Dosimetric Effects of the Interfraction Variations during Whole Breast Radiotherapy: A Prospective Study

To quantify the differences in setup errors measured with the cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) and electronic portal image devices (EPID) in breast cancer patients. Repeat CBCT scan were acquired for routine offline setup verification in 20 breast cancer patients. During the CBCT imaging fractions, EPID images of the treatment beams were recorded. Registrations of the bony anatomy for CBCT to planning CT and EPID to digitally reconstructed-radiographs (DRRs) were compared. In addition, similar measurements of an anthropomorphic thorax phantom were acquired. Bland-Altman and linear regression analysis were performed for clinical and phantom registrations. Systematic and random setup errors were quantified for CBCT and EPID-driven correction protocols in the EPID coordinate system (U, V), with V parallel to the cranial-caudal axis and U perpendicular to V and the central beam axis. Bland-Altman analysis of clinical EPID and CBCT registrations yielded 4 to 6-mm limits of agreement, indicating that both methods were not compatible. The EPID-based setup errors were smaller than the CBCT-based setup errors. Phantom measurements showed that CBCT accurately measures setup error whereas EPID underestimates setup errors in the cranial-caudal direction. In the clinical measurements, the residual bony anatomy setup errors after offline CBCT-based corrections were Σ(U) = 1.4 mm, Σ(V) = 1.7 mm, and σ(U) = 2.6 mm, σ(V) = 3.1 mm. Residual setup errors of EPID driven corrections corrected for underestimation were estimated at Σ(U) = 2.2mm, Σ(V) = 3.3 mm, and σ(U) = 2.9 mm, σ(V) = 2.9 mm. EPID registration underestimated the actual bony anatomy setup error in breast cancer patients by 20% to 50%. Using CBCT decreased setup uncertainties significantly. Copyright © 2010 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Respiratory motion during intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) causes two types of problems. First, the clinical target volume (CTV) to planning target volume (PTV) margin needed to account for respiratory motion means that the lung and heart dose is higher than would occur in the absence of such motion. Second, because respiratory motion is not synchronized with multileaf collimator (MLC) motion, the delivered dose is not the same as the planned dose. The aims of this work were to evaluate these problems to determine (a) the effects of respiratory motion and setup error during breast IMRT treatment planning, (b) the effects of the interplay between respiratory motion and multileaf collimator (MLC) motion during breast IMRT delivery, and (c) the potential benefits of breast IMRT using breath-hold, respiratory gated, and 4D techniques. Seven early stage breast cancer patient data sets were planned for IMRT delivered with a dynamic MLC (DMLC). For each patient case, eight IMRT plans with varying respiratory motion magnitudes and setup errors (and hence CTV to PTV margins) were created. The effects of respiratory motion and setup error on the treatment plan were determined by comparing the eight dose distributions. For each fraction of these plans, the effect of the interplay between respiratory motion and MLC motion during IMRT delivery was simulated by superimposing the respiratory trace on the planned DMLC leaf motion, facilitating comparisons between the planned and expected dose distributions. When considering respiratory motion in the CTV-PTV expansion during breast IMRT planning, our results show that PTV dose heterogeneity increases with respiratory motion. Lung and heart doses also increase with respiratory motion. Due to the interplay between respiratory motion and MLC motion during IMRT delivery, the planned and expected dose distributions differ. This difference increases with respiratory motion. The expected dose varies from fraction to fraction. However, for the seven patients studied and respiratory trace used, for no breathing, shallow breathing, and normal breathing, there were no statistically significant differences between the planned and expected dose distributions. Thus, for breast IMRT, intrafraction motion degrades treatment plans predominantly by the necessary addition of a larger CTV to PTV margin than would be required in the absence of such motion. This motion can be limited by breath-hold, respiratory gated, or 4D techniques.

The purpose of the present study was to quantify the robustness of the dose distributions from three whole-breast radiotherapy (RT) techniques involving different levels of intensity modulation against whole patient setup inaccuracies and breast shape changes. For 19 patients (one computed tomography scan and five cone beam computed tomography scans each), three treatment plans were made (wedge, simple intensity-modulated RT [IMRT], and full IMRT). For each treatment plan, four dose distributions were calculated. The first dose distribution was the original plan. The other three included the effects of patient setup errors (rigid displacement of the bony anatomy) or breast errors (e.g., rotations and shape changes of the breast with respect to the bony anatomy), or both, and were obtained through deformable image registration and dose accumulation. Subsequently, the effects of the plan type and error sources on target volume coverage, mean lung dose, and excess dose were determined. Systematic errors of 1-2 mm and random errors of 2-3 mm (standard deviation) were observed for both patient- and breast-related errors. Planning techniques involving glancing fields (wedge and simple IMRT) were primarily affected by patient errors (∼6% loss of coverage near the dorsal field edge and ∼2% near the skin). In contrast, plan deterioration due to breast errors was primarily observed in planning techniques without glancing fields (full IMRT, ∼2% loss of coverage near the dorsal field edge and ∼4% near the skin). The influences of patient and breast errors on the dose distributions are comparable in magnitude for whole breast RT plans, including glancing open fields, rendering simple IMRT the preferred technique. Dose distributions from planning techniques without glancing open fields were more seriously affected by shape changes of the breast, demanding specific attention in partial breast planning techniques. Copyright © 2011 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.