Dosimetric Analysis of Organs at Risk and its Correlation with Radiation Techniques in Left-Sided Breast Radiotherapy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Breast cancer (BC) burden has increased drastically and has been ranked 2nd worldwide and most common in India, with an incidence of 13.5% of all newly diagnosed cancers. Surgery is the main modality of treatment. The aim of adjuvant radiation therapy is to reduce local recurrence and improve survival. In breast radiotherapy, the proximity of the target to sensitive structures together with the uncertainty introduced by respiratory movement, make this treatment one of the most studied to increase its effectiveness. Various techniques like 3DCRT (Three-Dimensional Conformal Radiation Therapy), IMRT (Intensity Modulated Radiation Therapy) and VMAT (Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy) are used in RT (Radiation Therapy). Although 3DCRT lowers radiation exposure to normal tissues, it can result in suboptimal dosing of the tumor volume. Conversely, IMRT and VMAT achieve better tumor dose coverage but pose greater challenges in protecting organs at risk (OARs). Objectives: This retrospective study aims to highlight the Dosimetric study of OARS, and compare Dosimetric values of different RT Techniques in patients receiving left-sided breast irradiation. Methods: A total of 142 left breast carcinoma patients receiving either whole-breast irradiation or chest wall irradiation were enrolled in this study. The Dosimetric parameters of the heart, left lung and right breast were evaluated and compared, and possible correlations were studied. Results: Of the 142 patients assessed, 62 patients were stage III, 93 patients underwent post-mastectomy radiotherapy and 49 patients with Whole Breast Radiotherapy (WBRT). Majority of patients were treated by 3DCRT technique. Patients were planned for the 50 Gy in 25 fractions (n-72) and 40 Gy in 15 fractions (n-70) radiation dose regimens. Heart mean dose in 3DCRT, IMRT and VMAT is 6, 7.8 and 7.1Gy respectively (p-0.002).On comparing V20 (Volume of lung receiving 20Gy) of ipsilateral (I/L) Lung with 3DCRT, IMRT and VMAT (p-0.998) is 24.8%, 27.5 % and 22.5% respectively. Contralateral (C/L) breast mean dose in 3DCRT was 0.8Gy whereas 5.3Gy and 4Gy respectively in IMRT and VMAT which was statistically significant (p-0.05) Conclusion: Significant correlations for dosimetric parameters were registered between the OARs and RT Techniques. Our results suggest that heart mean dose and C/L breast dose is minimal in 3DCRT compared to IMRT and VMAT techniques.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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".