SU-E-T-532: Left-Sided Breast Cancer Irradiation Using Volumatric Modulated Arc Therapy: An Evaluation of Multiple Commercial Systems

Authors


Abstract

Purposes:

There has been growing interest in treating breast cancer using VMAT technique. Our goal is to compare the dosimetry and treatment delivery parameters for the left-sided breast cancer treatment using various VMAT platforms from commercially available planning systems.

Methods:

Five consecutive left-sided breast cancer patients initially treated with conventional 3D-conformal radiotherapy (3DCRT) were selected. Four VMAT plans using most popular treatment planning systems, including Eclipse (Version 11, Varian), Pinnacle (Version 9.8, Philips), Monaco (Version 2.03, Elekta) and helical Tomotherapy (V4.0, Accuray). The same structure set and same planning goals were used for all VMAT plans. The dosimetric parameters including target coverage and minimum/maximum/mean, dose-volume endpoints for the selected normal structures: the heart, ipsilateral-/contralateral lung and breast, were evaluated. Other dosimetric indices including heterogeneity index (HI) were evaluated. The treatment delivery parameters, such as monitor unit (MUs) and delivery time were also compared.

Results:

VMAT increases dose homogeneity to the treated volume and reduces the irradiated heart and left-lung volumes. Compared to the 3DCRT technique, all VMAT plans offer better heart and left-lung dose sparing; the mean heart doses were 4.5±1.6(Monaco), 1.2±0.4(Pinnacle), 1.3± (Eclipse) and 5.6±4.4(Tomo), the mean left-lung doses were 5.9±1.5(Monaco), 3.7±0.7(Pinnacle), 1.4± (Eclipse) and 5.2±1.6 (Tomo), while for the 3DCRT plan, the mean heart and left-Lung doses were 2.9±2.0, and 6.8±4.4 (Gy) respectively. The averaged contralateral-breast and lung mean doses were higher in VMAT plans than the 3DCRT plans but were not statistically significant. Among all the VMAT plans, the Pinnacle plans often yield the lowest right-lung/breast mean doses, and slightly better heterogeneity indices that are similar to Tomotherapy plans. Treatment delivery time of the VMAT plans (except helical Tomotherapy IMRT) is estimated to be comparable with the conventional 3DCRT.

Conclusion:

VMAT achieves equal or better PTV coverage and comparable OARs sparing compared to the conventional 3DCRT techniques.

Ancillary