To describe early clinical results of tomotherapy treatment in patients with breast cancer and complex treatment volumes.
Ten patients were treated with tomotherapy between January 2009 and March 2010. Treatment planning objectives were to cover at least 95% of the planning target volume with the 95% isodose; to have a minimum dose of 90% and a maximum dose of 105%. All treatments included daily CT/megavoltage image guidance. Acute toxicity was recorded weekly.
Six patients were treated because constraints were not accomplished for heart, lung or contralateral breast in a previous three-dimensional conformal plan; two for preexisting cardiac or pulmonary disease, and two more for bilateral breast irradiation. Treatment volumes included the whole breast in the majority of patients, as well as the supraclavicular and the internal mammary chain nodes when indicated. Most patients were older than 50 years, and had an early breast cancer, with positive oestrogen receptors, negative HER2 expression and a poorly differentiated, infiltrating ductal carcinoma. The majority of patients had received neoadjuvant chemotherapy associated to breast-conserving surgery and adjuvant hormonotherapy. Median homogeneity index was 1.09; median coverage index was 0.81. Median V20Gy and V10Gy for ipsilateral lung was 20% and 37.1% respectively. Median V25 and V35 for heart was 15% and 4% respectively. Median dose for contralateral breast was 7 Gy. Skin acute toxicity was grade 1 in 41.7% and grade 2 in 58.3%.
Tomotherapy is a technique capable of delivering a well tolerated treatment with high homogeneity and coverage indexes and high capabilities for sparing the organs at risk in patients with anatomically complex breast cancer, bilateral breast cancer, indication for internal mammary chain node irradiation, cardiac toxicity derived from chemotherapy, or preexisting cardiac or pulmonary disease. Further studies are required to evaluate local control and late toxicity.
": One of the two TomoTherapy Hi-Art treatment systems used in this study. throughout the complex volumes formed by the lymph nodes and the breast . We sought to report our early experience with the use of HT (with or without CCT) for inoperable LABC not eligible to conformal radiation techniques due to disease extension. "
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: Background:
We investigated the feasibility of helical tomotherapy (HT) for inoperable large breast tumors, after failing to achieve adequate treatment planning with conformal radiation techniques.
Material and methods:
Five consecutive patients with locally advanced breast cancer (LABC) were treated by preoperative HT. All patients received up-front chemotherapy before HT. Irradiated volumes included breast and nodal areas (45-50 Gy) in 4 patients. One patient received a simultaneous integrated boost (55 Gy) to gross tumor volume (GTV) without lymph node irradiation. Acute toxicity was assessed with Common Toxicity Criteria for Adverse Events v.4. Patients were evaluated for surgery at the end of treatment.
Patients were staged IIB to IIIC (according to the AJCC staging system 2010). HT was associated in 4 patients with concomitant chemotherapy (5-fluorouracil and vinorelbine). Two patients were scored with grade 3 skin toxicity (had not completed HT) and one with grade 3 febrile neutropenia. One patient stopped HT with grade 2 skin toxicity. All patients were able to undergo mastectomy at a median interval of 43 days (31-52) from HT. Pathological partial response was seen in all patients.
HT is feasible with acceptable toxicity profiles, potentially increased by chemotherapy. These preliminary results prompt us to consider a phase II study.
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: Pectus excavatum is a frequent anomaly. It represents a challenge for adjuvant radiotherapy in the conservative treatment of breast cancer. Primary objective of this study is to compare dosimetric outcomes, normal tissue complication probability (NTCP), and integral dose using four radiation techniques. Secondary objective is to describe acute toxicity and setup errors.
A 57-year-old female patient with an inner quadrant, left breast, ductal carcinoma in situ, was identified. Whole breast was prescribed with 50 Gy in 25 fractions. Boost planning target volume (PTV) was prescribed with 60 Gy in 30 fractions for sequential boost (SB) plans or 57.5 Gy in 25 fractions in the simultaneous integrated boost (SIB) plan. All plans were normalized to deliver 47.5 Gy to 95 % of the breast PTV. Daily image-guided radiotherapy (IGRT) was performed. Setup deviations were described.
Constraints were not accomplished for heart when using intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) + SB or conformal radiotherapy with three photon fields and SB. Left lung constraint was not achieved by any of the techniques in comparison. IMRT + SIB and conformal photons and electrons + SB plan were closer to the objective. Integral doses were lower with IMRT for heart and ipsilateral lung; however, it were higher for contralateral breast and lung. Coverage and tumoral conformity indexes were similar for all techniques in comparison. Greater inhomogeneity was observed with the photons and electrons + SB. IMRT + SIB treatment was administered daily with grade I skin toxicity. The highest setup error was observed in Y direction.
Planning target volume coverage was similar with the four techniques. Homogeneity was superior with both IMRT plans. A good balance between dose constraints for organs at risk, PTV coverage, homogeneity, and NTCP was observed with IMRT + SIB. The documented daily setup error justifies the use of online IGRT.
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: This article is a summary of the conference "Clinical and technological transition in breast cancer" that took place in the Congress of the Spanish Society of Radiation Oncology, placed in Vigo (Spain) on June 21, 2013. Hugo Marsiglia and Philip Poortmanns were the speakers, the first discussed about "Clinical and technological transition" and the second about "EORTC clinical trials and protocols".
Reports of Practical Oncology and Radiotherapy 11/2013; 18(6):345-352. DOI:10.1016/j.rpor.2013.08.002
Data provided are for informational purposes only. Although carefully collected, accuracy cannot be guaranteed. The impact factor represents a rough estimation of the journal's impact factor and does not reflect the actual current impact factor. Publisher conditions are provided by RoMEO. Differing provisions from the publisher's actual policy or licence agreement may be applicable.