Purpose: To compare the treatment plans for accelerated partial breast irradiation calculated by the new commercially available collapsed cone convolution (CCC) and current standard TG-43-based algorithms for 50 patients treated at our institution with either a Strut-Adjusted Volume Implant (SAVI) or Contura device.
Methods and materials: We recalculated target coverage, volume of highly dosed normal tissue, and dose to organs at risk (ribs, skin, and lung) with each algorithm. For 1 case an artificial air pocket was added to simulate 10% nonconformance. We performed a Wilcoxon signed rank test to determine the median differences in the clinical indices V90, V95, V100, V150, V200, and highest-dosed 0.1 cm(3) and 1.0 cm(3) of rib, skin, and lung between the two algorithms.
Results: The CCC algorithm calculated lower values on average for all dose-volume histogram parameters. Across the entire patient cohort, the median difference in the clinical indices calculated by the 2 algorithms was <10% for dose to organs at risk, <5% for target volume coverage (V90, V95, and V100), and <4 cm(3) for dose to normal breast tissue (V150 and V200). No discernable difference was seen in the nonconformance case.
Conclusions: We found that on average over our patient population CCC calculated (<10%) lower doses than TG-43. These results should inform clinicians as they prepare for the transition to heterogeneous dose calculation algorithms and determine whether clinical tolerance limits warrant modification.
Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.