Evaluation of the quality of fit of flexible bolus material created using 3D printing technology.

AIMS: To retrospectively evaluate the quality of fit of 3D printed bolus over four different treatment sites to determine whether certain sites favor a 3D printed approach and if the quality of fit changes over the course of treatment. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective analysis of the first 60 cases treated using 3D printed bolus in our radiotherapy center was undertaken. All boluses were printed using flexible thermoplastic polyurethane (TPU) material. We developed a system of rating the quality of fit using four quality categories. The analysis of 60 patients consisted of a review of a total 627 treatment fractions for head and neck (H&N), scalp, pelvis, and extremity treatment sites. RESULTS: Out of 627 fractions evaluated, 75.1% were rated either "good" or "excellent", 20.6% were rated as "acceptable" and 4.3% were rated "poor". H&N, scalp, and extremity treatment regions were found to favor a 3D printed approach. However, pelvis cases had a higher proportion of "acceptable" and "poor" ratings. Trend analysis showed no notable change in the quality of 3D printed bolus fit over the course of treatment, except for pelvis cases which tended to change categories more than other treatment sites. CONCLUSION: This evaluation demonstrates that 3D printed bolus, created using semi-flexible materials such as TPU, is an effective and practical bolus choice for radiotherapy. In particular, using a 3D printed approach for H&N, scalp, and extremities was found to have a highly conformal fit.

Screen-detected ductal carcinoma in situ, 2008-2020: An observational study.

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the grade distribution of screen-detected ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) diagnosed in Ireland, in the context of the clinical trials currently underway to determine if active surveillance is a feasible management option for low-risk DCIS. SETTING: BreastCheck is the national breast screening programme in Ireland, offering screening to women aged 50 to 69 every two years. METHODS: This study was a secondary analysis of data collected by BreastCheck on all screen-detected DCIS diagnosed in the 12 years of nationwide screening. Incidence and detection rates were calculated. Descriptive analysis of the cases was performed and, for comparative analysis, grade of DCIS was analysed as a binary variable (high vs. low/intermediate) in keeping with the inclusion criteria for active surveillance trials. Analysis was performed in IBM Statistical Package for Social Sciences, version 26. RESULTS: Between 2008 and 2020, 2240 women were diagnosed with DCIS through BreastCheck; 876 (39.1%) were low/intermediate-grade. The overall incidence rate has remained relatively stable during this period. Women with low/intermediate-grade DCIS were younger than women with high-grade DCIS (56 (interquartile range: 56-61) years v 57 (interquartile range: 53-61) years; p < 0.001). They were also more likely to have been diagnosed at an initial screening episode compared with those who had high-grade lesions (42.5% v 29.0%; p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: If current clinical trials recommend active surveillance as a feasible option for DCIS, up to 40% of women with screen-detected DCIS may be eligible. These women are younger and often diagnosed on initial screening episode, so may require longer active follow-up.