1
|
Ghazy SG, Abdel-Maksoud MA, Saleh IA, El-Tayeb MA, Elsaid AA, Kotb MA, Al-Sherif DA, Ramadan HS, Elwahsh A, Hussein AM, Kodous AS. Comparative Analysis of Dosimetry: IMRT versus 3DCRT in Left-Sided Breast Cancer Patients with Considering Some Organs in Out - of - Field Borders. BREAST CANCER (DOVE MEDICAL PRESS) 2024; 16:567-582. [PMID: 39253547 PMCID: PMC11382807 DOI: 10.2147/bctt.s463024] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/19/2024] [Accepted: 03/19/2024] [Indexed: 09/11/2024]
Abstract
Purpose The local management approach for node-positive breast cancer has undergone substantial evolution. Consequently, there exists a pressing need to enhance our treatment strategies by placing greater emphasis on planning and dosimetric factors, given the availability of more conformal techniques and delineation criteria, achieving optimal goals of radiotherapy treatment. The primary aim of this article is to discuss how the extent of regional nodal coverage influences the choice between IMRT and 3D radiation therapy for patients. Patients and Methods A total of 15 patients diagnosed with left breast cancer with disease involved lymph nodes were included in this study. Delivering the recommended dose required the use of a linear accelerator (LINAC) with photon beams energy of 6 mega voltage (6MV). Each patient had full breast radiation using two planning procedures: intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) and three-dimensional radiotherapy (3D conformal). Following the guidelines set forth by the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG), the planned treatment coverage was carefully designed to fall between 95% and 107% of the recommended dose. Additionally, Dose Volume Histograms (DVHs) were generated the dose distribution within these anatomical contours. Results and Conclusion The DVH parameters were subjected to a comparative analysis, focusing on the doses absorbed by both Organs at Risk (OARs) and the Planning Target Volume (PTV). The findings suggest that low doses in IMRT plan might raise the risk of adverse oncological outcomes or potentially result in an increased incidence of subsequent malignancies. Consequently, the adoption of inverse IMRT remains limited, and the decision to opt for this therapy should be reserved for situations where it is genuinely necessary to uphold a satisfactory quality of life. Additionally, this approach helps in reducing the likelihood of developing thyroid problems and mitigates the risk of injuries to the supraclavicular area and the proximal head of the humerus bone.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Shaimaa G Ghazy
- Radiation Therapy Department, Armed Forces Medical Complex, Alexandria, Egypt
| | - Mostafa A Abdel-Maksoud
- Botany and Microbiology Department- College of Science- King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
| | | | - Mohamed A El-Tayeb
- Botany and Microbiology Department- College of Science- King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
| | - Amr A Elsaid
- Oncology Department, Faculty of Medicine, Alexandria University, Alexandria, Egypt
| | - Metwally A Kotb
- Medical Biophysics Department, Medical Research Institute, Alexandria University, Alexandria, Egypt
| | - Diana A Al-Sherif
- Applied Medical Science Faculty, Sixth October University, Sixth October, Giza, Egypt
| | - Heba S Ramadan
- Medical Biophysics Department, Medical Research Institute, Alexandria University, Alexandria, Egypt
| | - Ahmed Elwahsh
- Central Radiology Institute, Kepler University Hospital GmbH, Linz, Austria
- Department of Molecular and Translational Medicine, Division of Biology and Genetics, University of Brescia, Brescia, Italy
| | - Ahmed M Hussein
- Department of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Division of Pharmacology and Toxicology, University of Vienna, Vienna, 1090, Austria
- Zoology Department, Faculty of Science, Al Azhar University, Assiut, Egypt
| | - Ahmad S Kodous
- Pharmacology Department, Saveetha Institute of Medical and Technical Sciences, Saveetha Dental College & Hospitals, Chennai, TN, India
- Radiation Biology Department, National Center for Radiation Research and Technology (NCRRT), Egyptian Atomic Energy Authority (EAEA), Cairo, Egypt
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Unterkirhere O, Stenger-Weisser A, Kaever A, Hoeng L, Jeller D, Logaritsch P, Glanzmann C, Studer G. Single-Institution Prospective Evaluation of Moderately Hypofractionated Whole-Breast Radiation Therapy With Simultaneous Integrated Boost With or Without Lymphatic Drainage Irradiation After Breast-Conserving Surgery. Adv Radiat Oncol 2023; 8:101270. [PMID: 38047219 PMCID: PMC10692289 DOI: 10.1016/j.adro.2023.101270] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/03/2023] [Accepted: 05/12/2023] [Indexed: 12/05/2023] Open
Abstract
Purpose We report treatment outcomes for patients who received adjuvant moderate hypofractionated whole-breast radiation therapy with simultaneous integrated boost (SIB-mhWBRT) after breast-conserving surgery. Methods and Materials SIB-mhWBRT for patients with breast cancer was introduced in our department in July 2017. This prospective evaluation includes 424 consecutive patients treated with SIB-mhWBRT for stage I-III invasive breast cancer (n = 391) and/or ductal carcinoma in situ (n = 33) until December 2021. SIB-mhWBRT was applied with 40 Gy in 15 daily fractions over 3 weeks according to the START B trial, with an SIB dose to the tumor bed of 48 Gy according to Radiation Therapy Oncology Group 1005/UK-IMPORT-HIGH, delivered as 3-dinemsional conformal radiation therapy (RT; n = 402), intensity modulated RT (n = 4), or volumetric modulated arc therapy (n = 18). The mean patient age was 60 years (range, 27-88). Since May 2018, patients with indications for lymphatic pathway RT were included (n = 62). Baseline parameters and follow-up data were recorded and reported, including objective assessment of treatment-related outcomes and subjective patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs). Results Mean/median follow-up was 29/33 months (range, 2-60). Acute toxicity grade 0, 1, 2, and 3 was observed in 25.0%, 61.4%, 13.3%, and 0%, respectively, at the completion of RT. Data of 281, 266, 243, 172, and 58 patients were available for 6-month and 1-, 2-, 3-, and 4-year follow-up, respectively. Grade 2 late effects were identified in 8.5%, 6.0%, 4.9%, 2.2%, and 10.2% and grade 3 in 2.8%, 1.1%, 1.2%, 0%, and 0% of patients at 6-month and 1-, 2-, 3-, and 4-year follow-up, respectively. Medical treatment of breast edema was the only grade 3 late effect observed. PROM cosmesis results were evaluated as excellent-good, fair, and poor in 97.2%, 2.5%, and 0.4%; 96.5%, 3.1%, and 0.4%; 97.4%, 2.2%, and 0.4%; 97.5%, 2.5%, and 0%; and 96.5%, 3.5%, and 0.0% at 6 months and 1, 2, 3, and 4 years post-RT, respectively. For all patients, the 3-year overall, cancer-specific, and disease-free survival rates were 98.2%, 99.1%, and 95.9%, respectively. Three-year risk of any locoregional recurrence was 0.6%. No mortality or relapse was observed in patients with ductal carcinoma in situ. Conclusions SIB-mhWBRT demonstrated very favorable side effect profiles and cosmesis/PROMs. Three-year results demonstrate excellent locoregional control. This short-term regimen offers substantial patient comfort and improves institutional efficacy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Olga Unterkirhere
- Radiation Oncology Department, Kantonsspital Luzern, Lucerne, Switzerland
| | | | | | - Laura Hoeng
- Radiation Oncology Department, Kantonsspital Luzern, Lucerne, Switzerland
| | - David Jeller
- Radiation Oncology Department, Kantonsspital Luzern, Lucerne, Switzerland
| | | | | | - Gabriela Studer
- Radiation Oncology Department, Kantonsspital Luzern, Lucerne, Switzerland
- Faculty of Health Sciences and Medicine, University of Lucerne, Lucerne, Switzerland
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Record SM, Hwang ESS, Chiba A. How to Navigate the Treatment Spectrum from Multimodality Therapy to Observation Alone for ductal carcinoma in situ. Surg Oncol Clin N Am 2023; 32:663-673. [PMID: 37714635 DOI: 10.1016/j.soc.2023.05.011] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 09/17/2023]
Abstract
DCIS detection has increased dramatically since the introduction of screening mammography. Current guidance concordant care recommends surgical intervention for all patients with DCIS, followed by radiation and/or endocrine therapy for some. Adjuvant therapies after surgical excision have reduced recurrence rates but not breast cancer mortality. Given the lack of evidence of current treatment regimens and the morbidity associated with these treatments, there is concern that DCIS is over-treated. Active surveillance may be a favorable alternative for selected patients and is currently being investigated through four international clinical trials.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sydney M Record
- Department of Surgery, Duke University Medical Center, 40 Duke Medicine Circle, 124 Davison Building, Durham, NC 27710, USA. https://twitter.com/sydney_record
| | - Eun-Sil Shelley Hwang
- Department of Surgery, Duke University Medical Center, 40 Duke Medicine Circle, 124 Davison Building, Durham, NC 27710, USA; Duke Cancer Institute, 20 Duke Medicine Circle, Durham, NC 27710, USA. https://twitter.com/drshelleyhwang
| | - Akiko Chiba
- Department of Surgery, Duke University Medical Center, 40 Duke Medicine Circle, 124 Davison Building, Durham, NC 27710, USA; Duke Cancer Institute, 20 Duke Medicine Circle, Durham, NC 27710, USA; Department of Surgery, 508 Fulton Street, Durham, NC 27705, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Cante D, Paolini M, Piva C, Petrucci E, Radici L, Ferrario S, Mondini G, Bagnera S, La Porta MR, Franco P. Hypofractionation and Concomitant Boost in Ductal Carcinoma In Situ (DCIS): Analysis of a Prospective Case Series with Long-Term Follow-Up. Life (Basel) 2022; 12:889. [PMID: 35743920 PMCID: PMC9225308 DOI: 10.3390/life12060889] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/22/2022] [Revised: 06/05/2022] [Accepted: 06/10/2022] [Indexed: 11/23/2022] Open
Abstract
We previously reported on a cohort of breast cancer patients affected with ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) that were treated with breast conservative surgery and hypofractionated whole-breast radiotherapy with a concomitant boost to the lumpectomy cavity. We now report on the long-term results of the oncological and toxicity outcomes, at a median follow-up of 11.2 years. We also include an analysis of the predictive factors for local recurrence (LR). Eighty-two patients with long-term observation were considered for this report. All received hypofractionated post-operative radiotherapy with a concomitant boost (45 Gy/20 fractions to the whole breast and 50 Gy/20 fractions to the lumpectomy cavity). We report on LC rates at 5 and 10 years, overall survival (OS), and breast-cancer-specific survival (BCSS), employing the Kaplan-Meier method. Cox proportional regression analysis was used to determine the role of selected clinical parameters on the risk of local recurrence, by the univariate and multivariate models. After a median follow-up of 11.2 years (range 5-15 years), 9 pts (11%) developed LR. The LR rates at 5 years and 10 years were 2.4% and 8.2%, respectively. The 5- and 10-year overall survival rates were 98.8% and 91.6%, respectively. The 5- and 10-year breast-cancer-specific survival rates were 100.0% and 99.0%. Late skin and subcutaneous toxicities were generally mild, and cosmetic results were good-excellent for most patients. For the univariate regression analysis, ER positive status (HR; 95% CI, p = 0.021), PgR positive status (HR; 95% CI, p = 0.012), and the aggregate data of positive hormonal status (HR; 95% CI, p = 0.021) were inversely correlated to LR risk. Conversely, a high tumor grade (G3) was directly correlated with the risk of LR (HR; 95% CI, p = 0.048). For the multivariate regression analysis, a high tumor grade (G3) confirmed its negative impact on LR (HR 0.40; 95% CI 0.19-0.75, p = 0.047). Our long-term data demonstrate hypofractionated whole-breast radiotherapy with a concomitant boost to be feasable, effective, and tolerable. Our experience suggests positive hormonal status to be protective with respect to LR risk. A high tumor grade is a risk factor for LR.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Domenico Cante
- Department of Radiation Oncology, ASL TO4, Ivrea Community Hospital, 10015 Ivrea, Italy; (D.C.); (M.P.); (C.P.); (S.F.); (M.R.L.P.)
| | - Marina Paolini
- Department of Radiation Oncology, ASL TO4, Ivrea Community Hospital, 10015 Ivrea, Italy; (D.C.); (M.P.); (C.P.); (S.F.); (M.R.L.P.)
| | - Cristina Piva
- Department of Radiation Oncology, ASL TO4, Ivrea Community Hospital, 10015 Ivrea, Italy; (D.C.); (M.P.); (C.P.); (S.F.); (M.R.L.P.)
| | - Edoardo Petrucci
- Department of Medical Physics, ASL TO4, Ivrea Community Hospital, 10015 Ivrea, Italy; (E.P.); (L.R.)
| | - Lorenzo Radici
- Department of Medical Physics, ASL TO4, Ivrea Community Hospital, 10015 Ivrea, Italy; (E.P.); (L.R.)
| | - Silvia Ferrario
- Department of Radiation Oncology, ASL TO4, Ivrea Community Hospital, 10015 Ivrea, Italy; (D.C.); (M.P.); (C.P.); (S.F.); (M.R.L.P.)
| | - Guido Mondini
- Department of Surgery, ASL TO4, Ivrea Community Hospital, 10015 Ivrea, Italy;
| | - Silvia Bagnera
- Department of Diagnostic Imaging, ASL TO4, Ivrea Community Hospital, 10015 Ivrea, Italy;
| | - Maria Rosa La Porta
- Department of Radiation Oncology, ASL TO4, Ivrea Community Hospital, 10015 Ivrea, Italy; (D.C.); (M.P.); (C.P.); (S.F.); (M.R.L.P.)
| | - Pierfrancesco Franco
- Department of Translational Medicine (DIMET), ‘Maggiore della Carità’ University Hospital, University of Eastern Piedmont, 28100 Novara, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Haussmann J, Budach W, Strnad V, Corradini S, Krug D, Schmidt L, Tamaskovics B, Bölke E, Simiantonakis I, Kammers K, Matuschek C. Comparing Local and Systemic Control between Partial- and Whole-Breast Radiotherapy in Low-Risk Breast Cancer-A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Trials. Cancers (Basel) 2021; 13:2967. [PMID: 34199281 PMCID: PMC8231985 DOI: 10.3390/cancers13122967] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/14/2021] [Revised: 06/09/2021] [Accepted: 06/09/2021] [Indexed: 11/16/2022] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE The standard treatment for localized low-risk breast cancer is breast-conserving surgery, followed by adjuvant radiotherapy and appropriate systemic therapy. As the majority of local recurrences occur at the site of the primary tumor, numerous trials have investigated partial-breast irradiation (PBI) instead of whole-breast treatment (WBI) using a multitude of irradiation techniques and fractionation regimens. This meta-analysis addresses the impact on disease-specific endpoints, such as local and regional control, as well as disease-free survival of PBI compared to that of WBI in published randomized trials. MATERIAL AND METHODS We conducted a systematic literature review and searched for randomized trials comparing WBI and PBI in early-stage breast cancer with publication dates after 2009. The meta-analysis was based on the published event rates and the effect sizes for available oncological endpoints of at least two trials reporting on them. We evaluated in-breast tumor recurrences (IBTR), local recurrences at the primary site and elsewhere in the ipsilateral breast, regional recurrences (RR), distant metastasis-free interval (DMFI), disease-free survival (DFS), contralateral breast cancer (CBC), and second primary cancer (SPC). Furthermore, we aimed to assess the impact of different PBI techniques and subgroups on IBTR. We performed all statistical analyses using the inverse variance heterogeneity model to pool effect sizes. RESULTS For the intended meta-analysis, we identified 13 trials (overall 15,561 patients) randomizing between PBI and WBI. IBTR was significantly higher after PBI (OR = 1.66; CI-95%: 1.07-2.58; p = 0.024) with an absolute difference of 1.35%. We detected significant heterogeneity in the analysis of the PBI technique with intraoperative radiotherapy resulting in higher local relapse rates (OR = 3.67; CI-95%: 2.28-5.90; p < 0.001). Other PBI techniques did not show differences to WBI in IBTR. Both strategies were equally effective at the primary tumor site, but PBI resulted in statistically more IBTRs elsewhere in the ipsilateral breast. IBTRs after WBI were more likely to be located at the primary tumor bed, whereas they appeared equally distributed within the breast after PBI. RR was also more frequent after PBI (OR = 1.75; CI-95%: 1.07-2.88; p < 0.001), yet we did not detect any differences in DMFI (OR = 1.08; CI-95%: 0.89-1.30; p = 0.475). DFS was significantly longer in patients treated with WBI (OR = 1.14; CI-95%: 1.02-1.27; p = 0.003). CBC and SPC were not different in the test groups (OR = 0.81; CI-95%: 0.65-1.01; p = 0.067 and OR = 1.09; CI-95%: 0.85-1.40; p = 0.481, respectively). CONCLUSION Limiting the target volume to partial-breast radiotherapy appears to be appropriate when selecting patients with a low risk for local and regional recurrences and using a suitable technique.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jan Haussmann
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heinrich Heine University, 40225 Dusseldorf, Germany; (J.H.); (W.B.); (L.S.); (B.T.); (I.S.); (C.M.)
| | - Wilfried Budach
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heinrich Heine University, 40225 Dusseldorf, Germany; (J.H.); (W.B.); (L.S.); (B.T.); (I.S.); (C.M.)
| | - Vratislav Strnad
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Erlangen, 91054 Erlangen, Germany;
| | - Stefanie Corradini
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital LMU (Ludwig Maximillian), 81377 Munich, Germany;
| | - David Krug
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Schleswig-Holstein, 24105 Kiel, Germany;
| | - Livia Schmidt
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heinrich Heine University, 40225 Dusseldorf, Germany; (J.H.); (W.B.); (L.S.); (B.T.); (I.S.); (C.M.)
| | - Balint Tamaskovics
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heinrich Heine University, 40225 Dusseldorf, Germany; (J.H.); (W.B.); (L.S.); (B.T.); (I.S.); (C.M.)
| | - Edwin Bölke
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heinrich Heine University, 40225 Dusseldorf, Germany; (J.H.); (W.B.); (L.S.); (B.T.); (I.S.); (C.M.)
| | - Ioannis Simiantonakis
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heinrich Heine University, 40225 Dusseldorf, Germany; (J.H.); (W.B.); (L.S.); (B.T.); (I.S.); (C.M.)
| | - Kai Kammers
- Division of Biostatistics and Bioinformatics, Department of Oncology, The Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center at Johns Hopkins, The Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21205, USA;
| | - Christiane Matuschek
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heinrich Heine University, 40225 Dusseldorf, Germany; (J.H.); (W.B.); (L.S.); (B.T.); (I.S.); (C.M.)
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Meduri B, De Rose F, Cabula C, Castellano I, Da Ros L, Grassi MM, Orrù S, Puglisi F, Trimboli RM, Ciabattoni A. Hypofractionated breast irradiation: a multidisciplinary review of the Senonetwork study group. Med Oncol 2021; 38:67. [PMID: 33970358 DOI: 10.1007/s12032-021-01514-w] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/19/2021] [Accepted: 04/23/2021] [Indexed: 11/30/2022]
Abstract
The multidisciplinary management represents a crucial part of the care for cancer patients, resulting in better clinical and process outcomes, with evidence of improved survival among different cancer primary sites, including breast. According with international recommendations established by the European Society of Breast Cancer Specialists (EUSOMA), all breast-cancer patients have to be evaluated by a multidisciplinary team including radiologist, pathologist, surgeon, medical oncologist and radiation oncologist. Thus, variations in clinical practice of each specialty should be discussed and shared with all team members to guarantee a fruitful cooperation among the involved specialists. During the last decades, radiation treatment was deeply changed by the evidence-based adoption of hypofractionated radiotherapy (HFRT) as standard of treatment in patients with early-stage breast cancer undergoing conservative surgery. Moreover, mature randomized data have showed that partial breast irradiation (PBI) is an effective and safe alternative to whole breast irradiation in selected patients with low-risk early-stage breast cancer. Based on this background, we reviewed indications and critical issues of HFRT and PBI analyzing impact of their adoption from a multidisciplinary perspective.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Bruno Meduri
- Radiation Oncology Unit, University Hospital of Modena, Modena, Italy
| | - Fiorenza De Rose
- Radiation Oncology Unit, Santa Chiara Hospital, Largo Medaglie d'oro 9, 38123, Trento, Italy.
| | - Carlo Cabula
- Oncologic Surgery, A. Businco Oncologic Hospital, Cagliari, Italy
| | - Isabella Castellano
- Pathology Unit, Department of Medical Sciences, "City of Health and Science University Hospital", University of Turin, Turin, Italy
| | - Lucia Da Ros
- Department of Medical Oncology, Centro di Riferimento Oncologico di Aviano (CRO), IRCCS, Aviano, Italy
| | | | - Sandra Orrù
- Pathology Unit, P.O. Businco, Azienda Ospedaliera Brotzu, Cagliari, Italy
| | - Fabio Puglisi
- Department of Medical Oncology, Centro di Riferimento Oncologico di Aviano (CRO), IRCCS, Aviano, Italy.,Department of Medicine, University of Udine, Udine, Italy
| | - Rubina Manuela Trimboli
- Unit of Radiology, IRCCS Policlinico San Donato, Via Morandi 30 San Donato Milanese, 20097, Milan, Italy
| | | |
Collapse
|
7
|
Comparing hypofractionated and conventionally fractionated whole breast irradiation for patients with ductal carcinoma in situ after breast conservation: a propensity score-matched analysis from a national multicenter cohort (COBCG-02 study). J Cancer Res Clin Oncol 2021; 147:2069-2077. [PMID: 33387035 DOI: 10.1007/s00432-020-03483-5] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/03/2020] [Accepted: 11/22/2020] [Indexed: 01/05/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE Randomized trials confirmed the efficacy and the safety of hypofractionated whole breast irradiation (HF-WBI) in patients with early-stage breast cancer. However, the role of HF-WBI in patients with DCIS after breast conserving surgery has not yet been clearly established in prospective randomized trials. The aim of this study was to evaluate if HF-WBI can be considered comparable to conventionally fractionated (CF)-WBI in DCIS patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS The analysis included DCIS patients from four Italian centers treated with CF-WBI 50 Gy/25 fractions or HFRT 40.5 Gy/15 fractions, without tumor bed boost. A propensity score matching (PSM) analysis was performed using a logistic regression that considered age, grading, presence of necrosis, resection margin status and adjuvant endocrine therapy. RESULTS Five hundred twenty-seven patients was included (367 in the CF-WBI-group and 160 in the HR-WBI group). After 1:1 matching, 101 patients were allocated to the CF-WBI-group and 104 to the HF-WBI group. No correlation was observed between the type of RT schedule and LRFS (HR 1.68, 95% CI 0.82-3.45; p = 0.152). After PSM, no statistical difference was observed between the two RT group (HR 1.11, 95% CI 0.40-3.04; p = 0.833), with 3- and 5-years LRFS rates of 100% and 97.9% for CF-WBI and 95.6% and 94% for HF-WBI. CONCLUSION A short course of radiation therapy seems to be comparable to CF-WBI in terms of clinical outcomes. These data support the use of hypofractionated schedules in DCIS patients, but considering the remaining uncertainties.
Collapse
|
8
|
Freedman GM, Taunk NK. Hypofractionated Whole Breast Radiotherapy and Boost in Early-Stage Breast Cancer. CURRENT BREAST CANCER REPORTS 2020. [DOI: 10.1007/s12609-020-00386-9] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/23/2022]
|
9
|
Arenas M, Selek U, Kaidar-Person O, Perrucci E, Montero Luis A, Boersma L, Coles C, Offersen B, Meattini I, Bölükbaşı Y, Leonardi MC, Pfeffer R, Cutuli B, Vidali C, Franco P, Kouloulias V, Masiello V, Rivera S, Bourgier C, Ciabattoni A, Lancellotta V, Trigo L, Valentini V, Poortmans P, Aristei C. The 2018 assisi think tank meeting on breast cancer: International expert panel white paper. Crit Rev Oncol Hematol 2020; 151:102967. [PMID: 32450277 DOI: 10.1016/j.critrevonc.2020.102967] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/18/2019] [Revised: 03/27/2020] [Accepted: 04/15/2020] [Indexed: 01/13/2023] Open
Abstract
We report on the second Assisi Think Tank Meeting (ATTM) on breast cancer which was held under the auspices of the European Society for RadioTherapy & Oncology (ESTRO). In discussing in-depth current evidence and practice it was designed to identify grey areas in diverse forms of the disease. It aimed at addressing uncertainties and proposing future trials to improve patient care. Before the meeting, three key topics were selected: 1) primary systemic therapy, mastectomy, breast reconstruction and post-mastectomy radiation therapy, 2) therapeutic options in ductal carcinoma in situ, and 3) therapy de-escalation in early stage breast cancer. Clinical practice in these areas was investigated by means of an online questionnaire. The time lapse period between the survey and the meeting was used to review the literature and on-going clinical trials. At the ATTM both were discussed in depth and research protocols were proposed.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Ugur Selek
- Radiation Oncology, Koc University School of Medicine, Istambul, Turkey
| | - Orit Kaidar-Person
- Radiation Oncology, Oncology Institute, Rambam Medical Center, Haifa, Israel
| | | | | | - Liesbeth Boersma
- Radiation Oncology (Maastro), GROW School for Oncology and Developmental Biology, Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | - Charlotte Coles
- Radiation Oncology, Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Cambridge, UK
| | | | - Icro Meattini
- Radiation Oncology, Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria Careggi (AOUC), Florence, Italy
| | - Yasemin Bölükbaşı
- Radiation Oncology, Koc University School of Medicine, Istambul, Turkey
| | | | - Raphael Pfeffer
- Radiation Oncology, Assuta Medical Centres, Tel Aviv, Israel
| | - Bruno Cutuli
- Radiation Oncology, Institut du Cancer Courlancy, Reims, France
| | - Cristiana Vidali
- Radiation Oncology, Azienda Sanitaria Universitaria Integrata di Trieste (ASUITS), Trieste, Italy
| | - Pierfrancesco Franco
- Radiation Oncology, Department of Oncology, University of Turin School of Medicine, Turin, Italy
| | - Vassilis Kouloulias
- Radiation Oncology, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Medical School, Attikon University Hospital, Athens, Greece
| | - Valeria Masiello
- Radiation Oncology, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Agostino Gemelli IRCCS, Rome, Italy
| | - Sofia Rivera
- Radiation Oncology, Institut Gustave Roussy, Villejuif, France
| | - Céline Bourgier
- Radiation Oncology, ICM-Val d'Aurelle, University Montpellier, Montpellier, France
| | | | - Valentina Lancellotta
- Radiation Oncology, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Agostino Gemelli IRCCS, Rome, Italy
| | - Lurdes Trigo
- Radiation Oncology, Instituto Portugues de Oncologia Francisco Martins Porto E.P.E, Porto, Portugal
| | - Vincenzo Valentini
- Radiation Oncology, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Agostino Gemelli IRCCS, Rome, Italy
| | - Philip Poortmans
- Radiation Oncology, Iridium Kankernetwerk, Wilrijk-Antwerp - University of Antwerp, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Wilrijk-Antwerp, Belgium
| | - Cynthia Aristei
- Radiation Oncology, University of Perugia and Perugia General Hospital, Perugia, Italy.
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Vanderbilt DB. In Regard to "Three-Dimensional Bioabsorbable Tissue Marker Placement is Associated With Decreased Tumor Bed Volume Among Patients Receiving Radiation Therapy for Breast Cancer". Pract Radiat Oncol 2019; 9:289. [PMID: 31234973 DOI: 10.1016/j.prro.2019.04.006] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/29/2019] [Accepted: 04/02/2019] [Indexed: 10/26/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Daniel B Vanderbilt
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Weill Cornell Medical Center, New York, New York.
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Montero-Luis A, Aristei C, Meattini I, Arenas M, Boersma L, Bourgier C, Coles C, Cutuli B, Falcinelli L, Kaidar-Person O, Leonardi MC, Offersen B, Marazzi F, Rivera S, Tagliaferri L, Tombolini V, Vidali C, Valentini V, Poortmans P. The Assisi Think Tank Meeting Survey of post-mastectomy radiation therapy in ductal carcinoma in situ: Suggestions for routine practice. Crit Rev Oncol Hematol 2019; 138:207-213. [PMID: 31092377 DOI: 10.1016/j.critrevonc.2019.04.016] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/12/2019] [Revised: 04/11/2019] [Accepted: 04/13/2019] [Indexed: 12/17/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Risk factors for local recurrence after mastectomy in ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) emerged as a grey area during the second "Assisi Think Tank Meeting" (ATTM) on Breast Cancer. AIM To review practice patterns of post-mastectomy radiation therapy (PMRT) in DCIS, identify risk factors for recurrence and select suitable candidates for PMRT. METHODS A questionnaire concerning DCIS management, focusing on PMRT, was distributed online via SurveyMonkey. RESULTS 142 responses were received from 15 countries. The majority worked in academic institutions, had 5-20 years work-experience and irradiated <5 DCIS patients/year. PMRT was more given if: surgical margins <1 mm, high-grade, multicentricity, young age, tumour size >5 cm, skin- or nipple- sparing mastectomy. Moderate hypofractionation was the most common schedule, except after immediate breast reconstruction (57% conventional fractionation). CONCLUSIONS The present survey highlighted risk factors for PMRT administration, which should be further evaluated.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- A Montero-Luis
- Radiation Oncology, University Hospital HM Sanchinarro, Madrid, Spain.
| | - C Aristei
- Radiation Oncology, University of Perugia and Perugia General Hospital, Perugia, Italy
| | - I Meattini
- Radiation Oncology, Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria Careggi (AOUC), Florence, Italy
| | - M Arenas
- Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Sant Joan, Reus, Spain
| | - L Boersma
- Radiation Oncology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Antoni van Leeuwenhøek Huis, Amsterdam, Netherlands
| | - C Bourgier
- Radiation Oncology, ICM-Val d'Aurelle, Univ Montpellier, Montpellier, France
| | - C Coles
- Radiation Oncology, Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Cambridge, UK
| | - B Cutuli
- Radiation Oncology, Institut du Cancer Courlancy, Reims, France
| | - L Falcinelli
- Radiation Oncology, Perugia General Hospital, Italy
| | - O Kaidar-Person
- Radiation Oncology Unit, Oncology Institute, Rambam Medical Center, Haifa, Israel
| | - M C Leonardi
- Radiation Oncology, IEO, European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Milan, Italy
| | - B Offersen
- Radiation Oncology, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark
| | - F Marazzi
- Radiation Oncology, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Agostino Gemelli IRCCS, Rome, Italy
| | - S Rivera
- Radiation Oncology, Institut Gustave Roussy, Villejuif, France
| | - L Tagliaferri
- Radiation Oncology, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Agostino Gemelli IRCCS, Roma, Italy
| | - V Tombolini
- Radiation Oncology, Policlinico Umberto I, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy
| | - C Vidali
- Radiation Oncology, Azienda Sanitaria Universitaria Integrata di Trieste (ASUITS), Trieste, Italy
| | - V Valentini
- Radiation Oncology, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Agostino Gemelli IRCCS, Roma, Italy
| | - P Poortmans
- Radiation Oncology, Institut Curie, Department of Radiation Oncology; Paris Sciences & Lettres - PSL University; Paris, France
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
Shaitelman SF, Lei X, Thompson A, Schlembach P, Bloom ES, Arzu IY, Buchholz D, Chronowski G, Dvorak T, Grade E, Hoffman K, Perkins G, Reed VK, Shah SJ, Stauder MC, Strom EA, Tereffe W, Woodward WA, Amaya DN, Shen Y, Hortobagyi GN, Hunt KK, Buchholz TA, Smith BD. Three-Year Outcomes With Hypofractionated Versus Conventionally Fractionated Whole-Breast Irradiation: Results of a Randomized, Noninferiority Clinical Trial. J Clin Oncol 2018; 36:JCO1800317. [PMID: 30379626 PMCID: PMC6286164 DOI: 10.1200/jco.18.00317] [Citation(s) in RCA: 40] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/27/2023] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE The adoption of hypofractionated whole-breast irradiation (HF-WBI) remains low, in part because of concerns regarding its safety when used with a tumor bed boost or in patients who have received chemotherapy or have large breast size. To address this, we conducted a randomized, multicenter trial to compare conventionally fractionated whole-breast irradiation (CF-WBI; 50 Gy/25 fx + 10 to 14 Gy/5 to 7 fx) with HF-WBI (42.56 Gy/16 fx + 10 to 12.5 Gy/4 to 5 fx). PATIENTS AND METHODS From 2011 to 2014, 287 women with stage 0 to II breast cancer were randomly assigned to CF-WBI or HF-WBI, stratified by chemotherapy, margin status, cosmesis, and breast size. The trial was designed to test the hypothesis that HF-WBI is not inferior to CF-WBI with regard to the proportion of patients with adverse cosmetic outcome 3 years after radiation, assessed using the Breast Cancer Treatment Outcomes Scale. Secondary outcomes included photographically assessed cosmesis scored by a three-physician panel and local recurrence-free survival. Analyses were intention to treat. RESULTS A total of 286 patients received the protocol-specified radiation dose, 30% received chemotherapy, and 36.9% had large breast size. Baseline characteristics were well balanced. Median follow-up was 4.1 years. Three-year adverse cosmetic outcome was 5.4% lower with HF-WBI ( Pnoninferiority = .002; absolute risks were 8.2% [n = 8] with HF-WBI v 13.6% [n = 15] with CF-WBI). For those treated with chemotherapy, adverse cosmetic outcome was higher by 4.1% (90% upper confidence limit, 15.0%) with HF-WBI than with CF-WBI; for large breast size, adverse cosmetic outcome was 18.6% lower (90% upper confidence limit, -8.0%) with HF-WBI. Poor or fair photographically assessed cosmesis was noted in 28.8% of CF-WBI patients and 35.4% of HF-WBI patients ( P = .31). Three-year local recurrence-free survival was 99% with both HF-WBI and CF-WBI ( P = .37). CONCLUSION Three years after WBI followed by a tumor bed boost, outcomes with hypofractionation and conventional fractionation are similar. Tumor bed boost, chemotherapy, and larger breast size do not seem to be strong contraindications to HF-WBI.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Simona F. Shaitelman
- Simona F. Shaitelman, Xiudong Lei, Alastair Thompson, Pamela Schlembach, Elizabeth S. Bloom, Isidora Y. Arzu, Gregory Chronowski, Karen Hoffman, George Perkins, Valerie K. Reed, Shalin J. Shah, Michael C. Stauder, Eric A. Strom, Welela Tereffe, Wendy A. Woodward, Diana N. Amaya, Yu Shen, Gabriel N. Hortobagyi, Kelly K. Hunt, and Benjamin D. Smith, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX; Daniel Buchholz and Tomas Dvorak, Orlando Health UF Health Cancer Center, Orlando, FL; Emily Grade, Banner MD Anderson Cancer Center, Gilbert AZ; and Thomas A. Buchholz, Scripps MD Anderson Cancer Center, La Jolla, CA
| | - Xiudong Lei
- Simona F. Shaitelman, Xiudong Lei, Alastair Thompson, Pamela Schlembach, Elizabeth S. Bloom, Isidora Y. Arzu, Gregory Chronowski, Karen Hoffman, George Perkins, Valerie K. Reed, Shalin J. Shah, Michael C. Stauder, Eric A. Strom, Welela Tereffe, Wendy A. Woodward, Diana N. Amaya, Yu Shen, Gabriel N. Hortobagyi, Kelly K. Hunt, and Benjamin D. Smith, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX; Daniel Buchholz and Tomas Dvorak, Orlando Health UF Health Cancer Center, Orlando, FL; Emily Grade, Banner MD Anderson Cancer Center, Gilbert AZ; and Thomas A. Buchholz, Scripps MD Anderson Cancer Center, La Jolla, CA
| | - Alastair Thompson
- Simona F. Shaitelman, Xiudong Lei, Alastair Thompson, Pamela Schlembach, Elizabeth S. Bloom, Isidora Y. Arzu, Gregory Chronowski, Karen Hoffman, George Perkins, Valerie K. Reed, Shalin J. Shah, Michael C. Stauder, Eric A. Strom, Welela Tereffe, Wendy A. Woodward, Diana N. Amaya, Yu Shen, Gabriel N. Hortobagyi, Kelly K. Hunt, and Benjamin D. Smith, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX; Daniel Buchholz and Tomas Dvorak, Orlando Health UF Health Cancer Center, Orlando, FL; Emily Grade, Banner MD Anderson Cancer Center, Gilbert AZ; and Thomas A. Buchholz, Scripps MD Anderson Cancer Center, La Jolla, CA
| | - Pamela Schlembach
- Simona F. Shaitelman, Xiudong Lei, Alastair Thompson, Pamela Schlembach, Elizabeth S. Bloom, Isidora Y. Arzu, Gregory Chronowski, Karen Hoffman, George Perkins, Valerie K. Reed, Shalin J. Shah, Michael C. Stauder, Eric A. Strom, Welela Tereffe, Wendy A. Woodward, Diana N. Amaya, Yu Shen, Gabriel N. Hortobagyi, Kelly K. Hunt, and Benjamin D. Smith, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX; Daniel Buchholz and Tomas Dvorak, Orlando Health UF Health Cancer Center, Orlando, FL; Emily Grade, Banner MD Anderson Cancer Center, Gilbert AZ; and Thomas A. Buchholz, Scripps MD Anderson Cancer Center, La Jolla, CA
| | - Elizabeth S. Bloom
- Simona F. Shaitelman, Xiudong Lei, Alastair Thompson, Pamela Schlembach, Elizabeth S. Bloom, Isidora Y. Arzu, Gregory Chronowski, Karen Hoffman, George Perkins, Valerie K. Reed, Shalin J. Shah, Michael C. Stauder, Eric A. Strom, Welela Tereffe, Wendy A. Woodward, Diana N. Amaya, Yu Shen, Gabriel N. Hortobagyi, Kelly K. Hunt, and Benjamin D. Smith, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX; Daniel Buchholz and Tomas Dvorak, Orlando Health UF Health Cancer Center, Orlando, FL; Emily Grade, Banner MD Anderson Cancer Center, Gilbert AZ; and Thomas A. Buchholz, Scripps MD Anderson Cancer Center, La Jolla, CA
| | - Isidora Y. Arzu
- Simona F. Shaitelman, Xiudong Lei, Alastair Thompson, Pamela Schlembach, Elizabeth S. Bloom, Isidora Y. Arzu, Gregory Chronowski, Karen Hoffman, George Perkins, Valerie K. Reed, Shalin J. Shah, Michael C. Stauder, Eric A. Strom, Welela Tereffe, Wendy A. Woodward, Diana N. Amaya, Yu Shen, Gabriel N. Hortobagyi, Kelly K. Hunt, and Benjamin D. Smith, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX; Daniel Buchholz and Tomas Dvorak, Orlando Health UF Health Cancer Center, Orlando, FL; Emily Grade, Banner MD Anderson Cancer Center, Gilbert AZ; and Thomas A. Buchholz, Scripps MD Anderson Cancer Center, La Jolla, CA
| | - Daniel Buchholz
- Simona F. Shaitelman, Xiudong Lei, Alastair Thompson, Pamela Schlembach, Elizabeth S. Bloom, Isidora Y. Arzu, Gregory Chronowski, Karen Hoffman, George Perkins, Valerie K. Reed, Shalin J. Shah, Michael C. Stauder, Eric A. Strom, Welela Tereffe, Wendy A. Woodward, Diana N. Amaya, Yu Shen, Gabriel N. Hortobagyi, Kelly K. Hunt, and Benjamin D. Smith, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX; Daniel Buchholz and Tomas Dvorak, Orlando Health UF Health Cancer Center, Orlando, FL; Emily Grade, Banner MD Anderson Cancer Center, Gilbert AZ; and Thomas A. Buchholz, Scripps MD Anderson Cancer Center, La Jolla, CA
| | - Gregory Chronowski
- Simona F. Shaitelman, Xiudong Lei, Alastair Thompson, Pamela Schlembach, Elizabeth S. Bloom, Isidora Y. Arzu, Gregory Chronowski, Karen Hoffman, George Perkins, Valerie K. Reed, Shalin J. Shah, Michael C. Stauder, Eric A. Strom, Welela Tereffe, Wendy A. Woodward, Diana N. Amaya, Yu Shen, Gabriel N. Hortobagyi, Kelly K. Hunt, and Benjamin D. Smith, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX; Daniel Buchholz and Tomas Dvorak, Orlando Health UF Health Cancer Center, Orlando, FL; Emily Grade, Banner MD Anderson Cancer Center, Gilbert AZ; and Thomas A. Buchholz, Scripps MD Anderson Cancer Center, La Jolla, CA
| | - Tomas Dvorak
- Simona F. Shaitelman, Xiudong Lei, Alastair Thompson, Pamela Schlembach, Elizabeth S. Bloom, Isidora Y. Arzu, Gregory Chronowski, Karen Hoffman, George Perkins, Valerie K. Reed, Shalin J. Shah, Michael C. Stauder, Eric A. Strom, Welela Tereffe, Wendy A. Woodward, Diana N. Amaya, Yu Shen, Gabriel N. Hortobagyi, Kelly K. Hunt, and Benjamin D. Smith, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX; Daniel Buchholz and Tomas Dvorak, Orlando Health UF Health Cancer Center, Orlando, FL; Emily Grade, Banner MD Anderson Cancer Center, Gilbert AZ; and Thomas A. Buchholz, Scripps MD Anderson Cancer Center, La Jolla, CA
| | - Emily Grade
- Simona F. Shaitelman, Xiudong Lei, Alastair Thompson, Pamela Schlembach, Elizabeth S. Bloom, Isidora Y. Arzu, Gregory Chronowski, Karen Hoffman, George Perkins, Valerie K. Reed, Shalin J. Shah, Michael C. Stauder, Eric A. Strom, Welela Tereffe, Wendy A. Woodward, Diana N. Amaya, Yu Shen, Gabriel N. Hortobagyi, Kelly K. Hunt, and Benjamin D. Smith, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX; Daniel Buchholz and Tomas Dvorak, Orlando Health UF Health Cancer Center, Orlando, FL; Emily Grade, Banner MD Anderson Cancer Center, Gilbert AZ; and Thomas A. Buchholz, Scripps MD Anderson Cancer Center, La Jolla, CA
| | - Karen Hoffman
- Simona F. Shaitelman, Xiudong Lei, Alastair Thompson, Pamela Schlembach, Elizabeth S. Bloom, Isidora Y. Arzu, Gregory Chronowski, Karen Hoffman, George Perkins, Valerie K. Reed, Shalin J. Shah, Michael C. Stauder, Eric A. Strom, Welela Tereffe, Wendy A. Woodward, Diana N. Amaya, Yu Shen, Gabriel N. Hortobagyi, Kelly K. Hunt, and Benjamin D. Smith, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX; Daniel Buchholz and Tomas Dvorak, Orlando Health UF Health Cancer Center, Orlando, FL; Emily Grade, Banner MD Anderson Cancer Center, Gilbert AZ; and Thomas A. Buchholz, Scripps MD Anderson Cancer Center, La Jolla, CA
| | - George Perkins
- Simona F. Shaitelman, Xiudong Lei, Alastair Thompson, Pamela Schlembach, Elizabeth S. Bloom, Isidora Y. Arzu, Gregory Chronowski, Karen Hoffman, George Perkins, Valerie K. Reed, Shalin J. Shah, Michael C. Stauder, Eric A. Strom, Welela Tereffe, Wendy A. Woodward, Diana N. Amaya, Yu Shen, Gabriel N. Hortobagyi, Kelly K. Hunt, and Benjamin D. Smith, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX; Daniel Buchholz and Tomas Dvorak, Orlando Health UF Health Cancer Center, Orlando, FL; Emily Grade, Banner MD Anderson Cancer Center, Gilbert AZ; and Thomas A. Buchholz, Scripps MD Anderson Cancer Center, La Jolla, CA
| | - Valerie K. Reed
- Simona F. Shaitelman, Xiudong Lei, Alastair Thompson, Pamela Schlembach, Elizabeth S. Bloom, Isidora Y. Arzu, Gregory Chronowski, Karen Hoffman, George Perkins, Valerie K. Reed, Shalin J. Shah, Michael C. Stauder, Eric A. Strom, Welela Tereffe, Wendy A. Woodward, Diana N. Amaya, Yu Shen, Gabriel N. Hortobagyi, Kelly K. Hunt, and Benjamin D. Smith, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX; Daniel Buchholz and Tomas Dvorak, Orlando Health UF Health Cancer Center, Orlando, FL; Emily Grade, Banner MD Anderson Cancer Center, Gilbert AZ; and Thomas A. Buchholz, Scripps MD Anderson Cancer Center, La Jolla, CA
| | - Shalin J. Shah
- Simona F. Shaitelman, Xiudong Lei, Alastair Thompson, Pamela Schlembach, Elizabeth S. Bloom, Isidora Y. Arzu, Gregory Chronowski, Karen Hoffman, George Perkins, Valerie K. Reed, Shalin J. Shah, Michael C. Stauder, Eric A. Strom, Welela Tereffe, Wendy A. Woodward, Diana N. Amaya, Yu Shen, Gabriel N. Hortobagyi, Kelly K. Hunt, and Benjamin D. Smith, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX; Daniel Buchholz and Tomas Dvorak, Orlando Health UF Health Cancer Center, Orlando, FL; Emily Grade, Banner MD Anderson Cancer Center, Gilbert AZ; and Thomas A. Buchholz, Scripps MD Anderson Cancer Center, La Jolla, CA
| | - Michael C. Stauder
- Simona F. Shaitelman, Xiudong Lei, Alastair Thompson, Pamela Schlembach, Elizabeth S. Bloom, Isidora Y. Arzu, Gregory Chronowski, Karen Hoffman, George Perkins, Valerie K. Reed, Shalin J. Shah, Michael C. Stauder, Eric A. Strom, Welela Tereffe, Wendy A. Woodward, Diana N. Amaya, Yu Shen, Gabriel N. Hortobagyi, Kelly K. Hunt, and Benjamin D. Smith, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX; Daniel Buchholz and Tomas Dvorak, Orlando Health UF Health Cancer Center, Orlando, FL; Emily Grade, Banner MD Anderson Cancer Center, Gilbert AZ; and Thomas A. Buchholz, Scripps MD Anderson Cancer Center, La Jolla, CA
| | - Eric A. Strom
- Simona F. Shaitelman, Xiudong Lei, Alastair Thompson, Pamela Schlembach, Elizabeth S. Bloom, Isidora Y. Arzu, Gregory Chronowski, Karen Hoffman, George Perkins, Valerie K. Reed, Shalin J. Shah, Michael C. Stauder, Eric A. Strom, Welela Tereffe, Wendy A. Woodward, Diana N. Amaya, Yu Shen, Gabriel N. Hortobagyi, Kelly K. Hunt, and Benjamin D. Smith, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX; Daniel Buchholz and Tomas Dvorak, Orlando Health UF Health Cancer Center, Orlando, FL; Emily Grade, Banner MD Anderson Cancer Center, Gilbert AZ; and Thomas A. Buchholz, Scripps MD Anderson Cancer Center, La Jolla, CA
| | - Welela Tereffe
- Simona F. Shaitelman, Xiudong Lei, Alastair Thompson, Pamela Schlembach, Elizabeth S. Bloom, Isidora Y. Arzu, Gregory Chronowski, Karen Hoffman, George Perkins, Valerie K. Reed, Shalin J. Shah, Michael C. Stauder, Eric A. Strom, Welela Tereffe, Wendy A. Woodward, Diana N. Amaya, Yu Shen, Gabriel N. Hortobagyi, Kelly K. Hunt, and Benjamin D. Smith, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX; Daniel Buchholz and Tomas Dvorak, Orlando Health UF Health Cancer Center, Orlando, FL; Emily Grade, Banner MD Anderson Cancer Center, Gilbert AZ; and Thomas A. Buchholz, Scripps MD Anderson Cancer Center, La Jolla, CA
| | - Wendy A. Woodward
- Simona F. Shaitelman, Xiudong Lei, Alastair Thompson, Pamela Schlembach, Elizabeth S. Bloom, Isidora Y. Arzu, Gregory Chronowski, Karen Hoffman, George Perkins, Valerie K. Reed, Shalin J. Shah, Michael C. Stauder, Eric A. Strom, Welela Tereffe, Wendy A. Woodward, Diana N. Amaya, Yu Shen, Gabriel N. Hortobagyi, Kelly K. Hunt, and Benjamin D. Smith, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX; Daniel Buchholz and Tomas Dvorak, Orlando Health UF Health Cancer Center, Orlando, FL; Emily Grade, Banner MD Anderson Cancer Center, Gilbert AZ; and Thomas A. Buchholz, Scripps MD Anderson Cancer Center, La Jolla, CA
| | - Diana N. Amaya
- Simona F. Shaitelman, Xiudong Lei, Alastair Thompson, Pamela Schlembach, Elizabeth S. Bloom, Isidora Y. Arzu, Gregory Chronowski, Karen Hoffman, George Perkins, Valerie K. Reed, Shalin J. Shah, Michael C. Stauder, Eric A. Strom, Welela Tereffe, Wendy A. Woodward, Diana N. Amaya, Yu Shen, Gabriel N. Hortobagyi, Kelly K. Hunt, and Benjamin D. Smith, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX; Daniel Buchholz and Tomas Dvorak, Orlando Health UF Health Cancer Center, Orlando, FL; Emily Grade, Banner MD Anderson Cancer Center, Gilbert AZ; and Thomas A. Buchholz, Scripps MD Anderson Cancer Center, La Jolla, CA
| | - Yu Shen
- Simona F. Shaitelman, Xiudong Lei, Alastair Thompson, Pamela Schlembach, Elizabeth S. Bloom, Isidora Y. Arzu, Gregory Chronowski, Karen Hoffman, George Perkins, Valerie K. Reed, Shalin J. Shah, Michael C. Stauder, Eric A. Strom, Welela Tereffe, Wendy A. Woodward, Diana N. Amaya, Yu Shen, Gabriel N. Hortobagyi, Kelly K. Hunt, and Benjamin D. Smith, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX; Daniel Buchholz and Tomas Dvorak, Orlando Health UF Health Cancer Center, Orlando, FL; Emily Grade, Banner MD Anderson Cancer Center, Gilbert AZ; and Thomas A. Buchholz, Scripps MD Anderson Cancer Center, La Jolla, CA
| | - Gabriel N. Hortobagyi
- Simona F. Shaitelman, Xiudong Lei, Alastair Thompson, Pamela Schlembach, Elizabeth S. Bloom, Isidora Y. Arzu, Gregory Chronowski, Karen Hoffman, George Perkins, Valerie K. Reed, Shalin J. Shah, Michael C. Stauder, Eric A. Strom, Welela Tereffe, Wendy A. Woodward, Diana N. Amaya, Yu Shen, Gabriel N. Hortobagyi, Kelly K. Hunt, and Benjamin D. Smith, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX; Daniel Buchholz and Tomas Dvorak, Orlando Health UF Health Cancer Center, Orlando, FL; Emily Grade, Banner MD Anderson Cancer Center, Gilbert AZ; and Thomas A. Buchholz, Scripps MD Anderson Cancer Center, La Jolla, CA
| | - Kelly K. Hunt
- Simona F. Shaitelman, Xiudong Lei, Alastair Thompson, Pamela Schlembach, Elizabeth S. Bloom, Isidora Y. Arzu, Gregory Chronowski, Karen Hoffman, George Perkins, Valerie K. Reed, Shalin J. Shah, Michael C. Stauder, Eric A. Strom, Welela Tereffe, Wendy A. Woodward, Diana N. Amaya, Yu Shen, Gabriel N. Hortobagyi, Kelly K. Hunt, and Benjamin D. Smith, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX; Daniel Buchholz and Tomas Dvorak, Orlando Health UF Health Cancer Center, Orlando, FL; Emily Grade, Banner MD Anderson Cancer Center, Gilbert AZ; and Thomas A. Buchholz, Scripps MD Anderson Cancer Center, La Jolla, CA
| | - Thomas A. Buchholz
- Simona F. Shaitelman, Xiudong Lei, Alastair Thompson, Pamela Schlembach, Elizabeth S. Bloom, Isidora Y. Arzu, Gregory Chronowski, Karen Hoffman, George Perkins, Valerie K. Reed, Shalin J. Shah, Michael C. Stauder, Eric A. Strom, Welela Tereffe, Wendy A. Woodward, Diana N. Amaya, Yu Shen, Gabriel N. Hortobagyi, Kelly K. Hunt, and Benjamin D. Smith, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX; Daniel Buchholz and Tomas Dvorak, Orlando Health UF Health Cancer Center, Orlando, FL; Emily Grade, Banner MD Anderson Cancer Center, Gilbert AZ; and Thomas A. Buchholz, Scripps MD Anderson Cancer Center, La Jolla, CA
| | - Benjamin D. Smith
- Simona F. Shaitelman, Xiudong Lei, Alastair Thompson, Pamela Schlembach, Elizabeth S. Bloom, Isidora Y. Arzu, Gregory Chronowski, Karen Hoffman, George Perkins, Valerie K. Reed, Shalin J. Shah, Michael C. Stauder, Eric A. Strom, Welela Tereffe, Wendy A. Woodward, Diana N. Amaya, Yu Shen, Gabriel N. Hortobagyi, Kelly K. Hunt, and Benjamin D. Smith, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX; Daniel Buchholz and Tomas Dvorak, Orlando Health UF Health Cancer Center, Orlando, FL; Emily Grade, Banner MD Anderson Cancer Center, Gilbert AZ; and Thomas A. Buchholz, Scripps MD Anderson Cancer Center, La Jolla, CA
| |
Collapse
|
13
|
Park HJ, Oh DH, Shin KH, Kim JH, Choi DH, Park W, Suh CO, Kim YB, Ahn SD, Kim SS. Patterns of Practice in Radiotherapy for Breast Cancer in Korea. J Breast Cancer 2018; 21:244-250. [PMID: 30275852 PMCID: PMC6158163 DOI: 10.4048/jbc.2018.21.e37] [Citation(s) in RCA: 14] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/16/2018] [Accepted: 07/06/2018] [Indexed: 11/30/2022] Open
Abstract
Adjuvant radiotherapy (RT) is a well-established treatment for breast cancer. However, there is a large degree of variation and controversy in practice patterns. A nationwide survey on the patterns of practice in breast RT was designed by the Division for Breast Cancer of the Korean Radiation Oncology Group. All board-certified members of the Korean Society for Radiation Oncology were sent a questionnaire comprising 39 questions on six domains: hypofractionated whole breast RT, accelerated partial breast RT, postmastectomy RT (PMRT), regional nodal RT, RT for ductal carcinoma in situ, and RT toxicity. Sixty-four radiation oncologists from 54 of 86 (62.8%) hospitals responded. Twenty-three respondents (35.9%) used hypofractionated whole breast RT, and the most common schedule was 43.2 Gy in 16 fractions. Only three (4.7%) used accelerated partial breast RT. Five (7.8%) used hypofractionated PMRT, and 40 (62.5%) had never used boost RT after chest wall irradiation. Indications for regional nodal RT varied; ≥pN2 (n=7) versus ≥pN1 (n=17) versus ≥pN1 with pathologic risk factors (n=40). Selection criteria for internal mammary lymph node (IMN) irradiation also varied; only four (6.3%) always treated IMN when regional nodal RT was administered and 30 (46.9%) treated IMN only if IMN involvement was identified through imaging. Thirty-one (48.4%) considered omission of whole breast RT after breast-conserving surgery for ductal carcinoma in situ based on clinical and pathologic risk factors. Fifty-two (81.3%) used heart-sparing techniques. Overall, there were wide variations in the patterns of practice in breast RT in Korea. Standard guidelines are needed, especially for regional nodal RT and omission of RT for ductal carcinoma in situ.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Hae Jin Park
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Hanyang University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
| | - Do Hoon Oh
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Myongji Hospital, Goyang, Korea
| | - Kyung Hwan Shin
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
| | - Jin Ho Kim
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
| | - Doo Ho Choi
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
| | - Won Park
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
| | - Chang-Ok Suh
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Yonsei Cancer Center, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
| | - Yong Bae Kim
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Yonsei Cancer Center, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
| | - Seung Do Ahn
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
| | - Su Ssan Kim
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
| | | |
Collapse
|
14
|
Gupta A, Ohri N, Haffty BG. Hypofractionated radiation treatment in the management of breast cancer. Expert Rev Anticancer Ther 2018; 18:793-803. [PMID: 29902386 DOI: 10.1080/14737140.2018.1489245] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/11/2023]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION The standard treatment for early-stage breast cancer is breast conservation therapy, consisting of breast conserving surgery followed by adjuvant radiation treatment (RT). Conventionally-fractionated whole breast irradiation (CF-WBI) has been the standard RT regimen, but recently shorter courses of hypofractionated whole breast irradiation (HF-WBI) have been advocated for patient convenience and reduction in healthcare costs and resources. Areas covered: This review covers the major randomized European and Canadian trials comparing HF-WBI to CF-WBI with long-term follow-up, as well as additional recently closed randomized trials that further seek to define the applicability of HF-WBI in clinical practice. Randomized data is summarized in terms of clinical utility and for a variety of clinical applications. Recently published consensus guidelines and practical implementation of HF-WBI including its broader effect on the healthcare system are reviewed. Finally, an assessment of the emerging evidence in support of hypofractionation for locally advanced disease is presented. Expert commentary: HF-WBI has replaced CF-WBI as the accepted standard of care in most women with early-stage breast cancer who do not require regional nodal irradiation. Early data supports the continued study of hypofractionation in the locally advanced setting, however broad adoption awaits longer follow-up and additional data from ongoing clinical trials.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Apar Gupta
- a Department of Radiation Oncology , Rutgers Cancer Institute of New Jersey , New Brunswick , NJ , USA
| | - Nisha Ohri
- a Department of Radiation Oncology , Rutgers Cancer Institute of New Jersey , New Brunswick , NJ , USA
| | - Bruce G Haffty
- a Department of Radiation Oncology , Rutgers Cancer Institute of New Jersey , New Brunswick , NJ , USA
| |
Collapse
|
15
|
De Rose F, Fogliata A, Franceschini D, Iftode C, Torrisi R, Masci G, Sagona A, Tinterri C, Testori A, Gatzemeier W, Fernandes B, Rahal D, Cozzi L, Santoro A, Scorsetti M. Hypofractionated volumetric modulated arc therapy in ductal carcinoma in situ: toxicity and cosmetic outcome from a prospective series. Br J Radiol 2018; 91:20170634. [PMID: 29322827 DOI: 10.1259/bjr.20170634] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/15/2022] Open
Abstract
OBJECTIVE Hypofractionated radiotherapy in early stage breast cancer is an effective adjuvant treatment, but there is a lack of randomized data for patients with ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS). The aim of this study is the evaluation of skin toxicity and cosmesis, and early clinical outcome of DCIS patients enrolled in an institutional Phase II trial of hypofractionated breast irradiation. METHODS 137 DCIS patients were enrolled in the trial. All patients underwent volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) to the whole breast with a total dose of 40.5 Gy in 15 fractions over 3 weeks, without tumour bed boost. Acute and late skin toxicities were recorded. Cosmetic outcomes were assessed as excellent/good or fair/poor. Early clinical outcome was reported. RESULTS Median age was 58 y.o. (range 30-86). The median follow-up time was 22 months (range 6-45). At the end of the radiotherapy, skin toxicity was grade G1 in 56% of the patients, G2 in 15%, no patients presented G3 toxicity. In the range of 3-9 months of follow-up, the skin toxicity was G1 in 28% of patients, no G2-G3 cases; cosmetic outcome was good/excellent in 95% of patients. In the follow-up interval of 9-24 months, the skin toxicity was G1 in 12% of patients, no G2-G3 toxicity; cosmetic outcome was good/excellent in 96% of patients. After an early evaluation of clinical outcomes, 5 patients (3.6%) presented an in-breast recurrence. CONCLUSION Hypofractionated radiotherapy using VMAT is a viable option for DCIS. A longer follow-up is needed to assess clinical outcomes and late toxicity. Advances in knowledge: The use of hypofractionated VMAT is dosimetrically feasible for treating breast DCIS.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Fiorenza De Rose
- 1 Department of Radiotherapy and Radiosurgery, Humanitas Research Hospital and Cancer Center , Milan, Rozzano , Italy
| | - Antonella Fogliata
- 1 Department of Radiotherapy and Radiosurgery, Humanitas Research Hospital and Cancer Center , Milan, Rozzano , Italy
| | - Davide Franceschini
- 1 Department of Radiotherapy and Radiosurgery, Humanitas Research Hospital and Cancer Center , Milan, Rozzano , Italy
| | - Cristina Iftode
- 1 Department of Radiotherapy and Radiosurgery, Humanitas Research Hospital and Cancer Center , Milan, Rozzano , Italy
| | - Rosalba Torrisi
- 2 Department of Medical Oncology, Humanitas Research Hospital and Cancer Center , Milan, Rozzano , Italy
| | - Giovanna Masci
- 2 Department of Medical Oncology, Humanitas Research Hospital and Cancer Center , Milan, Rozzano , Italy
| | - Andrea Sagona
- 3 Department of Breast Surgery, Humanitas Research Hospital and Cancer Center , Milan, Rozzano , Italy
| | - Corrado Tinterri
- 3 Department of Breast Surgery, Humanitas Research Hospital and Cancer Center , Milan, Rozzano , Italy
| | - Alberto Testori
- 3 Department of Breast Surgery, Humanitas Research Hospital and Cancer Center , Milan, Rozzano , Italy
| | - Wolfgang Gatzemeier
- 3 Department of Breast Surgery, Humanitas Research Hospital and Cancer Center , Milan, Rozzano , Italy
| | - Bethania Fernandes
- 4 Department of Pathology, Humanitas Research Hospital and Cancer Center , Milan, Rozzano , Italy
| | - Daoud Rahal
- 4 Department of Pathology, Humanitas Research Hospital and Cancer Center , Milan, Rozzano , Italy
| | - Luca Cozzi
- 1 Department of Radiotherapy and Radiosurgery, Humanitas Research Hospital and Cancer Center , Milan, Rozzano , Italy.,5 Department of Biomedical Sciences, Humanitas University , Milan, Rozzano , Italy
| | - Armando Santoro
- 2 Department of Medical Oncology, Humanitas Research Hospital and Cancer Center , Milan, Rozzano , Italy
| | - Marta Scorsetti
- 1 Department of Radiotherapy and Radiosurgery, Humanitas Research Hospital and Cancer Center , Milan, Rozzano , Italy.,5 Department of Biomedical Sciences, Humanitas University , Milan, Rozzano , Italy
| |
Collapse
|
16
|
Stokes WA, Amini A, Jackson MW, Plimpton SR, Kounalakis N, Kabos P, Rabinovitch RA, Rusthoven CG, Fisher CM. Patterns of Fractionation and Boost Usage in Adjuvant External Beam Radiotherapy for Ductal Carcinoma in Situ in the United States. Clin Breast Cancer 2017; 18:220-228. [PMID: 28797765 DOI: 10.1016/j.clbc.2017.06.009] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/12/2017] [Revised: 06/06/2017] [Accepted: 06/23/2017] [Indexed: 11/26/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND While the roles of hypofractionated (HFxn) radiotherapy and lumpectomy boost in the adjuvant management of invasive breast cancer are supported by the results of clinical trials, randomized data supporting their use for ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) are forthcoming. We sought to evaluate current national trends and identify factors associated with HFxn and boost usage using the National Cancer Database. PATIENTS AND METHODS We queried the National Cancer Database for women diagnosed with DCIS from 2004 to 2014 undergoing external beam radiotherapy after breast conservation surgery. Patients were categorized as receiving either conventional fractionation (CFxn) or HFxn and as either receiving or not receiving a boost. Multiple logistic regression was performed to identify demographic, clinical, and treatment factor associations. RESULTS A total of 101,615 women were identified, with 87,641 (86.2%) receiving CFxn, 13,974 (13.8%) receiving HFxn, and most patients in each group (84.9% and 57.7%, respectively) receiving a boost. Implementation of HFxn increased from 4.3% in 2004 to 33.0% in 2014, and the use of a boost declined from 83.3% to 74.6%. HFxn receipt was independently associated with later year of diagnosis, older age, higher income, greater distance from treatment facility, greater facility volume, academic facility type, Western residence, smaller lesions, and nonreceipt of a boost. Factors associated with boost receipt included earlier year of diagnosis, younger age, higher income, community facility type, adverse pathologic features, and nonreceipt of HFxn. CONCLUSION Although CFxn with a boost remains the most common external beam radiotherapy strategy for DCIS, implementation of HFxn without a boost appears to be increasing. Practice patterns at present seem to be driven by guidelines for invasive breast cancer and nonclinical factors.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- William A Stokes
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Colorado Denver School of Medicine, Aurora, CO
| | - Arya Amini
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Colorado Denver School of Medicine, Aurora, CO
| | - Matthew W Jackson
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Colorado Denver School of Medicine, Aurora, CO
| | - S Reed Plimpton
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of California, Irvine, School of Medicine, Irvine, CA
| | - Nicole Kounalakis
- Department of Surgery, University of Colorado Denver School of Medicine, Aurora, CO
| | - Peter Kabos
- Department of Medicine, University of Colorado Denver School of Medicine, Aurora, CO
| | - Rachel A Rabinovitch
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Colorado Denver School of Medicine, Aurora, CO
| | - Chad G Rusthoven
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Colorado Denver School of Medicine, Aurora, CO
| | - Christine M Fisher
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Colorado Denver School of Medicine, Aurora, CO.
| |
Collapse
|
17
|
Haque W, Verma V, Haque A, Butler EB, Teh BS. Trends in the use of implantable accelerated partial breast irradiation for ductal carcinoma in situ: Implications of the recent amendments to the American Society for Radiation Oncology consensus guidelines. Brachytherapy 2017; 16:402-408. [PMID: 28063816 DOI: 10.1016/j.brachy.2016.12.002] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/02/2016] [Revised: 12/07/2016] [Accepted: 12/08/2016] [Indexed: 11/26/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE In 2009, the American Society for Radiation Oncology (ASTRO) published consensus recommendations that stated ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) patients were in a "cautionary" group for accelerated partial breast irradiation (APBI) and should not receive APBI outside of a clinical trial. However, very recently, ASTRO placed low-risk DCIS patients in the "suitable" category. Given this recent change, we aimed to use the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database to evaluate past patterns of implantable APBI (IAPBI) utilization in women with DCIS. METHODS AND MATERIALS The Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database was queried for patients from 2000 to 2012 with DCIS that underwent lumpectomy and adjuvant radiation therapy. Patients receiving IAPBI were differentiated from those receiving whole breast radiation therapy. Trends based on treatment year and patient demographics were collected, and multivariable logistic regression determined factors independently predictive of use of IAPBI. RESULTS Of 52,012 eligible patients, 49,450 (95%) underwent external beam radiation and 2562 (5%) received APBI. Though IAPBI utilization steadily increased from 2000 (0.2% of the study population) to 2008 (9.4%), it abruptly declined in 2009 (7.9%, p = 0.009) and yearly thereafter. The 40-49 age group was proportionally most associated with this decline (8.6% in 2008 to 4.3% in 2009). Factors independently associated with IAPBI receipt included increasing age, hormone receptor negative status, and women living in the South. CONCLUSIONS Patterns of IAPBI administration in DCIS are described. These trends are important to consider as a benchmark going forward, in light of the very recent change in ASTRO recommendations to include low-risk DCIS patients.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Waqar Haque
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Greater Houston Physicians Medical Association, Houston, TX.
| | - Vivek Verma
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha, NE
| | - Anam Haque
- College of Natural Science and Mathematics, University of Houston, Houston, TX
| | - E Brian Butler
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Houston Methodist Hospital, Houston, TX
| | - Bin S Teh
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Houston Methodist Hospital, Houston, TX
| |
Collapse
|
18
|
Nguyen K, Mackenzie P, Allen A, Dreosti M, Morgia M, Zissiadis Y, Lamoury G, Windsor A. Breast interest group faculty of radiation oncology: Australian and New Zealand patterns of practice survey on breast radiotherapy. J Med Imaging Radiat Oncol 2016; 61:508-516. [PMID: 27987274 DOI: 10.1111/1754-9485.12566] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/13/2016] [Accepted: 10/31/2016] [Indexed: 11/29/2022]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION This patterns of practice study was conducted on behalf of the RANZCR Breast Interest Group in order to document current radiotherapy practices for breast cancer in Australia and New Zealand. The survey identifies variations and highlights potential contentious aspects of radiotherapy management of breast cancer. METHODS A fifty-eight question survey was disseminated via the Survey Monkey digital platform to 388 Radiation Oncologists in Australia and New Zealand. RESULTS In total, 156 responses were received and collated. Areas of notable consensus among respondents included hypofractionation (77.3% of respondents would 'always' or 'sometimes' consider hypofractionation in the management of ductal carcinoma in-situ and 99.3% in early invasive breast cancer); margin status in early breast cancer (73.8% believe a clear inked margin is sufficient and does not require further surgery) and use of bolus in post-mastectomy radiotherapy (PMRT) (91.1% of participants use bolus in PMRT). Areas with a wider degree of variability amongst respondents included regional nodal irradiation and components of radiotherapy planning and delivery (examples include the technique used for delivery of boost and frequency of bolus application for PMRT). CONCLUSION The results of these patterns of practice survey informs radiation oncologists in Australia and New Zealand of the current clinical practices being implemented by their peers. The survey identifies areas of consensus and contention, the latter of which may lead to a development of research trials and/or educational activities to address these areas of uncertainty.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kimberley Nguyen
- Central Coast Cancer Centre, Gosford Hospital, Gosford, New South Wales, Australia.,South Western Sydney Local Health District, Liverpool Cancer Therapy Centre, Liverpool, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Penny Mackenzie
- St George Hospital Cancer Care, St George Hospital, Kogarah, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Angela Allen
- Waikato Regional Cancer Centre, Waikato Hospital, Hamilton, New Zealand
| | - Marcus Dreosti
- Genesis Cancer Care: Adelaide Radiotherapy Centre, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia
| | - Marita Morgia
- Northern Sydney Cancer Centre Royal North Shore Hospital, St Leonards, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Yvonne Zissiadis
- Genesis Cancer Care: Wembley Radiotherapy Centre, Wembley, Western Australia, Australia
| | - Gilian Lamoury
- Northern Sydney Cancer Centre Royal North Shore Hospital, St Leonards, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Apsara Windsor
- Central Coast Cancer Centre, Gosford Hospital, Gosford, New South Wales, Australia.,University of New South Wales, Randwick, New South Wales, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
19
|
King MT, Winters ZE, Olivotto IA, Spillane AJ, Chua BH, Saunders C, Westenberg AH, Mann GB, Burnett P, Butow P, Rutherford C. Patient-reported outcomes in ductal carcinoma in situ: A systematic review. Eur J Cancer 2016; 71:95-108. [PMID: 27987454 DOI: 10.1016/j.ejca.2016.09.035] [Citation(s) in RCA: 28] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/15/2016] [Revised: 08/15/2016] [Accepted: 09/26/2016] [Indexed: 10/20/2022]
Abstract
Ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) is a pre-invasive breast cancer with excellent prognosis but with potential adverse impacts of diagnosis and treatment on quality of life and other patient-reported outcomes (PROs). We undertook a systematic review to synthesise current evidence about PROs following diagnosis and treatment for DCIS. We searched five electronic databases (from database inception to November 2015), cross-referenced and contacted experts to identify studies that reported PROs after DCIS treatment. Two reviewers independently applied inclusion and quality criteria, and extracted findings. Of 2130 papers screened, 23 were eligible, reporting 17 studies. Short- and long-term PRO evidence about differences between DCIS treatment options was lacking. Evidence pooled across treatments indicated core aspects of quality of life (physical, role, social, emotional function, pain, fatigue) and psychological distress (anxiety, depression) were impacted significantly initially, with most aspects returning to population norms by 6-12 months, and all by 2 years post-operatively. Fears of recurrence and dying from breast cancer were exaggerated, occurred early and persisted for many years. Sexuality and body image impacts were generally low and resolved within 1-3 months after surgery. A minority of women experienced considerable impact, including depression and sexual issues associated with body image problems. Well-powered PRO studies are required to track recovery trajectories and long-term impacts of the range of contemporary and emerging local and systemic treatments for DCIS. PRO data would enable care providers to prepare patients for short-term sequelae and enable patients who have treatment options to exercise preferences in choosing among them.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Madeleine T King
- School of Psychology, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia; Sydney Medical School, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia; Psycho-oncology Co-operative Group (PoCoG), University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
| | - Zoë E Winters
- Patient Reported & Clinical Outcomes Research Group, University of Bristol, UK
| | | | - Andrew J Spillane
- Sydney Medical School, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia; Northern Clinical School, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia
| | - Boon H Chua
- Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
| | | | - A Helen Westenberg
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Radiotherapiegroep, Arnhem, The Netherlands
| | - G Bruce Mann
- Royal Melbourne and Royal Women's Hospital, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
| | | | - Phyllis Butow
- Psycho-oncology Co-operative Group (PoCoG), University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia
| | - Claudia Rutherford
- School of Psychology, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia; Psycho-oncology Co-operative Group (PoCoG), University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
20
|
Hamilton DG, Bale R, Jones C, Fitzgerald E, Khor R, Knight K, Wasiak J. Impact of tumour bed boost integration on acute and late toxicity in patients with breast cancer: A systematic review. Breast 2016; 27:126-35. [PMID: 27113229 DOI: 10.1016/j.breast.2016.03.002] [Citation(s) in RCA: 18] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/09/2015] [Revised: 02/24/2016] [Accepted: 03/11/2016] [Indexed: 01/13/2023] Open
Abstract
The purpose of this systematic review was to summarise the evidence from studies investigating the integration of tumour bed boosts into whole breast irradiation for patients with Stage 0-III breast cancer, with a focus on its impact on acute and late toxicities. A comprehensive systematic electronic search through the Ovid MEDLINE, EMBASE and PubMed databases from January 2000 to January 2015 was conducted. Studies were considered eligible if they investigated the efficacy of hypo- or normofractionated whole breast irradiation with the inclusion of a daily concurrent boost. The primary outcomes of interest were the degree of observed acute and late toxicity following radiotherapy treatment. Methodological quality assessment was performed on all included studies using either the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale or a previously published investigator-derived quality instrument. The search identified 35 articles, of which 17 satisfied our eligibility criteria. Thirteen and eleven studies reported on acute and late toxicities respectively. Grade 3 acute skin toxicity ranged from 1 to 7% whilst moderate to severe fibrosis and telangiectasia were both limited to 9%. Reported toxicity profiles were comparable to historical data at similar time-points. Studies investigating the delivery of concurrent boosts with whole breast radiotherapy courses report safe short to medium-term toxicity profiles and cosmesis rates. Whilst the quality of evidence and length of follow-up supporting these findings is low, sufficient evidence has been generated to consider concurrent boost techniques as an alternative to conventional sequential techniques.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Daniel George Hamilton
- Epworth Radiation Oncology Research Centre, Epworth Richmond, 32 Erin St, Richmond VIC 3121, Australia; Epworth Radiation Oncology, Epworth Richmond, 32 Erin St, Richmond VIC 3121, Australia.
| | | | - Claire Jones
- Epworth Radiation Oncology, Epworth Richmond, 32 Erin St, Richmond VIC 3121, Australia
| | - Emma Fitzgerald
- Epworth Radiation Oncology, Epworth Richmond, 32 Erin St, Richmond VIC 3121, Australia
| | - Richard Khor
- Austin Health, Austin Hospital, 145 Studley Road, Heidelberg VIC 3121, Australia
| | - Kellie Knight
- Department of Medical Imaging & Radiation Sciences, School of Biomedical Sciences, Faculty of Medicine, Nursing & Health Sciences, Monash University, Clayton VIC 3800, Australia
| | - Jason Wasiak
- Epworth Radiation Oncology Research Centre, Epworth Richmond, 32 Erin St, Richmond VIC 3121, Australia; School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
21
|
Abstract
Ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) is a heterogeneous disease in both its biology and clinical course. In the past, recurrence rates after breast-conserving surgery have been as high as 30% after 10 years. The introduction of mammography screening and advances in imaging have led to an increase in the detection of DCIS. The focus of this review is on the role of radiotherapy in the multidisciplinary treatment, including current developments in hypofractionation and boost delivery, and attempts to define low-risk subsets of DCIS for which the need for adjuvant radiation is repeatedly questioned.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- David Krug
- Radioonkologie und Strahlentherapie, Universitätsklinikum Heidelberg, Germany
| | | |
Collapse
|
22
|
Gao C, Yu Z, Liu S, Xin H, Li X. Overexpression of CUGBP1 is associated with the progression of non-small cell lung cancer. Tumour Biol 2015; 36:4583-9. [PMID: 25619475 DOI: 10.1007/s13277-015-3103-1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 19] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/24/2014] [Accepted: 01/12/2015] [Indexed: 01/06/2023] Open
Abstract
The multifunctional RNA-binding protein CUGBP1 regulates multiple aspects of nuclear and cytoplasmic messenger RNA (mRNA) processing, including splicing, stabilization, and translation of mRNAs. Previous studies have shown that CUGBP1 is overexpressed in non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) tissues, but the pathological functions of CUGBP1 in tumorigenesis and development are unknown. Here, we provide the first evidence demonstrating the clinicopathological significance of CUGBP1 in NSCLC. Using immunohistochemistry, the levels of CUGBP1 expression in NSCLC tissues and adjacent non-cancerous tissues were examined and determined to be associated with differentiation. Short hairpin RNA-induced downregulation of CUGBP1 promoted apoptosis and decreased proliferation in the A549 NSCLC cell line. Moreover, Western blot analysis indicated that the depletion of CUGBP1 increased the protein levels of cyclin D1, BAD, BAX, Jun D, and E-cadherin, while the cyclin B1 level decreased. Knockdown of CUGBP1 decreased β-catenin and vimentin levels and increased E-cadherin expression, suggesting that CUGBP1 may contribute significantly to epithelial to mesenchymal transition (EMT) progression. These results demonstrate the importance of CUGBP1 in the biological and pathological functions of NSCLC and indicate its potential as a therapeutic target for NSCLC.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Caihong Gao
- Department of Oncology, The Affiliated Hospital of Qingdao University, Qingdao, Shandong, 266071, People's Republic of China
| | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
23
|
Lalani N, Paszat L, Sutradhar R, Thiruchelvam D, Nofech-Mozes S, Hanna W, Slodkowska E, Done SJ, Miller N, Youngson B, Tuck A, Sengupta S, Elavathil L, Chang MC, Jani PA, Bonin M, Rakovitch E. Long-term outcomes of hypofractionation versus conventional radiation therapy after breast-conserving surgery for ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2014; 90:1017-24. [PMID: 25220719 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2014.07.026] [Citation(s) in RCA: 47] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/07/2014] [Revised: 07/09/2014] [Accepted: 07/19/2014] [Indexed: 11/16/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE Whole-breast radiation therapy (XRT) after breast-conserving surgery (BCS) for ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) may decrease the risk of local recurrence, but the optimal dose regimen remains unclear. Past studies administered 50 Gy in 25 fractions (conventional); however, treatment pattern studies report that hypofractionated (HF) regimens (42.4 Gy in 16 fractions) are frequently used. We report the impact of HF (vs conventional) on the risk of local recurrence after BCS for DCIS. METHODS AND MATERIALS All women with DCIS treated with BCS and XRT in Ontario, Canada from 1994 to 2003 were identified. Treatment and outcomes were assessed through administrative databases and validated by chart review. Survival analyses were performed. To account for systematic differences between women treated with alternate regimens, we used a propensity score adjustment approach. RESULTS We identified 1609 women, of whom 971 (60%) received conventional regimens and 638 (40%) received HF. A total of 489 patients (30%) received a boost dose, of whom 143 (15%) received conventional radiation therapy and 346 (54%) received HF. The median follow-up time was 9.2 years. The median age at diagnosis was 56 years (interquartile range [IQR], 49-65 years). On univariate analyses, the 10-year actuarial local recurrence-free survival was 86% for conventional radiation therapy and 89% for HF (P=.03). On multivariable analyses, age <45 years (hazard ratio [HR] = 2.4; 95% CI: 1.6-3.4; P<.0001), high (HR=2.9; 95% CI: 1.2-7.3; P=.02) or intermediate nuclear grade (HR=2.7; 95% CI: 1.1-6.6; P=.04), and positive resection margins (HR=1.4; 95% CI: 1.0-2.1; P=.05) were associated with an increased risk of local recurrence. HF was not significantly associated with an increased risk of local recurrence compared with conventional radiation therapy on multivariate analysis (HR=0.8; 95% CI: 0.5-1.2; P=.34). CONCLUSIONS The risk of local recurrence among individuals treated with HF regimens after BCS for DCIS was similar to that among individuals treated with conventional radiation therapy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Nafisha Lalani
- University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Department of Radiation Oncology, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Lawrence Paszat
- University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Department of Radiation Oncology, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Rinku Sutradhar
- Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Deva Thiruchelvam
- Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Sharon Nofech-Mozes
- University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Department of Anatomic Pathology, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre and Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathobiology, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Wedad Hanna
- University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Department of Anatomic Pathology, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre and Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathobiology, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Elzbieta Slodkowska
- University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Department of Anatomic Pathology, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre and Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathobiology, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Susan J Done
- University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Laboratory Medicine Program, University Health Network and Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathobiology, Campbell Family Institute for Breast Cancer Research, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Naomi Miller
- University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Laboratory Medicine Program, University Health Network and Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathobiology, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Bruce Youngson
- University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Laboratory Medicine Program, University Health Network and Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathobiology, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Alan Tuck
- Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, London Health Sciences Centre and Saint Joseph's Health Care, London, Ontario, Canada
| | - Sandip Sengupta
- Department of Pathology and Molecular Medicine, Kingston General Hospital, Kingston, Ontario, Canada
| | - Leela Elavathil
- Department of Anatomical Pathology, Juravinski Hospital, Hamilton Health Sciences, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
| | - Martin C Chang
- Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Mount Sinai Hospital and Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathobiology, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Prashant A Jani
- Department of Anatomical Pathology, Thunder Bay Regional Health Sciences Centre, Thunder Bay, Ontario, Canada
| | - Michel Bonin
- Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Sudbury Regional Hospital, Sudbury, Ontario, Canada
| | - Eileen Rakovitch
- University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Department of Radiation Oncology, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
| |
Collapse
|
24
|
Fisher CM, Rabinovitch R. Frontiers in radiotherapy for early-stage invasive breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 2014; 32:2894-901. [PMID: 25113764 DOI: 10.1200/jco.2014.55.1184] [Citation(s) in RCA: 18] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/29/2023] Open
Abstract
The development of breast-conserving treatment for early-stage breast cancer is one of the most important success stories in radiation oncology in the latter half of the twentieth century. Lumpectomy followed by radiotherapy provides an appealing alternative to mastectomy for many women. In recent years, there has been a shift in clinical investigational focus toward refinements in the methods of delivering adjuvant radiotherapy that provide shorter, more convenient schedules of external-beam radiotherapy and interstitial treatment. Expedited courses of whole-breast treatment have been demonstrated to be equivalent to traditional lengthier courses in terms of tumor control and cosmetic outcome and to provide an opportunity for cost efficiencies.
Collapse
|
25
|
Montero A, Sanz X, Hernanz R, Cabrera D, Arenas M, Bayo E, Moreno F, Algara M. Accelerated hypofractionated breast radiotherapy: FAQs (Frequently Asked Questions) and facts. Breast 2014; 23:299-309. [DOI: 10.1016/j.breast.2014.01.011] [Citation(s) in RCA: 23] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/15/2013] [Revised: 01/14/2014] [Accepted: 01/19/2014] [Indexed: 10/25/2022] Open
|
26
|
Cante D, Franco P, Sciacero P, Girelli G, Marra AM, Pasquino M, Russo G, Casanova Borca V, Mondini G, Paino O, Numico G, Tofani S, La Porta MR, Ricardi U. Hypofractionation and concomitant boost to deliver adjuvant whole-breast radiation in ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS): a subgroup analysis of a prospective case series. Med Oncol 2014; 31:838. [PMID: 24415414 DOI: 10.1007/s12032-014-0838-2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 21] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/17/2013] [Accepted: 01/04/2014] [Indexed: 11/30/2022]
Abstract
To report the four-year outcomes of accelerated hypofractionated whole-breast radiotherapy (WBRT) with a concomitant boost (CB) to the tumor bed in ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS), we performed a subgroup analysis of 103 patients affected with DCIS within a cohort of 960 early breast cancer patients treated with breast conservation and hypofractionated WBRT. Prescription dose to the whole breast was 45 Gy (2.25 Gy/20 fractions) with an additional daily CB of 0.25 Gy to the surgical cavity (2.5 Gy/20 fractions up to 50 Gy). With a median follow-up of 48 months (range 12-91), no local recurrence was observed. Maximum detected acute skin toxicity was as follows: G0 in 35 % of patients, G1 in 54 %, G2 in 9 % and G3 in 2 %. Late skin and subcutaneous toxicity were generally mild with only 1 % of patients experiencing ≥G3 events (telangiectasia). No major lung and heart toxicity were detected. Cosmetic results were excellent in 50 % of patients, good in 37 %, fair in 9 % and poor in 4 %. Quality of life had a generally favorable profile both within the functioning and symptoms domains. The present result supports the hypothesis that DCIS patients could be safely treated with a hypofractionated schedule employing a CB to the lumpectomy cavity.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Domenico Cante
- Radiotherapy Department, ASL TO4, Ivrea Community Hospital, Ivrea, Italy
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
27
|
Hypofractionated regional nodal irradiation for breast cancer: Examining the data and potential for future studies. Radiother Oncol 2014; 110:39-44. [DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2013.12.006] [Citation(s) in RCA: 26] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/13/2013] [Revised: 12/23/2013] [Accepted: 12/23/2013] [Indexed: 12/25/2022]
|
28
|
Hathout L, Hijal T, Théberge V, Fortin B, Vulpe H, Hogue JC, Lambert C, Bahig H, Provencher L, Vavassis P, Yassa M. Hypofractionated radiation therapy for breast ductal carcinoma in situ. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2013; 87:1058-63. [PMID: 24113057 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2013.08.026] [Citation(s) in RCA: 33] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/19/2013] [Revised: 08/06/2013] [Accepted: 08/23/2013] [Indexed: 11/15/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE Conventional radiation therapy (RT) administered in 25 fractions after breast-conserving surgery (BCS) is the standard treatment for ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) of the breast. Although accelerated hypofractionated regimens in 16 fractions have been shown to be equivalent to conventional RT for invasive breast cancer, few studies have reported results of using hypofractionated RT in DCIS. METHODS AND MATERIALS In this multicenter collaborative effort, we retrospectively reviewed the records of all women with DCIS at 3 institutions treated with BCS followed by hypofractionated whole-breast RT (WBRT) delivered in 16 fractions. RESULTS Between 2003 and 2010, 440 patients with DCIS underwent BCS followed by hypofractionated WBRT in 16 fractions for a total dose of 42.5 Gy (2.66 Gy per fraction). Boost RT to the surgical bed was given to 125 patients (28%) at a median dose of 10 Gy in 4 fractions (2.5 Gy per fraction). After a median follow-up time of 4.4 years, 14 patients had an ipsilateral local relapse, resulting in a local recurrence-free survival of 97% at 5 years. Positive surgical margins, high nuclear grade, age less than 50 years, and a premenopausal status were all statistically associated with an increased occurrence of local recurrence. Tumor hormone receptor status, use of adjuvant hormonal therapy, and administration of additional boost RT did not have an impact on local control in our cohort. On multivariate analysis, positive margins, premenopausal status, and nuclear grade 3 tumors had a statistically significant worse local control rate. CONCLUSIONS Hypofractionated RT using 42.5 Gy in 16 fractions provides excellent local control for patients with DCIS undergoing BCS.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Lara Hathout
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Hôpital Maisonneuve-Rosemont, Centre affilié à l'Université de Montréal, Montreal, Quebec, Canada
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
29
|
McCormick B. Radiation therapy for duct carcinoma in situ: who needs radiation therapy, who doesn't? Hematol Oncol Clin North Am 2013; 27:673-86, vii. [PMID: 23915738 DOI: 10.1016/j.hoc.2013.05.001] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/26/2022]
Abstract
Duct carcinoma in situ (DCIS) is a common but non-life-threatening breast cancer. Four large prospective randomized trials comparing radiation therapy (RT) with none after breast-conservation surgery have all concluded that the use of RT reduces the risk of a local recurrence (LR) in the ipsilateral breast by at least 50%. More information is needed to assess the role of antiestrogen therapy when RT is not given. When markers are validated to predict which patients will have an invasive LR versus another DCIS or no LR, it is hoped that the discussion with the patient will clarify the situation further.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Beryl McCormick
- Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, 1275 York Avenue, New York, NY 10065, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
30
|
Jiao W, Zhao J, Wang M, Wang Y, Luo Y, Zhao Y, Tang D, Shen Y. CUG-binding protein 1 (CUGBP1) expression and prognosis of non-small cell lung cancer. Clin Transl Oncol 2013; 15:789-95. [PMID: 23359188 DOI: 10.1007/s12094-013-1005-5] [Citation(s) in RCA: 11] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/05/2012] [Accepted: 01/13/2013] [Indexed: 11/25/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND AIMS Non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is the leading cause of cancer mortality worldwide. As CUGBP1 may also play a great role in tumor genesis and deterioration, the purpose of this study was to detect the expression of CUGBP1 mRNA and CUGBP1 and assess the prognostic significance of CUGBP1 in NSCLC. METHODS Expression of CUGBP1 mRNA and CUGBP was detected by Semi-quantitative PCR and Immunohistochemistry, respectively, from 57 NSCLC patients. The percentage of CUGBP1 mRNA and CUGBP1 expression was correlated with clinical characteristics using χ (2) test. The prognostic significance was assessed by univariate and multivariate analyses in the Cox hazard model. RESULTS The expression of CUGBP1 mRNA and CUGBP1 was over-expressed in cancer group and was correlated with TNM stage and Differentiation. By both univariate and multivariate survival analyses, CUGBP1 expression (P = 0.0074, HR = 3.701, 95 % CI 1.420-9.648), TNM-stage (HR = 4.043, 95 % CI 2.098-7.794) and age (HR = 3.207, 95 % CI 1.544-6.664) were noted to be independent indicators of a shorter postsurgical survival. CONCLUSIONS The expression of CUGBP1 independently predicted a shorter postsurgical survival in NSCLC.
Collapse
MESH Headings
- Adenocarcinoma/genetics
- Adenocarcinoma/mortality
- Adenocarcinoma/surgery
- Adult
- Aged
- Biomarkers, Tumor/genetics
- Biomarkers, Tumor/metabolism
- CELF1 Protein
- Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung/genetics
- Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung/mortality
- Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung/surgery
- Carcinoma, Squamous Cell/genetics
- Carcinoma, Squamous Cell/mortality
- Carcinoma, Squamous Cell/surgery
- Cell Differentiation
- Female
- Follow-Up Studies
- Gene Expression Regulation, Neoplastic
- Humans
- Immunoenzyme Techniques
- Lung Neoplasms/genetics
- Lung Neoplasms/mortality
- Lung Neoplasms/surgery
- Male
- Middle Aged
- Neoplasm Staging
- Prognosis
- RNA, Messenger/genetics
- RNA-Binding Proteins/genetics
- RNA-Binding Proteins/metabolism
- Real-Time Polymerase Chain Reaction
- Reverse Transcriptase Polymerase Chain Reaction
- Survival Rate
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- W Jiao
- Department of Thoracic Surgery, The Affiliated Hospital of Medical College, Qingdao University, 16 Jiangsu Road, Qingdao, 266003, People's Republic of China
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
31
|
Freedman GM, White JR, Arthur DW, Allen Li X, Vicini FA. Accelerated fractionation with a concurrent boost for early stage breast cancer. Radiother Oncol 2013; 106:15-20. [DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2012.12.001] [Citation(s) in RCA: 34] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/04/2012] [Revised: 11/25/2012] [Accepted: 12/06/2012] [Indexed: 12/18/2022]
|