Exposure of the oesophagus in breast cancer radiotherapy: A systematic review of oesophagus doses published 2010-2020

Estimated Doses to the Heart, Lungs and Oesophagus and Risks From Typical UK Radiotherapy for Early Breast Cancer During 2015-2023

PURPOSE

Breast cancer radiotherapy can increase the risks of heart disease, lung cancer and oesophageal cancer. At present, the best dosimetric predictors of these risks are mean doses to the whole heart, lungs and oesophagus, respectively. We aimed to estimate typical doses to these organs and resulting risks from UK breast cancer radiotherapy.

METHODS

A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted of planned or delivered mean doses to the whole heart, lungs or oesophagus from UK breast cancer radiotherapy in studies published during 2015-2023. Average mean doses were summarised for combinations of laterality and clinical targets. Heart disease and lung cancer mortality risks were then estimated using established models.

RESULTS

For whole heart, thirteen studies reported 2893 doses. Average mean doses were higher in left than in right-sided radiotherapy and increased with extent of clinical targets. For left-sided radiotherapy, average mean heart doses were: 2.0 Gy (range 1.2-8.0 Gy) breast/chest wall, 2.7 Gy (range 0.6-5.6 Gy) breast/chest wall with either axilla or supraclavicular nodes and 2.9 Gy (range 1.3-4.7 Gy) breast/chest wall with nodes including internal mammary. For right-sided radiotherapy, average mean heart doses were: 1.0 Gy (range 0.3-1.0 Gy) breast/chest wall and 1.2 Gy (range 1.0-1.4 Gy) breast/chest wall with either axilla or supraclavicular nodes. There were no whole heart dose estimates from right internal mammary radiotherapy. For whole lung, six studies reported 2230 doses. Average mean lung doses increased with extent of targets irradiated: 2.6 Gy (range 1.4-3.0 Gy) breast/chest wall, 3.0 Gy (range 0.9-5.1 Gy) breast/chest wall with either axilla or supraclavicular nodes and 7.1 Gy (range 6.7-10.0 Gy) breast/chest wall with nodes including internal mammary. For whole oesophagus, two studies reported 76 doses. Average mean oesophagus doses increased with extent of targets irradiated: 1.4 Gy (range 1.0-2.0 Gy) breast/chest wall with either axilla or supraclavicular nodes and 5.8 Gy (range 1.9-10.0 Gy) breast/chest wall with nodes including internal mammary.

CONCLUSIONS

The typical doses to these organs may be combined with dose-response relationships to estimate radiation risks. Estimated 30-year absolute lung cancer mortality risks from modern UK breast cancer radiotherapy for patients irradiated when aged 50 years were 2-6% for long-term continuing smokers, and <1% for non-smokers. Estimated 30-year mortality risks for heart disease were <1%.

Association of Radiation-Induced Acute Esophagitis With Dosimetric Parameters of Oesophagus in Breast Carcinoma Patients Receiving Supraclavicular Nodal Irradiation

INTRODUCTION

We conducted this investigation to ascertain the dosimetric properties such as the mean and maximum radiation dosage during radiotherapy as well as the extent of radiation exposure to the esophagus. These factors can potentially impact the development of esophagitis in breast cancer patients undergoing supraclavicular radiation.

METHODOLOGY

 From January to June 2023, an observational study was conducted at Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujib Medical University in Bangladesh. The patients received radiation therapy (40.05 Gy in 15 parts) to the chest wall and supraclavicular node for three weeks. We were able to guess the following from the dose volume histogram (DVH) data: the length of the esophagus in the treatment area (i.e., the size of the esophagus that was visible on the planning CT scan), the maximum dose (Dmax), the mean dose (Dmean), and the volume of the 10Gy (V10Gy) and 20Gy (V20Gy) doses that were given to the esophagus. During radiotherapy, patients were checked on once a week, and the radiotherapy oncology group was used to evaluate and grade esophagitis Results: Patients with left-sided breast cancer showed a higher Dmean, Dmax, and length of the esophagus compared to those with right-sided breast cancer. Specifically, the Dmean was 6.7 (±2.1) Gy, the Dmax was 39.2 (±1.5) Gy, and the length of the esophagus was 6.1 (±1.2) Gy. Patients with left breast cancer had elevated V10Gy and V20Gy values for the esophagus, but the difference was not statistically significant. The incidence of V10Gy for right-sided breast cancer and left-sided breast cancer was 4.2% (±2.6%) and 19.8% (±9.2%), respectively. The V20Gy was 2.4% (±0.9%) for right-sided breast cancer and 13.09% (±5.0%) for left-sided breast cancer Conclusion: In conclusion, there is a strong association between the mean oesophageal dose and radiation to the left supraclavicular region following surgery in women with breast cancer and acute esophagitis. We can reduce esophageal toxicity by prescribing dose restrictions and performing precise delineation of the esophagus.

Association of radiotherapy for stage I-III breast cancer survivors and second primary malignant cancers: a population-based study

PURPOSE

With life span extending, breast cancer survivors may face the possibility of developing second primary cancers (SPCs). The objective of this research is to investigate the risk factors, risk attribute to radiotherapy and the survivalship for SPCs.

METHODS

A total of 445 523 breast cancer patients were enrolled from Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database in 2000-2018. The risk factors for SPCs development were confirmed by competing risk model, and then were integrated to the nomogram establishment. The cumulative incidence of SPCs including SBC (second breast cancer), SGC (second gynecological cancer), and SLC (second lung cancer) were estimated. The radiotherapy-associated risk for SPCs were evaluated by Poisson regression in radiotherapy and no-radiotherapy. Propensity score matching was used to reduce possible bias for survival comparison.

RESULTS

There were 57.63% patients in radiotherapy. The risk factors for developing SPCs were age, year, race, tumor size, stage, radiotherapy, grade, surgery, and histology. The cumulative incidence of SPCs was 7.75% in no-radiotherapy and 10.33% in radiotherapy. SLC, SBC, and SGC also appeared the similar results. The increased risk of developing SPCs were associated with radiotherapy in majority subgroups. The dynamic radiotherapy-associated risk for SPCs by age slightly increased risk was observed. Regardless radiotherapy or no-radiotherapy, the 10-year overall survival for SBC (radiotherapy: 59.41%; no-radiotherapy: 55.53%) and SGC (radiotherapy: 48.61%; no-radiotherapy: 35.53%) were worse than that among matched patients with only primary cancers.

CONCLUSIONS

Breast cancer survivors remained a high radiotherapy-associated risk for developing SPCs. The prognosis in radiotherapy was better than in no-radiotherapy for some specific SPCs. Largely attention should be paid to these patients.

Proton Beam Therapy for Early Breast Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Clinical Outcomes

PURPOSE

Adjuvant proton beam therapy (PBT) is increasingly available to patients with breast cancer. It achieves better planned dose distributions than standard photon radiation therapy and therefore may reduce the risks. However, clinical evidence is lacking.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

A systematic review of clinical outcomes from studies of adjuvant PBT for early breast cancer published in 2000 to 2022 was undertaken. Early breast cancer was defined as when all detected invasive cancer cells are in the breast or nearby lymph nodes and can be removed surgically. Adverse outcomes were summarized quantitatively, and the prevalence of the most common ones were estimated using meta-analysis.

RESULTS

Thirty-two studies (1452 patients) reported clinical outcomes after adjuvant PBT for early breast cancer. Median follow-up ranged from 2 to 59 months. There were no published randomized trials comparing PBT with photon radiation therapy. Scattering PBT was delivered in 7 studies (258 patients) starting 2003 to 2015 and scanning PBT in 22 studies (1041 patients) starting 2000 to 2019. Two studies (123 patients) starting 2011 used both PBT types. For 1 study (30 patients), PBT type was unspecified. Adverse events were less severe after scanning than after scattering PBT. They also varied by clinical target. For partial breast PBT, 498 adverse events were reported (8 studies, 358 patients). None were categorized as severe after scanning PBT. For whole breast or chest wall ± regional lymph nodes PBT, 1344 adverse events were reported (19 studies, 933 patients). After scanning PBT, 4% (44/1026) of events were severe. The most prevalent severe outcome after scanning PBT was dermatitis, which occurred in 5.7% (95% confidence interval, 4.2-7.6) of patients. Other severe adverse outcomes included infection, pain, and pneumonitis (each ≤1%). Of the 141 reconstruction events reported (13 studies, 459 patients), the most prevalent after scanning PBT was prosthetic implant removal (34/181, 19%).

CONCLUSIONS

This is a quantitative summary of all published clinical outcomes after adjuvant PBT for early breast cancer. Ongoing randomized trials will provide information on its longer-term safety compared with standard photon radiation therapy.

Beyond the heart in hypofractionated radiotherapy and in the transition from 3D to IMRT/VMAT

Background

The knowledge of the risks induced by radiation with hypofractionation regimens has only recently been estimated together with its implementation as a management standard. However, the dose to other risk organs with intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) or volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) is not clear, that is why this is only a reference study of radiation doses to organs at risk in hypofractionation in our center.

Materials and methods

We completed a retrospective and observational analysis of 1398 patients treated with adjuvant hypofractionated radiotherapy from 2015 to 2018, using the clinical records and dose-volume histogram of patients treated with moderate hypofractionated adjuvant radiotherapy. To analyze the institutional experience on the dosimetry of the esophagus and liver as risk organs in the use of moderate adjuvant hypofractionated radiotherapy in breast cancer.

Results

The dosimetry of the esophagus was 3271 cGy DMax, 177 cGy DMed, 68 cGy D50%, 500 cGy DcMAX with 3D RT and 4124 cGy DMax, 1242 cGy DMed, 934.50 cGy D50%, 3213 cGy DcMAX with IMRT/VMAT and the dosimetry for the liver was for right breast cancer 466 cGy DMed, 102 cGy D50% and 8% V20, for left breast cancer 22 cGy DMed, 6.10 cGy D50% and 0.3% V20.

Conclusion

The statistically significant differences in irradiation show the lack of consensus on the optimal restrictions in hypofractionation regimens to reduce clinical sequela; consequently, the variability in the specification of each radiation oncologist is observed; standardization in our center can lead to improvement in the quality of treatments.

Comparison of esophagus dose in breast cancer patients undergoing supraclavicular irradiation with and without esophagus countering

CONTEXT

Esophagus toxicity and the risk of esophageal cancer are linked to radiation dose to the esophagus in breast cancer patients undergoing supraclavicular irradiation.

AIMS

The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of esophagus contouring on the dose received in the esophagus in breast cancer patients undergoing supraclavicular irradiation.

SETTING AND DESIGN

This study included 30 treatment plans for breast cancer patients who received 50 Gy/25 fractions (2 Gy/fraction/day) using 3D-conformal radiation therapy (3D-CRT) to the whole breast or chest wall and supraclavicular.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Our study included two groups: the non-sparing group was the treatment plan in which the esophagus was not delineated and the esophagus sparing group was generated, in which the plans were modified to spare the esophagus. The maximum dose, mean dose, and percentage of esophagus volume received, 5, 10, 15, and 20 Gy, respectively (V5, V10, V15, and V20), were used to evaluate both groups.

STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

One-way analysis of variance was used. A P value <0.05 was considered statistically significant.

RESULTS

The esophagus sparing group plans show a reduction in the esophageal mean dose Dmean (5.72 ± 5.15) Gy when compared to the non-sparing group (7.83 ± 3.31) Gy. Likewise, the maximum dose, V5, V10, V15, and V20 were reduced in the esophagus sparing group. All dosimetric parameters were significantly higher (P < 0.05) in patients with left breast cancer for both groups.

CONCLUSION

Our results suggest that it is possible to reduce the dose to the esophagus by considering the esophagus during treatment planning while maintaining plan quality. This reduction could lead to the greatest predicted decrease in acute esophagitis and esophageal cancer.