Although hypofractionated radiotherapy has been standardised in early breast cancer, even in post-mastectomy no such consensus has been developed for locally advanced breast cancer (LABC), probably due to complex planning and field matching. This study is directed towards dosimetric evaluation and comparison of toxicity, response and disease-free survival (DFS) comparison between hypofractionation and conventional radiotherapy in post-mastectomy LABC.

In total, 222 female breast cancer patients were randomly assigned to be treated with either hypofractionated radiotherapy (n = 120) delivering 40 Gy in 15 fractions over 3 weeks or conventional radiotherapy (n = 102) with 50 Gy in 25 fractions over 5 weeks after modified radical mastectomy (MRM) along with neoadjuvant and/or adjuvant chemotherapy. All patients were planned with treatment planning software and assessed regularly during and after treatment.

Median follow-up period was 178 weeks in conventional arm (CRA) and 182 weeks in hypofractionation arm (HFA). There exists a dosimetric difference between the two arms of treatment, in spite of similar dose coverage [planning treatment volume (PTV) D90 92·04% in CRA versus 92·5% in HFA; p = 0·49], average dose in HFA is less than that of CRA (p < 0·001); so is the maximum clinical target volume (CTV) dose (p < 0·001). Similarly, average lung dose in HFA arm is significantly lower than CRA (9·9 versus 10·84; p = 0·06), but the V20Gy of lung and V30Gy of heart had no difference. The toxicity of radiation was comparable with similar mean time to produce toxicity [CRA: 7 W, HFA: 10 W; hazard ratio 0·64, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0·28–1·45]. Three-year recurrence event was alike in two arms (CRA: 4·9%, HFA: 5·8%; p = 0·76). Mean DFS in CRA is 230 weeks and that of HFA is 235 weeks with hazard ratio 1·01 (95% CI = 0·32–3·19; p = 0·987).

Though biologically effective dose (BED) in hypofractionation is lesser than that of conventional fractionation, there are indistinguishable toxicity, locoregional recurrence, distant failure rate and DFS between the two modalities.

To quantify the effect of breathing motion on post-mastectomy radiotherapy with three-dimensional (3D) tangents and intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT)

Patients trained for breath-hold underwent routine free breathing (FB) computed tomography (CT) simulation for radiotherapy as well as additional CT scans with breath held at the end of normal inspiration (NI scan) and expiration (NE scan) for study. The FB scan was used to develop both tangents and IMRT plans. To simulate breathing, each plan was copied and applied on NI and NE scans. The respiratory parameters of the patients as well as the dosimetric data with both the plans were analysed.

Breathing motion resulted in mean fall in target coverage (V95) with IMRT by more than 5% when compared with tangents, and this effect significantly correlated with higher tidal volume. There was also a decrease in the mean target minimal dose by 20–25% with IMRT when compared with 10–12% with tangents, attributable to breathing motion. However, the cardiac dose crossed the limit (V25<10%) with breathing in the 3D tangents plan.

Dosimetric coverage of the chest wall is sensitive to breathing motion for the IMRT technique when compared with standard tangents, especially in patients with large tidal volume.