Alternating Expiration and Inspiration Breath-Hold Spares the Chest Wall During Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy for Peripheral Lung Malignancies

Purpose The proximity of tumors to the chest wall brings additional risks of chest wall pain during stereotactic body radiation therapy. Herein, we dosimetrically compared alternated breath-hold (ABH) plans with single BH plans and determined the common characteristics of eligible patients who may obtain better chest wall sparing using this technique. Methods and Materials Twenty patients with lung lesions adjacent to the chest wall were enrolled and received respiratory training. Their half-fraction end expiration BH and deep inspiration BH plans were summed to generate the ABH plans. Dosimetric parameters of the chest wall were compared between single and alternated BH plans, and the correlation between tumor location and the outcome of chest wall sparing was quantitatively evaluated. Pretreatment cone beam computed tomography variations in eligible patients were recorded as well. Results Compared with the end expiration BH and deep inspiration BH plans, the ABH plans reduced chest wall dosimetric results with median reductions of 2.0% and 3.9% (Dmax: maximum point dose), 15.4% and 14.8% (D1cc: dose to a volume of 1 cm3), and 48.8% and 63% (V30: volume receiving 30 Gy or more), respectively. Relative tumor displacements (ratio of tumor displacement in the superior-inferior direction to planning target volume diameter) were greater in the lower lobe than in the upper and middle lobes (1.17 vs 0.18). Meanwhile, better median reductions of 44% (Dmax), 46% (D1cc), and 98% (V30) were obtained in the lower lobe cohort using the ABH technique. Pretreatment variations for all BHs met the 5-mm threshold. Conclusions The ABH technique can significantly spare the adjacent chest wall without compromising planning target volume coverage in comparison with the single BH, and patients with tumors in the lower lobes can obtain better chest wall sparing than in the upper and middle lobes. Further investigation is warranted to validate these findings. The proximity of tumors to the chest wall brings additional risks of chest wall pain during stereotactic body radiation therapy. Herein, we dosimetrically compared alternated breath-hold (ABH) plans with single BH plans and determined the common characteristics of eligible patients who may obtain better chest wall sparing using this technique. Twenty patients with lung lesions adjacent to the chest wall were enrolled and received respiratory training. Their half-fraction end expiration BH and deep inspiration BH plans were summed to generate the ABH plans. Dosimetric parameters of the chest wall were compared between single and alternated BH plans, and the correlation between tumor location and the outcome of chest wall sparing was quantitatively evaluated. Pretreatment cone beam computed tomography variations in eligible patients were recorded as well. Compared with the end expiration BH and deep inspiration BH plans, the ABH plans reduced chest wall dosimetric results with median reductions of 2.0% and 3.9% (Dmax: maximum point dose), 15.4% and 14.8% (D1cc: dose to a volume of 1 cm3), and 48.8% and 63% (V30: volume receiving 30 Gy or more), respectively. Relative tumor displacements (ratio of tumor displacement in the superior-inferior direction to planning target volume diameter) were greater in the lower lobe than in the upper and middle lobes (1.17 vs 0.18). Meanwhile, better median reductions of 44% (Dmax), 46% (D1cc), and 98% (V30) were obtained in the lower lobe cohort using the ABH technique. Pretreatment variations for all BHs met the 5-mm threshold. The ABH technique can significantly spare the adjacent chest wall without compromising planning target volume coverage in comparison with the single BH, and patients with tumors in the lower lobes can obtain better chest wall sparing than in the upper and middle lobes. Further investigation is warranted to validate these findings.