Araştırma Makalesi

Difference of Simultaneous Integrated Boost Technique after Breast Conserving Surgery

Sayı: 19 31 Ağustos 2020
PDF İndir
TR EN

Difference of Simultaneous Integrated Boost Technique after Breast Conserving Surgery

Öz

Whole breast irradiation after breast conserving surgery (BCS) is the standard treatment for early stage breast cancer. For early-stage breast cancer, breast-conserving surgery and subsequent postoperative radiotherapy are as effective as mastectomy. An early stage 10 breast cancer patient admitted to the Radiation Oncology Clinic of Sisli Hamidiye Etfal Training and Research Hospital was included in the study. The study is a retrospective study and patients were not treated with the plans and techniques used in the studies. In the study, the planning target volume (PTV) and the organs at risk (OAR) planned with Sequential Intensity Modulated Radiotherapy (IMRT) and Simultaneous Integrated Supplement (Boost) Intensity Modulated Radiotherapy (SIB IMRT) techniques in patients who have undergone breast conserving surgery due to breast cancer. It is aimed to be compared dosimetrically. For the study, patients with consecutive IMRT were given 50 Gy / 25 fraction to the whole breast and 10 Gy / 5 fraction to the boost area, while patients with SIB IMRT were given a total of 50.4 Gy / 28 fractions to the entire breast, while additional dose to the boost volume was given 60 Gy / 28 fraction dose. Ipsilateral lung, heart, the minimum and maximum doses of the PTV breast and PTV boost areas and the homogeneity index (HI), conformity index (CI) values were matched with the help of the t - test minitab program.

SIB IMRT technique and Sequential IMRT technique the ipsilateral lung; When the average doses of V5 value for 10 patients are compared, the results are not statistically significant, while the V20 value is statistically significant when the average dose values for 10 patients are compared, it has been demonstrated that SIB IMRT technique can be performed with a lower dose in the ipsilateral lung V20. When the heart average and heart V20 values are compared for the two techniques, the SIB IMRT technique was not statistically significant, and it has no superiority over the Sequential IMRT technique. While dose homogeneity was better with SIB IMRT in whole breasts, there was no difference in boost area homogeneity and whole breast conformity index SIB IMRT technique for decreasing excess normal tissue volumes irradiated, shortening the treatment process, dose reduction in organs at risk, reducing the dose per fraction for the breast and increasing the dose per fraction to the boost area due to the low incidence of acute skin toxicity, standard use in breast protector RT it can be recommended for.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Teşekkür

Our work has been done within the framework of academic ethical principles and the ethics committee permission has been obtained under the number 1322.

Kaynakça

  1. Alford, S. L., Prassas, G. N., Vogelesang, C. R., Leggett, H. J. & Hamilton, C. S. (2013). Adjuvant breast radiotherapy using a simultaneous integrated boost: clinical and dosimetric perspectives. J Med Imaging Radiation Oncology, 57(2), 222–9. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1754-9485.2012.02473.
  2. Bantema-Joppe, E. J., van der Laan, H. P., de Bock G. H., Wijsman, R., Dolsma, W. V. & Busz, D. M. (2011). Three-dimensional conformal hypofractionated simultaneous integrated boost in breast conserving therapy: results on local control and survival. Radiother Oncology, 100(2), 215–20. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.radonc.2011.05.027.
  3. Bantema-Joppe, E. J., Schilstra, C., de Bock, G. H., Dolsma, W. V., Busz, D. M. & Langendijk, J. A.(2012). Simultaneous integrated boost irradiation after breast-conserving surgery: physician-rated toxicity and cosmetic outcome at 30 months’ followup. Int J Radiat Oncol, Biol, Phys., 83(e), 471–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrobp.2012.01.050.
  4. Bantema-Joppe, E. J., Vredeveld, E. J., de Bock, G. H., Busz, D. M., Woltman-van Iersel, M. & Dolsma, W. V. (2013). Five year outcomes of hypofractionated simultaneous integrated boost irradiation in breast conserving therapy; patterns of recurrence. Radiotherapy Oncology,108(2), 269–72. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.radonc.2013.08.037.
  5. Bantema-Joppe, E. J., van der Laan, H. P. & Bock, G. H. (2011) Three-dimensional conformal hypofractionated simultaneous integrated boost in breast conserving therapy: Results on local control and survival. Radiotherapy and Oncology, 100(2), 215–220. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.radonc.2011.05.027.
  6. Bartelink, H., Horiot, J. C., Poortmans, P. M., Struikmans, H., Van den Bogaert, W. & Fourquet, A. (2007). Impact of a higher radiation dose on local control and survival in breast-conserving therapy of early breast cancer: 10-year results of the randomized boost versus no boost EORTC 22881–10882 trial. J Clinic Oncology, 25(22), 3259–65.
  7. Cendales, R., Vasquez, J., Arbelaez, J. C., Bobadilla, I., Espanol, R. & Torres, F. (2012). Intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) with simultaneous integrated boost (SIB) in a patient with left breast cancer and pectus excavatum. Clin Transl Oncology, 14(10), 747–54. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12094-012-0862-7.
  8. Chao, K. S, Perez C. A. & Brady L. W. (2004). Radyasyon Onkolojisi Tedavi Kararları. Nobel Tıp Kitabevleri, İstanbul, Turkey.

Ayrıntılar

Birincil Dil

İngilizce

Konular

Mühendislik

Bölüm

Araştırma Makalesi

Yayımlanma Tarihi

31 Ağustos 2020

Gönderilme Tarihi

13 Nisan 2020

Kabul Tarihi

26 Haziran 2020

Yayımlandığı Sayı

Yıl 2020 Sayı: 19

Kaynak Göster

APA
Yahşi Çelen, Y., & Kızılkaya, H. O. (2020). Difference of Simultaneous Integrated Boost Technique after Breast Conserving Surgery. Avrupa Bilim ve Teknoloji Dergisi, 19, 578-587. https://doi.org/10.31590/ejosat.719046
AMA
1.Yahşi Çelen Y, Kızılkaya HO. Difference of Simultaneous Integrated Boost Technique after Breast Conserving Surgery. EJOSAT. 2020;(19):578-587. doi:10.31590/ejosat.719046
Chicago
Yahşi Çelen, Yonca, ve H. Orhan Kızılkaya. 2020. “Difference of Simultaneous Integrated Boost Technique after Breast Conserving Surgery”. Avrupa Bilim ve Teknoloji Dergisi, sy 19: 578-87. https://doi.org/10.31590/ejosat.719046.
EndNote
Yahşi Çelen Y, Kızılkaya HO (01 Ağustos 2020) Difference of Simultaneous Integrated Boost Technique after Breast Conserving Surgery. Avrupa Bilim ve Teknoloji Dergisi 19 578–587.
IEEE
[1]Y. Yahşi Çelen ve H. O. Kızılkaya, “Difference of Simultaneous Integrated Boost Technique after Breast Conserving Surgery”, EJOSAT, sy 19, ss. 578–587, Ağu. 2020, doi: 10.31590/ejosat.719046.
ISNAD
Yahşi Çelen, Yonca - Kızılkaya, H. Orhan. “Difference of Simultaneous Integrated Boost Technique after Breast Conserving Surgery”. Avrupa Bilim ve Teknoloji Dergisi. 19 (01 Ağustos 2020): 578-587. https://doi.org/10.31590/ejosat.719046.
JAMA
1.Yahşi Çelen Y, Kızılkaya HO. Difference of Simultaneous Integrated Boost Technique after Breast Conserving Surgery. EJOSAT. 2020;:578–587.
MLA
Yahşi Çelen, Yonca, ve H. Orhan Kızılkaya. “Difference of Simultaneous Integrated Boost Technique after Breast Conserving Surgery”. Avrupa Bilim ve Teknoloji Dergisi, sy 19, Ağustos 2020, ss. 578-87, doi:10.31590/ejosat.719046.
Vancouver
1.Yonca Yahşi Çelen, H. Orhan Kızılkaya. Difference of Simultaneous Integrated Boost Technique after Breast Conserving Surgery. EJOSAT. 01 Ağustos 2020;(19):578-87. doi:10.31590/ejosat.719046

Cited By