Including internal mammary lymph nodes in radiation therapy for synchronous bilateral breast cancer: an international survey of treatment technique and clinical priorities

A Questionnaire Survey of Current Practice in the Management of Internal Mammary Lymph Nodes in Breast Cancer

Nita S. NairBackground  Radiotherapy (RT) is an important modality in the management of breast cancers (BC). Large randomized trials have suggested that prophylactic regional nodal irradiation inclusive of internal mammary lymph nodes (IMLN) reduces BC-related mortality. However, the adoption of IMLN-RT has been variable due to relative benefits and toxicity concerns. Methods  A survey was emailed to radiation oncologists (ROs) across the country wherein they were asked about their practice regarding IMLN-RT in BC. Results  We received 128 responses, which included radiation oncologists across both private institutions (PIs) and government institutions (GIs). Fifty-six (43.8%) routinely offer prophylactic(p) IMLN-RT and an additional 15 (11.71%) suggested they would have offered it in the absence of logistic constraints. Almost all, 121 (94.5%) radiate the IMLN in case of radiologically positive lymph nodes (LNs). Fifty-six ROs (43.8%) offered prophylactic IMLN-RT in node-negative disease. Among those who did not offer IMLN-RT, most (84.72%) felt the clinical evidence was equivocal. Of the 56 who offered pIMLN-RT, 34/56 (60.71%) offered to locally advanced tumors, 20/56 (35.71%) offered to all inner and central tumors (ICQT), 29/56 (51.78%) to > 4 axillary LN-positive and 9/56 (16.07%) to any axillary LN-positive. The majority, i.e., 36/56 (64.28%) radiated upper three intercostal spaces, 9 (16.07%) radiated upper five intercostal spaces, and 6 (10.9%) decided based on tumor location, while 5 (9%) irradiated one space below the involved space. Overall, simulation-based planning was undertaken in 99% of PIs as opposed to 89% of GIs ( p  = 0.03). The majority of ROs, i.e., 92 (72.4%) preferred IMRT to IMLN-RT. In addition, the surgical approach to IMLN was practiced by surgeons at 18 (14%) centers, of which 13 (72.22%) operated the IMLN when radiologically evident. The IMLN dissection was preferentially performed for second and third intercostal spaces as suggested in 10 (55.55%) responses, while 8 (44.44%) performed thoracoscopic dissection of the IMLN chain. The distribution of prophylactic, definitive IMLN-RT, and IMLN dissection did not differ significantly between GI and PI ( p  = NS). Conclusion  pIMLN-RT is still not the standard protocol in most centers citing equivocal evidence in the literature. Logistics, though different in GIs and PIs, did not impact the decision of pIMLN-RT. Further efforts would be required to standardize practice in IMLN across India.

Radiation Oncologists' Approach to Internal Mammary Lymph Node Radiotherapy in Breast Cancer: The Turkish Society for Radiation Oncology Breast Cancer Study Group (TROD 06-005 Survey Study)

Background

This study aimed to examine the practice patterns of radiation oncologists in Turkey regarding radiotherapy to the regional lymph nodes, including internal mammary lymph nodes (IMNs), and identify the factors influencing their clinical decisions in breast cancer patients.

Methods

A nationwide, 19-point questionnaire was sent to the physician members of the Turkish Society for Radiation Oncology (TROD).

Results

In total, 165 radiation oncologists completed the survey, corresponding to a 27% response rate. Regional radiotherapy was used in 64.2% of the patients with 1-3 axillary lymphatic involvement and unfavorable prognostic factors. In contrast, 61.2% of the respondents indicated that IMN should be included in the target volume for regional radiotherapy when the patient had one positive node after axillary lymph node dissection (ALND) in the inner quadrant and central region tumors. However, 71.5% of the respondents chose to include the IMN in the non-inner quadrant and non-central region tumors for patients with four or more positive nodes after ALND. The decision to offer internal mammary lymph node radiotherapy (IMNRT) varied widely and significantly among respondents, years in practice, and the rates of dedicating their clinical time to patients with breast cancer.

Conclusion

The results of this survey revealed significant national variation in attitudes regarding the treatment of IMN. Thus, this study may also help document the impact of future studies on clinical practice.

Heart-related mortality after postoperative breast irradiation in patients with ductal carcinoma in situ in the contemporary radiotherapy era

Although radiation-induced cardiotoxicity has been addressed, its prognostic relevance to modern radiotherapy (RT) techniques is unclear. This study assessed the impact of adjuvant RT on heart-related deaths in patients with ductal carcinoma in situ. Patients who underwent adjuvant RT after breast-conserving surgery between 1988 and 2008 were identified from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database. Kaplan‒Meier and competing risks analyses were conducted after propensity score-matching according to tumor laterality. A total of 41,526 propensity-matched patients were identified (n = 20,763 for either left- or right-sided tumor). In the analysis of the cumulative incidence of heart-related mortality events, there was a greater risk increment in the left-sided group over the first to second decades after RT in patients aged ≤ 50 years (P = 0.048). Competing risks analysis of the young patients showed that left-sided RT was associated with higher heart-related mortality rates (Grey’s test, P = 0.049). The statistical significance remained after adjusting for other covariates (subdistribution hazard ratio 2.35; 95% confidence interval 1.09‒5.10). Regarding the intrinsic effect of modern RT techniques, further strategies to reduce heart-related risks are needed for young patients. Close surveillance within an earlier follow-up period should be considered for these patients in clinics.

Using Cherenkov imaging to monitor the match line between photon and electron radiation therapy fields on biological tissue phantoms

SIGNIFICANCE

Due to patients' respiratory movement or involuntary body movements during breast cancer radiotherapy, the mismatched adjacent fields in surface exposure regions could result in insufficient dosage or overdose in these regions, which would lead to tissue injury, excessive skin burns, and potential death. Cherenkov luminescence imaging (CLI) could be used to effectively detect the matching information of adjacent radiation fields without extra radiation or invasive imaging.

AIM

Our objective was to provide a biological experimental basis for monitoring matching of adjacent radiation fields between photon and electron fields due to introduced shifts during radiotherapy by CLI technique.

APPROACH

A medical accelerator was used to generate photon and electron fields. An industrial camera system was adopted to image the excited CLI signal during irradiation of chicken tissue with yellow (group A and group C experiments) or black color (group B experiment). The following introduced shifts were tested: 10, 5, 2, and 0 mm toward superior or inferior direction. A model was introduced to deal with matching error analysis of adjacent radiation fields due to introduced shifts with adapted plans used to treat neoplasms of the right breast with supraclavicular nodes or internal mammary lymph node.

RESULTS

The matching values between photon and electron fields were consistent with the tested introduced shifts during yellow chicken irradiation. In group A, average discrepancies were 0.59  ±  0.35  mm and 0.68  ±  0.37  mm for photon fields and electron fields in anterior/posterior (AP) direction, with 87% and 75% of measurement within 1 mm, respectively. In group C, average discrepancies were 0.80  ±  0.65  mm and 1.07  ±  0.57  mm for oblique photon field with gantry angles of 330 deg and 150 deg, with 66% and 65% of measurement within 1 mm, respectively. The average discrepancies were 0.44  ±  0.30  mm for electron field in the AP direction, with 94% of measurement within 1 mm. The matching error introduced by the proposed method was less than 1.5 mm for AP fields and 2 mm for oblique incidence fields. However, the field matching could not be monitored with black chicken tissue irradiation due to a weak CLI signal that could hardly be extracted from background noise in group B.

CONCLUSIONS

CLI is demonstrated for the quantitative monitoring of the field match line on light biological tissue phantoms and has potential for monitoring of field matching in surface tissue during breast cancer radiotherapy.