TITLE:
Evaluation of 3D-CRT and VMAT Radiotherapy Plans for Left Breast Cancer with Regional Lymph Nodes Irradiation
AUTHORS:
Houda Benmessaoud, Hasnae Bouhia, Halima Ahmut, Sanaa El Majjaoui, Hanane El Kacemi, Khalid Hassouni, Tayeb Kebdani
KEYWORDS:
Volumetric-Modulated arc Therapy, 3D-Conformal Radiation Therapy, Left Breast Cancer, Target Volumes, Treatment Plan
JOURNAL NAME:
Journal of Cancer Therapy,
Vol.14 No.8,
August
17,
2023
ABSTRACT: Introduction: Radiation
therapy after breast surgery is an integral part of the treatment of early
breast cancer. The goal of radiation therapy is to achieve the best possible
coverage of the planning target volume (PTV), while reducing the dose to organs
at risk (OARs) which are normal tissues whose sensitivity to irradiation could
cause damage that can lead to modification of the treatment plan. In the
last decade, radiation oncologist started to use the Intensity Modulated Radiotherapy (IMRT) and Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy
(VMAT) for irradiating the breast, in order to achieve better dose distribution
and target dose to the PTV and OAR. The aim of this study is to compare 2 external radiotherapy techniques (VMAT vs
3D) for patients with node-positive left breast cancer. Patients and
Methods: We randomly selected 10 cases of postoperative radiotherapy for breast
cancer in our hospital. The patients are all female, the average age was 45.4 years old, and the primary lesions are left
breast. The ANOVA test was used to compare the mean difference between
subgroups, and the p value Results: Dose
volume histogram (DVH) was used to analyze each evaluation dose of clinical
target volume (CTV) and organs at risk (OARs). Compared to 3DCRT plans, VMAT
provided more uniform coverage to the breast and regional lymph nodes. The max
point dose for tVMAT was lower on average (106.4% for VMAT versus 109% for
3DCRT). OAR sparing was improved with tVMAT, with a lower average V17Gy for the left lung (27.91% for VMAT versus 30.04% for 3DCRT, p and lower for V28Gy (13.75% for VMAT versus 22.34% for 3DCRT, p = 0.01). We also found a lower V35Gy for the heart on VMAT plan (p = 0.02). On the contrary, dose of contralateral breast was lower in 3DCRT than VMAT (0.59 Gy vs 3.65 Gy, p = 0.00). Conclusion: The both types
of plans can meet the clinical dosimetry demands of postoperative
radiotherapy for left breast cancer. The VMAT plan has a better conformity, but
3CDRT can provide a lower dose to the contralateral organs (breast and lung) to
avoid the risk of secondary cancers.