Acceso abierto

Semi-supervised planning method for breast electronic tissue compensation treatments based on breast radius and separation

Alexander R. Podgorsak
Alexander R. Podgorsak
 y 
Lalith K. Kumaraswamy
Lalith K. Kumaraswamy
   | 22 dic 2020
Radiology and Oncology's Cover Image
Acerca de este artículo
Artículo anterior
Artículo siguiente
Cite
Article Category: Research Article
Publicado en línea: 22 dic 2020
Páginas: 106 - 115
Recibido: 24 jul 2020
Aceptado: 19 oct 2020
DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/raon-2020-0073
© 2021 Alexander R. Podgorsak, Lalith K. Kumaraswamy, published by Sciendo
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 3.0 License.

Figure 1

Left shows how the breast radius varies in the cranio-caudal direction, right shows how the breast separation varies in the cranio-caudal direction for the same collected patient breast.
Left shows how the breast radius varies in the cranio-caudal direction, right shows how the breast separation varies in the cranio-caudal direction for the same collected patient breast.

Figure 2

Variation in the optimal transmission penetration depth (TPD) over all slices in the cranio-caudal direction compared with the TPD considering a constant TPD or a TPD using the three-region breast approach.
Variation in the optimal transmission penetration depth (TPD) over all slices in the cranio-caudal direction compared with the TPD considering a constant TPD or a TPD using the three-region breast approach.

Figure 3

CT-simulation axial slice with fitted ellipse (red) and breast radius and separation estimation (yellow) and hand-measurement (blue) of left breast overlaid. Included is the location of the hand measurement for radius and separation in blue.
CT-simulation axial slice with fitted ellipse (red) and breast radius and separation estimation (yellow) and hand-measurement (blue) of left breast overlaid. Included is the location of the hand measurement for radius and separation in blue.

Figure 4

Correlation between breast separation and radius with the x-ray fluence needed to deliver homogenous dose distribution to the breast treatment volume using a 6 MV beam.
Correlation between breast separation and radius with the x-ray fluence needed to deliver homogenous dose distribution to the breast treatment volume using a 6 MV beam.

Figure 5

Optimal fluence maps from (A) assuming a single penetration depth, from (B) assuming a three-region breast model, and (C) our proposed model. Colorbar shows beam fluence.
Optimal fluence maps from (A) assuming a single penetration depth, from (B) assuming a three-region breast model, and (C) our proposed model. Colorbar shows beam fluence.

Figure 6

(A, C, E) axial, coronal, and sagittal views of the breast treatment volume showing the isodose color washes from the treatment plan generated with the proposed algorithm. (B, D, F) axial, coronal, and sagittal views of the breast treatment volume showing the isodose color washes from the treatment plan generated by assuming a constant transmission penetration depth of 30%.
(A, C, E) axial, coronal, and sagittal views of the breast treatment volume showing the isodose color washes from the treatment plan generated with the proposed algorithm. (B, D, F) axial, coronal, and sagittal views of the breast treatment volume showing the isodose color washes from the treatment plan generated by assuming a constant transmission penetration depth of 30%.

Summary of mean dose to the heart and ipsilateral lung V20 Gy for all ten collected courses. Compared are the treatments generated with our proposed algorithm, plans created using the 3-region breast model proposed by Alghufaili, those plans optimized by a medical dosimetrist, and plans generated by assuming a single transmission penetration depth (TPD) within the treatment planning software

Mean dose to the heart (cGy)Ipsilateral lung V20 Gy (%)
NumberProposed Work3-region breast modelDosimetrist OptimizedSingle TPDProposed Work3-region breast modelDosimetrist OptimizedSingle TPD
111.015.013.713.40.422.302.412.05
229829629432718.218.316.720.3
31771651091605.124.913.564.65
42712671492509.099.038.077.93
540.844.939.742.016.616.815.816.2
61131121081118.958.848.338.59
747.052.447.751.79.5611.29.910.9
826.928.926.528.711.411.211.410.9
995.912889.51259.1810.87.810.6
1040640215939718.718.512.418.2
Average14915110415110.711.29.6511.0

Summary of global dose maximum and clinical target volume (CTV) minimum values for all ten collected treatment courses. Compared are the treatments generated with our proposed algorithm, plans created using the 3-region breast model proposed by Alghufaili, those plans optimized by a medical dosimetrist, and plans generated by assuming a single transmission penetration depth (TPD) within the treatment planning software

Global dose max (%)CTV dose min (%)
NumberProposed work3-region breast modelDosimetrist optimizedSingle TPDProposed work3-region breast modelDosimetrist optimizedSingle TPD
1107.7108.5109.1113.396.997.3104.196.0
2109.7111.3106.5111.874.475.076.974.2
3107.4108.1107.5112.795.588.795.389.1
4107.5110.4105.9109.895.595.295.096.8
5107.7109.7104.0105.095.195.998.187.8
6107.5108.7105.5111.497.996.099.397.4
7108.0114.2105.9116.395.495.495.795.4
8107.6112.6106.6114.695.392.897.894.1
9107.5115.5106.0118.195.695.695.195.0
10107.5108.6107.8114.486.181.687.887.2
Average107.8111.2106.5112.792.791.494.591.3

Agreement between breast radius and separation hand-measurements and automatic algorithm measurement in centimeter (cm) difference and percent difference

Radius
Number% DifferenceDifference (cm)
19.6 [9.3–9.9]0.70 [0.68–0.72]
26.2 [5.7–6.7]0.40 [0.39–0.41]
322.0 [21.5–22.5]1.00 [0.98–1.02]
Average12.6 [10.4–14.8]0.69 [0.59–0.79]

Summary of dose homogeneity indices (HI) for all ten collected treatment courses. Compared are the treatments generated with our proposed algorithm, plans created using the 3-region breast model proposed by Alghufaili, those plans optimized by a medical dosimetrist, and plans generated by assuming a single transmission penetration depth (TPD) within the treatment planning software

NumberProposed Work HI3-region breast modelDosimetrist Optimized HISingle TPD HI
126.722.416.523.0
217.819.214.119.1
310.615.211.217.2
411.814.69.5113.3
58.497.873.328.04
68.7914.16.6412.6
74.597.443.828.19
87.5721.58.8423.5
911.317.98.2918.7
1010.616.010.517.8
Average12.615.69.8717.0
eISSN:
1581-3207
Idioma:
Inglés
Calendario de la edición:
4 veces al año
Temas de la revista:
Medicine, Clinical Medicine, Internal Medicine, Haematology, Oncology, Radiology
RSS Feed de revista