1
|
Belkacemi Y, Moran MS, Ozden BC, Masannat Y, Geara F, Albashir M, To NH, Debbi K, El Tamer M. Post-mastectomy radiation therapy after breast reconstruction: from historic dogmas to practical expert agreements based on a large literature review of surgical and radiation therapy considerations. Crit Rev Oncol Hematol 2024; 200:104421. [PMID: 38876160 DOI: 10.1016/j.critrevonc.2024.104421] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/10/2023] [Revised: 06/08/2024] [Accepted: 06/10/2024] [Indexed: 06/16/2024] Open
Abstract
Breast reconstruction (BR) after mastectomy is important to consider for a woman's body image enhancement and psychological well-being. Although post-mastectomy radiation (PMRT) significantly improves the outcome of patients with high-risk breast cancer (BC), PMRT after BR may affect cosmetic outcomes and may compromise the original goal of improving quality of life (QoL). With the lack of practical guidelines, it seems essential to work on a consensus and provide some "expert agreements" to offer patients the best option for PMRT after BR. We report a global "expert agreement" that results from a critical review of the literature on BR and PMRT during the 6th international multidisciplinary breast conference in March 2023.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Yazid Belkacemi
- AP-HP, Department of Radiation Oncology and Henri Mondor Breast Center, Henri Mondor University Hospital. University of Paris Est Creteil (UPEC), France; Institut Mondor de Recherche Biomédicale (IMRB), INSERM U955, i-Biot, UPEC, Créteil, France.
| | - Meena S Moran
- Smilow Cancer Center, Yale University School of Medicine. Department of Therapeutic Radiology, New Haven, CT, USA
| | | | - Yazan Masannat
- Broomfield Hospital, Mid and South Essex NHS Trust, England, UK
| | - Fady Geara
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Oncology Institute, Cleveland Clinic Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates
| | - Mohamed Albashir
- Levantine Medical Center, Ain Alkhaleej Hospital and Burjeel Royal Hospital, Alain, United Arab Emirates
| | - Nhu Hanh To
- AP-HP, Department of Radiation Oncology and Henri Mondor Breast Center, Henri Mondor University Hospital. University of Paris Est Creteil (UPEC), France; Institut Mondor de Recherche Biomédicale (IMRB), INSERM U955, i-Biot, UPEC, Créteil, France
| | - Kamel Debbi
- AP-HP, Department of Radiation Oncology and Henri Mondor Breast Center, Henri Mondor University Hospital. University of Paris Est Creteil (UPEC), France; Institut Mondor de Recherche Biomédicale (IMRB), INSERM U955, i-Biot, UPEC, Créteil, France
| | - Mahmoud El Tamer
- Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center and Weill Medical College at Cornell University, New York, USA
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Sterpin E, Widesott L, Poels K, Hoogeman M, Korevaar EW, Lowe M, Molinelli S, Fracchiolla F. Robustness evaluation of pencil beam scanning proton therapy treatment planning: A systematic review. Radiother Oncol 2024; 197:110365. [PMID: 38830538 DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2024.110365] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/09/2023] [Revised: 04/30/2024] [Accepted: 05/29/2024] [Indexed: 06/05/2024]
Abstract
Compared to conventional radiotherapy using X-rays, proton therapy, in principle, allows better conformity of the dose distribution to target volumes, at the cost of greater sensitivity to physical, anatomical, and positioning uncertainties. Robust planning, both in terms of plan optimization and evaluation, has gained high visibility in publications on the subject and is part of clinical practice in many centers. However, there is currently no consensus on the methods and parameters to be used for robust optimization or robustness evaluation. We propose to overcome this deficiency by following the modified Delphi consensus method. This method first requires a systematic review of the literature. We performed this review using the PubMed and Web Of Science databases, via two different experts. Potential conflicts were resolved by a third expert. We then explored the different methods before focusing on clinical studies that evaluate robustness on a significant number of patients. Many robustness assessment methods are proposed in the literature. Some are more successful than others and their implementation varies between centers. Moreover, they are not all statistically or mathematically equivalent. The most sophisticated and rigorous methods have seen more limited application due to the difficulty of their implementation and their lack of widespread availability.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- E Sterpin
- KU Leuven - Department of Oncology, Laboratory of Experimental Radiotherapy, Leuven, Belgium; UCLouvain - Institution de Recherche Expérimentale et Clinique, Center of Molecular Imaging Radiotherapy and Oncology (MIRO), Brussels, Belgium; Particle Therapy Interuniversity Center Leuven - PARTICLE, Leuven, Belgium.
| | - L Widesott
- Proton Therapy Center - UO Fisica Sanitaria, Azienda Provinciale per i Servizi Sanitari (APSS), Trento, Italy
| | - K Poels
- Particle Therapy Interuniversity Center Leuven - PARTICLE, Leuven, Belgium; UZ Leuven, Department of Radiation Oncology, Leuven, Belgium
| | - M Hoogeman
- Erasmus Medical Center, Cancer Institute, Department of Radiotherapy, Rotterdam, the Netherlands; HollandPTC, Delft, the Netherlands
| | - E W Korevaar
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, the Netherlands
| | - M Lowe
- Christie Medical Physics and Engineering, The Christie NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK
| | - S Molinelli
- Fondazione CNAO - Medical Physics Unit, Pavia, Italy
| | - F Fracchiolla
- Proton Therapy Center - UO Fisica Sanitaria, Azienda Provinciale per i Servizi Sanitari (APSS), Trento, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Stick LB, Nielsen LL, Trinh CB, Bahij I, Jensen MF, Kronborg CJS, Petersen SE, Thai LMH, Martinsen ML, Precht H, Offersen BV. Spot-scanning proton therapy for early breast cancer in free breathing versus deep inspiration breath-hold. Acta Oncol 2024; 63:56-61. [PMID: 38404218 DOI: 10.2340/1651-226x.2024.28591] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/23/2023] [Accepted: 12/13/2023] [Indexed: 02/27/2024]
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE Proton therapy for breast cancer is usually given in free breathing (FB). With the use of deep inspiration breath-hold (DIBH) technique, the location of the heart is displaced inferiorly, away from the internal mammary nodes and, thus, the dose to the heart can potentially be reduced. The aim of this study was to explore the potential benefit of proton therapy in DIBH compared to FB for highly selected patients to reduce exposure of the heart and other organs at risk. We aimed at creating proton plans with delivery times feasible with treatment in DIBH. MATERIAL AND METHODS Sixteen patients with left-sided breast cancer receiving loco-regional proton therapy were included. The FB and DIBH plans were created for each patient using spot-scanning proton therapy with 2-3 fields, robust and single field optimization. For the DIBH plans, minimum monitor unit per spot and spot spacing were increased to reduce treatment delivery time. RESULTS All plans complied with target coverage constraints. The median mean heart dose was statistically significant reduced from 1.1 to 0.6 Gy relative biological effectiveness (RBE) by applying DIBH. No statistical significant difference was seen for mean dose and V17Gy RBE to the ipsilateral lung. The median treatment delivery time for the DIBH plans was reduced by 27% compared to the FB plans without compromising the plan quality. INTERPRETATION The median absolute reduction in dose to the heart was limited. Proton treatment in DIBH may only be relevant for a subset of these patients with the largest reduction in heart exposure.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | - Cecilia Bui Trinh
- The Education of Radiography, University College Lillebælt, Svendborg, Denmark
| | - Ihsan Bahij
- Danish Centre for Particle Therapy, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark
| | | | | | | | - Linh My Hoang Thai
- Danish Centre for Particle Therapy, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark
| | - May-Lin Martinsen
- The Education of Radiography, University College Lillebælt, Svendborg, Denmark
| | - Helle Precht
- Health Sciences Research Center, University College Lillebælt, Svendborg, Denmark; Institute of Regional Health Sciences, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark; Department of Radiology, Lillebælt University Hospital of Southern Denmark, Kolding, Denmark
| | - Birgitte Vrou Offersen
- Danish Centre for Particle Therapy, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark; Department of Experimental Clinical Oncology & Department of Oncology, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Ruan H, Okamoto M, Ohno T, Li Y, Zhou Y. Particle radiotherapy for breast cancer. Front Oncol 2023; 13:1107703. [PMID: 37655110 PMCID: PMC10467264 DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2023.1107703] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/25/2022] [Accepted: 07/28/2023] [Indexed: 09/02/2023] Open
Abstract
Breast cancer is the most common malignant tumor in female patients. Along with surgery, radiotherapy is one of the most commonly prescribed treatments for breast cancer. Over the past few decades, breast cancer radiotherapy technology has significantly improved. Nevertheless, related posttherapy complications should not be overlooked. Common complications include dose-related coronary toxicity, radiation pneumonia, and the risk of second primary cancer of the contralateral breast. Particle radiotherapy with protons or carbon ions is widely attracting interest as a potential competitor to conventional photon radiotherapy because of its superior physical and biological characteristics. This article summarizes the results of clinical research on proton and carbon-ion radiotherapy for treating breast cancer.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Hanguang Ruan
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Gunma University, Maebashi, Japan
- Gunma University Heavy Ion Medical Center, Gunma University, Maebashi, Gunma, Japan
| | - Masahiko Okamoto
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Gunma University, Maebashi, Japan
- Gunma University Heavy Ion Medical Center, Gunma University, Maebashi, Gunma, Japan
| | - Tatsuya Ohno
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Gunma University, Maebashi, Japan
- Gunma University Heavy Ion Medical Center, Gunma University, Maebashi, Gunma, Japan
| | - Yang Li
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Harbin Medical University Cancer Hospital, Harbin, Heilongjiang, China
| | - Yuan Zhou
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Gunma University, Maebashi, Japan
- Gunma University Heavy Ion Medical Center, Gunma University, Maebashi, Gunma, Japan
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Stick LB, Lægdsmand PMT, Bjerre HL, Høyer M, Jensen K, Jensen MF, Kronborg MB, Offersen BV, Kronborg CJS. Spot-scanning proton therapy for targets with adjacent cardiac implantable electronic devices – Strategies for breast and head & neck cancer. Phys Imaging Radiat Oncol 2022; 21:66-71. [PMID: 35243034 PMCID: PMC8861136 DOI: 10.1016/j.phro.2022.02.006] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/30/2021] [Revised: 02/11/2022] [Accepted: 02/11/2022] [Indexed: 11/16/2022] Open
Abstract
Secondary neutron dose was calculated for pacemakers and implantable cardioverter defibrillators for patients with breast and head & neck cancer. Decision algorithms for selecting patients with targets adjacent to pacemakers and implantable cardioverter defibrillators for proton therapy were established. Eligibility for proton therapy depends on individual evaluation for some patients. The expected gain from proton therapy should outweigh the risk of device malfunction.
Background and purpose Cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) malfunctions can be induced by secondary neutron dose from spot-scanning proton therapy. A recent in-vitro study investigating secondary neutron dose to CIEDs up to 7 mSv per fraction found that exposure of secondary neutrons in this range was clinically manageable. This study presents decision algorithms proposed by a national expert group for selection of patients with breast and head & neck (H&N) cancer with CIEDs adjacent to target for proton therapy based on the 7 mSv threshold. Methods and materials Ten patients with breast cancer and five with H&N cancer were included in the study. Five patients with breast cancer received photon therapy with CIED and proton plans were retrospectively created. The remaining patients received proton therapy without CIED and a worst-case position of a virtual CIED was retrospectively delineated. Secondary neutron dose was estimated as ambient dose equivalent H*(10) using Monte Carlo simulations. Results For patients with breast cancer and with contralateral CIED, the secondary neutron dose to the CIED was below 7 mSv per fraction for CTV < 1500 cm3 in 2 Gy fractions and CTV < 1000 cm3 in 2.67 Gy fractions. The secondary neutron dose to the CIED was below 7 mSv per fraction for all patients with H&N cancer. Conclusions Simulations of neutron exposure suggest that proton therapy is feasible for most patients with CIED adjacent to target. This forms the basis for decision algorithms for selection of patients with CIED for proton therapy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Line Bjerregaard Stick
- Danish Centre for Particle Therapy, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark
- Corresponding author at: Danish Centre for Particle Therapy, Aarhus University Hospital, Palle Juul-Jensens Blvd. 99, 8200 Aarhus, Denmark.
| | | | - Henrik Laurits Bjerre
- Danish Centre for Particle Therapy, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark
- Department of Cardiology, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark
| | - Morten Høyer
- Danish Centre for Particle Therapy, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark
| | - Kenneth Jensen
- Danish Centre for Particle Therapy, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark
| | | | | | - Birgitte Vrou Offersen
- Danish Centre for Particle Therapy, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark
- Department of Experimental Clinical Oncology & Department of Oncology, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark
| | | |
Collapse
|
6
|
Loap P, De Marzi L, Almeida CE, Barcellini A, Bradley J, de Santis MC, Dendale R, Jimenez R, Orlandi E, Kirova Y. Hadrontherapy techniques for breast cancer. Crit Rev Oncol Hematol 2021; 169:103574. [PMID: 34958916 DOI: 10.1016/j.critrevonc.2021.103574] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/09/2021] [Revised: 12/22/2021] [Accepted: 12/22/2021] [Indexed: 12/31/2022] Open
Abstract
Radiotherapy plays a key role in breast cancer treatment, and recent technical advances have been made to improve the therapeutic window by limiting the risk of radiation-induced toxicity or by increasing tumor control. Hadrontherapy is a form a radiotherapy relying on particle beams; compared with photon beams, particle beams have specific physical, radiobiological and immunological properties, which can be valuable in diverse clinical situations. To date, available hadrontherapy techniques for breast cancer irradiation include proton therapy, carbon ion radiation therapy, fast neutron therapy and boron neutron capture therapy. This review analyzes the current rationale and level of evidence for each hadrontherapy technique for breast cancer.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Pierre Loap
- Proton Therapy Center, Institut Curie, Orsay, France.
| | | | - Carlos Eduardo Almeida
- Department of Radiological Sciences, Rio de Janeiro State University, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
| | | | - Julie Bradley
- University of Florida Health Proton Therapy Institute, Jacksonville, FL, United States
| | | | - Remi Dendale
- Proton Therapy Center, Institut Curie, Orsay, France
| | - Rachel Jimenez
- Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, United States
| | - Ester Orlandi
- National Center for Oncological Hadrontherapy, Pavia, Italy
| | - Youlia Kirova
- Proton Therapy Center, Institut Curie, Orsay, France
| |
Collapse
|