Propensity-score-matched evaluation of the incidence of radiation pneumonitis and secondary cancer risk for breast cancer patients treated with IMRT/VMAT

• Published in: Scientific reports 2017-10, Vol.7 (1), p.13771-9, Article 13771
• Main Authors: Chao, Pei-Ju, Lee, Hsiao-Fei, Lan, Jen-Hong, Guo, Shih-Sian, Ting, Hui-Min, Huang, Yu-Jie, Chen, Hui-Chun, Lee, Tsair-Fwu
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: 692/4028/67/1059/485; 692/4028/67/1347; Adult; Aged; Breast cancer; Breast Neoplasms - pathology; Breast Neoplasms - radiotherapy; Cancer therapies; Chronic toxicity; Female; Follow-Up Studies; Health risk assessment; Humanities and Social Sciences; Humans; Incidence; Lungs; Middle Aged; multidisciplinary; Neoplasms, Second Primary - etiology; Organs at Risk - radiation effects; Pneumonitis; Prognosis; Propensity Score; Radiation Pneumonitis - epidemiology; Radiation Pneumonitis - etiology; Radiation therapy; Radiotherapy Dosage; Radiotherapy, Intensity-Modulated - adverse effects; Risk Factors; Science; Science (multidisciplinary); Taiwan - epidemiology; Toxicity
• ISSN: 2045-2322; 2045-2322
• DOI: 10.1038/s41598-017-14145-x

Propensity score matching evaluates the treatment incidence of radiation-induced pneumonitis (RP) and secondary cancer risk (SCR) after intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) and volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) for breast cancer patients. Of 32 patients treated with IMRT and 58 who received VMAT were propensity matched in a 1:1 ratio. RP and SCR were evaluated as the endpoints of acute and chronic toxicity, respectively. Self-fitted normal tissue complication probability (NTCP) parameter values were used to analyze the risk of RP. SCRs were evaluated using the preferred Schneider’s parameterization risk models. The dosimetric parameter of the ipsilateral lung volume receiving 40 Gy (IV 40 ) was selected as the dominant risk factor for the RP NTCP model. The results showed that the risks of RP and NTCP, as well as that of SCR of the ipsilateral lung, were slightly lower than the values in patients treated with VMAT versus IMRT ( p  ≤ 0.01). However, the organ equivalent dose and excess absolute risk values in the contralateral lung and breast were slightly higher with VMAT than with IMRT ( p  ≤ 0.05). When compared to IMRT, VMAT is a rational radiotherapy option for breast cancer patients, based on its reduced potential for inducing secondary malignancies and RP complications.