<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE ArticleSet PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD PubMed 2.7//EN" "https://dtd.nlm.nih.gov/ncbi/pubmed/in/PubMed.dtd">
<ArticleSet>
<Article>
<Journal>
				<PublisherName>West Asia Organization for Cancer Prevention (WAOCP), APOCP's West Asia Chapter.</PublisherName>
				<JournalTitle>Asian Pacific Journal of Cancer Prevention</JournalTitle>
				<Issn>1513-7368</Issn>
				<Volume>19</Volume>
				<Issue>10</Issue>
				<PubDate PubStatus="epublish">
					<Year>2018</Year>
					<Month>10</Month>
					<Day>01</Day>
				</PubDate>
			</Journal>
<ArticleTitle>Comparision of Different Radiotherapy Planning Techniques for Breast Cancer after Breast Conserving Surgery</ArticleTitle>
<VernacularTitle></VernacularTitle>
			<FirstPage>2929</FirstPage>
			<LastPage>2934</LastPage>
			<ELocationID EIdType="pii">67431</ELocationID>
			
<ELocationID EIdType="doi">10.22034/APJCP.2018.19.10.2929</ELocationID>
			
			<Language>EN</Language>
<AuthorList>
<Author>
					<FirstName>Narudom </FirstName>
					<LastName>Supakalin</LastName>
<Affiliation>Division of Radiotherapy, Department of Radiology, Srinagarind Hospital, Faculty of Medicine, Khon Kaen University, Thailand.</Affiliation>

</Author>
<Author>
					<FirstName>Montien </FirstName>
					<LastName>Pesee</LastName>
<Affiliation>Division of Radiotherapy, Department of Radiology, Srinagarind Hospital, Faculty of Medicine, Khon Kaen University, Thailand.</Affiliation>

</Author>
<Author>
					<FirstName>Komsan </FirstName>
					<LastName>Thamronganantasakul</LastName>
<Affiliation>Division of Radiotherapy, Department of Radiology, Srinagarind Hospital, Faculty of Medicine, Khon Kaen University, Thailand.</Affiliation>
<Identifier Source="ORCID">0000-0002-6809-8855</Identifier>

</Author>
<Author>
					<FirstName>Kiattisak </FirstName>
					<LastName>Promsensa</LastName>
<Affiliation>Division of Radiotherapy, Department of Radiology, Srinagarind Hospital, Faculty of Medicine, Khon Kaen University, Thailand.</Affiliation>

</Author>
<Author>
					<FirstName>Chunsri </FirstName>
					<LastName>Supaadirek</LastName>
<Affiliation>Division of Radiotherapy, Department of Radiology, Srinagarind Hospital, Faculty of Medicine, Khon Kaen University, Thailand.</Affiliation>

</Author>
<Author>
					<FirstName>Srichai </FirstName>
					<LastName>Krusun</LastName>
<Affiliation>Division of Radiotherapy, Department of Radiology, Srinagarind Hospital, Faculty of Medicine, Khon Kaen University, Thailand.</Affiliation>

</Author>
</AuthorList>
				<PublicationType>Journal Article</PublicationType>
			<History>
				<PubDate PubStatus="received">
					<Year>2018</Year>
					<Month>05</Month>
					<Day>17</Day>
				</PubDate>
			</History>
		<Abstract>Objectives:To compare different radiotherapy planning techniques for breast cancer after breast conserving surgery.&lt;br /&gt;Materials and methods: Eighteen patients with breast cancer who underwent breast conserving surgery were selected.&lt;br /&gt;For each patient four different whole breast irradiation techniques including Tan, fIMRT, iIMRT and VMAT were&lt;br /&gt;compared to the conventional tangential technique (Tan). Results: Mean maximum point dose (Dmax) for Tan, fIMRT,&lt;br /&gt;iIMRT and VMAT were 110.17% (±1.87), 105.89% (±1.13), 106.47% (±0.92) and 106.99% (±1.16) (p&lt;0.001). Mean&lt;br /&gt;minimum point dose (Dmin) from Tan was 84.02% (±3.68) which was significantly higher than those from fIMRT,&lt;br /&gt;iIMRT and VMAT which were 76.57% (±11.4), 67.69 %( ±19.20) and 80.69% (±7.06) (p&lt;0.001). Only the mean&lt;br /&gt;V95 of fIMRT was significantly less than Tan (p=0.01). Mean percentage of volume receiving ≥ 20 Gy (V20Gy) and&lt;br /&gt;mean doses of the ipsilateral lung were 17.09% and 953.05 cGy, 16.60% and 879.20 cGy, 14.79% and 772.26 cGy,&lt;br /&gt;15.32% and 984.34 cGy for Tan, fIMRT, iIMRT and VMAT. Only iIMRT had a significantly lower mean V20Gy and&lt;br /&gt;the mean dose to ipsilateral lung in comparison with Tan. Significantly, high mean doses to the contralateral breast&lt;br /&gt;(498.07 cGy, p&lt;0.001) were observed in VMAT. Conclusion: The conventional tangential technique provides adequate&lt;br /&gt;dose coverage but resulted in high dose-volumes. The iIMRT and fIMRT had significantly smaller high dose-volumes&lt;br /&gt;and better conformity. VMAT demonstrated excellent dose homogeneity and conformity but an increased low-dose&lt;br /&gt;volume outside the target should be of concern.</Abstract>
		<ObjectList>
			<Object Type="keyword">
			<Param Name="value">breast cancer</Param>
			</Object>
			<Object Type="keyword">
			<Param Name="value">Radiotherapy planning technique</Param>
			</Object>
			<Object Type="keyword">
			<Param Name="value">IMRT</Param>
			</Object>
			<Object Type="keyword">
			<Param Name="value">VMAT</Param>
			</Object>
			<Object Type="keyword">
			<Param Name="value">Conventional tangential technique</Param>
			</Object>
		</ObjectList>
<ArchiveCopySource DocType="pdf">https://journal.waocp.org/article_67431_2d91645c7c05cd95e256c4ccaf45c631.pdf</ArchiveCopySource>
</Article>
</ArticleSet>
