Potential Impact of Preoperative Magnetic Resonance Imaging of the Breast on Patient Selection for Accelerated Partial Breast Irradiation

Modern radiation techniques in early stage breast cancer for the breast radiologist

Partial breast irradiation (PBI) and ultra-hypofractionated whole breast irradiation (uWBI) are contemporary alternatives to conventional and standard hypofractionated whole breast irradiation (WBI), which shorten treatment from 3 to 6 weeks to 1-2 weeks for select patients. PBI and accelerated PBI (APBI) can be delivered with external beam radiation (3D conformal radiation therapy (3D-CRT) or intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT)), intraoperative radiation (IORT), or brachytherapy. These new radiation techniques offer the advantage of convenience and lower cost, which ultimately improves access to care. Globally, the COVID 19 pandemic has accelerated APBI/PBI and ultra-hypofractionated regimens into routine practice for carefully selected patients. Recent long-term data from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have demonstrated these techniques are safe and effective in suitable patients demonstrating equivalent or improved local recurrence, acute/late toxicity, and cosmesis. PBI and APBI should be limited to low risk unifocal invasive ductal carcinoma and ductal carcinoma in situ with tumor size < 2 cm, clear margins (≥2 mm), ER+, and negative nodes. Based on the results from UK Fast-Forward and UK FAST ultra-hypofractionated breast radiation can be safely employed for early stage node negative patients, but is not yet considered an international standard of care. In this review, authors will appraise recent data for these shorter course radiation treatment regimens, as well as, considerations for breast radiologists including surveillance imaging and radiographic findings.

The Changing World of Breast Cancer: A Radiologist's Perspective

Compared with other fields of medicine, there is hardly an area that has seen such fast development as the world of breast cancer. Indeed, the way we treat breast cancer has changed fundamentally over the past decades. Breast imaging has always been an integral part of this change, and it undergoes constant adjustment to new ways of thinking. This relates not only to the technical tools we use for diagnosing breast cancer but also to the way diagnostic information is used to guide treatment. There is a constant change of concepts for and attitudes toward breast cancer, and a constant flux of new ideas, new treatment approaches, and new insights into the molecular and biological behavior of this disease. Clinical breast radiologists and even more so, clinician scientists, interested in breast imaging need to keep abreast with this rapidly changing world. Diagnostic or treatment approaches that are considered useful today may be abandoned tomorrow. Approaches that seem irrelevant or far too extravagant today may prove clinically useful and adequate next year. Radiologists must constantly question what they do, and align their clinical aims and research objectives with the changing needs of contemporary breast oncology. Moreover, knowledge about the past helps better understand present debates and controversies. Accordingly, in this article, we provide an overview on the evolution of breast imaging and breast cancer treatment, describe current areas of research, and offer an outlook regarding the years to come.

Patient selection for partial breast irradiation by intraoperative radiation therapy: can magnetic resonance imaging be useful?-perspective from radiation oncology point of view

The guidelines of the European and American Societies of Radiation Oncology (GEC-ESTRO and ASTRO) defined the selection criteria to offer partial breast irradiation (PBI) after lumpectomy in patients with low risk breast cancer regardless pre-operative staging. A recent publication by Tallet et al. explored the impact of preoperative magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) on patient eligibility for PBI. From their study, an ipsilateral BC was detected in 4% of patients, excluding these patients from intraoperative radiotherapy (IORT). The authors suggested that preoperative MRI should be used routinely for patient's candidate to IORT, because of the rate of ipsilateral breast cancer detected. In view of Tallet's article, we analyzed some aspects of this issue in order to envisage some possible perspective on how to better identify those patients who could benefit from PBI, especially using IORT. From historical studies, the risk of breast cancer recurrence outside index quadrant without irradiation is in the range of 1.5-3.5%. MRI sensitivity for detection of invasive cancer is reported up to 100%, and it is particularly useful in dense breast. Other imaging technique did not achieve the same sensibility and specificity as conventional MRI. Of note, none of randomized trials published and ongoing on PBI included preoperative MRI as part of staging. To perform a preoperative MRI in PBI setting is an interesting issue, but the available data suggest that this issue should be preferably studied in the setting of prospective clinical trials to clarify the role of MRI and the clinical meaning of the discovered additional foci.

Routine use of preoperative breast MRI for patients considered for intraoperative radiotherapy

This editorial comments on the study by Tallet et al. which reported on the incidence of ipsilateral second breast cancers (BC) detected by preoperative magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in patients being considered for intraoperative radiotherapy (IORT). Any second BC was detected in 7% of patients; an ipsilateral BC was detected in 4% of patients, precluding them from IORT. The authors comment that in view of detection of a substantial rate of ipsilateral BCs by preoperative MRI, this exam should be used routinely for staging patients being considered for IORT.

The Changing World of Breast Cancer: A Radiologist's Perspective

Compared with other fields of medicine, there is hardly an area that has seen such fast development as the world of breast cancer. Indeed, the way we treat breast cancer has changed fundamentally over the past decades. Breast imaging has always been an integral part of this change, and it undergoes constant adjustment to new ways of thinking. This relates not only to the technical tools we use for diagnosing breast cancer but also to the way diagnostic information is used to guide treatment. There is a constant change of concepts for and attitudes toward breast cancer, and a constant flux of new ideas, new treatment approaches, and new insights into the molecular and biological behavior of this disease. Clinical breast radiologists and even more so, clinician scientists, interested in breast imaging need to keep abreast with this rapidly changing world. Diagnostic or treatment approaches that are considered useful today may be abandoned tomorrow. Approaches that seem irrelevant or far too extravagant today may prove clinically useful and adequate next year. Radiologists must constantly question what they do, and align their clinical aims and research objectives with the changing needs of contemporary breast oncology. Moreover, knowledge about the past helps better understand present debates and controversies. Accordingly, in this article, we provide an overview on the evolution of breast imaging and breast cancer treatment, describe current areas of research, and offer an outlook regarding the years to come.

Targeted Intraoperative Radiotherapy for the Management of Ductal Carcinoma In Situ of the Breast

Multiple long-term studies have demonstrated a propensity for breast cancer recurrences to develop near the site of the original breast cancer. Recognition of this local recurrence pattern laid the foundation for the development of accelerated partial breast irradiation (APBI) approaches designed to limit the radiation treatment field to the site of the malignancy. However, there is a paucity of data regarding the efficacy of APBI in general, and intraoperative radiotherapy (IORT), in particular, for the management of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS). As a result, use of APBI, remains controversial. A prospective nonrandomized trial was designed to determine if patients with pure DCIS considered eligible for concurrent IORT based on preoperative mammography and contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (CE-MRI) could be successfully treated using IORT with minimal need for additional therapy due to inadequate surgical margins or excessive tumor size. Between November 2007 and June 2014, 35 women underwent bilateral digital mammography and bilateral breast CE-MRI prior to selection for IORT. Patients were deemed eligible for IORT if their lesion was ≤4 cm in maximal diameter on both digital mammography and CE-MRI, pure DCIS on minimally invasive breast biopsy or wide local excision, and considered resectable with clear surgical margins using breast-conserving surgery (BCS). Postoperatively, the DCIS lesion size determined by imaging was compared with lesion size and surgical margin status obtained from the surgical pathology specimen. Thirty-five patients completed IORT. Median patient age was 57 years (range 42-79 years) and median histologic lesion size was 15.6 mm (2-40 mm). No invasive cancer was identified. In more than half of the patients in our study (57.1%), MRI failed to detect a corresponding lesion. Nonetheless, 30 patients met criteria for negative margins (i.e., margins ≥2 mm) whereas five patients had positive margins (<2 mm). Two of the five patients with positive margins underwent mastectomy due to extensive imaging-occult DCIS. Three of the five patients with positive margins underwent successful re-excision at a subsequent operation prior to subsequent whole breast irradiation. A total of 14.3% (5/35) of patients required some form of additional therapy. At 36 months median follow-up (range of 2-83 months, average 42 months), only two patients experienced local recurrences of cancer (DCIS only), yielding a 5.7% local recurrence rate. No deaths or distant recurrences were observed. Imaging-occult DCIS is a challenge for IORT, as it is for all forms of breast-conserving therapy. Nonetheless, 91.4% of patients with DCIS were successfully managed with BCS and IORT alone, with relatively few patients requiring additional therapy.

MR Imaging for Selection of Patients for Partial Breast Irradiation: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

PURPOSE

To systematically review articles that estimated the ineligibility for partial breast irradiation (PBI) after magnetic resonance (MR) imaging.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

No ethics committee approval was needed. A systematic search was performed by using MEDLINE and EMBASE. The rate of patients eligible at standard assessment (ie, clinical examination, mammography, and/or ultrasonography) but ineligible after MR imaging was a study outcome. Odds ratios (ORs) were calculated to identify predictors. Quality was appraised by using the Strengthening Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology checklist.

RESULTS

Of 93 retrieved articles, six were included (total, 3136 patients). For PBI eligibility, all studies applied National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project B-39 criteria. Ineligibility at standard assessment varied from 21% to 80%; MR imaging prompted ineligibility for PBI in 6%-25% of patients who were initially deemed eligible or in 2%-20% if calculated on the overall number of patients initially screened. Meta-regression showed a negative correlation between ineligibility at standard assessment and ineligibility after MR imaging (P < .001). The pooled percentage of patients eligible at standard assessment but ineligible after MR imaging was 11% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 6%, 19%). Predictors for ineligibility after MR imaging were cancers stage pT2 or greater versus less than stage pT2 (OR, 8.8 [95% CI: 4.7, 16.7]; P < .001), invasive lobular histopathologic results versus invasive ductal pathologic results (OR, 3.0 [95% CI: 1.6, 6.6]; P = .007), pre- versus postmenopausal status (OR, 1.9 [95% CI: 1.3, 2.6]; P < .001), invasive cancer versus ductal carcinoma in situ (OR, 1.6 [95% CI: 1.0, 2.4]; P = .031). Study quality ranged from 17 to 20 (maximum quality, 22). The risk of publication bias was moderate.

CONCLUSION

One of nine women (11%), who on the sole basis of standard assessment were candidates to undergo PBI, was found to be ineligible after undergoing MR imaging. Breast MR imaging should be used to select patients for PBI.

Classification system for identifying women at risk for altered partial breast irradiation recommendations after breast magnetic resonance imaging

PURPOSE

To study the utility of preoperative breast MRI for partial breast irradiation (PBI) patient selection, using multivariable analysis of significant risk factors to create a classification rule.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Between 2002 and 2009, 712 women with newly diagnosed breast cancer underwent preoperative bilateral breast MRI at Mayo Clinic Florida. Of this cohort, 566 were retrospectively deemed eligible for PBI according to the National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project Protocol B-39 inclusion criteria using physical examination, mammogram, and/or ultrasound. Magnetic resonance images were then reviewed to determine their impact on patient eligibility. The patient and tumor characteristics were evaluated to determine risk factors for altered PBI eligibility after MRI and to create a classification rule.

RESULTS

Of the 566 patients initially eligible for PBI, 141 (25%) were found ineligible because of pathologically proven MRI findings. Magnetic resonance imaging detected additional ipsilateral breast cancer in 118 (21%). Of these, 62 (11%) had more extensive disease than originally noted before MRI, and 64 (11%) had multicentric disease. Contralateral breast cancer was detected in 28 (5%). Four characteristics were found to be significantly associated with PBI ineligibility after MRI on multivariable analysis: premenopausal status (P=.021), detection by palpation (P<.001), first-degree relative with a history of breast cancer (P=.033), and lobular histology (P=.002). Risk factors were assigned a score of 0-2. The risk of altered PBI eligibility from MRI based on number of risk factors was 0:18%; 1:22%; 2:42%; 3:65%.

CONCLUSIONS

Preoperative bilateral breast MRI altered the PBI recommendations for 25% of women. Women who may undergo PBI should be considered for breast MRI, especially those with lobular histology or with 2 or more of the following risk factors: premenopausal, detection by palpation, and first-degree relative with a history of breast cancer.

Four-year clinical update from a prospective trial of accelerated partial breast intensity-modulated radiotherapy (APBIMRT)

This prospective Phase II single-arm study gathered data on the use of intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) to deliver accelerated partial breast irradiation (APBI). Four-year efficacy, cosmesis, and toxicity results are presented. Between February 2004 and September 2007, 136 consecutive patients with Stage 0/I breast cancer and negative margins ≥0.2 cm were treated on protocol. Patients received 38.5 Gy in 10 equal fractions delivered twice daily. Breast pain and cosmesis were rated by patient, and cosmesis was additionally evaluated by physician per Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) criteria. The National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (NCI CTCAE v3.0) was used to grade toxicities. 136 patients (140 breasts) with median follow-up of 53.1 months (range, 8.9-83.2) were evaluated. Population characteristics included median age of 61.9 years and Tis (13.6 %), T1a (18.6 %), T1b (36.4 %), and T1c (31.4 %). Kaplan-Meier estimates at 4 years: ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence 0.7 %; contralateral breast failure 0 %; distant failure 0.9 %; overall survival 96.8 %; and cancer-specific survival 100 %. At last follow-up, patients and physicians rated cosmesis as excellent/good in 88.2 and 90.5 %, respectively; patients rated breast pain as none/mild in 97.0 %. Other observations included edema (1.4 %), telangiectasia (3.6 %), five cases of grade 1 radiation recall (3.6 %), and two cases of rib fractures (1.4 %). This analysis represents the largest cohort and longest follow-up of APBI utilizing IMRT reported to date. Four-year results continue to demonstrate excellent local control, survival, cosmetic results, and toxicity profile.

A prospective study of the utility of magnetic resonance imaging in determining candidacy for partial breast irradiation

PURPOSE

Retrospective data have demonstrated that breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) may change a patient's eligibility for partial breast irradiation (PBI) by identifying multicentric, multifocal, or contralateral disease. The objective of the current study was to prospectively determine the frequency with which MRI identifies occult disease and to establish clinical factors associated with a higher likelihood of MRI prompting changes in PBI eligibility.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

At The University of Chicago, women with breast cancer uniformly undergo MRI in addition to mammography and ultrasonography. From June 2009 through May 2011, all patients were screened prospectively in a multidisciplinary conference for PBI eligibility based on standard imaging, and the impact of MRI on PBI eligibility according to National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project protocol B-39/Radiation Therapy Oncology Group protocol 0413 entry criteria was recorded. Univariable analysis was performed using clinical characteristics in both the prospective cohort and in a separate cohort of retrospectively identified patients. Pooled analysis was used to derive a scoring index predictive of the risk that MRI would identify additional disease.

RESULTS

A total of 521 patients were screened for PBI eligibility, and 124 (23.8%) patients were deemed eligible for PBI based on standard imaging. MRI findings changed PBI eligibility in 12.9% of patients. In the pooled univariable analysis, tumor size ≥ 2 cm on mammography or ultrasonography (P=.02), age <50 years (P=.01), invasive lobular histology (P=.01), and HER-2/neu amplification (P=.01) were associated with a higher likelihood of MRI changing PBI eligibility. A predictive score was generated by summing the number of significant risk factors. Patients with a score of 0, 1, 2, and 3 had changes to eligibility based on MRI findings in 2.8%, 13.2%, 38.1%, and 100%, respectively (P<.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

MRI identified additional disease in a significant number of patients eligible for PBI, based on standard imaging. Clinical characteristics may be useful in directing implementation of MRI in the staging of PBI candidates.

Accelerated partial breast irradiation: the need for well-defined patient selection criteria, improved volume definitions, close follow-up and discussion of salvage treatment

Breast-conserving therapy, including whole breast irradiation, has become a well-established alternative to mastectomy in early-stage breast cancer patients, with similar survival rates and better cosmetic outcome. However, many women are still treated with mastectomy, due to logistical issues related to the long course of radiotherapy (RT). To reduce mastectomy rates and/or omission of RT after breast-conserving surgery, shorter, hypofractionated RT treatments have been introduced. More recently, the necessity of routinely treating the entire breast in all patients has been questioned, leading to the development of partial breast radiotherapy. With accelerated partial breast irradiation (APBI) these two approaches have been combined: the tumor bed with a 1-2 cm margin is irradiated either intra-operatively (single fraction) or postoperatively over 5-15 days. Different techniques have been developed, including interstitial brachytherapy, intra-cavity brachytherapy, intra-operative radiotherapy and external beam radiotherapy. These techniques are being evaluated in several ongoing phase III studies. Since its introduction, APBI has been the subject of continuous debate. ASTRO and GEC-ESTRO have published guidelines for patient selection for APBI, and strongly recommend that APBI be carried out within ongoing clinical trials. Recently, the patient selection criteria for APBI have also been up for debate, following the publication of results from different groups that do/do not confirm a difference in recurrence risk among the ASTRO defined risk groups. This paper reviews the different APBI techniques, current recommendations for patient selection, available clinical data and ongoing clinical trials. A case report is included to illustrate the need for careful follow-up of patients treated with APBI.

The role of preoperative bilateral breast magnetic resonance imaging in patient selection for partial breast irradiation in ductal carcinoma in situ

Purpose. Women with ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) are often candidates for breast-conserving therapy, and one option for radiation treatment is partial breast irradiation (PBI). This study evaluates the use of preoperative breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for PBI selection in DCIS patients. Methods. Between 2002 and 2009, 136 women with newly diagnosed DCIS underwent a preoperative bilateral breast MRI at Mayo Clinic in Florida. One hundred seventeen women were deemed eligible for PBI by the NSABP B-39 (National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project, Protocol B-39) inclusion criteria using physical examination, mammogram, and/or ultrasound. MRIs were reviewed for their impact on patient eligibility, and findings were pathologically confirmed. Results. Of the 117 patients, 23 (20%) were found ineligible because of pathologically proven MRI findings. MRI detected additional ipsilateral breast cancer in 21 (18%) patients. Of these women, 15 (13%) had more extensive disease than originally noted before MRI, and 6 (5%) had multicentric disease in the ipsilateral breast. In addition, contralateral breast cancer was detected in 4 (4%). Conclusions. Preoperative breast MRI altered the PBI recommendations for 20% of women. Bilateral breast MRI should be an integral part of the preoperative evaluation of all patients with DCIS being considered for PBI.