Purpose: To compare clinical setup using ultrasound (U/S)-delineated target versus computed tomography (CT) virtual simulation using CT-outlined target in breast electron boost. To describe a methodology for electron virtual simulation and collision testing with the treatment planning system (TPS).
Methods: The two techniques were compared in a prospective study on 12 patients, who were treated using a clinical setup. Target definition was performed by both U/S and CT imaging. The U/S-based target was made visible on CT images by placing a radio-opaque wire on U/S skin markings. The dose distribution of the clinical setup was reproduced in the TPS using the actual electron patient treatment parameters. A CT-based TPS virtual simulation/dose optimization was compared to the clinical setup technique.
Results: Mean beam aperture was larger by 16.3 cm2 (p = 0.011) for U/S compared to CT-outlined target. Target mean depth difference (CT minus U/S) was 0.03 cm (p = 0.875). Target coverage at depth was adequate in all cases with CT-based simulation while under/overcovering the target at depth by more than 5 mm in 2 out of 12 cases with clinical setup. Mean target V90% was 98.5% (CT-based simulation) and 84.4% (clinical setup). Ipsilateral lung/breast were better spared with CT-based simulation. To date, the methodology for CT virtual simulation was applied on 152 patients and collision was avoided in all cases.
Conclusions: CT-based simulation and target delineation allows for improved definition of the en-face electron field with less amount of normal tissue irradiated while including the entire target with an adequate margin and optimal electron energy.
Keywords: CT target delineation; CT virtual simulation; Electron breast boost; Electron clinical setup; En-face electron field; Ultrasound target delineation.
Copyright © 2019 Associazione Italiana di Fisica Medica. All rights reserved.