Evaluation of organ-specific peripheral doses after 2-dimensional, 3-dimensional and hybrid intensity modulated radiation therapy for breast cancer based on Monte Carlo and convolution/superposition algorithms: implications for secondary cancer risk assessment.

To make a comprehensive evaluation of organ-specific out-of-field doses using Monte Carlo (MC) simulations for different breast cancer irradiation techniques and to compare results with a commercial treatment planning system (TPS). Three breast radiotherapy techniques using 6MV tangential photon beams were compared: (a) 2DRT (open rectangular fields), (b) 3DCRT (conformal wedged fields), and (c) hybrid IMRT (open conformal+modulated fields). Over 35 organs were contoured in a whole-body CT scan and organ-specific dose distributions were determined with MC and the TPS. Large differences in out-of-field doses were observed between MC and TPS calculations, even for organs close to the target volume such as the heart, the lungs and the contralateral breast (up to 70% difference). MC simulations showed that a large fraction of the out-of-field dose comes from the out-of-field head scatter fluence (>40%) which is not adequately modeled by the TPS. Based on MC simulations, the 3DCRT technique using external wedges yielded significantly higher doses (up to a factor 4-5 in the pelvis) than the 2DRT and the hybrid IMRT techniques which yielded similar out-of-field doses. In sharp contrast to popular belief, the IMRT technique investigated here does not increase the out-of-field dose compared to conventional techniques and may offer the most optimal plan. The 3DCRT technique with external wedges yields the largest out-of-field doses. For accurate out-of-field dose assessment, a commercial TPS should not be used, even for organs near the target volume (contralateral breast, lungs, heart).

Evaluation of a new serological test for the detection of anti-Coxiella and anti-Rickettsia antibodies.

Coxiella burnetii and members of the genus Rickettsia are obligate intracellular bacteria. Since cultivation of these organisms requires dedicated techniques, their diagnosis usually relies on serological or molecular biology methods. Immunofluorescence is considered the gold standard to detect antibody-reactivity towards these organisms. Here, we assessed the performance of a new automated epifluorescence immunoassay (InoDiag) to detect IgM and IgG against C. burnetii, Rickettsia typhi and Rickettsia conorii. Samples were tested with the InoDiag assay. A total of 213 sera were tested, of which 63 samples from Q fever, 20 from spotted fever rickettsiosis, 6 from murine typhus and 124 controls. InoDiag results were compared to micro-immunofluorescence. For acute Q fever, the sensitivity of phase 2 IgG was only of 30% with a cutoff of 1 arbitrary unit (AU). In patients with acute Q fever with positive IF IgM, sensitivity reached 83% with the same cutoff. Sensitivity for chronic Q fever was 100% whereas sensitivity for past Q fever was 65%. Sensitivity for spotted Mediterranean fever and murine typhus were 91% and 100%, respectively. Both assays exhibited a good specificity in control groups, ranging from 79% in sera from patients with unrelated diseases or EBV positivity to 100% in sera from healthy patients. In conclusion, the InoDiag assay exhibits an excellent performance for the diagnosis of chronic Q fever but a very low IgG sensitivity for acute Q fever likely due to low reactivity of phase 2 antigens present on the glass slide. This defect is partially compensated by the detection of IgM. Because it exhibits a good negative predictive value, the InoDiag assay is valuable to rule out a chronic Q fever. For the diagnosis of rickettsial diseases, the sensitivity of the InoDiag method is similar to conventional immunofluorescence.