with normal organ exposure, which increases the toxicity and affects patient outcomes. Modern arc RT techniques can improve normal organ sparing compared with conventional techniques. The aim of this study was to explore the optimal technique for left-breast RT with RNI. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed patients receiving RT with RNI for left-breast cancer. We used modern arc RT techniques with either volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) or helical tomotherapy (HT) with a novel block technique, and compared differences in dosimetry parameters between the two groups. Subgroup analysis of RNI with or without internal mammary node (IMN) volume was also performed. Results: A total of 108 eligible patients were enrolled between 2017 and 2020, of whom 70 received VMAT and 38 received HT. The median RT dose was 55 Gy. No significant differences were found regarding the surgery, RT dose, number of fractions, target volume, and RNI volume between the VMAT and HT groups. VMAT reduced the heart mean dose more than HT (3.82 vs. 5.13 Gy, p < 0.001), as well as the cardiac parameters of V5-V20, whole-lung mean dose, lung parameters of V5-V20, and contralateral-breast and esophagus mean dose. In the subgroup analysis of RNI with IMNs, the advantage of VMAT persisted in protecting the heart, lung, contralateral breast, and esophagus. HT was beneficial for lowering the thyroid mean dose. For RNI without IMN, VMAT improved the low-dose exposure of the heart and lung, but HT was similar to VMAT in terms of heart, whole-lung, and contralateral-breast mean dose. Conclusions: For patients with left-breast cancer receiving adjuvant RT with RNI, VMAT reduced the exposure dose to the heart, lung, contralateral breast, and esophagus compared with HT. VMAT was superior to HT in terms of normal organ sparing in the patients who underwent RNI with IMN irradiation. Considering the reduction in normal organ exposure and potential toxicity, VMAT is the optimal technique for patients receiving RNI when deep inspiration breath-hold is not available.


Author(s):  
Kristina Caruana ◽  
Nick Refalo ◽  
Denise Spiteri ◽  
José Guilherme Couto ◽  
Frank Zarb ◽  
...  

Abstract Aim: The intent of the review was to identify different methodological approaches used to calculate the planning target volume (PTV) margin for head and neck patients treated with volumetric arc therapy (VMAT), and whether the necessary factors to calculate the margin size with the selected formula were used. Materials and Methods: A comprehensive, systematic search of related studies was done using the Hydi search engine and different databases: MEDLINE, PubMed, CINAHL, ProQuest (Nursing and Allied Health), Scopus, ScienceDirect and tipsRO. The literature search included studies published between January 2007 and December 2020. Eligibility screening was performed by two reviewers. Results: A total of seven studies were found. All the reviewed studies used the Van Herk formula to measure the PTV margin. None of the studies incorporated the systematic errors of target volume delineation in the PTV equation. Inter-fraction translational errors were assessed in all the studies, whilst intra-fraction errors were only included in the margin equation for two studies. The studies showed great heterogeneity in the key characteristics, aims and methods. Findings: Since systemic errors from target volume delineation were not considered and not all studies assess intra-fraction errors, PTV margins may be underestimated. The recommendations are that studies need to determine the effect of target volume variance on PTV margins. It is also recommended to compare PTV margin results using various formulas.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document