A quantitative method to implement and to assess the single isocenter technique for breast cancer radiation therapy

Abdulhamid Chaikh, Sara Fayolle, Isabelle Gabelle-Flandin1, Maud Marguet, Nicolas Docquiere, Jean-Yves Giraud, Jacques Balosso


Purpose: We propose a process of quality assurance to validate and implement the single isocenter technique for breast cancer radiotherapy. We evaluated the dosimetric and temporal gains using the single isocenter technique compared to classic source to skin distance (SSD) technique.

Methods: 6 patients of breast cancer localization were studied. For each patient 2 treatment plans were generated. In plan 1 the dose was calculated using SSD technique. In plan 2 the dose was calculated using single isocenter technique. To implement the plan 2 a dosimetric analysis including monitor units (MU), isodose curves, cumulative and differential dose volume histograms cDVH, dDVH respectively, coverage index, conformity index for planning target volume were used. The measurements using a PMMA phantom consist of measuring point dose by an ionization chamber and 2D dose distributions using 2D diodes arrays. Wilcoxon signed rank and Spearman’s tests were used to calculate p-value and correlation coefficient, respectively.

Results: The single isocenter technique reduced the MU by average on -30.1 ± 13.6%, (p = 0.03). We observed an improvement with statistical significance between the two techniques for the mean dose, minimum dose and volume receiving 95% of the prescribed dose without over-dosage. The analysis for dDVH showed that the dose distribution in the target volume calculated in the single isocenter technique is more homogeneous than the SSD technique. Wilcoxon test showed that the two treatment plans had the same quality (p > 0.05). The difference between calculated and measured dose was within 2.4 ± 3.3% for absolute point dose and the percentage of points passing gamma criteria was on average 99.8 ± 0.2%.

Conclusion: This method provides a quantitative evaluation and comparison of the two irradiation techniques for breast cancer and the consequences of the technical change on dose calculation.


Breast Cancer; Single Isocenter; Radiotherapy

Full Text:



Klein EE, Taylor M, Michaletz-Lorentz M, et al. A mono isocentric technique for breast and regional nodal therapy using dual asymmetric jaws. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1994;28:753-60.

Idzes M, Holmberg O, Mijnheer BJ, Huizenga H. Effect of set-up uncertainties on the dose distribution in the match region of supraclavicular and tangential breast fields. Radiother Oncol. 1998;46: 91-8.

Marshall MG. Three-field isocentric breast irradiation using asymmetric jaws and a tilt board. Radiother Oncol. 1993; 28:228-32.

Rosenow UF, Valentine ES, Davis LW. A technique for treating local breast cancer using a single set-up point and asymmetric collimation. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1990; 19: 183-8.

Conte G, Nascimben O, Tureato G, et al. Three-field technique for breast evaluation using individualized shielding blocks. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys.1988;14:1299-305.

Lu XQ, Sullivan S, Eggleston T, et al. A three-field breast treatment technique with precise geometric matching using multileaf collimator-equipped linear accelerators. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2003;55:1420-31.

Oozeer R, Aimard L, Alfonsi M, et al. Techniques single-isocentriques dans les cancers des VADS et les cancers du sein: mise en œuvre. Oncologie 2007;9:428-34.

Murthy KK, Sivakumar SS, Davis CA, et al. Optimization of dose distribution with multi-leaf collimator using field-in-field technique for parallel opposing tangential beams of breast cancers. J Med Phys. 2008;33:60-3.

Chaikh A, Giraud J, Balosso J. A method to quantify and assess the dosimetric and clinical impact resulting from the heterogeneity correction in radiotherapy for lung cancer. Int J Cancer Ther Oncol 2014; 2:020110.

Mijheer B, Georg D. Guidelines for the verification of IMRT. Brussels, Belgium: ESTRO; 2008.

Ezzell GA, Burmeister JW, Dogan N, et al. IMRT commissioning: multiple institution planning and dosimetry comparisons, a report from AAPM Task Group 119. Med Phys. 2009;36:5359-73.

Chaikh A, Giraud JY, Perrin E, et al. The choice of statistical methods for comparisons of dosimetric data in radiotherapy. Radiat Oncol. 2014; 9:205.

DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.14319/ijcto.33.19

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License.


International Journal of Cancer Therapy and Oncology (ISSN 2330-4049)

© International Journal of Cancer Therapy and Oncology (IJCTO)

To make sure that you can receive messages from us, please add the 'ijcto.org' domain to your e-mail 'safe list'. If you do not receive e-mail in your 'inbox', check your 'bulk mail' or 'junk mail' folders.


Number of visits since October, 2013