Program Information
Comparison of Plan Quality Between Arm Avoidance (AA) Vs. Non Arm Avoidance VMAT Planning Techniques for Breast Cancer Patients with Bilateral Implant Reconstructions Receiving Postmastectomy Radiation
L Kuo*, A Ballangrud , A Ho , J Mechalakos , G Li , L Hong , Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
Presentations
SU-E-T-209 (Sunday, July 12, 2015) 3:00 PM - 6:00 PM Room: Exhibit Hall
Purpose:
Breast cancer patients with bilateral implant reconstructions who require postmastectomy radiotherapy can pose unique treatment planning challenges. The use of VMAT may provide advantages over conventional tangent or multi-beam IMRT techniques. Moreover, daily setup uncertainly of the arm position, however, could have significant impact on accurate dose delivery. This study compares the plan qualities between non-AA and AA VMAT techniques.
Methods:
Three breast cancer patients receiving left chest wall and regional nodal irradiation with bilateral implant reconstructions were studied. PTV included chest wall and IMNs (PTV-CW), and supraclavicular and axillary lymph nodes (PTV-SCV). For each patient, one non-AA VMAT plan (VMAT-S) with 4 partial arcs encompassing the ipsilateral arm and three AA VMAT plans where no arcs were entering or existing through the ipsilateral arm were generated. VMAT-AA1 uses 2 arcs for PTV-CW and 2 arcs for PTV-SCV. VMAT-AA2 used two static fields for PTV-SCV with 2 arcs for PTV-CW. VMAT-AA3 used 2 narrow arcs for PTV-CW and 2 long arcs for all PTVs. Prescription dose (PD) was 50 Gy (25 fractions). All plans were normalized to have 95% of PD to 95 % of PTV. PTV dose inhomogeneity and dose to the heart, left lung, right thyroid dose and left humerus were evaluated.
Results:
For VMAT-S, VMAT-AA1, VMAT-AA2 and VMAT-AA3, respectively, the average and standard deviation (in Gy unless specified otherwise) of PTV D05 are 54.7±0.9, 55.9±0.4, 56.7±0.7 and 55.7±0.4; mean Heart dose: 7.1±0.7, 7.2±0.8, 7.3±0.9 and 6.9±1.0; left lung V20Gy (in %): 28.1±1.0, 28.8+2.2, 32.2±4.1 and 27.8±2.0; mean right thyroid dose: 8.1±0.6, 5.1±2.1, 2.1±0.4 and 5.0±2.0; mean left humerus dose: 20.0±4.4 ,15.6±4.4 , 15.2±8.2 and 15.3±4.6.
Conclusion:
AA VMAT can produce acceptable clinical plans while eliminating dosimetric impact related to arm setup uncertainty. These data require validation in larger planning studies prior to routine clinical implantation.
Contact Email: