Phase II Study of Proton Beam Radiation Therapy for Patients With Breast Cancer Requiring Regional Nodal Irradiation

Proton Radiation Therapy: A Systematic Review of Treatment-Related Side Effects and Toxicities

Cancer is the second leading cause of death worldwide. Around half of all cancer patients undergo some type of radiation therapy throughout the course of their treatment. Photon radiation remains (RT) the most widely utilized modality of radiotherapy despite recent advancements in proton radiation therapy (PBT). PBT makes use of the particle's biological property known as the Bragg peak to better spare healthy tissue from radiation damage, with data to support that this treatment modality is less toxic than photon RT. Hence, proton radiation dosimetry looks better compared to photon dosimetry; however, due to proton-specific uncertainties, unexpected acute, subacute, and long-term toxicities can be encountered. Reported neurotoxicity resulting from proton radiation treatments include radiation necrosis, moyamoya syndrome, neurosensory toxicities, brain edema, neuromuscular toxicities, and neurocognitive toxicities. Pulmonary toxicities include pneumonitis and fibrosis, pleural effusions, and bronchial toxicities. Pericarditis, pericardial effusions, and atrial fibrillations are among the cardiac toxicities related to proton therapy. Gastrointestinal and hematological toxicities are also found in the literature. Genitourinary toxicities include urinary and reproductive-related toxicities. Osteological, oral, endocrine, and skin toxicities have also been reported. The side effects will be comparable to the ones following photon RT, nonetheless at an expected lower incidence. The toxicities collected mainly from case reports and clinical trials are described based on the organs affected and functions altered.

Proton therapy for breast cancer: Reducing toxicity

Radiotherapy is a crucial component in the holistic management of breast cancer, with approximately 60% of individuals diagnosed with breast cancer requiring this treatment. As the survival rate of individuals with breast cancer has significantly increased, there is a growing focus on the long-term well-being of patients. Proton therapy (PT) is a new and rapidly developing radiotherapy method. In comparison with conventional photon therapy, PT offers the benefits of decreased radiation toxicity and increased dosage in the designated region. This can extend patients' lifespan and enhance their overall well-being. The present analysis examines the function of PT in diminishing the harmful effects of radiation in cases of breast cancer, while also providing a brief overview of the future potential and obstacles associated with PT for breast cancer.

Dosimetric analysis of six whole-breast irradiation techniques in supine and prone positions

In breast cancer radiation therapy, minimizing radiation-related risks and toxicity is vital for improving life expectancy. Tailoring radiotherapy techniques and treatment positions can reduce radiation doses to normal organs and mitigate treatment-related toxicity. This study entailed a dosimetric comparison of six different external beam whole-breast irradiation techniques in both supine and prone positions. We selected fourteen breast cancer patients, generating six treatment plans in both positions per patient. We assessed target coverage and organs at risk (OAR) doses to evaluate the impact of treatment techniques and positions. Excess absolute risk was calculated to estimate potential secondary cancer risk in the contralateral breast, ipsilateral lung, and contralateral lung. Additionally, we analyzed the distance between the target volume and OARs (heart and ipsilateral lung) while considering the treatment position. The results indicate that prone positioning lowers lung exposure in X-ray radiotherapy. However, particle beam therapies (PBTs) significantly reduce the dose to the heart and ipsilateral lung regardless of the patient's position. Notably, negligible differences were observed between arc-delivery and static-delivery PBTs in terms of target conformity and OAR sparing. This study provides critical dosimetric evidence to facilitate informed decision-making regarding treatment techniques and positions.

Dosimetric Correlation of Acute Radiation Dermatitis in Patients With Breast Cancer Undergoing Hypofractionated Proton Beam Therapy Using Pencil Beam Scanning

PURPOSE

Pencil-beam scanning (PBS) is a modern delivery technique used in proton beam therapy (PBT) to reduce normal tissue reactions. No dosimetric correlation between dermatitis and PBS has been reported for breast cancer. The current study aimed to investigate the factors associated with grade 2 or higher dermatitis in patients with breast cancer undergoing PBT using PBS.

METHODS

The medical data of 42 patients with breast cancer who underwent adjuvant radiotherapy between December 2019 and September 2023 were reviewed. All patients received hypofractionated radiotherapy (HFRT), either 26 Gy (relative biological effectiveness [RBE])/five fractions or 40.05 or 43.5 Gy (RBE)/15 fractions, for the whole breast/chest wall with or without nodal irradiation. The duration of acute radiation dermatitis was defined as within 90 days from the start of radiotherapy. The Kaplan-Meier method and Cox proportional hazards model were used for univariate and multivariate analyses of the actuarial rates of grade 2-3 dermatitis.

RESULTS

Twenty-two (52.4%) and 20 (47.6%) patients were diagnosed with grade 1 and 2 dermatitis, respectively. Multivariate analysis revealed a clinical target volume (CTV) ≥ of 320 cc (p = 0.035) and a skin dose of D10cc ≥ 38.3 Gy (RBE) (p = 0.009) as independent factors of grade 2 dermatitis. The 10-week cumulative grade 2 dermatitis rates were 88.2%, 39.4%, and 8.3% (p < 0.001) for patients with both high, either high, and neither high CTV and D10cc, respectively.

CONCLUSION

To the best of our knowledge, this is the first study on dosimetric correlations for dermatitis in patients with breast cancer who underwent hypofractionated PBT using PBS. In the era of HFRT, skin dose modulation using PBS may reduce the incidence of dermatitis.

Evolving Role of Proton Radiation Therapy in Clinical Practice

With the expansion of proton radiation therapy centers across the United States and a gradually expanding body of academic evidence supporting its use, more patients are receiving-and asking about-proton therapy than ever before. Here, we outline, for nonradiation oncologists, the theoretical benefits of proton therapy, the clinical evidence to date, the controversies affecting utilization, and the numerous randomized trials currently in progress. We also discuss the challenges of researching and delivering proton therapy, including the cost of constructing and maintaining centers, barriers with insurance approval, clinical situations in which proton therapy may be approached with caution, and the issue of equitable access for all patients. The purpose of this review is to assist practicing oncologists in understanding the evolving role of proton therapy and to help nonradiation oncologists guide patients regarding this technology.

Balancing Innovation and Patient Care in Breast Cancer: Integrating Hypofractionated Proton Therapy With Breast Reconstruction Outcomes

This review aims to assess the application of hypofractionated proton therapy in breast cancer reconstruction, analyzing its advantages, challenges, and broader implications for patient care. The goal is to comprehensively understand how this innovative approach can be integrated into breast cancer treatment. Proton therapy exhibits superior target coverage and safety, reducing radiation-induced complications and sparing critical organs, but skin toxicity outcomes differ from photon therapy. Tissue expanders are vital in breast reconstruction, employing innovative planning for positive long-term outcomes and highlighting the importance of balancing cancer treatment effectiveness with cosmetic outcomes. Hypofractionated proton therapy and breast cancer reconstruction present promising innovations with notable advantages in target coverage and organ sparing. However, variations in skin toxicity outcomes and the need for a careful balance between treatment effectiveness and cosmetic outcomes underscore ongoing challenges. Future directions should focus on refining treatment protocols, optimizing patient selection criteria, and integrating emerging technologies to enhance therapeutic outcomes while minimizing adverse effects.

Breast Reconstruction Complications After Postmastectomy Proton Radiation Therapy for Breast Cancer

Purpose

Our purpose was to report complications requiring surgical intervention among patients treated with postmastectomy proton radiation therapy (PMPRT) for breast cancer in the setting of breast reconstruction (BR).

Methods and Materials

Patients enrolled on a prospective proton registry who underwent BR with immediate autologous flap, tissue expander (TE), or implant in place during PMPRT (50/50.4 Gy +/- chest wall boost) were eligible. Major reconstruction complication (MRC) was defined as a complication requiring surgical intervention. Absolute reconstruction failure was an MRC requiring surgical removal of BR. A routine revision (RR) was a plastic surgery refining cosmesis of the BR. Kaplan-Meier method was used to assess disease outcomes and MRC. Cox regression was used to assess predictors of MRC.

Results

Seventy-three courses of PMPRT were delivered to 68 women with BR between 2013 and 2021. Median follow-up was 42.1 months. Median age was 47 years. Fifty-six (76.7%) courses used pencil beam scanning PMPRT. Of 73 BR, 29 were flaps (39.7%), 30 implants (41.1%), and 14 TE (19.2%) at time of irradiation. There were 20 (27.4%) RR. There were 9 (12.3%) MRC among 5 implants, 2 flaps, and 2 TE, occurring a median of 29 months from PMPRT start. Three-year freedom from MRC was 86.9%. Three (4.1%) of the MRC were absolute reconstruction failure. Complications leading to MRC included capsular contracture in 5, fat necrosis in 2, and infection in 2. On univariable analysis, BR type, boost, proton technique, age, and smoking status were not associated with MRC, whereas higher body mass index trended toward significance (hazard ratio, 1.07; 95% CI, 0.99-1.16; P = .10).

Conclusions

Patients undergoing PMPRT to BR had a 12.3% incidence of major complications leading to surgical intervention, and total loss of BR was rare. MRC rates were similar among reconstruction types. Minor surgery for RR is common in our practice.

Exploring Helium Ions' Potential for Post-Mastectomy Left-Sided Breast Cancer Radiotherapy

Proton therapy presents a promising modality for treating left-sided breast cancer due to its unique dose distribution. Helium ions provide increased conformality thanks to a reduced lateral scattering. Consequently, the potential clinical benefit of both techniques was explored. An explorative treatment planning study involving ten patients, previously treated with VMAT (Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy) for 50 Gy in 25 fractions for locally advanced, node-positive breast cancer, was carried out using proton pencil beam therapy with a fixed relative biological effectiveness (RBE) of 1.1 and helium therapy with a variable RBE described by the mMKM (modified microdosimetric kinetic model). Results indicated that target coverage was improved with particle therapy for both the clinical target volume and especially the internal mammary lymph nodes compared to VMAT. Median dose value analysis revealed that proton and helium plans provided lower dose on the left anterior descending artery (LAD), heart, lungs and right breast than VMAT. Notably, helium therapy exhibited improved ipsilateral lung sparing over protons. Employing NTCP models as available in the literature, helium therapy showed a lower probability of grade ≤ 2 radiation pneumonitis (22% for photons, 5% for protons and 2% for helium ions), while both proton and helium ions reduce the probability of major coronary events with respect to VMAT.

Proton Beam Therapy for Breast Cancer

Given the radiobiological and physical properties of the proton, proton beam therapy has the potential to be advantageous for many patients compared with conventional radiotherapy by limiting toxicity and improving patient outcomes in specific breast cancer scenarios.

Proton Therapy in Breast Cancer: A Review of Potential Approaches for Patient Selection

Proton radiotherapy may be a compelling technical option for the treatment of breast cancer due to its unique physical property known as the "Bragg peak." This feature offers distinct advantages, promising superior dose conformity within the tumor area and reduced radiation exposure to surrounding healthy tissues, enhancing the potential for better treatment outcomes. However, proton therapy is accompanied by inherent challenges, primarily higher costs and limited accessibility when compared to well-developed photon irradiation. Thus, in clinical practice, it is important for radiation oncologists to carefully select patients before recommendation of proton therapy to ensure the transformation of dosimetric benefits into tangible clinical benefits. Yet, the optimal indications for proton therapy in breast cancer patients remain uncertain. While there is no widely recognized methodology for patient selection, numerous attempts have been made in this direction. In this review, we intended to present an inspiring summarization and discussion about the current practices and exploration on the approaches of this treatment decision-making process in terms of treatment-related side-effects, tumor control, and cost-efficiency, including the normal tissue complication probability (NTCP) model, the tumor control probability (TCP) model, genomic biomarkers, cost-effectiveness analyses (CEAs), and so on. Additionally, we conducted an evaluation of the eligibility criteria in ongoing randomized controlled trials and analyzed their reference value in patient selection. We evaluated the pros and cons of various potential patient selection approaches and proposed possible directions for further optimization and exploration. In summary, while proton therapy holds significant promise in breast cancer treatment, its integration into clinical practice calls for a thoughtful, evidence-driven strategy. By continuously refining the patient selection criteria, we can harness the full potential of proton radiotherapy while ensuring maximum benefit for breast cancer patients.

Proton Reirradiation for High-Risk Recurrent or New Primary Breast Cancer

Radiotherapy is an integral component of multidisciplinary breast cancer care. Given how commonly radiotherapy is used in the treatment of breast cancer, many patients with recurrences have received previous radiotherapy. Patients with new primary breast cancer may also have received previous radiotherapy to the thoracic region. Curative doses and comprehensive field photon reirradiation (reRT) have often been avoided in these patients due to concerns for severe toxicities to organs-at-risk (OARs), such as the heart, lungs, brachial plexus, and soft tissue. However, many patients may benefit from definitive-intent reRT, such as patients with high-risk disease features such as lymph node involvement and dermal/epidermal invasion. Proton therapy is a potentially advantageous treatment option for delivery of reRT due to its lack of exit dose and greater conformality that allow for enhanced non-target tissue sparing of previously irradiated tissues. In this review, we discuss the clinical applications of proton therapy for patients with breast cancer requiring reRT, the currently available literature and how it compares to historical photon reRT outcomes, treatment planning considerations, and questions in this area warranting further study. Given the dosimetric advantages of protons and the data reported to date, proton therapy is a promising option for patients who would benefit from the added locoregional disease control provided by reRT for recurrent or new primary breast cancer.

Postmastectomy Intensity Modulated Proton Therapy: 5-Year Oncologic and Patient-Reported Outcomes

PURPOSE

To report oncologic, physician-assessed, and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) for a group of women homogeneously treated with modern, skin-sparing multifield optimized pencil-beam scanning proton (intensity modulated proton therapy [IMPT]) postmastectomy radiation therapy (PMRT).

METHODS AND MATERIALS

We reviewed consecutive patients who received unilateral, curative-intent, conventionally fractionated IMPT PMRT between 2015 and 2019. Strict constraints were applied to limit the dose to the skin and other organs at risk. Five-year oncologic outcomes were analyzed. Patient-reported outcomes were evaluated as part of a prospective registry at baseline, completion of PMRT, and 3 and 12 months after PMRT.

RESULTS

A total of 127 patients were included. One hundred nine (86%) received chemotherapy, among whom 82 (65%) received neoadjuvant chemotherapy. The median follow-up was 4.1 years. Five-year locoregional control was 98.4% (95% CI, 93.6-99.6), and overall survival was 87.9% (95% CI, 78.7-96.5). Acute grade 2 and 3 dermatitis was seen in 45% and 4% of patients, respectively. Three patients (2%) experienced acute grade 3 infection, all of whom had breast reconstruction. Three late grade 3 adverse events occurred: morphea (n = 1), infection (n = 1), and seroma (n = 1). There were no cardiac or pulmonary adverse events. Among the 73 patients at risk for PMRT-associated reconstruction complications, 7 (10%) experienced reconstruction failure. Ninety-five patients (75%) enrolled in the prospective PRO registry. The only metrics to increase by >1 point were skin color (mean change: 5) and itchiness (2) at treatment completion and tightness/pulling/stretching (2) and skin color (2) at 12 months. There was no significant change in the following PROs: bleeding/leaking fluid, blistering, telangiectasia, lifting, arm extension, or bending/straightening the arm.

CONCLUSIONS

With strict dose constraints to skin and organs at risk, postmastectomy IMPT was associated with excellent oncologic outcomes and PROs. Rates of skin, chest wall, and reconstruction complications compared favorably to previous proton and photon series. Postmastectomy IMPT warrants further investigation in a multi-institutional setting with careful attention to planning techniques.

Study of linear energy transfer effect on rib fracture in breast patients receiving pencil-beamscanning proton therapy

Purpose

To study the effect of proton linear energy transfer (LET) on rib fracture in breast cancer patients treated with pencil-beam scanning proton therapy (PBS) using a novel tool of dose-LET volume histogram (DLVH).

Methods

From a prospective registry of patients treated with post-mastectomy proton therapy to the chest wall and regional lymph nodes for breast cancer between 2015 and 2020, we retrospectively identified rib fracture cases detected after completing treatment. Contemporaneously treated control patients that did not develop rib fracture were matched to patients 2:1 considering prescription dose, boost location, reconstruction status, laterality, chest wall thickness, and treatment year.The DLVH index, V(d, l), defined as volume(V) of the structure with at least dose(d) and LET(l), was calculated. DLVH plots between the fracture and control group were compared. Conditional logistic regression (CLR) model was used to establish the relation of V(d, l) and the observed fracture at each combination of d and l. The p-value derived from CLR model shows the statistical difference between fracture patients and the matched control group. Using the 2D p-value map derived from CLR model, the DLVH features associated with the patient outcomes were extracted.

Results

Seven rib fracture patients were identified, and fourteen matched patients were selected for the control group. The median time from the completion of proton therapy to rib fracture diagnosis was 12 months (range 5 to 14 months). Two patients had grade 2 symptomatic rib fracture while the remaining 5 were grade 1 incidentally detected on imaging. The derived p-value map demonstrated larger V(0-36Gy[RBE], 4.0-5.0 keV/μm) in patients experiencing fracture (p<0.1). For example, the p value for V(30 Gy[RBE], 4.0 keV/um) was 0.069.

Conclusions

In breast cancer patients receiving PBS, a larger volume of chest wall receiving moderate dose and high LET may result in increased risk of rib fracture.

Comparing the Oncologic Outcomes of Proton Therapy and Intensity-Modulated Radiation Therapy for Head and Neck Squamous Cell Carcinoma

PURPOSE

To compare the oncologic outcomes between proton therapy and intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) for head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) patients undergoing curative radiotherapy (RT).

EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN

We studied HNSCC patients who underwent curative-intent RT from 2015 to 2019, comparing the oncologic outcomes of proton therapy and IMRT. Our national retrospective HNSCC cohort study involved three institutes with proton therapy and 17 institutes (medical center levels) with IMRT in Taiwan. We utilized the Taiwan Cancer Registry Database to collect medical data for this study. We classified patients into two groups based on treatment method: Group 1 received IMRT, while Group 2 received proton therapy. 3:1 propensity score matching was performed to minimize the impact of potential confounders. Cox proportional hazards models were used to evaluate oncologic outcomes.

RESULTS

This study of 60,485 patients with HNSCC found that proton therapy was associated with better overall and cancer-specific survival and lower locoregional recurrence rates than IMRT. After matching, 982 patients were analyzed, with well-balanced factors. Proton therapy was a significant predictor of all-cause mortality, cancer-specific death, and locoregional recurrence (LRR). Patients who received proton therapy had significantly lower risks of all-cause mortality (adjusted hazard ratio, aHR=0.43), cancer-specific death (aHR=0.44), and LRR (aHR=0.61) than those who received IMRT.

CONCLUSION

Proton therapy is associated with superior outcomes in terms of overall survival, cancer-specific survival, and locoregional recurrence rates compared to IMRT in patients with HNSCC. These results provide valuable evidence for clinicians and patients in decision-making regarding the choice of radiation therapy for HNSCC.

Conventional versus hypofractionated postmastectomy proton radiotherapy in the USA (MC1631): a randomised phase 2 trial

BACKGROUND

Proton therapy is under investigation in breast cancer as a strategy to reduce radiation exposure to the heart and lungs. So far, studies investigating proton postmastectomy radiotherapy (PMRT) have used conventional fractionation over 25-28 days, but whether hypofractionated proton PMRT is feasible is unclear. We aimed to compare conventional fractionation and hypofractionation in patients with indications for PMRT, including those with immediate breast reconstruction.

METHODS

We did a randomised phase 2 trial (MC1631) at Mayo Clinic in Rochester (MN, USA) and Mayo Clinic in Arizona (Phoenix, AZ, USA) comparing conventional fractionated (50 Gy in 25 fractions of 2 Gy [relative biological effectiveness of 1·1]) and hypofractionated (40·05 Gy in 15 fractions of 2·67 Gy [relative biological effectiveness of 1·1]) proton PMRT. All patients were treated with pencil-beam scanning. Eligibility criteria included age 18 years or older, an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-2, and breast cancer resected by mastectomy with or without immediate reconstruction with indications for PMRT. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to either conventional fractionation or hypofractionation, with presence of immediate reconstruction (yes vs no) as a stratification factor, using a biased-coin minimisation algorithm. Any patient who received at least one fraction of protocol treatment was evaluable for the primary endpoint and safety analyses. The primary endpoint was 24-month complication rate from the date of first radiotherapy, defined as grade 3 or worse adverse events occurring from 90 days after last radiotherapy or unplanned surgical interventions in patients with immediate reconstruction. The inferiority of hypofractionation would not be ruled out if the upper bound of the one-sided 95% CI for the difference in 24-month complication rate between the two groups was greater than 10%. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02783690, and is closed to accrual.

FINDINGS

Between June 2, 2016, and Aug 23, 2018, 88 patients were randomly assigned (44 to each group), of whom 82 received protocol treatment (41 in the conventional fractionation group and 41 in the hypofractionation group; median age of 52 years [IQR 44-64], 79 [96%] patients were White, two [2%] were Black or African American, one [1%] was Asian, and 79 [96%] were not of Hispanic ethnicity). As of data cutoff (Jan 30, 2023), the median follow-up was 39·3 months (IQR 37·5-61·2). The median mean heart dose was 0·54 Gy (IQR 0·30-0·72) for the conventional fractionation group and 0·49 Gy (0·25-0·64) for the hypofractionation group. Within 24 months of first radiotherapy, 14 protocol-defined complications occurred in six (15%) patients in the conventional fractionation group and in eight (20%) patients in the hypofractionation group (absolute difference 4·9% [one-sided 95% CI 18·5], p=0·27). The complications in the conventionally fractionated group were contracture (five [12%] of 41 patients]) and fat necrosis (one [2%] patient) requiring surgical intervention. All eight protocol-defined complications in the hypofractionation group were due to infections, three of which were acute infections that required surgical intervention, and five were late infections, four of which required surgical intervention. All 14 complications were in patients with immediate expander or implant-based reconstruction.

INTERPRETATION

After a median follow-up of 39·3 months, non-inferiority of the hypofractionation group could not be established. However, given similar tolerability, hypofractionated proton PMRT appears to be worthy of further study in patients with and without immediate reconstruction.

FUNDING

The Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, the Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Phoenix, AZ, USA, and the US National Cancer Institute.

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.

Particle radiotherapy for breast cancer

Breast cancer is the most common malignant tumor in female patients. Along with surgery, radiotherapy is one of the most commonly prescribed treatments for breast cancer. Over the past few decades, breast cancer radiotherapy technology has significantly improved. Nevertheless, related posttherapy complications should not be overlooked. Common complications include dose-related coronary toxicity, radiation pneumonia, and the risk of second primary cancer of the contralateral breast. Particle radiotherapy with protons or carbon ions is widely attracting interest as a potential competitor to conventional photon radiotherapy because of its superior physical and biological characteristics. This article summarizes the results of clinical research on proton and carbon-ion radiotherapy for treating breast cancer.

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.

A retrospective study of adjuvant proton radiotherapy for breast cancer after lumpectomy: a comparison of conventional-dose and hypofractionated dose

Purpose

This study aimed to compare the adverse reactions of conventional-dose and hypofractionated dose of proton therapy for breast cancer.

Materials and methods

Breast cancer patients treated with proton radiotherapy in conventional-dose or hypofractionated dose were studied retrospectively.

Result

From January 2017 to December 2019, our center treated 50 patients following lumpectomy with proton radiotherapy. According to the AJCC 8th Edition standard, there were stage I in 26 patients, stage II in 22 patients, and stage III in 2 patients. A total of 14 patients received intensity-modulated proton therapy at a dose of 50 Gy in 25 fractions, followed by a 10 Gy 4 fractionated boost to the lumpectomy cavity, while 36 received 40.05 Gy in 15 fractions, simultaneous integrated boost (SIB) 48 Gy to the lumpectomy cavity. Median follow-up time for 40.05 Gy group was 35.6 months (15–43 months). Median follow-up time for 50 Gy group was 46.8 months (36–68 months). For acute toxicity, the grade 1 and 2 radiodermatitis in conventional-dose group were 35.7% and 57.1%, respectively. In hypofractionated dose group, the grade 1 and 2 radiodermatitis were 91.7% and 8.3%, respectively. The radiodermatitis is hypofractionneted dose better than conventional-dose significantly. Grade 1 radiation-induced esophagitis in conventional-dose group and hypofractionated dose group were 85.71% and 60%, respectively. For late toxicity, no patients developed radiation-induced pneumonitis and rib fracture in conventional-dose group. Three patients presented grade 1 pneumonitis; one patient presented graded 2 pneumonitides and two patients presented rib fracture in hypofractionated dose group. One presented hypothyroidism in hypofractionated dose group. All patients were satisfied with breast shape. The one- and two-year OS and DFS for conventional-dose group were 100 and 100; 100 and 92.9%, respectively. The one- and two-year OS and DFS for hypofractionated dose group were 100 and 100; 100 and 100%, respectively.

Conclusion

Proton radiation therapy can significantly reduce the normal tissue dose in breast cancer patients' hearts, lungs, and other organs. Hypofractionated proton therapy shortens the treatment course with mild radiation-related adverse effects, and has a better effect on addressing the acute adverse reactions than conventional proton radiotherapy.

Serial Measurement of Global Longitudinal Strain Among Women With Breast Cancer Treated With Proton Radiation Therapy: A Prospective Trial for 70 Patients

PURPOSE

Conventional photon radiation therapy (RT) for breast cancer is associated with a reduction in global longitudinal strain (GLS) and an increase in troponin, N-terminal pro hormone B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP), and incident heart failure. The cardiac radiation exposure with proton-RT is much reduced and thus may be associated with less cardiotoxicity. The objective was to test the effect of proton-RT on GLS, troponin, and NT-proBNP.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

We conducted a prospective, observational, single-center study of 70 women being treated with proton-RT for breast cancer. Serial measurements of GLS, high-sensitivity troponin I, and NT-proBNP were performed at prespecified intervals (before proton-RT, 4 weeks after completion of proton-RT, and again at 2 months after proton-RT).

RESULTS

The mean age of the patients was 46 ± 11 years, and the mean body mass index was 25.6 ± 5.2 kg/m²; 32% of patients had hypertension, and the mean radiation doses to the heart and the left ventricle (LV) were 0.44 Gy and 0.12 Gy, respectively. There was no change in left ventricular ejection fraction (65 ± 5 vs 66 ± 5 vs 64 ± 4%; P = .15), global GLS (-21.7 ± 2.7 vs -22.7 ± 2.3 vs -22.8 ± 2.1%; P = .24), or segmental GLS from before to after proton-RT. Similarly, there was no change in either high-sensitivity troponin or NT-proBNP with proton-RT. However, in a post hoc subset analysis, women with hypertension had a greater decrease in GLS after proton-RT compared with women without hypertension (-21.3 ± 3.5 vs -24.0 ± 2.4%; P = .006).

CONCLUSIONS

Proton-RT did not affect LV function and was not associated with an increase in biomarkers. These data support the potential cardiac benefits of proton-RT compared with conventional RT.

Early Toxicity and Patient-Reported Cosmetic Outcomes in Patients Treated With Adjuvant Proton-Based Radiotherapy After Breast-Conserving Surgery

INTRODUCTION

To evaluate the dosimetric data, early toxicity, and patient-reported cosmetic outcomes in breast cancer patients treated with adjuvant proton-based radiotherapy (RT) after breast-conserving surgery.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We performed a retrospective review of our institutional database to identify breast cancer patients treated with breast-conserving surgery followed by proton-based RT from 2015 to 2020. Patient-reported cosmetic outcomes were graded as excellent, good, fair, or poor. Early toxicity outcomes were graded by the treating physician during treatment. Dose-volume histograms were reviewed to obtain dosimetry data.

RESULTS

We identified 21 patients treated with adjuvant proton-based RT. Median whole breast dose delivered was 46.8 Gy (range, 40.0-50.4 Gy). Target volumes included the regional lymph nodes in 17 patients (81%). Seventeen patients (81%) received a lumpectomy boost. The median planning target volume V95 was 94% (range, 77%-100%), V100 71% (range, 60%-97%), V110 2% (range 0%-18%), and median max point dose was 115% (range, 105%-120%). The median ipsilateral breast V105 was 367.3 cc (range, 0-1172 cc) and V110 was 24.1 cc (range, 0-321.3 cc). Grade 2 and 3 dermatitis occurred in 62% and 14% of patients, respectively. Grade 2 and 3 pain was reported by 33% and 10% of patients, respectively. Median follow-up at the time of cosmetic evaluation was 27 months (range, 5-42 months). Four patients (21%) reported fair cosmetic outcome and 15 patients (79%) reported good or excellent cosmetic outcome. No poor cosmesis was reported.

CONCLUSION

Adjuvant proton-based radiotherapy after breast-conserving surgery is well tolerated with acceptable rates of acute toxicities and a high rate of good-to-excellent patient-reported cosmetic outcomes.

Planning and Treatment Recommendations for Breast Proton Therapy From a Single Center's Experience

Purpose

Proton therapy use for breast cancer has grown due to advantages in coverage and potentially reduced late toxicities compared with conventional radiation therapy. We aimed to provide recommendations for robustness criteria, daily imaging, and quality assurance computed tomography (QA CT) frequency for these patients.

Methods and Materials

All patients treated for localized breast cancer at the Johns Hopkins Proton Center between November 2019 and February 2022 were eligible for inclusion. Daily shift information was extracted and examined through control charts. If an adaptive plan was used, the time to replan was recorded. Three and 5 mm setup uncertainty was used to calculate robustness. Robust evaluation of QA CTs was compared with initial robustness range for breast/chest wall and lymph node target coverage.

Results

Sixty-six patients were included: 19 with intact breast, 25 with non-reconstructed chest wall, and 22 with chest wall plus expanders or implants. Sixteen percent, 13%, and 41% of breast, chest wall, and expander/implant patients had a replan. Only patients with expanders or implants required 2 adaptive plans. Daily shift data showed large variation and did not correlate with plan adaptation. Patients without adaptive plans had QA CTs with dose-volume histogram metrics within robustness more frequently than those with adaptive plans. Using 3 mm robustness for patients who did not require an adaptive plan, 91% to 100% of patients had QA CTs within robustness, while 55% to 60% of patients with an adaptive plan had QA CTs within robustness for the axilla, internal mammary nodes, and supraclavicular nodes. Five millimeter setup uncertainty did not significantly improve this.

Conclusions

We recommend using daily cone beam CT because of the large variation in daily setup with 3 mm setup uncertainty in robustness analysis. If daily cone beam CT imaging is not available, then larger setup uncertainty should be used. Two QA CTs should be conducted during treatment if the patient has expanders or implants; otherwise, one QA CT is sufficient.

Incidence of Rib Fracture following Treatment with Proton Therapy for Breast Cancer

Purpose

To determine the rib fracture rate in a cohort of patients with breast cancer treated with proton therapy.

Patient and Methods

From a prospective database, we identified 225 patients treated with proton therapy between 2012 and 2020 (223 women; 2 men). Clinical and dosimetric data were extracted, the cumulative incidence method assessed rib fracture rate, and Fine-Gray tests assessed prognostic significance of select variables. In-field rib fracture was defined as a fracture that occurred in a rib located within the 10% isodose line. Out-of-field rib fracture was defined as a fracture occurring in a rib location outside of the 10% isodose line.

Results

Of the patients, 74% had left-sided breast cancer; 5%, bilateral; and 21%, right-sided. Dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry scans showed normality in 20%, osteopenia in 34%, and osteoporosis in 6% (test not performed in 40%). Additionally, 57% received an aromatase inhibitor. Target volumes were breast ± internal mammary nodes (IMNs) (16%), breast and comprehensive regional lymphatics (32%), chest wall ± IMNs (1%), and chest wall/comprehensive regional lymphatics (51%). Passive-scattered proton therapy was used for 41% of patients, 58% underwent pencil-beam scanning (PBS), and 1% underwent a combination (passive scattering/PBS), with 85% of patients receiving a boost. Median follow-up was 3.1 years, with 97% having >12-month follow-up. The 3-year cumulative in-field rib fracture incidence was 3.7%. Eight patients developed in-field rib fractures (1 symptomatic, 7 imaging identified) for a 0.4% symptomatic rib fracture rate. Median time from radiation completion to rib fracture identification was 1.8 years (fractures were identified within 2.2 years for 7 of 8 patients). No variables were associated with rib fracture on univariate analysis. Three fractures developed outside the radiation field (0.9% cumulative incidence of out-of-field rib fracture).

Conclusion

In this series of patients with breast cancer treated with proton therapy, the 3-year rib fracture rates remain low (in-field 3.7%; symptomatic 0.4%). As in photon therapy, the asymptomatic rate may be underestimated owing to a lack of routine surveillance imaging. However, patients experiencing symptomatic rib fractures after proton therapy for breast cancer are rare.

Breast Cancer and the Cardiovascular Disease: A Narrative Review

Breast cancer is the most common malignancy affecting females worldwide and is also among the top causes of all cancer-related deaths. Cardiovascular disease (CVD) is known to have the highest rate of mortality in women. There are several risk factors for both CVD and breast cancer that overlap, such as diet, smoking, and obesity, and also the current breast cancer treatment has a significant detrimental effect on cardiovascular health in general. Patients with exposure to potentially cardiotoxic treatments, including anthracyclines, trastuzumab, and radiation therapy, are more likely to develop CVD than non-cancer controls. Early detection and treatment may reduce the risk of the development of cardiac morbidity and mortality and would increase the number of breast cancer survivors. This article provides a comprehensive overview of breast cancer, identifies shared risk factors among breast cancer and CVD, and the cardiotoxic effects of therapy. It also reviews possible prevention and treatment of CVD in breast cancer patients and reviews literature about chemoprevention of cardiac disease in the setting of breast cancer treatment.

Intensity Modulated Proton Therapy for Bilateral Breast or Chest Wall and Comprehensive Nodal Irradiation for Synchronous Bilateral Breast Cancer: Initial Clinical Experience and Dosimetric Comparison

Purpose

Synchronous bilateral breast cancer (SBBC) poses distinct challenges for radiation therapy planning. We report our proton therapy experience in treating patients with SBBC. We also provide a dosimetric comparison of intensity modulated proton therapy (IMPT) versus photon therapy.

Methods and Materials

Patients with SBBC who received IMPT at our institution were retrospectively analyzed. The clinical target volume (CTV) included the breast or chest wall and comprehensive regional lymph nodes, including axilla, supraclavicular fossa, and the internal mammary chain. Intensity modulated proton therapy and volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) plans were generated with the goal that 90% of the CTV would recieve at least 90% of the prescription dose (D90>=90%). Comparisons between modalities were made using the Wilcoxon signed rank test. Physician-reported acute toxic effects and photography were collected at baseline, end of treatment, and each follow-up visit.

Results

Between 2015 and 2018, 11 patients with SBBC were treated with IMPT. The prescription was 50 Gy in 25 fractions. The median CTV D90 was 99.9% for IMPT and 97.6% for VMAT (P = .001). The mean heart dose was 0.7 Gy versus 7.2 Gy (P = .001), the total lung mean dose was 7.8 Gy versus 17.3 Gy (P = .001), and the total lung volume recieving 20 Gy was 13.0% versus 27.4% (P = .001). The most common acute toxic effects were dermatitis (mostly grade 1-2 with 1 case of grade 3) and grade 1 to 2 fatigue. The most common toxic effects at the last-follow up (median, 32 months) were grade 1 skin hyperpigmentation, superficial fibrosis, and extremity lymphedema. No nondermatologic or nonfatigue adverse events of grade >1 were recorded.

Conclusions

Bilateral breast and/or chest wall and comprehensive nodal IMPT is technically feasible and associated with low rates of severe acute toxic effects. Treatment with IMPT offered improved target coverage and normal-tissue sparing compared with photon therapy. Long-term follow-up is ongoing to assess efficacy and toxic effects.

Particle Therapy for Breast Cancer

Particle therapy has received increasing attention in the treatment of breast cancer due to its unique physical properties that may enhance patient quality of life and reduce the late effects of therapy. In this review, we will examine the rationale for the use of proton and carbon therapy in the treatment of breast cancer and highlight their potential for sparing normal tissue injury. We will discuss the early dosimetric and clinical studies that have been pursued to date in this domain before focusing on the remaining open questions limiting the widespread adoption of particle therapy.

Proton therapy for early breast cancer patients in the DBCG proton trial: planning, adaptation, and clinical experience from the first 43 patients

BACKGROUND

The Danish Breast Cancer Group (DBCG) Proton Trial randomizes breast cancer patients selected on high mean heart dose (MHD) or high lung dose (V20Gy/V17Gy) in the photon plan between photon and proton therapy. This study presents the proton plans and adaptation strategy for the first 43 breast cancer patients treated with protons in Denmark.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Forty-four proton plans (one patient with bilateral cancer) were included; 2 local and 42 loco-regional including internal mammary nodes (IMN). Nineteen patients had a mastectomy and 25 a lumpectomy. The prescribed dose was either 50 Gy in 25 fractions (n = 30) or 40 Gy in 15 fractions (n = 14) wherefrom five received simultaneous integrated boost to the tumor bed. Using 2-3 en face proton fields, single-field optimization, robust optimization and a 5 cm range shifter ensured robustness towards breathing motion, setup- and range uncertainties. An anatomical evaluation was performed by evaluating the dose after adding/removing 3 mm and 5 mm tissue to/from the body-outline and used to define treatment tolerances for anatomical changes.

RESULTS

The nominal and robust criteria were met for all patients except two. The median MHD was 1.5 Gy (0.5-3.4 Gy, 50 Gy) and 1.1 Gy (0.0-1.5 Gy, 40 Gy). The anatomical evaluations showed how 5 mm shrinkage approximately doubled the MHD while 5 mm swelling reduced target coverage of the IMN below constraints. Ensuring 3-5 mm robustness toward swelling was prioritized but not always achieved by robust optimization alone emphasizing the need for a distal margin. Twenty-eight patients received plan adaptation, eight patients received two, and one received five.

CONCLUSION

This proton planning strategy ensured robust treatment plans within a pre-defined level of acceptable anatomical changes that fulfilled the planning criteria for most of the patients and ensured low MHD.

Risk of Developing Breast Reconstruction Complications: A Machine-Learning Nomogram for Individualized Risk Estimation with and without Postmastectomy Radiation Therapy

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this study was to create a nomogram using machine learning models predicting risk of breast reconstruction complications with or without postmastectomy radiation therapy.

METHODS

Between 1997 and 2017, 1617 breast cancer patients undergoing mastectomy and breast reconstruction were analyzed. Those with autologous, tissue expander/implant, and single-stage direct-to-implant reconstruction were included. Postmastectomy radiation therapy was delivered either with three-dimensional conformal photon or proton therapy. Complication endpoints were defined based on surgical reintervention operative notes as infection/necrosis requiring débridement. For implant-based patients, complications were defined as capsular contracture requiring capsulotomy and implant failure. For each complication endpoint, least absolute shrinkage and selection operator-penalized regression was used to select the subset of predictors associated with the smallest prediction error from 10-fold cross-validation. Nomograms were built using the least absolute shrinkage and selection operator-selected predictors, and internal validation using cross-validation was performed.

RESULTS

Median follow-up was 6.6 years. Among 1617 patients, 23 percent underwent autologous reconstruction, 39 percent underwent direct-to-implant reconstruction, and 37 percent underwent tissue expander/implant reconstruction. Among 759 patients who received postmastectomy radiation therapy, 8.3 percent received proton-therapy to the chest wall and nodes and 43 percent received chest wall boost. Internal validation for each model showed an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 73 percent for infection, 75 percent for capsular contracture, 76 percent for absolute implant failure, and 68 percent for overall implant failure. Periareolar incisions and complete implant muscle coverage were found to be important predictors for infection and capsular contracture, respectively. In a multivariable analysis, we found that protons compared to no postmastectomy radiation therapy significantly increased capsular contracture risk (OR, 15.3; p < 0.001). This was higher than the effect of photons with electron boost versus no postmastectomy radiation therapy (OR, 2.5; p = 0.01).

CONCLUSION

Using machine learning, these nomograms provided prediction of postmastectomy breast reconstruction complications with and without radiation therapy.

CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Risk, III.

Hadrontherapy techniques for breast cancer

Radiotherapy plays a key role in breast cancer treatment, and recent technical advances have been made to improve the therapeutic window by limiting the risk of radiation-induced toxicity or by increasing tumor control. Hadrontherapy is a form a radiotherapy relying on particle beams; compared with photon beams, particle beams have specific physical, radiobiological and immunological properties, which can be valuable in diverse clinical situations. To date, available hadrontherapy techniques for breast cancer irradiation include proton therapy, carbon ion radiation therapy, fast neutron therapy and boron neutron capture therapy. This review analyzes the current rationale and level of evidence for each hadrontherapy technique for breast cancer.

What Can Proton Beam Therapy Achieve for Patients with Pectus Excavatum Requiring Left Breast, Axilla and Internal Mammary Nodal Radiotherapy?

AIMS

Exposure of the heart to radiation increases the risk of ischaemic heart disease, proportionate to the mean heart dose (MHD). Radiotherapy techniques including proton beam therapy (PBT) can reduce MHD. The aims of this study were to quantify the MHD reduction achievable by PBT compared with volumetric modulated arc therapy in breath hold (VMAT-BH) in patients with pectus excavatum (PEx), to identify an anatomical metric from a computed tomography scan that might indicate which patients will achieve the greatest MHD reductions from PBT.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Sixteen patients with PEx (Haller Index ≥2.7) were identified from radiotherapy planning computed tomography images. Left breast/chest wall, axilla (I-IV) and internal mammary node (IMN) volumes were delineated. VMAT and PBT plans were prepared, all satisfying target coverage constraints. Signed-rank comparisons of techniques were undertaken for the mean dose to the heart, ipsilateral lung and contralateral breast. Spearman's rho correlations were calculated for anatomical metrics against MHD reduction achieved by PBT.

RESULTS

The mean MHD for VMAT-BH plans was 4.1 Gy compared with 0.7 Gy for PBT plans. PBT reduced MHD by an average of 3.4 Gy (range 2.8-4.4 Gy) compared with VMAT-BH (P < 0.001). PBT significantly reduced the mean dose to the ipsilateral lung (4.7 Gy, P < 0.001) and contralateral breast (2.7 Gy, P < 0.001). The distance (mm) at the most inferomedial extent of IMN volume (IMN to heart distance) negatively correlated with MHD reduction achieved by PBT (Spearman's rho -0.88 (95% confidence interval -0.96 to -0.67, P < 0.001)).

CONCLUSION

For patients with PEx requiring left-sided breast and IMN radiotherapy, a clinically significant MHD reduction is achievable using PBT, compared with the optimal photon technique (VMAT-BH). This is a patient group in whom PBT could have the greatest benefit.

Radiation-Induced Toxicity Risks in Photon Versus Proton Therapy for Synchronous Bilateral Breast Cancer

Purpose

This study compares photon and proton therapy plans for patients with synchronous bilateral early breast cancer and estimates risks of early and late radiation-induced toxicities.

Materials and Methods

Twenty-four patients with synchronous bilateral early breast cancer receiving adjuvant radiation therapy using photons, 3-dimensional conformal radiation therapy or volumetric modulated arc therapy, were included and competing pencil beam scanning proton therapy plans were created. Risks of dermatitis, pneumonitis, acute esophageal toxicity, lung and breast fibrosis, hypothyroidism, secondary lung and esophageal cancer and coronary artery events were estimated using published dose-response relationships and normal tissue complication probability (NTCP) models.

Results

The primary clinical target volume V95% and/or nodal clinical target volume V90% were less than 95% in 17 photon therapy plans and none of the proton plans. Median NTCP of radiation dermatitis ≥ grade 2 was 18.3% (range, 5.4-41.7) with photon therapy and 58.4% (range, 31.4-69.7) with proton therapy. Median excess absolute risk (EAR) of secondary lung cancer at age 80 for current and former smokers was 4.8% (range, 0.0-17.0) using photons and 2.7% (range, 0.0-13.6) using protons. Median EAR of coronary event at age 80, assuming all patients have preexisting cardiac risk factors, was 1.0% (range, 0.0-5.6) with photons and 0.2% (range, 0.0-1.3) with protons.

Conclusion

Proton therapy plans improved target coverage and reduced risk of coronary artery event and secondary lung cancer while increasing the risk of radiation dermatitis.

Proton Radiotherapy for Patients With Oligometastatic Breast Cancer Involving the Sternum

Introduction

A subset of metastatic breast cancer patients present with oligometastatic disease involving the sternum. Given the proximity to traditional target structures, a proton radiation field can be expanded to include this region, providing definitive therapy for patients who are otherwise metastatic. We evaluated the feasibility and outcomes of a small series of patients who received comprehensive nodal irradiation inclusive of an isolated sternal metastasis using proton pencil beam scanning.

Materials and Methods

Four patients with a diagnosis of metastatic breast cancer with an isolated metastasis to the sternum received multimodality therapy with curative intent and then underwent adjuvant pencil beam scanning with definitive treatment to the sternum. Dosimetric parameters and treatment outcomes were evaluated.

Results

With respect to treatment coverage, proton therapy was able to deliver comprehensive target structure coverage while maintaining modest doses to the organs at risk compared with photon techniques. At a median follow-up of 28 months from diagnosis, none of the patients have experienced relapse within the radiation portal or developed additional sites of metastatic disease.

Conclusion

Pencil beam scanning for oligometastatic breast cancer with isolated sternal lesions appears feasible without undue normal tissue exposure. Current treatment outcomes appear promising.

Target coverage and cardiopulmonary sparing with the updated ESTRO-ACROP contouring guidelines for postmastectomy radiation therapy after breast reconstruction: a treatment planning study using VMAT and proton PBS techniques

BACKGROUND

The European Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology Advisory Committee in Radiation Oncology Practice (ESTRO-ACROP) recently released new contouring guidelines for postmastectomy radiation therapy (PMRT) after implant-based reconstruction (IBR). As compared to prior ESTRO guidelines, the new guidelines primarily redefined the chest wall (CW) target to exclude the breast prosthesis. In this study, we assessed the impact of these changes on treatment planning and dosimetric outcomes using volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) and proton pencil-beam scanning (PBS) therapy.

METHODS

We performed a treatment planning study of 10 women with left-sided breast cancer who underwent PMRT after IBR. All target structures were delineated first using standard (ESTRO) breast contouring guidelines and then separately using the new (ESTRO-ACROP) guidelines. Standard organs-at-risk (OARs) and cardiac substructures were contoured. Four sets of plans were generated: (1) VMAT using standard ESTRO contours, (2) VMAT using new ESTRO-ACROP contours, (3) PBS using standard contours, and (4) PBS using new contours.

RESULTS

VMAT plans using the new ESTRO-ACROP guidelines resulted in modest sparing of the left anterior descending coronary artery (LAD) (mean dose: 6.99 Gy standard ESTRO vs. 6.08 Gy new ESTRO-ACROP, p = 0.010) and ipsilateral lung (V₂₀: 21.66% vs 19.45%, p = 0.017), but similar exposure to the heart (mean dose: 4.6 Gy vs. 4.3 Gy, p = 0.513), with a trend toward higher contralateral lung (V₅: 31.0% vs 35.3%, p = 0.331) and CW doses (V₅: 31.9% vs 35.4%, p = 0.599). PBS plans using the new guidelines resulted in further sparing of the heart (mean dose: 1.05 Gy(RBE) vs. 0.54 Gy(RBE), p < 0.001), nearly all cardiac substructures (LAD mean dose: 2.01 Gy(RBE) vs. 0.66 Gy(RBE), p < 0.001), and ipsilateral lung (V₂₀: 16.22% vs 6.02%, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

PMRT after IBR using the new ESTRO-ACROP contouring guidelines with both VMAT and PBS therapy is associated with significant changes in exposure to several cardiopulmonary structures.

Proton reirradiation for recurrent or new primary breast cancer in the setting of prior breast irradiation

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Late local recurrences and second primary breast cancers are increasingly common. Proton beam therapy (PBT) reirradiation (reRT) may allow safer delivery of a second definitive radiotherapy (RT) course. We analyzed outcomes of patients with recurrent or new primary breast cancer who underwent reRT.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In an IRB-approved retrospective study, patient/tumor characteristics, treatment parameters, outcomes, and toxicities were collected for all consecutive patients with recurrent or new primary non-metastatic breast cancer previously treated with breast or chest wall RT who underwent PBT reRT.

RESULTS

Forty-six patients received reRT using uniform (70%) or pencil beam (30%) scanning PBT. Median first RT, reRT, and cumulative doses were 60 Gy (range 45-66 Gy), 50.4 Gy(RBE) (40-66.6 Gy(RBE)), and 110 Gy(RBE) (96.6-169.4 Gy(RBE)), respectively. Median follow-up was 21 months. There were no local or regional recurrences; 17% developed distant recurrence. Two-year DMFS and OS were 92.0% and 93.6%, respectively. Nine of 13 (69.2%) patients who underwent implant or flap reconstruction developed capsular contracture, 3 (23.1%) requiring surgical intervention. One (7.7%) patient developed grade 3 breast pain requiring mastectomy after breast conserving surgery. No acute or late grade 4-5 toxicities were seen. Increased body mass index (BMI) was protective of grade ≥ 2 acute toxicity (OR = 0.84, 95%CI = 0.70-1.00).

CONCLUSION

In the largest series to date of PBT reRT for breast cancer recurrence or new primary after prior definitive breast or chest wall RT, excellent locoregional control and few high-grade toxicities were encountered. PBT reRT may provide a relatively safe and highly effective salvage option. Additional patients and follow-up are needed to correlate composite normal tissue doses with toxicities and assess long-term outcomes.

Proton Therapy for Breast Cancer: A Consensus Statement From the Particle Therapy Cooperative Group Breast Cancer Subcommittee

Radiation therapy plays an important role in the multidisciplinary management of breast cancer. Recent years have seen improvements in breast cancer survival and a greater appreciation of potential long-term morbidity associated with the dose and volume of irradiated organs. Proton therapy reduces the dose to nontarget structures while optimizing target coverage. However, there remain additional financial costs associated with proton therapy, despite reductions over time, and studies have yet to demonstrate that protons improve upon the treatment outcomes achieved with photon radiation therapy. There remains considerable heterogeneity in proton patient selection and techniques, and the rapid technological advances in the field have the potential to affect evidence evaluation, given the long latency period for breast cancer radiation therapy recurrence and late effects. In this consensus statement, we assess the data available to the radiation oncology community of proton therapy for breast cancer, provide expert consensus recommendations on indications and technique, and highlight ongoing trials' cost-effectiveness analyses and key areas for future research.

Breast Radiation and the Heart: Cardiac Toxicity and Cardiac Avoidance

The purpose of this invited review is to discuss the most recent and relevant outcome studies assessing the risk of late cardiac toxicity in women treated with radiotherapy for breast cancer and to describe the evidence-based technical factors associated with late cardiac toxicity. This review will also discuss the common radiation techniques for reducing radiation dose to the heart, which will lead to better outcomes and lower rates of late toxicity that can cause morbidity and mortality in women who have been cured of their breast cancer.

Proton Reirradiation for Locoregionally Recurrent Breast Cancer

Purpose

Local-regional recurrence (LRR) of breast cancer after prior adjuvant radiation (RT) can present a clinical challenge. Proton therapy is recommended by the American Society for Radiation Oncology in cases where reirrradiation is needed; however, data are limited. We present the toxicity and outcomes after reirradiation for local-regional recurrence of breast cancer with proton therapy.

Methods and Materials

A single-institution retrospective review identified patients with the following criteria: LRR of breast cancer, prior photon radiation to the same region, proton beam reirradiation, and definitive intent. Surgery or systemic therapy at the time of recurrence was used when indicated. The log-rank test was used to compare Kaplan-Meier survival estimates. Kruskal-Wallis tests were performed to compare worst reported toxicities with clinical variables.

Results

The population included 27 patients with a history of prior radiation and treated with proton therapy for LRR between 2012 and 2019. The median interval between courses was 9.7 years. Proton reirradiation regimens included whole breast/chest wall (WB/CW) with regional nodal RT (22/27), nodal RT alone (2/27), or WB/CW alone (3/27). The median dose was 51 Gy, and the most common fractionation was 1.5 Gy twice daily. Median follow-up after reirradiation was 16.6 months. Acute grade 3 toxicities included dermatitis in 2 patients and breast pain in 2 patients. Grade 2 or higher late toxicities included 6 G2 rib fractures and 1 G2 brachial plexopathy, 1 G3 dermatitis, 1 G3 breast pain, and 1 G4 dermatitis. Twelve patients had new documented recurrences of which 1 was a second in-field LRR, and there were 7 deaths.

Conclusions

Proton salvage reirradiation to median 51 Gy in 1.5 Gy twice daily appears to be safe with acceptable acute and late toxicity, and effective with >95% local-regional control.

Cardiac substructure exposure in breast radiotherapy: a comparison between intensity modulated proton therapy and volumetric modulated arc therapy

INTRODUCTION

Proton therapy for breast cancer treatment reduces cardiac radiation exposure. Left-sided breast cancer patients with indication for internal mammary chain (IMC) irradiation are most at risk of radiation-induced cardiotoxicity. This study aims to evaluate in this situation the potential dosimetric benefit of intensity modulated proton therapy (IMPT) over volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) at the cardiac substructure level.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Cardiac substructures were retrospectively delineated according to ESTRO guidelines on the simulation CT scans of fourteen left-sided breast cancer patients having undergone conserving surgery and adjuvant locoregional free-breathing (FB-) or deep inspiration breath-hold (DIBH-) VMAT with internal mammary chain irradiation. IMPT treatment was re-planned on the simulation CT scans. Mean doses to cardiac substructures were retrieved and compared between VMAT treatment plans and IMPT simulation plans. Pearson correlation coefficients were calculated between mean doses delivered to cardiac substructures using these two techniques.

RESULTS

Mean doses to all cardiac substructures were significantly lower with IMPT than with VMAT. Regardless of the irradiation technique, the most exposed cardiac substructure was the mid segment of the left anterior descending coronary artery (LADCA). Pearson correlation coefficients between mean doses to cardiac substructures were usually weak and statistically non-significant for IMPT; mean heart dose (MHD) only correlated with mean doses delivered to the right ventricle, to the mid segment of the right coronary artery (RCA) and, to a lesser extent, to the LADCA.

CONCLUSION

The dosimetric benefit of IMPT over conformal photon therapy was consistently observed for all cardiac substructures. MHD may not be a reliable dosimetric parameter for precise cardiac exposure evaluation when planning IMPT.

Outcomes of and treatment planning considerations for a hybrid technique delivering proton pencil-beam scanning radiation to women with metal-containing tissue expanders undergoing post-mastectomy radiation

BACKGROUND

Following mastectomy, immediate breast reconstruction often involves the use of temporary tissue expanders (TEs). TEs contain metallic ports (MPs), which complicate proton pencil-beam scanning (PBS) planning. A technique was implemented for delivering PBS post-mastectomy radiation (PMRT) to patients with TEs and MPs.

METHODS

A protocol utilizing a hybrid single- and multi-field optimization (SFO, MFO) technique was developed. Plans were robustly optimized using a Monte Carlo algorithm. A CTV_eval structure including chest wall (CW) and regional nodal (RNI) targets and excluding the TE was evaluated. Organ at risk (OAR) dosimetry and acute toxicities were analyzed.

RESULTS

Twenty-nine women were treated with this technique. A 2-field SFO technique was used superior and inferior to the MP, with a 3 or 4-field MFO technique used at the level of the MP. Virtual blocks were utilized so that beams did not travel through the MP. A port-to-CW distance of 1 cm was required. Patients underwent daily image-guidance to ensure the port remained within a 0.5 cm internal planning volume (ITV). Median RT dose to CTV_eval was 50.4 Gy (45.0-50.4). Median 95% CTV_eval coverage was 99.5% (95-100). Optically stimulated luminescent dosimeter (OSLD) readings were available for 8 patients and correlated to the dose measurements in the treatment planning system (TPS); median OSLD ratio was 0.99 (range, 0.93-1.02).

CONCLUSIONS

Delivering PMRT with PBS for women with metal-containing TEs using a hybrid SFO/MFO technique is feasible, reproducible, and achieves excellent dose distributions. Specialized planning and image-guidance techniques are required to safely utilize this treatment in the clinic.

Cardiotoxicity of Radiation Therapy: Mechanisms, Management, and Mitigation

OPINION STATEMENT

Radiation therapy is a key component of modern-day cancer therapy and can reduce the rates of recurrence and death from cancer. However, it can increase risk of cardiovascular (CV) events, and our understanding of the timeline associated with that risk is shorter than previously thought. Risk mitigation strategies, such as different positioning techniques, and breath hold acquisitions as well as baseline cardiovascular risk stratification that can be undertaken at the time of radiotherapy planning should be implemented, particularly for patients receiving chest radiation therapy. Primary and secondary prevention of cardiovascular disease (CVD), as appropriate, should be used before, during, and after radiation treatment in order to minimize the risks. Opportunistic screening for subclinical coronary disease provides an attractive possibility for primary/secondary CVD prevention and thus mitigation of long-term CV risk. More data on long-term clinical usefulness of this strategy and development of appropriate management pathways would further strengthen the evidence for the implementation of such screening. Clear guidelines in initial cardiovascular screening and cardiac aftercare following radiotherapy need to be formulated in order to integrate these measures into everyday clinical practice and policy and subsequently improve post-treatment morbidity and mortality for these patients.

Personalization in Modern Radiation Oncology: Methods, Results and Pitfalls. Personalized Interventions and Breast Cancer

Breast cancer, the most frequent malignancy in women worldwide, is a heterogeneous group of diseases, characterized by distinct molecular aberrations. In precision medicine, radiation oncology for breast cancer aims at tailoring treatment according to tumor biology and each patient’s clinical features and genetics. Although systemic therapies are personalized according to molecular sub-type [i.e. endocrine therapy for receptor-positive disease and anti-human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) therapy for HER2-positive disease] and multi-gene assays, personalized radiation therapy has yet to be adopted in the clinical setting. Currently, attempts are being made to identify prognostic and/or predictive factors, biomarkers, signatures that could lead to personalized treatment in order to select appropriate patients who might, or might not, benefit from radiation therapy or whose radiation therapy might be escalated or de-escalated in dosages and volumes. This overview focuses on what has been achieved to date in personalized post-operative radiation therapy and individual patient radiosensitivity assessments by means of tumor sub-types and genetics.

Modeling Radioimmune Response-Current Status and Perspectives

The combination of immune therapy with radiation offers an exciting and promising treatment modality in cancer therapy. It has been hypothesized that radiation induces damage signals within the tumor, making it more detectable for the immune system. In combination with inhibiting immune checkpoints an effective anti-tumor immune response may be established. This inversion from tumor immune evasion raises numerous questions to be solved to support an effective clinical implementation: These include the optimum immune drug and radiation dose time courses, the amount of damage and associated doses required to stimulate an immune response, and the impact of lymphocyte status and dynamics. Biophysical modeling can offer unique insights, providing quantitative information addressing these factors and highlighting mechanisms of action. In this work we review the existing modeling approaches of combined ‘radioimmune’ response, as well as associated fields of study. We propose modeling attempts that appear relevant for an effective and predictive model. We emphasize the importance of the time course of drug and dose delivery in view to the time course of the triggered biological processes. Special attention is also paid to the dose distribution to circulating blood lymphocytes and the effect this has on immune competence.

Clinical practice of breast cancer protontherapy: A single-centre experience from selection to treatment

PURPOSE

Breast protontherapy efficiently limits cardiac, lung and contralateral breast exposure, which may clinically translate into better late tolerance profile compared with classic photon techniques. While breast protontherapy is already implemented in the United States and in some European countries, clinical experience of breast cancer protontherapy is currently limited in France. The aim of this study is to evaluate the clinical practice of breast cancer protontherapy at the Institut Curie in order to implement this technique at a larger scale.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Data from all breast cancer patients that have been addressed to the protontherapy centre of Orsay (CPO, Institut Curie) for adjuvant breast protontherapy were retrieved. We analysed why these patients were ultimately treated with protontherapy or not.

RESULTS

Between November 2019 and November 2020, eleven breast cancer patients have been evaluated for adjuvant protontherapy at the CPO. Two of them were ultimately treated with proton beams; adjuvant breast protontherapy therapy was well tolerated. The nine other patients were not treated with protontherapy due to lack of availability of protontherapy treatment rooms in acceptable time limits, at the time of patient evaluation.

CONCLUSION

Despite dosimetric advantages and excellent clinical tolerance, lack of availability of protontherapy machines currently limits wider implementation of breast protontherapy.

Selection criteria for early breast cancer patients in the DBCG proton trial - The randomised phase III trial strategy

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Adjuvant radiotherapy of internal mammary nodes (IMN) improves survival in high-risk early breast cancer patients but inevitably leads to more dose to heart and lung. Target coverage is often compromised to meet heart/lung dose constraints. We estimate heart and lung dose when target coverage is not compromised in consecutive patients. These estimates are used to guide the choice of selection criteria for the randomised Danish Breast Cancer Group (DBCG) Proton Trial.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

179 breast cancer patients already treated with loco-regional IMN radiotherapy from 18 European departments were included. If the clinically delivered treatment plan did not comply with defined target coverage requirements, the plan was modified retrospectively until sufficient coverage was reached. The choice of selection criteria was based on the estimated number of eligible patients for different heart and lung dose thresholds in combination with proton therapy capacity limitations and dose-response relationships for heart and lung.

RESULTS

Median mean heart dose was 3.0 Gy (range, 1.1-8.2 Gy) for left-sided and 1.4 Gy (0.4-11.5 Gy) for right-sided treatment plans. Median V17Gy/V20Gy (hypofractionated/normofractionated plans) for ipsilateral lung was 31% (9-57%). The DBCG Radiotherapy Committee chose mean heart dose ≥ 4 Gy and/or lung V17Gy/V20Gy ≥ 37% as thresholds for inclusion in the randomised trial. Using these thresholds, we estimate that 22% of patients requiring loco-regional IMN radiotherapy will be eligible for the trial.

CONCLUSION

The patient selection criteria for the DBCG Proton Trial are mean heart dose ≥ 4 Gy and/or lung V17Gy/V20Gy ≥ 37%.