Patient preferences regarding intraoperative versus external beam radiotherapy following breast-conserving surgery

Intraoperative Radiation Therapy as a Safe Alternative to Whole Breast Radiation for Treatment of Minimally Invasive Breast Cancers: A Retrospective Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

Intraoperative radiation therapy (IORT) in select populations is a viable alternative to whole breast radiation therapy (WBRT) in the treatment of biopsy-proven localized invasive and non-invasive breast cancer. We aim to assess recurrence and complication rates following IORT in lumpectomy patients at a community hospital in Baltimore City.

METHODS

An IRB-approved retrospective cohort study was conducted on consecutive cases of lumpectomy with IORT from 2013 through 2020 by a single surgeon. Patient demographics, tumor and operative characteristics, and complications were retrieved from electronic medical records. Primary outcomes were postoperative complications and local recurrence rates.

RESULTS

The final cohort included 117 patients with mean follow-up time of 2.60 + 1.78 years. Mean age was 69.84 + 8.77 years. Thirty-three (28.21%) of patients developed a seroma. Odds of seroma formation were mildly significant for skin spacing [OR: 1.18, 95% CI: (1.02-1.37)] and balloon fill volume [1.04 (1.00-1.08)], but not for age, BMI, diabetes, former or current smoking status, history of WBRT, tumor size, or balloon size. Three (2.6%) patients had local recurrence. Odds of local recurrence were mildly significant for increased tumor size [1.14 (1.04-1.24)] and not significant for any other covariates.

CONCLUSIONS

IORT exposure did not confer higher rates of complications and the local recurrence rate mirrored that of the general population undergoing lumpectomy and WBRT. This study demonstrates the need for equitable treatment options based on individual needs: IORT is a safe alternative to WBRT in certain subpopulations, especially those with physical, social, or personal limitations preventing participation in a 3- to 7-week time commitment of WBRT.

Novel Form of Breast Intraoperative Radiation Therapy with CT-Guided High-Dose-Rate Brachytherapy: Interim Results of a Prospective Phase-II Clinical Trial

BACKGROUND

Precision breast intraoperative radiation therapy (PB-IORT) is a novel method of IORT that uses customized CT-based treatment plans and high-dose-rate (HDR) brachytherapy. We conducted a phase-II multi-institution trial to evaluate the efficacy of PB-IORT.

STUDY DESIGN

Between 2015 and 2022, 3 centers enrolled women aged 45 years and older with invasive or in situ carcinoma measuring 3 cm or smaller and N0 status (n = 358). Breast-conserving surgery was performed, and a multilumen balloon catheter was placed in the lumpectomy bed. CT images were used to create customized HDR brachytherapy plans that delivered 12.5 Gy to the tumor bed. The primary outcome assessed was the 5-year rate of index quadrant tumor recurrence. An interim analysis was conducted after one-third of eligible participants completed 5 years of follow-up. This trial is registered with clinicaltrials.gov (NCT02400658).

RESULTS

The cohort comprised 153 participants with a median age of 64 years and median follow-up time of 5.9 years. The estimated 5-year index quadrant tumor recurrence rate and overall survival were 5.08% (95% CI 2.23 to 9.68) and 95.1%, respectively. Locoregional (ipsilateral breast and axilla) and distant recurrence rates were each 1.96%. Seven deaths occurred during the first 5 years of follow-up, with only 1 attributable to breast cancer. Overall, 68.6% of patients experienced any adverse effects, and 4 cases of breast-related severe toxicities were observed.

CONCLUSIONS

This study presents the results of a planned interim analysis of a phase-II trial investigating PB-IORT and demonstrates the efficacy and safety of single-fraction, CT-based, HDR brachytherapy after breast-conserving surgery. These findings provide valuable insights into the use of PB-IORT as a treatment modality.

Case Report: Bilateral targeted intraoperative radiotherapy: a safe and effective alternative for synchronous bilateral breast cancer

Background

The incidence of bilateral breast cancer (BBC) ranges from 1.4% to 11.8%. BBC irradiation is a challenge in current clinical practice due to the large target volume that must be irradiated while minimizing the dose to critical organs. Supine or prone breast techniques can be used, with the latter providing better organ sparing; both, however, result in lengthy treatment times. The use of Intra-operative radiotherapy (IORT) in breast cancer patients who choose breast conservation has been highlighted in previous studies, but there is a scarcity of literature analyzing the utility and applicability of IORT in BBC. This case series aims to highlight the applicability of administering bilateral IORT in patients with BBC.

Case reports

Five patients with bilateral early-stage breast cancer (or DCIS) were treated with breast-conserving surgery followed by bilateral IORT. Of the 10 breast cancers, 8 were diagnosed as either DCIS or IDC, while the other 2 were diagnosed as invasive lobular carcinoma and invasive carcinoma, respectively. During surgery, all patients received bilateral IORT. Furthermore, 1 patient received external beam radiation therapy after her final pathology revealed grade 3 DCIS. The IORT procedure was well tolerated by all five patients, and all patients received aromatase inhibitors as adjuvant therapy. Additionally, none of these patients showed evidence of disease after a 36-month median follow-up.

Conclusion

Our findings demonstrate the successful use of IORT for BCS in patients with BBC. Furthermore, none of the patients in our study experienced any complications, suggesting the feasibility of the use of IORT in BBC. Considering the benefits of improved patient compliance and a reduced number of multiple visits, IORT may serve as an excellent patient-centered alternative for BBC. Future studies are recommended to reinforce the applicability of IORT in patients with BBC.

Partial breast irradiation compared with whole breast irradiation: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Early-stage breast cancer is among the most common cancer diagnoses. Adjuvant radiotherapy is an essential component of breast-conserving therapy, and several options exist for tailoring its extent and duration. This study assesses the comparative effectiveness of partial-breast irradiation (PBI) compared with whole-breast irradiation (WBI).

METHODS

A systematic review was completed to identify relevant randomized clinical trials and comparative observational studies. Independent reviewers working in pairs selected studies and extracted data. Randomized trial results were pooled using a random effects model. Prespecified main outcomes were ipsilateral breast recurrence (IBR), cosmesis, and adverse events (AEs).

RESULTS

Fourteen randomized clinical trials and 6 comparative observational studies with 17 234 patients evaluated the comparative effectiveness of PBI. PBI was not statistically significantly different from WBI for IBR at 5 years (RR = 1.34, 95% CI = 0.83 to 2.18; high strength of evidence [SOE]) and 10 years (RR = 1.29, 95% CI = 0.87 to 1.91; high SOE). Evidence for cosmetic outcomes was insufficient. Statistically significantly fewer acute AEs were reported with PBI compared with WBI, with no statistically significant difference in late AEs. Data from subgroups according to patient, tumor, and treatment characteristics were insufficient. Intraoperative radiotherapy was associated with higher IBR at 5, 10, and over than 10 years (high SOE) compared with WBI.

CONCLUSIONS

Ipsilateral breast recurrence was not statistically significantly different between PBI and WBI. Acute AEs were less frequent with PBI. This evidence supports the effectiveness of PBI among selected patients with early-stage, favorable-risk breast cancer who are similar to those represented in the included studies.

Physicians’ Opinion on Intraoperative Radiotherapy as a Therapeutic De-Escalation Option in Older Women with Early Breast Cancer

Background: Intraoperative radiotherapy (IORT) is a therapeutic de-escalation option in older women with low-risk early breast cancer (EBC). A qualitative study was implemented to describe EBC physicians’ points of view on IORT as a de-escalation option. Methods: Recorded face-to-face and telephone semi-structured interviews were conducted among diverse physicians from seven French comprehensive cancer centers. Interview transcripts were grouped as corpus to construct a typology. Thematic analysis was performed. Results: Positions toward IORT were contrasted between the 16 participating physicians. Five fully supported IORT as a de-escalation option, four were not in favor, and seven had a more reserved or neutral opinion. Points of divergence concerned treatment efficacy, treatment duration, side effects and sequelae, psychological impact, compliance with adjuvant endocrine therapy, logistical constraints, financial cost, and availability of other techniques of partial breast irradiation. Physicians in favor of IORT emphasized direct benefits for the patient, and those against pointed the lack of specific guidelines, risk of lost opportunity in older women with long life expectancy, and challenges of shared decision making. Conclusions: Despite national policies to preserve cancer patients’ quality of life and increase their participation in medical decision making, therapeutic de-escalation using IORT is not consensual among physicians. Further efforts are needed to promote patient-centered care.

Global adoption of single-shot targeted intraoperative radiotherapy (TARGIT-IORT) for breast cancer—better for patients, better for healthcare systems

Micro abstract

Targeted intraoperative radiotherapy (TARGIT-IORT) is delivered immediately after lumpectomy for breast cancer. We estimated its impact. At least 44,752 patients with breast cancer were treated with TARGIT-IORT in 260 centres in 35 countries, saving >20 million miles of travel and preventing ~2,000 non–breast cancer deaths. The TARGIT-IORT website (https://targit.org.uk/travel) provides maps and tools to find the nearest centre offering TARGIT-IORT and travel savings.

Background

Targeted intraoperative radiotherapy (TARGIT-IORT) delivers radiotherapy targeted to the fresh tumour bed exposed immediately after lumpectomy for breast cancer. TARGIT-A trial found TARGIT-IORT to be as effective as whole-breast radiotherapy, with significantly fewer deaths from non–breast cancer causes. This paper documents its worldwide impact and provides interactive tools for clinicians and patients.

Method

Centres using TARGIT-IORT provided the date of the first case and the total number of patients. We plotted these data on a customised Google Map. An interactive web-based tool provided directions to the closest centre. Using the data from the TARGIT-A trial, we estimated the total savings in travel miles, carbon footprint, and the number of non–breast cancer deaths that might be prevented.

Results

Data from 242 (93%) of the 260 centres treating patients from 35 countries were available. From the first patient treated in 1998 to early 2020, at least 44,752 women with breast cancer have been treated with TARGIT-IORT. The TARGIT-IORT website (https://targit.org.uk/travel) displays the Google Map of centres with number of cases and an interactive tool for patients to find the nearest centre offering TARGIT-IORT and their travel savings. Scaling up to the already treated patients, >20 million miles of travel would have been saved and about 2,000 deaths prevented.

Conclusion

One can ascertain the number of patients treated with a novel treatment. These data show how widely TARGIT-IORT has now been adopted and gives an indication of its beneficial worldwide impact on a large number of women with breast cancer.

Case Report: Can Targeted Intraoperative Radiotherapy in Patients With Breast Cancer and Pacemakers be the New Standard of Care?

Background

Partial breast irradiation with Intra-operative radiotherapy (IORT) has become a popular management option as opposed to whole breast radiation using external beam radiotherapy for breast cancer patients. While previous studies have highlighted the use of IORT in breast cancer patients, there is a scarcity of literature on the use of IORT in those who also have ipsilateral pacemakers. Thus, the aim of our case report is to highlight the applicability of IORT in breast cancer patients who also have a pacemaker.

Case Reports

Two female patients with an implanted dual-chamber pacemaker presented with a diagnosis of left-sided invasive ductal carcinoma on mammogram. Mammography of the left breast revealed a 10 mm and 7 mm spiculated mass, respectively, further confirmed with an ultrasound-guided core biopsy that was conclusive of clinical Stage I T1 N0 grade 2, ER +, PR + Her2 – invasive ductal carcinoma. They met our eligibility criteria for IORT, which is being performed as a registry trial. These patients underwent a wide excision lumpectomy along with IORT.

Conclusion

Our findings underscore the successful use of targeted IORT for breast-conserving surgery in a patient with invasive ductal carcinoma and pacemaker, hence eliminating the necessity for relocating pacemaker surgeries in these patients. Furthermore, no device failure or malfunction for the pacemaker was recorded before, during, or after the surgery, demonstrating the safety of using IORT in patients with preinstalled pacemaker despite a lack of evidence on safe radiation dosage or manufacturer guidelines. Nonetheless, the effects of IORT on pacemaker < 10 cm were not studied in our patients and further clinical studies are recommended to reinforce the applicability and safe distance of IORT in breast cancer patients with pacemaker.

Long-Term Outcomes of an International Cooperative Study of Intraoperative Radiotherapy Upfront Boost With Low Energy X-Rays in Breast Cancer

Purpose

The purpose of this study was to assess the effectivity of upfront kilovoltage intraoperative radiotherapy (IORT) as a boost in high-risk early-stage breast cancer patients from an international pooled cohort.

Materials/Methods

Patients from four centers in three different countries were retrospectively screened. Those with a minimum 1-year follow-up were included. Cumulative local (LR), regional (RR), and distant metastasis rates (DM) were analyzed. Additionally, the estimated overall survival (OS) was assessed. The Cox regression analysis was performed to identify failure predicting factors.

Results

A total of 653 patients from centers in Peru, Spain, and Germany were included. The median follow-up was 55 (12–180) months, and age was 58 (27–86) years. Clinical tumor (T) staging was T1 65.85%, T2 30.17%, and T3 3.98%. Positive margins were found in 7.9% and in-situ component in 20.06%. The median IORT dose was 20 (6–20). The median time from IORT to EBRT was 74.5 (13-364) days. An overall 3.4% (n = 22) of patients developed local recurrence at some point during follow-up. The 12-, 60-, and 120-month cumulative LR were 0.3%, 2.3%, and 7.9%, respectively. After multivariate analysis, only age <50 remained to be a significant prognostic factor for local recurrence (HR 0.19, 95% CI 0.08–0.47; p < 0.05). The 10-year estimated OS was 81.2%.

Conclusion

Upfront boost with IORT yields similar local control outcomes to those EBRT-based reports. Results from prospective trials, regarding toxicity, cosmesis, and effectivity are awaited to confirm these findings.

Lived experience and perceived advantages of therapeutic De-escalation: A qualitative study of older patients with breast cancer

INTRODUCTION

One option for therapeutic de-escalation in older women with early breast cancer (EBC) is partial breast irradiation (PBI) instead of whole-breast irradiation (WBI) when the latter has no clear advantages. We aimed to explore the decision-making processes and the lived experiences of WBI and PBI from the perspectives of older women with EBC.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Thematic content analysis was performed on qualitative data collected using narrative interviews.

RESULTS

Twenty-two women aged 65 and over participated (ten patients who underwent WBI and twelve who underwent PBI). We identified three themes from their narratives: 1) Acceptance of a paternalistic relationship with physicians, 2) Strong need for an informed choice, and 3) PBI can help people conceal cancer-related physical marks. Narratives underlined participants' preferences for each of the two treatments and their perceptions about therapeutic de-escalation. Misconceptions about therapeutic de-escalation were observed.

DISCUSSION

When providing information about EBC treatment options, patients' perceived burden of side effects should be considered. Moreover, eliciting the value older patients place on available breast cancer treatments, as well as their related goals and preferences, could foster their participation in the therapeutic de-escalation decision-making process.

The Role of Intraoperative Radiation in Early-stage Breast Cancer

Intraoperative radiation therapy (IORT) is a specialized form of accelerated partial breast irradiation in which a single dose of radiation is delivered to the tumor bed at the time of breast conserving surgery. With completion of radiation to the tumor bed at the time of surgery, IORT promises improved patient convenience, compliance, and quality of life. In addition, with its potentially skin-sparing properties and ability to deliver a high biologically effective dose to the tumor bed while reducing dose to nontarget tissues, IORT results in different but overall less toxicities compared with other modalities of radiation for breast cancer. However, skepticism over the role of IORT in breast cancer exists, and the 2 randomized trials that have analyzed IORT as the definitive radiation component of breast conservation therapy have shown an increase in local recurrence rates with IORT compared with whole breast irradiation, but similar rates of overall survival. In this review, we discuss the practicalities of IORT, the prospective data supporting and negating the role of IORT in lieu of whole breast irradiation, and the toxicity after IORT in early-stage breast cancer. We also review the role of IORT as a radiation boost and specific strategies for successful implementation of IORT in breast cancer.

TARGIT-R (Retrospective): 5-Year Follow-Up Evaluation of Intraoperative Radiation Therapy (IORT) for Breast Cancer Performed in North America

BACKGROUND

Intraoperative radiation therapy (IORT) has been investigated for patients with low-risk, early-stage breast cancer. The The North American experience was evaluated by TARGIT-R (retrospective) to provide outcomes for patients treated in "real-world" clinical practice with breast IORT. This analysis presents a 5-year follow-up assessment.

METHODS

TARGIT-R is a multi-institutional retrospective registry of patients who underwent lumpectomy and IORT between the years 2007 and 2013. The primary outcome of the evaluation was ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence (IBTR).

RESULTS

The evaluation included 667 patients with a median follow-up period of 5.1 years. Primary IORT (IORT at the time of lumpectomy) was performed for 72%, delayed IORT (after lumpectomy) for 3%, intended boost for 8%, and unintended boost (primary IORT followed by whole-breast radiation) for 17% of the patients. At 5 years, IBTR was 6.6% for all the patients, with 8% for the primary IORT cohort and 1.7% for the unintended-boost cohort. No recurrences were identified in the delayed IORT or intended-boost cohorts. Noncompliance with endocrine therapy (ET) was associated with higher IBTR risk (hazard ratio [HR], 3.67). Patients treated with primary IORT who were complaint with ET had a 5-year IBTR rate of 3.9%.

CONCLUSION

The local recurrence rates in this series differ slightly from recent results of randomized IORT trials and are notably higher than in previous published studies using whole-breast radiotherapy for similar patients with early-stage breast cancer. Understanding differences in this retrospective series and the prospective trials will be critical to optimizing patient selection and outcomes going forward.

Use of an ultrasound imaging device within the applicator to evaluate placement and support treatment planning for breast brachytherapy and intraoperative radiation therapy

PURPOSE

We evaluated the use of ultrasound imaging within a brachytherapy applicator as a method for applicator positioning, evaluation, and treatment planning in a series of in vitro, cadaver, and human studies.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

We evaluated the performance of a prototype system comprising a small ultrasound imaging catheter inserted within the lumen of a balloon brachytherapy catheter. We tested the device in an ultrasound phantom, in human breast tissue, and in an endoscopic ultrasound catheter in cadaveric breast tissue. We evaluated the visualization of adjacent tissue to consider future development of a similar system for use in brachytherapy and intraoperative radiation therapy.

RESULTS

Based on the ultrasound images obtained in an ultrasound phantom, cadaveric breast, and human participants, we observed that an ultrasound imaging catheter placed within the lumen of a brachytherapy applicator can effectively image adjacent tissue, ribs, and air voids, with appropriate quality to support clinical use. We observed high correlation in clinically useful information detected on ultrasound and comparative CT, with ultrasound spatial resolution near 1 mm (spatially variant).

CONCLUSIONS

The findings from our pilot work suggest that real-time ultrasound imaging, operated from within the applicator, is a promising technique for image guidance and treatment planning during brachytherapy and intraoperative radiation therapy. Further expansion of this technology for clinical use will require development of a cohesive system of components to suit specific clinical applications.

Long term survival and local control outcomes from single dose targeted intraoperative radiotherapy during lumpectomy (TARGIT-IORT) for early breast cancer: TARGIT-A randomised clinical trial

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether risk adapted intraoperative radiotherapy, delivered as a single dose during lumpectomy, can effectively replace postoperative whole breast external beam radiotherapy for early breast cancer.

DESIGN

Prospective, open label, randomised controlled clinical trial.

SETTING

32 centres in 10 countries in the United Kingdom, Europe, Australia, the United States, and Canada.

PARTICIPANTS

2298 women aged 45 years and older with invasive ductal carcinoma up to 3.5 cm in size, cN0-N1, eligible for breast conservation and randomised before lumpectomy (1:1 ratio, blocks stratified by centre) to either risk adapted targeted intraoperative radiotherapy (TARGIT-IORT) or external beam radiotherapy (EBRT).

INTERVENTIONS

Random allocation was to the EBRT arm, which consisted of a standard daily fractionated course (three to six weeks) of whole breast radiotherapy, or the TARGIT-IORT arm. TARGIT-IORT was given immediately after lumpectomy under the same anaesthetic and was the only radiotherapy for most patients (around 80%). TARGIT-IORT was supplemented by EBRT when postoperative histopathology found unsuspected higher risk factors (around 20% of patients).

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Non-inferiority with a margin of 2.5% for the absolute difference between the five year local recurrence rates of the two arms, and long term survival outcomes.

RESULTS

Between 24 March 2000 and 25 June 2012, 1140 patients were randomised to TARGIT-IORT and 1158 to EBRT. TARGIT-IORT was non-inferior to EBRT: the local recurrence risk at five year complete follow-up was 2.11% for TARGIT-IORT compared with 0.95% for EBRT (difference 1.16%, 90% confidence interval 0.32 to 1.99). In the first five years, 13 additional local recurrences were reported (24/1140 v 11/1158) but 14 fewer deaths (42/1140 v 56/1158) for TARGIT-IORT compared with EBRT. With long term follow-up (median 8.6 years, maximum 18.90 years, interquartile range 7.0-10.6) no statistically significant difference was found for local recurrence-free survival (hazard ratio 1.13, 95% confidence interval 0.91 to 1.41, P=0.28), mastectomy-free survival (0.96, 0.78 to 1.19, P=0.74), distant disease-free survival (0.88, 0.69 to 1.12, P=0.30), overall survival (0.82, 0.63 to 1.05, P=0.13), and breast cancer mortality (1.12, 0.78 to 1.60, P=0.54). Mortality from other causes was significantly lower (0.59, 0.40 to 0.86, P=0.005).

CONCLUSION

For patients with early breast cancer who met our trial selection criteria, risk adapted immediate single dose TARGIT-IORT during lumpectomy was an effective alternative to EBRT, with comparable long term efficacy for cancer control and lower non-breast cancer mortality. TARGIT-IORT should be discussed with eligible patients when breast conserving surgery is planned.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ISRCTN34086741, NCT00983684.

Intraoperative Radiation Therapy Versus Whole Breast Radiation for Early-Stage Breast Cancer Treatment in Rural Appalachia

BACKGROUND

Intraoperative radiation therapy (IORT) is an alternate accelerated form of radiation following breast-conserving surgery (BCS). Lack of data regarding long-term outcomes has limited adoption. We report our experience with IORT in patients undergoing BCS versus whole breast radiation therapy (WBRT).

METHODS

Retrospective review of patients undergoing BCS with IORT versus WBRT (2012-2017). Inclusion: low grade, T1-2N0M0, estrogen receptor/progesterone receptor positive, and Her2-negative infiltrating ductal carcinomas. IORT was delivered as a single fraction of radiation (20 Gy) intraoperatively. Outcomes were compared using Fisher's test for discrete variables or Wilcoxon signed-rank test for continuous variables. Kaplan-Meier method was used to estimate disease-free survival (DFS).

RESULTS

Fifty-one patients (44%) received IORT, and 66 (56%) received WBRT. There was no difference in age, tumor size, receptor status, or in-breast recurrence (1.9% vs 0%, all P > .05). Length of follow-up was longer in the WBRT group due to time to inception of IORT (mean ± SD: 44 ± 8.1 vs 73 ± 13 months, P < .001). There was no difference in DFS between the 2 groups (HR 2.5; P = .44). IORT patients experienced delay to BCS (mean ± SD: 38 ± 12.7 vs 27 ± 12.2 days, P < .001) likely due to coordination of care. Analysis demonstrated IORT patients would have traveled a mean distance of 20 miles to the closest WBRT center (range 1-70, miles) for a mean travel time of 31 minutes (range 4-90, minutes) per WBRT treatment.

DISCUSSION

IORT produces noninferior oncologic outcomes and decreased skin toxicity compared with WBRT. It can be convenient for patients in rural regions with limited health care access.

Effect of Delayed Targeted Intraoperative Radiotherapy vs Whole-Breast Radiotherapy on Local Recurrence and Survival: Long-term Results From the TARGIT-A Randomized Clinical Trial in Early Breast Cancer

Importance

Conventional adjuvant radiotherapy for breast cancer given daily for several weeks is onerous and expensive. Some patients may be obliged to choose a mastectomy instead, and some may forgo radiotherapy altogether. We proposed a clinical trial to test whether radiotherapy could be safely limited to the tumor bed.

Objective

To determine whether delayed second-procedure targeted intraoperative radiotherapy (TARGIT-IORT) is noninferior to whole-breast external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) in terms of local control.

Design, Setting, and Participants

In this prospective, randomized (1:1 ratio) noninferiority trial, 1153 patients aged 45 years or older with invasive ductal breast carcinoma smaller than 3.5 cm treated with breast conservation were enrolled from 28 centers in 9 countries. Data were locked in on July 3, 2019.

Interventions

The TARGIT-A trial was started in March 2000; patients were randomized after needle biopsy to receive TARGIT-IORT immediately after lumpectomy under the same anesthetic vs EBRT and results have been shown to be noninferior. A parallel study, described in this article, was initiated in 2004; patients who had their cancer excised were randomly allocated using separate randomization tables to receive EBRT or delayed TARGIT-IORT given as a second procedure by reopening the lumpectomy wound.

Main Outcomes and Measures

A noninferiority margin for local recurrence rate of 2.5% at 5 years, and long-term survival outcomes.

Results

Overall, 581 women (mean [SD] age, 63 [7] years) were randomized to delayed TARGIT-IORT and 572 patients (mean [SD] age, 63 [8] years) were randomized to EBRT. Sixty patients (5%) had tumors larger than 2 cm, or had positive nodes and only 32 (2.7%) were younger than 50 years. Delayed TARGIT-IORT was not noninferior to EBRT. The local recurrence rates at 5-year complete follow-up were: delayed TARGIT-IORT vs EBRT (23/581 [3.96%] vs 6/572 [1.05%], respectively; difference, 2.91%; upper 90% CI, 4.4%). With long-term follow-up (median [IQR], 9.0 [7.5-10.5] years), there was no statistically significant difference in local recurrence-free survival (HR, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.57-1.003; P = .052), mastectomy-free survival (HR, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.65-1.18; P = .38), distant disease-free survival (HR, 1.00; 95% CI, 0.72-1.39; P = .98), or overall survival (HR, 0.96; 95% CI, 0.68-1.35; P = .80).

Conclusions and Relevance

These long-term data show that despite an increase in the number of local recurrences with delayed TARGIT-IORT, there was no statistically significant decrease in mastectomy-free survival, distant disease-free survival, or overall survival.

Trial Registration

ISRCTN34086741, ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00983684.

Time-driven activity-based costing of a novel form of CT-guided high-dose-rate brachytherapy intraoperative radiation therapy compared with conventional breast intraoperative radiation therapy for early stage breast cancer

INTRODUCTION

Intraoperative radiation therapy is an emerging option for adjuvant therapy for early stage breast cancer, although it is not currently considered standard of care in the United States. We applied time-driven activity-based costing to compare two alternative methods of breast intraoperative radiation therapy, including treatment similar to the techniques employed in the TARGIT-A clinical trial and a novel version with CT-guidance and high-dose-rate (HRD) brachytherapy.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Process maps were created to describe the steps required to deliver intraoperative radiation therapy for early stage breast cancer at each institution. The components of intraoperative radiation therapy included personnel, equipment, and consumable supplies. The capacity cost rate was determined for each resource. Based on this, the delivery costs were calculated for each regimen. For comparison across centers, we did not account for indirect facilities costs and interinstitutional differences in personnel salaries.

RESULTS

The CT-guided, HRD form of intraoperative radiation therapy costs more to deliver ($4,126.21) than the conventional method studied in the TARGIT-A trial ($1,070.45). The cost of the brachytherapy balloon applicator ($2,750) was the primary driver of the estimated differences in costs. Consumable supplies were the largest contributor to the brachytherapy-based approach, whereas personnel costs were the largest contributor to costs of the standard form of intraoperative radiation therapy.

CONCLUSIONS

When compared with the more established method of intraoperative radiation therapy using a portable superficial photon unit, the delivery of treatment with CT guidance and HDR brachytherapy is associated with substantially higher costs. The excess costs are driven primarily by the cost of the disposable brachytherapy balloon applicator and, to a lesser extent, additional personnel costs. Future work should include evaluation of a less expensive brachytherapy applicator to increase the anticipated value of brachytherapy-based intraoperative radiation therapy.

Using the Threshold Technique to Elicit Patient Preferences: An Introduction to the Method and an Overview of Existing Empirical Applications

Patient preference information (PPI) is a topic of interest to regulators and industry. One of many known methods for eliciting PPI is the threshold technique (TT). However, empirical studies of the TT differ from each other in many ways and no effort to date has been made to summarize them or the evidence regarding the performance of the method. We sought to describe the TT and summarize the empirical applications of the method. Forty-three studies were reviewed. Most studies estimated the minimum level of benefit required to make a treatment worthwhile, and over half estimated the maximum level of risk patients would accept to achieve a treatment benefit. The evidence demonstrates that the TT can be used to elicit multiple types of thresholds and can be used to explore preference heterogeneity and preference non-linearity. Some evidence suggests that the method may be sensitive to anchoring and shift-framing effects; however, no evidence suggests that the method is more or less sensitive to these potential biases than other stated-preference methods. The TT may be a viable method for eliciting PPI to support regulatory decision-making; however, additional understanding of the performance of this method may be needed. Future research should focus on TT performance compared with other stated-preference methods, the extent to which results predict patient choice, and the ability of the TT to inform individual treatment decisions at the point of healthcare delivery.

Implementation of an HDR brachytherapy-based breast IORT program: Initial experiences

PURPOSE

A multidisciplinary team at our institution developed a novel method of intraoperative breast radiation therapy (precision breast intraoperative radiation therapy [PB-IORT]) that uses high-dose-rate brachytherapy with CT on-rails imaging to deliver high-dose, customized radiotherapy to patients with early-stage breast cancer. This report summarizes our program's experience developing and implementing PB-IORT.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Literature on PB-IORT was reviewed including published articles and abstracts. To evaluate case volume, all patients with a breast cancer diagnosis who underwent breast surgery or breast radiation (2010-2017) at our academic institution were identified. Patients were stratified into pre-IORT and post-IORT eras with initiation of our PB-IORT program in October 2013. Overall trends in surgical and radiation therapy volume in each era were analyzed by linear regression. Travel distance for all surgical patients was calculated using Google Maps (Alphabet Inc.) and then compared between IORT and non-IORT patients.

RESULTS

Data from a PB-IORT Phase 1 trial found that the primary endpoints were met and that PB-IORT is feasible and safe. The direct health system's delivery costs for PB-IORT exceed those of 16-fraction whole-breast irradiation when accounting for consumable supplies (multilumen balloon applicator = $2,750 per patient). There was a significant increase in yearly growth of breast cancer surgical volume with PB-IORT.

CONCLUSIONS

Accrual rates for the ongoing Phase II trial have been quicker than expected in an area where more research is needed. The rapid accrual indicates patient interest and demand for this treatment and that it is very feasible to get more data from randomized trials.

Patient preferences for adjuvant radiotherapy in early breast cancer are strongly influenced by treatment received through random assignment

OBJECTIVE

TARGIT-A randomised women with early breast cancer to receive external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) or intraoperative radiotherapy (TARGIT-IORT). This study aimed to identify what extra risk of recurrence patients would accept for perceived benefits and risks of different radiotherapy treatments.

METHODS

Patient preferences were determined by self-rated trade-off questionnaires in two studies: Stage (1) 209 TARGIT-A participants (TARGIT-IORTn = 108, EBRTn = 101); Stage (2) 123 non-trial patients yet to receive radiotherapy (pre-treatment group), with 85 also surveyed post-radiotherapy. Patients traded-off risks of local recurrence in preference selection between TARGIT-IORT and EBRT.

RESULTS

TARGIT-IORT patients were more accepting of IORT than EBRT patients with 60% accepting the highest increased risk presented (4%-6%) compared to 12% of EBRT patients, and 2% not accepting IORT at all compared to 43% of EBRT patients. Pre-treatment patients were more accepting of IORT than post-treatment patients with 23% accepting the highest increased risk presented compared to 15% of post-treatment patients, and 15% not accepting IORT at all compared to 41% of pre-treatment patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Breast cancer patients yet to receive radiotherapy accept a higher recurrence risk than the actual risk found in TARGIT-A. Measured patient preferences are highly influenced by experience of treatment received. This finding challenges the validity of post-treatment preference studies.

Patient preferences regarding intraoperative versus external beam radiotherapy for early breast cancer and the impact of socio-demographic factors

PURPOSE

Patient comfort and preference have steadily gained attention in radio-oncologic treatment of breast cancer. Therefore, the purpose of this investigation was to further explore patient preferences in choosing between intraoperative radiotherapy (IORT) and external beam radiotherapy (EBRT).

METHODS

We prospectively analysed data of 101 women, who were candidates for breast-conserving surgery with adjuvant radiotherapy. A two-part video was shown to patients: an educational section about EBRT/IORT, followed by a preference elicitation section focusing on additional accepted risk (AAR) of recurrence after either treatment. Furthermore, participants completed a questionnaire to identify factors that influence patient preference of radiation modality.

RESULTS

The data demonstrate that 42.5% of patients would accept additional risk of recurrence for IORT versus 9% AAR for EBRT, while 48.5% of patients would not accept any additional risk, yet would choose IORT over EBRT if risks of recurrence were equivalent. When combining patient preferences and the results from the questionnaire, no single socio-economic/-demographic factor was found to significantly correlate with AAR of IORT.

CONCLUSION

Our study confirms the existence of subgroups of breast cancer patients who would accept an additional risk of recurrence associated with choice of radiation modality to receive a single dose of IORT as adjuvant radiotherapy for breast cancer instead of EBRT over several weeks; yet our data fail to identify a single factor significantly associated with these patient preferences and, therefore, helpful for individualised decision-making processes.

Patient Preferences Regarding Chemotherapy in Metastatic Breast Cancer-A Conjoint Analysis for Common Taxanes

Background: The purpose of this investigation was to explore patient perception regarding the importance of efficacy, toxicity, and logistics in the choice of regimen of taxane-based chemotherapy (CHT) for patients with metastatic breast cancer (MBC).

Methods: This dual-center study analyzed data of 100 women diagnosed with MBC, who were asked for their preferences regarding chemotherapy by means of conjoint analysis. Included attributes were progression free survival (PFS), application form, time and frequency, need of premedication, risk of alopecia, fatigue, febrile neutropenia, and neuropathy. Furthermore, participants completed a questionnaire about their personal and medical history. Regression analyses were performed to identify factors that influence patient preference in terms of specific treatment choice.

Results: Of 8 attributes, severe neutropenia was top priority for the majority of patients, followed by alopecia, neuropathy and PFS. When combining these patient preferences and the results of the questionnaire, patients' age as, well as, relationship status had significant impact on the importance of PFS. Moreover, longer travel time to the treatment center was significantly associated with preferences regarding PFS. Ranking by combination of respective part-worth values demonstrated nab-paclitaxel to be favored over paclitaxel and docetaxel.

Conclusion: Side effects of CHT and PFS prove to be critical factors for patients affecting choice of treatment in MBC with severe neutropenia being top priority, followed by alopecia, neuropathy, and PFS. Age, commute time, and relationship status were identified as significant determinants of patient preference. Total utility calculation by combination of part-worth values ranked nab-paclitaxel as the most preferable taxane.

Utility of CT imaging in a novel form of high-dose-rate intraoperative breast radiation therapy

INTRODUCTION

Intraoperative radiation therapy (IORT) is an alternative to whole breast radiation following breast conserving surgery. Conventional breast IORT is limited by lack of cross-sectional imaging. In response, our institution developed Precision Breast IORT (PB-IORT) which utilizes intraoperative computed tomography (CT) images for confirmation of brachytherapy applicator placement and for treatment planning. The purpose of this study was to determine the utility of CT imaging in PB-IORT in the first 103 patients treated in two prospective clinical trials.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed the first 103 patients treated with PB-IORT. All patients underwent breast surgery and placement of a multi-lumen brachytherapy applicator. Patients had a CT scan followed by high-dose-rate (HDR) brachytherapy. Endpoints were the number of patients having more than one CT during PB-IORT and the number of treatment plans having image-based modifications.

RESULTS

After initial CT scan, 27 patients (26.2%) had findings prompting surgical applicator adjustment. One patient underwent an additional scan to localize a biopsy clip and aid in excision to negative margin. Eighty-one patients (78.6%) had dosimetry modifications based on CT findings with 36 plans (35.0%) adjusted to protect the skin or chest wall and 45 plans (43.7%) to protect both the skin and chest wall.

CONCLUSIONS

Computed tomography findings prompted treatment alterations in the majority of patients treated with PB-IORT to enhance tissue conformity and to sculpt the radiation dose away from normal tissues. CT imaging is unique to PB-IORT. These findings suggest the potential clinical superiority of PB-IORT given its allowance for patient-specific alterations.

One-step intraoperative radiotherapy optimizes conservative treatment of breast cancer with advantages in quality of life and work resumption

BACKGROUND

Intraoperative radiotherapy (IORT) could be not-inferior to external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) in selected patients, but toxicities, self-perception of body image, quality of life, and resumption of work or daily activities have been poorly explored. The aim of the present study was to compare these outcomes between EBRT, IORT full-dose (IORT-f) and IORT boost (IORT-b).

METHODS

443 consecutive patients, candidates for breast-conserving surgery, were included: EBRT was performed in 220 patients (49.7%), IORT-f in 140 patients (31.6%), and IORT-b in 83 patients (18.7%). Radiotherapy-related toxicities were registered. Patients were evaluated at 6 months for Body Image after Breast Cancer Questionnaire (BIBCQ) to assess possible changes in self-perception of body image and limitations. A second questionnaire explored the impact of EBRT, IORT-f and IORT-b on resumption of work and normal daily activities.

RESULTS

EBRT had a higher risk of breast fibrosis and retraction (OR 3.58, 95% CI 1.024-12.526, p = 0.046) and breast edema (OR 6, 95% CI 2.077-17.335, p = 0.001) compared to IORT-f, but a lower risk of seroma compared to IORT-b (OR 0.36, 95% CI 0.166-0.785, p = 0.01). The BIBCQ scores showed a better outcome in arm concerns with IORT-f (-3.3) vs. IORT-b (-1.3, p = 0.002) and EBRT (-1.7, p = 0.006), although biased by the lower rate in axillary dissections. Return to daily activities occurred after 70.6 days with EBRT vs. 41 days with IORT-f (p < 0.0001) and 53.3 days with IORT-b (p = 0.07), without any effect of age or axillary dissection.

CONCLUSION

IORT could reduce adverse effects, allowing faster resumption of job and houseworks.

Intraoperative Radiotherapy for Breast Cancer

Intraoperative radiotherapy (IORT) for early stage breast cancer is a technique for partial breast irradiation. There are several technologies in clinical use to perform breast IORT. Regardless of technique, IORT generally refers to the delivery of a single dose of radiation to the periphery of the tumor bed in the immediate intraoperative time frame, although some protocols have performed IORT as a second procedure. There are two large prospective randomized trials establishing the safety and efficacy of breast IORT in early stage breast cancer patients with sufficient follow-up time on thousands of women. The advantages of IORT for partial breast irradiation include: direct visualization of the target tissue ensuring treatment of the high-risk tissue and eliminating the risk of marginal miss; the use of a single dose coordinated with the necessary surgical excision thereby reducing omission of radiation and the selection of mastectomy for women without access to a radiotherapy facility or unable to undergo several weeks of daily radiation; favorable toxicity profiles; patient convenience and cost savings; radiobiological and tumor microenvironment conditions which lead to enhanced tumor control. The main disadvantage of IORT is the lack of final pathologic information on the tumor size, histology, margins, and nodal status. When unexpected findings on final pathology such as positive margins or positive sentinel nodes predict a higher risk of local or regional recurrence, additional whole breast radiation may be indicated, thereby reducing some of the convenience and low-toxicity advantages of sole IORT. However, IORT as a tumor bed boost has also been studied and appears to be safe with acceptable toxicity. IORT has potential efficacy advantages related to overall survival related to reduced cardiopulmonary radiation doses. It may also be very useful in specific situations, such as prior to oncoplastic reconstruction to improve accuracy of adjuvant radiation delivery, or when used as a boost in higher risk patients to improve tumor control. Ongoing international clinical trials are studying these uses and follow-up data are accumulating on completed studies.

Health economics of targeted intraoperative radiotherapy (TARGIT-IORT) for early breast cancer: a cost-effectiveness analysis in the United Kingdom

OBJECTIVE

The clinical effectiveness of targeted intraoperative radiotherapy (TARGIT-IORT) has been confirmed in the randomised TARGIT-A (targeted intraoperative radiotherapy-alone) trial to be similar to a several weeks' course of whole-breast external-beam radiation therapy (EBRT) in patients with early breast cancer. This study aims to determine the cost-effectiveness of TARGIT-IORT to inform policy decisions about its wider implementation.

SETTING

TARGIT-A randomised clinical trial (ISRCTN34086741) which compared TARGIT with traditional EBRT and found similar breast cancer control, particularly when TARGIT was given simultaneously with lumpectomy.

METHODS

Cost-utility analysis using decision analytic modelling by a Markov model. A cost-effectiveness Markov model was developed using TreeAge Pro V.2015. The decision analytic model compared two strategies of radiotherapy for breast cancer in a hypothetical cohort of patients with early breast cancer based on the published health state transition probability data from the TARGIT-A trial. Analysis was performed for UK setting and National Health Service (NHS) healthcare payer's perspective using NHS cost data and treatment outcomes were simulated for both strategies for a time horizon of 10 years. Model health state utilities were drawn from the published literature. Future costs and effects were discounted at the rate of 3.5%. To address uncertainty, one-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs).

RESULTS

In the base case analysis, TARGIT-IORT was a highly cost-effective strategy yielding health gain at a lower cost than its comparator EBRT. Discounted TARGIT-IORT and EBRT costs for the time horizon of 10 years were £12 455 and £13 280, respectively. TARGIT-IORT gained 0.18 incremental QALY as the discounted QALYs gained by TARGIT-IORT were 8.15 and by EBRT were 7.97 showing TARGIT-IORT as a dominant strategy over EBRT. Model outputs were robust to one-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses.

CONCLUSIONS

TARGIT-IORT is a dominant strategy over EBRT, being less costly and producing higher QALY gain.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ISRCTN34086741; post results.

Intraoperative radiation therapy for breast cancer patients: current perspectives

Accelerated partial breast irradiation (APBI) provides an attractive alternative to whole breast irradiation (WBI) through normal tissue radiation exposure and reduced treatment duration. Intraoperative radiation therapy (IORT) is a form of APBI with the shortest time interval, as it delivers the entirety of a planned radiation course at the time of breast surgery. However, faster is not always better, and IORT has been met with healthy skepticism. Patients treated with IORT have an increased compliance and overall satisfaction when compared to patients treated with WBI. However, early randomized trial results demonstrated an increased rate of recurrence after IORT, slowing its widespread adoption. Despite these controversies, IORT utilization is increasing nationally and several novel developments are aimed at continuing to minimize the risk of recurrence and treatment-related toxicity while maximizing the patient experience.

Precision surgery and avoiding over-treatment

Over-diagnosis and over-treatment are consequences of greater awareness about breast cancer, more intensive screening, and the resultant identification of more cases of breast cancer that are low or ultralow risk. This area represents an important opportunity to optimize the delivery of appropriate targeted therapy for breast cancer patients. Despite the evolution of breast cancer care over the last few decades and our ability to tailor treatment to biology, a one-size fits all approach is still prevalent in the local and regional management of and screening for breast cancer, failing to reflect the unique biology and tumor characteristics of each patient. In this review, we explore how we can use new tools to better define tumor biology and also how we can change current clinical practices based on already available data. Every surgeon should be knowledgeable about how to craft personalized breast cancer care in the areas of systemic therapy, adjuvant radiation therapy, management of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS), precision surgery, and breast cancer screening.

TGF-β1 Is Present at High Levels in Wound Fluid from Breast Cancer Patients Immediately Post-Surgery, and Is Not Increased by Intraoperative Radiation Therapy (IORT)

In patients with low-risk breast cancer, intraoperative radiotherapy (IORT) during breast-conserving surgery is a novel and convenient treatment option for delivering a single high dose of irradiation directly to the tumour bed. However, edema and fibrosis can develop after surgery and radiotherapy, which can subsequently impair quality of life. TGF- β is a strong inducer of the extracellular matrix component hyaluronan (HA). TGF-β expression and HA metabolism can be modulated by irradiation experimentally, and are involved in edema and fibrosis. We therefore hypothesized that IORT may regulate these factors.Wound fluid (WF) draining from breast lumpectomy sites was collected and levels of TGF-β1 and HA were determined by ELISA. Proliferation and marker expression was analyzed in primary lymphatic endothelial cells (LECs) treated with recombinant TGF-β or WF. Our results show that IORT does not change TGF-β1 or HA levels in wound fluid draining from breast lumpectomy sites, and does not lead to accumulation of sHA oligosaccharides. Nevertheless, concentrations of TGF-β1 were high in WF from patients regardless of IORT, at concentrations well above those associated with fibrosis and the suppression of LEC identity. Consistently, we found that TGF-β in WF is active and inhibits LEC proliferation. Furthermore, all three TGF-β isoforms inhibited LEC proliferation and suppressed LEC marker expression at pathophysiologically relevant concentrations.

Given that TGF-β contributes to edema and plays a role in the regulation of LEC identity, we suggest that inhibition of TGF-β directly after surgery might prevent the development of side effects such as edema and fibrosis.

An international randomised controlled trial to compare TARGeted Intraoperative radioTherapy (TARGIT) with conventional postoperative radiotherapy after breast-conserving surgery for women with early-stage breast cancer (the TARGIT-A trial)

BACKGROUND

Based on our laboratory work and clinical trials we hypothesised that radiotherapy after lumpectomy for breast cancer could be restricted to the tumour bed. In collaboration with the industry we developed a new radiotherapy device and a new surgical operation for delivering single-dose radiation to the tumour bed - the tissues at highest risk of local recurrence. We named it TARGeted Intraoperative radioTherapy (TARGIT). From 1998 we confirmed its feasibility and safety in pilot studies.

OBJECTIVE

To compare TARGIT within a risk-adapted approach with whole-breast external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) over several weeks.

DESIGN

The TARGeted Intraoperative radioTherapy Alone (TARGIT-A) trial was a pragmatic, prospective, international, multicentre, non-inferiority, non-blinded, randomised (1 : 1 ratio) clinical trial. Originally, randomisation occurred before initial lumpectomy (prepathology) and, if allocated TARGIT, the patient received it during the lumpectomy. Subsequently, the postpathology stratum was added in which randomisation occurred after initial lumpectomy, allowing potentially easier logistics and a more stringent case selection, but which needed a reoperation to reopen the wound to give TARGIT as a delayed procedure. The risk-adapted approach meant that, in the experimental arm, if pre-specified unsuspected adverse factors were found postoperatively after receiving TARGIT, EBRT was recommended. Pragmatically, this reflected how TARGIT would be practised in the real world.

SETTING

Thirty-three centres in 11 countries.

PARTICIPANTS

Women who were aged ≥ 45 years with unifocal invasive ductal carcinoma preferably ≤ 3.5 cm in size.

INTERVENTIONS

TARGIT within a risk-adapted approach and whole-breast EBRT.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcome measure was absolute difference in local recurrence, with a non-inferiority margin of 2.5%. Secondary outcome measures included toxicity and breast cancer-specific and non-breast-cancer mortality.

RESULTS

In total, 3451 patients were recruited between March 2000 and June 2012. The following values are 5-year Kaplan-Meier rates for TARGIT compared with EBRT. There was no statistically significant difference in local recurrence between TARGIT and EBRT. TARGIT was non-inferior to EBRT overall [TARGIT 3.3%, 95% confidence interval (CI) 2.1% to 5.1% vs. EBRT 1.3%, 95% CI 0.7% to 2.5%; p = 0.04; P_{non-inferiority} = 0.00000012] and in the prepathology stratum (n = 2298) when TARGIT was given concurrently with lumpectomy (TARGIT 2.1%, 95% CI 1.1% to 4.2% vs. EBRT 1.1%, 95% CI 0.5% to 2.5%; p = 0.31; P_{non-inferiority} = 0.0000000013). With delayed TARGIT postpathology (n = 1153), the between-group difference was larger than 2.5% and non-inferiority was not established for this stratum (TARGIT 5.4%, 95% CI 3.0% to 9.7% vs. EBRT 1.7%, 95% CI 0.6% to 4.9%; p = 0.069; P_{non-inferiority} = 0.06640]. The local recurrence-free survival was 93.9% (95% CI 90.9% to 95.9%) when TARGIT was given with lumpectomy compared with 92.5% (95% CI 89.7% to 94.6%) for EBRT (p = 0.35). In a planned subgroup analysis, progesterone receptor (PgR) status was found to be the only predictor of outcome: hormone-responsive patients (PgR positive) had similar 5-year local recurrence with TARGIT during lumpectomy (1.4%, 95% CI 0.5% to 3.9%) as with EBRT (1.2%, 95% CI 0.5% to 2.9%; p = 0.77). Grade 3 or 4 radiotherapy toxicity was significantly reduced with TARGIT. Overall, breast cancer mortality was much the same between groups (TARGIT 2.6%, 95% CI 1.5% to 4.3% vs. EBRT 1.9%, 95% CI 1.1% to 3.2%; p = 0.56) but there were significantly fewer non-breast-cancer deaths with TARGIT (1.4%, 95% CI 0.8% to 2.5% vs. 3.5%, 95% CI 2.3% to 5.2%; p = 0.0086), attributable to fewer deaths from cardiovascular causes and other cancers, leading to a trend in reduced overall mortality in the TARGIT arm (3.9%, 95% CI 2.7% to 5.8% vs. 5.3%, 95% CI 3.9% to 7.3%; p = 0.099]. Health economic analyses suggest that TARGIT was statistically significantly less costly than EBRT, produced similar quality-adjusted life-years, had a positive incremental net monetary benefit that was borderline statistically significantly different from zero and had a probability of > 90% of being cost-effective. There appears to be little uncertainty in the point estimates, based on deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses. If TARGIT were given instead of EBRT in suitable patients, it might potentially reduce costs to the health-care providers in the UK by £8-9.1 million each year. This does not include environmental, patient and societal costs.

LIMITATIONS

The number of local recurrences is small but the number of events for local recurrence-free survival is not as small (TARGIT 57 vs. EBRT 59); occurrence of so few events (< 3.5%) also implies that both treatments are effective and any difference is unlikely to be large. Not all 3451 patients were followed up for 5 years; however, more than the number of patients required to answer the main trial question (n = 585) were followed up for > 5 years.

CONCLUSIONS

For patients with breast cancer (women who are aged ≥ 45 years with hormone-sensitive invasive ductal carcinoma that is up to 3.5 cm in size), TARGIT concurrent with lumpectomy within a risk-adapted approach is as effective as, safer than and less expensive than postoperative EBRT.

FUTURE WORK

The analyses will be repeated with longer follow-up. Although this may not change the primary result, the larger number of events may confirm the effect on overall mortality and allow more detailed subgroup analyses. The TARGeted Intraoperative radioTherapy Boost (TARGIT-B) trial is testing whether or not a tumour bed boost given intraoperatively (TARGIT) boost is superior to a tumour bed boost given as part of postoperative EBRT.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN34086741 and ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00983684.

FUNDING

University College London Hospitals (UCLH)/University College London (UCL) Comprehensive Biomedical Research Centre, UCLH Charities, Ninewells Cancer Campaign, National Health and Medical Research Council and German Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF). From September 2009 this project was funded by the NIHR Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 20, No. 73. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

The INTRABEAM® Photon Radiotherapy System for the adjuvant treatment of early breast cancer: a systematic review and economic evaluation

BACKGROUND

Initial treatment for early breast cancer is usually either breast-conserving surgery (BCS) or mastectomy. After BCS, whole-breast external beam radiotherapy (WB-EBRT) is the standard of care. A potential alternative to post-operative WB-EBRT is intraoperative radiation therapy delivered by the INTRABEAM(®) Photon Radiotherapy System (Carl Zeiss, Oberkochen, Germany) to the tissue adjacent to the resection cavity at the time of surgery.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of INTRABEAM for the adjuvant treatment of early breast cancer during surgical removal of the tumour.

DATA SOURCES

Electronic bibliographic databases, including MEDLINE, EMBASE and The Cochrane Library, were searched from inception to March 2014 for English-language articles. Bibliographies of articles, systematic reviews, clinical guidelines and the manufacturer's submission were also searched. The advisory group was contacted to identify additional evidence.

METHODS

Systematic reviews of clinical effectiveness, health-related quality of life and cost-effectiveness were conducted. Two reviewers independently screened titles and abstracts for eligibility. Inclusion criteria were applied to full texts of retrieved papers by one reviewer and checked by a second reviewer. Data extraction and quality assessment were undertaken by one reviewer and checked by a second reviewer, and differences in opinion were resolved through discussion at each stage. Clinical effectiveness studies were included if they were carried out in patients with early operable breast cancer. The intervention was the INTRABEAM system, which was compared with WB-EBRT, and study designs were randomised controlled trials (RCTs). Controlled clinical trials could be considered if data from available RCTs were incomplete (e.g. absence of data on outcomes of interest). A cost-utility decision-analytic model was developed to estimate the costs, benefits and cost-effectiveness of INTRABEAM compared with WB-EBRT for early operable breast cancer.

RESULTS

One non-inferiority RCT, TARGeted Intraoperative radioTherapy Alone (TARGIT-A), met the inclusion criteria for the review. The review found that local recurrence was slightly higher following INTRABEAM than WB-EBRT, but the difference did not exceed the 2.5% non-inferiority margin providing INTRABEAM was given at the same time as BCS. Overall survival was similar with both treatments. Statistically significant differences in complications were found for the occurrence of wound seroma requiring more than three aspirations (more frequent in the INTRABEAM group) and for a Radiation Therapy Oncology Group toxicity score of grade 3 or 4 (less frequent in the INTRABEAM group). Cost-effectiveness base-case analysis indicates that INTRABEAM is less expensive but also less effective than WB-EBRT because it is associated with lower total costs but fewer total quality-adjusted life-years gained. However, sensitivity analyses identified four model parameters that can cause a switch in the treatment option that is considered cost-effective.

LIMITATIONS

The base-case result from the model is subject to uncertainty because the disease progression parameters are largely drawn from the single available RCT. The RCT median follow-up of 2 years 5 months may be inadequate, particularly as the number of participants with local recurrence is low. The model is particularly sensitive to this parameter.

CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS

A significant investment in INTRABEAM equipment and staff training (clinical and non-clinical) would be required to make this technology available across the NHS. Longer-term follow-up data from the TARGIT-A trial and analysis of registry data are required as results are currently based on a small number of events and economic modelling results are uncertain.

STUDY REGISTRATION

This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42013006720.

FUNDING

The National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme. Note that the economic model associated with this document is protected by intellectual property rights, which are owned by the University of Southampton. Anyone wishing to modify, adapt, translate, reverse engineer, decompile, dismantle or create derivative work based on the economic model must first seek the agreement of the property owners.

Intraoperative Radiotherapy Versus Whole-Breast External Beam Radiotherapy in Early-Stage Breast Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

There has not been a clear answer about the efficacy of intraoperative radiotherapy (IORT) for women with early-stage breast cancer.The aim of this meta-analysis was to summarize the available evidence comparing the efficacy and safety of IORT with those of whole-breast external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) for women with early-stage breast cancer.MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library were searched up to October 2014. Two authors independently conducted the literature selection and data extraction.Studies that compared IORT with whole-breast EBRT were included in the systematic review. IORT was defined as a single dose of irradiation to the tumor bed during breast-conserving surgery rather than whole-breast irradiation.Qualities of RCTs were evaluated according to the PEDro scale. Qualities of non-RCTs were evaluated according to the Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies (MINORS). The risk ratios (RRs) of ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence, overall mortality, breast cancer mortality, non-breast cancer mortality, and distant metastasis were pooled using a random-effects model.Four studies with 5415 patients were included in this meta-analysis, including 2 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and 2 non-RCTs. Ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence was significantly higher in patients with IORT compared to those with whole-breast EBRT (RR 2.83, 95% CI 1.23-6.51), but with significant heterogeneity (I = 58.5%, P = 0.065). Comparing IORT with whole-breast EBRT, the pooled RRs for overall mortality, breast cancer mortality, non-breast cancer mortality, and distant metastasis were 0.88 (95% CI: 0.66-1.17), 1.20 (95% CI: 0.77-1.86), 0.76 (95% CI: 0.44-1.31), and 0.95 (95% CI: 0.61-1.49), respectively.IORT had a significantly higher risk of ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence than whole-breast EBRT. Overall mortality did not differ significantly. IORT should be used in conjunction with the prudent selection of suitable patients. It is imperative to identify women with a low risk of local recurrence.

Techniques for intraoperative radiation therapy for early-stage breast carcinoma

ABSTRACT 

Intraoperative radiation therapy (IORT) is a method of accelerated partial breast irradiation developed to replace other longer courses of radiotherapy with a single radiation session administered at the time of breast-conserving surgery. The purpose of this review is to summarize the advantages and disadvantages of breast IORT techniques that are currently available, as well to consider potential alternative techniques for breast IORT or ultra-short course breast radiotherapy. Furthermore, we highlight the published outcomes for the IORT treatment approaches including: electron therapy, superficial photon therapy and other techniques. Potential future directions of IORT are explored including novel IORT techniques utilizing intraoperative brachytherapy with in-room imaging and rapid treatment planning.

Intraoperative radiotherapy of the breast for early-stage breast cancer: ready for primetime

The findings of the TARGIT A and ELIOT prospective, randomized controlled trials provide compelling data regarding the efficacy and safety of single fraction intraoperative radiotherapy as an alternative to standard postoperative radiotherapy in the management of early-stage breast cancer. This editorial summarizes the findings of both studies and discusses the importance of patient selection in identifying potential candidates for intraoperative radiotherapy.

Intraoperative radiotherapy for breast cancer

Intra-operative radiotherapy (IORT) as a treatment for breast cancer is a relatively new technique that is designed to be a replacement for whole breast external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) in selected women suitable for breast-conserving therapy. This article reviews twelve reasons for the use of the technique, with a particular emphasis on targeted intra-operative radiotherapy (TARGIT) which uses X-rays generated from a portable device within the operating theatre immediately after the breast tumour (and surrounding margin of healthy tissue) has been removed. The delivery of a single fraction of radiotherapy directly to the tumour bed at the time of surgery, with the capability of adding EBRT at a later date if required (risk-adaptive technique) is discussed in light of recent results from a large multinational randomised controlled trial comparing TARGIT with EBRT. The technique avoids irradiation of normal tissues such as skin, heart, lungs, ribs and spine, and has been shown to improve cosmetic outcome when compared with EBRT. Beneficial aspects to both institutional and societal economics are discussed, together with evidence demonstrating excellent patient satisfaction and quality of life. There is a discussion of the published evidence regarding the use of IORT twice in the same breast (for new primary cancers) and in patients who would never be considered for EBRT because of their special circumstances (such as the frail, the elderly, or those with collagen vascular disease). Finally, there is a discussion of the role of the TARGIT Academy in developing and sustaining high standards in the use of the technique.