Reduction in Doses to Organs at Risk and Normal Tissue During Breast Radiation Therapy With a Carbon-Fiber Adjustable Reusable Accessory
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PurposeThis pilot study (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04543851) investigates a novel breast positioning device using a low density, high tensile carbon-fiber cradle to support the breast, remove the inframammary fold, and reduce dose to organs at risk for whole breast radiation therapy in the supine position.Methods and MaterialsThirty patients with inframammary folds ≥1 cm or lateral ptosis in supine treatment position were planned with standard positioning and with a carbon-fiber Adjustable Reusable Accessory (CARA) breast support. Twenty patients received whole breast with or without regional nodal irradiation with 42.5 Gy in 16 fractions or 50 Gy in 25 fractions using CARA. Median body mass index was 32 in this study.ResultsCARA removed all inframammary folds and reduced V20Gyipsilateral lung, V105%breast, and V50% body, without compromising target coverage. Median (range) V20Gyipsilateral lung for whole breast radiation therapy was 12.3% (1.4%-28.7%) with standard of care versus 10.9% (1.2%-17.3%) with CARA (Wilcoxon P = .005). Median V105% breast was 8.0% (0.0%-29%) with standard of care versus 4.0% (0.0%-23%) with CARA (P = .006) and median V50% body was 3056 mL (1476-5285 mL) versus 2780 mL (1415-5123 mL) with CARA (P = .001). CARA was compatible with deep inspiration breath hold and achieved median V25Gyheart = 0.1% (range 0%-1.9%) for all patients with left breast cancer. Skin reactions with CARA were consistent with historical data and daily variation in treatment setup was consistent with standard supine positioning.ConclusionsCARA can reduce V105%breast, lung and normal tissue dose, and remove the inframammary fold for breast patients with large or pendulous breasts and high body mass index treated in the supine position, without compromising target coverage. CARA will undergo further study in a randomized controlled trial.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".