SU-F-BRB-02: Towards Quantitative Clinical Decision On Deep Inspiration Breath Hold (DIBH) Or Prone for Left-Sided Breast Irradiation

Authors

  • Lin H,

    1. Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy, NY
    2. Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy, NY
    3. Memorial Sloan Kettering West Harrison, West Harrison, New York
    4. Memorial Sloan Lettering Cancer Center, New York City, New York
    5. Memorial Sloan Lettering Cancer Center, New York City, New York
    6. Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
    7. Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, West Harrison, NY
    8. Rensselaer Polytechnic Inst., Troy, NY
    Search for more papers by this author
  • Gao Y,

    1. Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy, NY
    2. Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy, NY
    3. Memorial Sloan Kettering West Harrison, West Harrison, New York
    4. Memorial Sloan Lettering Cancer Center, New York City, New York
    5. Memorial Sloan Lettering Cancer Center, New York City, New York
    6. Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
    7. Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, West Harrison, NY
    8. Rensselaer Polytechnic Inst., Troy, NY
    Search for more papers by this author
  • Liu T,

    1. Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy, NY
    2. Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy, NY
    3. Memorial Sloan Kettering West Harrison, West Harrison, New York
    4. Memorial Sloan Lettering Cancer Center, New York City, New York
    5. Memorial Sloan Lettering Cancer Center, New York City, New York
    6. Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
    7. Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, West Harrison, NY
    8. Rensselaer Polytechnic Inst., Troy, NY
    Search for more papers by this author
  • Gelblum D,

    1. Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy, NY
    2. Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy, NY
    3. Memorial Sloan Kettering West Harrison, West Harrison, New York
    4. Memorial Sloan Lettering Cancer Center, New York City, New York
    5. Memorial Sloan Lettering Cancer Center, New York City, New York
    6. Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
    7. Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, West Harrison, NY
    8. Rensselaer Polytechnic Inst., Troy, NY
    Search for more papers by this author
  • Ho A,

    1. Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy, NY
    2. Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy, NY
    3. Memorial Sloan Kettering West Harrison, West Harrison, New York
    4. Memorial Sloan Lettering Cancer Center, New York City, New York
    5. Memorial Sloan Lettering Cancer Center, New York City, New York
    6. Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
    7. Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, West Harrison, NY
    8. Rensselaer Polytechnic Inst., Troy, NY
    Search for more papers by this author
  • Powell S,

    1. Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy, NY
    2. Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy, NY
    3. Memorial Sloan Kettering West Harrison, West Harrison, New York
    4. Memorial Sloan Lettering Cancer Center, New York City, New York
    5. Memorial Sloan Lettering Cancer Center, New York City, New York
    6. Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
    7. Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, West Harrison, NY
    8. Rensselaer Polytechnic Inst., Troy, NY
    Search for more papers by this author
  • Tang X,

    1. Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy, NY
    2. Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy, NY
    3. Memorial Sloan Kettering West Harrison, West Harrison, New York
    4. Memorial Sloan Lettering Cancer Center, New York City, New York
    5. Memorial Sloan Lettering Cancer Center, New York City, New York
    6. Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
    7. Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, West Harrison, NY
    8. Rensselaer Polytechnic Inst., Troy, NY
    Search for more papers by this author
  • Xu X

    1. Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy, NY
    2. Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy, NY
    3. Memorial Sloan Kettering West Harrison, West Harrison, New York
    4. Memorial Sloan Lettering Cancer Center, New York City, New York
    5. Memorial Sloan Lettering Cancer Center, New York City, New York
    6. Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
    7. Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, West Harrison, NY
    8. Rensselaer Polytechnic Inst., Troy, NY
    Search for more papers by this author

Abstract

Purpose:

To develop quantitative clinical guidelines between supine Deep Inspiratory Breath Hold (DIBH) and prone free breathing treatments for breast patients, we applied 3D deformable phantoms to perform Monte Carlo simulation to predict corresponding Dose to the Organs at Risk (OARs).

Methods:

The RPI-adult female phantom (two selected cup sizes: A and D) was used to represent the female patient, and it was simulated using the MCNP6 Monte Carlo code. Doses to OARs were investigated for supine DIBH and prone treatments, considering two breast sizes. The fluence maps of the 6-MV opposed tangential fields were exported. In the Monte Carlo simulation, the fluence maps allow each simulated photon particle to be weighed in the final dose calculation. The relative error of all dose calculations was kept below 5% by simulating 3*10⁷ photons for each projection.

Results:

In terms of dosimetric accuracy, the RPI Adult Female phantom with cup size D in DIBH positioning matched with a DIBH treatment plan of the patient. Based on the simulation results, for cup size D phantom, prone positioning reduced the cardiac dose and the dose to other OARs, while cup size A phantom benefits more from DIBH positioning. Comparing simulation results for cup size A and D phantom, dose to OARs was generally higher for the large breast size due to increased scattering arising from a larger portion of the body in the primary beam. The lower dose that was registered for the heart in the large breast phantom in prone positioning was due to the increase of the distance between the heart and the primary beam when the breast was pendulous.

Conclusion:

Our 3D deformable phantom appears an excellent tool to predict dose to the OARs for the supine DIBH and prone positions, which might help quantitative clinical decisions. Further investigation will be conducted.

National Institutes of Health R01EB015478

Ancillary