Format

Send to

Choose Destination
Pract Radiat Oncol. 2015 Sep-Oct;5(5):e499-e504. doi: 10.1016/j.prro.2015.02.011. Epub 2015 Apr 6.

Dosimetric impact of setup accuracy for an electron breast boost technique.

Author information

1
Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas Medical Branch, Galveston, Texas. Electronic address: scott.davidson@utmb.edu.
2
Department of Radiation Physics, The University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas.
3
Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas.
4
Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Tennessee Health Science Center, Memphis, Tennessee.

Abstract

PURPOSE:

To determine the setup error on an electron breast boost technique using daily cone beam computed tomography (CBCT). Patient and setup attributes were studied as contributing factors to the accuracy.

METHODS AND MATERIALS:

Reproducibility of a modified lateral decubitus position breast boost setup was verified for 33 patients using CBCT. Three-dimensional matching was performed between the CBCT and the initial planning CT for each boost fraction by matching the tumor bed and/or surgical clips. The dosimetric impact of the daily positioning error was achieved by rerunning the initial treatment plans incorporating the recorded shifts to study the dose differences. Breast compression, decubitus angle, tumor bed location and volume, and cup size were studied for their contribution to setup error.

RESULTS:

The range of setup errors was: 1.5 cm anterior to 9 mm posterior, 1.3 cm superior to 2.3 cm inferior, and 3.2 cm medial to 2.4 cm lateral. Seven patients had setup errors that were ≥2-cm margin placed on the tumor bed and scar. Four of those 7 patients had unacceptable coverage as defined by the volume of the tumor bed plus scar that is covered by the 90% isodose line (V90) compared with the original plan. All other patients had no discernible difference in the coverage (V90). The use of compression, tumor bed location, or volumes >20 mL showed no effect on coverage.

CONCLUSIONS:

In general, this study supported that a 2-cm margin was adequate (29 of 33 patients) when patients are treated under typical conditions. Care should be taken when high electron energies are selected because the coverage at depth is more difficult to maintain in the clinical environment.

PMID:
25858772
DOI:
10.1016/j.prro.2015.02.011
[Indexed for MEDLINE]

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for Elsevier Science
Loading ...
Support Center