MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4376613759 · doi:10.1016/j.esmoop.2023.101506

166P A mono-institutional experience of field-in-field 3D-CRT planning in breast radiotherapy with FAST and FAST-forward protocols

2023· article· en· W4376613759 on OpenAlexfundno aff
M.C. Daniotti, S. Trivellato, S. Carminati, P. Caricato, S. Terrevazzi, Chiara Julita, R.M. Niespolo, Sofia Meregalli, Andrea Podhradska, E. Bonetto, Stefano Arcangeli, Elena De Ponti

Bibliographic record

VenueESMO Open · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicBreast Cancer Treatment Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMcMaster University
KeywordsMedicineRadiation therapyNuclear medicineBreast cancerBreast-conserving surgeryRadiologyCancerMastectomyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The benefits of hypofractionated radiotherapy with FAST and FAST-forward protocols could be compromised by soft tissue reactions and cardiac toxicity caused by dose inhomogeneity and inaccurate heart sparing. This study aims to evaluate the dosimetric results of whole-breast hypofractionated radiotherapy with the field-in-field 3D conformal radiotherapy (3D-CRT) technique. A mono-institutional consecutive cohort of 122 early-stage invasive breast cancer patients was treated using field-in-field 3D-CRT. Thirty-nine patients were treated with 28.5 Gy in 5 fractions once a week (FAST protocol) and eighty-three patients with 26 Gy in 5 consecutive fractions (FAST-forward protocol). Different parameters were evaluated to assess target coverage, dose conformity and homogeneity and hot spots in unspecified tissues. To assess breast dimensions, nipple-to-pectoral muscle distance (NPD) and maximum mediolateral thickness (MLT) along tangential fields were measured. Evaluated OARs were ipsilateral lung and heart with their respective dose constraints as required by the clinical protocols. The median NPD and MLT were 4.65 cm [1.70-9.30] and 21.55 cm [11.26-32.30] respectively, with a median CTV of 380.50 cm3 [60.29-1255.13]. The median V95% was 99.45% [95.19-100], and the median 105% isodose volume was 0.74 cm3 [0.00-48.02] of whom 0.07 cm3 [0.00-5.22] in the first skin centimetre. This led to a median CI of 0.53 [0.33-1.00] and a median HI of 0.07 [0.03-0.19]. OARs dose-volume constraints were always respected. The median ipsilateral lung V8Gy was 7.32% [0.31-25.15]; as for the heart (left breast only), the median V1.5Gy was 6.45% [0.00-25.12] and median V7Gy was 0.34% [0.00-4.50]. Each plan achieved a clinically acceptable target coverage and homogeneity, with reduced superficial hot spots. These results suggested that field-in-field 3D-CRT can provide good quality FAST and FAST-forward breast RT plans, with the advantages of an efficient and cost-effective delivery technique. The clinical follow-up will give further critical feedback on treatment outcomes and toxicities.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.030
Threshold uncertainty score0.343

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.017
GPT teacher head0.328
Teacher spread0.311 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueESMO OpenSame topicBreast Cancer Treatment StudiesFrench-language works237,207