% IMPORTANT: The following is UTF-8 encoded. This means that in the presence
% of non-ASCII characters, it will not work with BibTeX 0.99 or older.
% Instead, you should use an up-to-date BibTeX implementation like “bibtex8” or
% “biber”.
@ARTICLE{Duma:305582,
author = {M. N. Duma and K. Borm$^*$ and T. Hehr and M. D. Piroth and
F. Gerd and R. Baumann and S. E. Combs$^*$ and S. Corradini
and J. Dunst and D. Krug and J. Hörner-Rieber and C.
Matuschek and L. C. Schmeel and R. Fietkau and V. Strnad and
W. Budach},
title = {{R}egional nodal irradiation in breast cancer patients: {A}
treatment planning study of the breast cancer working group
of the {G}erman society of radiation oncology.},
journal = {Medical dosimetry},
volume = {nn},
issn = {0958-3947},
address = {Amsterdam [u.a.]},
publisher = {Elsevier Science},
reportid = {DKFZ-2025-02241},
pages = {nn},
year = {2025},
note = {epub},
abstract = {The aim of the study was to analyze the interinstitutional
differences in the planning process/approach of regional
nodal irradiation (RNI) in breast cancer patients in expert
centres. Based on a predefined risk constellation, the left
breast and the axillary, periclavicular and internal
mammarian lymph node areas had to be irradiated. The study
focused on left-sided RNI. One CT dataset (free breathing)
each of a regular (R) adipose (A) and a slender patient (S)
were centrally selected and all target volumes (CTV: level
II, III, IV + internal mammary artery chain region-IMC, left
breast, PTV and OARs) were contoured according to the ESTRO
recommendations. A total dose of 50.4/1.8 Gy was set as the
dosage with free choice of technique/inclinic constraints.
Dose files were analyzed centrally as DICOM files (CTV:
$D95\%,$ $D50\%,$ $D1\%$ and $V95\%;$ OAR: $D1\%,$ Dmean,
V20Gy, V30Gy, V40Gy and the absolute $V95\%$ of normal
tissue outside the PTV). A total of 18 data sets were
analyzed. Differences of almost 10 Gy in TV coverage were
significant (p < 0.05). This was evident between patients
e.g., for $CTV_IMC$ $D95\%/D50\%$ S:47.1Gy ± 1.9/50.1Gy ±
0.6; R:39.4Gy ± 8.4/47.6Gy ± 4; A:38.3Gy ± 10.4/47.9Gy ±
4.4) and $PTV_IMA$ $D95\%/D50\%$ (S:37.6Gy ± 3.9/49.7Gy ±
0.8; R:27.9Gy ± 7.8/46.9Gy ± 3.3; A:25.6Gy ± 9.7/47.5Gy
± 2.8). Patient-related dose differences were also
significant for OAR`s: Dmean heart (S:4.6Gy ± 1.1; N:6.1Gy
± 1.2; A:7.9Gy ± 2.1), humeral head (S:8.3Gy ± 2.7;
N:3.8Gy ± 0.7; A:6.4Gy ± 1.7), and thyroid (S:17.7Gy ±
2.7; N:14.3Gy ± 1.6; A:27.9Gy ± 4.5). Patient anatomical
factors and institutional planning differences create
significant dosimetric variations in breast cancer radiation
therapy, emphasizing the need for personalized planning
approaches that incorporate patient-specific constraints and
age-dependent risk considerations.},
keywords = {Breast cancer (Other) / Lymphatics (Other) / RNI (Other)},
cin = {MU01},
ddc = {610},
cid = {I:(DE-He78)MU01-20160331},
pnm = {899 - ohne Topic (POF4-899)},
pid = {G:(DE-HGF)POF4-899},
typ = {PUB:(DE-HGF)16},
pubmed = {pmid:41168045},
doi = {10.1016/j.meddos.2025.09.006},
url = {https://inrepo02.dkfz.de/record/305582},
}