ABSTRACT
PURPOSE: Adjacent tissues-in-beam (TIB) may receive substantial incidental doses within standard tangent fields during hypofractioned whole breast irradiation (HF-WBI). To characterize the impact of dose to TIB, we analyzed dosimetric parameters of TIB and associated acute toxicity. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Plans prescribed to 40.5â¯Gy/15 fractions from 4/2016-1/2018 were evaluated. Structures of interest were contoured: (1) TIB: all tissues encompassed by plan 30% isodose lines, (2) breast, (3) non-breast TIB (nTIB): TIB minus contoured breast. Volumes of TIB, breast, and nTIB receiving 100%-107% of prescription dose (V100-V107) were calculated. Twelve patient- and physician-reported acute toxicities were prospectively collected weekly. Correlations between volumetric and dosimetric parameters were assessed. Uni- and multivariable logistic regressions evaluated toxicity grade changes as a function of TIB, breast, and nTIB V100-V107 (in cm3). RESULTS: We evaluated 137 plans. Breast volume was positively correlated with nTIB and nTIB V100 (rhoâ¯=â¯0.52, rhoâ¯=â¯0.30, respectively, both pâ¯<â¯0.001). V107â¯>â¯2 cm3 were noted in 14% of breast and 21% of nTIB volumes. On multivariable analyses, increasing breast and nTIB V100 significantly raised odds of grade 2+ dermatitis and burning/twinging pain, respectively; increasing nTIB V105 elevated odds of hyperpigmentation and burning pain; and increasing nTIB V107 raised odds of burning pain. Threshold volumes for >6-fold odds of developing burning pain were TIB V105â¯>â¯100â¯cm3 and V107â¯>â¯5â¯cm3. CONCLUSIONS: For HF-WBI, doses to nTIB over the prescription predicted acute toxicities independent of breast doses. These data support inclusion of TIB as a region of interest in treatment planning and protocol design.
ABSTRACT
Purpose: Recent single institution, phase II evidence has demonstrated the feasibility and efficacy of ultra-hypofractionated, preoperative photon therapy in 5 fractions for the treatment of soft tissue sarcoma (STS). Our purpose was to evaluate the dosimetric benefits of modern scanning beam proton therapy compared with conventional photon radiation therapy (RT) for the neoadjuvant treatment of adult extremity STS. Materials and Methods: Existing proton and photon plans for 11 adult patients with STS of the lower extremities previously treated preoperatively with neoadjuvant RT at our center were used to create proton therapy plans using Raystation Treatment Planning System v10.A. Volumes were delineated, and doses reported consistent with International Commission on Radiation Units and Measurements reports 50, 62, and 78. Target volumes were optimized such that 100% clinical target volume (CTV) was covered by 99% of the prescription dose. The prescribed dose was 30 Gy for PT and RT delivered in 5 fractions. For proton therapy, doses are reported in GyRBE = 1.1 Gy. The constraints for adjacent organs at risk (OARs) within 1 cm of the CTV were the following: femur V30Gy ≤ 50%, joint V30Gy < 50%, femoral head V30Gy ≤ 5 cm3, strip V12 ≤ 10%, and skin V12 < 50%. Target coverage goals, OAR constraints, and integral dose were compared by Student t test with P < .05 significance. Results: A minimum 99% CTV coverage was achieved for all plans. OAR dose constraints were achieved for all proton and photon plans; however, mean doses to the femur (10.7 ± 8.5 vs 16.1 ± 7.7 GyRBE), femoral head (2.0 ± 4.4 vs 3.6 ± 6.4 GyRBE), and proximal joint (1.8 ± 2.4 vs 3.5 ± 4.4 GyRBE) were all significantly lower with PT vs intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) (all P < .05). Integral dose was significantly reduced for proton vs photon plans. Conformity and heterogeneity indices were significantly better for proton therapy. Conclusion: Proton therapy maintained target coverage while significantly reducing integral and mean doses to the proximal organs at risk compared with RT. Further prospective investigation is warranted to validate these findings and potential benefit in the management of adult STS.