Abstract
Purpose
The purpose of this study is to compare dosimetric parameters of intensity-modulated mode of TomoDirect and three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3D-CRT) in patients with early breast cancer.
Methods
TomoDirect and 3D-CRT planning were carried out for 26 patients with early breast cancer who had received breast-conserving surgery. A total of 50.4 Gy in 28 fractions were prescribed to the planning target volume. The organs at risk (OAR) such as lung and heart were contoured. Planning target volume (PTV) dose coverage, radiation conformity index (RCI), radical dose homogeneity index (rDHI), and irradiation dose of organs at risk were compared between TomoDirect and 3D-CRT planning.
Results
The mean PTV dose (51.65±0.37 Gy) and V47.8 (100%) in TomoDirect were significantly higher than the mean PTV dose (50.88±0.65 Gy) and V47.8 (89.23%±0.06%) in 3D-CRT (all, p<0.001). The RCI value in TomoDirect was significantly better than that in 3D-CRT (1.00 vs. 1.13, p<0.001). However, the rDHI value in TomoDirect was not significantly better than that in 3D-CRT (0.72 vs. 0.67, p=0.056). The mean lung dose and V10, V20, V30, and V40 values of ipsilateral lung in TomoDirect were significantly lower than those in 3D-CRT (all, p<0.05). There is no significant difference in the V10, V20, V30, and V40 values of heart between TomoDirect and 3D-CRT. And the mean dose for heart in TomoDirect was marginally lower than that in 3D-CRT (1.05 Gy vs. 1.62 Gy, p=0.085). The mean dose for left anterior descending coronary artery in left breast cancer was significantly lower in TomoDirect than in 3D-CRT (7.2 Gy vs. 12.1 Gy, p<0.001).
Conclusion
Compared to 3D-CRT, TomoDirect could result in favorable target coverage while reducing the irradiation dose of the ipsilateral lung for patients with early breast cancer.
Keywords: Breast, Neoplasms, Radiometry, Radiotherapy
INTRODUCTION
Breast cancer is the second most common cancer in Korean women based on the Korean National Cancer Screening Survey. The incidence of breast cancer has been gradually increasing in Korea [1].
Breast-conserving surgery followed by breast irradiation has become a standard treatment for early breast cancer [2]. Radiotherapy (RT) has a definite role in reducing locoregional recurrence, leading to improved recurrence-free survival in early breast cancer [3]. Conventional radiotherapy consisted of tangential opposed beams to deliver radiation to the entire breast. However, the entire breast irradiation has acute toxicities to organs at risk such as lung and heart [4]. Therefore, clinicians have made great efforts to minimize the dose of irradiation to adjacent normal tissues near the breast to avoid acute and long-term adverse effects in breast cancer patients.
Modern radiotherapy techniques, such as TomoTherapy using image-guided radiotherapy and intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT), are able to improve the accuracy of radiation delivery while reducing the irradiation dose to normal tissues. TomoDirect, a nonrotational treatment option of TomoTherapy Hi-Art System (Accuray, Sunnyvale, USA), allows planning and delivering of RT with a series of highly modulated linear beam paths [5,6]. TomoDirect can yield IMRT which allows highly conformal distributions of radiation dose to the target while minimizing irradiation to the adjacent dose limiting organs. Use of TomoDirect technique for breast cancer can attain optimal planning target volume coverage and adequate normal tissue sparing in a pilot study [7].
Moreover, the beam-on time of TomoDirect during breast irradiation is less than helical TomoTherapy and comparable to that of three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3D-CRT) [7]. In Lee et al. [8], median beam-on time was just 175 seconds. These considerations could make TomoDirect as a useful option for the radiation oncology department which only equipped with helical TomoTherapy without conventional linear accelerator. However, it has been not clinically determined whether TomoDirect was dosimetrically better than 3D-CRT for Asian patients with early breast cancer. Therefore, the objective of this study was to compare dosimetric parameters of TomoDirect and 3D-CRT in early breast cancer patients of an Asian cohort.
METHODS
Patients
Consecutive 26 patients diagnosed with early breast cancer with negative axillary node or carcinoma in situ between November 2013 and April 2014 were evaluated in this study. The 26 patients had breast-conserving surgery followed by entire breast irradiation using TomoDirect-IMRT. Patients with metastatic breast cancer or previous radiation history of chest wall due to the thoracic malignancy and patients had resection margin were excluded. This study was approved by the Institutional Review Board of our institution (VC14RISI0064).
Simulation and treatment planning
During simulation, patients were immobilized on wing board with both arms raised. Patients underwent computed tomography (CT) scans from the lower neck to the mid abdomen with 3 mm-slice thickness. Axial images were imported to the Eclipse treatment planning system (Varian Medical System, Palo Alto, USA) for three-dimensional planning and TomoTherapy Hi-Art System.
Planning target volume (PTV) was defined using the contouring guideline of Radiation Therapy Oncology Group [9,10]. PTV included breast palpable tissue and the tumor bed. The heart was contoured according to the Taylor et al. [11]. The cranial limit of the heart included the right atrium and excluded the pulmonary trunk, ascending aorta and superior vena cava. The lowest contour of the heart was the caudal myocardial border. For IMRT-mode of TomoDirect plan, the field width, pitch, and modulation factor need to be selected. Then, the dose distribution for each beamlet that passes through the target is calculated by a convolution/superposition algorithm. Two tangential beams with a jaw size of 2.5 cm, a pitch of 0.25, and a modulation factor of 2.0 was set. A normal calculation grid of 0.356×0.356 cm2 was used in optimization and calculation processes. Beam angles were selected to minimize the dose to normal tissues and to avoid the irradiation to the contralateral breast (Figure 1A). A total of 50.4 Gy in 28 fractions with 6 MV photon were prescribed to the PTV in TomoDirect. The organ at risk (OAR) such as lung and heart was contoured. The goals of TomoDirect were as follows: (1) at least 95% of PTV received 100% of the prescribed dose; (2) more than 105% of the prescribed dose should be below 10% of PTV; (3) more than 110% of the prescribed dose should be below 5% of PTV; (4) mean irradiation dose of the lung should be under 10 Gy; (5) 20% of the lung was kept under 20 Gy; (6) 10% of the lung was kept under 30 Gy; (7) 10% of the heart was kept under 10 Gy; and (8) 5% of the heart was kept under 20 Gy. For 3D-CRT planning, two tangential fields with enhanced dynamic wedge were used. The same gantry angles were used for TomoDirect and 3D-CRT planning. Dynamic wedge and beam weighting were applied to optimize the coverage of the PTV while minimizing the exposure to the normal tissue. A total of 50.4 Gy in 28 fractions delivered with 6 to 15 MV photon was prescribed for the PTV in 3D-CRT. The isocenter was set at the half point between the mid-axilla and the anterior chest wall in the middle CT-slice of the PTV. The superior, inferior, and lateral border of the field was 1.5 cm apart from the contoured PTV without block. Medial border of the field was 1 cm apart from the PTV with a conventional block margin (Figure 1B).
Figure 1. Dose distribution for TomoDirect plan (A) and three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy plan (B). Red contour means the planning target volume which contains lumpectomy site with clips and normal breast tissue.
Dosimetric comparison between TomoDirect and 3D-CRT
Dosimetric parameters between TomoDirect and 3D-CRT for the same patient were compared. The mean dose, percentage of the volume receiving radiation ≥n Gy (VnGy), minimum dose (Dmin), maximum dose (Dmax), radiation conformity index (RCI), and radical dose homogeneity index (rDHI) were analyzed for the PTV. RCI and rDHI were defined as follows: RCI=PTV/V95 (volume enclosed by the 95% of isodose line); rDHI=Dmin/Dmax in the PTV [12,13].
The avoidance of irradiation to the heart and lung was evaluated using the values such as mean dose and VnGy. Paired t-test was performed to compare the dosimetric parameters between TomoDirect and 3D-CRT. Difference was considered statistically significant when p-value was less than 0.05. Data analysis was performed with R software version 2.15 (Alcatel-Lucent, Murray Hill, USA).
RESULTS
Patient characteristics were summarized in Table 1. A total of 10 patients (38.5%) had ductal carcinoma in situ. Twelve (46.2%) with T1 tumors and four (15.3%) patients with T2 tumors were enrolled for this study. All patients had pathologically negative node. Of the 26 patients, 11 had right-sided breast tumors, and 15 had left-sided breast tumors. The median age of the 26 patients was 51 years (range, 37-70 years).
Table 1. Patient characteristics (n=26).
| Characteristic | No. (%) |
|---|---|
| Age (yr)* | 51 (37-70) |
| Body mass index (kg/m2)* | 23 (19-29) |
| Site | |
| Right | 11 (42.3) |
| Left | 15 (57.7) |
| pT stage | |
| Tis | 12 (46.2) |
| T1 | 10 (38.4) |
| T2 | 4 (15.4) |
| Tumor location | |
| Upper | 24 (92.3) |
| Lower | 2 (7.7) |
| Axillary staging | |
| None | 9 (34.7 ) |
| Sentinal node biopsy | 3 (11.5) |
| Axillary node dissection | 14 (53.8) |
| Presence of seroma ≥ 15 mL | |
| Negative | 20 (77.0) |
| Positive | 6 (23.0) |
| Adjuvant chemotherapy | |
| No | 13 (50.0) |
| Yes | 13 (50.0) |
*Median (range).
Dose distribution of the target
The median of PTVs in the 26 patients was 356.5 cc (range, 216.2-525.5 cc). The prescription goal of TomoDirect plan was completely met for PTVs in all cases. The dose parameters for PTV in the TomoDirect and 3D-CRT were compared and summarized in Table 2. The mean PTV dose in TomoDirect was significantly higher than that in 3D-CRT (51.65 Gy vs. 50.88 Gy, p<0.001). The dosimetric value of V47.8 for TomoDirect was significantly higher than that for 3D-CRT (100% vs. 89.2%, p<0.001) (Figure 2). However, there was no significant difference in the V52.9 and V55.4 values between the two radiation techniques. The Dmin (39.96 Gy) and Dmax (55.40 Gy) values in TomoDirect were significantly higher than those (Dmin 36.61 Gy; Dmax 54.26 Gy) in 3D-CRT (all, p<0.05). The RCI values of TomoDirect and 3D-CRT were 1.00 and 1.13, respectively. The RCI value of TomoDirect was significantly better than that of 3D-CRT (p<0.001). The rDHI value in TomoDirect was not significantly better than that in 3D-CRT plan (0.72 vs. 0.67, p=0.056).
Table 2. Comparison of dosimetric parameters for the planning target volume between TomoDirect and three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy.
| Parameter | TomoDirect | 3D-CRT | p-value |
|---|---|---|---|
| Mean dose (Gy) | 51.65 ± 0.37 | 50.88 ± 0.65 | <0.001 |
| V47.8 (%) | 100 ± 0.00 | 89.23 ± 6.33 | <0.001 |
| V52.9 (%) | 5.23 ± 10.02 | 4.46 ± 4.94 | 0.727 |
| V55.4 (%) | 0.13 ± 0.52 | 0.00 ± 0.00 | 0.193 |
| Dmin (Gy) | 39.96 ± 5.96 | 36.61 ± 2.37 | 0.011 |
| Dmax (Gy) | 55.40 ± 1.45 | 54.26 ± 0.92 | 0.001 |
| RCI | 1 ± 0.00 | 1.13 ± 0.10 | <0.001 |
| rDHI | 0.72 ± 0.11 | 0.67 ± 0.04 | 0.056 |
3D-CRT=three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy; VnGy=percentage of the volume receiving radiation ≥n Gy; Dmin=minimum dose irradiated to the planning target volume; Dmax=maximum dose irradiated to the planning target volume; RCI=radiation conformality index; rDHI=radical dose homogeneity index.
Figure 2. Dose-volume histogram of the planning target volume in TomoDirect and three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3D-CRT) planning. The mean value of V47.8 was significantly higher in TomoDirect than in 3D-CRT (100% vs. 89.2%, *p<0.001).
VnGy=percentage of the volume receiving radiation ≥n Gy.
Dose distribution of OAR
The dosimetric parameters for the ipsilateral lung and heart were summarized in Table 3. The mean dose for the ipsilateral lung in TomoDirect was significantly lower than that in 3D-CRT plan (5.07 Gy vs. 6.94 Gy, p=0.002). Values of V10, V20, V30, and V40 of the ipsilateral lung in TomoDirect were also significantly lower than those in 3D-CRT (all, p<0.05) (Figure 3A). The mean dose for heart in TomoDirect was marginally lower than that in 3D-CRT (1.05 Gy vs. 1.62 Gy, p=0.085). There were no significant differences in the V10, V20, V30, V40 values of heart between the two arms (Figure 3B). In subgroup analysis of left breast cancer patients, there was not significant heart dose reduction in TomoDirect compared to 3D-CRT planning.
Table 3. Comparison of dosimetric parameters for the ipsilateral lung and heart between TomoDirect and three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy.
| Parameter | TomoDirect | 3D-CRT | p-value | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lung | Mean (Gy) | 5.07 ± 1.81 | 6.94 ± 2.25 | 0.002 |
| V40 (%) | 4.73 ± 2.86 | 9.71 ± 4.12 | <0.001 | |
| V30 (%) | 6.83 ± 3.51 | 11.5 ± 4.42 | <0.001 | |
| V20 (%) | 8.98 ± 4.01 | 13.19 ± 4.70 | 0.001 | |
| V10 (%) | 12.32 ± 4.28 | 15.28 ± 4.99 | 0.026 | |
| Heart | Mean (Gy) | 1.05 ± 0.82 | 1.62 ± 1.44 | 0.085 |
| V40 (%) | 0.24 ± 0.80 | 0.53 ± 1.53 | 0.395 | |
| V30 (%) | 0.47 ± 1.17 | 0.96 ± 1.98 | 0.290 | |
| V20 (%) | 0.73 ± 1.48 | 1.53 ± 2.53 | 0.169 | |
| V10 (%) | 1.16 ± 2.02 | 2.19 ± 3.26 | 0.780 | |
| Coronary artery* | Mean (Gy) | 7.24 ± 2.11 | 12.13 ± 2.84 | <0.001 |
3D-CRT=three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy; VnGy=percentage of the volume receiving radiation ≥n Gy.
*Irradiated doses of left anterior descending coronary artery were compared in left breast cancer patients.
Figure 3. Dose volume histogram of the ipsilateral lung (A) and heart (B) in TomoDirect and three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3D-CRT) planning. The mean±SD values of V10, V20, V30, and V40 of ipsilateral lung were significantly lower in TomoDirect than in 3D-CRT.
VnGy=percentage of the volume receiving radiation ≥n Gy.
*p<0.05.
The mean doses for the ipsilateral heart in TomoDirect and 3D-CRT of left breast cancer patients were 1.44 Gy and 2.32 Gy, respectively, and the difference was marginally significant (p=0.070). The mean dose for left anterior descending coronary artery in left breast cancer was significantly lower in TomoDirect than in 3D-CRT (7.2 Gy vs. 12.1 Gy, p<0.001).
DISCUSSION
Several studies have suggested that chemotherapy, hormonal therapy, individual biologic factors, and radiation could induce pneumonitis in breast cancer patients [14,15,16]. Those therapies could lead to early inflammatory damage and later complications of chronic fibrosis. Radiation induced pneumonitis most commonly occurs as a result of radiation therapy [17]. Many studies have growing concerns that cardiac mortality and morbidity may be raised by the use of the left sided breast irradiation with cobalt-60 or orthovaltage therapy which often includes some coronary arteries and myocardium [18]. Based on the data from the Ontario Cancer Registry (Ontario, Canada) on breast cancer treated with breast-conserving surgery from 1982 to 1987, 2% of women with left-sided breast irradiation had a fatal myocardiac infarction, which is significantly (p=0.020) higher than the 1% of women with right-sided breast irradiation [19].
Although modern radiotherapy technique such as 3D-CRT has been improved, symptomatic radiation induced pneumonitis occured in 1% to 10% of patients irradiated for breast cancer [20]. Therefore, there have been investigational studies to reduce the radiation dose to the lung using IMRT. Several studies have analyzed the dosimetric parameters between IMRT and 3D-CRT for the entire breast irradiation in early breast cancer patients [21,22,23]. There are obvious dosimetric differences between IMRT and 3D-CRT. IMRT improved the avoidance of radiation to the heart, lung, and axillary region while promoting PTV coverage. There is an investigational report that TomoTherapy could attain fine PTV coverage and OAR sparing compared to 3D-CRT in rectal cancer patients [24]. Thus, this study was conducted to compare the dose distribution of PTV, ipsilateral lung, and heart between TomoDirect and 3D-CRT.
In a pilot study, Borca et al. [7] evaluated plans for 17 breast cancer patients using TomoDirect in 3D-CRT and IMRT mode and field-in field 3D-CRT planning (FIF). They compared in terms of PTV coverage, overdosage, homogeneity, conformality and dose to OARs. In Borca et al. [7], the median PTV volume was 731 cm3 (range, 425-1,643 cm3). Unlike their results, the mean PTV volume in our patients was 342.1±101.0 cm3. This difference meant that Korean women had relatively small breasts, as compared with Western women. They reported that 3D-CRT provided significantly higher values of ipsilateral lung mean volume receiving >20 Gy (p<0.05), mean heart volume receiving >25 Gy (p<0.010) and mean heart dose (p<0.010), while contralateral lung Dmax and Dmean were significantly lower (p<0.001) and D2cc was significantly higher for 3D-CRT than TD-IMRT and FIF (p<0.001) [7].
Our data showed that, compared to 3D-CRT, TomoDirect plan of the entire breast irradiation reduced the mean ipsilateral lung dose and the V10, V20, V30, V40 values of the lung. Similar studies have been published for IMRT of the entire breast in early breast cancer patients [25]. In their data, the dose in 50% of volume of OAR was lower in IMRT than in 3D-CRT. The median dose of the ipsilateral lung was 4.5 to 5 Gy for IMRT and 5.6 Gy for 3D-CRT. Sas-Korczyńska et al. [26] reported that IMRT seemed to reduce the mean heart dose when compared to 3D-CRT. IMRT improved reduction of cardiac high dose area and reduced long-term cardiac complications. In our study, the mean heart dose and the V10, V20, V30, V40 values of the heart have no significant difference between TomoDirect and 3D-CRT. In our analysis, the mean heart doses were just 1.05 Gy for TomoDirect and 1.62 Gy for 3D-CRT (p=0.085). As compared with 3D-CRT, TomoDirect showed a tendency for reducing the mean heart dose and a significant improvement for reducing the mean left anterior descending coronary artery dose. In the 3D-CRT technique, we applied medial block of 1 cm from the PTV to reduce the heart dose. Heart block could decrease irradiated heart volume. Comparison of RCI values between the two plans showed statistically significant and favorable results for the TomoDirect plan, confirming the findings of Baycan et al. [27] who reported a significant improvement in RCI value with IMRT compared to 3D-CRT.
In conclusion, our study suggests that the use of TomoDirect could result in favorable dose coverage for the target while reducing the radiation dose for the ipsilateral lung in patients with early breast cancer, as compared to 3D-CRT.
Footnotes
The authors wish to acknowledge the financial support of the St. Vincent's Hospital Research Institute of the Medical Science Foundation. The present research has been supported by Korea Breast Cancer Foundation.
CONFLICT OF INTEREST: The authors declare that they have no competing interests.
References
- 1.Suh M, Choi KS, Lee YY, Jun JK. Trends in cancer screening rates among Korean men and women: results from the Korean National Cancer Screening Survey, 2004-2012. Cancer Res Treat. 2013;45:86–94. doi: 10.4143/crt.2013.45.2.86. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 2.Fisher B, Anderson S, Bryant J, Margolese RG, Deutsch M, Fisher ER, et al. Twenty-year follow-up of a randomized trial comparing total mastectomy, lumpectomy, and lumpectomy plus irradiation for the treatment of invasive breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2002;347:1233–1241. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa022152. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 3.Early Breast Cancer Trialists' Collaborative Group. Favourable and unfavourable effects on long-term survival of radiotherapy for early breast cancer: an overview of the randomised trials. Lancet. 2000;355:1757–1770. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 4.Early Breast Cancer Trialists' Collaborative Group (EBCTCG) Darby S, McGale P, Correa C, Taylor C, Arriagada R, et al. Effect of radiotherapy after breast-conserving surgery on 10-year recurrence and 15-year breast cancer death: meta-analysis of individual patient data for 10,801 women in 17 randomised trials. Lancet. 2011;378:1707–1716. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(11)61629-2. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 5.Franco P, Zeverino M, Migliaccio F, Cante D, Sciacero P, Casanova Borca V, et al. Intensity-modulated and hypofractionated simultaneous integrated boost adjuvant breast radiation employing statics ports of tomotherapy (TomoDirect): a prospective phase II trial. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol. 2014;140:167–177. doi: 10.1007/s00432-013-1560-8. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 6.Franco P, Zeverino M, Migliaccio F, Sciacero P, Cante D, Casanova Borca V, et al. Intensity-modulated adjuvant whole breast radiation delivered with static angle tomotherapy (TomoDirect): a prospective case series. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol. 2013;139:1927–1936. doi: 10.1007/s00432-013-1515-0. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 7.Borca VC, Franco P, Catuzzo P, Migliaccio F, Zenone F, Aimonetto S, et al. Does TomoDirect 3DCRT represent a suitable option for post-operative whole breast irradiation? A hypothesis-generating pilot study. Radiat Oncol. 2012;7:211. doi: 10.1186/1748-717X-7-211. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 8.Lee H, Kim S, Suh Y, Chung M, Kang D, Choi H, et al. A prospective cohort study on postoperative radiotherapy with TomoDirect using simultaneous integrated boost technique in early breast cancer. Radiat Oncol. 2014;9:244. doi: 10.1186/s13014-014-0244-0. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 9.NSABP B-39, RTOG 0413: a randomized phase III study of conventional whole breast irradiation versus partial breast irradiation for women with stage 0, I, or II breast cancer. Clin Adv Hematol Oncol. 2006;4:719–721. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 10.Li XA, Tai A, Arthur DW, Buchholz TA, Macdonald S, Marks LB, et al. Variability of target and normal structure delineation for breast cancer radiotherapy: an RTOG Multi-Institutional and Multiobserver Study. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2009;73:944–951. doi: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2008.10.034. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 11.Taylor CW, Nisbet A, McGale P, Goldman U, Darby SC, Hall P, et al. Cardiac doses from Swedish breast cancer radiotherapy since the 1950s. Radiother Oncol. 2009;90:127–135. doi: 10.1016/j.radonc.2008.09.029. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 12.Knöös T, Kristensen I, Nilsson P. Volumetric and dosimetric evaluation of radiation treatment plans: radiation conformity index. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1998;42:1169–1176. doi: 10.1016/s0360-3016(98)00239-9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 13.Yoon M, Park SY, Shin D, Lee SB, Pyo HR, Kim DY, et al. A new homogeneity index based on statistical analysis of the dose-volume histogram. J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2007;8:9–17. doi: 10.1120/jacmp.v8i2.2390. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 14.Bentzen SM, Skoczylas JZ, Overgaard M, Overgaard J. Radiotherapy-related lung fibrosis enhanced by tamoxifen. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1996;88:918–922. doi: 10.1093/jnci/88.13.918. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 15.Dörr W, Bertmann S, Herrmann T. Radiation induced lung reactions in breast cancer therapy: modulating factors and consequential effects. Strahlenther Onkol. 2005;181:567–573. doi: 10.1007/s00066-005-1457-9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 16.West CM, Elliott RM, Burnet NG. The genomics revolution and radiotherapy. Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol) 2007;19:470–480. doi: 10.1016/j.clon.2007.02.016. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 17.Vogelius IR, Bentzen SM. A literature-based meta-analysis of clinical risk factors for development of radiation induced pneumonitis. Acta Oncol. 2012;51:975–983. doi: 10.3109/0284186X.2012.718093. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 18.Movsas B, Raffin TA, Epstein AH, Link CJ., Jr Pulmonary radiation injury. Chest. 1997;111:1061–1076. doi: 10.1378/chest.111.4.1061. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 19.Harris EE, Correa C, Hwang WT, Liao J, Litt HI, Ferrari VA, et al. Late cardiac mortality and morbidity in early-stage breast cancer patients after breast-conservation treatment. J Clin Oncol. 2006;24:4100–4106. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2005.05.1037. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 20.Paszat LF, Mackillop WJ, Groome PA, Schulze K, Holowaty E. Mortality from myocardial infarction following postlumpectomy radiotherapy for breast cancer: a population-based study in Ontario, Canada. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1999;43:755–762. doi: 10.1016/s0360-3016(98)00412-x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 21.Marks LB, Yu X, Vujaskovic Z, Small W, Jr, Folz R, Anscher MS. Radiation-induced lung injury. Semin Radiat Oncol. 2003;13:333–345. doi: 10.1016/S1053-4296(03)00034-1. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 22.Qiu JJ, Chang Z, Horton JK, Wu QR, Yoo S, Yin FF. Dosimetric comparison of 3D conformal, IMRT, and V-MAT techniques for accelerated partial-breast irradiation (APBI) Med Dosim. 2014;39:152–158. doi: 10.1016/j.meddos.2013.12.001. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 23.Herrick JS, Neill CJ, Rosser PF. A comprehensive clinical 3-dimensional dosimetric analysis of forward planned IMRT and conventional wedge planned techniques for intact breast radiotherapy. Med Dosim. 2008;33:62–70. doi: 10.1016/j.meddos.2007.06.001. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 24.Michalski A, Atyeo J, Cox J, Rinks M, Morgia M, Lamoury G. A dosimetric comparison of 3D-CRT, IMRT, and static tomotherapy with an SIB for large and small breast volumes. Med Dosim. 2014;39:163–168. doi: 10.1016/j.meddos.2013.12.003. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 25.Yu M, Jang HS, Jeon DM, Cheon GS, Lee HC, Chung MJ, et al. Dosimetric evaluation of Tomotherapy and four-box field conformal radiotherapy in locally advanced rectal cancer. Radiat Oncol J. 2013;31:252–259. doi: 10.3857/roj.2013.31.4.252. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 26.Sas-Korczyńska B, Sladowska A, Rozwadowska-Bogusz B, Dyczek S, Lesiak J, Kokoszka A, et al. Comparison between intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) and 3D tangential beams technique used in patients with early-stage breast cancer who received breast-conserving therapy. Rep Pract Oncol Radiother. 2010;15:79–86. doi: 10.1016/j.rpor.2010.06.002. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 27.Baycan D, Karacetin D, Balkanay AY, Barut Y. Field-in-field IMRT versus 3D-CRT of the breast. Cardiac vessels, ipsilateral lung, and contralateral breast absorbed doses in patients with left-sided lumpectomy: a dosimetric comparison. Jpn J Radiol. 2012;30:819–823. doi: 10.1007/s11604-012-0126-z. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]