Simultaneous couch and gantry dynamic arc rotation (CG-Darc) in the treatment of breast cancer with accelerated partial breast irradiation (APBI): a feasibility study.

The purpose of this study was to compare the dosimetry of CG-Darc with three-dimensional conformal radiation therapy (3D CRT) and volumetric-modulated arc therapy (RapidArc) in the treatment of breast cancer with APBI. CG-Darc plans were generated using two tangential couch arcs combined with a simultaneous noncoplanar gantry arc. The dynamic couch arc was modeled by consecutive IMRT fields at 10° intervals. RapidArc plans used a single partial arc with an avoidance sector, preventing direct beam exit into the thorax. CG-Darc and RapidArc plans were compared with 3D CRT in 20 patients previously treated with 3D CRT (group A), and in 15 additional patients who failed the dosimetric constraints of the Canadian trial and of NSABP B-39/RTOG 0413 for APBI (group B). CG-Darc resulted in superior target coverage compared to 3D CRT and RapidArc (V95%: 98.2% vs. 97.1% and 95.7%). For outer breast lesions, CG-Darc and RapidArc significantly reduced the ipsilateral breast V50% by 8% in group A and 15% in group B (p < 0.05) as compared with 3D CRT. For inner and centrally located lesions, CG-Darc resulted in significant ipsilateral lung V10% reduction when compared to 3D CRT and RapidArc (10.7% vs. 12.6% and 20.7% for group A, and 15.1% vs. 25.2% and 27.3% for group B). Similar advantage was observed in the dosimetry of contralateral breast where the percent maximum dose for CG-Darc, 3D CRT, and RapidArc were 3.9%, 6.3%, and 5.8% for group A and 4.3%, 9.2%, and 6.3% for group B, respectively (p < 0.05). CG-Darc achieved superior target coverage while decreasing normal tissue dose even in patients failing APBI dose constraints. Consequently, this technique has the potential of expanding the use of APBI to patients currently ineligible for such treatment. Modification of the RapidArc algorithm will be necessary to link couch and gantry rotation with variable dose rate and, therefore, enable the use of CG-Darc in clinical practice.

Is multibeam IMRT better than standard treatment for patients with left-sided breast cancer?

PURPOSE: When treatment intent is to include breast and internal mammary lymph nodes (IMNs) in the clinical target volume (CTV), a significant volume of the heart may receive radiation, which may result in late morbidity. The value of conformal intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) to avoid heart dose was studied. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Breast, IMNs, and normal tissues were contoured for 30 consecutive patients previously treated with RT after lumpectomy for left-sided breast cancer. Eleven-beam, conformal, inverse-planned IMRT plans were developed and compared with best standard plans. Conformity Index (CI), Homogeneity Index (HI), and doses to normal tissues were compared. RESULTS: Intensity-modulated RT significantly improved (two-sided paired t test) HI (0.95 vs. 0.74), CI (0.91 vs. 0.48), volume of the heart receiving more than 30 Gy (V30-heart) (1.7% vs. 12.5%), and volume of lung receiving more than 20-Gy (V20-left lung) (17.1% vs. 26.6%), all p < 0.001. The mean Healthy Tissue Volume (HTV = CT set - PTV) dose was similar between IMRT and best standard plans (6.0 and 6.9 Gy, respectively), but IMRT increased the volume of normal tissues receiving low-dose RT: V5-right lung (13.7% vs. 2.0%), V5-right breast (29.2% vs. 7.9%), and V5-HTV (31.7% vs. 23.6%), all p < 0.001. IMRT plans were generated in less than 60 min and treatment delivered in approximately 20 min, suggesting that this technique is clinically applicable. CONCLUSIONS: IMRT significantly improved conformity and homogeneity for plans when the breast + IMNs were in the CTV. Heart and lung volume receiving high doses were decreased, but more healthy tissue received low doses. A simple algorithm based on amount of heart included in the standard plan showed limited ability to predict the benefit from IMRT.