SU-F-T-151: Measurement Evaluation of Skin Dose in Scanning Proton Beam Therapy for Breast Cancer

2016 ◽  
Vol 43 (6Part15) ◽  
pp. 3496-3496
Author(s):  
J Yu ◽  
E Nichols ◽  
D Strauss ◽  
H Chung ◽  
U Langner ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Proton Beam ◽  
Proton Beam Therapy ◽  
Skin Dose ◽  
Measurement Evaluation

A feasibility study of a hybrid breast-immobilization system for early breast cancer in proton beam therapy

2017 ◽  
Vol 44 (4) ◽  
pp. 1268-1274 ◽  
Author(s):  
Takeshi Arimura ◽  
Takashi Ogino ◽  
Takashi Yoshiura ◽  
Mitsugi Matsuyama ◽  
Naoaki Kondo ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Proton Beam ◽  
Early Breast Cancer ◽  
Feasibility Study ◽  
Proton Beam Therapy

scholarly journals Proton versus Photon Breath-Hold Radiation for Left-Sided Breast Cancer after Breast-Conserving Surgery: A Dosimetric Comparison

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dodul Mondal ◽  
Sachin R. Jhawar ◽  
Rihan Millevoi ◽  
Bruce G. Haffty ◽  
Rahul R. Parikh
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Proton Beam Therapy ◽  
Target Volume ◽  
Cardiac Complications ◽  
Breath Hold ◽  
Skin Dose ◽  
Target Coverage ◽  
Ipsilateral Lung ◽  
Dosimetric Comparison ◽  
Cancer Management

Abstract Purpose Radiation to breast, chest wall, and/or regional nodes is an integral component of breast cancer management in many situations. Irradiating left-sided breast and/or regional nodes may be technically challenging because of cardiac tolerance and subsequent risk of long-term cardiac complications. Deep inspiratory breath-hold (DIBH) technique physically separates cardiac structures away from radiation target volume, thus reducing cardiac dose with either photon (Ph) or proton beam therapy (PBT). The utility of combining PBT with DIBH is less well understood. Methods and Materials We compared photon-DIBH (Ph-DIBH) versus proton DIBH (Pr-DIBH) for different planning parameters, including target coverage and organ at risk (OAR) sparing. Necessary ethical permission was obtained from the institutional review board. Ten previous patients with irradiated, intact, left-sided breast and Ph-DIBH were replanned with PBT for dosimetric comparison. Clinically relevant normal OARs were contoured, and Ph plans were generated with parallel, opposed tangent beams and direct fields for supraclavicular and/or axillae whenever required. For proton planning, all targets were delineated individually and best possible coverage of planning target volume was achieved. Dose-volume histogram was analyzed to determine the difference in doses received by different OARs. Minimum and maximum dose (Dmin and Dmax) as well as dose received by a specific volume of OAR were compared. Each patient's initial plan (Ph-DIBH) was used as a control for comparing newly devised PBT plan (Pr-DIBH). Matched, paired t tests were applied to determine any significant differences between the 2 plans. Results Both the plans were adequate in target coverage. Dose to cardiac structure subunits and ipsilateral lung were significantly reduced with the proton breath-hold technique. Significant dose reduction with Pr-DIBH was observed in comparison to Ph-DIBH for mean dose (Dmean) to the heart (0.23 Gy versus 1.19 Gy; P < .001); Dmean to the left ventricle (0.25 Gy versus 1.7 Gy; P < .001); Dmean, Dmax, and the half-maximal dose to the left anterior descending artery (1.15 Gy versus 5.54 Gy; P < .003; 7.7 Gy versus 22.15 Gy; P < .007; 1.61 Gy versus 4.42 Gy, P < .049); Dmax of the left circumflex coronary artery (0.13 Gy versus 1.35 Gy; P < .001) and Dmean, the volume to the ipsilateral lung receiving 20 Gy and 5 Gy (2.28 Gy versus 8.04 Gy; P < .001; 2.36 Gy versus 15.54 Gy, P < .001; 13.9 Gy versus 30.28 Gy; P = .002). However, skin dose and contralateral breast dose were not significantly improved with proton. Conclusion This comparative dosimetric study showed significant benefit of Pr-DIBH technique compared with Ph-DIBH in terms of cardiopulmonary sparing and may be the area of future clinical research.

scholarly journals Incorporation of Biologic Response Variance Modeling Into the Clinic: Limiting Risk of Brachial Plexopathy and Other Late Effects of Breast Cancer Proton Beam Therapy

2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. e71-e81 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert W. Mutter ◽  
Krishan R. Jethwa ◽  
Hok Seum Wan Chan Tseung ◽  
Stephanie M. Wick ◽  
Mohamed M.H. Kahila ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Proton Beam ◽  
Late Effects ◽  
Proton Beam Therapy ◽  
Brachial Plexopathy ◽  
Variance Modeling ◽  
Response Variance ◽  
Biologic Response

Proton Beam Therapy for Locally Advanced Breast Cancer: Dosimetric Results and Acute Toxicity

2014 ◽  
Vol 90 (1) ◽  
pp. S273
Author(s):  
W.F. Hartsell ◽  
P.L. Dorn ◽  
L.A. McGee ◽  
S.L. Schmidt ◽  
S.O. Hartsell ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Acute Toxicity ◽  
Advanced Breast Cancer ◽  
Proton Beam ◽  
Locally Advanced Breast Cancer ◽  
Locally Advanced ◽  
Proton Beam Therapy ◽  
Advanced Breast

scholarly journals Advantages of Post-Mastectomy Proton Beam Therapy in a Breast Cancer Patient With Pectus Excavatum

2017 ◽  
Vol 8 (3) ◽  
pp. 98-101 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bryeson Rodgers ◽  
Dawn E. Jaroszewski ◽  
Jonathan B. Ashman ◽  
William G. Rule ◽  
Terence T. Sio ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Cancer Patient ◽  
Breast Cancer Patient ◽  
Proton Beam ◽  
Pectus Excavatum ◽  
Proton Beam Therapy

scholarly journals Clinical Effectiveness of Hypofractionated Proton Beam Therapy for Liver Metastasis From Breast Cancer

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tae Hyun Kim ◽  
Keun Seok Lee ◽  
Sung Hoon Sim ◽  
Yeon-Joo Kim ◽  
Dae Yong Kim ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Liver Metastasis ◽  
Proton Beam ◽  
Local Treatment ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Clinical Effectiveness ◽  
Proton Beam Therapy ◽  
Local Progression ◽  
Grade 3

BackgroundFew studies of proton beam therapy (PBT) for patients with liver metastasis from breast cancer (LMBC) are available to date. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the clinical effectiveness of PBT for patients with LMBC.Material and MethodsSeventeen patients with LMBC treated with PBT were included in this study. The median prescribed dose of PBT was 66 GyE (range, 60–80) in 10 fractions, 5 times a week. In patients with LMBC receiving PBT, freedom from local progression (FFLP), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS) rates were assessed.ResultsThe median follow-up time was 34.2 months (range, 11.5–56.1). The median FFLP time was not yet reached, and the 3-year FFLP rates were 94.1% (95% confidence interval [CI], 82.9–105.3). The median times of PFS and OS were 7.9 months (95% CI, 5.3–10.5) and 39.3 months (95% CI, 33.2–51.9), respectively, and the 3-year PFS and OS rates were 19.6% (95% CI, -1.8–41.0) and 71.7% (95% CI, 46.8–96.6), respectively. Grade 3 or higher adverse events were not observed.ConclusionPBT for patients with LMBC showed promising FFLP and OS with safe toxicity profiles. These findings suggest that PBT can be considered a local treatment option in patients with LMBC.

Acute toxicities after proton beam therapy following breast‐conserving surgery for breast cancer: Multi‐institutional prospective PCG registry analysis

2020 ◽  
Vol 26 (9) ◽  
pp. 1760-1764 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cameron S. Thorpe ◽  
Joshua R. Niska ◽  
Justin D. Anderson ◽  
Marlene E. Girardo ◽  
Lisa A. McGee ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Proton Beam ◽  
Proton Beam Therapy ◽  
Breast Conserving Surgery ◽  
Registry Analysis
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document