Key result
LV and LAD constraints in left-sided breast VMAT cut LV mean dose ~48% vs heart-only plans.
Why the study?
The study aimed to compare left-sided breast volumetric modulated arc therapy plans using heart-only dose constraints versus plans incorporating additional left ventricle and left anterior descending coronary artery constraints.
Does incorporating LV and LAD dose constraints improve cardiac substructure sparing in left-sided breast VMAT planning?
Does incorporating LV and LAD dose constraints improve cardiac substructure sparing in left-sided breast VMAT planning?
Mean Difference: -2.629
Absolute Event Rate: 2.843% vs 5.472%
p-value: p=<0.001
Incorporating specific LV and LAD dose constraints in left-sided breast VMAT planning is feasible and significantly reduces cardiac substructure doses with only modest trade-offs in target coverage.
Including LV+LAD constraints in left-breast VMAT planning reduced cardiac substructure doses; hypothesis-generating for clinical benefit, prospective outcome trials needed.
Purpose: This study aimed to compare left-sided breast volumetric modulated arc therapy plans using heart-only dose constraints with plans that include additional left ventricle (LV) and left anterior descending coronary artery (LAD) dose constraints (heart + LV + LAD). Materials and Methods: Thirty patients treated with whole-breast irradiation with simultaneous integrated boost were replanned using both strategies. The heart + LV + LAD strategy applied dose constraints based on German Society for Radiation Oncology recommendations and Danish Breast Cancer Group HYPO protocol (LV: Dmean [mean dose] <3 Gy, V5Gy [percentage of volume receiving ≥5 Gy] <17%, V23Gy <5%; LAD: Dmean <10 Gy, Dmax [maximum dose] <17 Gy). Target and organ-at-risk (OAR) metrics were compared using Wilcoxon signed-rank tests. For exploratory analyses, LAD-planning target volume (PTV) distance was defined as the minimum distance between LAD and whole-breast PTV, and Spearman's correlations between LAD-PTV distance and LAD or target metrics were evaluated. Results: Compared with heart-only plans, heart + LV + LAD plans reduced LV Dmean, V5Gy, and V23Gy, as well as LAD Dmean and Dmax (all p < 0.001), meeting all prespecified dose constraints except LV Dmean and LAD Dmax (achieved in 70.0% and 63.3%, respectively). Target metrics showed small compromises (e.g., PTV V95% [percentage of volume receiving ≥95% of the prescription dose] 98.391% vs. 99.431%; p < 0.001). Ipsilateral lung Dmean and V5Gy decreased, whereas contralateral breast Dmean and lung V10Gy increased (all p < 0.05). In heart + LV + LAD plans, greater LAD-PTV distance correlated with lower LAD Dmax and Dmean and higher PTV D98%. Conclusion: Applying LV and LAD dose constraints improved cardiac substructure sparing with modest trade-offs in target and contralateral OAR metrics. LAD-PTV distance may influence the feasibility of LAD sparing, but this exploratory association warrants further study.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Cho et al. (2026) studied Left-sided early breast cancer (n=30). Heart + LV + LAD dose constraints vs. Heart-only dose constraints was evaluated on Left ventricle mean dose (LV Dmean) (MD -2.629, p=<0.001). Applying left ventricle and left anterior descending coronary artery dose constraints in left-sided breast VMAT planning significantly reduced LV mean dose by 2.63 Gy compared to heart-only plans.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: