Predictors for poor cosmetic outcome in patients with early stage breast cancer treated with breast conserving therapy: Results of the Young boost trial

The 2024 Assisi think tank on breast cancer: Focus on the use of a tumour bed boost after breast conserving therapy

At the Fifth Assisi Think Tank Meeting (ATTM) on breast cancer, one key topic was the role of tumor bed boost in invasive breast cancer and ductal carcinoma in situ. The need for a tumor bed boost after whole breast irradiation is controversial. A literature review assessed boost indications, target volume definition, techniques, dose fractionation, and ongoing trials. Findings indicated that while a boost halves the risk of local recurrence at 10 years, it also leads to worsened cosmetic outcomes and increased fibrosis without improving overall survival. Therefore, we would recommend to omit the boost if the estimated reduction in local recurrence at 10 years is less than 3 %, and to apply shared decision-making with patients, if the boost is expected to reduce the local recurrence rate with >3 % at 10 years. Future research will focus on identifying patient subgroups that can safely omit the boost and improving boost volume precision.

Early-Stage Breast Cancer: A Critical Review of Current and Emerging Practice

Breast-conserving surgery followed by adjuvant radiation to reduce the risk of ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence is the mainstay of treatment for early-stage breast cancer (ESBC). However, improved understanding of the heterogeneity of the clinical and molecular characteristics of ESBC has led to greater efforts to personalize approaches to treatment. Furthermore, advances in the understanding of the radiobiology of breast cancer have led to several practice-changing trials on the effectiveness and tolerability of moderate and ultrahypofractionated radiation. Here, we review the recent evidence and ongoing research in the radiotherapeutic management of ESBC, including the use of boost for high-risk disease and opportunities for accelerated fractionation, partial breast irradiation, and radiation omission for low-risk disease. We also discuss how molecular profiling can inform decision-making and new opportunities for primary radiation therapy and reirradiation.

Breast induration and irradiated volume in the DBCG HYPO trial: The impact of age, smoking, and boost

PURPOSE

To investigate the association between irradiated breast volume and grade 2-3 breast induration three years after radiotherapy in the phase III Danish Breast Cancer Group HYPO trial randomizing patients ≥ 41 years to whole breast irradiation (WBI) with 40 Gy/15fr versus 50 Gy/25fr.

METHODS

Treatment plans were available for all Danish patients. Associations between frequency of induration and irradiated volume, age, smoking status, and boost were assessed by logistic regression. A sequential boost was given to patients < 50 years or in case of a narrow (<2 mm) resection margin.

RESULTS

RT plans from 1,333 patients were analyzed with 178 (13 %) having grade 2-3 induration. 1135 patients had only WBI. For this group, induration was correlated with irradiated breast volume for patients ≥ 65 years (n = 343, 10 %/22 % for small/large irradiated volumes, p = 0.005) but not for patients aged 50-64 years (n = 792, 11 % for both small and large volumes, p = 0.82). Smoking doubled the frequency irrespective of irradiated volume and age. All patients < 50 years (n = 156) had a boost. A volume effect was found for this group (5 %/21 % induration for small/large volume, p = 0.002). 42 patients ≥ 50 years had a boost and 14 (33 %) had grade 2-3 induration, however, with a p-value > 0.05 due to the few numbers of patients.

CONCLUSION

A relationship between irradiated breast volume and 3-year frequency of breast induration was found for patients ≥ 65 years, whilst not for patients aged 50-64 years. Smoking doubled the risk of induration irrespective of volume and age. A dose-induration relationship was seen for boost patients < 50 years.

The Effect of Wire Versus Magnetic Seed Localization on Lumpectomy Cavity Size

PURPOSE

Our purpose was to assess whether an association exists between surgical localization technique and lumpectomy cavity size on radiation therapy planning computed tomography (CT) scan.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

A single-institution retrospective review was conducted of women undergoing breast conserving surgery with wire or magnetic seed guided lumpectomy followed by adjuvant radiation therapy from 2018 to 2021. Patients of a surgeon only performing 1 localization technique or undergoing bracketed localization were excluded. The primary outcome was lumpectomy cavity size on simulation CT. Confounding due to imbalance in patient and tumor factors was addressed with overlap weights derived from a propensity score analysis and used in a weighted multivariable analysis. Secondary outcomes included positive margins, total pathologic volume, boost delivery, and boost modality.

RESULTS

Of 617 women who received lumpectomy during the study period, 387 were included in final analysis. Tumors of patients undergoing seed localization were more likely unifocal, assessable by ultrasound, and smaller. Seed use rates ranged from 27.7% to 70.7% per surgeon. There was no difference in positive margins (6.4 vs 5.4%, P = .79) or second surgeries (9.4 vs 8.1%, P = .79) between groups. Close margin rates were similar for ductal carcinoma in situ (P = .35) and invasive carcinoma (P = .97). In unadjusted bivariable analyses, wire localization was associated with larger total pathology volume (P = .004), but localization technique showed no association with CT cavity volume (P = .15). After adjusting for potentially confounding variables, multivariable analysis failed to show an association between localization technique and either CT cavity (P = .35) or total path volume (P = .08). There was no difference in indicated-boost delivery (P = .15) or electron boost (P = .14) by localization technique.

CONCLUSIONS

There was no significant difference in CT cavity size by localization technique, suggesting choice between surgical techniques does not impede radiation therapy boost delivery.

Quantifying radiation-induced breast fibrosis by shear-wave elastography in patients with breast cancer: A 12-months-follow-up data of a prospective study

Purpose

To assess radiation-induced fibrosis (RIF) using shear-wave elastography (SWE) in patients with breast cancer who received radiotherapy (RT) after breast conserving surgery.

Methods

Forty-one patients were enrolled in a prospective study before RT. SWE and B-mode ultrasonography were performed to measure elasticity. For quantitative measurement, the maximum elasticity value was measured in the tumor bed and non-tumor bed of the treated breast, and contralateral breast before RT and at 3, and 12 months after RT. and RIF was recorded using the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) version 5.0.

Results

The mean ± standard deviation elasticity values for the tumor bed, non-tumor bed, and contralateral breast were 71.2 ± 74.9 kPa, 19.4 ± 9.8 kPa and 20.3 ± 10.0 kPa before RT; 28.7 ± 26.3 kPa, 15.1 ± 7.0 kPa, and 14.7 ± 6.3 kPa at 12 months after RT, respectively. The elasticity values for all three measurement areas before and 12 months after RT were significantly different (p < 0.001 for tumor bed, p = 0.002 for non-tumor bed, p = 0.001 for contralateral breast). At 12 months follow-up, the distribution of grades of RIF evaluated by CTCAE grade was grade 0 in 43.9 %, grade 1 in 48.8 %, and grade 2 in 7.3 %.

Conclusion

We demonstrated that SWE enables the evaluation of tissue stiffness to provide quantified information for the RIF of breast cancer. Further studies with long-term follow-up should provide more quantitative data.

CANTO skin: Evaluation of skin toxicity risk factors in patients treated for breast cancer

Skin reaction is a common toxicity during oncology management, especially followed during the radiotherapy. Its assessment and understanding of the factors influencing its occurrence, is a major issue in the management of patients treated for an early breast cancer (BC). We evaluated 8561 patients during their overall management for a BC. We focus on specific skin toxicities: erythema, fibrosis, telangiectasia and changes of skin colour. These toxicities were assessed at the baseline defined as 0-3-6 (M0), 12 (M12), 36 (M36) and 60 (M60) months. The prevalence of toxicities of interest varied over time, so at M0, 30.4% of patients had erythema while 17.7% of patients had fibrosis. At M60, the prevalence of erythema was 2%, while fibrosis remained stable at about 19%. After adjustments, at M0, there was a significant association between the onset of cutaneous erythema and obesity, the presence of axillary dissection, the type of surgery and the tumour phenotype RH+/HER2+. Concerning fibrosis, a significant association was found, at M12, with the age of the patient, obesity, Charlson score and type of surgery. Concerning the modification of skin colour at M12, we find a link between the age of the patient, obesity, tobacco consumption and alcohol consumption. The prevention of this toxicity is a major issue for the quality of life. Our results allow us to understand the risk of developing skin toxicity in a patient, depending on her intrinsic, tumour or therapeutic characteristics and to implement adapted means of prevention and monitoring.

Dose-escalated simultaneous integrated boost radiotherapy in early breast cancer (IMPORT HIGH): a multicentre, phase 3, non-inferiority, open-label, randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

A tumour-bed boost delivered after whole-breast radiotherapy increases local cancer-control rates but requires more patient visits and can increase breast hardness. IMPORT HIGH tested simultaneous integrated boost against sequential boost with the aim of reducing treatment duration while maintaining excellent local control and similar or reduced toxicity.

METHODS

IMPORT HIGH is a phase 3, non-inferiority, open-label, randomised controlled trial that recruited women after breast-conserving surgery for pT1-3pN0-3aM0 invasive carcinoma from radiotherapy and referral centres in the UK. Patients were randomly allocated to receive one of three treatments in a 1:1:1 ratio, with computer-generated random permuted blocks used to stratify patients by centre. The control group received 40 Gy in 15 fractions to the whole breast and 16 Gy in 8 fractions sequential photon tumour-bed boost. Test group 1 received 36 Gy in 15 fractions to the whole breast, 40 Gy in 15 fractions to the partial breast, and 48 Gy in 15 fractions concomitant photon boost to the tumour-bed volume. Test group 2 received 36 Gy in 15 fractions to the whole breast, 40 Gy in 15 fractions to the partial breast, and 53 Gy in 15 fractions concomitant photon boost to the tumour-bed volume. The boost clinical target volume was the clip-defined tumour bed. Patients and clinicians were not masked to treatment allocation. The primary endpoint was ipsilateral breast tumour relapse (IBTR) analysed by intention to treat; assuming 5% 5-year incidence with the control group, non-inferiority was predefined as 3% or less absolute excess in the test groups (upper limit of two-sided 95% CI). Adverse events were assessed by clinicians, patients, and photographs. This trial is registered with the ISRCTN registry, ISRCTN47437448, and is closed to new participants.

FINDINGS

Between March 4, 2009, and Sept 16, 2015, 2617 patients were recruited. 871 individuals were assigned to the control group, 874 to test group 1, and 872 to test group 2. Median boost clinical target volume was 13 cm3 (IQR 7 to 22). At a median follow-up of 74 months there were 76 IBTR events (20 for the control group, 21 for test group 1, and 35 for test group 2). 5-year IBTR incidence was 1·9% (95% CI 1·2 to 3·1) for the control group, 2·0% (1·2 to 3·2) for test group 1, and 3·2% (2·2 to 4·7) for test group 2. The estimated absolute differences versus the control group were 0·1% (-0·8 to 1·7) for test group 1 and 1·4% (0·03 to 3·8) for test group 2. The upper confidence limit for test group 1 versus the control group indicated non-inferiority for 48 Gy. Cumulative 5-year incidence of clinician-reported moderate or marked breast induration was 11·5% for the control group, 10·6% for test group 1 (p=0·40 vs control group), and 15·5% for test group 2 (p=0·015 vs control group).

INTERPRETATION

In all groups 5-year IBTR incidence was lower than the 5% originally expected regardless of boost sequencing. Dose-escalation is not advantageous. 5-year moderate or marked adverse event rates were low using small boost volumes. Simultaneous integrated boost in IMPORT HIGH was safe and reduced patient visits.

FUNDING

Cancer Research UK.

Comparison of intraoperative radiotherapy as a boost vs. simultaneously integrated boosts after breast-conserving therapy for breast cancer

Background

Currently, there are no data from randomized trials on the use of intraoperative radiotherapy (IORT) as a tumor bed boost in women at high risk of local recurrence. The aim of this retrospective analysis was to compare the toxicity and oncological outcome of IORT or simultaneous integrated boost (SIB) with conventional external beam radiotherapy (WBI) after breast conserving surgery (BCS).

Methods

Between 2009 and 2019, patients were treated with a single dose of 20 Gy IORT with 50 kV photons, followed by WBI 50 Gy in 25 or 40.05 in 15 fractions or WBI 50 Gy with SIB up to 58.80-61.60 Gy in 25-28 fractions. Toxicity was compared after propensity score matching. Overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method.

Results

A 1:1 propensity-score matching resulted in an IORT + WBI and SIB + WBI cohort of 60 patients, respectively. The median follow-up for IORT + WBI was 43.5 vs. 32 months in the SIB + WBI cohort. Most women had a pT1c tumor: IORT group 33 (55%) vs. 31 (51.7%) SIB group (p = 0.972). The luminal-B immunophenotype was most frequently diagnosed in the IORT group 43 (71.6%) vs. 35 (58.3%) in the SIB group (p = 0.283). The most reported acute adverse event in both groups was radiodermatitis. In the IORT cohort, radiodermatitis was grade 1: 23 (38.3%), grade 2: 26 (43.3%), and grade 3: 6 (10%) vs. SIB cohort grade 1: 3 (5.1%), grade 2: 21 (35%), and grade 3: 7 (11.6%) without a meaningful difference (p = 0.309). Fatigue occurred more frequently in the IORT group (grade 1: 21.7% vs. 6.7%; p = 0.041). In addition, intramammary lymphedema grade 1 occurred significantly more often in the IORT group (11.7% vs. 1.7%; p = 0.026). Both groups showed comparable late toxicity. The 3- and 5-year local control (LC) rates were each 98% in the SIB group vs. 98% and 93% in the IORT group (LS: log rank p = 0.717).

Conclusion

Tumor bed boost using IORT and SIB techniques after BCS shows excellent local control and comparable late toxicity, while IORT application exhibits a moderate increase in acute toxicity. These data should be validated by the expected publication of the prospective randomized TARGIT-B study.

The role of the radiation therapy breast boost in the 2020s

Given that most local relapses of breast cancer occur proximal to the original location of the primary, the delivery of additional radiation dose to breast tissue that contained the original primary cancer (known as a "boost") has been a standard of care for some decades. In the context of falling relapse rates, however, it is an appropriate time to re-evaluate the role of the boost. This article reviews the evolution of the radiotherapy boost in breast cancer, discussing who to boost and how to boost in the 2020s, and arguing that, in both cases, less is more.

Immediate or delayed oncoplastic surgery after breast conserving surgery at the Netherlands Cancer Institute: a cohort study of 251 cases

PURPOSE

Oncoplastic surgery (OPS) after breast conserving surgery is preferably performed during the same operation. Offering delayed OPS instead of mastectomy to patients with a high risk of tumor-positive margins allows breast conservation with the option of margin re-excision during OPS, without having to dismantle the reconstruction. We aimed to evaluate surgical outcomes after immediate and delayed OPS.

METHODS

We included early-stage breast cancer patients who underwent OPS at the Netherlands Cancer Institute between 2016 and 2019. Patients were selected for delayed OPS after multidisciplinary consultation if the risk of tumor-positive margins with immediate OPS was considered significant (> 30%). Groups were compared on baseline characteristics and short-term surgical outcomes.

RESULTS

Of 242 patients with 251 OPS, 130 (52%) OPS had neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Immediate OPS was performed in 176 (70%) cases and delayed OPS in 76 (30%). Selection for delayed OPS was associated with tumor size (OR 1.03, 95% CI 1.01-1.04), ILC (OR 2.61, 95% CI 1.10-6.20), DCIS (OR 3.45, 95% CI 1.42-8.34) and bra size (OR 0.76, 95% CI 0.62-0.94). Delayed and immediate OPS differed in tissue weight (54 vs. 67 g, p = 0.034), tissue replacement (51% vs. 26%, p < .001) and tumor-positive margins (66% vs. 18%, p < .001). Re-excision was performed in 48 (63%) delayed OPS and in 11 (6%) immediate OPS. Groups did not differ in complications (21% vs. 18%, p = 0.333). Breast conservation after immediate and delayed OPS was 98% and 93%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Performing delayed OPS in selected cases facilitated simultaneous margin re-excision without increasing complications, and resulted in an excellent breast conservation rate.

Efficacy and Tolerance of IMRT Boost Compared to IORT Boost in Early Breast Cancer: A German Monocenter Study

The aim of this retrospective study is to compare the two boost subgroups, IORT or IMRT, in terms of overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), cosmesis, and acute and late toxicity. It shall be shown whether and which of the boost techniques offers better results with respect to the facial points, since there are already many studies on applying boost to the tumor bed after/during breast conserving surgery, and there are few which compare the different techniques. For this comparison, two subgroups of 76 patients each (n = 152), treated between 2002 and 2015, were enrolled in the study. In one subgroup, the 9 Gy boost was intraoperatively administered after complete removal of the primary tumor, while the other subgroup received the boost of 8.4 Gy percutaneously and simultaneously integrated into the tumor bed after breast conserving surgery. Both subgroups have subsequently undergone whole breast irradiation (WBI) of 50.4/50 Gy in 1.8−2 Gy per fraction. OS and the incidence of late toxicity did not differ between the two subgroups and no risk factor was found regarding PFS. Acute toxicities initially occurred significantly less (p < 0.001) in the IORT subgroup; however, after WBI took place, this difference vanished. Therefore, boost application by means of IORT or IMRT can be considered equivalent.

Ten-year results of hypofractionated whole breast radiotherapy and intraoperative electron boost in premenopausal women

AIM

To evaluate outcome of intraoperative electron boost (IOERT) and hypofractionated whole breast irradiation (HWBI) for breast cancer (BC) in young women.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Women aged ≤ 48 with pT1-2 N0-1 BC received 12 Gy IOERT boost during conservative surgery followed by 3-dimensional conformal HWBI in 13 fractions (2.85 Gy/die). Local relapses (LR) and survival (disease-free, DFS; specific, BCSS; overall, OS) were analyzed.

RESULTS

481 consecutive BC patients, mostly node negative, with median age of 42 were treated between 2004 and 2014. Median tumor size was 1.48 cm and median IOERT collimator was 4 cm. After 25-day mean interval, HWBI was delivered. At a median follow-up of 9.6 years, there were 23 LRs (4.8 %, 9 of which were in the boost region). Ten-year LR cumulative incidence was 4.1 % (95 %CI, 2.5-6.3). Over time, local control rate decreased for Luminal A and HER2 positive with negative hormonal receptors, while remained steady for triple negative. At multivariate analysis, LR predictors included age < 40, extensive intraductal component and the use of 4-cm IOERT collimator size. Ten-year survival outcomes were as follows: DFS 80.0 % (95 % CI, 75.8-83.5), BCSS 97.5 % (95 % CI, 95.5-98.6 %), OS 96.5 % (95 % CI, 94.3-97.9). Luminal B HER2 negative had the worse survival outcomes. Perioperative complications were uncommon (16.4 %), acute toxicity was mild (<2% Grade 3), but moderate/severe fibrosis was described in 40.8 % of the cases. Cosmesis was scored as excellent/good in 86 % of the cases.

CONCLUSIONS

ELIOT boost and HWBI achieved an excellent local control at the cost of tumor bed fibrosis. IOERT boost dose lower than 12 Gy is advisable.

The comparison of transforming growth factor beta-1 serum levels in early-stage breast cancer patients treated with external beam whole breast irradiation plus boost versus interstitial brachytherapy accelerated partial breast irradiation

PURPOSE

Transforming growth factor beta-1 (TGF-β1) is a profibrotic cytokine used as an early biomarker to develop radiation-induced fibrosis (RIF). This study aimed to compare TGF-β1 serum levels in early-stage breast cancer patients treated with whole-breast radiation therapy (WBRT) plus boost versus accelerated partial breast irradiation (APBI) using multicatheter interstitial brachytherapy.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

This clinical trial study was conducted on 20 women with early-stage breast cancer after breast-conserving surgery candidate for adjuvant radiotherapy in Golestan hospital, Ahvaz, in 2021. In one group APBI with high-dose-rate brachytherapy (n = 10), the other group WBRT with external beam radiation plus boost (n = 10) was performed. Serum level of TGF-β1 was evaluated before radiotherapy, immediately after the end of radiotherapy and three months after the end of radiotherapy by Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay technique (ELISA).

RESULTS

Median serum TGF-β1 level before radiotherapy was not significantly different between the two groups (p = 0.971). In both APBI and WBRT groups, serum TGF-β1 levels significantly decreased immediately after radiotherapy compared to before treatment (p = 0.005 and p = 0.007, respectively); But three months after radiotherapy, serum TGF-β1 levels increased significantly in the WBRT group (40.50 to 77.41 pg/mL; p = 0.017), while no significant change was observed in the APBI group (24.75 to 30.50 pg/mL; p = 0.332).

CONCLUSIONS

Higher TGF-β1 values in the WBRT group after radiotherapy can be used as an early and vital biomarker in this treatment, and this data may corroborate links between TGF-beta1 and fibrosis and fibrosis rates between APBI and WBRT; It also shows the preference for using the brachytherapy technique in this group of patients. However, due to the small number of samples, definitive conclusions require further prospective studies.

Simple oncoplastic breast defect closure improves long-term cosmetic outcome of breast conserving surgery for breast cancer: A randomised controlled trial

Introduction

Breast conserving surgery (BCS) is associated with unsatisfactory cosmetic outcomes in up to 30% of patients, carrying psychological and quality-of-life implications. This study compares long-term cosmetic outcomes after BCS for breast cancer with v without simple oncoplastic defect closure.

Methods

A randomised controlled trial was performed, recruiting patients who underwent BCS over four years and randomising to the “reshaping” group (closure of excision defect with mobilised breast tissue; n = 124) and to the “control” group (no attempt at defect closure; n = 109). The estimated excision volume (EEV) was <20% of breast volume (BV) in both groups. Photography and breast retraction assessment (BRA) were recorded preoperatively. Cosmetic outcomes were blindly assessed annually for five years by BRA, panel assessment of patients, and body image questionnaire (BIQ).

Results

There were no significant differences between the reshaping and control groups in mean age (52.4 v 53.0; p = 0.63), body mass index (27.8 v 27.7; p = 0.80), margin re-excision (9 v 9; p = 0.78), mean BV (562.5 v 590.3 cc; p = 0.56), mean EEV (54.6 v 60.1 cc; p = 0.14), mean EEV/BV ratio (11.2 v 11.0; p = 0.84), or mean specimen weight (52.1 v 57.7 g; p = 0.24). Reshaping group patients had significantly better outcomes compared to control group patients in terms of mean BRA (0.9 v 2.8; p < 0.0001), achieving a score of “good” or “excellent” by panel assessment at 5 years (75.8% v 48%, p < 0.0001), body image questionnaire top score at 5 years (66.9% v 35.8%; p = 0.0001).

Conclusions

Simple oncoplastic closure of defects after breast-conserving surgery improves long-term objective and subjective cosmetic outcomes.

•

Breast-conserving cancer surgery can lead to unsatisfactory cosmetic outcomes.

•

Simple oncoplastic closure improves long-term cosmetic outcomes.

•

Objective and subjective cosmetic outcomes of oncoplastic closure are correlated.

Early Outcome, Cosmetic Result and Tolerability of an IOERT-Boost Prior to Adjuvant Whole-Breast Irradiation

Background/Aims: Due to its favorable dose distribution and targeting of the region at highest risk of recurrence due to direct visualization of tumor bed, intraoperative electron radiation therapy (IOERT) is used as part of a breast-conserving treatment approach. The aim of this study was to analyze tumor control and survival, as well as the toxicity profile, and cosmetic outcomes in patients irradiated with an IOERT boost for breast cancer. Materials and Methods: 139 Patients treated at our institution between January 2010 and January 2015 with a single boost dose of 10 Gy to the tumor bed during breast-conserving surgery followed by whole-breast irradiation were retrospectively analyzed. Results: 139 patients were included in this analysis. The median age was 54 years (range 28−83 years). The preferred surgical strategy was segmental resection with sentinel lymphonodectomy (66.5%) or axillary dissection (23.1%). Regarding adjuvant radiotherapy, the vast majority received 5 × 1.8 Gy to 50.4 Gy. At a median follow-up of 33.6 months, recurrence-free and overall survival were 95.5% and 94.9%, respectively. No patient developed an in-field recurrence. Seven patients (5.0%) died during the follow-up period, including two patients due to disease recurrence (non-in-field). High-grade (CTCAE > 2) perioperative adverse events attributable to IOERT included wound healing disorder (N = 1) and hematoma (N = 1). High-grade late adverse events (LENT-SOMA grade III) were reported only in one patient with fat necrosis. Low-grade late adverse events (LENT-SOMA grade I-II) included pain (18.0%), edema (10.5%), fibrosis (21%), telangiectasia (4.5%) and pigmentation change (23.0%). The mean breast retraction assessment score was 1.66 (0−6). Both patients and specialists rated the cosmetic result “excellent/good” in 84.8% and 87.9%, respectively. Conclusion: Our study reports favorable data on the cosmetic outcome as well as the acute and early long-term tolerability for patients treated with an IOERT boost. Our oncologic control rates are comparable to the previous literature. However, prospective investigations on the role of IOERT in comparison to other boost procedures would be desirable.

CANTO-RT: Skin toxicities evaluation of a multicenter large prospective cohort of irradiated patients for early-stage breast cancer

Skin damage is the most common and most important toxicity during and after radiotherapy. Its assessment and understanding of the factors influencing its occurrence, is a major issue in the management of patients irradiated for an early breast cancer CANTO is a prospective clinical cohort study of 10 150 patients with stage I-III BC treated from 2012-2017 in 26 cancer centers. In this study, we used CANTO-RT, a sub-cohort of CANTO, including 3480 patients who received RT. We are focus on specifical skin toxicities: Erythema, fibrosis, telangiectasia, and cutaneous pigmentation The prevalence of toxicities of interest varied over time, so at M3-6, 41.1% of patients had erythema while 24.8% of patients had fibrosis. At M12 and M36, the prevalence of erythema decreased respectively while fibrosis remains stable. The prevalence of telangiectasia increases from 1% to 7.1% from M3-6 to M36. After adjustments, we showed an association between the occurrence of skin erythema and obesity; the type of surgery; the presence of axillary dissection; the use of taxane-based CT and the 3DvsIMRT irradiation technique. Regarding fibrosis, an association is found, at M3-6, with age at diagnosis, obesity, tobacco, and the use of boost. Only obesity and the type of surgery received by the patient remained statistically significant at M12 and M36. In this study we identified several risk factors for acute and late skin. The use of a boost was mainly related to the occurrence of fibrosis while the use of IMRT-type technique decreased the occurrence of skin erythema.

Favorable safety profile of moderate hypofractionated over normofractionated radiotherapy in breast cancer patients: a multicentric prospective real-life data farming analysis

Background

Moderately hypofractionated whole-breast radiotherapy (HFRT) has proven to be as safe and efficient as normofractionated radiotherapy (NFRT) in randomized trials resulting in major changes in clinical practice. Toxicity rates observed in selected clinical trial patients may differ from those observed in unselected patients with possible comorbidities and frailty in real-life. This study aimed to examine the influence of HFRT versus NFRT on acute toxicity and identify risks factors of dermatitis in real-life patients.

Materials and methods

Prospective data from breast cancer patients, treated with locoregional radiotherapy were collected between November 2015 and February 2020 in 3 comprehensive cancer centers. Through a systematic data-farming strategy, acute toxicity evaluation forms (CTCAEv4.0) were prospectively completed and extracted electronically. The results from each center were then anonymously merged into a single database for analysis. A Chi-2 test was used to compare HFRT and NFRT. Furthermore, risk factors of dermatitis were identified in a sub-study (622 patients) by multivariate logistic regression analysis.

Results

In total, 3518 T0-4 N0-3 mostly M0 (85.8%) breast cancer patients with a median age of 60.7 (24–96 years old) were analyzed. Acute grade 2–3 dermatitis, grade 1–3 breast oedema, and grade 1–2 hyperpigmentation were less frequent with HFRT versus NFRT: respectively 8.9% versus 35.1% (Chi-2 = 373.7; p < 0.001), 29.0% versus 37.0% (Chi-2 = 23.1; p < 0.001) and 27.0% versus 55.8% (Chi-2 = 279.2; p < 0.001). Fewer patients experienced pain with HFRT versus NFRT: 33.4% versus 53.7% respectively (Chi-2 = 137.1; p < 0.001). Factors such as high BMI (OR = 2.30 [95% CI, 1.28–4.26], p < 0.01), large breast size (OR = 1.88 [95% CI, 1.07–3.28], p < 0.01) and lumpectomy over mastectomy (OR = 0.52 [95% CI, 0.27–0.97], p < 0.05) were associated with greater risk factors of grade 2–3 dermatitis in multivariate analysis regardless of NFRT or HFRT.

Conclusion

The results of this study suggests that breast HFRT may be a better option even for patients with a high BMI or large breast size. Acute toxicity was low to mild, and lower with HFRT compared to NFRT. Results from real-life data were robust, and support the use of HFRT beyond randomized study populations. Long-term real-life data awaits further investigation.

Breast Radiotherapy after Oncoplastic Surgery-A Multidisciplinary Approach

Oncoplastic breast surgery encompasses a range of techniques used to provide equitable oncological outcomes compared with standard breast surgery while, simultaneously, prioritizing aesthetic outcomes. While the outcomes of oncoplastic breast surgery are promising, it can add an extra complexity to the treatment paradigm of breast cancer and impact on decision-making surrounding adjuvant therapies, like chemotherapy and radiotherapy. As such, early discussions at the multidisciplinary team meeting with surgeons, medical oncologists, and radiation oncologists present, should be encouraged to facilitate best patient care.

Hypofractionated Whole Breast Irradiation and Boost-IOERT in Early Stage Breast Cancer (HIOB): First Clinical Results of a Prospective Multicenter Trial (NCT01343459)

Background and purpose: To investigate intraoperative electron radiation therapy (IOERT) as a tumor bed boost during breast conserving surgery (BCS) followed by hypofractionated whole breast irradiation (HWBI) on age-correlated in-breast recurrence (IBR) rates in patients with low- to high-risk invasive breast cancer. Material and methods: BCS and IOERT (11.1 Gy) preceded a HWBI (40.5 Gy) in 15 fractions. Five-year IBR-rates were compared by a sequential ratio test (SQRT) with best evidences in three age groups (35−40 y and 41−50 y: 3.6%, >50 y: 2%) in a prospective single arm design. Null hypothesis (H0) was defined to undershoot these benchmarks for proof of superiority. Results: Of 1445 enrolled patients, 326 met exclusion criteria, leaving 1119 as eligible for analysis. After a median follow-up of 50 months (range 0.7−104), we detected two local recurrences, both in the age group >50 y. With no observed IBR, superiority was demonstrated for the patient groups 41−50 and >50 y, respectively. For the youngest group (35−40 y), no appropriate statistical evaluation was yet possible due to insufficient recruitment. Conclusions: In terms of five-year IBR-rates, Boost-IOERT followed by HWBI has been demonstrated to be superior in patients older than 50 and in the age group 41−50 when compared to best published evidence until 2010.

Failed Breast Conservation Therapy Predicts Higher Frequency of Revision Surgery following Mastectomy with Reconstruction

BACKGROUND

Breast conservation therapy remains the gold standard for women with localized breast cancer; however, some women may eventually undergo mastectomy with reconstruction. Little is understood regarding the risks of failed breast conservation therapy as they relate to postmastectomy reconstruction and whether this affects outcomes.

METHODS

Patients undergoing breast reconstruction were extracted from a merged version of the MarketScan inpatient and outpatient databases from 2007 to 2016. Frequency of lumpectomy and radiation therapy were determined per reconstructive patient. Outcomes included inpatient complications and frequency of revision procedures. Regression models were adjusted for age, obesity, timing of reconstruction, and Elixhauser Comorbidity Index.

RESULTS

Six thousand two hundred eighty-eight of 52,826 (11.9 percent) women underwent more than breast mass excisions before mastectomy with reconstruction. Of those, the mean number of excisions per woman was 1.67 ± 0.90. There were 3334 lumpectomy patients (53.0 percent) who completed radiation therapy. The mean number of revisions with breast conservation therapy was 1.5 versus 1.3 in the general cohort. On multivariable analysis, excision of breast mass alone was not associated with increased odds of inpatient complications (OR, 1.07; p = 0.363), nor was radiation therapy (OR, 0.89; p = 0.153). However, radiation therapy with or without excision of breast mass before mastectomy was a significant predictor of more frequent revision operations (p = 0.032). Excision of breast mass alone was not associated with an increased frequency of revision (p = 0.173).

CONCLUSIONS

History of radiation therapy in the setting of failed breast conservation therapy resulting in mastectomy with reconstruction was associated with an increased risk for revision. Patients should be counseled accordingly before breast conservation therapy in the event they may eventually undergo mastectomy with reconstruction.

CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic, III.

Intra-Operative Electron Radiation Therapy (IOERT) Anticipated Boost in Breast Cancer Treatment: An Italian Multicenter Experience

In breast cancer, the use of a boost to the tumor bed can improve local control. The aim of this research is to evaluate the safety and efficacy of the boost with intra-operative electron radiotherapy (IOERT) in patients with early-stage breast cancer undergoing conservative surgery and postoperative whole breast irradiation (WBI). The present retrospective multicenter large data were collected between January 2011 and March 2018 in 8 Italian Radiation Oncology Departments. Acute and late toxicity, objective (obj) and subjective (subj) cosmetic outcomes, in-field local control (LC), out-field LC, disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) were evaluated. Overall, 797 patients were enrolled. IOERT-boost was performed in all patients during surgery, followed by WBI. Acute toxicity (≥G2) occurred in 179 patients (22.46%); one patient developed surgical wound infection (G3). No patients reported late toxicity ≥ G2. Obj-cosmetic result was excellent in 45%, good in 35%, fair in 20% and poor in 0% of cases. Subj-cosmetic result was excellent in 10%, good in 20%, fair in 69% and poor in 0.3% of cases. Median follow-up was 57 months (range 12-109 months). At 5 years, in-field LC was 99.2% (95% CI: 98-99.7); out-field LC 98.9% (95% CI: 97.4-99.6); DFS 96.2% (95% CI: 94.2-97.6); OS 98.6% (95% CI: 97.2-99.3). In conclusion, IOERT-boost appears to be safe, providing excellent local control for early-stage breast cancer. The safety and long-term efficacy&nbsp;should encourage use of this treatment, with the potential to reduce local recurrence.

Expert Discussion: Hypofractionated Radiation Therapy - Standard for All Indications?

n/a

Factors related to patient-reported cosmetic outcome after breast-conserving therapy for breast cancer

BACKGROUND

Multiple factors can affect cosmetic outcome after breast-conserving therapy. We investigated which combination of factors could optimally predict patient reported cosmetic outcome.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Dutch patients treated with BCT between 2008 and 2013 were retrospectively analysed. Demographics, tumour characteristics, and treatment-related factors were obtained from available digital medical records. Patients were asked to indicate their degree of cosmetic satisfaction using the Harvard scale. Both univariable and multivariable logistic regression analyses were performed to create a prediction model.

RESULTS

The present study based on 220 patients shows that univariable analysis radiotherapy boost (OR 4.01 [1.85-8.70], p ≤ 0.001) and adjuvant chemotherapy (OR 2.67 [1.45-4.92], p = 0.002) were significantly associated with unsatisfactory cosmetic outcome. In multivariable analyses, only a radiotherapy boost remained significantly associated (OR 4.08 [1.76-9.49], p = 0.001) with poor cosmetic outcome, while adjuvant chemotherapy was no longer associated with it (OR 1.61 [0.81-3.24), p = 0.18). These two factors, together with tumour histology and lymph node staging, showed the highest predictive values, although the predictive property of the overall model was limited (AUC = 0.69).

CONCLUSION

In the present study, a variety of factors is explored. However, a radiotherapy boost was the only factor that was independently associated with a poor cosmetic outcome after BCT. This finding can be used for counselling in daily clinical practice. Creation of a prediction model will require further investigation.

Radiodermatitis and Fibrosis in the Context of Breast Radiation Therapy: A Critical Review

Simple Summary

Skin toxicity is the main complication during irradiation in the management of early-stage breast cancer. In some cases, it may cause treatment to stop. These toxicities may be acute (mainly radiodermatitis) and/or late (mainly fibrosis). Their understandings, their mechanisms of occurrence, as well as their management is indispensable in order to improve the management of these patients. Through this study we propose to provide a clear picture of these toxicities in relation to the modalities of radiotherapy, advances in their quantification, and management to help practitioners improve their knowledge and clinical practices on this topic.

Abstract

Background: Radiation therapy has been progressively improved in order to maintain a satisfactory tumour response, while reducing toxicity. We will review the incidence of radiodermatitis and fibrosis according to the various radiation and fractionation techniques. We will then focus on the various methods used to manage, prevent, and quantify this toxicity. Method: More than 1753 articles were identified using the various search terms. We selected 53 articles to answer the questions addressed in this study according to criteria set in advance. Result: The literature reports lower acute toxicity with IMRT compared to 3DCRT, but no significant differences in terms of late toxicities. Partial breast irradiation appears to be less effective in terms of local control with a higher rate of late toxicity. Intra operative radiation therapy appears to provide good results in terms of both local control and late toxicity. The hypofractionation has equivalent efficacy and safety to the normofractionated regimen, but with lower rates of radiodermatitis and fibrosis. The adddition of a boost, particularly a sequential boost, increases the risk of fibrosis and radiodermatitis during treatment. Conclusion: The development of IMRT has significantly reduced acute toxicity and has improved tolerability during treatment. Modified fractionation has reduced treatment time, as well as adverse effects.

Breast cancer patient-reported outcome of factors influencing cosmetic satisfaction after breast-conserving therapy

Background

The aim of this study was to investigate which factors patients considered to be important for determining the degree of cosmetic satisfaction with regards to perceived body image after previous breast-conserving therapy (BCT).

Methods

Outcomes considered relevant by the patients were first identified using interviews. A questionnaire based on this group input was then devised and added to the physician-based Sneeuw questionnaire. Next, a quantitative study using this questionnaire was conducted in Dutch patients treated at least 6 months earlier for (non-) invasive breast cancer by BCT. Exclusion criteria were: previous mastectomy or BCT of the contralateral breast, BCT with nipple resection, metastatic disease, local recurrence or (previous) plastic breast surgery. Descriptive statistics were used throughout.

Results

A total of 149 patients (aged 36–87 years) completed the questionnaire. From this focus group input, the top three factors in overall importance (important or very important) for satisfaction were: ‘wearability of bra’ (67%), ‘breast sensitivity’ (59%) and ‘asymmetry’ (51%). Younger patients (< 55 years) considered ‘breast size’ to be most important, whereas ‘wearability of bra’ was most frequently reported by older patients (> 55 years). Time since BCT did not significantly influence the rating of relevant factors.

Conclusion

Patients consider ‘wearability of bra’, ‘breast sensitivity’ and ‘asymmetry’ as the most important factors when assessing their satisfaction with regards to cosmetic outcome and body image. These factors should be addressed in routine clinical practice during (pre) counseling.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s12282-021-01287-0.

Maintaining Contour with a Three-dimensional Interstitial Tissue Marker in 134 Lumpectomies

Breast-conserving surgery (BCS) is meant to preserve the natural appearance of the breast; however, tissue volume deficits cannot always be compensated by soft tissue mobilization. A three-dimensional (3D) interstitial tissue marker (BioZorb) was designed to delineate the lumpectomy cavity for targeting boost irradiation, but an unexpected secondary benefit may be in guiding wound contraction and restoring contour to the lumpectomy bed. We analyze tissue volume excised at the time of lumpectomy as a function of device size selected.

Methods

In total, 134 consecutive lumpectomy patients implanted with BioZorb between May 2015 and February 2020 were retrospectively analyzed for tissue volume excised, device size used, location, and re-operation rates, including explantation of the device.

Results

An estimated 113 patients underwent device implantation at initial lumpectomy, and 21 at margin re-excision. Twenty-seven patients underwent re-excision, while 14 elected mastectomy for positive margins following insertion; 22 had the same device reimplanted. Mean lumpectomy volume was 79.0 cm³ (range 10.3-275.8 cm³) during the first implant procedure. Large-volume lumpectomies, averaging 136.5 cm³, were associated with selection of larger devices, which aided in restoring volume and maintaining breast contour. Three (2.2%) patients requested removal of the device.

Conclusions

BioZorb implantation can be a safe and useful oncoplastic technique for restoring volume with BCS. Large-volume lumpectomies can be performed without contouring defects using the device. An unexpected secondary benefit of the device may be scaffolding for wound contraction.

IOERT versus external beam electrons for boost radiotherapy in stage I/II breast cancer: 10-year results of a phase III randomized study

Background

Intraoperative radiotherapy with electrons (IOERT) boost could be not inferior to external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) boost in terms of local control and tissue tolerance. The aim of the study is to present the long-term follow-up results on local control, esthetic evaluation, and toxicity of a prospective study on early-stage breast cancer patients treated with breast-conserving surgery with an IOERT boost of 10 Gy (experimental group) versus 5 × 2 Gy EBRT boost (standard arm). Both arms received whole-breast irradiation (WBI) with 50 Gy (2 Gy single dose).

Methods

A single-institution phase III randomized study to compare IOERT versus EBRT boost in early-stage breast cancer was conducted as a non-inferiority trial. Primary endpoints were the evaluation of in-breast true recurrences (IBTR) and out-field local recurrences (LR) as well as toxicity and cosmetic results. Secondary endpoints were overall survival (OS), disease-free survival (DFS), and patient’s grade of satisfaction with cosmetic outcomes.

Results

Between 1999 and 2004, 245 patients were randomized: 133 for IOERT and 112 for EBRT. The median follow-up was 12 years (range 10–16 years). The cumulative risk of IBTR at 5–10 years was 0.8% and 4.3% after IOERT, compared to 4.2% and 5.3% after EBRT boost (p = 0.709). The cumulative risk of out-field LR at 5–10 years was 4.7% and 7.9% for IOERT versus 5.2% and 10.3% for EBRT (p = 0.762). All of the IOERT arm recurrences were observed at > 100 months’ follow-up, whereas the mean time to recurrence in the EBRT group was earlier (55.2 months) (p < 0.05). No late complications associated with IOERT were observed. The overall cosmetic results were scored as good or excellent in physician and patient evaluations for both IOERT and EBRT. There were significantly better scores for IOERT at all time points in physician and patient evaluations with the greatest difference at the end of EBRT (p = 0.006 objective and p = 0.0004 subjective) and most narrow difference at 12 months after the end of EBRT (p = 0.08 objective and p = 0.04 subjective analysis).

Conclusion

A 10-Gy IOERT boost during breast-conserving surgery provides high local control rates without significant morbidity. Although not significantly superior to external beam boosts, the median time to local recurrences after IOERT is prolonged by more than 4 years.

Post-lumpectomy radiation therapy boost in breast cancer patients: evidence revisited

Purpose

Radiation therapy is an integral part in the management of breast cancer after breast conservative surgery. In selected patients at high risk for local recurrence (LR), a boost radiation dose is commonly applied to the tumour bed.

Methods

We performed a review of the English literature using PubMed, Medline and Google Scholar for published manuscripts addressing the effect of boost radiation in breast cancer patients, focusing mainly on LR and overall survival (OS).

Results

A total of seven studies were included in our review. Most studies (6/7, 85.7%) showed a significant improvement in local control independent of age (hazard ratios ranging between 0.34 and 0.73), with the largest absolute benefit in younger patients. None of the studies, however, was able to demonstrate an improvement in OS.

Conclusions

With lack of sufficient studies addressing the role of boost radiation, individualised treatment decisions are recommended, taking into account the risk factors for LR, including tumour biology. Real-life data are sorely needed to better assess the role of tumour bed boost in the contemporary era.

Implementation of Royal College of Radiologists Consensus Statements and National Institute for Health and Care Excellence Guidance: Breast Radiotherapy Practice in the UK

AIMS

Breast radiotherapy practice, driven by large randomised controls trials, is increasingly being risk adapted to the biology and stage of the cancer. The aim of this audit was to measure current breast radiotherapy practice in the UK against quality standards from the 2016 Royal College of Radiologists (RCR) consensus statements and the 2018 updated National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) guidelines. These guidelines include new recommendations for partial breast irradiation for women at lower risk of recurrence and internal mammary chain radiotherapy for those at higher risk.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Radiotherapy departments completed a questionnaire for all patients starting adjuvant radiotherapy for early breast cancer in a 2-week period mid-2019.

RESULTS

Eighty-one per cent of centres returned data on 958 patients, including 18 bilateral cancers. Of 976 breast cancers, 23.9% were treated with mastectomy. The dose fractionation schedule for adjuvant radiotherapy was 40 Gy in 15 fractions in 95.7% of cases. Of the 743 cases treated with breast conservation, 29.9% received an additional tumour bed boost. The boost was given sequentially in 91.9% of cases and with eight different dose fractionation schedules. Of 494 left-sided breast cancer cases, 54% (n = 267) received radiotherapy in deep inspiratory breath hold. All centres except one had a deep inspiratory breath hold technique available. Only 12% of patients who met the RCR criteria for partial breast irradiation received it. Overall, 14.7% and 9.9% of patients meeting the RCR and NICE criteria for internal mammary chain radiotherapy, respectively, received it.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite established consensus statements and NICE guidelines there persists variation in breast radiotherapy practice in the UK. The results of practice-changing trials showing the benefit of cardiac-sparing radiotherapy techniques, partial breast radiotherapy and internal mammary nodal radiotherapy have not been fully implemented. This audit highlights areas for targeted quality improvement and future consensus statements.

Local Treatment of Triple-Negative Breast Cancer

ABSTRACT

Triple-negative breast cancer, compared with other molecular subtypes, poses particular challenges for optimizing the timing and the extent of locoregional treatments. In the past, the combination of increased rates of both locoregional and distant recurrences led to a preference of radical surgery and extensive radiation therapy; however, since the introduction of more effective chemotherapy, a sharp de-escalation in the extent of locoregional treatments followed. Current evidence confirms that less aggressive surgery in combination with tailored radiation therapy offers improved oncological outcomes combined with better quality of life. However, further research is required to optimize locoregional treatments, considering the significant heterogeneity in biological behavior and tumor response to systemic treatments.

Breast brachytherapy

Accelerated partial breast irradiation with brachytherapy is a treatment method with a very low risk profile. In fact, accelerated partial breast irradiation brachytherapy has been proven in randomized trials to have fewer late side effects than whole-breast irradiation. Notably, Grade 3 late side effects are extremely rare, and excellent to good cosmetic results are observed in well over 90% of patients. In this article, published side effects of breast brachytherapy are reviewed and appropriate management discussed.

A Three-Dimensional Bioabsorbable Tissue Marker for Volume Replacement and Radiation Planning: A Multicenter Study of Surgical and Patient-Reported Outcomes for 818 Patients with Breast Cancer

Background

Accurate identification of the tumor bed after breast-conserving surgery (BCS) ensures appropriate radiation to the tumor bed while minimizing normal tissue exposure. The BioZorb^® three-dimensional (3D) bioabsorbable tissue marker provides a reliable target for radiation therapy (RT) planning and follow-up evaluation while serving as a scaffold to maintain breast contour.

Methods

After informed consent, 818 patients (826 breasts) implanted with the BioZorb^® at 14 U.S. sites were enrolled in a national registry. All the patients were prospectively followed with the BioZorb^® implant after BCS. The data collected at 3, 6, 12, and 24 months included all demographics, treatment parameters, and provider/patient-assessed cosmesis.

Results

The median follow-up period was 18.2 months (range, 0.2–53.4 months). The 30-day breast infection rate was 0.5 % of the patients (n = 4), and re-excision was performed for 8.1 % of the patients (n = 66), whereas 2.6 % of the patients (n = 21) underwent mastectomy. Two patients (0.2 %) had local recurrence. The patient-reported cosmetic outcomes at 6, 12, and 24 months were rated as good-to-excellent by 92.4 %, 90.6 %, and 87.3 % of the patients, respectively and similarly by the surgeons. The radiation oncologists reported planning of target volume (PTV) reduction for 46.2 % of the patients receiving radiation boost, with PTV reduction most commonly estimated at 30 %.

Conclusions

This report describes the first large multicenter study of 818 patients implanted with the BioZorb^® tissue marker during BCS. Radiation oncologists found that the device yielded reduced PTVs and that both the patients and the surgeons reported good-to-excellent long-term cosmetic outcomes, with low adverse effects. The BioZorb^® 3D tissue marker is a safe adjunct to BCS and may add benefits for both surgeons and radiation oncologists.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1245/s10434-020-09271-2) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

A Meta-Analysis of Autologous Microsurgical Breast Reconstruction and Timing of Adjuvant Radiation Therapy

BACKGROUND

 Postmastectomy radiation therapy (PMRT) decreases loco-regional recurrence and improves survival in patients with locally advanced breast cancer. Autologous free flap reconstruction, while more durable in the setting of radiation than alloplastic reconstruction, is still susceptible to radiation-induced fibrosis, contracture, fat necrosis, volume loss, and distortion of breast shape. Options for reconstruction timing (immediate vs. delayed) have been discussed to mitigate these effects, but a clear optimum is not known.

METHODS

 A systematic review of the literature was conducted according to PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines using search terms "breast reconstruction AND (radiation OR irradiation OR radiotherapy)" were used. Inclusion criteria consisted of studies reporting complications for free flap breast reconstruction in the setting of PMRT. Patients who underwent PMRT were pooled into two groups: those who underwent immediate free flap reconstruction prior to PMRT and those who underwent delayed reconstruction after PMRT.

RESULTS

 Out of the 23 studies, 12 focused on immediate reconstruction, seven focused on delayed reconstruction, and four studies included both groups. Overall, 729 patients underwent immediate reconstruction, while 868 underwent delayed reconstruction. Complete and partial flap loss rates were significantly higher in patients undergoing delayed reconstruction, while infection and wound-healing complication rates were higher in those undergoing immediate reconstructions. Rates of unplanned reoperations, vascular complications, hematoma/seroma, and fat necrosis did not differ significantly between the two groups. However, rates of planned revision surgeries were higher in the delayed reconstruction group.

CONCLUSION

 Immediate free flap breast reconstruction is associated with superior flap survival compared with delayed reconstruction. Rates of complications are largely comparable, and rates of revision surgeries are equivalent. The differences in long-term aesthetic outcomes are not, however, clearly assessed by the available literature. Even in the face of PMRT, immediate free flap breast reconstruction is an effective approach.

Hypofractionated Whole Breast Irradiation and Simultaneous Integrated Boost in Large-breasted Patients: Long-term Toxicity and Cosmesis

INTRODUCTION

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the impact of breast size on long-term toxicity and cosmesis in patients with breast cancer treated with hypofractionated simultaneous integrated boost (SIB) using volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients with early stage breast cancer were treated with 3-week hypofractionated SIB-VMAT to the whole breast (40.5 Gy) and tumor bed (48 Gy). Two cohorts were identified: small/medium- (< 1000 cm³) and large- (> 1000 cm³) breasted patients. Acute and late (at 2 and 5 years) skin toxicity and cosmetic data were analyzed. Univariate and multivariate analysis evaluated associations between toxicity and dosimetric/anatomical variables.

RESULTS

From August 2010 to March 2017, a total of 1160 patients were treated; 831 had at least 2 years of follow-up and were analyzed. Treated skin area (TSA) receiving at least 20 Gy > 400 cm² and V_{105% of Boost} > 5 cm³ were significant predictors for acute skin toxicity. Multivariate analysis at 2 years was significant for boost volume > 70 cm³, TSA > 400 cm², and breast size > 1500 cm³. At 5 year analysis (352 patients), none of the analyzed variables was significant. For cosmetic outcome, only the breast size (> 1000 cm³) and the boost size > 70 cm³ at 2 and 5 years, respectively, confirmed significance.

CONCLUSIONS

The TSA > 400 cm² resulted as a significant predictor of both acute and late skin toxicity at 2 years; however, at 5 years, no breast size or dosimetric parameter suggested indications for increased toxicity. A worse cosmetic outcome was recorded at the 2-year follow up for large breasts, but was not confirmed at the 5-year follow-up. These long-term data suggest that hypofractionated SIB-VMAT is a viable modality also in large-breasted patients.

Quality of life after breast-conserving therapy and adjuvant radiotherapy for non-low-risk ductal carcinoma in situ (BIG 3-07/TROG 07.01): 2-year results of a randomised, controlled, phase 3 trial

BACKGROUND

BIG 3-07/TROG 07.01 is an international, multicentre, randomised, controlled, phase 3 trial evaluating tumour bed boost and hypofractionation in patients with non-low-risk ductal carcinoma in situ following breast-conserving surgery and whole breast radiotherapy. Here, we report the effects of diagnosis and treatment on health-related quality of life (HRQOL) at 2 years.

METHODS

The BIG 3-07/TROG 07.01 trial is ongoing at 118 hospitals in 11 countries. Women aged 18 years or older with completely excised non-low-risk ductal carcinoma in situ were randomly assigned, by use of a minimisation algorithm, to tumour bed boost or no tumour bed boost, following conventional whole breast radiotherapy or hypofractionated whole breast radiotherapy using one of three randomisation categories. Category A was a 4-arm randomisation of tumour bed boost versus no boost following conventional whole breast radiotherapy (50 Gy in 25 fractions over 5 weeks) versus hypofractionated whole breast radiotherapy (42·5 Gy in 16 fractions over 3·5 weeks). Category B was a 2-arm randomisation between tumour bed boost versus no boost following conventional whole breast radiotherapy, and category C was a 2-arm randomisation between tumour bed boost versus no boost following hypofractionated whole breast radiotherapy. Stratification factors were age at diagnosis, planned endocrine therapy, and treating centre. The primary endpoint, time to local recurrence, will be reported when participants have completed 5 years of follow-up. The HRQOL statistical analysis plan prespecified eight aspects of HRQOL, assessed by four questionnaires at baseline, end of treatment, and at 6, 12, and 24 months after radiotherapy: fatigue and physical functioning (EORTC QLQ-C30); cosmetic status, breast-specific symptoms, arm and shoulder functional status (Breast Cancer Treatment Outcome Scale); body image and sexuality (Body Image Scale); and perceived risk of invasive breast cancer (Cancer Worry Scale and a study-specific question). For each of these measures, tumour bed boost was compared with no boost, and conventional whole breast radiotherapy compared with hypofractionated whole breast radiotherapy, by use of generalised estimating equation models. Analyses were by intention to treat, with Hochberg adjustment for multiple testing. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT00470236.

FINDINGS

Between June 1, 2007, and Aug 14, 2013, 1208 women were enrolled and randomly assigned to receive no tumour bed boost (n=605) or tumour bed boost (n=603). 396 of 1208 women were assigned to category A: conventional whole breast radiotherapy with tumour bed boost (n=100) or no boost (n=98), or to hypofractionated whole breast radiotherapy with tumour bed boost (n=98) or no boost (n=100). 447 were assigned to category B: conventional whole breast radiotherapy with tumour bed boost (n=223) or no boost (n=224). 365 were assigned to category C: hypofractionated whole breast radiotherapy with tumour bed boost (n=182) or no boost (n=183). All patients were followed up at 2 years for the HRQOL analysis. 1098 (91%) of 1208 patients received their allocated treatment, and most completed their scheduled HRQOL assessments (1147 [95%] of 1208 at baseline; 988 [87%] of 1141 at 2 years). Cosmetic status was worse with tumour bed boost than with no boost across all timepoints (difference 0·10 [95% CI 0·05-0·15], global p=0·00014, Hochberg-adjusted p=0·0016); at the end of treatment, the estimated difference between tumour bed boost and no boost was 0·13 (95% CI 0·06-0·20; p=0·00021), persisting at 24 months (0·13 [0·06-0·20]; p=0·00021). Arm and shoulder function was also adversely affected by tumour bed boost across all timepoints (0·08 [95% CI 0·03-0·13], global p=0·0033, Hochberg adjusted p=0·045); the difference between tumour bed boost and no boost at the end of treatment was 0·08 (0·01 to 0·15, p=0·021), and did not persist at 24 months (0·04 [-0·03 to 0·11], p=0·29). None of the other six prespecified aspects of HRQOL differed significantly after adjustment for multiple testing. Conventional whole breast radiotherapy was associated with worse body image than hypofractionated whole breast radiotherapy at the end of treatment (difference -1·10 [95% CI -1·79 to -0·42], p=0·0016). No significant differences were reported in the other PROs between conventional whole breast radiotherapy compared with hypofractionated whole breast radiotherapy.

INTERPRETATION

Tumour bed boost was associated with persistent adverse effects on cosmetic status and arm and shoulder functional status, which might inform shared decision making while local recurrence analysis is pending.

FUNDING

National Health and Medical Research Council, Susan G Komen for the Cure, Breast Cancer Now, OncoSuisse, Dutch Cancer Society.

Toxicity and cosmetic outcome after hypofractionated whole breast irradiation and boost-IOERT in early stage breast cancer (HIOB): First results of a prospective multicenter trial (NCT01343459)

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

To assess the role of intraoperative radiation with electrons (IOERT) as tumor bed boost followed by hypofractionated whole breast irradiation (HWBI) after breast conserving surgery (BCS) of patients with low to intermediate risk breast cancer focusing on acute/late toxicity and cosmetic outcome.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

In 2011, a prospective multicenter trial (NCT01343459) was started. Treatment consisted of BCS, IOERT (11.1 Gy) and HWBI (40.5 Gy in 15 fractions). In a single-arm design, 5-year IBR-rates are benchmarked by a sequential ratio test (SQRT) against best published evidences in 3 age groups (35-40 y, 41-50 y, >50 y). Acute/late toxicity and cosmesis were evaluated by validated scorings systems.

RESULTS

Of 627 eligible patients, 44 were excluded, leaving 583 to analyze. After a median follow-up (FUP) of 45 months (range 0-74), for acute effects CTCAE-score 0/1 was noted in 91% (end of HWBI) and 92% (4 weeks later), respectively. Late toxicity Grading 0/1 (mean values, ranges) by LENT-SOMA criteria were observed in 92.7% (89-97.3) at 4/5 months, rising to 96.5% (91-100) at 6 years post HWBI. Baseline cosmesis after wound healing prior to HWBI was scored as excellent/good in 86% of cases by subjective (patient) and in 74% by objective (doctor) assessment with no impairment thereafter.

CONCLUSIONS

Acute and late treatment tolerance of a combined Boost-IOERT/HWBI regimen is excellent in short/mid-term assessment. Postoperative cosmetic appearance is not impaired after 3 years FUP.

Winter is over: The use of Artificial Intelligence to individualise radiation therapy for breast cancer

Artificial intelligence demonstrated its value for automated contouring of organs at risk and target volumes as well as for auto-planning of radiation dose distributions in terms of saving time, increasing consistency, and improving dose-volumes parameters. Future developments include incorporating dose/outcome data to optimise dose distributions with optimal coverage of the high-risk areas, while at the same time limiting doses to low-risk areas. An infinite gradient of volumes and doses to deliver spatially-adjusted radiation can be generated, allowing to avoid unnecessary radiation to organs at risk. Therefore, data about patient-, tumour-, and treatment-related factors have to be combined with dose distributions and outcome-containing databases.

Breast cancer

Breast cancer is the most frequent malignancy in women worldwide and is curable in ~70-80% of patients with early-stage, non-metastatic disease. Advanced breast cancer with distant organ metastases is considered incurable with currently available therapies. On the molecular level, breast cancer is a heterogeneous disease; molecular features include activation of human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2, encoded by ERBB2), activation of hormone receptors (oestrogen receptor and progesterone receptor) and/or BRCA mutations. Treatment strategies differ according to molecular subtype. Management of breast cancer is multidisciplinary; it includes locoregional (surgery and radiation therapy) and systemic therapy approaches. Systemic therapies include endocrine therapy for hormone receptor-positive disease, chemotherapy, anti-HER2 therapy for HER2-positive disease, bone stabilizing agents, poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitors for BRCA mutation carriers and, quite recently, immunotherapy. Future therapeutic concepts in breast cancer aim at individualization of therapy as well as at treatment de-escalation and escalation based on tumour biology and early therapy response. Next to further treatment innovations, equal worldwide access to therapeutic advances remains the global challenge in breast cancer care for the future.

[Individual modification of the dose, volume and fractionation of breast radiotherapy]

Randomized trials demonstrated similar overall survival between mastectomy and breast-conservative surgery followed by adjuvant radiation therapy. Breast-conservative surgery, with adjuvant radiation therapy, with or without neoadjuvant systemic therapy has become the standard of care for women with early or locally advanced breast cancer. Nevertheless, certain cardiac, lung or cutaneous toxicities may alter the long-term body image and the quality of life of a limited number of patients who consider having had "overtreatment" or treatment outside the best knowledge of science. In case of low-risk breast cancer, several trials have evaluated the carcinologic outcome in absence of radiation therapy after breast-conservative surgery. Local recurrences increased in case of breast-conservative surgery alone but without impact on overall survival. Multiple debates have emerged in order to select the most appropriate evaluation criteria. Finally, a large consensus has considered that reducing local recurrences is important but with modern technologies and after identifying patients of individual radiosensitivity. Indeed, in case of a low absolute risk of local recurrence, radiation therapy techniques have been developed to allow a focal treatment especially for patients with high risk of developing late effects. This kind of compromise takes into account the reduction risk of local recurrences but also the probability of developing radiation-induced cutaneous sequelae. In the same way, for patients considered at high risk of recurrence, the huge volumes need specific techniques to better cover the targets while protecting the surrounding critic organs such as heart and lung. Intensity-modulated radiation therapy and the local high boost may help to decrease local recurrences of these more extended and aggressive diseases while considering the individual radiosensitivity that paves the way of long-term sequelae. In this article, we detail a personalized approach of breast radiation therapy considering the absolute risk of local recurrences and the probability of radiation-induced toxicity appearance.

A prospective comparison of subjective and objective assessments of cosmetic outcomes following breast brachytherapy

Purpose

We evaluated agreement between subjective and objective methods of cosmesis scoring in an accelerated partial breast irradiation (APBI) cohort.

Material and methods

Consecutive women treated with APBI using interstitial brachytherapy reported for clinical follow-up every 6 months. Single cross-sectional assessment of the breast cosmesis was done by a radiation oncologist (subjective method) using Harvard scale and by photographic assessment using BCCT.core (Breast Cancer Conservative Treatment. Cosmetic results, version 3.1) software (objective method) at 18-36 months post-APBI. The agreement between subjective and objective methods for the overall score as well as individual subjective/objective subdomains was computed using kappa statistics. ANOVA was used to test the correlation between objective indices and subjective subdomains.

Results

The agreement between the subjective (physician) and objective assessment was good with a kappa of 0.673. Overall, 77 (98.7%) patients were satisfied with the overall outcomes of breast conservation therapy. The kappa agreement between physician and patient scoring was 0.457 (95% CI: 0.240-0.674). Among the subjective subdomains, location of the nipple areola complex (NAC) had good agreement with both the overall subjective and objective score, with the kappa of 0.778 and 0.547, respectively. In the objective indices, BCE (breast compliance evaluation), LBC (lower breast contour), and UNR (unilateral nipple retraction) correlated significantly with the subjective subdomains: location of the NAC, breast size, and shape (p < 0.05 for all indices).

Conclusions

Good agreement exists for overall cosmetic outcomes measured by subjective and objective methods. Location of the NAC, breast size and shape are the most important parameters determining cosmetic outcomes irrespective of the method of assessment.