Intrafraction motion monitoring to determine PTV margins in early stage breast cancer patients receiving neoadjuvant partial breast SABR.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: To quantify intra-fraction tumor motion using imageguidance and implanted fiducial markers to determine if a 5 mm planning-target-volume (PTV) margin is sufficient for early stage breast cancer patients receiving neoadjuvant stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR). MATERIALS AND METHODS: A HydroMark© (Mammotome) fiducial was implanted at the time of biopsy adjacent to the tumor. Sixty-one patients with 62 tumours were treated prone using a 5 mm PTV margin. Motion was quantified using two methods (separate patient groups): 1) difference in 3D fiducial position pre- and post-treatment cone-beam CTs (CBCTs) in 18 patients receiving 21 Gy/1fraction (fx); 2) acquiring 2D triggered-kVimages to quantify 3D intra-fraction motion using a 2D-to-3D estimation method for 44 tumours receiving 21 Gy/1fx (n = 22) or 30 Gy/3fx (n = 22). For 2), motion was quantified by calculating the magnitude of intra-fraction positional deviation from the pretreatment CBCT. PTV margins were derived using van Herkian analysis. RESULTS: The average ± standard deviation magnitude of motion across patients was 1.3 ± 1.15 mm Left/Right (L/R), 1.0 ± 0.9 mm Inferiorly/Superiorly (I/S), and 1.8 ± 1.5 mm Anteriorly/Posteriorly (A/P). 85/105 (81%) treatment fractions had dominant anterior motion. 6/62patients (9.7%) had mean intra-fraction motion during any fraction > 5 mm in any direction, with 4 in the anterior direction. Estimated PTV margins for single and three-fx patients in the L/R, I/S, and A/P directions were 6.0x4.1x5.9 mm and 4.5x2.9x4.3 mm, respectively. CONCLUSION: Our results suggest that a 5 mm PTV margin is sufficient for the I/S and A/P directions if a lateral kV image is acquired immediately before treatment. For the L/R direction, either further immobilization or a larger margin is required.

The Effect of Registration on Voxel-Wise Tofts Model Parameters and Uncertainties from DCE-MRI of Early-Stage Breast Cancer Patients Using 3DSlicer.

We quantitatively investigate the influence of image registration, using open-source software (3DSlicer), on kinetic analysis (Tofts model) of dynamic contrast enhanced MRI of early-stage breast cancer patients. We also show that registration computation time can be reduced by reducing the percent sampling (PS) of voxels used for estimation of the cost function. DCE-MRI breast images were acquired on a 3T-PET/MRI system in 13 patients with early-stage breast cancer who were scanned in a prone radiotherapy position. Images were registered using a BSpline transformation with a 2 cm isotropic grid at 100, 20, 5, 1, and 0.5PS (BRAINSFit in 3DSlicer). Signal enhancement curves were analyzed voxel-by-voxel using the Tofts kinetic model. Comparing unregistered with registered groups, we found a significant change in the 90th percentile of the voxel-wise distribution of Ktrans. We also found a significant reduction in the following: (1) in the standard error (uncertainty) of the parameter value estimation, (2) the number of voxel fits providing unphysical values for the extracellular-extravascular volume fraction (ve > 1), and (3) goodness of fit. We found no significant differences in the median of parameter value distributions (Ktrans, ve) between unregistered and registered images. Differences between parameters and uncertainties obtained using 100PS versus 20PS were small and statistically insignificant. As such, computation time can be reduced by a factor of 2, on average, by using 20PS while not affecting the kinetic fit. The methods outlined here are important for studies including a large number of post-contrast images or number of patient images.

DCE-MRI assessment of response to neoadjuvant SABR in early stage breast cancer: Comparisons of single versus three fraction schemes and two different imaging time delays post-SABR.

PURPOSE: To determine the effect of dose fractionation and time delay post-neoadjuvant stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR) on dynamic contrast-enhanced (DCE)-MRI parameters in early stage breast cancer patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: DCE-MRI was acquired in 17 patients pre- and post-SABR. Five patients were imaged 6-7 days post-21 Gy/1fraction (group 1), six 16-19 days post-21 Gy/1fraction (group 2), and six 16-18 days post-30 Gy/3 fractions every other day (group 3). DCE-MRI scans were performed using half the clinical dose of contrast agent. Changes in the surrounding tissue were quantified using a signal-enhancement threshold metric that characterizes changes in signal-enhancement volume (SEV). Tumour response was quantified using Ktrans and ve (Tofts model) pre- and post-SABR. Significance was assessed using a Wilcoxin signed-rank test. RESULTS: All group 1 and 4/6 group 2 patients' SEV increased post-SABR. All group 3 patients' SEV decreased. The mean Ktrans increased for group 1 by 76% (p = 0.043) while group 2 and 3 decreased 15% (p = 0.028) and 34% (p = 0.028), respectively. For ve, there was no significant change in Group 1 (p = 0.35). Groups 2 showed an increase of 24% (p = 0.043), and Group 3 trended toward an increase (23%, p = 0.08). CONCLUSION: Kinetic parameters measured 2.5 weeks post-SABR in both single fraction and three fraction groups were indicative of response but only the single fraction protocol led to enhancement in the surrounding tissue. Our results also suggest that DCE-MRI one-week post-SABR may be too early for response assessment, at least for single fraction SABR, whereas 2.5 weeks appears sufficiently long to minimize confounding acute effects.

New Palpable Breast Lump With Recent Negative Mammogram: Is Repeat Mammography Necessary?

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this article is to determine the utility of repeat mammography, compared with targeted ultrasound and previous mammogram, in the assessment of an interval palpable breast lump found within 1 year after a negative mammogram study. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Women who were examined for a new palpable lump with mammography and targeted ultrasound between January 2005 and December 2012, who also had a negative mammogram within the previous 6-12 months, were included. The following data were collected: age, mammographic findings, change from previous mammogram, ultrasound findings, BI-RADS category, and biopsy results. RESULTS: A total of 618 palpable lumps in 612 women (mean [± SD] age, 55.9 ± 11.2 years) were included in this study. In 314 of 618 cases (50.8%), a sonographic finding or mammographic change, or both was detected in the region of the palpable lump. Ultrasound detected a finding in 311 cases (50.3%), whereas repeat mammography detected a change in only 80 (12.9%) cases (p < 0.001). Of the 314 cases with imaging findings, 234 findings (74.5%) were detected by ultrasound alone. Repeat mammography identified a more prominent focal asymmetry in the palpable region in three cases with no sonographic correlate; none had malignancy. Eighty lesions were biopsied, and 48 (60.0%) of them were positive for malignancy. The repeat mammogram findings were unchanged for 10 of these lesions. CONCLUSION: Interval palpable breast lumps should be evaluated with targeted ultrasound. Mammography does not appear to add value beyond sonography performed by trained ultrasound technologists and should not be routinely performed.