Risks and benefits of reducing target volume margins in breast tangent radiotherapy
- 265 Downloads
This study investigates the potential benefits of planning target volume (PTV) margin reduction for whole breast radiotherapy in relation to dose received by organs at risk (OARs), as well as reductions in radiation-induced secondary cancer risk. Such benefits were compared to the increased radiation-induced secondary cancer risk attributed from increased ionizing radiation imaging doses. Ten retrospective patients’ computed tomography datasets were considered. Three computerized treatment plans with varied PTV margins (0, 5 and 10 mm) were created for each patient complying with the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) 1005 protocol requirements. The BEIR VII lifetime attributable risk (LAR) model was used to estimate secondary cancer risk to OARs. The LAR was assessed for all treatment plans considering (a) doses from PTV margin variation and (b) doses from two (daily and weekly) kilovoltage cone beam computed tomography (kV CBCT) imaging protocols during the course of treatment. We found PTV margins from largest to smallest resulted in a mean OAR relative dose reduction of 31% (heart), 28% (lung) and 23% (contralateral breast) and the risk of radiation-induced secondary cancer by a relative 23% (contralateral breast) and 22% (contralateral lung). Daily image-guidance using kV CBCT increased the risk of radiation induced secondary cancer to the contralateral breast and contralateral lung by a relative 1.6–1.9% and 1.9–2.5% respectively. Despite the additional dose from kV CBCT for the two considered imaging protocols, smaller PTV margins would still result in an overall reduction in secondary cancer risk.
KeywordsBreast radiotherapy Planning target volume Margin Secondary cancer risk Imaging dose
This work is supported by Cancer Australia and The National Breast Cancer Foundation Grant Project Number 1033237.
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
The ethics was approved by the local institutional ethics board.
- 2.International Commission of Radiation Units and Measurements (ICRU) Prescribing, recording and reporting photon beam therapy (supplement to ICRU report 50) (1999). ICRU report 62Google Scholar
- 11.van Loon J, Siedschlag C, Stroom J, Blauwgeers H, van Suylen R-J, Knegjens J, Rossi M, van Baardwijk A, Boersma L, Klomp H (2012) Microscopic disease extension in three dimensions for non–small-cell lung cancer: development of a prediction model using pathology-validated positron emission tomography and computed tomography features. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 82(1):448–456CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 12.Van Herk M (2007) Different styles of image-guided radiotherapy. In: Semin Radiat Oncol. Vol 4. Elsevier, pp 258–267Google Scholar
- 13.Schnitt SJ, Abner A, Gelman R, Connolly JL, Recht A, Duda RB, Eberlein TJ, Mayzel K, Silver B, Harris JR (1994) The relationship between microscopic margins of resection and the risk of local recurrence in patients with breast cancer treated with breast-conserving surgery and radiation therapy. Cancer 74(6):1746–1751CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 20.Santos AM, Marcu LG, Wong CM, Bezak E (2016) Risk estimation of second primary cancers after breast radiotherapy. Acta Oncologica 1–7Google Scholar
- 22.Vicini F, Freedman G, White J, Arthur D, Hayman J, Rosenstein B, Bentzen S, Li X, Halyard M, Taghian A, Bleicher R, Winter K (2012) Availabe from: http://www.rtog.org/ClinicalTrials/ProtocolTable/StudyDetails.aspx?study=1005 RTOG 1005: A phase III trial of accelerated whole breast irradiation with hypofractionation plus concurrent boost versus standard whole breast irradiation plus sequential boost for early-stage breast cancer. National Cancer Institute
- 29.BEIR VII PHASE II (2006) Health risks from exposure to low levels of ionizing radiation. The National Academies Press, Washington DCGoogle Scholar
- 35.Collette S, Collette L, Budiharto T, Horiot J-C, Poortmans PM, Struikmans H, Van den Bogaert W, Fourquet A, Jager JJ, Hoogenraad W (2008) Predictors of the risk of fibrosis at 10 years after breast conserving therapy for early breast cancer: a study based on the EORTC trial 22881–10882 ‘boost versus no boost’. Eur J Cancer 44(17):2587–2599CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 40.Wiant DB, Wentworth S, Maurer JM, Vanderstraeten CL, Terrell JA, Sintay BJ (2014) Surface imaging-based analysis of intrafraction motion for breast radiotherapy patients. J Appl Clin Med Phys 15(6)Google Scholar
- 41.Murray L, Sethugavalar B, Robertshaw H, Bayman E, Thomas E, Gilson D, Prestwich R (2015) Involved node, site, field and residual volume radiotherapy for lymphoma: a comparison of organ at risk dosimetry and second malignancy risks. Clin Oncol 27(7):401–410. doi: 10.1016/j.clon.2015.03.005 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 42.Coles C, Agrawal R, Ah-See M, Algurafi H, Alhasso A, Brunt A, Chan C, Griffin C, Harnett A, Hopwood P (2016) Partial breast radiotherapy for women with early breast cancer: first results of local recurrence data for IMPORT LOW (CRUK/06/003). In: EUR J CANCER, 2016. ELSEVIER SCI LTD THE BOULEVARD, LANGFORD LANE, KIDLINGTON, OXFORD OX5 1GB, OXON, ENGLAND, pp S4–S4Google Scholar