Dosimetric Evaluation of Intact Breast Radiotherapy in Early Stages Breast Cancer Patients using Field-in-Field and 3D-CRT Enhanced Dynamic Wedge Techniques: Experience at a Tertiary Hospital in Tanzania

Document Type : Original Paper

Authors

1 Department of Physics, College of Natural and Applied Sciences, University of Dar es Salaam, Tanzania

2 Department of Physics, University of Dar es Salaam, Dar es Salaam, Tanzania

3 Department of Radiotherapy, Ocean Road Cancer Institute, Dar es Salaam, Tanzania

4 Directorate of Radiation Control, Tanzania Atomic Energy Commission, Dodoma, Tanzania

Abstract

Introduction: Dose planning is one of the important steps for the effective implementation of radiotherapy. As recommended, 95% to 107% of the prescribed dose should cover the target volume. Thus, radiotherapy cannot improve patient outcomes unless the desired dose delivery accuracy is achieved. The study was performed to evaluate field-in-field (FIF) technique (Forward intensity-modulated radiotherapy) compared with 3D-conformal radiotherapy enhanced dynamic wedge (EDW) technique.
Material and Methods: Two plans with opposed tangential fields; FIF and EDW for each breast cancer patient were created.
Results: The two techniques were comparable as far as the , D2%, and D5% were concerned. However, the FIF plan was slightly superior to EDW as far as D95% and D98% were concerned. The V95% was slightly higher in favor of FIF technique. The superiority of the FIF technique was further demonstrated by the lower mean dose (Dmean) and the volumes receiving 10 Gy (V10Gy) and 20 Gy (V20Gy) of the prescribed dose for the heart. The Dmean, V5Gy, V10Gy, and V20Gy for ipsilateral and contralateral lungs were comparable between the two techniques. However, the FIF technique demonstrated higher Dmean to the contralateral breast than EDW technique.
Conclusion: These results along with experiences elsewhere show the dosimetric benefits of the FIF technique for the optimal dose that should cover the target volume. However, the higher Dmean to the contralateral breast was a substantial shortcoming for the FIF technique. It can be recommended that the two planning techniques can be combined and used together to cover their drawbacks.

Keywords

Main Subjects

References

  1. Aref A, Thornton D, Youssef E, He T. Dosimetric improvements following 3D planning of tangential breast irradiation. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2000; 48:1569-74.
  2. Sasaoka M, Futami T. Dosimetric evaluation of whole breast radiotherapy using field-in-field technique in early-stage breast cancer. Int J Clin Oncol. 2011; 16:250-6.
  3. Yavas G, Yavas C, Acar H, Buyukyoruk A, Cobanoglu G, Kerimoglu OS, et al. Dosimetric comparison of 3-dimensional conformal and field-in-field radiotherapy techniques for the adjuvant treatment of early stage endometrial cancer. Phys Med. 2013; 29(6): 577-82.
  4. Gaur G, Singh RP, Gurjar OP, Garg P, Grover R, Kang MS, et al. Radiotherapy Treatment Plan Quality Metrics for Postmastectomy Breast Cancer Patients Using Conformal Planning Techniques. Iranian Journal of Medical Physics/Majallah-I Fīzīk-I Pizishkī-i Īrān. 2022 Jul 1;19(4).
  5. Aras S, İkizceli T, Aktan M. Dosimetric comparison of three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3D-CRT) and intensity modulated radiotherapy techniques (IMRT) with radiotherapy dose simulations for left-sided mastectomy patients. Eur J Breast Health. 2019; 15(2): 85-9.
  6. D'almeida M, Nagesh J, Balasubramanian R, Chandraguthi SG, Nair SS, Sharan K. Dosimetric comparison between two different intensity modulated radiation therapy and 3D-conformal radiation therapy planning techniques for carcinoma of breast following conservative surgery. J Clin Diagn Res. 2018; 12(10):1-4.
  7. Liu, YC, Chang, HM, Lin HH, Lu CC, Lai LH. Dosimetric Comparison of Intensity-Modulated Radiotherapy, Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy and Hybrid Three-Dimensional Conformal Radiotherapy/Intensity-Modulated Radiotherapy Techniques for Right Breast Cancer. J Clin Med. 2020; 9 (12): 3884.
  8. Gupte A, Sasidharan A, Kunheri B, Kumar AN, Reddy S, Nair H, et al. Dosimetric comparison of four different radiotherapy planning techniques for adjuvant radiotherapy of left-sided breast, axilla, and supraclavicular fossa. J Med Phys. 2021; 46:308-14.
  9. D’Avenia P, Nigro R, Camarda M, Di Nicola E, Giannini M, Mangiacotti M, et al. Field-in-field versus 3d-dynamic wedge techniques for patients with breast cancer: a preliminary study. Physica Medica: Eur J Med Phys. 2016; 32:17.
  10. Sun LM, Meng FY, Yang TH, Tsao MJ. Field-in-field plan does not improve the dosimetric outcome compared with the wedged beams plan for breast cancer radiotherapy. Med Dosim. 2014; 39: 79-82.
  11. Nelms BE, Robinson G, Markham J, Velasco K, Boyd S, Narayan S, et al. Variation in external beam treatment plan quality: an inter-institutional study of planners and planning systems. Pract Radiat Oncol. 2012; 2(4):296-305.
  12. International Commission on Radiation Units and Measurements. ICRU Report 50: Prescribing, Recording, and Reporting Photon Beam Therapy. Bethesda, MD. 1993.
  13. International Commission on Radiation Units and Measurements. ICRU Report 62: Prescribing, Recording, and Reporting Photon Beam Therapy (supplement to ICRU Report 50). Bethesda, MD. 1999.
  14. Mostafa AA, Hussein AA, Galal MM, El-Shahat Kh. The Impact of Dose Calculation Algorithm for SBRT Lung Cancer Radiotherapy Treatment. Iran J Med Phys. 2022; 19: 290-5. DOI: 10.22038/IJMP.2021.56733.1951.
  15. Kataria T, Sharma K, Subramani V, Karrthick K, Bisht S. Homogeneity index: an objective tool for assessment of conformal radiation treatments. J Med Phys. 2012; 37:207-213.
  16. Shaw E, Kline R, Gillin M, Souhami L, Hirschfeld A, Dinapoli R, Martin L. Radiation Therapy Oncology Group: radiosurgery quality assurance guidelines. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1993; 27(5):1231-9.
  17. Nokhasteh S, Nazemi H, Hejazi P, Dayyani M. Comparison of dosimetric parameters between field in field and conformal radiation therapy techniques in early stage of left breast cancer patients. Int J Cancer Manage. 2019; 12(2): 1-8.
  18. Onal C, Sonmez A, Arslan G, Oymak E, Kotek A, Efe E, et al. Dosimetric comparison of the field-infield technique and tangential wedged beams for breast irradiation. Jpn J Radiol. 2012; 30:218-26.
  19. Lee J-W, Hong S, Choi K-S, Kim Y-L, Park B-M and Chung J-B et al. Performance evaluation of field-in-field technique for tangential breast irradiation. Jpn J Clin Oncol. 2008; 38:158-63.

 

 

 

 

 

Iranian Journal of Medical Physics
Volume 20, Issue 6 - Serial Number 6
November and December 2023
Pages 333-340

Files

History

  • Receive Date: 10 November 2022
  • Revise Date: 20 January 2024
  • Accept Date: 18 February 2023

Share

How to cite

Statistics