Multi-criteria optimization for comparing free-breathing and breath-hold techniques in helical and volumetric treatment of locoregional left-sided breast cancer
IF 2.7 3区 医学Q1 RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING
Romain Cayez , Thomas Lacornerie , Séverine Risbourg , Kaoutar Lodyga , Alexandre Ba , Frederik Crop
{"title":"Multi-criteria optimization for comparing free-breathing and breath-hold techniques in helical and volumetric treatment of locoregional left-sided breast cancer","authors":"Romain Cayez , Thomas Lacornerie , Séverine Risbourg , Kaoutar Lodyga , Alexandre Ba , Frederik Crop","doi":"10.1016/j.ejmp.2025.105175","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Purpose</h3><div>Combining breath-hold (BH) with volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) or helical treatment can be challenging for locoregional left-sided breast cancer. We aimed to use multi-criteria optimization (MCO) to provide objective comparisons of BH with free breathing (FB) techniques.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>Thirty-one consecutive treatment plans were optimized using pareto-navigated MCO for FB tomotherapy (TFB), FB VMAT Halcyon (HFB), and BH VMAT Halcyon (HDIBH). The heart dose was minimized while maintaining target coverage. Quantitative comparisons focused on dose indicators, correlations and adherence to constraints, whereas blinded qualitative ratings, along with planning study guidelines, were used to identify possible biases.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>VMAT provided better-than-required coverage (D95% 38.6 Gy vs. 37.7 Gy for TFB), whereas TFB offered better sparing of the left anterior descending artery (LAD) and contralateral breast dose. HDIBH resulted in a mean heart dose Dm(heart) of 3.7 Gy compared to 5.2 Gy in HFB and TFB groups. Dm(heart), 2 % LAD and mean LAD in DIBH resulted in 70–74 % of the FB dose, but with residual standard deviation of ± 0.9, 6 and 3.5 Gy respectively. Qualitative ratings showed a significant preference order: HDIBH, HFB, and TFB. No significant lung dose improvements were observed for DIBH. Finally, Dm(heart) showed correlations with FB V17Gy and D2% heart but not in DIBH and also not with both 2 % LAD or mean LAD.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>Trade-offs were observed between VMAT and tomotherapy techniques while DIBH improved heart doses by 30%, albeit with per-patient variability. Additionally, mean heart dose correlation with other indicators varied between structures and techniques.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":56092,"journal":{"name":"Physica Medica-European Journal of Medical Physics","volume":"138 ","pages":"Article 105175"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Physica Medica-European Journal of Medical Physics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1120179725002856","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Purpose
Combining breath-hold (BH) with volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) or helical treatment can be challenging for locoregional left-sided breast cancer. We aimed to use multi-criteria optimization (MCO) to provide objective comparisons of BH with free breathing (FB) techniques.
Methods
Thirty-one consecutive treatment plans were optimized using pareto-navigated MCO for FB tomotherapy (TFB), FB VMAT Halcyon (HFB), and BH VMAT Halcyon (HDIBH). The heart dose was minimized while maintaining target coverage. Quantitative comparisons focused on dose indicators, correlations and adherence to constraints, whereas blinded qualitative ratings, along with planning study guidelines, were used to identify possible biases.
Results
VMAT provided better-than-required coverage (D95% 38.6 Gy vs. 37.7 Gy for TFB), whereas TFB offered better sparing of the left anterior descending artery (LAD) and contralateral breast dose. HDIBH resulted in a mean heart dose Dm(heart) of 3.7 Gy compared to 5.2 Gy in HFB and TFB groups. Dm(heart), 2 % LAD and mean LAD in DIBH resulted in 70–74 % of the FB dose, but with residual standard deviation of ± 0.9, 6 and 3.5 Gy respectively. Qualitative ratings showed a significant preference order: HDIBH, HFB, and TFB. No significant lung dose improvements were observed for DIBH. Finally, Dm(heart) showed correlations with FB V17Gy and D2% heart but not in DIBH and also not with both 2 % LAD or mean LAD.
Conclusion
Trade-offs were observed between VMAT and tomotherapy techniques while DIBH improved heart doses by 30%, albeit with per-patient variability. Additionally, mean heart dose correlation with other indicators varied between structures and techniques.
期刊介绍:
Physica Medica, European Journal of Medical Physics, publishing with Elsevier from 2007, provides an international forum for research and reviews on the following main topics:
Medical Imaging
Radiation Therapy
Radiation Protection
Measuring Systems and Signal Processing
Education and training in Medical Physics
Professional issues in Medical Physics.