Master Breast Radiation Planning: Simple Guide for Radiation Oncology Residents.

This article focuses on various aspects of breast radiation treatment planning, from simulation to field design. It covers the most common techniques including tangents, mono isocentric, dual isocentric, electron-photon match, and VMAT. This can serve as a guide for radiation oncology residents and medical students to advance their understanding of key aspects of breast radiation treatment and planning processes.

Updating and Optimizing Anatomic Atlases for Elective Radiation of Para-Aortic Lymph Nodes in Cervical Cancer.

PURPOSE: Previous studies have proposed 2 different contouring guidelines for the prophylactic radiation of para-aortic lymph nodes (PANs) for locally advanced cervical cancer. Because PAN-mapping atlases in current literature are limited to small patient samples and nodal populations, we updated the PAN atlas with a large data set of positron emission tomography (PET)-positive PANs on PET/computed tomography (CT) from patients with cervical cancer. METHODS AND MATERIALS: We identified 176 PET-positive PANs on pretreatment PET/CT of 47 patients with diagnosed International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics stage IB to IVA cervical cancer. PANs were classified as left-lateral para-aortic (LPA), aortocaval (AC), or right paracaval (RPC). PAN clinical target volume (CTV) contours were drawn for all patients based on previously published guidelines by Takiar (CTV-T) and Keenan (CTV-K) and nodal volumetric coverage was assessed. RESULTS: We identified 94 LPA nodes (54%), 71 AC nodes (40%), and 11 (6%) RPC nodes. CTV-T had improved nodal center coverage of 97.6% compared with 85.0% for CTV-K (P < .001). Nodal center coverage for CTV-K and CTV-T (with corresponding PAN) were 79 (84.0%) and 93 (99.0%) LPA nodes (P = .001), 64 (90.1%) and 68 (95.8%) AC nodes (P = .221), and 5 (45.5%) and 9 (81.8%) RPC nodes (P = .134), respectively. Additionally, our updated PAN atlas identified nodal centers anterior to the aorta and inferior vena cava that are not covered by CTV-T but covered by CTV-K due to the 10 mm anterior aortic expansion of CTV-K. CONCLUSIONS: We have updated the PAN anatomic map of 176 PET-positive nodes from 47 patients and demonstrated that CTV-T has significantly better PAN coverage over CTV-K for posterior LPA and retrocaval regions for our data set. Additionally, we suggest a modification that includes a blend of CTV-T and CTV-K to provide optimal coverage for the mapped nodes anterior to the great vessels in our data set.