:: Volume 21, Issue 1 (1-2023) ::
Int J Radiat Res 2023, 21(1): 67-72 Back to browse issues page
Can dynamic wedges reduce thyroid dose in breast radiotherapy compared to physical wedges?
M. Joya , T. Kordane , A.H. Karimi , G. Geraily
Department of Medical Physics and Biomedical Engineering, School of Medicine, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
Abstract:   (677 Views)
Background: In breast radiotherapy, enhanced dynamic wedge (EDW) and physical wedges are used to improve the homogeneity of the dose. Scattered photons are the major factor in the off-field organs' unwanted dose. In breast radiotherapy, the thyroid is a critical off-field organ at risk for scattered photons. This study was performed to compare the unwanted dose and the secondary fatal cancer risk to the thyroid in breast radiotherapy between EDW and physical wedge. Material and Methods: The 6-MV Varian 2100 C/D linac was used to irradiate the breast of a thorax phantom under two opposite tangential fields. The unwanted dose that reached the thyroid was estimated using Eclipse Treatment Planning System and Gafchromic film dosimetry. Corresponding fatal secondary cancer risks were also assessed according to the NCRP report 116 recommendations. Results: The measured dose for thyroid using a physical wedge and enhanced dynamic wedge were measured as 2.1 and 0.735 cGy, which are approximately 1% and 0.37% of the prescribed dose to the breast (2 Gy), respectively. In the case of radiotherapy with the physical wedge, the lifetime risk of secondary fatal cancer attributed to the thyroid is 0.0480 and 0.0504 % using TPS and measured data, respectively. In the case of the dynamic wedge, the above values were reduced to 0.0168 and 0.0176 %, respectively. Conclusions: Using an enhanced dynamic wedge in breast radiotherapy reduced the thyroid dose by about 65% compared to the physical wedge technique. As a result, it was concluded that the application of EDW is safer than the physical wedge in breast radiotherapy.
Keywords: Radiotherapy, wedges, thyroid, film dosimetry, TPS.
Full-Text [PDF 542 kb]   (737 Downloads)    
Type of Study: Original Research | Subject: Radiation Biology
1. 1. WHO (2022) Breast cancer: WHO; [cited 2022 8/7/2022]. Available from: https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/breast-cancer.
2. Lee BL, Lee S, Sung J, Yoon M (2014) Radiotherapy-induced secondary cancer risk for breast cancer: 3D conformal therapy versus IMRT versus VMAT. Radiol Prot, 34(2): 325-31. [DOI:10.1088/0952-4746/34/2/325] [PMID]
3. Desobry GEW, Waldron TJ, Das IJ (1998) Validation of a new virtual wedge model. Med Phys, 25(1): 71-2. [DOI:10.1118/1.598172] [PMID]
4. Baycan D, Karacetin D, Balkanay AY, Barut Y (2012) Field-in-field IMRT versus 3D-CRT of the breast Cardiac vessels, ipsilateral lung, and contralateral breast absorbed doses in patients with left-sided lumpectomy A dosimetric comparison. Japanese Journal of Radiology, 30(10): 819-23. [DOI:10.1007/s11604-012-0126-z] [PMID]
5. Lee JW, Hong S, Choi KS, Kim YL, Park BM, Chung JB, et al. (2008) Performance evaluation of field-in-field technique for tangential breast irradiation. Jpn J Clin Oncol, 38(2): 158-63. [DOI:10.1093/jjco/hym167] [PMID]
6. Momeni ZT, Tavakoli MB, Atarod M (2018) Estimation of the thyroid secondary cancer risk on the patient of standard breast external beam radiotherapy. Med Signals Sens, 8(4): 238-43. [DOI:10.4103/jmss.JMSS_12_18] [PMID] []
7. Howell RM, Scarboro SB, Taddei PJ, Krishnan S, Kry SF, Newhauser WD (2010) Methodology for determining doses to in-field, out-of-field and partially in-field organs for late effects studies in photon radiotherapy. Phys Med Biol, 55(23): 7009-23. [DOI:10.1088/0031-9155/55/23/S04] [PMID] []
8. Schneider U (2011) Modeling the risk of secondary malignancies after radiotherapy. Genes (Basel), 2(4): 1033-49. [DOI:10.3390/genes2041033] [PMID] []
9. Valentin J (2007) The 2007 recommendations of the international commission on radiological protection: Elsevier International Commission on Radiological Protection; 2008.
10. Council NR Health Risks from Exposure to Low Levels of Ionizing Radiation: BEIR VII Phase 2. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press; 2006. 422 p.
11. Vicini F, Cecchini R, White J, Julian T, Arthur D, Rabinovitch R, et al. (2019) Abstract GS4-04: Primary results of NSABP B-39/RTOG 0413 (NRG Oncology): A randomized phase III study of conventional whole breast irradiation (WBI) versus partial breast irradiation (PBI) for women with stage 0, I, or II breast cancer. Cancer Research, 79(4): GS4-04-GS4. [DOI:10.1158/1538-7445.SABCS18-GS4-04]
12. Vicini F, Winter K, Straube W, Wong J, Pass H, Rabinovitch R, et al. (2005) A phase I/II trial to evaluate three-dimensional conformal radiation therapy confined to the region of the lumpectomy cavity for Stage I/II breast carcinoma: initial report of feasibility and reproducibility of Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) Study 0319. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys, 63(5): 1531-7. [DOI:10.1016/j.ijrobp.2005.06.024] [PMID]
13. Vlachopoulou VM, Malatara G, Delis H, Kardamakis D, Panayiotakis G (2013) Estimation of the risk of secondary cancer in the thyroid gland and the breast outside the treated volume in patients undergoing brain, mediastinum and breast radiotherapy. Radiat Prot Dosimetry, 154(1): 121-6. [DOI:10.1093/rpd/ncs134] [PMID]
14. Farhood B, Bahreyni Toossi MT, Vosoughi H, Khademi S, Knaup C (2016) Measurement of thyroid dose by TLD arising from radiotherapy of breast cancer patients from supraclavicular field. Biomed Phys Eng, 6(3): 147-56.
15. Sulieman A, Kappas K, Theodorou K (2008) Entrance and peripheral dose measurements during radiotherapy. 10 National Conference on Biomedical Physics and Engineering, 2008; Bulgaria.
16. Wolny-Rokicka E, Tukiendorf A, Wydmański J, Roszkowska D, Staniul BS, Zembroń-Łacny A (2016) Thyroid function after postoperative radiation therapy in patients with breast cancer. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev, 17(10): 4577-81.
17. Joensuu H and Viikari J (1986) Thyroid function after postoperative radiation therapy in patients with breast cancer. Acta Radiol Oncol, 25(3): 167-70. [DOI:10.3109/02841868609136397] [PMID]
18. Monson JM, Chin L, Nixon A, Gage I, Silver B, Recht A, et al. (1997) Is machine energy (4-8 MV) associated with outcome for stage I-II breast cancer patients? Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys, 37(5): 1095-100. [DOI:10.1016/S0360-3016(96)00574-3] [PMID]
19. Edwards FM (1986) Dose-response models and methods of risk prediction and causation estimation. Seminars in Nuclear Medicine, 16(2): 118-30. [DOI:10.1016/S0001-2998(86)80025-3]
20. Gao Xiang, Fisher SG, Emami B (2003) Risk of second primary cancer in the contralateral breast in women treated for early-stage breast cancer: a population-based study. Radiat Oncol Biol Phys, 56(4): 1038-45. [DOI:10.1016/S0360-3016(03)00203-7] [PMID]
21. Butson MJ, Cheung T, Yu PK (2006) Weak energy dependence of EBT gafchromic film dose response in the 50 kVp-10 MVp X-ray range. Appl Radiat Isot, 64(1): 60-2. [DOI:10.1016/j.apradiso.2005.07.002] [PMID]
22. Chiu-Tsao ST, Ho Y, Shankar R, Wang L, Harrison LB (2005) Energy dependence of response of new high sensitivity radiochromic films for megavoltage and kilovoltage radiation energies. Med Phys, 32(11): 3350-4. [DOI:10.1118/1.2065467] [PMID]
23. Warlick WB, O'Rear JH, Earley L, Moeller JH, Gaffney DK, Leavitt DD (1997) Dose to the contralateral breast: a comparison of two techniques using the enhanced dynamic wedge versus a standard wedge. Med Dosim, 22(3): 185-91. [DOI:10.1016/S0958-3947(97)00015-0]
24. Menzel H-GJJotI (2014) International commission on radiation units and measurements. Journal of the ICRU, 14(2): 1-2. [DOI:10.1093/jicru_ndx006]
25. Mahmoud A, Somayeh N, Mahbod E, Mehdi A, Vahid C, Ghazale G (2013) Optimization of three dimensional planning dosimetric in breast phantom for match region of supraclavicular and tangential fields. J Cancer Res Ther, 9(1): 64-70. [DOI:10.4103/0973-1482.110376] [PMID]
26. White DR, Booz J, Griffith RV, Spokas JJ, Wilson IJ (1989) Selection requirements for tissue substitutes. Reports of the International Commission on Radiation Units and Measurements. Journal of the ICRU, 23(1): 14-9. [DOI:10.1093/jicru_os23.1.14]
27. Sim GS, Wong JHD, Ng KH (2013) The use of radiochromic EBT2 film for the quality assurance and dosimetric verification of 3D conformal radiotherapy using Microtek ScanMaker 9800XL flatbed scanner. J Appl Clin Med Phys, 14(4): 4182. [DOI:10.1120/jacmp.v14i4.4182] [PMID] []
28. Sorriaux J, Kacperek A, Rossomme S, Lee JA, Bertrand D, Vynckier S, et al. (2013) Evaluation of Gafchromic® EBT3 films characteristics in therapy photon, electron and proton beams. Phys Med, 29(6): 599-606. [DOI:10.1016/j.ejmp.2012.10.001] [PMID]
29. Cheung T, Butson MJ, Yu PKN (2005) Post-irradiation colouration of Gafchromic EBT radiochromic film. Physics in Medicine and Biology, 50(20): N281-N5. [DOI:10.1088/0031-9155/50/20/N04] [PMID]
30. Fiji (2021) Fiji is just image J. Contents · 2021. 7. 8.
31. Farah NF, Ziad F, Abboud M (2014) Analysis of the EBT3 Gafchromic film irradiated with 6 MV photons and 6 MeV electrons using reflective mode scanners. Physica Medica, 30(6): 708-12. [DOI:10.1016/j.ejmp.2014.04.010] [PMID]
32. Wood EJ (1994) Review of NCRP report No 116: Limitation of exposure to ionising radiation: Occup Environ. Phys Med, 51(3): 216. [DOI:10.1136/oem.51.3.216] []
33. Grantzau T and Overgaard J (2015) Risk of second non-breast cancer after radiotherapy for breast cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis of 762,468 patients. Radiother Oncol, 114(1): 56-65. [DOI:10.1016/j.radonc.2014.10.004] [PMID]
34. Veiga LHL, Lubin JH, AndersonH, de Vathaire F, Tucker M, et al. (2012) A pooled analysis of thyroid cancer incidence following radiotherapy for childhood cancer. Radiat Res, 178(4): 365-76. [DOI:10.1667/RR2889.1] [PMID] []
35. Han EYP, Pudal N, Sung J, Yoon M, Chung WK, Kim DW (2016) Estimation of the risk of secondary malignancy arising from whole-breast irradiation: comparison of five radiotherapy modalities, including TomoHDA. Oncotarget, 7(16): 22960-9. [DOI:10.18632/oncotarget.8392] [PMID] []

XML     Print

Rights and permissions
Creative Commons License This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
Volume 21, Issue 1 (1-2023) Back to browse issues page