Export Ready — 

Comparison of different breast planning techniques and algorithms for radiation therapy treatment

Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Borges, C.
Publication Date: 2013
Other Authors: Cunha, Gilda, Monteiro-Grillo, I., Vaz, P., Teixeira, Nuno
Format: Article
Language: eng
Source: Repositórios Científicos de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (RCAAP)
Download full: http://hdl.handle.net/10400.21/3035
Summary: This work aims at investigating the impact of treating breast cancer using different radiation therapy (RT) techniques – forwardly-planned intensity-modulated, f-IMRT, inversely-planned IMRT and dynamic conformal arc (DCART) RT – and their effects on the whole-breast irradiation and in the undesirable irradiation of the surrounding healthy tissues. Two algorithms of iPlan BrainLAB treatment planning system were compared: Pencil Beam Convolution (PBC) and commercial Monte Carlo (iMC). Seven left-sided breast patients submitted to breast-conserving surgery were enrolled in the study. For each patient, four RT techniques – f-IMRT, IMRT using 2-fields and 5-fields (IMRT2 and IMRT5, respectively) and DCART – were applied. The dose distributions in the planned target volume (PTV) and the dose to the organs at risk (OAR) were compared analyzing dose–volume histograms; further statistical analysis was performed using IBM SPSS v20 software. For PBC, all techniques provided adequate coverage of the PTV. However, statistically significant dose differences were observed between the techniques, in the PTV, OAR and also in the pattern of dose distribution spreading into normal tissues. IMRT5 and DCART spread low doses into greater volumes of normal tissue, right breast, right lung and heart than tangential techniques. However, IMRT5 plans improved distributions for the PTV, exhibiting better conformity and homogeneity in target and reduced high dose percentages in ipsilateral OAR. DCART did not present advantages over any of the techniques investigated. Differences were also found comparing the calculation algorithms: PBC estimated higher doses for the PTV, ipsilateral lung and heart than the iMC algorithm predicted.
id RCAP_74de607807769d14d67aa16f83a89b4d
oai_identifier_str oai:repositorio.ipl.pt:10400.21/3035
network_acronym_str RCAP
network_name_str Repositórios Científicos de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (RCAAP)
repository_id_str https://opendoar.ac.uk/repository/7160
spelling Comparison of different breast planning techniques and algorithms for radiation therapy treatmentRadiotherapyBreast cancerIrradiation techniquesCalculationAlgorithmsThis work aims at investigating the impact of treating breast cancer using different radiation therapy (RT) techniques – forwardly-planned intensity-modulated, f-IMRT, inversely-planned IMRT and dynamic conformal arc (DCART) RT – and their effects on the whole-breast irradiation and in the undesirable irradiation of the surrounding healthy tissues. Two algorithms of iPlan BrainLAB treatment planning system were compared: Pencil Beam Convolution (PBC) and commercial Monte Carlo (iMC). Seven left-sided breast patients submitted to breast-conserving surgery were enrolled in the study. For each patient, four RT techniques – f-IMRT, IMRT using 2-fields and 5-fields (IMRT2 and IMRT5, respectively) and DCART – were applied. The dose distributions in the planned target volume (PTV) and the dose to the organs at risk (OAR) were compared analyzing dose–volume histograms; further statistical analysis was performed using IBM SPSS v20 software. For PBC, all techniques provided adequate coverage of the PTV. However, statistically significant dose differences were observed between the techniques, in the PTV, OAR and also in the pattern of dose distribution spreading into normal tissues. IMRT5 and DCART spread low doses into greater volumes of normal tissue, right breast, right lung and heart than tangential techniques. However, IMRT5 plans improved distributions for the PTV, exhibiting better conformity and homogeneity in target and reduced high dose percentages in ipsilateral OAR. DCART did not present advantages over any of the techniques investigated. Differences were also found comparing the calculation algorithms: PBC estimated higher doses for the PTV, ipsilateral lung and heart than the iMC algorithm predicted.Associazione Italiana di Fisica MedicaRCIPLBorges, C.Cunha, GildaMonteiro-Grillo, I.Vaz, P.Teixeira, Nuno2013-12-31T18:08:01Z2013-062013-06-01T00:00:00Zinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/articleapplication/pdfhttp://hdl.handle.net/10400.21/3035eng1724-191Xinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessreponame:Repositórios Científicos de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (RCAAP)instname:FCCN, serviços digitais da FCT – Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologiainstacron:RCAAP2025-02-12T07:13:56Zoai:repositorio.ipl.pt:10400.21/3035Portal AgregadorONGhttps://www.rcaap.pt/oai/openaireinfo@rcaap.ptopendoar:https://opendoar.ac.uk/repository/71602025-05-28T19:48:05.054391Repositórios Científicos de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (RCAAP) - FCCN, serviços digitais da FCT – Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologiafalse
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Comparison of different breast planning techniques and algorithms for radiation therapy treatment
title Comparison of different breast planning techniques and algorithms for radiation therapy treatment
spellingShingle Comparison of different breast planning techniques and algorithms for radiation therapy treatment
Borges, C.
Radiotherapy
Breast cancer
Irradiation techniques
Calculation
Algorithms
title_short Comparison of different breast planning techniques and algorithms for radiation therapy treatment
title_full Comparison of different breast planning techniques and algorithms for radiation therapy treatment
title_fullStr Comparison of different breast planning techniques and algorithms for radiation therapy treatment
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of different breast planning techniques and algorithms for radiation therapy treatment
title_sort Comparison of different breast planning techniques and algorithms for radiation therapy treatment
author Borges, C.
author_facet Borges, C.
Cunha, Gilda
Monteiro-Grillo, I.
Vaz, P.
Teixeira, Nuno
author_role author
author2 Cunha, Gilda
Monteiro-Grillo, I.
Vaz, P.
Teixeira, Nuno
author2_role author
author
author
author
dc.contributor.none.fl_str_mv RCIPL
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Borges, C.
Cunha, Gilda
Monteiro-Grillo, I.
Vaz, P.
Teixeira, Nuno
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv Radiotherapy
Breast cancer
Irradiation techniques
Calculation
Algorithms
topic Radiotherapy
Breast cancer
Irradiation techniques
Calculation
Algorithms
description This work aims at investigating the impact of treating breast cancer using different radiation therapy (RT) techniques – forwardly-planned intensity-modulated, f-IMRT, inversely-planned IMRT and dynamic conformal arc (DCART) RT – and their effects on the whole-breast irradiation and in the undesirable irradiation of the surrounding healthy tissues. Two algorithms of iPlan BrainLAB treatment planning system were compared: Pencil Beam Convolution (PBC) and commercial Monte Carlo (iMC). Seven left-sided breast patients submitted to breast-conserving surgery were enrolled in the study. For each patient, four RT techniques – f-IMRT, IMRT using 2-fields and 5-fields (IMRT2 and IMRT5, respectively) and DCART – were applied. The dose distributions in the planned target volume (PTV) and the dose to the organs at risk (OAR) were compared analyzing dose–volume histograms; further statistical analysis was performed using IBM SPSS v20 software. For PBC, all techniques provided adequate coverage of the PTV. However, statistically significant dose differences were observed between the techniques, in the PTV, OAR and also in the pattern of dose distribution spreading into normal tissues. IMRT5 and DCART spread low doses into greater volumes of normal tissue, right breast, right lung and heart than tangential techniques. However, IMRT5 plans improved distributions for the PTV, exhibiting better conformity and homogeneity in target and reduced high dose percentages in ipsilateral OAR. DCART did not present advantages over any of the techniques investigated. Differences were also found comparing the calculation algorithms: PBC estimated higher doses for the PTV, ipsilateral lung and heart than the iMC algorithm predicted.
publishDate 2013
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2013-12-31T18:08:01Z
2013-06
2013-06-01T00:00:00Z
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv http://hdl.handle.net/10400.21/3035
url http://hdl.handle.net/10400.21/3035
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv eng
language eng
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv 1724-191X
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv application/pdf
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Associazione Italiana di Fisica Medica
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Associazione Italiana di Fisica Medica
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv reponame:Repositórios Científicos de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (RCAAP)
instname:FCCN, serviços digitais da FCT – Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia
instacron:RCAAP
instname_str FCCN, serviços digitais da FCT – Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia
instacron_str RCAAP
institution RCAAP
reponame_str Repositórios Científicos de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (RCAAP)
collection Repositórios Científicos de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (RCAAP)
repository.name.fl_str_mv Repositórios Científicos de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (RCAAP) - FCCN, serviços digitais da FCT – Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia
repository.mail.fl_str_mv info@rcaap.pt
_version_ 1833598332815015936