No abstract

HF-WBI is superior to CF-WBI in terms of acute skin reaction and has the same short-term efficacy.

To evaluate the dosimetric impact of respiratory breast motion and daily setup error on whole breast irradiation (WBI) using three irradiation techniques; conventional wedge (CW), field-in-field (FIF) and irregular surface compensator (ISC). WBI was planned for 16 breast cancer patients. The dose indices for evaluated clinical target volume (CTVevl), lung, and body were evaluated. For the anterior-posterior (AP) respiratory motion and setup error of a single fraction, the isocenter was moved according to a sine function, and the dose indices were averaged over one period. Furthermore, the dose indices were weighted according to setup error frequencies that have a normal distribution to model systematic and random setup error for the entire treatment course. In all irradiation techniques, AP movement has a significant impact on dose distribution. CTVevlD95 (the minimum relative dose that covers 95 % volume) and V95 (the relative volume receiving 95 % of the prescribed dose) were observed to significantly decrease from the original ISC plan when simulated for the entire treatment course. In contrast, the D95, V95 and dose homogeneity index did not significantly differ from those of the original plans for FIF and CW. With regard to lung dose, the effect of motion was very similar among all three techniques. The dosimetric impact of AP respiratory breast motion and setup error was largest for the ISC technique, and the second greatest effect was observed with the FIF technique. However, these variations are relatively small.

We compared treatment plans for volumetric intensity-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) and step-and-shoot intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) in terms of their monitor unit (MU) and segment area at each control point to investigate the difference between the two methods. We investigated three sites: prostate (three cases), head and neck (three cases), and pleura (two cases). We used the total MU and the MU weighted average of segment area (MWSA) in each plan to compare VMAT and IMRT plans. VMAT plans tended to have a larger MWSA and a lower total MU than did IMRT plans in all sites, although there was little difference between dose indices in either irradiation technique. We conclude that VMAT is a better treatment technique due to its higher MU efficiency caused by the larger segment area.

No abstract