What is the dosimetric impact of isotropic vs anisotropic safety margins for delineation of the clinical target volume in breast brachytherapy

Abstract Purpose The purpose of the study was to report dosimetric differences for breast brachytherapy plans optimized for clinical target volume (CTV) generated using conventional isotropic expansion of tumor bed volume (TBV) and Groupe Europeen de Curietherapie–European Society for Radiotherapy and Oncology (GEC-ESTRO) recommendations to expand the TBV anisotropically to achieve a total safety margin of 2 cm (resection margin size + added safety margin). Methods Institutional records of 100 patients who underwent accelerated partial breast irradiation using multicatheter interstitial brachytherapy from May 2015 to March 2020 were reviewed retrospectively. Two sets of CT-based plans were made, one with 1-cm isotropic margins around the tumor bed (CTV_ISO) and the other with anisotropic margins (CTV_GEC). Plans were evaluated and compared using the American Brachytherapy Society and GEC-ESTRO guidelines. Results The median TBV was 36.97 cc. The median margin widths were as follows: anterior 1.2, posterior 1.0, superior 1.0, inferior 0.9, medial 1.2, and lateral 1.2 cm. The mean tumor bed coverage index was 0.94; 0.93 [p.066], the CTV coverage index 0.86; 0.84 [p 0.001], the dose homogeneity index (DHI) 0.77; 0.75 [p  35 cc, the CTV coverage index was 0.86; 0.84 [p 0.003] and the DHI 0.78; 0.76 [p 0.001] in CTV_ISO and CTV_GEC plans, respectively. Conclusions In this cohort of patients who underwent accelerated partial breast irradiation, plans with anisotropic margins had lower conformity, the impact of which was predominantly seen in smaller implants. Rest of the dosimetric constraints were achieved in both the plans as per the American Brachytherapy Society and GEC-ESTRO guidelines.