Dosimetric Study and Robustness Analysis of Base Note Intensive Locked Field Radiotherapy for Left Breast Cancer.

Background: The locked vision plan can make the left breast cancer heart and lung organs dose. Objective: The aim of the present study was to compare the dosimetric differences between field-locked and field-split plans in intensity-modulated radiotherapy for left-sided breast cancer, to explore the effect of field-locking on the low-dose region, and to evaluate its robustness to the radiotherapy target, in order to provide a reference for the selection of clinical radiotherapy protocols. Methods: A total of 30 patients were selected after radical left breast cancer surgery, and 7-field locked-field and split-field plans were developed to compare the dose difference (∆D) between the target area and each organ at risk, and to introduce offsets of 3, 5 and 7 mm in six directions and recalculate the perturbed dose distributions, and to compare the ∆D between the original and the perturbed plans according to the robustness of the plans. Results: The results revealed that the D98%, D95% and Dmean values of the planning target volume (PTV) of the two plans differed little and were not statistically different. The locked field plan provided better protection for the left lung, right lung, heart, right breast and left anterior descending coronary artery. For PTV∆D98%, PTV∆D95%, PTV∆Dmean, the ∆D was higher for the Locked Fields plan, and for LungL∆5, LungL∆20 and Heart∆mean, the ∆D was higher for the original plan. Discussion: It was concluded that the field-locking plan could reduce the low-dose area of the affected lung and provide improved protection to the remaining critical organs, and the field-locking plan was more robust in protecting critical organs. Meanwhile, the field-locking plan showed higher sensitivity to positional deviation for target PTV.

Role of hypoxia-inducible factor-1α and survivin in breast cancer recurrence and prognosis.

Objective: To analyze the expression of hypoxia-inducible factor-1α (HIF-1α) and survivin in breast cancer, and different molecular subtypes of breast cancer and to assess their relationship with recurrence and prognosis. Methods: The expression levels of HIF-1α and survivin genes in breast cancer were investigated using bioinformatics. Their protein expression levels were then verified through immunohistochemistry (IHC), and their relationship with recurrence and prognosis was assessed. Results: Expression levels of HIF-1α and survivin genes and proteins were increased in breast cancer tissues compared with normal tissues. Both were associated with clinical features of breast cancer and differentially expressed in different molecular subtypes of breast cancer, and both are related to the signal pathway of breast cancer growth and invasion. HIF-1α and survivin gene and protein expression levels were correlated, and both were associated with breast cancer recurrence (R = 0.380, P < 0.05; R = 0.673, P < 0.05, respectively). According to The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) database, HIF1A and BIRC5 gene were not associated with breast cancer prognosis (P ≥ 0.05); however, HIF-1α and survivin protein were associated with recurrence patient's overall survival (OS) (P < 0.05). Conclusion: HIF-1α and survivin are highly expressed in breast cancer and can be used as potential biomarkers to predict recurrence and assess prognosis.

Comparison of positioning accuracy of different registration methods and dosimetric analysis of adaptive radiotherapy for breast cancer after breast conserving surgery.

BACKGROUND: This study explores the effect of different registration methods on the placement accuracy and dosimetric analysis of adaptive radiation therapy (ART) after breast conserving surgery for breast cancer, based on cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT). METHODS: Thirty breast cancer patients, who underwent breast conserving surgery, were divided into three groups, with 10 patients in each group: automatic grayscale registration (group A), automatic bony marker registration (group B), and automatic grayscale registration combined with manual bony marker registration (group C). Three registration methods were conducted before the first radiotherapy, and once a week under the guidance of CBCT. The dosimetric comparison was made with the original plan. RESULTS: The X direction was significantly different between groups A and B (P=0.036). The X and Y direction were significantly different between groups A and C (P=0.001, P=0.019). The placement errors were significantly different between groups B and C in the X and Y directions (P<0.001, P=0.003). The ART plan was significantly better than the original plan, in terms of the Dmax, Dmean, D90, V90, V100, V95, HI and CI of planning target volume (PTV) (P<0.05). Furthermore, the ART plan was significantly better, in terms of the Dmean, V5, V10, V20 and V30 of the affected lung, the Dmean, V5, V10, V20 and V30 of the double lung, and the Dmean, V5, V10, V20 and V30 of the heart. Moreover, the Dmax, V5 and V10 of the contralateral breast were significantly lower than those in the original CT plan (P<0.05). CONCLUSIONS: For the CBCT placement verification after breast conserving surgery, the accuracy and stability of automatic gray-scale registration combined with manual bone markers are better than those of the automatic gray-scale registration and automatic bone marker registration.