4.7 Article Proceedings Paper

Phase I-II trial of prone accelerated intensity modulated radiation therapy to the breast to optimally spare normal tissue

Journal

JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY
Volume 25, Issue 16, Pages 2236-2242

Publisher

AMER SOC CLINICAL ONCOLOGY
DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2006.09.1041

Keywords

-

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Purpose To report the clinical feasibility of a trial of accelerated whole-breast intensity modulated radiotherapy, with the patient in prone position, optimally to spare the heart and lung. Patients and Methods Patients with stages I or II breast cancer, excised by breast conserving surgery with negative margins, were eligible for this institutional review board-approved prospective trial. Computed tomography simulation was performed with the patient prone on a dedicated breast board, in the exact position used for treatment. A dose of 40.5 Gy, delivered at 2.7 Gy in 15 fractions, was prescribed to the index breast with an additional concomitant boost of 0.5 Gy delivered to the tumor bed, for a total dose of 48 Gy to the lumpectomy site. Physics constraints consisted of limiting <= 5% of the heart volume to receive >= 18 Gy and <= 10% of the ipsilateral lung volume to receive >= 20 Gy. Results Between September 2003 and August 2005, 91 patients were enrolled on the study. Median length of follow-up was 12 months (range, 1 to 28 months). In all patients the technique was feasible and heart and lung sparing was achieved as prescribed by the protocol. Acute toxicities consisting mostly of reversible grades 1-2 skin dermatitis (67%) and fatigue (18%) occurred in 75 patients. One patient sustained a regional recurrence rapidly followed by distant metastases. Conclusion Accelerated whole breast intensity modulated radiotherapy in the prone position is feasible and it permits a drastic reduction in the volume of lung and heart tissue exposed to significant radiation.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available