Garda Allison E, Hunzeker Ashley E, Michel Ann K, Fattahi Sayeh, Shiraishi Satomi, Remmes Nicholas B, Schultz Heather L, Harmsen W Scott, Shumway Dean A, Yan Elizabeth S, Park Sean S, Mutter Robert W, Corbin Kimberly S
Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota.
Mayo Clinic Alix School of Medicine, Rochester, Minnesota.
Adv Radiat Oncol. 2022 Jan 24;7(3):100901. doi: 10.1016/j.adro.2022.100901. eCollection 2022 May-Jun.
Synchronous bilateral breast cancer (SBBC) poses distinct challenges for radiation therapy planning. We report our proton therapy experience in treating patients with SBBC. We also provide a dosimetric comparison of intensity modulated proton therapy (IMPT) versus photon therapy.
Patients with SBBC who received IMPT at our institution were retrospectively analyzed. The clinical target volume (CTV) included the breast or chest wall and comprehensive regional lymph nodes, including axilla, supraclavicular fossa, and the internal mammary chain. Intensity modulated proton therapy and volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) plans were generated with the goal that 90% of the CTV would recieve at least 90% of the prescription dose (D90>=90%). Comparisons between modalities were made using the Wilcoxon signed rank test. Physician-reported acute toxic effects and photography were collected at baseline, end of treatment, and each follow-up visit.
Between 2015 and 2018, 11 patients with SBBC were treated with IMPT. The prescription was 50 Gy in 25 fractions. The median CTV D90 was 99.9% for IMPT and 97.6% for VMAT ( = .001). The mean heart dose was 0.7 Gy versus 7.2 Gy ( = .001), the total lung mean dose was 7.8 Gy versus 17.3 Gy ( = .001), and the total lung volume recieving 20 Gy was 13.0% versus 27.4% ( = .001). The most common acute toxic effects were dermatitis (mostly grade 1-2 with 1 case of grade 3) and grade 1 to 2 fatigue. The most common toxic effects at the last-follow up (median, 32 months) were grade 1 skin hyperpigmentation, superficial fibrosis, and extremity lymphedema. No nondermatologic or nonfatigue adverse events of grade >1 were recorded.
Bilateral breast and/or chest wall and comprehensive nodal IMPT is technically feasible and associated with low rates of severe acute toxic effects. Treatment with IMPT offered improved target coverage and normal-tissue sparing compared with photon therapy. Long-term follow-up is ongoing to assess efficacy and toxic effects.
同步双侧乳腺癌(SBBC)给放射治疗计划带来了独特的挑战。我们报告了我们在治疗SBBC患者方面的质子治疗经验。我们还提供了调强质子治疗(IMPT)与光子治疗的剂量学比较。
对在我们机构接受IMPT治疗的SBBC患者进行回顾性分析。临床靶区(CTV)包括乳房或胸壁以及全面的区域淋巴结,包括腋窝、锁骨上窝和内乳链。生成调强质子治疗和容积调强弧形治疗(VMAT)计划的目标是,90%的CTV将接受至少90%的处方剂量(D90≥90%)。使用Wilcoxon符号秩检验进行不同治疗方式之间的比较。在基线、治疗结束时以及每次随访时收集医生报告的急性毒性反应和照片。
2015年至2018年期间,11例SBBC患者接受了IMPT治疗。处方剂量为50 Gy,分25次照射。IMPT的CTV D90中位数为99.9%,VMAT为97.6%(P = 0.001)。平均心脏剂量分别为0.7 Gy和7.2 Gy(P = 0.001),全肺平均剂量分别为7.8 Gy和17.3 Gy(P = 0.001),接受20 Gy照射的全肺体积分别为13.0%和27.4%(P = 0.001)。最常见的急性毒性反应是皮炎(大多为1 - 2级,1例3级)和1至2级疲劳。末次随访(中位数为32个月)时最常见的毒性反应是1级皮肤色素沉着、浅表纤维化和肢体淋巴水肿。未记录到大于1级的非皮肤或非疲劳不良事件。
双侧乳房和/或胸壁以及全面的淋巴结IMPT在技术上是可行的,且严重急性毒性反应发生率较低。与光子治疗相比,IMPT治疗可提高靶区覆盖率并减少对正常组织的照射。正在进行长期随访以评估疗效和毒性反应。