A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

Dosimetric feasibility of an "off-breast isocenter" technique for whole-breast cancer radiotherapy. | LitMetric

Dosimetric feasibility of an "off-breast isocenter" technique for whole-breast cancer radiotherapy.

Rep Pract Oncol Radiother

Servicio de Oncología Radioterápica, Hospital Quirón Barcelona, Plaza Alfonso Comín, 5, 08023 Barcelona, Spain.

Published: August 2016

Aim: To investigate the viability of placing the treatment isocenter at the patient midline for breast cancer radiotherapy in order to avoid the risk of collisions during image-guided setup and treatment delivery.

Background: The use of kilovoltage orthogonal setup images has spread in last years in breast radiotherapy. There is a potential risk of an imaging system-patient collision when the isocenter is laterally placed.

Materials And Methods: Twenty IMRT plans designed by placing the isocenter within the breast volume ("plan_ref"), were retrospectively replanned by shifting the isocenter at the patient's midline ("plan_off-breast"). An integrated simultaneous boost (SIB) technique was used. Multiple metrics for the planning target volumes (PTVs) and organs at risk (OARs) were compared for both approaches using a paired test.

Results: Comparing plan_ref vs. plan_off-breast, no significant differences in PTV coverage (V95%) were found (96.5% vs. 96.2%;  = 0.361 to PTVbreast; 97.0% vs. 97.0%;  = 0.977 to PTVtumor_bed). With regard to OARs, no substantial differences were observed in any analyzed metric: V5Gy (30.3% vs. 31.4%;  = 0.486), V20Gy (10.3% vs. 10.3%;  = 0.903) and mean dose (7.1 Gy vs. 7.1 Gy;  = 0.924) to the ipsilateral lung; V5Gy (11.2% vs. 10.0%;  = 0.459), V30Gy (0.7% vs. 0.6%;  = 0.251) and mean dose (2.3 Gy vs. 2.2 Gy;  = 0.400) to the heart; and average dose to the contralateral breast (0.4 Gy vs. 0.5 Gy;  = 0.107).

Conclusions: The off-breast isocenter solution resulted in dosimetrically comparable plans as the reference technique, avoiding the collision risk during the treatment session.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5036509PMC
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.rpor.2016.06.001DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

cancer radiotherapy
8
isocenter
5
dosimetric feasibility
4
feasibility "off-breast
4
"off-breast isocenter"
4
isocenter" technique
4
technique whole-breast
4
whole-breast cancer
4
radiotherapy aim
4
aim investigate
4

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!