Effect of internal port on dose distribution in post-mastectomy radiotherapy for breast cancer patients after expander breast reconstruction.

Background: In patients with expander-based reconstruction a few dosimetric analyses detected radiation therapy dose perturbation due to the internal port of an expander, potentially leading to toxicity or loss of local control. This study aimed at adding data on this field. Materials and methods: A dosimetric analysis was conducted in 30 chest wall treatment planning without and with correction for port artifact. In plans with artifact correction density was overwritten as 1 g/cm3. Medium, minimum and maximum chest wall doses were compared in the two plans. Both plans, with and without correction, were compared on an anthropomorphic phantom with a tissue expander on the chest covered by a bolus simulating the skin. Ex vivo dosimetry was carried out on the phantom and in vivo dosimetry in three patients by using film strips during one treatment fraction. Estimated doses and measured film doses were compared. Results: No significant differences emerged in the minimum, medium and maximum doses in the two plans, without and with correction for port artifacts. Ex vivo and in vivo analyses showed a good correspondence between detected and calculated doses without and with correction. Conclusions: The port did not significantly affect dose distribution in patients who will receive post-mastectomy radiation therapy.

Pulmonary function in stereotactic body radiotherapy with helical tomotherapy for primary and metastatic lung lesions.

AIMS: This retrospective study reports outcomes after stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) as delivered by helical tomotherapy (HT) for lung lesions. It promotes a dose escalation program. METHODS: Histological and/or radiological findings and/or case histories identified 41 primary and 15 metastatic lesions. Thirty patients received 40 Gy in 5 fractions (BED 72 Gy10Gy) and 26 50 Gy in 5 fractions (BED 100Gy10Gy). Primary end point was lung toxicity. Secondary end points were respiratory function, local control and local progression-free survival. RESULTS: Acute toxicity developed in 18/56 patients and late toxicity in 8/54. Median FEV-1 variations versus baseline were - 0.5% (range - 16 to + 43%) at 6 months and - 4.00% (range - 42 to + 18%) at 24 months. Median DLCO variations versus baseline were - 1% (range - 38 to + 36%) at 6 months and - 12.2% (range - 48 to + 11%) at 24 months. At 6 months, a significant positive correlation emerged between FEV-1 change and KPS (p = 0.047). At 24 months, a significant negative correlation emerged between FEV-1 change and the ipsilateral lung V5 (p = 0.006). A low baseline DLCO correlated with more marked DLCO worsening at 6 months (p = 0.012). At 24 months, DLCO worsening correlated significantly with the median contralateral lung dose (p = 0.003). At the last checkup, 23 patients were in complete remission, 16 were in partial remission, 5 had stable disease, and 7 were in relapse. Median follow-up was 12 months (range 5-56). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with lung disease, SBRT, as delivered by HT, was well tolerated and provided good local control.

Evaluation of equivalent dose to eye lens through dose equivalent Hp(3).

PURPOSE: Individual dosimetry allows to quantify doses from ionizing radiation of exposed workers. Scientific and epidemiological evidences highlight the need for adequate measures for a greater protection of the eye and a reduction in annual doses. ICRP Publication 103, illustrating the operational dose quantity Hp(d) for the individual monitoring, proposes a depth d = 3 mm for eye lens monitoring, indicating that even the Hp(0.07) can be used. In this study, it was investigated if there are differences in the evaluation of the equivalent dose to eye lens (Hlens) using Hp(3) or Hp(0.07). MATERIALS AND METHODS: A slab phantom calibration was performed by an Accredited Calibration Laboratory in terms of Hp(3) and Hp(0.07) using ext-rad TLD-100 (LiF:Mg,Ti) dosimeters. Hp(0.07) and Hp(3) were measured for 26 exposed workers to assess Hlens. The measuring took place monthly in 2017 to obtain both semestral and annual doses. RESULTS: Hlens(0.07) was always smaller than Hlens(3). However, the differences were not statistically significant (Mann-Whitney test, p > 0.05) for both semestral and annual doses. The percentage differences were 7 ±â€¯3%, 6 ±â€¯3% and 7 ±â€¯2% for I semester, II semester and whole year, respectively. The mean underestimation index <10%, intra-class correlation coefficient >0.99, coefficient of variation <3% and the excellent correlation (R2 ≈ 0.999) for both semestral and annual doses highlighted that Hp(0.07) can be used to evaluate Hlens instead of Hp(3). CONCLUSIONS: No statistical evidence was found that the use of Hp(0.07) underestimates the equivalent dose to eye lens obtained through Hp(3).

Gamma camera calibrations for the Italian multicentre study for lesion dosimetry in 223Ra therapy of bone metastases.

PURPOSE: The aim was to calibrate gamma cameras in the framework of the Italian multicentre study for lesion dosimetry in 223Ra therapy of bone metastases. Equipments of several manufacturers and different models were used. METHODS: Eleven gamma cameras (3/8- and 5/8-inch crystal) were used, acquiring planar static images with double-peak (82 and 154keV, 20% wide) and MEGP collimator. The sensitivity was measured in air, varying source-detector distance and source size. Transmission curves were measured, calculating the parameters used for attenuation/scatter correction with the pseudo-extrapolation number method, and assessing their variations with the source size. RESULTS: Values of the calibration factor (geometric mean of both detector sensitivities) ranged from 41.1 to 113.9cps/MBq. For the smallest source (diameter of 3.5cm), the calibration factor decrease ranged from -30% to -4%, highlighting the importance of partial volume effects according to the equipment involved. The sensitivity variation with the source-detector distance, with respect to the 15cm-value, reached 10% (in absolute value) in the range 5-30cm, but fixing the distance between the two heads, the calibration factor variation with the distance from the midline was within 3.6%. Appreciable variation of the transmission curves with the source size were observed, examining the results obtained with six gamma cameras. CONCLUSION: Assessments of sensitivity and transmission curve variations with source size should be regularly implemented in calibration procedures. The results of this study represent a useful compendium to check the obtained calibrations for dosimetric purposes.