Brachytherapy
Volume 8, Issue 3 , Pages 331-334, July 2009

Radiation recall reaction with docetaxel administration after accelerated partial breast irradiation with electronic brachytherapy

  • Sea S. Chen

      Affiliations

    • Department of Radiation Oncology, Rush University Medical Center, Chicago, IL
  • ,
  • Jonathan B. Strauss

      Affiliations

    • Department of Radiation Oncology, Rush University Medical Center, Chicago, IL
  • ,
  • Anand P. Shah

      Affiliations

    • Department of Radiation Oncology, Rush University Medical Center, Chicago, IL
    • Corresponding Author InformationCorresponding author. Department of Radiation Oncology, Women's Board Cancer Treatment Center, 500 South Paulina Street, Ground Floor, Room 013, Chicago, IL 60612. Tel.: +1-312-942-5751; fax: +1-312-942-2339.
  • ,
  • Ruta D. Rao

      Affiliations

    • Section of Medical Oncology, Rush University Medical Center, Chicago, IL
  • ,
  • Damien A. Bernard

      Affiliations

    • Department of Radiation Oncology, Rush University Medical Center, Chicago, IL
  • ,
  • Katherine L. Griem

      Affiliations

    • Department of Radiation Oncology, Rush University Medical Center, Chicago, IL

Received 24 December 2008; received in revised form 16 January 2009; accepted 20 January 2009. published online 18 May 2009.

Abstract 

Purpose

Accelerated partial breast irradiation (APBI) offers several advantages over whole breast irradiation. Electronic brachytherapy may further reduce barriers to breast conserving therapy by making APBI more available. However, its toxicity profile is not well characterized.

Methods and Materials

A 60-year-old woman was treated with APBI using Axxent (Xoft, Sunnyvale, CA) electronic brachytherapy. One month after APBI, a cycle of docetaxel and cyclophosphamide was given. Within 3 weeks, the patient developed an ulcerative radiation recall reaction in the skin overlying the lumpectomy cavity. To investigate this toxicity, the skin dose from electronic brachytherapy was compared with the dose that would have been delivered by an iridium-192 (192Ir) source. Additionally, a dose equivalent was estimated by adjusting for the increased relative biologic effectiveness (RBE) of low energy photons generated by the electronic source.

Results

Using electronic brachytherapy, the skin dose was 537cGy per fraction compared with 470cGy for an 192Ir source. Given an RBE for a 40kV source of 1.28 compared with 192Ir, the equivalent dose at the skin for an electronic source was 687cGy-equivalents, a 46% increase.

Conclusions

We present a case of an ulcerative radiation recall reaction in a patient receiving APBI with electronic brachytherapy followed by chemotherapy. Our analysis shows that the use of electronic brachytherapy resulted in the deposition of significantly higher equivalent dose at the skin compared with 192Ir. These findings suggest that standard guidelines (e.g., surface-to-skin distance) that apply to 192Ir-based balloon brachytherapy may not be applicable to electronic brachytherapy.

Keywords: Docetaxel, Radiation recall reaction, Partial breast irradiation, Electronic brachytherapy, Breast cancer

To access this article, please choose from the options below

Login to an existing account or Register a new account.

  • Purchase this article for 31.50 USD (You must login/register to purchase this article)

    Online access for 24 hours. The PDF version can be downloaded as your permanent record.

  • Subscribe to this title

    Get unlimited online access to this article and all other articles in this title 24/7 for one year.

  • Claim access now

    For current subscribers with Society Membership or Account Number.

  • Visit SciVerse ScienceDirect to see if you have access via your institution.
 

PII: S1538-4721(09)00002-6

doi:10.1016/j.brachy.2009.01.001

Brachytherapy
Volume 8, Issue 3 , Pages 331-334, July 2009