4.7 Article Proceedings Paper

Treatment optimization using computed tomography-delineated targets should be used for supraclavicular irradiation for breast cancer

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2007.05.075

关键词

supraclavicular; axillary; lymph node; treatment planning; computed tomography

资金

  1. NCI NIH HHS [T32 CA077050, L30 CA123630-01, L30 CA123630-02, P30 CA016672, L30 CA123630] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: The purpose of this study was to determine whether the use of optimized CT treatment planning offered better coverage of axillary level III (LIII)/supraclavicular (SC) targets than the empirically derived dose prescription that are commonly used. Materials/Methods: Thirty-two consecutive breast cancer patients who underwent CT treatment planning of a SC field were evaluated. Each patient was categorized according to body mass index (BMI) classes: normal, overweight, or obese. The SC and LIII nodal beds were contoured, and four treatment plans for each patient were generated. Three of the plans used empiric dose prescriptions, and these were compared with a CT-optimized plan. Each plan was evaluated by two criteria: whether 98% of target volume receive >90% of prescribed dose and whether < 5% of the irradiated volume received 105% of prescribed dose. Results: The mean depth of SC and LIII were 3.2 cm (range, 1.4-6.7 cm) and 3.1 (range, 1.7-5.8 cm). The depth of these targets varied according across BMI classes (p = 0.01). Among the four sets of plans, the CT-optimized plans were the most successful at achieving both of the dosimetry objectives for every BMI class (normal BMI, p =.003; overweight BMI, p <.0001; obese BMI, p <.001). Conclusions: Across all BMI classes, routine radiation prescriptions did not optimally cover intended targets for every patient. Optimized CT-based treatment planning generated the most successful plans; therefore, we recommend the use of routine CT simulation and treatment planning of SC fields in breast cancer. (C) 2007 Elsevier Inc.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据