CT-image based conformal high-dose-rate brachytherapy boost in the conservative treatment of stage I – II breast cancer – introducing the procedure

Thermally boosted interstitial high-dose-rate brachytherapy in high-risk early-stage breast cancer conserving therapy - large cohort long-term results

Background

Early-stage high-risk breast cancer (BC) is standardly treated with breast-conserving therapy (BCT), combined with systemic therapy and radiotherapy (RT) ± tumor bed boost, e.g., with interstitial high-dose-rate brachytherapy (HDR-BT). To improve local recurrence rate (LRR), BT radiosensitization (thermal boost, TB) with interstitial microwave hyperthermia (MWHT) may be an option. The paper aims to report a retrospective single-institutional study on 5- and 10-year local control (LC), distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS), disease-free survival (DFS), overall survival (OS), cosmetic outcome (CO), and late toxicity (fibrosis, fat necrosis) after thermally enhanced HDR-BT boost to the BC tumor bed.

Materials and methods

In 2006-2018, 557 early-stage (I-IIIA) high-risk BC patients were treated with BCT. If indicated, they were administered systemic therapy, then referred for 40.0-50.0 Gy whole breast irradiation (WBI) and 10 Gy interstitial HDR-BT boost (group A). Eligible patients had a single MWHT session preceding BT (group B). Based on present risk factors (RF), medium-risk (1-2 RF) and high-risk subgroups (≥ 3 RF) were formed. Patients were standardly checked, and control mammography (MMG) was performed yearly. Breast cosmesis (Harvard scale) and fibrosis were recorded. LC, DMFS, DFS, and OS were statistically analyzed.

Results

Out of 557 patients aged 57 years (26-84), 364 (63.4%) had interstitial HDR-BT boost (group A), and 193 (34.6%) were preheated with MWHT (group B). Patients in group B had a higher clinical stage and had more RFs. The median follow-up was 65.9. Estimated 5-year and 10-year LC resulted in 98.5% and 97.5%, respectively. There was no difference in LC, DMFS, DFS, and OS between groups A and B and between extracted high-risk subgroups A and B. Five- and ten-year OS probability was 95.4% and 88.0%, respectively, with no difference between groups A and B. Harvard criteria-based CO assessment revealed good/excellent cosmesis in 74.9-79.1%. Tumor bed hardening was present in 40.1-42.2%. Asymptomatic fat necrosis-related macrocalcifications were detected in 15.6%, more frequently in group B (p = 0.016).

Conclusions

Thermally boosted or not, HDR-BT was locally highly effective as part of combined treatment. Five- and ten-year LC, DMFS, DFS, and OS were high and equally distributed between the groups, although TB was prescribed in more advanced one with more RFs. TB did not influence CO and fibrosis. TB added to late toxicity regarding asymptomatic fat necrosis detected on MMG.

Thermal Boost Combined with Interstitial Brachytherapy in Early Breast Cancer Conserving Therapy—Initial Group Long-Term Clinical Results and Late Toxicity

(1) In breast-conserving therapy (BCT), adjuvant radiation, including tumor bed boost, is mandatory. Safely delivered thermal boost (TB) based on radio-sensitizing interstitial microwave hyperthermia (MWHT) preceding standard high-dose-rate (HDR) brachytherapy (BT) boost has the potential for local control (LC) improvement. The study is to report the long-term results regarding LC, disease-free survival (DFS), overall survival (OS), toxicity, and cosmetic outcome (CO) of HDR-BT boost ± MWHT for early breast cancer (BC) patients treated with BCT. (2) In the years 2006 and 2007, 57 diverse stages and risk (IA-IIIA) BC patients were treated with BCT ± adjuvant chemotherapy followed by 42.5–50.0 Gy whole breast irradiation (WBI) and 10 Gy HDR-BT boost. Overall, 25 patients (group A; 43.9%) had a BT boost, and 32 (group B; 56.1%) had an additional pre-BT single session of interstitial MWHT on a tumor bed. Long-term LC, DFS, OS, CO, and late toxicity were evaluated. (3) Median follow-up was 94.8 months (range 1.1–185.5). LC was 55/57, or 96.5% (1 LR in each group). DFS was 48/57, or 84.2% (4 failures in group A, 5 in B). OS was 46/57, or 80.7% (6 deaths in group A, 5 in B). CO was excellent in 60%, good in 36%, and satisfactory in 4% (A), and in 53.1%, 34.4%, and 9.4% (B), respectively. One poor outcome was noted (B). Late toxicity as tumor bed hardening occurred in 19/57, or 33.3% of patients (9 in A, 10 in B). In one patient, grade 2 telangiectasia occurred (group A). All differences were statistically insignificant. (4) HDR-BT boost ± TB was feasible, well-tolerated, and highly locally effective. LC, DFS, and OS were equally distributed between the groups. Pre-BT MWHT did not increase rare late toxicity.

Thermal Boost to Breast Tumor Bed—New Technique Description, Treatment Application and Example Clinical Results

(1) Current breast-conserving therapy for breast cancer consists of a combination of many consecutive treatment modalities. The most crucial goal of postoperative treatment is to eradicate potentially relapse-forming residual cancerous cells within the tumor bed. To achieve this, the HDR brachytherapy boost standardly added to external beam radiotherapy was enhanced with an initial thermal boost. This study presents an original thermal boost technique developed in the clinic. (2) A detailed point-by-point description of thermal boost application is presented. Data on proper patient selection, microwave thermal boost planning, and interstitial hyperthermia treatment delivery are supported by relevant figures and schemes. (3) Out of 1134 breast cancer patients who were administered HDR brachytherapy boost in the tumor bed, 262 were also pre-heated interstitially without unexpected complications. The results are supported by two example cases of hyperthermia planning and delivery. (4) Additional breast cancer interstitial thermal boost preceding HDR brachytherapy boost as a part of combined treatment in a unique postoperative setting was feasible, well-tolerated, completed in a reasonable amount of time, and reproducible. A commercially available interstitial hyperthermia system fit and worked well with standard interstitial brachytherapy equipment.

Study of the dosimetric differences between (192)Ir and (60)Co sources of high dose rate brachytherapy for breast interstitial implant

AIM

The study intends to compare (192)Ir source against the (60)Co source for interstitial breast metal implant in high dose rate brachytherapy.

BACKGROUND

Few studies have been reported to compare (60)Co and (192)Ir on HDR brachytherapy in gynaecology and prostate cancer and very few with reference to breast cancer.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Twenty patients who had undergone interstitial template guided breast implant were treated in HDR (192)Ir brachytherapy unit. Plans were generated substituting (60)Co source without changing the dwell positions and optimization. Cumulative dose volume histograms were compared.

RESULTS

The reference isodose line enclosing CTV (CTVref) and the 2.34% difference seen in the volume enclosed by the reference isodose line (V ref) between the two isotopes show small but statistically significant difference (p < 0.05). In DHI, no difference was observed in the relative dose between the two sources (p = 0.823). The over dose volume index showed 11% difference. The conformity index showed 2.32% difference compared to (192)Ir (p < 0.05). D mean (%) and D max (%) for the heart, ipsilateral lung, ipsilateral ribs, skin presented very small difference. V 5% and V 10% of the heart shows 25% and 32% difference in dose. D 2cc (%) and D 0.1cc (%) for the contralateral breast, contralateral lung and D 2cc (%) of the skin displayed significant difference (p < 0.05). However, D 0.1cc (%) of the skin indicated no noteworthy difference with p = 0.343.

CONCLUSION

Based on the 3D dosimetric analysis of patient plans considered in this study, most of the DVH parameters showed statistically significant differences which can be reduced by treatment planning optimization techniques. (60)Co isotope can be used as a viable alternative because of its long half-life, logistic advantages in procurement, infrequent need of source replacement and disposal of used source.

New perspectives in radiation oncology: Young radiation oncologist point of view and challenges

AIM

To assess the role of the young radiation oncologist in the context of important recent advancements in the field of radiation oncology, and to explore new perspectives and competencies of the young radiation oncologist.

BACKGROUND

Radiation oncology is a field that has rapidly advanced over the last century. It holds a rich tradition of clinical care and evidence-based practice, and more recently has advanced with revolutionary innovations in technology and computer science, as well as pharmacology and molecular biology.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Several young radiation oncologists from different countries evaluated the current status and future directions of radiation oncology.

RESULTS

For young radiation oncologists, it is important to reflect on the current practice and future directions of the specialty as it relates to the role of the radiation oncologist in the comprehensive management of cancer patients. Radiation oncologists are responsible for the radiation treatment provided to patients and its subsequent impact on patients' quality of life. Young radiation oncologists must proactively master new clinical, biological and technical information, as well as lead radiation oncology teams consisting of physicists, dosimetrists, nurses and technicians.

CONCLUSIONS

The role of the young radiation oncologist in the field of oncology should be proactive in developing new competencies. Above all, it is important to remember that we are dealing with the family members and loved ones of many individuals during the most difficult part of their lives.

Thermal boost combined with interstitial brachytherapy in breast conserving therapy - Assessment of early toxicity

BACKGROUND

Hyperthermia (HT) causes a direct damage to cancerous cells and/or sensitize them to radiotherapy with usually minimal injury to normal tissues. Adjuvant HT is probably one of the most effective radiation sensitizers known and works best when delivered simultaneously with radiation. In breast conserving therapy, irradiation has to minimize the risk of local relapse within the treated breast, especially in an area of a tumor bed. Brachytherapy boost reduces 5-year local recurrence rate to mean 5,5%, so there still some place for further improvement. The investigated therapeutic option is an adjuvant single session of local HT (thermal boost) preceding standard CT-based multicatheter interstitial HDR brachytherapy boost in order to increase the probability of local cure.

AIM

To report the short-term results in regard to early toxicity of high-dose-rate (HDR) brachytherapy (BT) boost with or without interstitial microwave hyperthermia (MV HT) for early breast cancer patients treated with breast conserving therapy (BCT).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Between February 2006 and December 2007, 57 stage IA-IIIA breast cancer patients received a 10 Gy HDR BT boost after conservative surgery and 42.5-50 Gy whole breast irradiation (WBI) ± adjuvant chemotherapy. 32 patients (56.1%) were treated with additional pre-BT single session of interstitial MW HT to a tumor bed (multi-catheter technique). Reference temperature was 43 °C and therapeutic time (TT) was 1 h. Incidence, severity and duration of radiodermatitis, skin oedema and skin erythema in groups with (I) or without HT (II) were assessed, significant p-value ≤ 0.05.

RESULTS

Median follow-up was 40 months. Local control was 100% and distant metastasis free survival was 91.1%. HT sessions (median): reference temperature 42.2 °C, therapeutic time (TT) 61.4 min, total thermal dose 42 min and a gap between HT and BT 30 min. Radiodermatitis grades I and II occurred in 24 and 6 patients, respectively, differences between groups I and II were not significant. Skin oedema and erythema occurred in 48 (85.7%) and 36 (64.3%) cases, respectively, and were equally distributed between the groups. The incidence and duration of skin oedema differed between the subgroups treated with different fractionation protocols of WBI, p = 0.006. Skin oedema was present up to 12 months. No difference in pattern of oedema regression between groups I and II was observed, p = 0.933.

CONCLUSION

Additional thermal boost preceding standard HDR BT boost has a potential of further improvement in breast cancer local control in BCT. Pre-BT hyperthermia did not increase early toxicity in patients treated with BCT and was well tolerated. All side effects of combined treatment were transient and were present for up to 12 months. The increase in incidence of skin oedema was related to hypofractionated protocols of WBI. The study has to be randomized and continued on a larger group of breast cancer patients to verify the potential of local control improvement and to assess the profile of late toxicity.

The role of high-dose-rate brachytherapy boost in breast-conserving therapy: Long-term results of the Hungarian National Institute of Oncology

AIM

To report the long-term results of high-dose-rate (HDR) brachytherapy (BT) boost for breast cancer patients treated with conservative surgery and radiotherapy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Between 1995 and 2007, 100 early-stage breast cancer patients received an HDR BT boost after conservative surgery and whole breast irradiation. Ten patients (10%) received a single-fraction HDR boost of 8-10.35 Gy using rigid needles, while 90 (90%) were treated with a fractionated multi-catheter HDR BT boost. The latter consisted of 3 × 4 Gy (n = 19), 3 × 4.75 Gy (n = 70), and 2 × 6.4 Gy (n = 1). Breast cancer related events, cosmetic results and side effects were assessed.

RESULTS

At a median follow-up time of 94 months (range: 8-152) only 7 (7%) ipsilateral breast failures were observed for a 5- and 8-year actuarial rate of 4.5 and 7.0%, respectively. The 8-year disease-free, cancer-specific, and overall survival was 76.1, 82.8, and 80.4%, respectively. Cosmetic outcome was rated excellent in 17%, good in 39%, fair in 33%, and poor in 11%. Data on late radiation side effects were available for 91 patients (91%). Grade 3 fibrosis and grade 3 telangiectasia occurred in 6 (6.6%) and 2 (2.2%) patients, respectively. In univariate analysis only positive margin status had a significant negative effect on local control.

CONCLUSIONS

HDR BT boost using multi-catheter implants produce excellent long-term local tumour control with acceptable cosmetic outcome and low rate of grade 3 late radiation side effects.