[en] Purpose: Postmastectomy radiation therapy (PMRT) is often delivered to patients with permanent breast implants. On occasion, patients are irradiated with a tissue expander (TE) in place before their permanent implant exchange. Because of concern of potential under-dosing in these patients, we examined the dosimetric effects of the Magna-Site (Santa Barbara, CA) metallic port that is present in certain TEs. Methods and Materials: We performed ex vivo film dosimetry with single 6-MV and 15-MV photon beams on a water phantom containing a Magna-Site disc in two orientations. Additionally, using in vivo films, we measured the exit dose from 1 patient's TE-reconstructed breast during chest wall treatment with 15-MV tangent beams. Finally, we placed thermoluminescent dosimeters (TLDs) on 6 patients with TEs who received PMRT delivered with 15-MV tangent beams. Results: Phantom film dosimetry revealed decreased transmission in the region of the Magna-Site, particularly with the magnet in the parallel orientation (at 22 mm: 78% transmission with 6 MV, 84% transmission with 15 MV). The transmission measured by in vivo films during single beam treatment concurred with ex vivo results. TLD data showed acceptable variation in median dose to the skin (86-101% prescription dose). Conclusion: Because of potential dosimetric effects of the Magna-Site, it is preferable to treat PMRT patients with permanent implants. However, it is not unreasonable to treat with a TE because the volume of tissue affected by attenuation from the Magna-Site is small. In this scenario, we recommend using 15 MV photons with compensating bolus

[en] To determine if the presence of bilateral implants, in addition to other anatomic and treatment-related variables, affects coverage of the target volume and dose to the heart and lung in patients receiving postmastectomy radiation therapy (PMRT). A total of 197 consecutive women with breast cancer underwent mastectomy and immediate tissue expander (TE) placement, with or without exchange for a permanent implant (PI) before radiation therapy at our center. PMRT was delivered with 2 tangential beams + supraclavicular lymph node field (50 Gy). Patients were grouped by implant number: 51% unilateral (100) and 49% bilateral (97). The planning target volume (PTV) (defined as implant + chest wall + nodes), heart, and ipsilateral lung were contoured and the following parameters were abstracted from dose-volume histogram (DVH) data: PTV D_95% > 98%, Lung V₂₀Gy > 30%, and Heart V₂₅Gy > 5%. Univariate (UVA) and multivariate analyses (MVA) were performed to determine the association of variables with these parameters. The 2 groups were well balanced for implant type and volume, internal mammary node (IMN) treatment, and laterality. In the entire cohort, 90% had PTV D_95% > 98%, indicating excellent coverage of the chest wall. Of the patients, 27% had high lung doses (V₂₀Gy > 30%) and 16% had high heart doses (V₂₅Gy > 5%). No significant factors were associated with suboptimal PTV coverage. On MVA, IMN treatment was found to be highly associated with high lung and heart doses (both p < 0.0001), but implant number was not (p = 0.54). In patients with bilateral implants, IMN treatment was the only predictor of dose to the contralateral implant (p = 0.001). In conclusion, bilateral implants do not compromise coverage of the target volume or increase lung and heart dose in patients receiving PMRT. The most important predictor of high lung and heart doses in patients with implant-based reconstruction, whether unilateral or bilateral, is treatment of the IMNs. Refinement of radiation techniques in reconstructed patients who require comprehensive nodal irradiation is warranted