Impact of deep inspiration breath-hold (DIBH) on dose distribution and radiobiological effects in left-sided breast irradiation: A comparative study of IMRT and VMAT techniques under DIBH and free breathing conditions

Radiotherapy for left-sided breast cancer faces challenges in sparing cardiac structures due to anatomical proximity. Deep inspiration breath-hold (DIBH) and advanced techniques like VMAT offer potential solutions, but their synergistic effects on dose distribution and radiobiological outcomes require comprehensive evaluation. To compare the dosimetric and radiobiological differences between various radiotherapy techniques (VMAT vs. IMRT) under different respiratory modes (DIBH vs. FB) for left breast cancer patients after breast-conserving surgery. This retrospective study analyzed 27 left breast cancer patients treated between May 2023 and October 2024. CT scans were acquired under both FB and DIBH conditions for each patient. Three half-beam radiotherapy plans were designed: D-IMRT (DIBH-IMRT), D-VMAT (DIBH-VMAT), and F-VMAT (FB-VMAT). Dosimetric evaluation included Conformity Index (CI) and Homogeneity Index (HI) for targets alongside dose-volume parameters for OARs (heart, LAD, bilateral lungs) derived from Dose-volume histogram (DVHs). Radiobiological assessment employed: 1) Niemierko-based Tumor Control Probability (TCP), 2) Lyman-Kutcher-Burman Normal Tissue Complication Probability (NTCP) for cardiac/left lung tissues, and 3) linear model-derived Excess Absolute Risk (EAR) for contralateral breast. DIBH significantly increased left lung volume by 799.2 cm 3 ( p < 0.001) and heart-chest wall distance by 1.3 cm ( p < 0.001). All plans achieved comparable target coverage and homogeneity. Compared with D-IMRT, D-VMAT demonstrated superior target conformity (PTV: 0.870 vs. 0.827; PTV_Bed: 0.775 vs. 0.757, p < 0.05), reduced monitor units by 47.6 % (618 vs. 1179, p < 0.001), and significantly lowered cardiac doses (V5 %: 5.82 % vs. 11.83 %; V20 %: 0.16 % vs. 0.58 %; mean dose: 1.92 Gy vs. 2.57 Gy, p < 0.05) with corresponding NTCP reduction (1.93E-11 vs. 6.61E-11, p < 0.003). However, D-VMAT increased contralateral breast exposure (V5 %: 5.60 % vs. 1.72 %; mean dose: 1.45 Gy vs. 0.71 Gy) and EAR (152.82 vs. 55.63, p < 0.001). Compared with F-VMAT, D-VMAT further reduced cardiac doses (V5 %: 5.82 % vs. 13.27 %; V20 %: 0.16 % vs. 5.2 %; mean dose: 1.92 Gy vs. 3.83 Gy; NTCP: 1.93E-11 vs. 8.77E-11, p < 0.001) and left lung V20 % (11.15 % vs. 13.43 %, p < 0.001). DIBH-VMAT synergistically reduces cardiac and pulmonary radiation exposure while maintaining target coverage, albeit with increased contralateral breast dose. Clinical implementation requires careful risk-benefit assessment for personalized radiotherapy.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Radiation Research and Applied Sciences
Published
2025-08-28
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrras.2025.101912
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Advanced Radiotherapy Techniques
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
1.88
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Impact of deep inspiration breath-hold (DIBH) on dose distribution and radiobiological effects in left-sided breast irradiation: A comparative study of IMRT and VMAT techniques under DIBH and free breathing conditions

Fangfang Xie, Qungui Zhang, Zhiwei Liu, Weiwei Wu et al.
1 citations
Journal of Radiation Research and Applied Sciences
Advanced Radiotherapy Techniques
1.88
article

Impact of deep inspiration breath-hold (DIBH) on dose distribution and radiobiological effects in left-sided breast irradiation: A comparative study of IMRT and VMAT techniques under DIBH and free breathing conditions

Fangfang Xie, Qungui Zhang, Zhiwei Liu, Weiwei Wu, Hui Yin
article en
1 citations

Abstract

Radiotherapy for left-sided breast cancer faces challenges in sparing cardiac structures due to anatomical proximity. Deep inspiration breath-hold (DIBH) and advanced techniques like VMAT offer potential solutions, but their synergistic effects on dose distribution and radiobiological outcomes require comprehensive evaluation. To compare the dosimetric and radiobiological differences between various radiotherapy techniques (VMAT vs. IMRT) under different respiratory modes (DIBH vs. FB) for left breast cancer patients after breast-conserving surgery. This retrospective study analyzed 27 left breast cancer patients treated between May 2023 and October 2024. CT scans were acquired under both FB and DIBH conditions for each patient. Three half-beam radiotherapy plans were designed: D-IMRT (DIBH-IMRT), D-VMAT (DIBH-VMAT), and F-VMAT (FB-VMAT). Dosimetric evaluation included Conformity Index (CI) and Homogeneity Index (HI) for targets alongside dose-volume parameters for OARs (heart, LAD, bilateral lungs) derived from Dose-volume histogram (DVHs). Radiobiological assessment employed: 1) Niemierko-based Tumor Control Probability (TCP), 2) Lyman-Kutcher-Burman Normal Tissue Complication Probability (NTCP) for cardiac/left lung tissues, and 3) linear model-derived Excess Absolute Risk (EAR) for contralateral breast. DIBH significantly increased left lung volume by 799.2 cm 3 ( p < 0.001) and heart-chest wall distance by 1.3 cm ( p < 0.001). All plans achieved comparable target coverage and homogeneity. Compared with D-IMRT, D-VMAT demonstrated superior target conformity (PTV: 0.870 vs. 0.827; PTV_Bed: 0.775 vs. 0.757, p < 0.05), reduced monitor units by 47.6 % (618 vs. 1179, p < 0.001), and significantly lowered cardiac doses (V5 %: 5.82 % vs. 11.83 %; V20 %: 0.16 % vs. 0.58 %; mean dose: 1.92 Gy vs. 2.57 Gy, p < 0.05) with corresponding NTCP reduction (1.93E-11 vs. 6.61E-11, p < 0.003). However, D-VMAT increased contralateral breast exposure (V5 %: 5.60 % vs. 1.72 %; mean dose: 1.45 Gy vs. 0.71 Gy) and EAR (152.82 vs. 55.63, p < 0.001). Compared with F-VMAT, D-VMAT further reduced cardiac doses (V5 %: 5.82 % vs. 13.27 %; V20 %: 0.16 % vs. 5.2 %; mean dose: 1.92 Gy vs. 3.83 Gy; NTCP: 1.93E-11 vs. 8.77E-11, p < 0.001) and left lung V20 % (11.15 % vs. 13.43 %, p < 0.001). DIBH-VMAT synergistically reduces cardiac and pulmonary radiation exposure while maintaining target coverage, albeit with increased contralateral breast dose. Clinical implementation requires careful risk-benefit assessment for personalized radiotherapy.

Journal of Radiation Research and Applied SciencesVol. 18(4)
Ganzhou People's Hospital (CN)
Zero hunger
Openalex Percentile: Top 13%
Advanced Radiotherapy Techniques
1.88
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.