Radiation-related quality of life parameters after targeted intraoperative radiotherapy versus whole breast radiotherapy in patients with breast cancer: results from the randomized phase III trial TARGIT-A

Prevention and Treatment of Lymphedema in Breast Cancer

Breast cancer related lymphedema (BCRL) affects many breast cancer survivors and drastically affects their quality of life. There are several surveillance methods for BCRL that are critical at early detection. Prevention of BCRL involves knowledge of alternatives to aggressive axillary surgery, avoidance of axillary surgery, and de-escalation of axillary surgery. There are also techniques to better delineate the anatomy in the axilla to avoid taking nodes that drain the upper extremity. A multidisciplinary approach with medical oncology and radiation oncology can also help avoid unnecessary surgery or radiation that can together strongly increase the risk of BCRL.

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.

Comparison of adverse events in partial- or whole breast radiotherapy: investigation of cosmesis, toxicities and quality of life in a meta-analysis of randomized trials

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE

Adjuvant whole breast radiotherapy and systemic therapy are part of the current evidence-based treatment protocols for early breast cancer, after breast-conserving surgery. Numerous randomized trials have investigated the therapeutic effects of partial breast irradiation (PBI) compared to whole breast irradiation (WBI), limiting the treated breast tissue. These trials were designed to achieve equal control of the disease with possible reduction in adverse events, improvements in cosmesis and quality of life (QoL). In this meta-analysis, we aimed to investigate the differences between PBI and WBI in side effects and QoL.

MATERIAL/METHODS

We performed a systematic literature review searching for randomized trials comparing WBI and PBI in early-stage breast cancer with publication dates after 2009. The meta-analysis was performed using the published event rates and the effect-sizes for available acute and late adverse events. Additionally, we evaluated cosmetic outcomes as well as general and breast-specific QoL using the EORTC QLQ-C30 and QLQ-BR23 questionnaires.

RESULTS

Sixteen studies were identified (n = 19,085 patients). PBI was associated with a lower prevalence in any grade 1 + acute toxicity and grade 2 + skin toxicity (OR = 0.12; 95% CI 0.09-0.18; p < 0.001); (OR = 0.16; 95% CI 0.07-0.41; p < 0.001). There was neither a significant difference in late adverse events between the two treatments, nor in any unfavorable cosmetic outcomes, rated by either medical professionals or patients. PBI-technique using EBRT with twice-daily fractionation schedules resulted in worse cosmesis rated by patients (n = 3215; OR = 2.08; 95% CI 1.22-3.54; p = 0.007) compared to WBI. Maximum once-daily EBRT schedules (n = 2071; OR = 0.60; 95% CI 0.45-0.79; p < 0.001) and IORT (p = 0.042) resulted in better cosmetic results grade by medical professionals. Functional- and symptom-based QoL in the C30-scale was not different between PBI and WBI. Breast-specific QoL was superior after PBI in the subdomains of "systemic therapy side effects" as well as "breast-" and "arm symptoms".

CONCLUSION

The analysis of multiple randomized trials demonstrate a superiority of PBI in acute toxicity as well breast-specific quality of life, when compared with WBI. Overall, late toxicities and cosmetic results were similar. PBI-technique with a fractionation of twice-daily schedules resulted in worse cosmesis rated by patients.

Case Report: Bilateral targeted intraoperative radiotherapy: a safe and effective alternative for synchronous bilateral breast cancer

Background

The incidence of bilateral breast cancer (BBC) ranges from 1.4% to 11.8%. BBC irradiation is a challenge in current clinical practice due to the large target volume that must be irradiated while minimizing the dose to critical organs. Supine or prone breast techniques can be used, with the latter providing better organ sparing; both, however, result in lengthy treatment times. The use of Intra-operative radiotherapy (IORT) in breast cancer patients who choose breast conservation has been highlighted in previous studies, but there is a scarcity of literature analyzing the utility and applicability of IORT in BBC. This case series aims to highlight the applicability of administering bilateral IORT in patients with BBC.

Case reports

Five patients with bilateral early-stage breast cancer (or DCIS) were treated with breast-conserving surgery followed by bilateral IORT. Of the 10 breast cancers, 8 were diagnosed as either DCIS or IDC, while the other 2 were diagnosed as invasive lobular carcinoma and invasive carcinoma, respectively. During surgery, all patients received bilateral IORT. Furthermore, 1 patient received external beam radiation therapy after her final pathology revealed grade 3 DCIS. The IORT procedure was well tolerated by all five patients, and all patients received aromatase inhibitors as adjuvant therapy. Additionally, none of these patients showed evidence of disease after a 36-month median follow-up.

Conclusion

Our findings demonstrate the successful use of IORT for BCS in patients with BBC. Furthermore, none of the patients in our study experienced any complications, suggesting the feasibility of the use of IORT in BBC. Considering the benefits of improved patient compliance and a reduced number of multiple visits, IORT may serve as an excellent patient-centered alternative for BBC. Future studies are recommended to reinforce the applicability of IORT in patients with BBC.

Tumor Bed Boost Radiotherapy in the Conservative Treatment of Breast Cancer: A Review of Intra-Operative Techniques and Outcomes

Conservative surgery is the preferred treatment in the management of breast cancer followed by adjuvant whole-breast irradiation. Since the tumor bed is the main site of relapse, boost doses are conveniently administered according to risk factors for local relapse to increase the efficacy of the treatment. The benefit of a radiation boost is well established and it can be performed by several techniques like brachytherapy, external radiation or intraoperative radiotherapy. Greater precision in localizing the tumor cavity, immediacy and increased biological response are the main advantages of intraoperative boost irradiation. This modality of treatment can be performed by means of mobile electron accelerators or low-photon X-ray devices. There is a lot of research and some published series analyzing the results of the use of an intraoperative boost as an adjuvant treatment, after neoadjuvant systemic therapy and in combination with some reconstructive surgeries. This review discusses advantages of intraoperative radiotherapy and presents the main results of a boost in terms of local control, survival, tolerance and cosmesis.

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.

Postoperative cosmetic outcome of intraoperative radiotherapy in comparison to whole breast radiotherapy in early stage breast cancer; a retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

In this study, we aim to evaluate the cosmetic outcome differences between Intraoperative electron beam radiation therapy (IOERT) and whole breast radiotherapy (WBR) with further investigation of boosted IOERT.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study was conducted in two referral centers in Tehran, Iran. 116 women aged 30 to 79 with early-stage breast cancer (T0-2N0-1M0) eligible for breast conservation were divided into two groups of 58 based on the intervention they received, and further subgroups were defined based on receiving boosted IOERT. Patients in both groups underwent breast conservation surgery and those in the IOERT group received either a 21 Gy radical dose (radical IOERT) or 12 Gy boosted electron beam radiotherapy and a routine fractionated dose of 50 Gy in 25 sessions of WBR (boosted IOERT). Those in the WBR group were administered 50Gy in 32 sessions. Physician-assessed cosmetic outcome was defined as the primary result and incidence of fat necrosis and fibrosis and post-operative chronic pain were secondary outcomes.

RESULTS

Post-operative cosmetic outcome scores and chronic pain, showed no significant difference between the two groups. The median cosmetic score in both groups was 9. Fat necrosis and fibrosis had significantly higher rates in the IOERT group (P.

VALUE

0.001). However, the majority (21/34 or 61.8%) of this complication was observed in the boosted IOERT subgroup and no statistical significance was recorded between the radical IOERT subgroup and the WBR group.

CONCLUSIONS

In early-stage breast cancer treatment, radical IOERT has noninferiority compared to WBR in terms of cosmesis. Regarding fat necrosis and fibrosis, boosted IOERT was associated with higher rates in comparison to other groups. Therefore, radical IOERT seems to be a better treatment option for selected patients.

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.

Effects of a novel form of intraoperative radiation therapy on quality of life among patients with early-stage breast cancer

PURPOSE

To investigate patient-perceived quality of life (QOL) among patients treated with a novel form of breast intraoperative radiation therapy (PB-IORT).

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Patients treated with PB-IORT as part of a phase II clinical trial from 2013 to 2020 were identified. Patients were given the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) core 30-item Quality of Life Questionnaire (QLQ-C30) encompassing global health, functionality, and symptomatology at baseline, 1-month, 6-months, 12-months, and 24-months after PB-IORT. Scores were on a 100-point scale with change greater than 10 considered clinically significant. Scores at interval follow-up were compared to baseline using repeated measure modeling with an unstructured covariance matrix.

RESULTS

The cohort consisted of 303 patients, a majority of which were White (84.2%) with a median age of 64 years (IQR: 52, 76). One month after PB-IORT, a decline from baseline in physical (-2.5, 95% CI: -4.4 - -0.55, p = 0.01), role (-7.6, 95% CI: -11.7 - -3.5, p < 0.001), and social functioning (-3.0, 95% CI: -5.5 - -0.42, p = 0.02) were observed, which correlated with increased fatigue (8.4, 95% CI: 5.5-11.3, p < 0.001). At 6 months, nearly all QOL measures returned to baseline or improved. There were no statistically or clinically significant differences from baseline in overall global health. All functional and symptom scale differences were less than 10, indicating minimal clinical significance.

CONCLUSIONS

PB-IORT has minimal negative impact on QOL, further supporting this patient-centered treatment approach for early-stage breast cancer.

The POLO (Partially Omitted Lobe) approach to safely treat in-breast recurrence after intraoperative radiotherapy with electrons

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study is to evaluate feasibility of salvage 4-week hypofractionated whole breast radiotherapy (WBRT) in patients with in-breast recurrence after receiving intraoperative radiotherapy with electrons (IOERT) for primary breast cancer (BC).

METHODS

BC patients who had repeated quadrantectomy underwent modified WBRT with intensity-modulated radiotherapy using Helical Tomotherapy to underdose the IOERT region. This approach, called POLO (Partially Omitted Lobe), excluded the IOERT volume from receiving the full prescription dose.

RESULTS

Nine patients were treated with this approach, receiving 45 Gy in 20 fractions. A simultaneous integrated boost of 2.5 Gy in 20 fractions was delivered in 6/9 patients. Dose constraints and planning objectives were reported. No severe toxicity was reported while local control and overall survival were 100%.

CONCLUSION

The POLO approach is technically feasible and capable to achieve a significant reduction of radiation dose delivered to the previous treated IOERT area.

ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE

The study demonstrates the technical and dosimetric feasibility of conservative salvage whole breast radiotherapy, while sparing the area already treated with IORT, in patients with in-breast recurrence.

Intraoperative irradiation in breast cancer: preliminary results in 80 patients as partial breast irradiation or anticipated boost prior to hypo-fractionated whole breast irradiation

Purpose

To present the first results of intraoperative irradiation (IORT) in breast cancer with a low-energy photon system used as partial breast irradiation (PBI) or as an anticipated boost before whole breast hypo-fractionated irradiation (IORT + WBI), concerning tolerance, side effects, quality of life, and patient-reported outcomes.

Materials and methods

Eighty patients treated with an Intrabeam^® system of 50 kV X-rays received a 20 Gy dose intraoperatively were included. Moderate daily hypofractionation of 2.7 Gy in 15 fractions up to 40.5 Gy was administered if high-risk factors were present. Acute post-operative toxicity, surgery complications, chronic toxicity, patient-reported cosmesis and Breast-Q questionnaire were performed at follow-up visits.

Results

Thirty-one patients were treated as PBI and the remaining 49 as IORT + WBI. Only the IORT + WBI group presented acute toxicity, mainly mild acute dermatitis (11 patients) and one subacute mastitis. A total of 20 patients presented fibrosis (18 patients grade I, 2 patients grade II), 15 (30.5%) patients in the IORT + WBI group and 3 (9.6%) patients in the group of PBI. The cosmesis evaluation in 73 patients resulted poor, fair, good or excellent in 2, 7, 38 and 26 patients, respectively. In PBI group Breast-Q scored higher, especially in terms of their psychosocial well-being (78 vs 65) and satisfaction with radiation-induced toxicity (77 vs 72, respectively) compared to IORT + WBI group.

Conclusion

IORT is a well-tolerated procedure with low toxicity, good cosmesis and favorable patient-reported outcomes mainly when administered as PBI.

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.

Intra-operative Radiation Therapy versus Whole Breast External Beam Radiotherapy: A Comparison of Patient-Reported Outcomes

Introduction

This project sought to compare patient-reported outcomes between patients who received intra-operative radiation therapy (IORT) and those who qualified for IORT but received whole-breast external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) following breast-conserving surgery (BCS).

Methods

Three scales from the BREAST-Q Breast Cancer BCT Module Version 2.0 questionnaire were used to collect patient-reported outcomes regarding post-operative physical well-being of the chest, post-operative satisfaction with breast cosmesis, and post-operative adverse effects of radiation.

Results

Patients who received EBRT travelled farther on average than patients who received IORT to complete treatment. Respondents who received IORT reported better physical well-being of the chest than those who received EBRT. Regression revealed that the respondent’s age was the determining factor in the difference between IORT and EBRT post-operative physical well-being scores, where younger patients report poorer well-being. There was no difference in patient-reported outcomes regarding post-operative satisfaction with breast cosmesis or adverse effects of radiation.

Conclusions

Patients who received IORT reported better physical well-being of the chest than patients who received EBRT. There appeared to be a relationship between age and physical well-being of chest. This study suggested that there was no difference in patient-reported outcomes concerning post-operative satisfaction with breast cosmesis or post-operative adverse effects of radiation between patients who received IORT and those who received EBRT.

Comparing Local and Systemic Control between Partial- and Whole-Breast Radiotherapy in Low-Risk Breast Cancer-A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Trials

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE

The standard treatment for localized low-risk breast cancer is breast-conserving surgery, followed by adjuvant radiotherapy and appropriate systemic therapy. As the majority of local recurrences occur at the site of the primary tumor, numerous trials have investigated partial-breast irradiation (PBI) instead of whole-breast treatment (WBI) using a multitude of irradiation techniques and fractionation regimens. This meta-analysis addresses the impact on disease-specific endpoints, such as local and regional control, as well as disease-free survival of PBI compared to that of WBI in published randomized trials.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

We conducted a systematic literature review and searched for randomized trials comparing WBI and PBI in early-stage breast cancer with publication dates after 2009. The meta-analysis was based on the published event rates and the effect sizes for available oncological endpoints of at least two trials reporting on them. We evaluated in-breast tumor recurrences (IBTR), local recurrences at the primary site and elsewhere in the ipsilateral breast, regional recurrences (RR), distant metastasis-free interval (DMFI), disease-free survival (DFS), contralateral breast cancer (CBC), and second primary cancer (SPC). Furthermore, we aimed to assess the impact of different PBI techniques and subgroups on IBTR. We performed all statistical analyses using the inverse variance heterogeneity model to pool effect sizes.

RESULTS

For the intended meta-analysis, we identified 13 trials (overall 15,561 patients) randomizing between PBI and WBI. IBTR was significantly higher after PBI (OR = 1.66; CI-95%: 1.07-2.58; p = 0.024) with an absolute difference of 1.35%. We detected significant heterogeneity in the analysis of the PBI technique with intraoperative radiotherapy resulting in higher local relapse rates (OR = 3.67; CI-95%: 2.28-5.90; p < 0.001). Other PBI techniques did not show differences to WBI in IBTR. Both strategies were equally effective at the primary tumor site, but PBI resulted in statistically more IBTRs elsewhere in the ipsilateral breast. IBTRs after WBI were more likely to be located at the primary tumor bed, whereas they appeared equally distributed within the breast after PBI. RR was also more frequent after PBI (OR = 1.75; CI-95%: 1.07-2.88; p < 0.001), yet we did not detect any differences in DMFI (OR = 1.08; CI-95%: 0.89-1.30; p = 0.475). DFS was significantly longer in patients treated with WBI (OR = 1.14; CI-95%: 1.02-1.27; p = 0.003). CBC and SPC were not different in the test groups (OR = 0.81; CI-95%: 0.65-1.01; p = 0.067 and OR = 1.09; CI-95%: 0.85-1.40; p = 0.481, respectively).

CONCLUSION

Limiting the target volume to partial-breast radiotherapy appears to be appropriate when selecting patients with a low risk for local and regional recurrences and using a suitable technique.

Single-dose intraoperative radiotherapy during lumpectomy for breast cancer: an innovative patient-centred treatment

In the randomised TARGIT-A trial, risk-adapted targeted intraoperative radiotherapy (TARGIT-IORT) during lumpectomy was non-inferior to whole-breast external beam radiotherapy, for local recurrence. In the long-term, no difference was found in any breast cancer outcome, whereas there were fewer deaths from non-breast-cancer causes. TARGIT-IORT should be included in pre-operative consultations with eligible patients.

Prevention of Breast Cancer-Related Lymphedema

Tremendous progress has been made over the past several decades in the treatment of breast cancer. Mortality and recurrence rates continue to decline. Our ability to tailor patient- and tumor-specific treatments has rapidly advanced. The vast majority of our patients can safely have breast conservation. Unfortunately, for many patients, survivorship is burdened by ongoing quality-of-life issues. Most breast cancer patients are asymptomatic at presentation, and the onus is on us to preserve this. Surgery, radiation, and systemic therapy can result in long-term toxicities that can be amplified with multimodality approaches. We must strive to apply minimally effective therapies rather than a maximally tolerated approach. Breast cancer-related lymphedema (BCRL) is a particularly dreaded chronic complication. This review strives to give the reader a better understanding of BCRL and shed light on wisely choosing an integration of treatment modalities that minimizes BCRL risk. Key literature on emerging concepts is highlighted.

Impact of intraoperative radiotherapy on the perioperative period of patients after breast-conserving surgery

BACKGROUND

To investigate the effect of intraoperative radiotherapy (IORT) in the perioperative period of patients after breast-conserving surgery (BCS).

METHODS

The clinical data of 100 patients with early breast cancer undergoing breast-conserving surgery (BCS) followed by treatment with IORT using the Intrabeam system (Carl Zeiss Meditec, Oberkochen, Germany) (BCS + IORT group, n=100) between June 2016 and December 2019 were analyzed and compared with the data of 60 matched patients who only underwent breast-conserving therapy over the same period (BCS group, n=60). The surgical settings and postoperative acute complications between the groups were assessed.

RESULTS

There was no significant statistical difference between the groups in terms of age, tumor size, grading, lymph node status, hormone receptor status, and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER-2) status (P>0.05). The BCS + IORT group had a significantly longer surgery duration (P<0.05), but there was no significant statistical difference in terms of intraoperative blood loss, amount of bleeding, drainage tube removal time, postoperative length of hospitalization, incision suture removal time, or incidence of postoperative complications (P>0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

IORT using the Intrabeam system safely delivers radiation therapy, is well-tolerated, has acceptable acute toxicity, and does not significant increase the risk of surgery or the incidence of perioperative complications.

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.

No Difference in Overall Survival and Non-Breast Cancer Deaths after Partial Breast Radiotherapy Compared to Whole Breast Radiotherapy-A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Trials

Purpose/objective: Adjuvant radiotherapy after breast conserving surgery is the standard approach in early stage breast cancer. However, the extent of breast tissue that has to be targeted with radiation has not been determined yet. Traditionally, the whole breast was covered by two opposing tangential beams. Several randomized trials have tested partial breast irradiation (PBI) compared to whole breast irradiation (WBI) using different radiation techniques. There is evidence from randomized trials that PBI might result in lower mortality rates compared to WBI. We aimed to reassess this question using current data from randomized trials. Material/methods: We performed a systematic literature review searching for randomized trials comparing WBI and PBI in early stage breast cancer with publication dates after 2009. The meta-analysis was performed using the published event rates and the effect sizes for overall survival (OS), breast cancer-specific survival (BCSS), and non-breast cancer death (NBCD) as investigated endpoints. Analysis of subgroups using different radiation techniques was intended. We used hazard ratios (HR) and risk differences (RD) to estimate pooled effect sizes. Statistical analysis was performed using the inverse variance heterogeneity model. Results: We identified eleven studies randomizing between PBI and WBI. We did not find significant differences in OS (n = 14,070; HR = 1.02; CI-95%: 0.89–1.16; p = 0.810, and n = 15,203; RD = −0.001; CI-95%: −0.008–0.006; p = 0.785) and BCSS (n = 15,203; RD = 0.001; CI-95%: −0.002–0.005; p = 0.463). PBI also did not result in a significant decrease of NBCD (n = 15,203; RD = −0.003; CI-95%: −0.010–0.003; p = 0.349). A subgroup analysis by radiation technique also did not point to any detectable differences. Conclusion: In contrast to a previous assessment of mortality, we could not find a detrimental effect of WBI on OS or NBCD. A longer follow-up might be necessary to fully assess the long-term mortality effects of PBI compared to WBI.

Accelerated Partial Breast Irradiation: A New Standard of Care?

Background

Breast-conserving therapy including lumpectomy and adjuvant whole breast irradiation (WBI) has become the standard therapy for early-stage breast cancer (EBC). Without WBI, the recurrence rate is significantly increased. However, when selecting patients at a low a priori risk of local recurrence only a small breast-cancer-specific mortality benefit, but no overall survival improvement, was detected for WBI. As most recurrences occur close to the lumpectomy cavity, accelerated partial breast irradiation (APBI) delivered exclusively to a limited volume of tissue around the initial lumpectomy site, has gained increased attention and is now discussed as an alternative to WBI for selected EBC patients.

Summary

Numerous techniques for APBI (interstitial brachytherapy, external beam-based APBI, intraoperative radiotherapy, MR-guided radiotherapy) allow treatment delivery in a shorter period of time, and radiation oncologists expect to further reduce side effects by using these new techniques, with improvements in cosmetics and quality of life. In this review, we aim to describe the existing evidence for the feasibility and effectiveness of different APBI techniques used in modern radiotherapy.

Key Messages

APBI has provided outcomes similar to WBI combined with potentially reduced toxicity. While appropriate patient selection persists to be crucial for acceptable recurrence rates, the precise definition of patients suitable for APBI remains a matter of discussion. As long-term data are often still lacking, special attention should be paid to late side effects and long-term outcomes. Decision-making on appropriate treatment techniques should take into account not only local control rates, but also the impact on the patient's quality of life.

Intraoperative radiotherapy for breast cancer treatment efficiently targets the tumor bed preventing breast adipose stromal cell outgrowth

OBJECTIVES

Mesenchymal stromal cells (MSC) in bone marrow have been shown to be radioresistant, which is related to pronounced DNA repair mechanisms. Intraoperative radiotherapy (IORT) during breast-conserving surgery for early breast cancer is an innovative technique applying low energy x‑ray to the tumor bed immediately after removal of the tumor. IORT is considered to reduce the risk of local tumor recurrence by directly targeting cells of the tumor bed and altering the local microenvironment. Aim of this study was to investigate whether IORT affects the outgrowth potential of breast adipose tissue-derived MSC (bASC) as part of the tumor bed.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

After surgical tumor resection, biopsies of the tumor bed were taken before (pre IORT) and after IORT (post IORT) and processed applying well-established protocols for ASC isolation and characterization.

RESULTS

In all, 95% of pre IORT tumor bed samples yielded persistently outgrowing bASC with typical ASC characteristics: fibroblastoid morphology, proliferation, adipogenic and osteogenic differentiation and ASC surface marker expression. However, none of the post IORT samples yielded persistent outgrowth of bASC.

CONCLUSIONS

After breast-conserving surgery, approximately 90% of local recurrences emerge in close proximity to the initial tumor bed, potentially reflecting a significant contribution of the tumor bed to relapse. Our data show that IORT, besides the proven effect on breast cancer cells, efficiently modifies the tumor environment by having an impact on tumor bed bASC. This effect on tumor bed stromal cells might contribute to reduce the risk of tumor relapse and metastases.

Intraoperative radiation therapy in early-stage breast cancer: Presence of lobular features is not associated with increased rate of requiring additional therapy

BACKGROUND

There is a paucity of data regarding the application of IORT to the treatment of carcinomas with lobular features.

METHODS

This study includes women with invasive breast cancer who underwent breast conservation in combination with IORT from February 2011 to October 2016. Patients whose final pathology did not satisfy inclusion criteria or had inadequate margins were recommended to undergo additional therapy (AT) with WBRT as well as re-excision of inadequate margins.

RESULTS

243 invasive breast cancers were treated with IORT. The lobular features (LF) group comprised 62 patients and the invasive ductal carcinoma (IDCA) group consisted of 172 patients. Rate of AT was similar between groups (LF 19 patients, 30.6%, vs IDCA 56 patients, 32.6%, p = 0.87) groups. Lobular histology was not associated with a need for AT. Local recurrence rate for the cohort was 1.2% with a median follow up of 46 months. There was no difference in recurrence or survival after 46 months of follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

IORT is an effective treatment option for well-selected patients with early breast cancer and can be considered for patients with lobular histology.

Intraoperative radiotherapy (IORT) versus whole-breast external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) in early stage breast cancer: results from SEER database

PURPOSE

Intraoperative radiotherapy (IORT) has emerged as an alternative to whole-breast external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) for early breast cancer. This study aimed to investigate the risk factors for survival after IORT or whole-breast EBRT in breast cancer patients.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Breast cancer patients undergoing IORT or whole-breast EBRT were included from the surveillance, epidemiology, and end results database. Risk factors for overall survival (OS) and cancer-specific survival (CSS) were identified by Cox proportional hazards regression analysis.

RESULTS

The IORT and EBRT groups did not differ significantly in OS and CSS. T2 stage (tumor size > 2 cm) was associated with poorer OS (aHR 3.49, 95% CI 1.05-11.62, P = 0.042), whereas ER-positive tumors were associated with better OS (aHR 0.26, 95% CI 0.09-0.76, P = 0.014).

CONCLUSION

IORT was not inferior than EBRT considering the OS and CSS in the short-term follow-up of early breast cancer. It may be a reasonable alternative to EBRT for early breast cancer in select patients with favorable tumor size and receptor status, given the need for long-term monitoring of local control and radiation toxicity.

Health-related quality of life of breast cancer patients after accelerated partial breast irradiation using intraoperative or external beam radiotherapy technique

PURPOSE

To compare health-related quality of life (HRQL) in elderly breast cancer patients between two types of Accelerated Partial Breast Irradiation: intraoperative radiotherapy (IORT) and external beam APBI (EB-APBI).

METHODS

Between 2011 and 2016 women ≥60 years undergoing breast conserving therapy for early stage breast cancer were included in a prospective multi-centre cohort study. Patients were treated with electron IORT (1 × 23.3 Gy) or photon EB-APBI (10 × 3.85 Gy daily). HRQL was measured by the EORTC-QLQ C30 and BR23 questionnaires before surgery and at several time points until 1 year.

RESULTS

HRQoL data was available of 204 IORT and 158 EB-APBI patients. In longitudinal analyses emotional functioning and future perspective were significantly, but not clinically relevantly, worse in IORT-treated patients, and improved significantly during follow-up in both groups. All other aspects of HRQL slightly worsened after treatment and recovered within 3 months with an improvement until 1 year. Cross-sectional analysis showed that postoperatively fatigue and role functioning were significantly worse in IORT patients compared to EB-APBI patients who were not yet irradiated, but the difference was not clinically relevant. At other timepoints there were no significant differences. Multivariable analysis at 1 year identified comorbidity and systemic therapy as risk factors for a worse global health score (GHS).

CONCLUSIONS

EB-APBI and IORT were well tolerated. Despite a temporary deterioration after treatment, all HRQL scales recovered within 3 months resulting in no clinically relevant differences until 1 year between groups nor compared to baseline levels.

Patient preferences for adjuvant radiotherapy in early breast cancer are strongly influenced by treatment received through random assignment

OBJECTIVE

TARGIT-A randomised women with early breast cancer to receive external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) or intraoperative radiotherapy (TARGIT-IORT). This study aimed to identify what extra risk of recurrence patients would accept for perceived benefits and risks of different radiotherapy treatments.

METHODS

Patient preferences were determined by self-rated trade-off questionnaires in two studies: Stage (1) 209 TARGIT-A participants (TARGIT-IORTn = 108, EBRTn = 101); Stage (2) 123 non-trial patients yet to receive radiotherapy (pre-treatment group), with 85 also surveyed post-radiotherapy. Patients traded-off risks of local recurrence in preference selection between TARGIT-IORT and EBRT.

RESULTS

TARGIT-IORT patients were more accepting of IORT than EBRT patients with 60% accepting the highest increased risk presented (4%-6%) compared to 12% of EBRT patients, and 2% not accepting IORT at all compared to 43% of EBRT patients. Pre-treatment patients were more accepting of IORT than post-treatment patients with 23% accepting the highest increased risk presented compared to 15% of post-treatment patients, and 15% not accepting IORT at all compared to 41% of pre-treatment patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Breast cancer patients yet to receive radiotherapy accept a higher recurrence risk than the actual risk found in TARGIT-A. Measured patient preferences are highly influenced by experience of treatment received. This finding challenges the validity of post-treatment preference studies.

A Prospective Analysis of Quality of Life and Toxicity Outcomes in Treating Early Breast Cancer With Breast Conservation Therapy and Intraoperative Radiation Therapy

Introduction: Intraoperative radiation therapy (IORT) is a minimally invasive radiation option for select patients with early stage breast cancer. This prospective, single institution, pilot study summarizes patient-reported quality of life (QoL) outcomes and clinician-reported toxicity following IORT following breast conservation therapy.

Methods: Forty-nine patients were enrolled in a prospective study from 2013 until 2015 to assess QoL and toxicity following breast conservation therapy and IORT. Nine patients did not meet criteria for IORT alone on final pathology and required whole breast irradiation afterwards. These patients were evaluated separately. Validated QoL questionnaires were provided to patients at 1-week, 1-month, and subsequent 6-month intervals for 2 years. Radiation-related toxicity symptoms were evaluated by clinicians at the same time intervals. Likert scale responses were converted to continuous variables to depict patient-reported and clinician-reported outcomes.

Results: Outcomes were analyzed as weighted averages of the Likert scale for each symptom. Responses for negative QoL symptoms ranged largely from 0 (none) to 2 (moderate). Responses for positive QoL symptoms ranged largely from 3 (quite a bit) to 4 (very much). Seventy-five percent of patients developed a toxicity; however, 99% of the toxicities were grades 1 and 2. All toxicities demonstrated a downward trend over time, with the exception of breast fibrosis and nodularity, which increased over time. There were no local recurrences upon 2-year follow up.

Conclusion: Early stage breast cancer treated with IORT yields favorable QoL outcomes and minimal toxicity profiles with adequate short-term local control.

Improved long-term patient-reported health and well-being outcomes of early-stage breast cancer treated with partial breast proton therapy

Background

Because early‐stage breast cancer can be treated successfully by a variety of breast‐conservation approaches, long‐term quality of life (QoL) is an important consideration in assessing treatment outcomes for these patients. This study compares patient‐reported QoL outcomes among women with stage 0‐2 disease treated via lumpectomy followed by whole breast irradiation (WBI) or partial breast proton irradiation (PBPT).

Methods

In this cross‐sectional study, 129 participants evaluated QoL several years post‐treatment by responding to subjective instruments, including established scalar questionnaires and self‐report measures. Responses were averaged between the two groups.

Results

At 6.5 years (median) postdiagnosis, participants’ demographic, and clinical characteristics were similar. Patient‐reported outcomes were reported as mean scale scores for the two groups, all displaying significant differences favoring PBPT, including: cosmetic breast cancer treatment outcome scale (BCTOS) (PBPT mean 1.45, WBI mean 1.88, P < 0.001); breast pain (PBPT mean 1.30, WBI mean 1.67, P < 0.05); breast texture (BPT mean 1.44, WBI mean 1.91, P < 0.001); clothing fit (PBPT mean 1.06, WBI 1.46, P < 0.001); fatigue (PBPT mean 2.24, WBI mean 3.77, P < 0.002); impact of daily life fatigue on personal relations (OBPT mean 0.83, WBI mean 2.15, P < 0.001); and self‐consciousness (appearance dissatisfaction) (PBPT mean 1.38, WBI mean 1.77, P < 0.004).

Conclusion

Patients’ responses suggest that PBPT is associated with improved overall QoL compared to standard whole breast treatment. These self‐perceptions are reported by patients who are 5‐10 years post‐treatment, and that PBPT may enhance QoL in a multitude of interrelated ways.

Intraoperative radiation therapy for breast cancer patients: current perspectives

Accelerated partial breast irradiation (APBI) provides an attractive alternative to whole breast irradiation (WBI) through normal tissue radiation exposure and reduced treatment duration. Intraoperative radiation therapy (IORT) is a form of APBI with the shortest time interval, as it delivers the entirety of a planned radiation course at the time of breast surgery. However, faster is not always better, and IORT has been met with healthy skepticism. Patients treated with IORT have an increased compliance and overall satisfaction when compared to patients treated with WBI. However, early randomized trial results demonstrated an increased rate of recurrence after IORT, slowing its widespread adoption. Despite these controversies, IORT utilization is increasing nationally and several novel developments are aimed at continuing to minimize the risk of recurrence and treatment-related toxicity while maximizing the patient experience.

Accelerated partial breast irradiation compared with whole breast radiation therapy: a breast cancer cohort study measuring change in radiation side-effects severity and quality of life

PURPOSE

Radiotherapy (RT) after breast-conserving surgery for early-stage breast cancer patients has similar survival benefits with whole breast RT (WBRT) or accelerated partial breast irradiation (APBI). However, the impact of RT type and side-effects severity on change in quality of life (QOL) is unknown. We examined changes in RT side-effects severity and QOL by RT type.

METHODS

We analyzed data from a cohort of 285 newly diagnosed early-stage breast cancer patients with tumor size ≤3.0 cm and lymph node-negative disease. Patients (93 [32.6%] stage 0; 49 [17.2%] non-white; mean age = 59.3 years) completed four interviews (6 weeks, 6, 12, and 24 months) after definitive surgical treatment. We measured severity of RT side effects, fatigue and skin irritation, using a 5-point scale (1 "not at all" to 5 "all the time") and measured QOL using the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Breast (FACT-B) and RAND 36-item Health Survey Vitality subscale. Repeated-measures analysis of covariance of each outcome controlled for demographic, clinical/treatment, and psychosocial factors.

RESULTS

Patients initiated RT by 6 months (113 received APBI; 172 received WBRT) and completed RT by 12 months. Patients receiving WBRT (vs. APBI) reported greater increase in fatigue and skin irritation severity from 6-week to 6-month interviews (each P < 0.001). Improvement in neither total FACT-B nor Vitality differed significantly by RT type over 2-year follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

Findings suggest that early-stage breast cancer patients can benefit from less-severe, short-term side effects of APBI with no differential impact on QOL change within 2-year follow-up.

Accelerated Partial Breast Irradiation: Executive summary for the update of an ASTRO Evidence-Based Consensus Statement

PURPOSE

To update the accelerated partial breast irradiation Consensus Statement published in 2009 and provide guidance on use of intraoperative radiation therapy (IORT) for partial breast irradiation in early-stage breast cancer, based on published evidence complemented by expert opinion.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

A systematic PubMed search using the same terms as the original Consensus Statement yielded 419 articles; 44 articles were selected. The authors synthesized the published evidence and, through a series of conference calls and e-mails, reached consensus regarding the recommendations.

RESULTS

The new recommendations include lowering the age in the "suitability group" from 60 to 50 years and in the "cautionary group" to 40 years for patients who meet all other elements of suitability (Table 1). Patients with low-risk ductal carcinoma in situ, as per Radiation Therapy Oncology Group 9804 criteria, were categorized in the "suitable" group. The task force agreed to maintain the current criteria based on margin status. Recommendations for the use of IORT for breast cancer patients include: counseling patients regarding the higher risk of ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence with IORT compared with whole breast irradiation; the need for prospective monitoring of long-term local control and toxicity with low-energy radiograph IORT given limited follow-up; and restriction of IORT to women with invasive cancer considered "suitable."

CONCLUSION

These recommendations will provide updated clinical guidance regarding use of accelerated partial breast irradiation for radiation oncologists and other specialists participating in the care of breast cancer patients.

An international randomised controlled trial to compare TARGeted Intraoperative radioTherapy (TARGIT) with conventional postoperative radiotherapy after breast-conserving surgery for women with early-stage breast cancer (the TARGIT-A trial)

BACKGROUND

Based on our laboratory work and clinical trials we hypothesised that radiotherapy after lumpectomy for breast cancer could be restricted to the tumour bed. In collaboration with the industry we developed a new radiotherapy device and a new surgical operation for delivering single-dose radiation to the tumour bed - the tissues at highest risk of local recurrence. We named it TARGeted Intraoperative radioTherapy (TARGIT). From 1998 we confirmed its feasibility and safety in pilot studies.

OBJECTIVE

To compare TARGIT within a risk-adapted approach with whole-breast external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) over several weeks.

DESIGN

The TARGeted Intraoperative radioTherapy Alone (TARGIT-A) trial was a pragmatic, prospective, international, multicentre, non-inferiority, non-blinded, randomised (1 : 1 ratio) clinical trial. Originally, randomisation occurred before initial lumpectomy (prepathology) and, if allocated TARGIT, the patient received it during the lumpectomy. Subsequently, the postpathology stratum was added in which randomisation occurred after initial lumpectomy, allowing potentially easier logistics and a more stringent case selection, but which needed a reoperation to reopen the wound to give TARGIT as a delayed procedure. The risk-adapted approach meant that, in the experimental arm, if pre-specified unsuspected adverse factors were found postoperatively after receiving TARGIT, EBRT was recommended. Pragmatically, this reflected how TARGIT would be practised in the real world.

SETTING

Thirty-three centres in 11 countries.

PARTICIPANTS

Women who were aged ≥ 45 years with unifocal invasive ductal carcinoma preferably ≤ 3.5 cm in size.

INTERVENTIONS

TARGIT within a risk-adapted approach and whole-breast EBRT.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcome measure was absolute difference in local recurrence, with a non-inferiority margin of 2.5%. Secondary outcome measures included toxicity and breast cancer-specific and non-breast-cancer mortality.

RESULTS

In total, 3451 patients were recruited between March 2000 and June 2012. The following values are 5-year Kaplan-Meier rates for TARGIT compared with EBRT. There was no statistically significant difference in local recurrence between TARGIT and EBRT. TARGIT was non-inferior to EBRT overall [TARGIT 3.3%, 95% confidence interval (CI) 2.1% to 5.1% vs. EBRT 1.3%, 95% CI 0.7% to 2.5%; p = 0.04; P_{non-inferiority} = 0.00000012] and in the prepathology stratum (n = 2298) when TARGIT was given concurrently with lumpectomy (TARGIT 2.1%, 95% CI 1.1% to 4.2% vs. EBRT 1.1%, 95% CI 0.5% to 2.5%; p = 0.31; P_{non-inferiority} = 0.0000000013). With delayed TARGIT postpathology (n = 1153), the between-group difference was larger than 2.5% and non-inferiority was not established for this stratum (TARGIT 5.4%, 95% CI 3.0% to 9.7% vs. EBRT 1.7%, 95% CI 0.6% to 4.9%; p = 0.069; P_{non-inferiority} = 0.06640]. The local recurrence-free survival was 93.9% (95% CI 90.9% to 95.9%) when TARGIT was given with lumpectomy compared with 92.5% (95% CI 89.7% to 94.6%) for EBRT (p = 0.35). In a planned subgroup analysis, progesterone receptor (PgR) status was found to be the only predictor of outcome: hormone-responsive patients (PgR positive) had similar 5-year local recurrence with TARGIT during lumpectomy (1.4%, 95% CI 0.5% to 3.9%) as with EBRT (1.2%, 95% CI 0.5% to 2.9%; p = 0.77). Grade 3 or 4 radiotherapy toxicity was significantly reduced with TARGIT. Overall, breast cancer mortality was much the same between groups (TARGIT 2.6%, 95% CI 1.5% to 4.3% vs. EBRT 1.9%, 95% CI 1.1% to 3.2%; p = 0.56) but there were significantly fewer non-breast-cancer deaths with TARGIT (1.4%, 95% CI 0.8% to 2.5% vs. 3.5%, 95% CI 2.3% to 5.2%; p = 0.0086), attributable to fewer deaths from cardiovascular causes and other cancers, leading to a trend in reduced overall mortality in the TARGIT arm (3.9%, 95% CI 2.7% to 5.8% vs. 5.3%, 95% CI 3.9% to 7.3%; p = 0.099]. Health economic analyses suggest that TARGIT was statistically significantly less costly than EBRT, produced similar quality-adjusted life-years, had a positive incremental net monetary benefit that was borderline statistically significantly different from zero and had a probability of > 90% of being cost-effective. There appears to be little uncertainty in the point estimates, based on deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses. If TARGIT were given instead of EBRT in suitable patients, it might potentially reduce costs to the health-care providers in the UK by £8-9.1 million each year. This does not include environmental, patient and societal costs.

LIMITATIONS

The number of local recurrences is small but the number of events for local recurrence-free survival is not as small (TARGIT 57 vs. EBRT 59); occurrence of so few events (< 3.5%) also implies that both treatments are effective and any difference is unlikely to be large. Not all 3451 patients were followed up for 5 years; however, more than the number of patients required to answer the main trial question (n = 585) were followed up for > 5 years.

CONCLUSIONS

For patients with breast cancer (women who are aged ≥ 45 years with hormone-sensitive invasive ductal carcinoma that is up to 3.5 cm in size), TARGIT concurrent with lumpectomy within a risk-adapted approach is as effective as, safer than and less expensive than postoperative EBRT.

FUTURE WORK

The analyses will be repeated with longer follow-up. Although this may not change the primary result, the larger number of events may confirm the effect on overall mortality and allow more detailed subgroup analyses. The TARGeted Intraoperative radioTherapy Boost (TARGIT-B) trial is testing whether or not a tumour bed boost given intraoperatively (TARGIT) boost is superior to a tumour bed boost given as part of postoperative EBRT.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN34086741 and ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00983684.

FUNDING

University College London Hospitals (UCLH)/University College London (UCL) Comprehensive Biomedical Research Centre, UCLH Charities, Ninewells Cancer Campaign, National Health and Medical Research Council and German Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF). From September 2009 this project was funded by the NIHR Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 20, No. 73. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Partial breast irradiation 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). RT is given to sterilize tumour cells that may remain after surgery to decrease the risk of local tumour recurrence. 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 hypo-fractionated WBRT after breast-conserving therapy for early-stage breast cancer.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Breast Cancer Group Specialized Register (4 May 2015), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (2015, Issue 5), MEDLINE (January 1966 to 4 May 2015), EMBASE (1980 to 4 May 2015), CINAHL (4 May 2015) and Current Contents (4 May 2015). We searched the International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial Number Register (5 May 2015), the World Health Organization's International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (4 May 2015) and ClinicalTrials.gov (17 June 2015). We searched for grey literature: OpenGrey (17 June 2015), reference lists of articles, several conference proceedings and published abstracts, and applied no language restrictions.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized 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 and used Cochrane's 'Risk of bias' tool, and resolved any disagreements through discussion. We entered data into Review Manager 5 for analysis.

MAIN RESULTS

We included seven RCTs and studied 7586 women of the 8955 enrolled.Local recurrence-free survival appeared worse for women receiving PBI/APBI compared to WBRT (hazard ratio (HR) 1.62, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.11 to 2.35; six studies, 6820 participants, low-quality evidence). Cosmesis (physician-reported) appeared worse with PBI/APBI (odds ratio (OR) 1.51, 95% CI 1.17 to 1.95, five studies, 1720 participants, low-quality evidence). Overall survival did not differ with PBI/APBI (HR 0.90, 95% CI 0.74 to 1.09, five studies, 6718 participants, high-quality evidence).Late radiation toxicity (subcutaneous fibrosis) appeared worse with PBI/APBI (OR 6.58, 95% CI 3.08 to 14.06, one study, 766 participants, moderate-quality evidence). Acute skin toxicity appeared reduced with PBI/APBI (OR 0.04, 95% CI 0.02 to 0.09, two studies, 608 participants). Telangiectasia (OR 26.56, 95% CI 3.59 to 196.51, 1 study, 766 participants) and radiological fat necrosis (OR 1.58, 95% CI 1.02 to 2.43, three studies, 1319 participants) appeared worse with PBI/APBI. Late skin toxicity (OR 0.21, 95% CI 0.01 to 4.39, two studies, 608 participants) and breast pain (OR 2.17, 95% CI 0.56 to 8.44, one study, 766 participants) appeared not to differ with PBI/APBI.'Elsewhere primaries' (new primaries in the ipsilateral breast) appeared more frequent with PBI/APBI (OR 3.97, 95% CI 1.51 to 10.41, three studies, 3009 participants).We found no clear evidence of a difference for the comparison of PBI/APBI with WBRT for the outcomes of: cause-specific survival (HR 1.08, 95% CI 0.73 to 1.58, five studies, 6718 participants, moderate-quality evidence), distant metastasis-free survival (HR 0.94, 95% CI 0.65 to 1.37, four studies, 3267 participants, moderate-quality evidence), relapse-free survival (HR 1.36, 95% CI 0.88 to 2.09, three studies, 3811 participants), loco-regional recurrence-free survival (HR 1.80, 95% CI 1.00 to 3.25, two studies, 3553 participants) or mastectomy rates (OR 1.20, 95% CI 0.77 to 1.87, three studies, 4817 participants, low-quality evidence). Compliance was met: more than 90% of the women in all studies received the RT they were assigned to receive. We found no data for the outcomes of costs, quality of life or consumer preference.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

It appeared that local recurrence and 'elsewhere primaries' (new primaries in the ipsilateral breast) are increased with PBI/APBI (the difference was small), but we found no evidence of detriment to other oncological outcomes. It appeared that cosmetic outcomes and some late effects were worse with PBI/APBI but its use was associated with less acute skin toxicity. The limitations of the data currently available mean that we cannot make definitive conclusions about the efficacy and safety or ways to deliver of PBI/APBI. We await completion of ongoing trials.

The INTRABEAM® Photon Radiotherapy System for the adjuvant treatment of early breast cancer: a systematic review and economic evaluation

BACKGROUND

Initial treatment for early breast cancer is usually either breast-conserving surgery (BCS) or mastectomy. After BCS, whole-breast external beam radiotherapy (WB-EBRT) is the standard of care. A potential alternative to post-operative WB-EBRT is intraoperative radiation therapy delivered by the INTRABEAM(®) Photon Radiotherapy System (Carl Zeiss, Oberkochen, Germany) to the tissue adjacent to the resection cavity at the time of surgery.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of INTRABEAM for the adjuvant treatment of early breast cancer during surgical removal of the tumour.

DATA SOURCES

Electronic bibliographic databases, including MEDLINE, EMBASE and The Cochrane Library, were searched from inception to March 2014 for English-language articles. Bibliographies of articles, systematic reviews, clinical guidelines and the manufacturer's submission were also searched. The advisory group was contacted to identify additional evidence.

METHODS

Systematic reviews of clinical effectiveness, health-related quality of life and cost-effectiveness were conducted. Two reviewers independently screened titles and abstracts for eligibility. Inclusion criteria were applied to full texts of retrieved papers by one reviewer and checked by a second reviewer. Data extraction and quality assessment were undertaken by one reviewer and checked by a second reviewer, and differences in opinion were resolved through discussion at each stage. Clinical effectiveness studies were included if they were carried out in patients with early operable breast cancer. The intervention was the INTRABEAM system, which was compared with WB-EBRT, and study designs were randomised controlled trials (RCTs). Controlled clinical trials could be considered if data from available RCTs were incomplete (e.g. absence of data on outcomes of interest). A cost-utility decision-analytic model was developed to estimate the costs, benefits and cost-effectiveness of INTRABEAM compared with WB-EBRT for early operable breast cancer.

RESULTS

One non-inferiority RCT, TARGeted Intraoperative radioTherapy Alone (TARGIT-A), met the inclusion criteria for the review. The review found that local recurrence was slightly higher following INTRABEAM than WB-EBRT, but the difference did not exceed the 2.5% non-inferiority margin providing INTRABEAM was given at the same time as BCS. Overall survival was similar with both treatments. Statistically significant differences in complications were found for the occurrence of wound seroma requiring more than three aspirations (more frequent in the INTRABEAM group) and for a Radiation Therapy Oncology Group toxicity score of grade 3 or 4 (less frequent in the INTRABEAM group). Cost-effectiveness base-case analysis indicates that INTRABEAM is less expensive but also less effective than WB-EBRT because it is associated with lower total costs but fewer total quality-adjusted life-years gained. However, sensitivity analyses identified four model parameters that can cause a switch in the treatment option that is considered cost-effective.

LIMITATIONS

The base-case result from the model is subject to uncertainty because the disease progression parameters are largely drawn from the single available RCT. The RCT median follow-up of 2 years 5 months may be inadequate, particularly as the number of participants with local recurrence is low. The model is particularly sensitive to this parameter.

CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS

A significant investment in INTRABEAM equipment and staff training (clinical and non-clinical) would be required to make this technology available across the NHS. Longer-term follow-up data from the TARGIT-A trial and analysis of registry data are required as results are currently based on a small number of events and economic modelling results are uncertain.

STUDY REGISTRATION

This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42013006720.

FUNDING

The National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme. Note that the economic model associated with this document is protected by intellectual property rights, which are owned by the University of Southampton. Anyone wishing to modify, adapt, translate, reverse engineer, decompile, dismantle or create derivative work based on the economic model must first seek the agreement of the property owners.

Is current clinical practice modified about intraoperative breast irradiation?

After the results obtained in the two randomized clinical trial, the ELIOT trial and the TARGIT-A trial, a heated debate is going on concerning the question of applying intraoperative radiotherapy (IORT) instead of postoperative whole breast irradiation (WBI) after breast conservative treatment. Currently, many centers are applying the IORT following the strict selection criteria dictated by the working groups American Society for Radiation Oncology (ASTRO) and Groupe Européen de Curiethérapie-European Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology (GEC-ESTRO) and monitoring the oncological outcome together with radiation toxicity on breast tissue. The clinical experience of the Geneva University Hospital regarding the use of the Intrabeam system is evaluated and compared with current evidences.

Risk factors for seroma evacuation in breast cancer patients treated with intraoperative radiotherapy

BACKGROUND

Novel techniques in oncology provide new treatment opportunities but also introduce different patterns of side effects. Intraoperative radiotherapy (IORT) allows a shortened overall treatment time for early breast cancer either combined with whole breast radiotherapy (WBRT), or alone. Although the early side effects of IORT are well known, data on clinically important late side effects, which require medical intervention, are scarce.

AIM

In this study, we analyze risk factors for seroma evacuation more than 6 months after IORT.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We evaluated 120 patients with a mean follow-up of 27.8 months (range: 7-52 months). Fifty-one patients received IORT only and 69 were additionally treated with WBRT.

RESULTS

Seroma evacuation was performed 6-38 months after IORT. Two (3.9%) events were observed in the IORT group and 14 (20%) in the IORT + WBRT group. Univariate (Kaplan-Meier) analysis showed that addition of WBRT to IORT increased the risk of seroma evacuation [hazard ratio = 5.5, 95% confidence interval: 2.0-14.7, P = 0.011]. In a multivariate analysis (Cox proportional hazards regression), WBRT and axillary lymph node dissection were significant risk factors for seroma evacuation (model P value = 0.0025).

CONCLUSIONS

WBRT applied after IORT is associated with increased risk of seroma evacuation, which might be considered as a late side effect.

Prospective evaluation of radiation-induced skin toxicity in a race/ethnically diverse breast cancer population

We evaluated predictors of radiation‐induced skin toxicity in a prospective study of a tri‐racial/ethnic breast cancer population. We evaluated patient demographics, tumor characteristics, and treatment variables in the first 392 patients in a prospective study assessing radiation‐induced skin toxicity. Logistic regression analyses were conducted to evaluate potential predictors of skin toxicity. The study consists of 59 non‐Hispanic whites (NHW; 15%), 241 Hispanic Whites (HW; 62%), 79 black or African Americans (AA; 20%), and 13 others (3%). Overall, 48% developed grade 0–1 skin toxicity, 49.8% grade 2, and 2.2% grade 3 by the National Cancer Institute's Common Toxicity Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) scale. Twenty‐one percent developed moist desquamation. In multivariate analysis, higher body mass index (BMI; OR = 2.09; 95%CI = 1.15, 3.82), higher disease stage (OR = 1.82; 95%CI = 1.06, 3.11), ER‐positive/PR‐negative status (OR = 2.74; 95%CI = 1.26, 5.98), and conventionally fractionated regimens (OR = 3.25; 95%CI = 1.76, 6.01) were significantly associated with higher skin toxicity grade after adjustment for age, race, ethnicity, ER status, and breast volume. BMI specifically predicted for moist desquamation, but not degree of erythema. In this racially and ethnically diverse cohort of breast cancer patients receiving radiation to the intact breast, risk factors including BMI, disease stage, and conventionally fractionated radiation predicted for higher skin toxicity grade, whereas age, race, ethnicity, and breast volume did not. BMI specifically predicted for moist desquamation, suggesting that preventive measures to address this particular outcome should be investigated.

Accelerated Partial Breast Irradiation in Clinical Practice

Accelerated partial breast irradiation (APBI) has been under clinical investigation for more than 15 years. There are several technical approaches that are clinically established, e.g. brachytherapy, intraoperative radiotherapy (IORT), or external-beam radiotherapy. The understanding of the underlying biology, optimal technical procedures, patient selection criteria, and imaging changes during follow-up has increased enormously. After completion of several phase III trials using brachytherapy or IORT, APBI is currently increasingly used either in phase IV studies, registries, or in selected patients outside of clinical studies. Consensus statements about suitable patients are available from several international and national societies like ASTRO, ESTRO, and DEGRO. One may expect that 15-25% of patients undergoing breast-conserving surgery may qualify for APBI, i.e. patients with small invasive ductal breast cancer without clinical lymph node involvement.

Techniques for intraoperative radiation therapy for early-stage breast carcinoma

ABSTRACT 

Intraoperative radiation therapy (IORT) is a method of accelerated partial breast irradiation developed to replace other longer courses of radiotherapy with a single radiation session administered at the time of breast-conserving surgery. The purpose of this review is to summarize the advantages and disadvantages of breast IORT techniques that are currently available, as well to consider potential alternative techniques for breast IORT or ultra-short course breast radiotherapy. Furthermore, we highlight the published outcomes for the IORT treatment approaches including: electron therapy, superficial photon therapy and other techniques. Potential future directions of IORT are explored including novel IORT techniques utilizing intraoperative brachytherapy with in-room imaging and rapid treatment planning.

Accelerated partial irradiation for breast cancer: systematic review and meta-analysis of 8653 women in eight randomized trials

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Accelerated partial breast irradiation (APBI) is the strategy that allows adjuvant treatment delivery in a shorter period of time in smaller volumes. This study was undertaken to assess the effectiveness and outcomes of APBI in breast cancer compared with whole-breast irradiation (WBI).

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials of WBI versus APBI. Two authors independently selected and assessed the studies regarding eligibility criteria.

RESULTS

Eight studies were selected. A total of 8653 patients were randomly assigned for WBI versus APBI. Six studies reported local recurrence outcomes. Two studies were matched in 5 years and only one study for different time of follow-up. Meta-analysis of two trials assessing 1407 participants showed significant difference in the WBI versus APBI group regarding the 5-year local recurrence rate (HR=4.54, 95% CI: 1.78-11.61, p=0.002). Significant difference in favor of WBI for different follow-up times was also found. No differences in nodal recurrence, systemic recurrence, overall survival and mortality rates were observed.

CONCLUSIONS

APBI is associated with higher local recurrence compared to WBI without compromising other clinical outcomes.