Search

A comparison of the radiation exposure to the left anterior descending artery (LAD) and left ventricle (LV) was performed for twenty-three left breast cancer patients. For each participant, two tangential fields 3D-CRT, two- and seven-field IMRT and two and four partial arcs VMAT plans were created. Dose constraints for CTV, ipsilateral lung and heart were followed. The V 40Gy , V 30Gy , D av of LAD and V 23Gy , V 5Gy , D av of LV were calculated and extracted from the plans. Parametric and non-parametric tests were applied to compare the parameters derived from the five treatment techniques. All generated plans fulfilled the dose constraints. The D av ranges of the LAD and LV from all examined techniques were 11.77-14.73 Gy and 5.37-6.40 Gy, respectively. The V 40Gy and V 30Gy ranges of the LAD were 2.90-12.91% and 10.80-18.51%, respectively. The V 23Gy and V 5Gy of the LV were 4.29-7.43% and 18.24-30.05%, respectively. The VMAT plans and seven-field IMRT significantly reduced the V 40Gy , V 30Gy of LAD and V 23Gy of LV compared with the two-field treatments ( p < 0.05). However, 3D-CRT plans provided statistically lower values for V 5Gy of LV over the other techniques ( p < 0.05). The presented results provide a detailed dataset of the radiation burden of two critical cardiac structures from five radiotherapy techniques.

Background: Breast cancer (BC) is the most common malignancy in females, accounting for the majority of cancer-related deaths worldwide. There is well-established understanding about the effective role of radiotherapy (RT) in BC therapeutic strategies, offering a better local-regional control, prolonged survival, and improved quality of life for patients. However, it has been proven that conventional RT modalities, especially in left-sided BC cases, are unable to avoid the administration of high RT doses to the heart, thus resulting in cardiotoxicity and promoting long-term cardiovascular diseases (CVD). Recent radiotherapeutic techniques, characterized by dosimetric dose restrictions, target volume revision/modifications, an increased awareness of risk factors, and consistent follow-ups, have created an advantageous context for a significant decrease inpost-RT CVD incidence., Aim: This review presents the fundamental role of current cardioprotective strategies in the prevention of cardiotoxic effects in left-BCRT., Material and Methods: A literature search was conducted up to January 2023 using the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and PubMed Central databases. Our review refers to new radiotherapeutic techniques carried out on patients after BC surgery. Specifically, a dose evaluation of the heart and left anterior descending coronary artery (LADCA) was pointed out for all the included studies, depending on the implemented RT modality, bed positioning, and internal mammary lymph nodes radiation., Results: Several studies reporting improved heart sparing with new RT techniques in BC patients were searched. In addition to the RT modality, which definitely determines the feasibility of achieving lower doses for the organs at risk (OARs), better target coverage, dose conformity and homogeneity, and the patient's position, characteristics, and anatomy may also affect the evaluated RT dose to the whole heart and its substructures., Conclusions: Modern BC RT techniques seem to enable the administration of lower doses to the OARs without compromising on the target coverage. The analysis of several anatomical parameters and the assessment of cardiac biomarkers potentiate the protective effect of these new irradiation modalities, providing a holistic approach to the radiation-associated risks of cardiac disease for BC patients. Despite technological advances, an inevitable cardiac radiation risk still exists, while adverse cardiac events may be observed even many years after RT. Studies with longer follow-ups are required in order to determine the effectiveness of modern breast RT techniques.

Background: Significant changes in the accessibility and viability of health services have been observed during the COVID-19 period, particularly in vulnerable groups such as cancer patients. In this study, we described the impact of radical practice and perceived changes on cancer patients’ mental well-being and investigated potential outcome descriptors. Methods: Generalized anxiety disorder assessment (GAD-7), patient health (PHQ-9), and World Health Organization-five well-being index (WHO-5) questionnaires were used to assess anxiety, depression, and mental well-being. Information on participants, disease baseline information, and COVID-19-related questions were collected, and related explanatory variables were included for statistical analysis. Results: The mean score values for anxiety, depression, and mental well-being were 4.7 ± 5.53, 4.9 ± 6.42, and 72.2 ± 18.53, respectively. GAD-7 and PHQ-9 scores were statistically associated (p < 0.001), while high values of GAD-7 and PHQ-9 questionnaires were related to low values of WHO-5 (p < 0.001).Using the GAD-7 scale, 16.2% of participants were classified as having mild anxiety (GAD-7 score: 5−9).Mild to more severe anxiety was significantly associated with a history of mental health conditions (p = 0.01, OR = 3.74, 95% CI [1.372−10.21]), and stage category (stage III/IV vs. I/II, p = 0.01, OR = 3.83, 95% CI [1.38−10.64]. From the participants, 36.2% were considered to have depression (PHQ-9 score ≥ 5). Depression was related with older patients (p = 0.05, OR = 1.63, 95% CI [1.16−2.3]), those with previous mental health conditions (p = 0.03, OR = 14.24, 95% CI [2.47−81.84]), those concerned about the COVID-19 impact on their cancer treatment (p = 0.027, OR = 0.19, 95% CI [0.045−0.82]) or those who felt that COVID-19 pandemic has affected mental health (p = 0.013, OR = 3.56, 95% CI [1.30−9.72]). Additionally, most participants (86.7%) had a good well-being score (WHO-5 score ≥ 50). Mental well-being seemed more reduced among stage I−III patients than stage IV patients (p = 0.014, OR = 0.12, 95% CI [0.023−0.65]). Conclusion: There is a necessity for comprehensive cancer care improvement. These patients’ main concern related to cancer therapy, yet the group of patients who were mentally affected by the pandemic should be identified and supported.