Proton Therapy for Primary Breast Cancer

Recent advances progress in radiotherapy for breast cancer after breast-conserving surgery: a review

Adjuvant radiotherapy after breast-conserving surgery has become an integral part of the treatment of breast cancer. In recent years, the development of radiotherapy technology has made great progress in this field, including the comparison of the curative effects of various radiotherapy techniques and the performance of the segmentation times. The choice of radiotherapy technology needs to be co-determined by clinical evidence practice and evaluated for each individual patient to achieve precision radiotherapy. This article discusses the treatment effects of different radiotherapy, techniques, the risk of second cancers and short-range radiation therapy techniques after breast-conserving surgery such as hypo fractionated whole breast irradiation and accelerated partial breast irradiation. The choice of radiotherapy regimen needs to be based on the individual condition of the patient, and the general principle is to focus on the target area and reduce the irradiation of the normal tissues and organs. Short-range radiotherapy and hypofractionated are superior to conventional radiotherapy and are expected to become the mainstream treatment after breast-conserving surgery.

Current Cardioprotective Strategies for the Prevention of Radiation-Induced Cardiotoxicity in Left-Sided Breast Cancer Patients

BACKGROUND

Breast cancer (BC) is the most common malignancy in females, accounting for the majority of cancer-related deaths worldwide. There is well-established understanding about the effective role of radiotherapy (RT) in BC therapeutic strategies, offering a better local-regional control, prolonged survival, and improved quality of life for patients. However, it has been proven that conventional RT modalities, especially in left-sided BC cases, are unable to avoid the administration of high RT doses to the heart, thus resulting in cardiotoxicity and promoting long-term cardiovascular diseases (CVD). Recent radiotherapeutic techniques, characterized by dosimetric dose restrictions, target volume revision/modifications, an increased awareness of risk factors, and consistent follow-ups, have created an advantageous context for a significant decrease inpost-RT CVD incidence.

AIM

This review presents the fundamental role of current cardioprotective strategies in the prevention of cardiotoxic effects in left-BCRT.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A literature search was conducted up to January 2023 using the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and PubMed Central databases. Our review refers to new radiotherapeutic techniques carried out on patients after BC surgery. Specifically, a dose evaluation of the heart and left anterior descending coronary artery (LADCA) was pointed out for all the included studies, depending on the implemented RT modality, bed positioning, and internal mammary lymph nodes radiation.

RESULTS

Several studies reporting improved heart sparing with new RT techniques in BC patients were searched. In addition to the RT modality, which definitely determines the feasibility of achieving lower doses for the organs at risk (OARs), better target coverage, dose conformity and homogeneity, and the patient's position, characteristics, and anatomy may also affect the evaluated RT dose to the whole heart and its substructures.

CONCLUSIONS

Modern BC RT techniques seem to enable the administration of lower doses to the OARs without compromising on the target coverage. The analysis of several anatomical parameters and the assessment of cardiac biomarkers potentiate the protective effect of these new irradiation modalities, providing a holistic approach to the radiation-associated risks of cardiac disease for BC patients. Despite technological advances, an inevitable cardiac radiation risk still exists, while adverse cardiac events may be observed even many years after RT. Studies with longer follow-ups are required in order to determine the effectiveness of modern breast RT techniques.

Proton therapy for reducing heart and cardiac substructure doses in Indian breast cancer patients

PURPOSE

Indians have a higher incidence of cardiovascular diseases, often at a younger age, than other ethnic groups. This higher baseline risk requires consideration when assessing additional cardiac morbidity of breast cancer treatment. Superior cardiac sparing is a critical dosimetric advantage of proton therapy in breast cancer radiotherapy. We report here the heart and cardiac-substructure doses and early toxicities in breast cancer patients treated post-operatively with proton therapy in India's first proton therapy center.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We treated twenty breast cancer patients with intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT) from October 2019 to September 2022, eleven after breast conservation, nine following mastectomy, and appropriate systemic therapy, when indicated. The most prescribed dose was 40 GyE to the whole breast/chest wall and 48 GyE by simultaneous integrated boost to the tumor bed and 37.5 GyE to appropriate nodal volumes, delivered in 15 fractions.

RESULTS

Adequate coverage was achieved for clinical target volume (breast/chest wall), i.e., CTV40, and regional nodes, with 99% of the targets receiving 95% of the prescribed dose (V95% > 99%). The mean heart dose was 0.78 GyE and 0.87 GyE for all and left breast cancer patients, respectively. The mean left anterior descending artery (LAD) dose, LAD D0.02cc, and left ventricle dose were 2.76, 6.46, and 0.2 GyE, respectively. Mean ipsilateral lung dose, V20Gy, V5Gy, and contralateral breast dose (Dmean) were 6.87 GyE, 14.6%, 36.4%, and 0.38 GyE, respectively.

CONCLUSION

The dose to heart and cardiac substructures is lower with IMPT than published photon therapy data. Despite the limited access to proton therapy at present, given the higher cardiovascular risk and coronary artery disease prevalence in India, the cardiac sparing achieved using this technique merits consideration for wider adoption in breast cancer treatment.

Factors Associated With Travel Distance in the Receipt of Proton Breast Radiation Therapy

Introduction

Proton radiation therapy (PBT) may reduce cardiac doses in breast cancer treatment. Limited availability of proton facilities could require significant travel distances. This study assessed factors associated with travel distances for breast PBT.

Materials and Methods

Patients receiving breast PBT at the University of Pennsylvania from 2010 to 2021 were identified. Demographic, cancer, and treatment characteristics were summarized. Straight-line travel distances from the department to patients' addresses were calculated using BatchGeo. Median and mean travel distances were reported. Given non-normality of distribution of travel distances, Wilcoxon rank sum or Kruskal-Wallis test was used to determine whether travel distances differed by race, clinical trial participation, disease laterality, recurrence, and prior radiation.

Results

Of 1 male and 284 female patients, 67.8% were White and 21.7% Black. Median travel distance was 13.5 miles with interquartile range of 6.1 to 24.8 miles, and mean travel distance was 13.5 miles with standard deviation of 261.4 miles. 81.1% of patients traveled less than 30 and 6.0% more than 100 miles. Black patients' travel distances were significantly shorter than White patients' and non-Black or non-White patients' travel distances (median = 4.5, 16.5, and 11.3 miles, respectively; P < .0001). Patients not on clinical trials traveled more those on clinical trials (median = 14.7 and 10.2 miles, respectively; P = .032). There was no difference found between travel distances of patients with left-sided versus right-sided versus bilateral disease (P = .175), with versus without recurrent disease (P = .057), or with versus without prior radiation (P = .23).

Conclusion

This study described travel distances and demographic and clinicopathologic characteristics of patients receiving breast PBT at the University of Pennsylvania. Black patients traveled less than White and non-Black or non-White patients and comprised a small portion of the cohort, suggesting barriers to travel and PBT. Patients did not travel further to receive PBT for left-sided or recurrent disease.

RBE-weighted dose and its impact on the risk of acute coronary event for breast cancer patients treated with intensity modulated proton therapy

PURPOSE

To evaluate the relative biological effectiveness (RBE)-weighted dose to the heart and to estimate RBE uncertainties when assuming a constant RBE of 1.1, for breast cancer patients receiving intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT). Further, to study the impact of RBE uncertainties on the risk of an acute coronary event (ACE).

MATERIAL AND METHODS

We analyzed 20 patients who received IMPT to either the left breast (n = 10) or left chest wall (n = 10) and regional lymph nodes. The Monte Carlo simulation engine, MCsquare, was used to simulate the dose-averaged linear energy transfer (LETd) map. The RBE-weighted dose to the heart and its substructures was calculated using three different RBE models. The risk of ACE was estimated per its linear relationship with mean heart dose (MHD) as established by Darby et al.

RESULTS

The median MHD increased from 1.33 GyRBE assuming an RBE of 1.1 to 1.64, 1.87, and 1.99 GyRBE when using the RBE-weighted dose models. The median values (and ranges) of the excess absolute risk of ACE were 0.4% (0.1%-0.8%) when assuming an RBE of 1.1, and 0.6% (0.2%-1.0%), 0.6% (0.2%-1.1%), and 0.7% (0.2%-1.1%) with the RBE-weighted models. For our patient cohort, the maximum excess absolute risk of ACE increased by 0.3% with the RBE-weighted doses compared to the constant RBE of 1.1, reaching an excess absolute ACE risk of 1.1%. The interpatient LETd variation was small for the relevant high-dose regions of the heart.

CONCLUSION

All three RBE models predicted a higher biological dose compared to the clinical standard dose assuming a constant RBE of 1.1. An underestimation of the biological dose results in underestimation of the ACE risk. Analyzing the voxel-by-voxel biological dose and the LET map alongside clinical outcomes is warranted in the development of a more accurate normal-tissue complication probability model.

What can space radiation protection learn from radiation oncology?

Protection from cosmic radiation of crews of long-term space missions is now becoming an urgent requirement to allow a safe colonization of the moon and Mars. Epidemiology provides little help to quantify the risk, because the astronaut group is small and as yet mostly involved in low-Earth orbit mission, whilst the usual cohorts used for radiation protection on Earth (e.g. atomic bomb survivors) were exposed to a radiation quality substantially different from the energetic charged particle field found in space. However, there are over 260,000 patients treated with accelerated protons or heavier ions for different types of cancer, and this cohort may be useful for quantifying the effects of space-like radiation in humans. Space radiation protection and particle therapy research also share the same tools and devices, such as accelerators and detectors, as well as several research topics, from nuclear fragmentation cross sections to the radiobiology of densely ionizing radiation. The transfer of the information from the cancer radiotherapy field to space is manifestly complicated, yet the two field should strengthen their relationship and exchange methods and data.

Future Perspectives of Proton Therapy in Minimizing the Toxicity of Breast Cancer Radiotherapy

The toxicity of radiotherapy is a key issue when analyzing the eligibility criteria for patients with breast cancer. In order to obtain better results, proton therapy is proposed because of the more favorable distribution of the dose in the patient’s body compared with photon radiotherapy. Scientific groups have conducted extensive research into the improved efficacy and lower toxicity of proton therapy for breast cancer. Unfortunately, there is no complete insight into the potential reasons and prospects for avoiding undesirable results. Cardiotoxicity is considered challenging; however, researchers have not presented any realistic prospects for preventing them. We compared the clinical evidence collected over the last 20 years, providing the rationale for the consideration of proton therapy as an effective solution to reduce cardiotoxicity. We analyzed the parameters of the dose distribution (mean dose, Dmax, V5, and V20) in organs at risk, such as the heart, blood vessels, and lungs, using the following two irradiation techniques: whole breast irradiation and accelerated partial breast irradiation. Moreover, we presented the possible causes of side effects, taking into account biological and technical issues. Finally, we collected potential improvements in higher quality predictions of toxic cardiac effects, like biomarkers, and model-based approaches to give the full background of this complex issue.

Incorporation of the LETd-weighted biological dose in the evaluation of breast intensity-modulated proton therapy plans

PURPOSE

To evaluate the LETd-weighted biological dose to OARs in proton therapy for breast cancer and to study the relationship of the LETd-weighted biological dose relative to the standard dose (RBE = 1.1) and thereby to provide estimations of the biological dose uncertainties with the standard dose calculations (RBE = 1.1) commonly used in clinical practice.

METHOD

This study included 20 patients who received IMPT treatment to the whole breast/chest wall and regional lymph nodes. The LETd distributions were calculated along with the physical dose using an open-source Monte Carlo simulation package, MCsquare. Using the McMahon linear model, the LETd-weighted biological dose was computed from the physical dose and LETd. OAR doses were compared between the Dose (RBE = 1.1) and the LETd-weighted biological dose, on brachial plexus, rib, heart, esophagus, and Ipsilateral lung.

RESULTS

On average, the LETd-weighted biological dose compared to the Dose (RBE = 1.1) was higher by 8% for the brachial plexus D0.1 cc, 13% for the ribs D0.5 cc, 24% for mean heart dose, and 10% for the esophagus D0.1 cc, respectively. The LETd-weighted doses to the Ipsilateral lung V5, V10, and V20 were comparable to the Dose (RBE = 1.1). No statistically significant difference in biological dose enhancement to OARs was observed between the intact breast group and the CW group, with the exception of the ribs: the CW group experienced slightly greater biological dose enhancement (13% vs. 12%, p = 0.04) to the ribs than the intact breast group.

CONCLUSION

Enhanced biological dose was observed compared to standard dose with assumed RBE of 1.1 for the heart, ribs, esophagus, and brachial plexus in breast/CW and regional nodal IMPT plans. Variable RBE models should be considered in the evaluation of the IMPT breast plans, especially for OARs located near the end of range of a proton beam. Clinical outcome studies are needed to validate model predictions for clinical toxicities.

Patient-specific quality assurance and plan dose errors on breast intensity-modulated proton therapy

PURPOSE

To investigate, in proton therapy, whether the Gamma passing rate (GPR) is related to the patient dose error and whether MU scaling can improve dose accuracy.

METHODS

Among 20 consecutively treated breast patients selected for analysis, two IMPT plans were retrospectively generated: (1) the pencil-beam (PB) plan and (2) the Monte Carlo (MC) plan. Patient-specific QA was performed. A 3%/3-mm Gamma analysis was conducted to compare the TPS-calculated PB algorithm dose distribution with the measured 2D dose. Dose errors were compared between the plans that passed the Gamma testing and those that failed. The MU was then scaled to obtain a better GPR. MU-scaled PB plan dose errors were compared to the original PB plan.

RESULTS

Of the 20 PB plans, 8 were passed Gamma testing (G_pass_group) and 12 failed (G_fail_group). Surprisingly, the G_pass_group had a greater dose error than the G_fail_group. The median (range) of the PTV DVH RMSE and PTV ΔDmean were 1.36 (1.00-1.91) Gy vs 1.18 (1.02-1.80) Gy and 1.23 (0.92-1.71) Gy vs 1.10 (0.87-1.49) Gy for the G_pass_group and the G_fail_group, respectively. MU scaling reduced overall dose error. However, for PTV D99 and D95, MU scaling worsened some cases.

CONCLUSION

For breast IMPT, the PB plans that passed the Gamma testing did not show smaller dose errors compared to the plans that failed. For individual plans, the MU scaling technique leads to overall smaller dose errors. However, we do not suggest use of the MU scaling technique to replace the MC plans when the MC algorithm is available.

The risk for developing a secondary cancer after breast radiation therapy: Comparison of photon and proton techniques

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

To compare secondary malignancy risks of modern proton and photon therapy techniques for locally advanced breast cancer.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

We utilized dosimetric data from 34 [10 photon-VMAT, 10 photon-3DCRT, 14 pencil beam scanning proton (PBS)] breast cancer patients who received comprehensive nodal irradiation. Employing a model based on organ equivalent dose to account for both inhomogeneous organ dose distributions and non-linear functional dose relationships, we estimated excess absolute risk, excess relative risk, and lifetime attributable risk (LAR) for secondary malignancies. The model uses dose distribution, number of fractions, age at exposure, attained age, the linear-quadratic dose response relationship for cell survival, repopulation factor, as well as gender specific age dependencies, and initial slopes of dose response curves.

RESULTS

The LAR for carcinoma at age 70 was estimated to be up to 3.64% for esophagus with an advantage of 3DCRT over PBS and VMAT. For the ipsilateral lung, risks were lowest for PBS (up to 5.56%), followed by 3DCRT (up to 6.54%) and VMAT (up to 7.7%). For the contralateral lung, there is a clear advantage of 3DCRT and PBS techniques (risk <0.86%) over VMAT (up to 4.4%). The risk for the contralateral breast is negligible for 3DCRT and PBS but was estimated as up to 1.2% for VMAT. Risks for the thyroid are overall negligible. Independently performed comparative treatment plans on 10 patients revealed that the risk for the contralateral lung and breast using VMAT can be more than an order of magnitude higher compared to PBS. Sarcoma risks were estimated as well showing similar trends but were overall lower compared to carcinoma.

CONCLUSION

Conventional (3DCRT) techniques led to the lowest estimated risks of, thyroid and esophageal secondary cancers while PBS demonstrated a benefit for secondary lung and contralateral breast cancer risks, with the highest risks overall associated with VMAT techniques.

Intraoperative high dose rate brachytherapy during breast-conserving surgery: A Prospective Pilot Study

PURPOSE

To evaluate feasibility, quality of life, toxicity, and cosmetic outcome for intraoperative breast cancer brachytherapy after breast-conserving surgery using high dose rate brachytherapy.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Fifty-two consecutive women, ⩾50 years old, diagnosed with a unifocal non-lobular breast cancer ⩽3 cm, N0, underwent breast-conserving surgery and sentinel node biopsy. Twenty-five women received intraoperative brachytherapy pre-pathology at primary surgery and the others post-pathology, during a second procedure. An applicator, connected to a high dose rate afterloader, was used. Two of the women were excluded due to metastases found per-operatively at a frozen section from the sentinel node. Quality of life was evaluated using two validated health questionnaires. Treatment toxicity was documented according to the LENT-SOMA scale by two oncologists. The cosmetic result was evaluated using the validated freely available software BCCT.core 2.0.

RESULTS

The clinical procedure worked out well logistically. Seven women received supplementary external radiotherapy due to insufficient margins and, in one case, poor adaptation of the breast parenchyma to the applicator. No serious adverse effects from irradiation were registered. The results from the health questionnaires showed no major differences compared with reference groups from the Swedish population. Only two women were registered as having a "poor" cosmetic result while a majority of the women had a "good" outcome.

CONCLUSION

This pilot study shows that intraoperative brachytherapy is a feasible procedure and encourages further trials evaluating its role in treatment of early breast cancer.

Dosimetric consequences of image guidance techniques on robust optimized intensity-modulated proton therapy for treatment of breast Cancer

PURPOSE

To investigate the consequences of residual setup error on target dose distribution using various image registration strategies for breast cancer treated with intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Among 11 post-lumpectomy patients who received IMPT, 44 dose distributions were computed. For each patient, the original plan (Plan-O) and three verification plans were calculated using different alignments: bony anatomy (VPlan-B), breast tissue (VPlan-T), and skin (VPlan-S). The target coverage were evaluated for each alignment technique. Additionally, 2 subvolumes-BreastNearSkin (1-cm rim of anterior CTV) and BreastNearCW (1-cm rim of posterior CTV)-were created to help localize CTV underdosing. Furthermore, we divided the setup error into the posture error and breast error. Patients with a large posture error and those with good posture setup but a large breast error were identified to evaluate the effect of posture error and breast error.

RESULTS

For Plan-O, VPlan-B, VPlan-T, and VPlan-S, respectively, the median (interquartile range) breast CTV D95 was 95.7%(94.7-96.3%), 95.1% (93.9-95.7%), 95.2% (94.8-95.6%), and 95.2% (94.9-95.7%); BreastNearCW D95 was 96.9% (95.6-97.3%), 94.8% (93.5-97.0%), 95.6% (94.8-97.0%), 95.6% (94.8-97.1%); and BreastNearSkin D95 was 94.1% (92.7-94.4%), 93.6% (92.2-94.5%), 93.5% (92.4-94.5%), and 94.4% (92.2-94.5%) of the prescription dose. 4/11 patients had ≥1% decrease in breast CTV D95, 1 of whom developed breast edema while the other 3 all had a > 2^o posture error. The CTV D95 variation was within 1% for the patients with good posture setup but >2^o breast error.

CONCLUSION

Acceptable target coverage was achieved with all three alignment strategies. Breast tissue and skin alignment maintained the breast target coverage marginally better than bony alignment, with which the posterior CTV along the chest wall is the predominant area affected by under-dosing. For target dose distribution, posture error appears more influential than breast error.