Health economics of targeted intraoperative radiotherapy (TARGIT-IORT) for early breast cancer: a cost-effectiveness analysis in the United Kingdom

Outcomes and complications of intraoperative radiotherapy versus external beam radiotherapy for early breast cancer

BACKGROUND

Intraoperative radiotherapy (IORT) is an alternative for external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) for early stage breast cancer (BC). Herein, we compared outcomes, postoperative and post-radiation complications of IORT and EBRT.

METHODS

We conducted a cohort study to compare complications of IORT and EBRT in patients. A checklist of the complications of IORT and EBRT, was used to assess and post-radiation complications and outcomes.

RESULTS

Overall, 264 women (121 in IORT and 143 in EBRT group) with a mean (SD) age of 55 ± 8.6 years analyzed in this study. The IORT group (quadrantectomy + SLNB + IORT) had more severe post-operative pain compared to the EBRT group (quadrantectomy + SLNB) (OR = 1.929, 95% CI: 1.116-3.332). Other postoperative complications, including edema, erythema, seroma, hematoma, and wound complications were not significantly different between the IORT and EBRT groups. EBRT was associated with higher rates post-radiation complications, including erythema (95.8% vs. 21.5%), skin dryness (30.8% vs. 12.4%), pruritus (26.6% vs. 17.4%), hyperpigmentation (48.3% vs. 9.9%), and telangiectasia (1.4% vs. 0.8%). Multivariate analysis showed that erythema, skin dryness and pruritus, and hyperpigmentation were more severe in the EBRT group, while breast induration was higher in the IORT group (OR = 4.109, 95% CI: 2.242-7.531). Excellent, good, and fair cosmetic outcome was seen in 11.2%, 72%, and 16.8% of the patients in the EBRT group and 29.8%, 63.6%, and 6.6% in the IORT group, respectively, suggesting that the cosmetic outcome was significantly better in the IORT group (P < .001). There wasn't statistically significant difference in recurrence-free survival and overall survival rates between two groups of patients who received either IORT or EBRT (P = .953, P = .56).

CONCLUSION

IORT is considered to have lower post-radiation complications and better cosmetic outcomes in breast cancer patients. Therefore, IORT might be used as the treatment of choice in eligible patients.

Comparative efficacy of intraoperative radiotherapy and external boost irradiation in early-stage breast cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

External boost radiotherapy (EBRT) and intraoperative radiotherapy (IORT) are shown to be effective in patients with early-stage breast cancer. However, the difference between IORT and EBRT for patients' prognosis remains to be elucidated. The purpose of this meta-analysis is to investigate differences in local recurrence (LR), distant metastases, disease free survival (DFS), and overall survival (OS) between these two therapies. We searched the Cochrane Library, PubMed, Web of Science and Embase, from inception to Jan 10th, 2022. We used The Cochrane risk-of-bias assessment tool to assess the risk of bias of the included studies, and the STATA15.0 tool was used for the meta-analyses. Eight studies were ultimately included. Meta-analysis demonstrated that there was an inconsistent finding in the long-term risk of LR between the two radiotherapies, and there was no significant difference in short-term risk of LR, the metastasis rate, DFS, and OS IORT would be more convenient, less time-consuming, less costly, and more effective at reducing side effects and toxicity. However, these benefits must be balanced against the potential for increased risk of LR in the long term.

Targeted Intraoperative Radiation Therapy during Breast-Conserving Surgery for Patients with Early Stage Breast Cancer: A Phase II Single Center Prospective Trial

Purpose

Patients with early stage breast cancer (ESBC) are conventionally treated with breast-conserving surgery (BCS) followed by whole-breast external beam radiation therapy (EBRT). The emergence of targeted intraoperative radiation therapy (TARGIT) with Intrabeam has been used as a therapeutic alternative for patients with risk-adapted ESBC. Here we present our radiation therapy toxicities (RTT), postoperative complications (PC), and short-term outcomes of the prospective phase II trial at the McGill University Health Center.

Methods and Materials

Patients aged ≥50 years with biopsy-proven hormone receptor-positive, grade 1 or 2, invasive ductal carcinoma of the breast, cT1N0, were eligible for the study. Enrolled patients underwent BCS followed by immediate TARGIT of 20 Gy in 1 fraction. Upon final pathology, patients with low-risk breast cancer (LRBC) received no further EBRT, and those with high-risk breast cancer (HRBC) received further 15 to 16 fractions of whole breast EBRT. HRBC criteria included pathologic tumor size >2 cm, grade 3, positive lympho-vascular invasion, multifocal disease, close margins (<2 mm), or positive nodal disease.

Results

A total of 61 patients with ESBC were enrolled in the study; upon final pathology, 40 (65.6%) had LRBC, and 21 (34.4%) had HRBC. The median follow-up was 3.9 years. The most common HRBC criteria were close margins in 66.6% (n = 14) and lymphovascular invasion in 28.6% (n = 6). No grade 4 RTT were observed in either group. The most common PC were seroma and cellulitis for both groups. The rate of locoregional recurrence was 0% in both groups. The overall survival in LRBC was 97.5% and in HRBC 95.2% with no significant differences. Deaths were nonbreast cancer related.

Conclusions

In patients with ESBC undergoing BCS, the use of TARGIT shows low rates of RTT and PC complications. Moreover, our short-term outcomes show no significant difference at 3.9 years median follow-up for locoregional recurrence or overall survival between groups of patients receiving TARGIT alone or TARGIT followed by EBRT. Of all patients, 34.4% required further EBRT, most commonly due to close margins.

Health Services Research in Brachytherapy: Current Understanding and Future Challenges

Brachytherapy is an integral component of cancer care. Widespread concerns have been expressed though about the need for greater brachytherapy availability across many jurisdictions. Yet, health services research in brachytherapy has lagged behind that in external beam radiotherapy. Optimal brachytherapy utilisation, to help inform expected demand, have not been defined beyond the New South Wales region in Australia, with few studies having reported observed brachytherapy utilisation. There is also a relative lack of robust cost and cost-effectiveness studies, making investment decisions in brachytherapy even more uncertain and challenging to justify, despite its key role in cancer control. As the range of indications for brachytherapy expands, providing organ/function preservation for a wider range of diagnoses, there is an urgent need to redress this balance. By outlining the work undertaken in this area to date, we highlight its importance and explore where further study is required.

Experience with intraoperative radiation therapy in an urban cancer center

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVE

Intra-operative radiation therapy (IORT) is a newer partial breast irradiation technique that has been well studied in 2 large randomized trials, the TARGIT-A and ELIOT trials. We initiated our IORT program in 2018 in the context of a registry trial, and aim to report our early results thus far.

METHODS

We instituted an IORT practice using Intrabeam® low energy 50kVp x-rays for selected breast cancer cases in 2018. Patients were enrolled on our institutional registry protocol which allowed for IORT in ER + patients with grade 1-2 DCIS ≤ 2.5 cm or invasive disease ≤ 3.5 cm in patients of at least 45 years of age.

RESULTS

Between January 2018 and December 2021, 181 patients with clinical stage 0-IIA ER + breast cancer were evaluated. One hundred sixty-seven patients ultimately received IORT to 172 sites. The majority of patients received IORT at the time of initial diagnosis and surgery (160/167; 95.8%). Re-excision post IORT occurred in 16/167 patients (9.6%) due to positive margins. Adjuvant RT to the whole breast +/- LN was ultimately given to 23/167 (13.8%) patients mainly due to positive sentinel LN found on final pathology (12/23; 52%); other reasons were close margins for DCIS (3/23; 13%), tumor size (3/23; 4.3%), and multifactorial (5/23; 17.4%). Five patients (3%) had post-operative complications of wound dehiscence. There were 3 local recurrences (1.6%) at a median follow-up of 27.9 months (range: 0.7- 54.8 months).

CONCLUSIONS

IORT has been proven to be a safe and patient-centered form of local adjuvant RT for our population, in whom compliance with a longer course of external beam radiation can be an issue. Long term efficacy remains to be evaluated through continued follow up. In the era of COVID-19 and beyond, IORT has been an increasingly attractive option, as it greatly minimizes toxicities and patient visits to the clinic.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

All patients were prospectively enrolled on an institutional review board-approved registry trial (IRB number: 2018-9409).

Case Report: Intraoperative radiotherapy as the new standard of care for breast cancer patients with disabling health conditions or impairments

In selected patients, intraoperative radiotherapy (IORT) offers an alternative to standard external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) while providing equivalent breast cancer control outcomes. After IORT, most patients do not require external beam radiotherapy and thus avoid the need to travel to and from a radiotherapy centre in the weeks after surgery. EBRT is associated with an increased risk of non-breast cancer mortality and poorer cosmetic outcomes while increasing patient travel time, emissions associated with travel and time spent in the hospital. Consequently, EBRT is associated with an overall reduction in quality of life compared to IORT. Patients with other on-going health conditions or clinical impairments are likely to be affected by the daily radiotherapy requirement. Should these patients be consulted during their pre-operative assessment as to options to undergo IORT? This paper describes a case of IORT and follow up in a functionally blind patient. Quality of life effects are elucidated and further support the use of IORT in selected breast cancer patients with health conditions or impairments.

Intraoperative Radiation Therapy: A Large Integrated Health Care System's Approach and Outcomes

Introduction Intraoperative radiation therapy (IORT) may not be as effective in the community compared with clinical trials. Methods The authors reviewed data from the electronic health records of patients who received IORT between February 2014 and February 2020 at a single center within a large integrated health care system. The primary outcome was ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence. Results Of 5731 potentially eligible patients, 245 (4.3%) underwent IORT (mean age: 65.4 ± 0.4 years; median follow-up time: 3.5 years ± 2.2 months). According to the American Society for Radiation Oncology's accelerated partial breast irradiation guidelines based on final pathology, 51% of patients were suitable candidates for IORT, 38.4% were cautionary, and 10.6% were unsuitable. For adjuvant therapy, 6.5% had consolidative whole breast irradiation, and 66.4% received endocrine treatment. At the median follow-up time of 3.5 years, overall ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence was 3.7%. Recurrences tended to be more frequent in patients who refused or did not complete endocrine treatment than in those who received it (7.4% vs 1.9%, p = 0.07). The complication rate was 14.7%, with seroma being the most common (8.2%). Discussion The IORT ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence rate of 3.7% confirms a higher-than-expected rate compared to randomized clinical trials, possibly due to less compliance with endocrine therapy. Conclusion The authors subsequently revised their IORT protocol to require endocrine treatment as a part of the IORT treatment plan and to strongly recommend adjuvant whole breast irradiation for all patients deemed cautionary or unsuitable for IORT according to the American Society for Radiation Oncology's accelerated partial breast irradiation guidelines.

Real World and Public Health Perspectives of Intraoperative Radiotherapy in Early-Stage Breast Cancer: A Multidisciplinary Analysis Beyond the Statistical Facts

Breast conservation therapy (BCT) (usually a lumpectomy plus radiotherapy (RT)) has become a standard alternative to radical mastectomy in early-stage breast cancers with equal, if not higher, survival rates. The established standard of the RT component of the BCT had been about six weeks of Monday through Friday external beam RT to the whole breast (WBRT). Recent clinical trials have shown that partial breast radiation therapy (PBRT) to the region surrounding the lumpectomy cavity with shorter courses can result in equal local control, survival, and slightly improved cosmetic outcomes. Intraoperative RT (IORT) wherein RT is administered at the time of operation for BCT to the lumpectomy cavity as a single-fraction RT is also considered PBRT. The advantage of IORT is that weeks of RT are avoided. However, the role of IORT as part of BCT has been controversial. The extreme views go from "I will not recommend to anyone" to "I can recommend to all early-stage favorable patients." These divergent views are due to difficulty in interpreting the clinical trial results. There are two modalities of delivering IORT, namely, the use of low-energy 50 kV beams or electron beams. There are several retrospective, prospective, and two randomized clinical trials comparing IORT versus WBRT. Yet, the opinions are divided. In this paper, we try to bring clarity and consensus from a highly broad-based multidisciplinary team approach. The multidisciplinary team included breast surgeons, radiation oncologists, medical physicists, biostatisticians, public health experts, nurse practitioners, and medical oncologists. We show that there is a need to more carefully interpret and differentiate the data based on electron versus low-dose X-ray modalities; the randomized study results have to be extremely carefully dissected from biostatistical points of view; the importance of the involvement of patients and families in the decision making in a very transparent and informed manner needs to be emphasized; and the compromise some women may be willing to accept between 2-4% potential increase in local recurrence (as interpreted by some of the investigators in IORT randomized studies) versus mastectomy. We conclude that, ultimately, the choice should be that of women with detailed facts of the pros and cons of all options being presented to them from the angle of patient/family-focused care. Although the guidelines of various professional societies can be helpful, they are only guidelines. The participation of women in IORT clinical trials is still needed, and as genome-based and omics-based fine-tuning of prognostic fingerprints evolve, the current guidelines need to be revisited. Finally, the use of IORT can help rural, socioeconomically, and infrastructure-deprived populations and geographic regions as the convenience of single-fraction RT and the possibility of breast preservation are likely to encourage more women to choose BCT than mastectomy. This option can also likely lead to more women choosing to get screened for breast cancer, thus enabling the diagnosis of breast cancer at an earlier stage and improving the survival outcomes.

Intraoperative radiation therapy in the management of early stage breast cancer

Adjuvant radiotherapy (RT) following breast conserving surgery (BCS) is associated with an improvement in local control and a reduction in breast cancer mortality. While traditionally delivered with whole breast irradiation (WBI), novel approaches have looked to reduce the duration, target volume, and toxicity of adjuvant RT. One such approach is intraoperative radiation therapy (IORT), which delivers radiation at the time of surgery with 80-90% of patients not requiring additional WBI. The current review presents IORT techniques and outcomes from modern series evaluating IORT as monotherapy or as a tumor bed boost. Based on two randomized trials (TARGIT-A and ELIOT) with recent updates, concern regarding higher rates of local recurrence with IORT exist, whether using electrons or low-energy techniques. In contrast, data is promising regarding IORT used as a boost, with ongoing studies evaluating its role prospectively. With respect to toxicity, the data suggest IORT is associated with comparable to slightly lower rates of toxicity though there may be a higher risk of seroma requiring aspiration and fat necrosis with IORT. Given current data and guidelines, WBI or other partial breast techniques should remain the standard of care in early stage breast cancer patients, while IORT should not be utilized outside of prospective clinical trials at this time.

Intraoperative radiotherapy versus no radiotherapy for early stage low-risk breast cancer patients undergoing breast-conserving surgery: a propensity score matching study based on the SEER database

PURPOSE

To compare the effect of intraoperative radiotherapy (IORT) and no radiotherapy in early stage low-risk breast cancer patients undergoing breast-conserving surgery.

METHODS

According to the criteria recommended by ASTRO for patients eligible for IORT, we retrospectively selected women with early stage low-risk breast cancer who underwent breast-conserving surgery from 2010 to 2019 from the SEER database. Propensity score matching was used to balance the differences in baseline characteristics. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to calculate the overall survival (OS) and breast cancer-specific survival (BCSS) of patients, and the log-rank test was used to compare the differences.

RESULTS

A total of 20,245 patients were included in the analysis, including 1738 in the IORT group and 18,507 in the no radiotherapy group, with a median follow-up of 41 months. Before matching, the 5-year OS rates of the IORT group and the no radiotherapy group were 95.5% and 85.7% (p < 0.001), respectively, and the 5-year BCSS rates of the two groups were 99.6% and 98.3% (p < 0.001), respectively. After matching, the 5-year OS rates were 95.6% and 90.3% (p < 0.001) in the IORT group and the no radiotherapy group, respectively, and the 5-year BCSS rates were 99.5% and 99.1% (p = 0.028), respectively. Cox multivariate analysis of the original data showed that radiotherapy was an independent prognostic factor for both OS and BCSS (p < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

For patients aged 50 years or older with early stage low-risk breast cancer, IORT may be a better option, with improved BCSS compared to the elimination of radiotherapy. The study could not draw conclusions on OS, because underlying diseases may be unevenly distributed between the two groups.

Global adoption of single-shot targeted intraoperative radiotherapy (TARGIT-IORT) for breast cancer—better for patients, better for healthcare systems

Micro abstract

Targeted intraoperative radiotherapy (TARGIT-IORT) is delivered immediately after lumpectomy for breast cancer. We estimated its impact. At least 44,752 patients with breast cancer were treated with TARGIT-IORT in 260 centres in 35 countries, saving &gt;20 million miles of travel and preventing ~2,000 non–breast cancer deaths. The TARGIT-IORT website (https://targit.org.uk/travel) provides maps and tools to find the nearest centre offering TARGIT-IORT and travel savings.

Background

Targeted intraoperative radiotherapy (TARGIT-IORT) delivers radiotherapy targeted to the fresh tumour bed exposed immediately after lumpectomy for breast cancer. TARGIT-A trial found TARGIT-IORT to be as effective as whole-breast radiotherapy, with significantly fewer deaths from non–breast cancer causes. This paper documents its worldwide impact and provides interactive tools for clinicians and patients.

Method

Centres using TARGIT-IORT provided the date of the first case and the total number of patients. We plotted these data on a customised Google Map. An interactive web-based tool provided directions to the closest centre. Using the data from the TARGIT-A trial, we estimated the total savings in travel miles, carbon footprint, and the number of non–breast cancer deaths that might be prevented.

Results

Data from 242 (93%) of the 260 centres treating patients from 35 countries were available. From the first patient treated in 1998 to early 2020, at least 44,752 women with breast cancer have been treated with TARGIT-IORT. The TARGIT-IORT website (https://targit.org.uk/travel) displays the Google Map of centres with number of cases and an interactive tool for patients to find the nearest centre offering TARGIT-IORT and their travel savings. Scaling up to the already treated patients, &gt;20 million miles of travel would have been saved and about 2,000 deaths prevented.

Conclusion

One can ascertain the number of patients treated with a novel treatment. These data show how widely TARGIT-IORT has now been adopted and gives an indication of its beneficial worldwide impact on a large number of women with breast cancer.

Prospective Comparison of Hypofractionated Versus Normofractionated Intensity-Modulated Radiotherapy in Breast Cancer: Late Toxicity Results of the Non-Inferiority KOSIMA Trial (ARO2010-3)

Purpose

To compare the late toxicity profile of hypofractionation and normofractionation for whole-breast radiotherapy in breast cancer (BC) patients after conserving surgery.

Methods

Sixty-year-old or older patients with pTis-pT3, pN0-pN1a, M0 BC were recruited and stratified to hypofractionated (arm R-HF) or normofractionated (arm L-NF) intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT), for right- and left-sided BC, respectively, in this single-center, non-randomized, non-inferiority trial. A boost was allowed if indicated. The primary outcome was the cumulative percentage of patients developing grade III fibrosis, grade I telangiectasia, and/or grade II hyperpigmentation after 2 years, with a pre-specified non-inferiority margin of 15% increase from an expected 2-year toxicity rate of 20%.

Results

The Median follow-up was 4.93 (0.57-8.65) years for R-HF and 5.02 (0.65-8.72) years for L-NF (p=0.236). The median age was 68 (60-83 and 60-80) years, respectively. In total, 226 patients were recruited (107 for R-HF and 119 for L-NF), with 100 and 117 patients suitable for assessment, respectively. A boost was delivered in 51% and 53% of each arm, respectively. Median PTV volumes were 1013.6 (273-2805) cm3 (R-HF) and 1058.28 (315-2709) cm3 (L-NF, p=0.591). The 2-year primary endpoint rate was 6.1% (95% CI 1.3-11.7, n=5 of 82) and 13.3% (95% CI 7-20.2, n=14 of 105), respectively (absolute difference -7.2%, one-sided 95% CI ∞ to -0.26, favoring R-HF). No local recurrence-free- or overall-survival differences were found.

Conclusion

In this prospective non-randomized study, hypofractionation did not have higher toxicity than normofractionated whole-breast IMRT.

Long-Term Outcomes of an International Cooperative Study of Intraoperative Radiotherapy Upfront Boost With Low Energy X-Rays in Breast Cancer

Purpose

The purpose of this study was to assess the effectivity of upfront kilovoltage intraoperative radiotherapy (IORT) as a boost in high-risk early-stage breast cancer patients from an international pooled cohort.

Materials/Methods

Patients from four centers in three different countries were retrospectively screened. Those with a minimum 1-year follow-up were included. Cumulative local (LR), regional (RR), and distant metastasis rates (DM) were analyzed. Additionally, the estimated overall survival (OS) was assessed. The Cox regression analysis was performed to identify failure predicting factors.

Results

A total of 653 patients from centers in Peru, Spain, and Germany were included. The median follow-up was 55 (12–180) months, and age was 58 (27–86) years. Clinical tumor (T) staging was T1 65.85%, T2 30.17%, and T3 3.98%. Positive margins were found in 7.9% and in-situ component in 20.06%. The median IORT dose was 20 (6–20). The median time from IORT to EBRT was 74.5 (13-364) days. An overall 3.4% (n = 22) of patients developed local recurrence at some point during follow-up. The 12-, 60-, and 120-month cumulative LR were 0.3%, 2.3%, and 7.9%, respectively. After multivariate analysis, only age <50 remained to be a significant prognostic factor for local recurrence (HR 0.19, 95% CI 0.08–0.47; p < 0.05). The 10-year estimated OS was 81.2%.

Conclusion

Upfront boost with IORT yields similar local control outcomes to those EBRT-based reports. Results from prospective trials, regarding toxicity, cosmesis, and effectivity are awaited to confirm these findings.

Surgical and Oncologic Outcomes With Intraoperative Radiation Therapy for Early Breast Cancer

BACKGROUND

For selected patients with early-stage breast cancer (BC), intraoperative radiation therapy (IORT) has emerged as a convenient alternative to standard whole breast irradiation (WBI). We report a single institution experience with IORT in terms of oncologic outcomes, toxicities, and cosmesis.

METHODS

Clinicopathological and perioperative outcomes of patients who underwent IORT for early-stage BC at a public hospital from 2017 to 2020 were retrospectively retrieved. Toxicity was categorized to acute or chronic based on 6 months post-IORT cutoff.

RESULTS

85 patients underwent IORT and had complete data, aged 49-85 years (mean 62). Intraoperative radiation therapy added 23 minutes on average to the total operative time. Final stage was 0, I, and II in 40%, 58.9%, and 1.1% of patients, respectively. Mean tumor size was 0.8 cm (range .1-2.1), with ductal histology comprising 94% of cases. Surgical margins were positive in 2 patients, and adjuvant WBI was required in 5 patients. After a median follow-up of 17 months (range 3-41), none of the patients had local recurrence and no mortality was recorded. Early wound complications included wound dehiscence (n = 1), seroma/hematoma (n = 15), and re-operation with loss of nipple-areola complex (n = 1). Chronic skin toxicities were reported in 10 (12%) patients and good or excellent cosmetic outcome was reported in 93% of patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Utilizing IORT among low-risk early BC patients may be a safe and more convenient alternative to traditional WBI, with low toxicity rate, acceptable cosmetic results, and good oncologic outcomes at 17 months. Longer follow-up and further prospective controlled studies are needed to confirm these findings.

Intraoperative Radiotherapy with Balloon-Based Electronic Brachytherapy System-A Systematic Review and First Bulgarian Experience in Breast Cancer Patients

(1) Background: We aimed to analyze currently available studies with intraoperative radiotherapy (IORT) as a choice of treatment where the Xoft Axxent^® electronic brachytherapy (eBx) system was used as a single-dose irradiation and an exclusive radiotherapy approach at the time of surgery in patients with early breast cancer (EBC). We also compared the results of the systematic review to the Bulgarian experience. (2) Methods and Materials: We performed a systematic review of the studies published before February 2021, which investigate the application of a single-fraction 20 Gy radiation treatment, delivered at the time of lumpectomy in EBC patients with the Xoft Axxent^® eBx System. A systematic search in PubMed, Scopus, and ScienceDirect was performed. The results are reported following the PRISMA guidelines. The criteria on patients’ selection for IORT (the additional need for EBRT), cosmetic outcomes, and recurrence rate from the eligible studies are compared to the treatment results in Bulgarian patients. (3) Results: We searched through 1032 results to find 17 eligible studies. There are no published outcomes from randomized trials. When reported, the cosmetic outcomes in most of the studies are defined as excellent. The observed recurrence rate is low (1–5.8%). Still, the number of patients additionally referred to postoperative external breast radiotherapy (EBRT) is up to 31%. Amongst the 20 patients treated in Bulgaria, the cosmetic outcomes are also evaluated as excellent, five of which (25%) are referred for EBRT. Within median follow-up of 39 months, there was one local and one distal recurrence. (4) Conclusions: Current evidence demonstrates the Xoft Axxent^® eBx system as a safe and feasible technique for IORT delivery in EBC patients. There are no randomized controlled trials conducted at this time point to prove its long-term effectiveness. Better patient selection and a reimbursement strategy have to be proposed to extend the application of this technique in Bulgaria.

Partial breast irradiation versus whole breast radiotherapy for early breast cancer

BACKGROUND

Breast-conserving therapy for women with breast cancer consists of local excision of the tumour (achieving clear margins) followed by radiotherapy (RT). Most true recurrences occur in the same quadrant as the original tumour. Whole breast radiotherapy (WBRT) may not protect against the development of a new primary cancer developing in other quadrants of the breast. In this Cochrane Review, we investigated the delivery of radiation to a limited volume of the breast around the tumour bed (partial breast irradiation (PBI)) sometimes with a shortened treatment duration (accelerated partial breast irradiation (APBI)).

OBJECTIVES

To determine whether PBI/APBI is equivalent to or better than conventional or hypofractionated WBRT after breast-conserving therapy for early-stage breast cancer.

SEARCH METHODS

On 27 August 2020, we searched the Cochrane Breast Cancer Group Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL and three trial databases. We searched for grey literature: OpenGrey (September 2020), reference lists of articles, conference proceedings and published abstracts, and applied no language restrictions.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) without confounding, that evaluated conservative surgery plus PBI/APBI versus conservative surgery plus WBRT. Published and unpublished trials were eligible.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors (BH and ML) performed data extraction, used Cochrane's risk of bias tool and resolved any disagreements through discussion, and assessed the certainty of the evidence for main outcomes using GRADE. Main outcomes were local recurrence-free survival, cosmesis, overall survival, toxicity (subcutaneous fibrosis), cause-specific survival, distant metastasis-free survival and subsequent mastectomy. We entered data into Review Manager 5 for analysis.

MAIN RESULTS

We included nine RCTs that enrolled 15,187 women who had invasive breast cancer or ductal carcinoma in-situ (6.3%) with T1-2N0-1M0 Grade I or II unifocal tumours (less than 2 cm or 3 cm or less) treated with breast-conserving therapy with negative margins. This is the second update of the review and includes two new studies and 4432 more participants. Local recurrence-free survival is probably slightly reduced (by 3/1000, 95% CI 6 fewer to 0 fewer) with the use of PBI/APBI compared to WBRT (hazard ratio (HR) 1.21, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.03 to 1.42; 8 studies, 13,168 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Cosmesis (physician/nurse-reported) is probably worse (by 63/1000, 95% CI 35 more to 92 more) with the use of PBI/APBI (odds ratio (OR) 1.57, 95% CI 1.31 to 1.87; 6 studies, 3652 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Overall survival is similar (0/1000 fewer, 95% CI 6 fewer to 6 more) with PBI/APBI and WBRT (HR 0.99, 95% CI 0.88 to 1.12; 8 studies, 13,175 participants; high-certainty evidence). Late radiation toxicity (subcutaneous fibrosis) is probably increased (by 14/1000 more, 95% CI 102 more to 188 more) with PBI/APBI (OR 5.07, 95% CI 3.81 to 6.74; 2 studies, 3011 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). The use of PBI/APBI probably makes little difference (1/1000 less, 95% CI 6 fewer to 3 more) to cause-specific survival (HR 1.06, 95% CI 0.83 to 1.36; 7 studies, 9865 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). We found the use of PBI/APBI compared with WBRT probably makes little or no difference (1/1000 fewer (95% CI 4 fewer to 6 more)) to distant metastasis-free survival (HR 0.95, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.13; 7 studies, 11,033 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). We found the use of PBI/APBI in comparison with WBRT makes little or no difference (2/1000 fewer, 95% CI 20 fewer to 20 more) to mastectomy rates (OR 0.98, 95% CI 0.78 to 1.23; 3 studies, 3740 participants, high-certainty evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

It appeared that local recurrence-free survival is probably worse with PBI/APBI; however, the difference was small and nearly all women remain free of local recurrence. Overall survival is similar with PBI/APBI and WBRT, and we found little to no difference in other oncological outcomes. Some late effects (subcutaneous fibrosis) may be worse with PBI/APBI and its use is probably associated with worse cosmetic outcomes. The limitations of the data currently available mean that we cannot make definitive conclusions about the efficacy and safety or ways to deliver PBI/APBI. We await completion of ongoing trials.

The Role of Intraoperative Radiation in Early-stage Breast Cancer

Intraoperative radiation therapy (IORT) is a specialized form of accelerated partial breast irradiation in which a single dose of radiation is delivered to the tumor bed at the time of breast conserving surgery. With completion of radiation to the tumor bed at the time of surgery, IORT promises improved patient convenience, compliance, and quality of life. In addition, with its potentially skin-sparing properties and ability to deliver a high biologically effective dose to the tumor bed while reducing dose to nontarget tissues, IORT results in different but overall less toxicities compared with other modalities of radiation for breast cancer. However, skepticism over the role of IORT in breast cancer exists, and the 2 randomized trials that have analyzed IORT as the definitive radiation component of breast conservation therapy have shown an increase in local recurrence rates with IORT compared with whole breast irradiation, but similar rates of overall survival. In this review, we discuss the practicalities of IORT, the prospective data supporting and negating the role of IORT in lieu of whole breast irradiation, and the toxicity after IORT in early-stage breast cancer. We also review the role of IORT as a radiation boost and specific strategies for successful implementation of IORT in breast cancer.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of intraoperative radiation therapy versus external beam radiation therapy for the adjuvant treatment of early breast cancer: A systematic review

Background: Breast-conserving surgery (BCS) is the recommended treatment for early breast cancer. After BCS. Whole-breast external beam radiotherapy (WB-EBRT) is the standard of care. A possible alternative to post-operative WB-EBRT is intraoperative radiation therapy (IORT). The objectives of this systematic review were to analyses the cost-effectiveness of IORT versus EBRT for early-stage breast cancer and to assess the reporting quality of the included studies to inform future studies.

Methods: A systematic literature search was carried out in five main databases (PubMed, Scopus, Embase, Cochrane library, and Web of Science) to identify original studies published to June 25, 2020. We included all full economic evaluation studies (cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA), cost-utility analysis (CUA), and cost-benefit analysis (CBA), Model-based or trial-based) that assessed and compared IORT and EBRT in patients with early operable breast cancer. Study outcomes included cost per life-years gained or cost per quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) gained or in monetary units or incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). The quality of the included articles was assessed using the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) checklist. This review has been conducted and reported in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement.

Results: Of 1155 studies identified, eight studies met the inclusion criteria. In four studies, IORT was associated with lower costs and higher effectiveness than EBRT. In three studies, the dominant option was EBRT. In these studies, IORT also had lower costs and lower effectiveness than EBRT. Existing evidence suggests that IORT can be a cost-effective alternative to early breast cancer treatment by reducing therapeutic costs. Variables of cost-effectiveness were treatment costs, health state utilities, local and distant recurrence rates, and the probabilities of metastasis after treatment, recurrent cancer and death for both IORT and EBRT. The reporting quality of the included studies was "high" in five, "medium quality" in one and "low" in two studies.

Conclusion: Current evidence is sparse, and the number of studies was small but this evidence proposes that IORT can be a potential cost-saving strategy to the health systems for the adjuvant treatment of early breast cancer if the technology was carried out routinely in eligible patients. However, these results should be interpreted with caution because of the heterogeneity of studies and possible publication bias.

Initiation of an Intraoperative Radiotherapy Program at a Safety net Hospital: What Is the Impact of an Intraoperative Radiotherapy Program in Underserved Patients With Early Breast Cancer?

BACKGROUND

Intraoperative radiotherapy (IORT) can allow for single-dose radiation treatment following breast conservation therapy in low-risk patients with early breast cancer, in lieu of a traditional 6-week course of whole breast radiotherapy (WBRT). The objective of this study was to analyze the uptake and utilization of an IORT program in a safety-net hospital.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A retrospective review was conducted for all patients who underwent IORT from September 2014 to June 2018. Patient demographics, tumor characteristics, and IORT outcomes were analyzed. The proportion of patients undergoing IORT were determined to assess utilization and uptake.

RESULTS

There were 27 female patients that received IORT, 23 (85.2%) of which required no further radiotherapy. Three (7.4%) patients had positive axillary lymph nodes and/or positive margins requiring subsequent WBRT. One patient (3.7%) developed an in-breast recurrence distant from the lumpectomy site 23 months after IORT. Ten patients (37.0%) developed a postoperative complication, including 5 seromas and 6 wound complications (superficial infections and/or wound necrosis). Overall, in the 46-month study period, IORT accounted for only 6.4% of 423 operations. Still, 27 of 29 (93.1%) patients who met eligibility criteria for IORT underwent the procedure.

DISCUSSION

Although IORT comprised only 6.4% of all cases due to higher rates of mastectomy rates and advanced disease in our population, there was a high uptake of IORT among patients who met eligibility criteria for the procedure. Major complication rates of IORT were low, and most patients successfully completed radiotherapy in 1 intraoperative dose.

Intraoperative radiotherapy versus whole-breast external beam radiotherapy, and other factors associated with the prognosis of early breast cancer treated with breast-conserving surgery and radiotherapy: a retrospective study from SEER database

BACKGROUND

This study was aimed to investigate the prognostic factors of early breast cancer treated with breast-conserving surgery (BCS) and radiotherapy. Besides, we focused our attention exclusively on the comparison of the impact on prognosis between intraoperative radiotherapy (IORT) and whole-breast external beam radiotherapy (EBRT).

METHODS

An observational cohort study was performed on patients with Tis-2 N0-1 M0 breast cancer from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database who treated with BCS and radiotherapy. Cox regression analysis, Kaplan-Meier analysis, and propensity score matching (PSM) were used to estimate risk factors for overall survival (OS) and breast cancer-specific survival (BCSS).

RESULTS

Of the 98,614 early breast cancer patients treated with BCS and radiotherapy, 97,164 (98.5%) patients underwent EBRT and 1,450 (1.5%) underwent IORT. Multivariable Cox regression analysis showed that early breast cancer patients with age ≥65, poor marital status, lack of medical insurance, histological grade III/IV (SEER 4 grades), high T stage, high N stage, and TNBC were associated with a decreased OS/BCSS, whereas ER-positive and PR-positive were associated with an improved OS/BCSS. No significant difference was observed in survival between IORT and EBRT groups (P=0.213 for OS, P=0.180 for BCSS), or between intraoperative beam radiation and intraoperative radioactive implants groups (P=0.319 for OS, P=0.972 for BCSS).

CONCLUSIONS

Our study can help clinicians identify patients with poor prognosis after breast-conserving therapy. IORT may be an alternative to EBRT for early breast cancer patients who are unable to complete the long-term postoperative radiation treatment. Beam radiation and radioactive implants are both ideal alternatives for patients who choose IORT.

Long term survival and local control outcomes from single dose targeted intraoperative radiotherapy during lumpectomy (TARGIT-IORT) for early breast cancer: TARGIT-A randomised clinical trial

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether risk adapted intraoperative radiotherapy, delivered as a single dose during lumpectomy, can effectively replace postoperative whole breast external beam radiotherapy for early breast cancer.

DESIGN

Prospective, open label, randomised controlled clinical trial.

SETTING

32 centres in 10 countries in the United Kingdom, Europe, Australia, the United States, and Canada.

PARTICIPANTS

2298 women aged 45 years and older with invasive ductal carcinoma up to 3.5 cm in size, cN0-N1, eligible for breast conservation and randomised before lumpectomy (1:1 ratio, blocks stratified by centre) to either risk adapted targeted intraoperative radiotherapy (TARGIT-IORT) or external beam radiotherapy (EBRT).

INTERVENTIONS

Random allocation was to the EBRT arm, which consisted of a standard daily fractionated course (three to six weeks) of whole breast radiotherapy, or the TARGIT-IORT arm. TARGIT-IORT was given immediately after lumpectomy under the same anaesthetic and was the only radiotherapy for most patients (around 80%). TARGIT-IORT was supplemented by EBRT when postoperative histopathology found unsuspected higher risk factors (around 20% of patients).

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Non-inferiority with a margin of 2.5% for the absolute difference between the five year local recurrence rates of the two arms, and long term survival outcomes.

RESULTS

Between 24 March 2000 and 25 June 2012, 1140 patients were randomised to TARGIT-IORT and 1158 to EBRT. TARGIT-IORT was non-inferior to EBRT: the local recurrence risk at five year complete follow-up was 2.11% for TARGIT-IORT compared with 0.95% for EBRT (difference 1.16%, 90% confidence interval 0.32 to 1.99). In the first five years, 13 additional local recurrences were reported (24/1140 v 11/1158) but 14 fewer deaths (42/1140 v 56/1158) for TARGIT-IORT compared with EBRT. With long term follow-up (median 8.6 years, maximum 18.90 years, interquartile range 7.0-10.6) no statistically significant difference was found for local recurrence-free survival (hazard ratio 1.13, 95% confidence interval 0.91 to 1.41, P=0.28), mastectomy-free survival (0.96, 0.78 to 1.19, P=0.74), distant disease-free survival (0.88, 0.69 to 1.12, P=0.30), overall survival (0.82, 0.63 to 1.05, P=0.13), and breast cancer mortality (1.12, 0.78 to 1.60, P=0.54). Mortality from other causes was significantly lower (0.59, 0.40 to 0.86, P=0.005).

CONCLUSION

For patients with early breast cancer who met our trial selection criteria, risk adapted immediate single dose TARGIT-IORT during lumpectomy was an effective alternative to EBRT, with comparable long term efficacy for cancer control and lower non-breast cancer mortality. TARGIT-IORT should be discussed with eligible patients when breast conserving surgery is planned.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ISRCTN34086741, NCT00983684.

Intraoperative partial irradiation for highly selected patients with breast cancer: Results of the INTRAOBS prospective study

PURPOSE

To evaluate our long-term experience on one-day breast intraoperative radiotherapy (IORT) given as sole radiation treatment to selected patients with breast cancer.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Inclusion criteria of INTRAOBS study (prospective observational study) were: ER+ T1N0 unifocal ductal carcinoma; absence of lymphovascular invasion or of extensive intraductal component (Scarff-Bloom-Richardson grade III and HER2+++ excluded). Two different linacs were used (20Gy/1 fraction): one dedicated electron linac (<October 2011), and afterwards a mobile linac (50kV photons). The primary endpoint was the local recurrence rate (=ipsilateral breast cancer recurrences number). Secondary endpoints were recurrence-free survival (RFS), overall and specific survival, cosmetic results, and patient satisfaction.

RESULTS

Of the present pre-planned analysis for the first 200 patients (median age: 68 years; range, 59-87 years) who received IORT between January 2010 and October 2014 (median follow-up of 53.4 months). A total of 193 patients were still alive. The local recurrence rate was 2.5% (n=5). The 1- and 5-year local RFS rates were 100% and 95.2%, respectively. At 12 months post-surgery, satisfaction about IORT was excellent for 86.9% of patients. Cosmetic results were considered by patients and physicians as good or very good in 89.4% and 97.3% of cases, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

IORT for selected patients with breast cancer shows low recurrence rates, good cosmetic outcomes and excellent satisfaction.

Intraoperative breast radiotherapy: survival, local control and risk factors for recurrence

Background

Whole breast irradiation reduces loco-regional recurrence and risk of death in patients submitted to breast-conserving treatment. Data show that radiation to the index quadrant alone may be enough in selected patients.

Aim

To report the experience with intra-operative radiotherapy (IORT) with Electron-beam Cone in Linear Accelerator (ELIOT) and the results in overall survival, local control and late toxicity of patients submitted to this treatment.

Materials and Methods

147 patients treated with a median follow up of 6.9 years (0.1⿿11.5 years). The actuarial local control and overall survival probabilities were estimated using the Kaplan Meier method. All tests were two-sided and p ⿤ 0.05 was considered statistically significant.

Results

Overall survival of the cohort in 5 years, in the median follow up and in 10 years was of 98.3%, 95.1% and 95.1%, respectively, whereas local control in 5 years, in the median follow up and in 10 years was of 96%, 94.9% and 89.5%, respectively. Two risk groups were identified for local recurrence depending on the estrogen or progesterone receptors, axillary or margin status and lymphovascular invasion (LVI) (p = 0.016).

Conclusions

IORT is a safe and effective treatment. Rigorous selection is important to achieve excellent local control results.

Intraoperative Radiotherapy for Breast Cancer Treatment in a Rural Community

BACKGROUND

Access to health care poses particular challenges for patients living in rural communities. Intraoperative radiotherapy (IORT) offers a treatment alternative to traditional whole-breast radiation therapy (WBRT) for select patients. This study aimed to analyze the use of IORT for patients undergoing breast-conserving surgery at an academic institution located in a rural state.

METHODS

A retrospective review analyzed all patients at a single institution with a diagnosis of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) or invasive breast cancer from April 2012 to January 2017 who were undergoing breast-conserving surgery with either IORT or WBRT. Student's t test or Fisher's exact test was used to make statistical comparisons.

RESULTS

Patients undergoing IORT (n = 117) were significantly older than patients treated with WBRT (n = 191) (65.6 vs 58.6 years; p < 0.001) and had smaller tumors on both preoperative imaging (1.04 vs 1.66 cm; p < 0.05) and final pathology (0.99 vs 1.48 cm; p < 0.05). Patients receiving IORT lived farther from the treating facility than patients treated with WBRT (67.2 vs 30.8 miles; p < 0.05). To account for biases created in the IORT selection criteria, subgroup analysis was performed for women receiving WBRT who fulfilled IORT selection criteria, and distance traveled remained significant (67.2 vs 31.4 miles; p < 0.05). Neither recurrence nor survival differed between the IORT and WBRT groups. Medicare reimbursement for IORT was approximately 50% more than for WBRT.

CONCLUSIONS

For women from rural communities, IORT appears to be an attractive option because these women tend to be older and to live farther from the treatment facility.

Health economics of targeted intraoperative radiotherapy (TARGIT-IORT) for early breast cancer: a cost-effectiveness analysis in the United Kingdom

OBJECTIVE

The clinical effectiveness of targeted intraoperative radiotherapy (TARGIT-IORT) has been confirmed in the randomised TARGIT-A (targeted intraoperative radiotherapy-alone) trial to be similar to a several weeks' course of whole-breast external-beam radiation therapy (EBRT) in patients with early breast cancer. This study aims to determine the cost-effectiveness of TARGIT-IORT to inform policy decisions about its wider implementation.

SETTING

TARGIT-A randomised clinical trial (ISRCTN34086741) which compared TARGIT with traditional EBRT and found similar breast cancer control, particularly when TARGIT was given simultaneously with lumpectomy.

METHODS

Cost-utility analysis using decision analytic modelling by a Markov model. A cost-effectiveness Markov model was developed using TreeAge Pro V.2015. The decision analytic model compared two strategies of radiotherapy for breast cancer in a hypothetical cohort of patients with early breast cancer based on the published health state transition probability data from the TARGIT-A trial. Analysis was performed for UK setting and National Health Service (NHS) healthcare payer's perspective using NHS cost data and treatment outcomes were simulated for both strategies for a time horizon of 10 years. Model health state utilities were drawn from the published literature. Future costs and effects were discounted at the rate of 3.5%. To address uncertainty, one-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs).

RESULTS

In the base case analysis, TARGIT-IORT was a highly cost-effective strategy yielding health gain at a lower cost than its comparator EBRT. Discounted TARGIT-IORT and EBRT costs for the time horizon of 10 years were £12 455 and £13 280, respectively. TARGIT-IORT gained 0.18 incremental QALY as the discounted QALYs gained by TARGIT-IORT were 8.15 and by EBRT were 7.97 showing TARGIT-IORT as a dominant strategy over EBRT. Model outputs were robust to one-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses.

CONCLUSIONS

TARGIT-IORT is a dominant strategy over EBRT, being less costly and producing higher QALY gain.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ISRCTN34086741; post results.