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

Comparing breath hold versus free breathing irradiation for left-sided breast radiotherapy by PlanIQ™. | LitMetric

Background: Breast cancer is the most widespread cancer in women and young women worldwide. Moving towards customised radiotherapy, balancing the use of the available technology with the best treatment modality may not be an easy task in the daily routine. This study aims to evaluate the effectiveness of introducing IQ-feasibility into clinical practice to support the decision of free-breathing (FB) versus breath-hold (BH) left-sided breast irradiations, in order to optimise the technology available and the effectiveness of the treatment.

Methods: Thirty-five patients who received 3D radiotherapy treatment of the left breast in deep-inspiration BH were included in this retrospective study. Computed tomography scans in FB and BH were acquired for each patient; targets contoured in both imaging datasets by an experienced radiation oncologist, and organs at risk delineated using automatic segmentation software were exported to PlanIQ™ (Sun Nuclear Corp.) to generate feasibility dose volume histogram (FDVHs). The dosimetric parameter of BH versus FB FDVH, and BH clinical dataset versus BH FDVH were compared.

Results: A total of 30 patients out of 35 patients analysed, presented for the BH treatments a significant reduction (p < 0.05) in the heart mean dose ([Formula: see text]), volume receiving 5 Gy ([Formula: see text]) and 20 Gy ([Formula: see text]), of 35.7%, 54.5%, and 2.1%, respectively; for the left lung, a lower reduction was registered and significant only for [Formula: see text] (21.4%, p = 0.046). For the remaining five patients, the FDVH cut-off points of heart and lung were superimposable with differences of less than 1%. Heart and left lung dosimetric parameters of the BH clinical plans are located in the difficult zone of the FDVH and differ significantly (p < 0.05) from the corresponding parameters of the FDVH curves delimiting this buffer area between the impossible and feasible zones, respectively.

Conclusion: The use of PlanIQTM as a decision-support tool for the FB versus BH treatment delivery modality allows customisation of the treatment technique using the most appropriate technology for each patient enabling accurate management of available technologies.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10722777PMC
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13014-023-02386-2DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

left-sided breast
8
versus fdvh
8
comparing breath
4
breath hold
4
versus
4
hold versus
4
versus free
4
free breathing
4
breathing irradiation
4
irradiation left-sided
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!