Early breast cancer with positive margins: excellent local control with an upfront brachytherapy boost

Thermal Boost Combined with Interstitial Brachytherapy in Early Breast Cancer Conserving Therapy—Initial Group Long-Term Clinical Results and Late Toxicity

(1) In breast-conserving therapy (BCT), adjuvant radiation, including tumor bed boost, is mandatory. Safely delivered thermal boost (TB) based on radio-sensitizing interstitial microwave hyperthermia (MWHT) preceding standard high-dose-rate (HDR) brachytherapy (BT) boost has the potential for local control (LC) improvement. The study is to report the long-term results regarding LC, disease-free survival (DFS), overall survival (OS), toxicity, and cosmetic outcome (CO) of HDR-BT boost ± MWHT for early breast cancer (BC) patients treated with BCT. (2) In the years 2006 and 2007, 57 diverse stages and risk (IA-IIIA) BC patients were treated with BCT ± adjuvant chemotherapy followed by 42.5–50.0 Gy whole breast irradiation (WBI) and 10 Gy HDR-BT boost. Overall, 25 patients (group A; 43.9%) had a BT boost, and 32 (group B; 56.1%) had an additional pre-BT single session of interstitial MWHT on a tumor bed. Long-term LC, DFS, OS, CO, and late toxicity were evaluated. (3) Median follow-up was 94.8 months (range 1.1–185.5). LC was 55/57, or 96.5% (1 LR in each group). DFS was 48/57, or 84.2% (4 failures in group A, 5 in B). OS was 46/57, or 80.7% (6 deaths in group A, 5 in B). CO was excellent in 60%, good in 36%, and satisfactory in 4% (A), and in 53.1%, 34.4%, and 9.4% (B), respectively. One poor outcome was noted (B). Late toxicity as tumor bed hardening occurred in 19/57, or 33.3% of patients (9 in A, 10 in B). In one patient, grade 2 telangiectasia occurred (group A). All differences were statistically insignificant. (4) HDR-BT boost ± TB was feasible, well-tolerated, and highly locally effective. LC, DFS, and OS were equally distributed between the groups. Pre-BT MWHT did not increase rare late toxicity.

ACR-ABS-ASTRO practice parameter for the performance of radionuclide-based high-dose-rate brachytherapy

PURPOSE

This practice parameter aims to detail the processes, qualifications of personnel, patient selection, equipment, patient and personnel safety, documentation, and quality control and improvement necessary for an HDR brachytherapy program.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

This practice parameter was revised collaboratively by the American College of Radiology (ACR), the American Brachytherapy Society (ABS), and the American Society for Radiation Oncology (ASTRO).

RESULTS

Brachytherapy is a radiotherapeutic modality in which radionuclide or electronic sources are used to deliver a radiation dose at a distance of up to a few centimeters by surface, intracavitary, intraluminal, or interstitial application. Brachytherapy alone or combined with external beam radiotherapy plays an important role in the management and treatment of patients with cancer. High-dose-rate (HDR) brachytherapy uses radionuclides, such as iridium-192, at dose rates of ≥12 Gy/hr to a designated target point or volume, and it is an important treatment for a variety of malignant and benign conditions. Its use allows for application of high doses of radiation to defined target volumes with relative sparing of adjacent critical structures.

CONCLUSIONS

HDR brachytherapy requires detailed attention to personnel, equipment, patient and personnel safety, and continuing staff education. Coordination between the radiation oncologist and treatment planning staff and effective quality assurance procedures are important components of successful HDR brachytherapy programs.

Modern Approaches for Breast Brachytherapy

Breast brachytherapy represents a radiation technique that can be utilized as both monotherapy and as a tumor bed boost following breast conserving surgery. As monotherapy, the rationale for brachytherapy is that the majority of residual disease and therefore recurrences occur in close proximity to the lumpectomy cavity; for boost treatment, brachytherapy represents a technique that provided a more conformal approach prior to 3D treatment planning, and more recently can be used in conjunction with oncoplastic surgery. Multiple guidelines are available to assist clinicians with patient selection for accelerated partial breast irradiation (APBI), and recent guidelines support brachytherapy as an appropriate technique to deliver APBI. Modern breast brachytherapy can be performed with interstitial or applicator-based brachytherapy with multilumen and strut devices offering the ability to provide greater skin, chest wall, and normal breast sparing than previous devices. Novel strategies are being evaluated, including high dose rate perioperative/intraoperative radiotherapy, permanent breast seed implants, and noninvasive breast brachytherapy. Additionally, studies are evaluating shorter courses of brachytherapy. Multiple Level I studies are now available supporting interstitial brachytherapy to deliver APBI while prospective data and the National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project B-39/Radiation Therapy Oncology Group 0413 trial are available with applicator brachytherapy and provide standardized prescriptions, target volume definitions, and dosimetric goals.

Is a higher boost dose of radiation necessary after breast-conserving therapy for patients with breast cancer with final close or positive margins?

To determine rates of loco-regional recurrence (LRR), distant failure and overall survival for patients with breast cancer treated with breast-conserving therapy (BCT) with a close or positive surgical margin (C/PM) treated with standard dose boost radiation compared with a higher boost of radiation. We retrospectively studied 1476 patients with T1-T3 invasive breast cancer treated with BCT between 1992 and 2009. Median age was 57 years. Patients were divided into three groups: Group I included 1197 patients (81 %) with negative margins who received a standard boost (median 60 Gy) total dose to the lumpectomy cavity; Group II included 116 patients (8 %) with C/PM who received a standard boost (median 60 Gy); and Group III included 163 patients (11 %) with C/PM who received a higher boost (median 68 Gy). Biological subtypes (e.g., ER, PR, HER2/neu) were available for 858 patients (58 %) and were also assessed for any relationship to LRR rate. The Kaplan-Meier, Cox-regression, and log-rank tests were used to estimate rates of LRR and the significance of risk factors. Median follow-up was 8.6 years. The overall 5- and 10-year cumulative incidences of LRR were 2.1 % (95 % CI 0.8-2.1 %) and 4.5 % (95 % CI 3.4-6.0 %), respectively. The 5- and 10-year cumulative incidences of LRR for Group I (negative margins + standard boost) were 1.9 and 4.4 %; for Group II (C/PM + standard boost) were 3.9 and 7.0 %; and for Group III (C/PM + higher boost) were 2.9 and 3.8 %, respectively. No statistically significant differences in LRR rates were found among the three groups (p = 0.4). Similar results were obtained for distant failure (p = 0.3) and overall survival (p = 0.4). On multivariate analysis, tumor grade (p = 0.03), systemic-therapy (p = 0.005), node positivity (p = 0.05), young age (p = 0.001), and biological subtype (p = 0.04) were statistically significantly associated with higher LRR. Higher boost dose and margin positivity were not significant. Our data suggest that the 10-year risk of local recurrence for patients with close or positive margins receiving a standard boost was 7 % compared to 3.8 % for those receiving a higher boost; however, this difference was not significant. A higher boost dose did not significantly improve local control, nor did margins impact LRR risk in our cohort of patients.

The association of surgical margins and local recurrence in women with early-stage invasive breast cancer treated with breast-conserving therapy: a meta-analysis

PURPOSE

There is no consensus on what constitutes adequate negative margins in breast-conserving therapy (BCT). We systematically review the evidence on surgical margins in BCT for invasive breast cancer to support the development of clinical guidelines.

METHODS

Study-level meta-analysis of studies reporting local recurrence (LR) data relative to final microscopic margin status and the threshold distance for negative margins. LR proportion was modeled using random-effects logistic meta-regression.

RESULTS

Based on 33 studies (LR in 1,506 of 28,162), the odds of LR were associated with margin status [model 1: odds ratio (OR) 1.96 for positive/close vs negative; model 2: OR 1.74 for close vs. negative, 2.44 for positive vs. negative; (P < 0.001 both models)] but not with margin distance [model 1: >0 mm vs. 1 mm (referent) vs. 2 mm vs. 5 mm (P = 0.12); and model 2: 1 mm (referent) vs. 2 mm vs. 5 mm (P = 0.90)], adjusting for study median follow-up time. There was little to no statistical evidence that the odds of LR decreased as the distance for declaring negative margins increased, adjusting for follow-up time [model 1: 1 mm (OR 1.0, referent), 2 mm (OR 0.95), 5 mm (OR 0.65), P = 0.21 for trend; and model 2: 1 mm (OR 1.0, referent), 2 mm (OR 0.91), 5 mm (OR 0.77), P = 0.58 for trend]. Adjustment for covariates, such as use of endocrine therapy or median-year of recruitment, did not change the findings.

CONCLUSIONS

Meta-analysis confirms that negative margins reduce the odds of LR; however, increasing the distance for defining negative margins is not significantly associated with reduced odds of LR, allowing for follow-up time. Adoption of wider relative to narrower margin widths to declare negative margins is unlikely to have a substantial additional benefit for long-term local control in BCT.

The American Brachytherapy Society consensus statement for accelerated partial breast irradiation

PURPOSE

To develop clinical guidelines for the quality practice of accelerated partial breast irradiation (APBI) as part of breast-conserving therapy for women with early-stage breast cancer.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Members of the American Brachytherapy Society with expertise in breast cancer and breast brachytherapy in particular devised updated guidelines for appropriate patient evaluation and selection based on an extensive literature search and clinical experience.

RESULTS

Increasing numbers of randomized and single and multi-institution series have been published documenting the efficacy of various APBI modalities. With more than 10-year followup, multiple series have documented excellent clinical outcomes with interstitial APBI. Patient selection for APBI should be based on a review of clinical and pathologic factors by the clinician with particular attention paid to age (≥50 years old), tumor size (≤3cm), histology (all invasive subtypes and ductal carcinoma in situ), surgical margins (negative), lymphovascular space invasion (not present), and nodal status (negative). Consistent dosimetric guidelines should be used to improve target coverage and limit potential for toxicity following treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

These guidelines have been created to provide clinicians with appropriate patient selection criteria to allow clinicians to use APBI in a manner that will optimize clinical outcomes and patient satisfaction. These guidelines will continue to be evaluated and revised as future publications further stratify optimal patient selection.