Browse > Article

Evaluation of Electron Boost Fields based on Surgical Clips and Operative Scars in Definitive Breast Irradiation  

Lee, Re-Na (Department of Radiation Oncology, Ewha Womans University Mokdong Hospital)
Chung, Eun-Ah (Department of Radiation Oncology, Ewha Womans University Mokdong Hospital)
Lee, Ji-Hye (Department of Radiation Oncology, Ewha Womans University Mokdong Hospital)
Suh, Hyun-Suk (Department of Radiation Oncology, Ewha Womans University Mokdong Hospital)
Publication Information
Radiation Oncology Journal / v.23, no.4, 2005 , pp. 236-242 More about this Journal
Abstract
Purpose: To evaluate the role of surgical clips and scars in determining electron boost field for early stage breast cancer undergoing conserving surgery and postoperative radiotherapy and to provide an optimal method in drawing the boost field. Materials and Methods: Twenty patients who had $4{\sim}7$ surgical clips in the excision cavity were selected for this study. The depth informations were obtained to determine electron energy by measuring the distance from the skin to chest wall (SCD) and to the clip implanted in the most posterior area of tumor bed. Three different electron fields were outlined on a simulation film. The radiological tumor bed was determined by connecting all the clips implanted during surgery Clinical field (CF) was drawn by adding 3 cm margin around surgical scar. Surgical field (SF) was drawn by adding 2 cm margin around surgical clips and an Ideal field (IF) was outlined by adding 2 cm margin around both scar and clips. These fields were digitized into our planning system to measure the area of each separate field. The areas of the three different electron boost fields were compared. Finally, surgical clips were contoured on axial CT images and dose volume histogram was plotted to investigate 3-dimensional coverage of the clips. Results : The average depth difference between SCD and the maximal clip location was $0.7{\pm}0.55cm$. Greater difference of 5 mm or more was seen in 12 patients. The average shift between the borders of scar and clips were 1.7 1.2, 1.2, and 0.9 cm in superior, inferior, medial, and lateral directions, respectively. The area of the CF was larger than SF and IF in 6y20 patients. In 15/20 patients, the area difference between SF and if was less than 5%. One to three clips were seen outside the CF in 15/20 patients. In addition, dosimetrically inadequate coverage of clips (less than 80% of prescribed dose) were observed in 17/20 patients when CF was used as the boost field. Conclusion: The electron field determined from clinical scar underestimates the tumor bed in superior-inferior direction significantly and thereby underdosing the tissue at risk. The electron field obtained from surgical clips alone dose not cover the entire scar properly As a consequence, our technique, which combines the surgical clips and clinical scars in determining electron boost field, was proved to be effective in minimizing the geographical miss as well as normal tissue complications.
Keywords
Electron boost field; Surgical clips; Tumor bed; Breast cancer;
Citations & Related Records
연도 인용수 순위
  • Reference
1 Bartelink H, Horiot JC, Poortmans P, et al. Recurrence rates after treatment of breast cancer with standard radiotherapy with or without additional radiation. N Engl J Med 2001;345:1378-1387   DOI   ScienceOn
2 Frazier RC, Kestin LL, Kini V, et al. Impact of boost technique on outcome in early-stage breast cancer patients treated with breast-conserving therapy. Am J Clin Oncol 2001;24:26-32   DOI   ScienceOn
3 Machtay M, Lanciano R, Hoffman J, Hanks GE. Inaccuracies in using the lumpectomy scar for planning electron boosts in primary breast carcinoma. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 1994; 30:43-48   DOI   ScienceOn
4 Fisher ER, Sass R, Fisher B, Gregorio R, Brown R, Wickerham L. Pathologic findings from the national Surgical adjuvant breast project II. Relation of local breast recurrence to multicentricity. Cancer 1986;57:1717-1724   DOI   PUBMED   ScienceOn
5 Regine WF, Ayyanger KM, Komarnickyk LT, Bhabdare N, Mansfield CM. Computer CT-planning of the electron boost in definitive breast irradiation. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 1991;20: 121-125   DOI
6 Poortmans P, Bartelink H, Horiot JC, et al. The influence of the boost technique on local control in breast conserving treatment in the EORTC 'boost versus no boost' randomised trial. Radiother Oncol 2004;72:25-33   DOI   ScienceOn
7 Solin L. Radiation treatment volumes and doses for patients with early stage carcinoma of the breast treated with breast conserving surgery and definitive irradiation. Semin Radiat Oncol 1992;2:82-93   DOI   PUBMED   ScienceOn
8 Harris JR, Botnick L, Bloomer WD, et al. Primary radiation therapy for early breast cancer: The experience at the Joint Center for Radiation Therapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 1981; 7:1549-1552   DOI
9 Harrington KJ, Harrison R, Bayle P, et al. Surgical clips in planning the electron boost in breast cancer: a qualitative and quantitative evaluation. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 1996;34: 579-584   DOI   ScienceOn
10 Vicini F, Kini VR, Chen P, et al. Irradiation of the tumor bed alone after lumpectomy in selected patients with early-stage breast cancer treated with breast conserving therapy. J Surg Oncol 1999;70:33-40   DOI   ScienceOn
11 Bartelink H, Collette L, Fourquet A, et al. Impack of a boost dose of 16 Gy on the local control and cosmesis in patients with early breast cancer: the EORTC boost vs no boost trial. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2000;48:111   DOI   ScienceOn
12 Solin L, Danoff BF, Schwartz GF, Galvin JM, Goodman RL. A practical technique for the localization of the tumor volume in definitive irradiation of the breast. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 1985;11:1215-1220   DOI
13 Denham JW, Carter ML. Conservative treatment of breast cancer-Where should the booster does go? Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 1988;14:399-401   DOI
14 Polgar C, Major T, Fodor J, et al. High-dose-rate brachytherapy alone versus whole breast radiotherapy with or without tumor bed boost after breast-conserving surgery: seven-year results of a comparative study. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2004;60:1173-1181   DOI   ScienceOn