Program Information

Radiation Damage Comparison Between Intensity Modulated Radiotherapy and Field-In-Field Technique in Breast Cancer Treatments

H Ai

H Ai¹*, H Zhang² , (1) IU School of Medicine, Indianapolis, IN, (2) Northwestern Memorial Hospital, Chicago, Illinois

Presentations

SU-E-T-272 Sunday 3:00PM - 6:00PM Room: Exhibit Hall

Purpose:To compare normal tissue complications between IMRT and FIF treatment in breast cancer.

Methods:16 patients treated with IMRT plan and 20 patients treated with FIF plan were evaluated in this study. Both kinds of plans were generated using Eclipse treatment planning system by dosimetrist following clinical radiotherapy treatment guidelines. The plans were reviewed and approved by radiation oncologist. The average survival fraction (SF) for three different normal tissue cells of each concerned structure can be calculated from differential dose volume histogram (DVH) using linear quadratic model. The three types of normal tissues include radiosensitive, moderately radiosensitive and radio-resistant that represents 70%, 50% and 30% survival fractions, respectively, for a 2-Gy open field. Equivalent uniform doses (EUD) for corresponding normal tissues of each structure were calculated.

Results:The EUDs of the lungs, heart, healthy breast and spinal cord with both IMRT and FIF treatments were calculated. Considering the average value of all IMRT plans, the lung of treated side absorbed 16.0% of dosage prescribed to the tumor if the radiosensitivity of the lung is similar to the radiosensitive cell line. For moderately radiosensitive and radio-resistant lung tissue, the average EUDs can be 18.9% and 22.4% of prescription. In contrast, patients treated with FIF plans were delivered 6.0%, 7.5% and 10.3% of prescribed dose for radiosensitive, moderately radiosensitive and radio-resistant lung tissue, respectively. Comparing heart EUDs between IMRT and FIF plans, average absorbed doses in IMRT treatment were 7.7%, 8.7% and 9.7% of prescription for three types of heart normal tissue cell lines while FIF treatments delivered only 1.3%, 1.5% and 1.6% of prescription dose. For the other organs, the results were similar.

Conclusion:The results indicated that breast cancer treatment using IMRT technique had more normal tissue damage than FIF treatment. FIF demonstrated more effective normal tissue dose reduction in breast cancer treatment.


Contact Email: