Vol 26, No 6 (2021)
Research paper
Published online: 2021-11-09

open access

Page views 5523
Article views/downloads 339
Get Citation

Connect on Social Media

Connect on Social Media

Dosimetric evaluation of irregular surface compensator and intensity-modulated radiotherapy in breast radiotherapy

Gokcen Inan1, Osman Vefa Gul1, Hamit Basaran1
Rep Pract Oncol Radiother 2021;26(6):984-989.

Abstract

Background: This dosimetric study aims to evaluate the dosimetric advantage of the irregular surface compensator (ISC) compared with the intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT).

Materials and methods: Ten patients with whole breast irradiation were planned with the ISC and IMRT techniques. Six different beam directions were selected for IMRT and ISC plans. The treatment plans were evaluated with respect to planning target coverage, dose homogeneity index (DHI) and organs at risk (OAR) sparing. Monitor units (MUs) and the delivery time were analysed for treatment efficiency.

Results: The ISC technique provides a better coverage of the PTV and statistically significantly better homogeneity of the dose distribution. For the ipsilateral lung and heart, ISC and IMRT techniques deliver almost the same dose in all plans. However, MU counts and delivery time were significantly lower with the IMRT technique (p < 0.05).

Conclusion: For breast radiotherapy, when the ISC method was compared to the IMRT method, ISC provided better dose distribution for the target. 

Article available in PDF format

View PDF Download PDF file

References

  1. Perez C, Brady WL, Halperin CE, Wazwe DE. Principles and Practice of Radiation Oncology. 7th ed. Wolters Kluwer : 3962–3963.
  2. Liu MJ, Hawk H, Gershman ST, et al. The effects of a National Breast and Cervical Cancer Early Detection Program on social disparities in breast cancer diagnosis and treatment in Massachusetts. Cancer Causes Control. 2005; 16(1): 27–33.
  3. Katz SJ, Lantz PM, Janz NK, et al. Patterns and correlates of local therapy for women with ductal carcinoma-in-situ. J Clin Oncol. 2005; 23(13): 3001–3007.
  4. Low DA, Moran JM, Dempsey JF, et al. Dosimetry tools and techniques for IMRT. Med Phys. 2011; 38(3): 1313–1338.
  5. Chui CS, Hong L, Hunt M, et al. A simplified intensity modulated radiation therapy technique for the breast. Med Phys. 2002; 29(4): 522–529.
  6. James HV, Scrase CD, Poynter AJ. Practical experience with intensity-modulated radiotherapy. Br J Radiol. 2004; 77(913): 3–14.
  7. Sankar A, Velmurugan J. Different intensity extension methods and their impact on entrance dose in breast radiotherapy: A study. J Med Phys. 2009; 34(4): 200–205.
  8. Caudell JJ, De Los Santos JF, Keene KS, et al. A dosimetric comparison of electronic compensation, conventional intensity modulated radiotherapy, and tomotherapy in patients with early-stage carcinoma of the left breast. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2007; 68(5): 1505–1511.
  9. Emmens DJ, James HV. Irregular surface compensation for radiotherapy of the breast: correlating depth of the compensation surface with breast size and resultant dose distribution. Br J Radiol. 2010; 83(986): 159–165.
  10. Yoon M, Park SY, Shin D, et al. A new homogeneity index based on statistical analysis of the dose-volume histogram. J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2007; 8(2): 9–17.
  11. Paddick I. A simple scoring ratio to index the conformity of radiosurgical treatment plans. J Neurosurg. 2000; 93(Suppl_3): 219–222.
  12. Chui CS, Hong L, Hunt M, et al. A simplified intensity modulated radiation therapy technique for the breast. Med Phys. 2002; 29(4): 522–529.
  13. Caudell JJ, De Los Santos JF, Keene KS, et al. A dosimetric comparison of electronic compensation, conventional intensity modulated radiotherapy, and tomotherapy in patients with early-stage carcinoma of the left breast. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2007; 68(5): 1505–1511.
  14. Flejmer AM, Josefsson D, Nilsson M, et al. Clinical Implications of the ISC Technique for Breast Cancer Radiotherapy and Comparison with Clinical Recommendations. Antıcancer Res. 2014; 34: 3563–3568.
  15. Kuwahata N, Fujita H, Yamanishi H, et al. Dosimetric Comparison of Irregular Surface Compensator and Field-in-Field for Whole Breast Radiotherapy. J Med Phys. 2018; 43(2): 79–84.
  16. Hideki F, Nao K, Hiroyuki H, et al. Improvement of dose distribution with irregular surface compensator in whole breast radiotherapy. J Med Phys. 2013; 38(3): 115–119.
  17. Dyer BA, Jenshus A, Mayadev JS. Integrated skin flash planning technique for intensity-modulated radiation therapy for vulvar cancer prevents marginal misses and improves superficial dose coverage. Med Dosim. 2019; 44(1): 7–10.
  18. Sung W, Kim JI, Kim HS, et al. Performance of the irregular surface compensator compared with four-field box and intensity modulated radiation therapy for gynecologic cancer. Phys Med. 2016; 32(12): 1537–1542.
  19. Xing L, Crooks S, Li JG, et al. Incorporating respiratory motion into the design of intensity maps in IMRT treatment of breast cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2000; 48(3): 199.
  20. Cao J, Roeske JC, Chmura SJ, et al. Calculation and prediction of the effect of respiratory motion on whole breast radiation therapy dose distributions. Med Dosim. 2009; 34(2): 126–132.
  21. Furuya T, Sugimoto S, Kurokawa C, et al. The dosimetric impact of respiratory breast movement and daily setup error on tangential whole breast irradiation using conventional wedge, field-in-field and irregular surface compensator techniques. J Radiat Res. 2013; 54(1): 157–165.