1
|
Wang RJ, Liu HY, Guo LF, Yu D, Wu SG. 21-gene recurrence score predictive of the benefit of postoperative radiotherapy after breast-conserving surgery for elderly patients with T1N0 and luminal breast cancer. Breast Cancer 2024; 31:1156-1166. [PMID: 39300035 DOI: 10.1007/s12282-024-01636-9] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/27/2024] [Accepted: 09/16/2024] [Indexed: 09/22/2024]
Abstract
PURPOSE To assess the predictive value of the 21-gene recurrence score (RS) on the survival outcomes of postoperative radiotherapy (PORT) in elderly patients with T1N0 luminal breast cancer after breast-conserving surgery. METHODS We retrospectively included patients aged ≥ 70 years and diagnosed with T1N0 luminal BC between 2004 and 2015 using the data from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results. The RS groups were categorized using the TAILORx criteria as follows: low risk (RS < 11) (LR), intermediate risk (RS 11-25) (IR), and high risk (RS > 25) (HR). Kaplan-Meier analysis, propensity score matching (PSM), and Cox proportional hazards analysis were used for statistical analysis. RESULTS We included 5901 patients in the analysis. Of the patients, 4492 (76.1%) underwent PORT, while 1409 (23.9%) did not receive PORT. There were 1588 (26.9%), 3613 (61.2%), and 700 (12.0%) patients classified as LR, IR, and HR, respectively. There were 1182 (74.4%), 2773 (76.8%), and 537 (76.7%) patients in the LR, IR, and HR groups receiving PORT, respectively (P = 0.182). A total of 1353 pairs of patients were completely matched using PSM. PORT was independently associated with better overall survival (OS) (P < 0.001) and breast cancer-specific survival (BCSS) (P = 0.015) in the entire cohort. The sensitivity analyses showed that the receipt of PORT was not associated with OS (P = 0.887) and BCSS (P = 0.861) in the LR group. However, the receipt of PORT was associated with OS (P < 0.001) and BCSS in the IRHR group (P = 0.026). CONCLUSION Our study highlights the possible role of the 21-gene RS in predicting the survival outcomes of PORT following BCS in elderly patients with T1N0 luminal breast cancer.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Run-Jie Wang
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Xiamen Cancer Center, Xiamen Key Laboratory of Radiation Oncology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Xiamen University, School of Medicine, Xiamen University, Xiamen, 361003, People's Republic of China
| | - Hai-Ying Liu
- Department of Breast Surgery, Hainan General Hospital (Hainan Affiliated Hospital of Hainan Medical University), Haikou, 570311, People's Republic of China
| | - Lin-Feng Guo
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Xiamen Cancer Center, Xiamen Key Laboratory of Radiation Oncology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Xiamen University, School of Medicine, Xiamen University, Xiamen, 361003, People's Republic of China
| | - De Yu
- Department of Radiotherapy, Zhongshan Hospital Affiliated to Xiamen University, Xiamen, 361000, People's Republic of China.
| | - San-Gang Wu
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Xiamen Cancer Center, Xiamen Key Laboratory of Radiation Oncology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Xiamen University, School of Medicine, Xiamen University, Xiamen, 361003, People's Republic of China.
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Almeida ND, Pepin A, Schrand TV, Shekher R, Goulenko V, Fung-Kee-Fung S, Farrugia MK, Shah C, Singh AK. Re-Evaluating the Omission of Radiation Therapy in Low-Risk Patients With Early-Stage Breast Cancer. Clin Breast Cancer 2024; 24:563-574. [PMID: 39179441 DOI: 10.1016/j.clbc.2024.07.007] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/02/2024] [Revised: 07/06/2024] [Accepted: 07/13/2024] [Indexed: 08/26/2024]
Abstract
Traditionally, management of early-stage breast cancer has required adjuvant radiation therapy following breast conserving surgery, due to decreased local recurrence and breast cancer mortality. However, over the past decade, there has been an increasing emphasis on potential overtreatment of patients with early-stage breast cancer. This has given rise to questions of how to optimize deintensification of treatment in this cohort of patients while maintaining clinical outcomes. A multitude of studies have focused on identification of a subset of patients with invasive breast cancer who were at low risk of local recurrence based on clinicopathologic features and therefore suitable for RT omission. These studies have failed to identify a subset that does not from RT with respect to local control. Several ongoing trials are evaluating alternative approaches to deintensification while focusing on tumor biology. With regards to ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS), the role of RT has been questioned since breast conservation was utilized. Paralleling invasive disease studies, studies have sought to use clinicopathologic features to identify low risk patients suitable for RT omission but have failed to identify a subset that does not from RT with respect to local control. Use of new assays in patients with DCIS may represent the ideal approach for risk stratification and appropriate deintensification. At this time, when considering deintensification, individualizing treatment decisions with a focus on shared decision making is paramount.
Collapse
MESH Headings
- Humans
- Breast Neoplasms/radiotherapy
- Breast Neoplasms/pathology
- Breast Neoplasms/surgery
- Female
- Radiotherapy, Adjuvant/methods
- Carcinoma, Intraductal, Noninfiltrating/radiotherapy
- Carcinoma, Intraductal, Noninfiltrating/pathology
- Carcinoma, Intraductal, Noninfiltrating/surgery
- Neoplasm Recurrence, Local/prevention & control
- Neoplasm Recurrence, Local/pathology
- Mastectomy, Segmental
- Neoplasm Staging
- Risk Assessment
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Neil D Almeida
- Department of Radiation Medicine, Roswell Park Comprehensive Cancer Center, Buffalo, NY
| | - Abigail Pepin
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA
| | - Tyler V Schrand
- Department of Radiation Medicine, Roswell Park Comprehensive Cancer Center, Buffalo, NY; Department of Chemistry, Bowling Green State University, Bowling Green, OH
| | - Rohil Shekher
- Department of Radiation Medicine, Roswell Park Comprehensive Cancer Center, Buffalo, NY
| | - Victor Goulenko
- Department of Radiation Medicine, Roswell Park Comprehensive Cancer Center, Buffalo, NY
| | - Simon Fung-Kee-Fung
- Department of Radiation Medicine, Roswell Park Comprehensive Cancer Center, Buffalo, NY
| | - Mark K Farrugia
- Department of Radiation Medicine, Roswell Park Comprehensive Cancer Center, Buffalo, NY
| | - Chirag Shah
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Taussig Cancer Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH.
| | - Anurag K Singh
- Department of Radiation Medicine, Roswell Park Comprehensive Cancer Center, Buffalo, NY.
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Mutter RW, Golafshar MA, Buras MR, Comstock BP, Jacobson M, DeWees T, Remmes NB, Francis LN, Boughey JC, Ruddy KJ, McGee LA, Afzal A, Vallow LA, Furutani KM, Deufel CL, Shumway DA, Kim H, Liu MC, Degnim AC, Jakub JW, Vern-Gross TZ, Wong WW, Patel SH, Vargas CE, Stish BJ, Waddle MR, Pafundi DH, Halyard MY, Corbin KS, Hieken TJ, Park SS. Dose Deintensified 3-Day Photon, Proton, or Brachytherapy: A Nonrandomized Controlled Partial Breast Irradiation Trial. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2024:S0360-3016(24)03389-3. [PMID: 39299551 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2024.09.019] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/12/2023] [Revised: 08/19/2024] [Accepted: 09/04/2024] [Indexed: 09/22/2024]
Abstract
PURPOSE The optimal approach for partial breast irradiation (PBI) is unknown. We investigated a novel de-intensified 3-fraction PBI regimen for photons, protons, and brachytherapy. METHODS AND MATERIALS A multicenter nonrandomized controlled trial with the primary outcome of adverse cosmesis at 3 years versus before PBI. Eligibility criteria were age ≥50 years treated with breast-conserving surgery for node-negative estrogen receptor-positive (ER+) invasive breast cancer or any ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) measuring ≤2.5 cm. Photon and proton PBI were prescribed 21.9 Gy (relative biological effectiveness) and brachytherapy 21 Gy in 3 fractions. Radiation therapy technique and adjuvant endocrine therapy were selected at physician and patient discretion. RESULTS Between June 17, 2015, and July 13, 2017, 161 eligible patients were treated with photons (56), protons (49), or brachytherapy (56). Median patient age was 66.8 years. One hundred twenty-six (78.3%) had invasive breast cancer (all ER+) and 35 (21.7%) had DCIS (88.6% ER+). Fifty-four percent of patients with invasive breast cancer and 25.8% of patients with ER+ DCIS initiated and adhered to the prescribed endocrine therapy. The proportion of patients with adverse cosmesis (by trained nurse assessment) was 14.5% at baseline and 2.3% at 3 years (difference, -12.2%; 95% CI, -100% to -6.4%). Adverse cosmesis at the last follow-up, with a median follow-up of 5 years, was 5.7% by nurse assessment, 5.6% by panel assessment of digital photographs, and 5.2% by patient self-report. There were no observed clinically meaningful changes in other patient-reported outcomes, and just 2 grade 2 or higher adverse events, both grade 2, in the brachytherapy cohort. Five-year local recurrence-free survival and progression-free survival were 98.0% and 95.5%, respectively. There were no local recurrences among 60 patients with invasive breast cancer and Ki67 ≤13.25%. CONCLUSIONS Deintensified 3-day PBI provided favorable disease control, tolerability, and cosmetic outcomes, meeting the prespecified criteria for acceptability. This approach is an attractive option for patients with small node-negative ER+ breast cancer and DCIS.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Robert W Mutter
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota; Department of Molecular Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota.
| | - Michael A Golafshar
- Division of Biostatistics and Clinical Trials, Department of Quantitative Health Sciences, Mayo Clinic, Phoenix, Arizona
| | - Matthew R Buras
- Division of Biostatistics and Clinical Trials, Department of Quantitative Health Sciences, Mayo Clinic, Phoenix, Arizona
| | - Bryce P Comstock
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota
| | - Maddi Jacobson
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota
| | - Todd DeWees
- Division of Biostatistics and Clinical Trials, Department of Quantitative Health Sciences, Mayo Clinic, Phoenix, Arizona
| | | | - Leah N Francis
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota
| | - Judy C Boughey
- Department of Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota
| | - Kathryn J Ruddy
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Phoenix, Arizona
| | - Lisa A McGee
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, Florida
| | - Arslan Afzal
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota
| | - Laura A Vallow
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, Florida
| | - Keith M Furutani
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, Florida
| | | | - Dean A Shumway
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota
| | - Haeyoung Kim
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota; Department of Radiation Oncology, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, South Korea
| | - Minetta C Liu
- Division of Medical Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota
| | - Amy C Degnim
- Department of Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota
| | - James W Jakub
- Department of Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, Florida
| | | | - William W Wong
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Phoenix, Arizona
| | - Samir H Patel
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Phoenix, Arizona
| | - Carlos E Vargas
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Phoenix, Arizona
| | - Bradley J Stish
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota
| | - Mark R Waddle
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota
| | - Deanna H Pafundi
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, Florida
| | | | | | - Tina J Hieken
- Department of Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota
| | - Sean S Park
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Rodin D, Glicksman RM, Hepel JT, Huber K, Kirova Y, Loap P, Rakovitch E. Early-Stage Breast Cancer: A Critical Review of Current and Emerging Practice. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2024:S0360-3016(24)03293-0. [PMID: 39237044 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2024.08.037] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/20/2024] [Revised: 08/05/2024] [Accepted: 08/09/2024] [Indexed: 09/07/2024]
Abstract
Breast-conserving surgery followed by adjuvant radiation to reduce the risk of ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence is the mainstay of treatment for early-stage breast cancer (ESBC). However, improved understanding of the heterogeneity of the clinical and molecular characteristics of ESBC has led to greater efforts to personalize approaches to treatment. Furthermore, advances in the understanding of the radiobiology of breast cancer have led to several practice-changing trials on the effectiveness and tolerability of moderate and ultrahypofractionated radiation. Here, we review the recent evidence and ongoing research in the radiotherapeutic management of ESBC, including the use of boost for high-risk disease and opportunities for accelerated fractionation, partial breast irradiation, and radiation omission for low-risk disease. We also discuss how molecular profiling can inform decision-making and new opportunities for primary radiation therapy and reirradiation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Danielle Rodin
- Radiation Medicine Program, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
| | - Rachel M Glicksman
- Radiation Medicine Program, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Jaroslaw T Hepel
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Rhode Island Hospital, Providence, Rhode Island
| | - Kathryn Huber
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Tufts University, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Youlia Kirova
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Institut Curie, Paris, France
| | - Pierre Loap
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Institut Curie, Paris, France
| | - Eileen Rakovitch
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Department of Radiation Oncology, Odette Cancer Centre, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Williams LJ, Kunkler IH, Taylor KJ, Dunlop J, Piper T, Caldwell J, Jack W, Loane JF, Elder K, Bartlett JMS, Dixon JM, Cameron DA. Postoperative radiotherapy in women with early operable breast cancer (Scottish Breast Conservation Trial): 30-year update of a randomised, controlled, phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol 2024; 25:1213-1221. [PMID: 39127062 DOI: 10.1016/s1470-2045(24)00347-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/20/2024] [Revised: 05/31/2024] [Accepted: 06/14/2024] [Indexed: 08/12/2024]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Breast-conserving surgery, adjuvant systemic therapy, and radiotherapy are the standard of care for most women with early breast cancer. There are few reports of clinical outcomes beyond the first decade of follow-up of randomised trials comparing breast-conserving surgery with or without radiotherapy. We present a 30-year update of the Scottish Breast Conservation Trial. METHODS In this randomised, controlled, phase 3 trial across 14 hospitals in Scotland, women aged younger than 70 years with early breast cancer (tumours ≤4 cm [T1 or T2 and N0 or N1]) were included. They underwent breast-conserving surgery (1 cm margin) with axillary node sampling or clearance. Oestrogen receptor (ER)-rich patients (≥20 fmol/mg protein) received 20 mg oral tamoxifen daily for 5 years. ER-poor patients (<20 fmol/mg protein) received chemotherapy (cyclophosphamide 600 mg/m2, methotrexate 50 mg/m2, and fluorouracil 600 mg/m2 every 21 days intravenously in eight courses). Stratification was by menstrual status (within or more than 12 months from last menstrual period) and ER status (oestrogen concentration ≥20 fmol/mg protein, <20 fmol/mg protein, or unknown) and patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to high-dose (50 Gy in 20-25 fractions) local or locoregional radiotherapy versus no radiotherapy. No blinding was possible due to the nature of the treatment. We report the primary endpoint of the original trial, ipsilateral breast tumour recurrence, and the co-primary endpoint, overall survival. Clinical outcomes were compared by the log-rank test. Hazard ratios (HRs) are reported, with no radiotherapy as the reference group. Failures of the proportional hazards assumption are reported if significant. All analyses are by intention to treat. FINDINGS Between April 1, 1985, and Oct 2, 1991, 589 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to the two treatment groups (293 to radiotherapy and 296 to no radiotherapy). After exclusion of four ineligible patients (two in each group), there were 291 patients in the radiotherapy group and 294 patients in the no radiotherapy group. Median follow-up was 17·5 years (IQR 8·4-27·9). Ipsilateral breast tumour recurrence was significantly lower in the radiotherapy group than in the no radiotherapy group (46 [16%] of 291 vs 107 [36%] of 294; HR 0·39 [95% CI 0·28-0·55], p<0·0001). Although there were differences in the hazard rate for ipsilateral breast tumour recurrence in the first decade after treatment (HR 0·24 [95% CI 0·15-0·38], p<0·0001), subsequent risks of ipsilateral breast tumour recurrence were similar in both groups (0·98 [0·54-1·79], p=0·95). There was no difference in overall survival between the two groups (median 18·7 years [95% CI 16·5-21·5] in the no radiotherapy group vs 19·2 years [16·9-21·3] in the radiotherapy group; HR 1·08 [95% CI 0·89-1 ·30], log-rank p=0·43). INTERPRETATION Our findings suggest that patients whose biology predicts a late relapse a decade or more after breast-conserving surgery for early breast cancer might gain little from adjuvant radiotherapy. FUNDING Breast Cancer Institute (part of Edinburgh and Lothian Health Foundation) and PFS Genomics (now part of Exact Sciences).
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Linda J Williams
- Edinburgh Clinical Trials Unit, Usher Institute, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.
| | - Ian H Kunkler
- Edinburgh Cancer Research, CRUK Scotland Centre, Institute of Genetics and Cancer, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK
| | - Karen J Taylor
- Edinburgh Cancer Research, CRUK Scotland Centre, Institute of Genetics and Cancer, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK
| | | | - Tammy Piper
- Edinburgh Cancer Research, CRUK Scotland Centre, Institute of Genetics and Cancer, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK
| | | | - Wilma Jack
- Edinburgh Breast Unit, Western General Hospital, Edinburgh, UK
| | - Joseph F Loane
- Pathology Department, Queen Elizabeth University Hospital, Glasgow, UK
| | - Kenneth Elder
- Edinburgh Breast Unit, Western General Hospital, Edinburgh, UK
| | - John M S Bartlett
- Edinburgh Cancer Research, CRUK Scotland Centre, Institute of Genetics and Cancer, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK
| | - J Michael Dixon
- Edinburgh Breast Unit, Western General Hospital, Edinburgh, UK
| | - David A Cameron
- Edinburgh Cancer Research, CRUK Scotland Centre, Institute of Genetics and Cancer, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK; Edinburgh Breast Unit, Western General Hospital, Edinburgh, UK
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Chen YA, Lai HW, Su HC, Loh EW, Huang TW, Tam KW. Efficacy and safety of adjuvant therapies in older patients with breast cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis of real-world data. Breast Cancer 2024; 31:739-753. [PMID: 39085679 DOI: 10.1007/s12282-024-01622-1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/27/2024] [Accepted: 07/29/2024] [Indexed: 08/02/2024]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Insufficient data available for older patients with breast cancer complicates decision-making regarding optimal treatment. A systematic review that uses real-world data is required for assessing the effectiveness and potential adverse effects of various therapies for this age group of patients. METHODS Databases of PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library were searched. We included clinical studies that evaluated various treatments for geriatric breast cancer, including adjuvant radiation therapy, hypofractionated radiation therapy (hypo-RT) and accelerated and partial breast irradiation (APBI), endocrine therapy, chemotherapy, and targeted therapy. RESULTS A total of 71 studies were retrieved. Adjuvant radiation therapy significantly improved overall survival (OS) compared with no radiation [hazard ratio (HR) = 0.60, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.54-0.67]. The pooled estimates of OS for hypo-RT and APBI demonstrated no inferiority compared with conventional radiation. Both endocrine treatment (HR = 0.63, 95% CI 0.43-0.92) and chemotherapy (HR = 0.76, 95% CI 0.65-0.88) significantly increased OS compared with no treatment. Trastuzumab monotherapy significantly enhanced OS compared with no trastuzumab use (HR = 0.23, 95% CI 0.07-0.73). CONCLUSION Despite concerns about potential complications during treatment in older patients, proactive therapies significantly increase their survival rates. For patients who are frailer, hypo-RT and APBI offer survival rates comparable to traditional modalities. Additionally, targeted therapy as a monotherapy holds promise as a viable option for patients with HER2-positive breast cancer who cannot undergo chemotherapy. Therefore, by conducting thorough general assessments and clinical evaluations, the side effects of postoperative treatments can be effectively managed.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Yu-An Chen
- School of Medicine, College of Medicine, Taipei Medical University, Taipei, Taiwan
| | - Hsuan-Wen Lai
- School of Medicine, College of Medicine, Taipei Medical University, Taipei, Taiwan
| | - Hui-Chen Su
- Department of Pharmacy, Chi Mei Medical Center, Tainan City, Taiwan
| | - El-Wui Loh
- Cochrane Taiwan, Taipei Medical University, Taipei, Taiwan
- Graduate Institute of Clinical Medicine, College of Medicine, Taipei Medical University, Taipei, Taiwan
- Department of Medical Imaging, Shuang Ho Hospital, Taipei Medical University, New Taipei City, Taiwan
| | - Tsai-Wei Huang
- Cochrane Taiwan, Taipei Medical University, Taipei, Taiwan
- School of Nursing, College of Nursing, Taipei Medical University, Taipei, Taiwan
| | - Ka-Wai Tam
- Cochrane Taiwan, Taipei Medical University, Taipei, Taiwan.
- Division of General Surgery, Department of Surgery, School of Medicine, College of Medicine, Taipei Medical University, Taipei, Taiwan.
- Division of General Surgery, Department of Surgery, Shuang Ho Hospital, Taipei Medical University, 291, Zhongzheng Road, Zhonghe District, New Taipei City, 23561, Taiwan.
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Speers C, Anderson B. Can Less Be More? Evolving Strategies for Therapy De-escalation in Early-Stage Breast Cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2024; 119:1327-1330. [PMID: 39038902 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2024.03.022] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/07/2024] [Accepted: 03/13/2024] [Indexed: 07/24/2024]
Affiliation(s)
- Corey Speers
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospitals Seidman Cancer Center, Cleveland, OH.
| | - Bethany Anderson
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Wisconsin Carbone Cancer Center, Madison, WI.
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Mutter RW, Chauhan C, Goetz MP, Wright JL. Revisiting Combined Modality Therapy in Older Patients With Luminal Breast Cancer Through the Patient Lens. J Clin Oncol 2024; 42:2121-2125. [PMID: 38564696 DOI: 10.1200/jco.23.02289] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/20/2023] [Revised: 01/08/2024] [Accepted: 02/20/2024] [Indexed: 04/04/2024] Open
Affiliation(s)
- Robert W Mutter
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN
| | | | | | - Jean L Wright
- Department of Radiation Oncology, John Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Lorentzen EH, Minami CA. Avoiding Locoregional Overtreatment in Older Adults With Early-Stage Breast Cancer. Clin Breast Cancer 2024; 24:319-327. [PMID: 38461117 PMCID: PMC11261391 DOI: 10.1016/j.clbc.2024.02.004] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/31/2023] [Revised: 02/01/2024] [Accepted: 02/07/2024] [Indexed: 03/11/2024]
Abstract
Advances in the treatment of older women with early-stage breast cancer, particularly opportunities for de-escalation of therapy, have afforded patients and providers opportunity to individualize care. As the majority of women ≥65 have estrogen receptor-positive, HER2-negative disease, locoregional therapy (surgery and/or radiation) may be tailored based on a patient's physiologic age to avoid either over- or undertreatment. To determine who would derive benefit from more or less intensive therapy, an accurate assessment of an older patient's physiologic age and incorporation of patient-specific values are paramount. While there now exist well-validated geriatric assessment tools whose use is encouraged by the American Society of Clinical Oncology when considering systemic therapy, these instruments have not been widely integrated into the locoregional breast cancer care model. This review aims to highlight the importance of assessing frailty and the concepts of and over- and undertreatment, in the context of trial data supporting opportunities for safe deescalation of locoregional therapy, when treating older women with early-stage breast cancer.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Eliza H Lorentzen
- Department of Surgery, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA; Center for Surgery and Public Health, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA.
| | - Christina A Minami
- Department of Surgery, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA; Center for Surgery and Public Health, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA; Breast Oncology Program, Dana-Farber/Brigham and Women's Cancer Center, Boston, MA
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Vo K, Ladbury C, Yoon S, Bazan J, Glaser S, Amini A. Omission of adjuvant radiotherapy in low-risk elderly males with breast cancer. Breast Cancer 2024; 31:485-495. [PMID: 38507145 PMCID: PMC11045584 DOI: 10.1007/s12282-024-01560-y] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/08/2024] [Accepted: 02/26/2024] [Indexed: 03/22/2024]
Abstract
PURPOSE Randomized clinical trials demonstrate that lumpectomy + hormone therapy (HT) without radiation therapy (RT) yields equivalent survival and acceptable local-regional outcomes in elderly women with early-stage, node-negative, hormone-receptor positive (HR +) breast cancer. Whether these data apply to men with the same inclusion criteria remains unknown. METHODS The National Cancer Database was queried for male patients ≥ 65 years with pathologic T1-2N0 (≤ 3 cm) HR + breast cancer treated with breast-conserving surgery with negative margins from 2004 to 2019. Adjuvant treatment was classified as HT alone, RT alone, or HT + RT. Male patients were matched with female patients for OS comparison. Survival analysis was performed using Cox regression and Kaplan - Meier method. Inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) was applied to adjust for confounding. RESULTS A total of 523 patients met the inclusion criteria, with 24.4% receiving HT, 16.3% receiving RT, and 59.2% receiving HT + RT. The median follow-up was 6.9 years (IQR: 5.0-9.4 years). IPTW-adjusted 5-yr OS rates in the HT, RT, and HT + RT cohorts were 84.0% (95% CI 77.1-91.5%), 81.1% (95% CI 71.1-92.5%), and 93.0% (95% CI 90.0-96.2%), respectively. On IPTW-adjusted MVA, relative to HT, receipt of HT + RT was associated with improvements in OS (HR: 0.641; p = 0.042). RT alone was not associated with improved OS (HR: 1.264; p = 0.420). CONCLUSION Among men ≥ 65 years old with T1-2N0 HR + breast cancer, RT alone did not confer an OS benefit over HT alone. Combination of RT + HT demonstrated significant improvements in OS. De-escalation of treatment through omission of either RT or HT at this point should be done with caution.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kim Vo
- College of Osteopathic Medicine of the Pacific, Western University of Health Sciences, 309 E 2 ndSt, Pomona, CA, 91766, USA
| | - Colton Ladbury
- Department of Radiation Oncology, City of Hope National Medical Center, 1500 East Duarte Road, Duarte, CA, 91010, USA.
| | - Stephanie Yoon
- Department of Radiation Oncology, City of Hope National Medical Center, 1500 East Duarte Road, Duarte, CA, 91010, USA
| | - Jose Bazan
- Department of Radiation Oncology, City of Hope National Medical Center, 1500 East Duarte Road, Duarte, CA, 91010, USA
| | - Scott Glaser
- Department of Radiation Oncology, City of Hope National Medical Center, 1500 East Duarte Road, Duarte, CA, 91010, USA
| | - Arya Amini
- Department of Radiation Oncology, City of Hope National Medical Center, 1500 East Duarte Road, Duarte, CA, 91010, USA
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Li M, Tang J, Pan X, Zhang D. Predicting the Survival Benefit of Radiotherapy in Elderly Breast Cancer Patients: A Population-Based Analysis. J Surg Res 2024; 297:26-40. [PMID: 38428261 DOI: 10.1016/j.jss.2024.02.002] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/31/2023] [Revised: 12/30/2023] [Accepted: 02/05/2024] [Indexed: 03/03/2024]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION This study aimed to establish two prediction tools predicting cancer-specific survival (CSS) and overall survival (OS) in elderly breast cancer patients with or without radiotherapy. METHODS Clinicopathological data of breast cancer patients aged more than 70 y from 2010 to 2018 were retrospectively collected from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database. Patients were randomly divided into the training and validation cohorts at 7:3, and the Cox proportional risk model was used to construct the nomograms. The concordance index, the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve, and the calibration plot are used to evaluate the discrimination and accuracy of the nomograms. RESULTS One lakh twenty eight thousand two hundred twenty three elderly breast cancer patients were enrolled, including 57,915 who received radiotherapy. The Cox regression model was used to identify independent factors. These independent influencing factors are used to construct the prediction models. The calibration plots reflect the excellent consistency between the predicted and actual survival rates. The concordance index of nomograms for CSS and OS was more than 0.7 in both the radiotherapy group and the nonradiotherapy group, and similar results are also shown in area under the receiver operating characteristic curve. Decision curve analysis showed that the prognostication accuracy of the model was much higher than that of the traditional tumor, node, metastasis staging. CONCLUSIONS Radiotherapy can benefit elderly breast cancer patients significantly. The two prediction tools provide a personalized survival scale for evaluating the CSS and OS of elderly breast cancer patients, which can better provide clinicians with better-individualized management for these patients.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Maoxian Li
- Department of Pediatric Surgery, Chengdu Women's and Children's Central Hospital, School of Medicine, University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, Chengdu, Sichuan, China.
| | - Jie Tang
- Department of Biostatistics and Epidemiology, Public Health School, Shenyang Medical College, Shenyang, China
| | - Xiudan Pan
- Department of Biostatistics and Epidemiology, Public Health School, Shenyang Medical College, Shenyang, China
| | - Dianlong Zhang
- Women and Children's Hospital, Qingdao University, Qingdao, China.
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
Meattini I, Kunkler IH. Omission of radiation therapy after breast conserving surgery for older women at low-risk of local recurrence: One option among many. EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF SURGICAL ONCOLOGY 2024; 50:108058. [PMID: 38428108 DOI: 10.1016/j.ejso.2024.108058] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/19/2024] [Accepted: 02/22/2024] [Indexed: 03/03/2024]
Abstract
This editorial discusses the evolving landscape of early-stage breast cancer treatment, emphasizing the need to tailor therapies based on disease biology and genomic approaches. The focus is on the reconsideration of postoperative radiation therapy (RT) for older patients with low-risk, hormone receptor-positive (HR+), human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 negative (HER2-) breast cancer. Recent trials show modest long-term local recurrence rates with the omission of RT after BCS in certain cases, challenging the traditional approach. The commentary calls for continued research on predictive tests for treatment response and advocates for a multidisciplinary approach to decision-making, considering factors like quality of life. The nuanced risk/benefit ratio of RT in older patients is explored, emphasizing the importance of comprehensive assessment for optimal therapy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Icro Meattini
- Department of Experimental and Clinical Biomedical Sciences "M Serio", University of Florence, Florence, Italy; Radiation Oncology & Breast Unit, Oncology Department, Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria Careggi, Florence, Italy.
| | - Ian H Kunkler
- Edinburgh Cancer Research Centre, Institute of Genetic and Molecular Medicine, University of Edinburgh, Western General Hospital, Edinburgh, UK
| |
Collapse
|
13
|
Haque W, Butler EB, Teh BS. Personalized Radiation Therapy for Breast Cancer. Curr Oncol 2024; 31:1588-1599. [PMID: 38534954 PMCID: PMC10969188 DOI: 10.3390/curroncol31030121] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/12/2024] [Revised: 03/08/2024] [Accepted: 03/18/2024] [Indexed: 05/26/2024] Open
Abstract
Breast cancer is diagnosed in nearly 3 million people worldwide. Radiation therapy is an integral component of disease management for patients with breast cancer, and is used after breast-conserving surgery or a mastectomy to reduce the risk of a local recurrence. The following review describes the methods used to personalize radiation therapy by optimizing patient selection, using advanced treatment techniques to lessen the radiation dose to normal organs, and using hypofractionation in order to shorten the duration of radiation treatment.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Waqar Haque
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Houston Methodist Hospital, Houston, TX 77030, USA; (E.B.B.); (B.S.T.)
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
14
|
González-Viguera J, Martínez-Pérez E, Pérez-Montero H, Arangüena M, Guedea F, Gutiérrez-Miguélez C. Hype or hope? A review of challenges in balancing tumor control and treatment toxicity in breast cancer from the perspective of the radiation oncologist. Clin Transl Oncol 2024; 26:561-573. [PMID: 37505372 DOI: 10.1007/s12094-023-03287-2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/02/2023] [Accepted: 07/17/2023] [Indexed: 07/29/2023]
Abstract
The aim of this article is to discuss the challenges and new strategies in managing breast cancer patients, with a specific focus on radiation oncology and the importance of balancing oncologic outcomes with quality of life and post-treatment morbidity. A comprehensive literature review was conducted to identify advances in the management of breast cancer, exploring de-escalation strategies, hypofractionation schemes, predictors and tools for reducing toxicity (radiation-induced lymphocyte apoptosis, deep inspiration breath-hold, adaptive radiotherapy), enhancer treatments (hyperthermia, immunotherapy) and innovative diagnostic modalities (PET-MRI, omics). Balancing oncologic outcomes with quality of life and post-treatment morbidity is crucial in the era of personalized medicine. Radiotherapy plays a critical role in the management of breast cancer patients. Large randomized trials are necessary to generalize some practices and cost remains the main obstacle for many innovations that are already applicable.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Javier González-Viguera
- Radiation Oncology Department, Catalan Institute of Oncology, L'Hospitalet de Llobregat, Barcelona, Spain.
| | - Evelyn Martínez-Pérez
- Radiation Oncology Department, Catalan Institute of Oncology, L'Hospitalet de Llobregat, Barcelona, Spain
| | - Héctor Pérez-Montero
- Radiation Oncology Department, Catalan Institute of Oncology, L'Hospitalet de Llobregat, Barcelona, Spain
| | - Marina Arangüena
- Radiation Oncology Department, Catalan Institute of Oncology, L'Hospitalet de Llobregat, Barcelona, Spain
| | - Ferran Guedea
- Radiation Oncology Department, Catalan Institute of Oncology, L'Hospitalet de Llobregat, Barcelona, Spain
| | | |
Collapse
|
15
|
Jagsi R, Griffith KA, Harris EE, Wright JL, Recht A, Taghian AG, Lee L, Moran MS, Small W, Johnstone C, Rahimi A, Freedman G, Muzaffar M, Haffty B, Horst K, Powell SN, Sharp J, Sabel M, Schott A, El-Tamer M. Omission of Radiotherapy After Breast-Conserving Surgery for Women With Breast Cancer With Low Clinical and Genomic Risk: 5-Year Outcomes of IDEA. J Clin Oncol 2024; 42:390-398. [PMID: 38060195 DOI: 10.1200/jco.23.02270] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/18/2023] [Accepted: 11/03/2023] [Indexed: 12/08/2023] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE Multiple studies have shown a low risk of ipsilateral breast events (IBEs) or other recurrences for selected patients age 65-70 years or older with stage I breast cancers treated with breast-conserving surgery (BCS) and endocrine therapy (ET) without adjuvant radiotherapy. We sought to evaluate whether younger postmenopausal patients could also be successfully treated without radiation therapy, adding a genomic assay to classic selection factors. METHODS Postmenopausal patients age 50-69 years with pT1N0 unifocal invasive breast cancer with margins ≥2 mm after BCS whose tumors were estrogen receptor-positive, progesterone receptor-positive, and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative with Oncotype DX 21-gene recurrence score ≤18 were prospectively enrolled in a single-arm trial of radiotherapy omission if they consented to take at least 5 years of ET. The primary end point was the rate of locoregional recurrence 5 years after BCS. RESULTS Between June 2015 and October 2018, 200 eligible patients were enrolled. Among the 186 patients with clinical follow-up of at least 56 months, overall and breast cancer-specific survival rates at 5 years were both 100%. The 5-year freedom from any recurrence was 99% (95% CI, 96 to 100). Crude rates of IBEs for the entire follow-up period for patients age 50-59 years and age 60-69 years were 3.3% (2/60) and 3.6% (5/140), respectively; crude rates of overall recurrence were 5.0% (3/60) and 3.6% (5/140), respectively. CONCLUSION This trial achieved a very low risk of recurrence using a genomic assay in combination with classic clinical and biologic features for treatment selection, including postmenopausal patients younger than 60 years. Long-term follow-up of this trial and others will help determine whether the option of avoiding initial radiotherapy can be offered to a broader group of women than current guidelines recommend.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Reshma Jagsi
- Emory University, Atlanta, GA
- University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI
| | | | | | | | - Abram Recht
- Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA
| | | | | | | | | | | | - Asal Rahimi
- University of Texas, Southwestern, Dallas, TX
| | | | | | - Bruce Haffty
- Rutgers Cancer Institute of New Jersey, New Brunswick, NJ
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
16
|
Chua BH. Omission of radiation therapy post breast conserving surgery. Breast 2024; 73:103670. [PMID: 38211516 PMCID: PMC10788792 DOI: 10.1016/j.breast.2024.103670] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/31/2023] [Revised: 12/24/2023] [Accepted: 01/04/2024] [Indexed: 01/13/2024] Open
Abstract
Radiation therapy (RT) after breast conserving surgery decreases the risks of local recurrence and breast cancer mortality in the multidisciplinary management of patients with breast cancer. However, breast cancer is a heterogeneous disease, and the absolute benefit of post-operative RT in individual patients varies substantially. Clinical trials aiming to identify patients with low-risk early breast cancer in whom post-operative RT may be safely omitted, based on conventional clinical-pathologic variables alone, have not provided sufficiently tailored information on local recurrence risk assessment to guide treatment decisions. The majority of patients with early breast cancer continue to be routinely treated with RT after breast conserving surgery. This approach may represent over-treatment for a substantial proportion of the patients. The clinical impact of genomic signatures on local therapy decisions for early breast cancer has been remarkably modest due to the lack of high-level evidence supporting their clinical validity for assessment of the risk of local recurrence. Efforts to personalise breast cancer care must be supported by high level evidence to enable balanced, informed treatment decisions. These considerations underpin the importance of ongoing biomarker-directed clinical trials to generate the high-level evidence necessary for setting the future standard of care in personalised local therapy for patients with early breast cancer.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Boon H Chua
- Faculty of Medicine and Health, University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW, Australia; Nelune Comprehensive Cancer Centre, Prince of Wales Hospital, Randwick, NSW, Australia.
| |
Collapse
|
17
|
Braunstein LZ. Optimising adjuvant breast radiotherapy via preoperative imaging. Lancet 2024; 403:222-224. [PMID: 38065195 DOI: 10.1016/s0140-6736(23)02698-3] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/27/2023] [Accepted: 11/29/2023] [Indexed: 01/22/2024]
Affiliation(s)
- Lior Z Braunstein
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY 10065, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
18
|
Whelan TJ, Fyles A, Parpia S, Nielsen T, Levine MN. LUMINA: Using molecular biomarkers to guide decision making for breast radiotherapy. Radiother Oncol 2024; 190:110074. [PMID: 38163484 DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2023.110074] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/18/2023] [Revised: 12/21/2023] [Accepted: 12/22/2023] [Indexed: 01/03/2024]
Abstract
In this opinion piece, we respond to comments about the LUMINA trial by Meattini and colleagues in the Journal. LUMINA was a prospective cohort study which evaluated the omission of radiotherapy after breast conserving surgery (BCS) in patients treated with endocrine therapy with low risk clinico-pathologic features and luminal A breast cancer. We address their areas of concern including the single cohort design that required careful patient selection, the relatively short follow-up period of 5 years, and the limited follow-up on younger patients. The Ki67 biomarker was key to defining the luminal A phenotype. We clarify the evidence supporting the Ki67 criteria used. The compliance with endocrine therapy was high and similar to other contemporary trials. Based on the results of LUMINA, and mounting evidence from other trials, we feel comfortable offering our patients the option of no radiotherapy after BCS if they fit the trial eligibility criteria from LUMINA and have decided to receive adjuvant endocrine therapy. We concur that a patient-centered approach to treatment decision making should be used to make patients aware of all available information including the results of the LUMINA trial when deciding on post-operative breast radiotherapy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Timothy J Whelan
- Department of Oncology, McMaster University and Juravinski Cancer Centre at Hamilton Health Sciences, Hamilton, ON, Canada.
| | - Anthony Fyles
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Toronto and Princess Margaret Hospital, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | - Sameer Parpia
- Department of Oncology, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada
| | - Torsten Nielsen
- Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada
| | - Mark N Levine
- Department of Oncology, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
19
|
Chadha M, White J, Swain SM, Rakovitch E, Jagsi R, Whelan T, Sparano JA. Optimal adjuvant therapy in older (≥70 years of age) women with low-risk early-stage breast cancer. NPJ Breast Cancer 2023; 9:99. [PMID: 38097623 PMCID: PMC10721824 DOI: 10.1038/s41523-023-00591-6] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/31/2023] [Accepted: 10/06/2023] [Indexed: 12/17/2023] Open
Abstract
Older women are under-represented in breast cancer (BC) clinical trials, and treatment guidelines are primarily based on BC studies in younger women. Studies uniformly report an increased incidence of local relapse with omission of breast radiation therapy. Review of the available literature suggests very low rates of distant relapse in women ≥70 years of age. The incremental benefit of endocrine therapy in decreasing rate of distant relapse and improving disease-free survival in older patients with low-risk BC remains unclear. Integration of molecular genomic assays in diagnosis and treatment of estrogen receptor positive BC presents an opportunity for optimizing risk-tailored adjuvant therapies in ways that may permit treatment de-escalation among older women with early-stage BC. The prevailing knowledge gap and lack of risk-specific adjuvant therapy guidelines suggests a compelling need for prospective trials to inform selection of optimal adjuvant therapy, including omission of adjuvant endocrine therapy in older women with low risk BC.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- M Chadha
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY, USA.
| | - J White
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Kansas Medical Center, Kansas City, KS, USA
| | - S M Swain
- Department of Medicine, Georgetown Lombardi Comprehensive Cancer Center, MedStar Health, Washington, DC, USA
| | - E Rakovitch
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | - R Jagsi
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Winship Cancer Institute, Emory University, Atlanta, GA, USA
| | - T Whelan
- Division of Radiation Oncology, Department of Oncology, McMaster University and Juravinski Cancer Centre at Hamilton Health Sciences, Hamilton, ON, Canada
| | - J A Sparano
- Division of Hematology and Medical Oncology, Department of Medicine, Tisch Cancer Institute, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY, USA
| |
Collapse
|
20
|
Kouhen F. Omitting radiotherapy in elderly breast cancer patients: Valid strategy or illusory hope? Breast 2023; 72:103598. [PMID: 37979372 PMCID: PMC10692950 DOI: 10.1016/j.breast.2023.103598] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/17/2023] [Revised: 10/21/2023] [Accepted: 11/05/2023] [Indexed: 11/20/2023] Open
Abstract
Breast cancer treatment strategies have evolved significantly over the years, and decisions regarding the use of radiotherapy have become increasingly complex. This paper explores the considerations and limitations associated with omitting radiotherapy as part of breast cancer treatment. While omitting radiotherapy may be a viable option for select patient groups, it is not without its challenges. The decision to omit radiotherapy in breast cancer treatment should be highly individualized and made after a comprehensive evaluation of the patient's specific circumstances.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Fadila Kouhen
- Mohammed VI University of Sciences and Health (UM6SS). Casablanca, Morocco. Department of Radiotherapy, International University Hospital Sheikh Khalifa, Morocco; Laboratory of Neurosciences and Oncogenetics, Neurooncology and Oncogenetic Team, Mohammed VI Center for Research & Innovation, Morocco.
| |
Collapse
|
21
|
Wong LY, Kapula N, He H, Guenthart BA, Vitzthum LK, Horst K, Liou DZ, Backhus LM, Lui NS, Berry MF, Shrager JB, Elliott IA. Risk of developing subsequent primary lung cancer after receiving radiation for breast cancer. JTCVS OPEN 2023; 16:919-928. [PMID: 38204675 PMCID: PMC10775166 DOI: 10.1016/j.xjon.2023.10.031] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/20/2023] [Revised: 10/17/2023] [Accepted: 10/26/2023] [Indexed: 01/12/2024]
Abstract
Background Radiotherapy (RT) is integral to breast cancer treatment, especially in the current era that emphasizes breast conservation. The aim of our study was to determine the incidence of subsequent primary lung cancer after RT exposure for breast cancer over a time span of 3 decades to quantify this risk over time as modern oncologic treatment continues to evolve. Methods The SEER (Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results) database was queried from 1988 to 2014 for patients diagnosed with nonmetastatic breast cancer. Patients who subsequently developed primary lung cancer were identified. Multivariable regression modeling was performed to identify independent factors associated with the development of lung cancer stratified by follow up intervals of 5 to 9 years, 10 to 15 years, and >15 years after breast cancer diagnosis. Results Of the 612,746 patients who met our inclusion criteria, 319,014 (52%) were irradiated. primary lung cancer developed in 5556 patients (1.74%) in the RT group versus 4935 patients (1.68%) in the non-RT group. In a multivariable model stratified by follow-up duration, the overall HR of developing subsequent ipsilateral lung cancer in the RT group was 1.14 (P = .036) after 5 to 9 years of follow-up, 1.28 (P = .002) after 10 to 15 years of follow-up, and 1.30 (P = .014) after >15 years of follow-up. The HR of contralateral lung cancer was not increased at any time interval. Conclusions The increased risk of developing a primary lung cancer secondary to RT exposure for breast cancer is much lower than previously published. Modern RT techniques may have contributed to the improved risk profile, and this updated study is important for counseling and surveillance of breast cancer patients.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Lye-Yeng Wong
- Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Stanford University Medical Center, Stanford, Calif
| | - Ntemena Kapula
- Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Stanford University Medical Center, Stanford, Calif
| | - Hao He
- Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Stanford University Medical Center, Stanford, Calif
| | - Brandon A. Guenthart
- Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Stanford University Medical Center, Stanford, Calif
| | - Lucas K. Vitzthum
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Stanford University Medical Center, Stanford, Calif
| | - Kathleen Horst
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Stanford University Medical Center, Stanford, Calif
| | - Douglas Z. Liou
- Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Stanford University Medical Center, Stanford, Calif
| | - Leah M. Backhus
- Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Stanford University Medical Center, Stanford, Calif
- Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery, VA Palo Alto Health Care System, Palo Alto, Calif
| | - Natalie S. Lui
- Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Stanford University Medical Center, Stanford, Calif
| | - Mark F. Berry
- Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Stanford University Medical Center, Stanford, Calif
- Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery, VA Palo Alto Health Care System, Palo Alto, Calif
| | - Joseph B. Shrager
- Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Stanford University Medical Center, Stanford, Calif
- Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery, VA Palo Alto Health Care System, Palo Alto, Calif
| | - Irmina A. Elliott
- Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Stanford University Medical Center, Stanford, Calif
- Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery, VA Palo Alto Health Care System, Palo Alto, Calif
| |
Collapse
|
22
|
Sasada S, Kondo N, Hashimoto H, Takahashi Y, Terata K, Kida K, Sagara Y, Ueno T, Anan K, Suto A, Kanbayashi C, Takahashi M, Nakamura R, Ishiba T, Tsuneizumi M, Nishimura S, Naito Y, Hara F, Shien T, Iwata H. Prognostic impact of adjuvant endocrine therapy for estrogen receptor-positive and HER2-negative T1a/bN0M0 breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2023; 202:473-483. [PMID: 37688665 PMCID: PMC10564809 DOI: 10.1007/s10549-023-07097-6] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/03/2023] [Accepted: 08/14/2023] [Indexed: 09/11/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE Mammography screening has increased the detection of subcentimeter breast cancers. The prognosis for estrogen receptor (ER)-positive and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-negative T1a/bN0M0 breast cancers is excellent; however, the necessity of adjuvant endocrine therapy (ET) is uncertain. METHODS We evaluated the effectiveness of adjuvant ET in patients with ER-positive and HER2-negative T1a/bN0M0 breast cancer who underwent surgery from 2008 to 2012. Standard ET was administrated after surgery. The primary endpoint was the cumulative incidence of distant metastasis. All statistical tests were 2-sided. RESULTS Adjuvant ET was administered to 3991 (83%) of the 4758 eligible patients (1202 T1a [25.3%] and 3556 T1b [74.7%], diseases). The median follow-up period was 9.2 years. The 9-year cumulative incidence of distant metastasis was 1.5% with ET and 2.6% without ET (adjusted subdistribution hazard ratio [sHR], 0.54; 95% CI, 0.32-0.93). In multivariate analysis, the independent risk factors for distant metastasis were no history of ET, mastectomy, high-grade, and lymphatic invasion. The 9-year overall survival was 97.0% and 94.4% with and without ET, respectively (adjusted HR, 0.57; 95% CI, 0.39-0.83). In addition, adjuvant ET reduced the incidence of ipsilateral and contralateral breast cancer (9-year rates; 1.1% vs. 6.9%; sHR, 0.17, and 1.9% vs. 5.2%; sHR, 0.33). CONCLUSIONS The prognosis was favorable in patients with ER-positive and HER2-negative T1a/bN0M0 breast cancer. Furthermore, adjuvant ET reduced the incidence of distant metastasis with minimal absolute risk difference. These findings support considering the omission of adjuvant ET, especially for patients with low-grade and no lymphatic invasion disease.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Shinsuke Sasada
- Department of Surgical Oncology, Research Institute for Radiation Biology and Medicine, Hiroshima University, Hiroshima, Japan
| | - Naoto Kondo
- Department of Breast Surgery, Nagoya City University Graduate School of Medical Sciences, Nagoya, Japan
| | - Hiroya Hashimoto
- Core Laboratory, Nagoya City University Graduate School of Medical Sciences, Nagoya, Japan
| | - Yuko Takahashi
- Department of Breast and Endocrine Surgery, Okayama University Hospital, 2-5-1 Shikata-cho, Kitaku, 700-8558, Okayama, Japan
| | - Kaori Terata
- Department of Breast and Endocrine Surgery, Akita University Hospital, Akita, Japan
| | - Kumiko Kida
- Department of Breast Surgical Oncology, St. Luke's International Hospital, Tokyo, Japan
| | - Yasuaki Sagara
- Department of Breast and Thyroid Surgical Oncology, Social medical corporation Hakuaikai, Sagara Hospital, Kagoshima, Japan
| | - Takayuki Ueno
- Breast Oncology Center, The Cancer Institute Hospital of Japanese Foundation for Cancer Research, Tokyo, Japan
| | - Keisei Anan
- Department of Surgery, Kitakyushu Municipal Medical Center, Kitakyushu, Japan
| | - Akihiko Suto
- Department of Breast Surgery, National Cancer Center Hospital, Tokyo, Japan
| | - Chizuko Kanbayashi
- Department of Breast Oncology, Niigata Cancer Center Hospital, Niigata, Japan
| | - Mina Takahashi
- Department of Breast Oncology, National Hospital Organization Shikoku Cancer Center, Matsuyama, Japan
| | - Rikiya Nakamura
- Department of Breast Surgery, Chiba Cancer Center, Chiba, Japan
| | - Toshiyuki Ishiba
- Department of Breast Surgery, Tokyo Metropolitan Cancer and Infectious Diseases Center, Komagome Hospital, Tokyo, Japan
| | - Michiko Tsuneizumi
- Department of Breast Surgery, Shizuoka General Hospital, Shizuoka, Japan
| | - Seiichiro Nishimura
- Department of Breast Surgery, Shizuoka Cancer Center Hospital, Shizuoka, Japan
| | - Yoichi Naito
- Department of General Internal Medicine, National Cancer Center Hospital East, Chiba, Japan
| | - Fumikata Hara
- Breast Oncology Center, The Cancer Institute Hospital of Japanese Foundation for Cancer Research, Tokyo, Japan
| | - Tadahiko Shien
- Department of Breast and Endocrine Surgery, Okayama University Hospital, 2-5-1 Shikata-cho, Kitaku, 700-8558, Okayama, Japan.
| | - Hiroji Iwata
- Department of Breast Oncology, Aichi Cancer Center Hospital, Nagoya, Japan
| |
Collapse
|
23
|
Thai JN, Sevrukov AB, Ward RC, Monticciolo DL. Cryoablation Therapy for Early-Stage Breast Cancer: Evidence and Rationale. JOURNAL OF BREAST IMAGING 2023; 5:646-657. [PMID: 38141236 DOI: 10.1093/jbi/wbad064] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/04/2023] [Indexed: 12/25/2023]
Abstract
Recent advances in breast cancer research and treatment propel a paradigm shift toward less aggressive and less invasive treatment for some early-stage breast cancer. Select patients with small, low-risk tumors may benefit from a less aggressive approach with de-escalated local therapy. Cryoablation of breast cancer is an emerging nonsurgical treatment alternative to breast-conserving surgery. Advantages of cryoablation over surgery include the use of local anesthesia, faster recovery, improved cosmesis, and cost savings. Proper patient selection and meticulous technique are keys to achieving successful clinical outcomes. The best candidates for cryoablation have unifocal invasive ductal carcinoma tumors that are low grade, hormone receptor positive, and ≤1.5 cm in size. In this review, we outline the current evidence, patient selection criteria, procedural technique, pre- and postablation imaging, and the advantages and limitations of cryoablation therapy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Janice N Thai
- Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Department of Radiology, Division of Breast Imaging, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Alexander B Sevrukov
- Sidney Kimmel College of Medicine, Thomas Jefferson University, Department of Radiology, Division of Breast Imaging, Philadelphia, PA, USA
| | - Robert C Ward
- The Warren Alpert Medical School of Brown University, Rhode Island Hospital and Women and Infants Hospital, Department of Diagnostic, Imaging, Division of Breast Imaging, Providence, RI, USA
| | - Debra L Monticciolo
- Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Department of Radiology, Division of Breast Imaging, Boston, MA, USA
| |
Collapse
|
24
|
Haussmann J, Budach W, Corradini S, Krug D, Jazmati D, Tamaskovics B, Bölke E, Pedotoa A, Kammers K, Matuschek C. 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. Radiat Oncol 2023; 18:181. [PMID: 37919752 PMCID: PMC10623828 DOI: 10.1186/s13014-023-02365-7] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/14/2023] [Accepted: 10/17/2023] [Indexed: 11/04/2023] Open
Abstract
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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jan Haussmann
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Medical Faculty and University Hospital Düsseldorf, Heinrich-Heine-University Düsseldorf, Moorenstr. 5, 40225, Düsseldorf, Germany.
| | - Wilfried Budach
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Medical Faculty and University Hospital Düsseldorf, Heinrich-Heine-University Düsseldorf, Moorenstr. 5, 40225, Düsseldorf, Germany
| | - Stefanie Corradini
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Ludwig Maximillian University, Munich, Germany
| | - David Krug
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Schleswig-Holstein, Kiel, Germany
| | - Danny Jazmati
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Medical Faculty and University Hospital Düsseldorf, Heinrich-Heine-University Düsseldorf, Moorenstr. 5, 40225, Düsseldorf, Germany
| | - Bálint Tamaskovics
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Medical Faculty and University Hospital Düsseldorf, Heinrich-Heine-University Düsseldorf, Moorenstr. 5, 40225, Düsseldorf, Germany
| | - Edwin Bölke
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Medical Faculty and University Hospital Düsseldorf, Heinrich-Heine-University Düsseldorf, Moorenstr. 5, 40225, Düsseldorf, Germany
| | - Alessia Pedotoa
- Department of Anesthesiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York City, New York, USA
| | - Kai Kammers
- Department of Oncology, The Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center, The Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, USA
| | - Christiane Matuschek
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Medical Faculty and University Hospital Düsseldorf, Heinrich-Heine-University Düsseldorf, Moorenstr. 5, 40225, Düsseldorf, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
25
|
Braunstein LZ. Incorporating Tumor Biology to Select Patients for the Omission of Radiation Therapy. Surg Oncol Clin N Am 2023; 32:725-732. [PMID: 37714639 DOI: 10.1016/j.soc.2023.05.006] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 09/17/2023]
Abstract
Although adjuvant breast radiotherapy has long been a universal component of breast conservation therapy (BCT), it is now clear that "breast cancer" is a broad class of many disparate diseases with varying natural histories and risk profiles. In turn, some breast conservation patients enjoy exceedingly favorable outcomes following surgery alone. Ongoing trials seek to identify such low-risk patient populations, hypothesizing that some may safely forego radiotherapy. Whereas prior-generation trials focused on clinicopathologic features for risk stratification, contemporary studies are employing molecular biomarkers to identify those patients who are unlikely to benefit significantly from radiotherapy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Lior Z Braunstein
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, 1275 York Avenue, Box 22, New York, NY 10065, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
26
|
Haussmann J, Budach W, Corradini S, Krug D, Bölke E, Tamaskovics B, Jazmati D, Haussmann A, Matuschek C. Whole Breast Irradiation in Comparison to Endocrine Therapy in Early Stage Breast Cancer-A Direct and Network Meta-Analysis of Published Randomized Trials. Cancers (Basel) 2023; 15:4343. [PMID: 37686620 PMCID: PMC10487067 DOI: 10.3390/cancers15174343] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/30/2023] [Revised: 08/09/2023] [Accepted: 08/15/2023] [Indexed: 09/10/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Multiple randomized trials have established adjuvant endocrine therapy (ET) and whole breast irradiation (WBI) as the standard approach after breast-conserving surgery (BCS) in early-stage breast cancer. The omission of WBI has been studied in multiple trials and resulted in reduced local control with maintained survival rates and has therefore been adapted as a treatment option in selected patients in several guidelines. Omitting ET instead of WBI might also be a valuable option as both treatments have distinctly different side effect profiles. However, the clinical outcomes of BCS + ET vs. BCS + WBI have not been formally analyzed. METHODS We performed a systematic literature review searching for randomized trials comparing BCS + ET vs. BCS + WBI in low-risk breast cancer patients with publication dates after 2000. We excluded trials using any form of chemotherapy, regional nodal radiation and mastectomy. The meta-analysis was performed using a two-step process. First, we extracted all available published event rates and the effect sizes for overall and breast-cancer-specific survival (OS, BCSS), local (LR) and regional recurrence, disease-free survival, distant metastases-free interval, contralateral breast cancer, second cancer other than breast cancer and mastectomy-free interval as investigated endpoints and compared them in a network meta-analysis. Second, the published individual patient data from the Early Breast Cancer Trialists' Collaborative Group (EBCTCG) publications were used to allow a comparison of OS and BCSS. RESULTS We identified three studies, including a direct comparison of BCS + ET vs. BCS + WBI (n = 1059) and nine studies randomizing overall 7207 patients additionally to BCS only and BCS + WBI + ET resulting in a four-arm comparison. In the network analysis, LR was significantly lower in the BCS + WBI group in comparison with the BCS + ET group (HR = 0.62; CI-95%: 0.42-0.92; p = 0.019). We did not find any differences in OS (HR = 0.93; CI-95%: 0.53-1.62; p = 0.785) and BCSS (OR = 1.04; CI-95%: 0.45-2.41; p = 0.928). Further, we found a lower distant metastasis-free interval, a higher rate of contralateral breast cancer and a reduced mastectomy-free interval in the BCS + WBI-arm. Using the EBCTCG data, OS and BCSS were not significantly different between BCS + ET and BCS + WBI after 10 years (OS: OR = 0.85; CI-95%: 0.59-1.22; p = 0.369) (BCSS: OR = 0.72; CI-95%: 0.38-1.36; p = 0.305). CONCLUSION Evidence from direct and indirect comparison suggests that BCS + WBI might be an equivalent de-escalation strategy to BCS + ET in low-risk breast cancer. Adverse events and quality of life measures have to be further compared between these approaches.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jan Haussmann
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Medical Faculty and University Hospital Düsseldorf, Heinrich Heine University, 40225 Düsseldorf, Germany; (J.H.); (W.B.); (B.T.); (D.J.); (C.M.)
| | - Wilfried Budach
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Medical Faculty and University Hospital Düsseldorf, Heinrich Heine University, 40225 Düsseldorf, Germany; (J.H.); (W.B.); (B.T.); (D.J.); (C.M.)
| | - Stefanie Corradini
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital, Ludwig-Maximilians-University (LMU), 81377 Munich, Germany;
| | - David Krug
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Schleswig-Holstein, 24105 Kiel, Germany;
| | - Edwin Bölke
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Medical Faculty and University Hospital Düsseldorf, Heinrich Heine University, 40225 Düsseldorf, Germany; (J.H.); (W.B.); (B.T.); (D.J.); (C.M.)
| | - Balint Tamaskovics
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Medical Faculty and University Hospital Düsseldorf, Heinrich Heine University, 40225 Düsseldorf, Germany; (J.H.); (W.B.); (B.T.); (D.J.); (C.M.)
| | - Danny Jazmati
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Medical Faculty and University Hospital Düsseldorf, Heinrich Heine University, 40225 Düsseldorf, Germany; (J.H.); (W.B.); (B.T.); (D.J.); (C.M.)
| | - Alexander Haussmann
- Division of Physical Activity, Prevention and Cancer, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), 69120 Heidelberg, Germany;
| | - Christiane Matuschek
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Medical Faculty and University Hospital Düsseldorf, Heinrich Heine University, 40225 Düsseldorf, Germany; (J.H.); (W.B.); (B.T.); (D.J.); (C.M.)
| |
Collapse
|
27
|
Whelan TJ, Smith S, Parpia S, Fyles AW, Bane A, Liu FF, Rakovitch E, Chang L, Stevens C, Bowen J, Provencher S, Théberge V, Mulligan AM, Kos Z, Akra MA, Voduc KD, Hijal T, Dayes IS, Pond G, Wright JR, Nielsen TO, Levine MN. Omitting Radiotherapy after Breast-Conserving Surgery in Luminal A Breast Cancer. N Engl J Med 2023; 389:612-619. [PMID: 37585627 DOI: 10.1056/nejmoa2302344] [Citation(s) in RCA: 43] [Impact Index Per Article: 43.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 08/18/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Adjuvant radiotherapy is prescribed after breast-conserving surgery to reduce the risk of local recurrence. However, radiotherapy is inconvenient, costly, and associated with both short-term and long-term side effects. Clinicopathologic factors alone are of limited use in the identification of women at low risk for local recurrence in whom radiotherapy can be omitted. Molecularly defined intrinsic subtypes of breast cancer can provide additional prognostic information. METHODS We performed a prospective cohort study involving women who were at least 55 years of age, had undergone breast-conserving surgery for T1N0 (tumor size <2 cm and node negative), grade 1 or 2, luminal A-subtype breast cancer (defined as estrogen receptor positivity of ≥1%, progesterone receptor positivity of >20%, negative human epidermal growth factor receptor 2, and Ki67 index of ≤13.25%), and had received adjuvant endocrine therapy. Patients who met the clinical eligibility criteria were registered, and Ki67 immunohistochemical analysis was performed centrally. Patients with a Ki67 index of 13.25% or less were enrolled and did not receive radiotherapy. The primary outcome was local recurrence in the ipsilateral breast. In consultation with radiation oncologists and patients with breast cancer, we determined that if the upper boundary of the two-sided 90% confidence interval for the cumulative incidence at 5 years was less than 5%, this would represent an acceptable risk of local recurrence at 5 years. RESULTS Of 740 registered patients, 500 eligible patients were enrolled. At 5 years after enrollment, recurrence was reported in 2.3% of the patients (90% confidence interval [CI], 1.3 to 3.8; 95% CI, 1.2 to 4.1), a result that met the prespecified boundary. Breast cancer occurred in the contralateral breast in 1.9% of the patients (90% CI, 1.1 to 3.2), and recurrence of any type was observed in 2.7% (90% CI, 1.6 to 4.1). CONCLUSIONS Among women who were at least 55 years of age and had T1N0, grade 1 or 2, luminal A breast cancer that were treated with breast-conserving surgery and endocrine therapy alone, the incidence of local recurrence at 5 years was low with the omission of radiotherapy. (Funded by the Canadian Cancer Society and the Canadian Breast Cancer Foundation; LUMINA ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01791829.).
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Timothy J Whelan
- From the Department of Oncology, McMaster University and the Division of Radiation Oncology, Juravinski Cancer Centre at Hamilton Health Sciences, Hamilton, ON (T.J.W., I.S.D., J.R.W.), the Division of Radiation Oncology, Department of Surgery, University of British Columbia and Radiation Therapy Program, BC Cancer Agency, Victoria (S.S.), the Department of Oncology, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON (S. Parpia, G.P., M.N.L.), the Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Toronto, and the Radiation Medicine Program, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre (A.W.F., F.-F.L.), the Department of Pathology, University of Toronto (A.B.), and the Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Toronto and Sunnybrook Odette Cancer Centre (E.R.), Toronto, the Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Ottawa and Ottawa Regional Cancer Centre, Ottawa (L.C.), the Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Toronto and Royal Victoria Regional Health Centre, Barrie, ON (C.S.), the Department of Radiation Oncology, Laurentian University and Radiation Treatment Program, Northeast Cancer Centre, Health Sciences North, Sudbury, ON (J.B.), the Department of Radiation Oncology, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Sherbrooke, Sherbrooke, QC (S. Provencher), the Department of Radiation Oncology, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Québec-Université Laval, Quebec, QC (V.T.), the Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathobiology, and the Radiation Medicine Program, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, Toronto (A.M.M.), the Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, University of British Columbia, and the BC Cancer Agency, Vancouver (Z.K.), the Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Manitoba and Cancer Care Manitoba, Winnipeg (M.A.A.), the Department of Radiation Oncology, University of British Columbia and Radiation Therapy Program, BC Cancer Agency, Vancouver (K.D.V.), the Department of Radiation Oncology, McGill University, Montreal (T.H.), and the Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, University of British Columbia, Vancouver (T.O.N.) - all in Canada
| | - Sally Smith
- From the Department of Oncology, McMaster University and the Division of Radiation Oncology, Juravinski Cancer Centre at Hamilton Health Sciences, Hamilton, ON (T.J.W., I.S.D., J.R.W.), the Division of Radiation Oncology, Department of Surgery, University of British Columbia and Radiation Therapy Program, BC Cancer Agency, Victoria (S.S.), the Department of Oncology, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON (S. Parpia, G.P., M.N.L.), the Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Toronto, and the Radiation Medicine Program, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre (A.W.F., F.-F.L.), the Department of Pathology, University of Toronto (A.B.), and the Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Toronto and Sunnybrook Odette Cancer Centre (E.R.), Toronto, the Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Ottawa and Ottawa Regional Cancer Centre, Ottawa (L.C.), the Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Toronto and Royal Victoria Regional Health Centre, Barrie, ON (C.S.), the Department of Radiation Oncology, Laurentian University and Radiation Treatment Program, Northeast Cancer Centre, Health Sciences North, Sudbury, ON (J.B.), the Department of Radiation Oncology, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Sherbrooke, Sherbrooke, QC (S. Provencher), the Department of Radiation Oncology, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Québec-Université Laval, Quebec, QC (V.T.), the Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathobiology, and the Radiation Medicine Program, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, Toronto (A.M.M.), the Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, University of British Columbia, and the BC Cancer Agency, Vancouver (Z.K.), the Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Manitoba and Cancer Care Manitoba, Winnipeg (M.A.A.), the Department of Radiation Oncology, University of British Columbia and Radiation Therapy Program, BC Cancer Agency, Vancouver (K.D.V.), the Department of Radiation Oncology, McGill University, Montreal (T.H.), and the Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, University of British Columbia, Vancouver (T.O.N.) - all in Canada
| | - Sameer Parpia
- From the Department of Oncology, McMaster University and the Division of Radiation Oncology, Juravinski Cancer Centre at Hamilton Health Sciences, Hamilton, ON (T.J.W., I.S.D., J.R.W.), the Division of Radiation Oncology, Department of Surgery, University of British Columbia and Radiation Therapy Program, BC Cancer Agency, Victoria (S.S.), the Department of Oncology, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON (S. Parpia, G.P., M.N.L.), the Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Toronto, and the Radiation Medicine Program, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre (A.W.F., F.-F.L.), the Department of Pathology, University of Toronto (A.B.), and the Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Toronto and Sunnybrook Odette Cancer Centre (E.R.), Toronto, the Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Ottawa and Ottawa Regional Cancer Centre, Ottawa (L.C.), the Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Toronto and Royal Victoria Regional Health Centre, Barrie, ON (C.S.), the Department of Radiation Oncology, Laurentian University and Radiation Treatment Program, Northeast Cancer Centre, Health Sciences North, Sudbury, ON (J.B.), the Department of Radiation Oncology, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Sherbrooke, Sherbrooke, QC (S. Provencher), the Department of Radiation Oncology, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Québec-Université Laval, Quebec, QC (V.T.), the Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathobiology, and the Radiation Medicine Program, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, Toronto (A.M.M.), the Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, University of British Columbia, and the BC Cancer Agency, Vancouver (Z.K.), the Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Manitoba and Cancer Care Manitoba, Winnipeg (M.A.A.), the Department of Radiation Oncology, University of British Columbia and Radiation Therapy Program, BC Cancer Agency, Vancouver (K.D.V.), the Department of Radiation Oncology, McGill University, Montreal (T.H.), and the Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, University of British Columbia, Vancouver (T.O.N.) - all in Canada
| | - Anthony W Fyles
- From the Department of Oncology, McMaster University and the Division of Radiation Oncology, Juravinski Cancer Centre at Hamilton Health Sciences, Hamilton, ON (T.J.W., I.S.D., J.R.W.), the Division of Radiation Oncology, Department of Surgery, University of British Columbia and Radiation Therapy Program, BC Cancer Agency, Victoria (S.S.), the Department of Oncology, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON (S. Parpia, G.P., M.N.L.), the Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Toronto, and the Radiation Medicine Program, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre (A.W.F., F.-F.L.), the Department of Pathology, University of Toronto (A.B.), and the Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Toronto and Sunnybrook Odette Cancer Centre (E.R.), Toronto, the Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Ottawa and Ottawa Regional Cancer Centre, Ottawa (L.C.), the Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Toronto and Royal Victoria Regional Health Centre, Barrie, ON (C.S.), the Department of Radiation Oncology, Laurentian University and Radiation Treatment Program, Northeast Cancer Centre, Health Sciences North, Sudbury, ON (J.B.), the Department of Radiation Oncology, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Sherbrooke, Sherbrooke, QC (S. Provencher), the Department of Radiation Oncology, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Québec-Université Laval, Quebec, QC (V.T.), the Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathobiology, and the Radiation Medicine Program, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, Toronto (A.M.M.), the Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, University of British Columbia, and the BC Cancer Agency, Vancouver (Z.K.), the Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Manitoba and Cancer Care Manitoba, Winnipeg (M.A.A.), the Department of Radiation Oncology, University of British Columbia and Radiation Therapy Program, BC Cancer Agency, Vancouver (K.D.V.), the Department of Radiation Oncology, McGill University, Montreal (T.H.), and the Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, University of British Columbia, Vancouver (T.O.N.) - all in Canada
| | - Anita Bane
- From the Department of Oncology, McMaster University and the Division of Radiation Oncology, Juravinski Cancer Centre at Hamilton Health Sciences, Hamilton, ON (T.J.W., I.S.D., J.R.W.), the Division of Radiation Oncology, Department of Surgery, University of British Columbia and Radiation Therapy Program, BC Cancer Agency, Victoria (S.S.), the Department of Oncology, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON (S. Parpia, G.P., M.N.L.), the Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Toronto, and the Radiation Medicine Program, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre (A.W.F., F.-F.L.), the Department of Pathology, University of Toronto (A.B.), and the Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Toronto and Sunnybrook Odette Cancer Centre (E.R.), Toronto, the Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Ottawa and Ottawa Regional Cancer Centre, Ottawa (L.C.), the Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Toronto and Royal Victoria Regional Health Centre, Barrie, ON (C.S.), the Department of Radiation Oncology, Laurentian University and Radiation Treatment Program, Northeast Cancer Centre, Health Sciences North, Sudbury, ON (J.B.), the Department of Radiation Oncology, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Sherbrooke, Sherbrooke, QC (S. Provencher), the Department of Radiation Oncology, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Québec-Université Laval, Quebec, QC (V.T.), the Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathobiology, and the Radiation Medicine Program, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, Toronto (A.M.M.), the Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, University of British Columbia, and the BC Cancer Agency, Vancouver (Z.K.), the Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Manitoba and Cancer Care Manitoba, Winnipeg (M.A.A.), the Department of Radiation Oncology, University of British Columbia and Radiation Therapy Program, BC Cancer Agency, Vancouver (K.D.V.), the Department of Radiation Oncology, McGill University, Montreal (T.H.), and the Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, University of British Columbia, Vancouver (T.O.N.) - all in Canada
| | - Fei-Fei Liu
- From the Department of Oncology, McMaster University and the Division of Radiation Oncology, Juravinski Cancer Centre at Hamilton Health Sciences, Hamilton, ON (T.J.W., I.S.D., J.R.W.), the Division of Radiation Oncology, Department of Surgery, University of British Columbia and Radiation Therapy Program, BC Cancer Agency, Victoria (S.S.), the Department of Oncology, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON (S. Parpia, G.P., M.N.L.), the Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Toronto, and the Radiation Medicine Program, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre (A.W.F., F.-F.L.), the Department of Pathology, University of Toronto (A.B.), and the Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Toronto and Sunnybrook Odette Cancer Centre (E.R.), Toronto, the Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Ottawa and Ottawa Regional Cancer Centre, Ottawa (L.C.), the Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Toronto and Royal Victoria Regional Health Centre, Barrie, ON (C.S.), the Department of Radiation Oncology, Laurentian University and Radiation Treatment Program, Northeast Cancer Centre, Health Sciences North, Sudbury, ON (J.B.), the Department of Radiation Oncology, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Sherbrooke, Sherbrooke, QC (S. Provencher), the Department of Radiation Oncology, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Québec-Université Laval, Quebec, QC (V.T.), the Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathobiology, and the Radiation Medicine Program, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, Toronto (A.M.M.), the Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, University of British Columbia, and the BC Cancer Agency, Vancouver (Z.K.), the Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Manitoba and Cancer Care Manitoba, Winnipeg (M.A.A.), the Department of Radiation Oncology, University of British Columbia and Radiation Therapy Program, BC Cancer Agency, Vancouver (K.D.V.), the Department of Radiation Oncology, McGill University, Montreal (T.H.), and the Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, University of British Columbia, Vancouver (T.O.N.) - all in Canada
| | - Eileen Rakovitch
- From the Department of Oncology, McMaster University and the Division of Radiation Oncology, Juravinski Cancer Centre at Hamilton Health Sciences, Hamilton, ON (T.J.W., I.S.D., J.R.W.), the Division of Radiation Oncology, Department of Surgery, University of British Columbia and Radiation Therapy Program, BC Cancer Agency, Victoria (S.S.), the Department of Oncology, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON (S. Parpia, G.P., M.N.L.), the Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Toronto, and the Radiation Medicine Program, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre (A.W.F., F.-F.L.), the Department of Pathology, University of Toronto (A.B.), and the Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Toronto and Sunnybrook Odette Cancer Centre (E.R.), Toronto, the Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Ottawa and Ottawa Regional Cancer Centre, Ottawa (L.C.), the Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Toronto and Royal Victoria Regional Health Centre, Barrie, ON (C.S.), the Department of Radiation Oncology, Laurentian University and Radiation Treatment Program, Northeast Cancer Centre, Health Sciences North, Sudbury, ON (J.B.), the Department of Radiation Oncology, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Sherbrooke, Sherbrooke, QC (S. Provencher), the Department of Radiation Oncology, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Québec-Université Laval, Quebec, QC (V.T.), the Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathobiology, and the Radiation Medicine Program, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, Toronto (A.M.M.), the Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, University of British Columbia, and the BC Cancer Agency, Vancouver (Z.K.), the Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Manitoba and Cancer Care Manitoba, Winnipeg (M.A.A.), the Department of Radiation Oncology, University of British Columbia and Radiation Therapy Program, BC Cancer Agency, Vancouver (K.D.V.), the Department of Radiation Oncology, McGill University, Montreal (T.H.), and the Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, University of British Columbia, Vancouver (T.O.N.) - all in Canada
| | - Lynn Chang
- From the Department of Oncology, McMaster University and the Division of Radiation Oncology, Juravinski Cancer Centre at Hamilton Health Sciences, Hamilton, ON (T.J.W., I.S.D., J.R.W.), the Division of Radiation Oncology, Department of Surgery, University of British Columbia and Radiation Therapy Program, BC Cancer Agency, Victoria (S.S.), the Department of Oncology, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON (S. Parpia, G.P., M.N.L.), the Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Toronto, and the Radiation Medicine Program, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre (A.W.F., F.-F.L.), the Department of Pathology, University of Toronto (A.B.), and the Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Toronto and Sunnybrook Odette Cancer Centre (E.R.), Toronto, the Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Ottawa and Ottawa Regional Cancer Centre, Ottawa (L.C.), the Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Toronto and Royal Victoria Regional Health Centre, Barrie, ON (C.S.), the Department of Radiation Oncology, Laurentian University and Radiation Treatment Program, Northeast Cancer Centre, Health Sciences North, Sudbury, ON (J.B.), the Department of Radiation Oncology, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Sherbrooke, Sherbrooke, QC (S. Provencher), the Department of Radiation Oncology, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Québec-Université Laval, Quebec, QC (V.T.), the Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathobiology, and the Radiation Medicine Program, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, Toronto (A.M.M.), the Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, University of British Columbia, and the BC Cancer Agency, Vancouver (Z.K.), the Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Manitoba and Cancer Care Manitoba, Winnipeg (M.A.A.), the Department of Radiation Oncology, University of British Columbia and Radiation Therapy Program, BC Cancer Agency, Vancouver (K.D.V.), the Department of Radiation Oncology, McGill University, Montreal (T.H.), and the Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, University of British Columbia, Vancouver (T.O.N.) - all in Canada
| | - Christiaan Stevens
- From the Department of Oncology, McMaster University and the Division of Radiation Oncology, Juravinski Cancer Centre at Hamilton Health Sciences, Hamilton, ON (T.J.W., I.S.D., J.R.W.), the Division of Radiation Oncology, Department of Surgery, University of British Columbia and Radiation Therapy Program, BC Cancer Agency, Victoria (S.S.), the Department of Oncology, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON (S. Parpia, G.P., M.N.L.), the Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Toronto, and the Radiation Medicine Program, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre (A.W.F., F.-F.L.), the Department of Pathology, University of Toronto (A.B.), and the Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Toronto and Sunnybrook Odette Cancer Centre (E.R.), Toronto, the Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Ottawa and Ottawa Regional Cancer Centre, Ottawa (L.C.), the Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Toronto and Royal Victoria Regional Health Centre, Barrie, ON (C.S.), the Department of Radiation Oncology, Laurentian University and Radiation Treatment Program, Northeast Cancer Centre, Health Sciences North, Sudbury, ON (J.B.), the Department of Radiation Oncology, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Sherbrooke, Sherbrooke, QC (S. Provencher), the Department of Radiation Oncology, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Québec-Université Laval, Quebec, QC (V.T.), the Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathobiology, and the Radiation Medicine Program, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, Toronto (A.M.M.), the Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, University of British Columbia, and the BC Cancer Agency, Vancouver (Z.K.), the Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Manitoba and Cancer Care Manitoba, Winnipeg (M.A.A.), the Department of Radiation Oncology, University of British Columbia and Radiation Therapy Program, BC Cancer Agency, Vancouver (K.D.V.), the Department of Radiation Oncology, McGill University, Montreal (T.H.), and the Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, University of British Columbia, Vancouver (T.O.N.) - all in Canada
| | - Julie Bowen
- From the Department of Oncology, McMaster University and the Division of Radiation Oncology, Juravinski Cancer Centre at Hamilton Health Sciences, Hamilton, ON (T.J.W., I.S.D., J.R.W.), the Division of Radiation Oncology, Department of Surgery, University of British Columbia and Radiation Therapy Program, BC Cancer Agency, Victoria (S.S.), the Department of Oncology, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON (S. Parpia, G.P., M.N.L.), the Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Toronto, and the Radiation Medicine Program, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre (A.W.F., F.-F.L.), the Department of Pathology, University of Toronto (A.B.), and the Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Toronto and Sunnybrook Odette Cancer Centre (E.R.), Toronto, the Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Ottawa and Ottawa Regional Cancer Centre, Ottawa (L.C.), the Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Toronto and Royal Victoria Regional Health Centre, Barrie, ON (C.S.), the Department of Radiation Oncology, Laurentian University and Radiation Treatment Program, Northeast Cancer Centre, Health Sciences North, Sudbury, ON (J.B.), the Department of Radiation Oncology, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Sherbrooke, Sherbrooke, QC (S. Provencher), the Department of Radiation Oncology, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Québec-Université Laval, Quebec, QC (V.T.), the Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathobiology, and the Radiation Medicine Program, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, Toronto (A.M.M.), the Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, University of British Columbia, and the BC Cancer Agency, Vancouver (Z.K.), the Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Manitoba and Cancer Care Manitoba, Winnipeg (M.A.A.), the Department of Radiation Oncology, University of British Columbia and Radiation Therapy Program, BC Cancer Agency, Vancouver (K.D.V.), the Department of Radiation Oncology, McGill University, Montreal (T.H.), and the Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, University of British Columbia, Vancouver (T.O.N.) - all in Canada
| | - Sawyna Provencher
- From the Department of Oncology, McMaster University and the Division of Radiation Oncology, Juravinski Cancer Centre at Hamilton Health Sciences, Hamilton, ON (T.J.W., I.S.D., J.R.W.), the Division of Radiation Oncology, Department of Surgery, University of British Columbia and Radiation Therapy Program, BC Cancer Agency, Victoria (S.S.), the Department of Oncology, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON (S. Parpia, G.P., M.N.L.), the Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Toronto, and the Radiation Medicine Program, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre (A.W.F., F.-F.L.), the Department of Pathology, University of Toronto (A.B.), and the Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Toronto and Sunnybrook Odette Cancer Centre (E.R.), Toronto, the Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Ottawa and Ottawa Regional Cancer Centre, Ottawa (L.C.), the Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Toronto and Royal Victoria Regional Health Centre, Barrie, ON (C.S.), the Department of Radiation Oncology, Laurentian University and Radiation Treatment Program, Northeast Cancer Centre, Health Sciences North, Sudbury, ON (J.B.), the Department of Radiation Oncology, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Sherbrooke, Sherbrooke, QC (S. Provencher), the Department of Radiation Oncology, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Québec-Université Laval, Quebec, QC (V.T.), the Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathobiology, and the Radiation Medicine Program, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, Toronto (A.M.M.), the Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, University of British Columbia, and the BC Cancer Agency, Vancouver (Z.K.), the Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Manitoba and Cancer Care Manitoba, Winnipeg (M.A.A.), the Department of Radiation Oncology, University of British Columbia and Radiation Therapy Program, BC Cancer Agency, Vancouver (K.D.V.), the Department of Radiation Oncology, McGill University, Montreal (T.H.), and the Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, University of British Columbia, Vancouver (T.O.N.) - all in Canada
| | - Valerie Théberge
- From the Department of Oncology, McMaster University and the Division of Radiation Oncology, Juravinski Cancer Centre at Hamilton Health Sciences, Hamilton, ON (T.J.W., I.S.D., J.R.W.), the Division of Radiation Oncology, Department of Surgery, University of British Columbia and Radiation Therapy Program, BC Cancer Agency, Victoria (S.S.), the Department of Oncology, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON (S. Parpia, G.P., M.N.L.), the Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Toronto, and the Radiation Medicine Program, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre (A.W.F., F.-F.L.), the Department of Pathology, University of Toronto (A.B.), and the Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Toronto and Sunnybrook Odette Cancer Centre (E.R.), Toronto, the Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Ottawa and Ottawa Regional Cancer Centre, Ottawa (L.C.), the Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Toronto and Royal Victoria Regional Health Centre, Barrie, ON (C.S.), the Department of Radiation Oncology, Laurentian University and Radiation Treatment Program, Northeast Cancer Centre, Health Sciences North, Sudbury, ON (J.B.), the Department of Radiation Oncology, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Sherbrooke, Sherbrooke, QC (S. Provencher), the Department of Radiation Oncology, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Québec-Université Laval, Quebec, QC (V.T.), the Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathobiology, and the Radiation Medicine Program, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, Toronto (A.M.M.), the Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, University of British Columbia, and the BC Cancer Agency, Vancouver (Z.K.), the Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Manitoba and Cancer Care Manitoba, Winnipeg (M.A.A.), the Department of Radiation Oncology, University of British Columbia and Radiation Therapy Program, BC Cancer Agency, Vancouver (K.D.V.), the Department of Radiation Oncology, McGill University, Montreal (T.H.), and the Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, University of British Columbia, Vancouver (T.O.N.) - all in Canada
| | - Anna Marie Mulligan
- From the Department of Oncology, McMaster University and the Division of Radiation Oncology, Juravinski Cancer Centre at Hamilton Health Sciences, Hamilton, ON (T.J.W., I.S.D., J.R.W.), the Division of Radiation Oncology, Department of Surgery, University of British Columbia and Radiation Therapy Program, BC Cancer Agency, Victoria (S.S.), the Department of Oncology, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON (S. Parpia, G.P., M.N.L.), the Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Toronto, and the Radiation Medicine Program, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre (A.W.F., F.-F.L.), the Department of Pathology, University of Toronto (A.B.), and the Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Toronto and Sunnybrook Odette Cancer Centre (E.R.), Toronto, the Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Ottawa and Ottawa Regional Cancer Centre, Ottawa (L.C.), the Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Toronto and Royal Victoria Regional Health Centre, Barrie, ON (C.S.), the Department of Radiation Oncology, Laurentian University and Radiation Treatment Program, Northeast Cancer Centre, Health Sciences North, Sudbury, ON (J.B.), the Department of Radiation Oncology, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Sherbrooke, Sherbrooke, QC (S. Provencher), the Department of Radiation Oncology, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Québec-Université Laval, Quebec, QC (V.T.), the Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathobiology, and the Radiation Medicine Program, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, Toronto (A.M.M.), the Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, University of British Columbia, and the BC Cancer Agency, Vancouver (Z.K.), the Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Manitoba and Cancer Care Manitoba, Winnipeg (M.A.A.), the Department of Radiation Oncology, University of British Columbia and Radiation Therapy Program, BC Cancer Agency, Vancouver (K.D.V.), the Department of Radiation Oncology, McGill University, Montreal (T.H.), and the Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, University of British Columbia, Vancouver (T.O.N.) - all in Canada
| | - Zuzana Kos
- From the Department of Oncology, McMaster University and the Division of Radiation Oncology, Juravinski Cancer Centre at Hamilton Health Sciences, Hamilton, ON (T.J.W., I.S.D., J.R.W.), the Division of Radiation Oncology, Department of Surgery, University of British Columbia and Radiation Therapy Program, BC Cancer Agency, Victoria (S.S.), the Department of Oncology, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON (S. Parpia, G.P., M.N.L.), the Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Toronto, and the Radiation Medicine Program, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre (A.W.F., F.-F.L.), the Department of Pathology, University of Toronto (A.B.), and the Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Toronto and Sunnybrook Odette Cancer Centre (E.R.), Toronto, the Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Ottawa and Ottawa Regional Cancer Centre, Ottawa (L.C.), the Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Toronto and Royal Victoria Regional Health Centre, Barrie, ON (C.S.), the Department of Radiation Oncology, Laurentian University and Radiation Treatment Program, Northeast Cancer Centre, Health Sciences North, Sudbury, ON (J.B.), the Department of Radiation Oncology, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Sherbrooke, Sherbrooke, QC (S. Provencher), the Department of Radiation Oncology, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Québec-Université Laval, Quebec, QC (V.T.), the Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathobiology, and the Radiation Medicine Program, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, Toronto (A.M.M.), the Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, University of British Columbia, and the BC Cancer Agency, Vancouver (Z.K.), the Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Manitoba and Cancer Care Manitoba, Winnipeg (M.A.A.), the Department of Radiation Oncology, University of British Columbia and Radiation Therapy Program, BC Cancer Agency, Vancouver (K.D.V.), the Department of Radiation Oncology, McGill University, Montreal (T.H.), and the Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, University of British Columbia, Vancouver (T.O.N.) - all in Canada
| | - Mohamed A Akra
- From the Department of Oncology, McMaster University and the Division of Radiation Oncology, Juravinski Cancer Centre at Hamilton Health Sciences, Hamilton, ON (T.J.W., I.S.D., J.R.W.), the Division of Radiation Oncology, Department of Surgery, University of British Columbia and Radiation Therapy Program, BC Cancer Agency, Victoria (S.S.), the Department of Oncology, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON (S. Parpia, G.P., M.N.L.), the Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Toronto, and the Radiation Medicine Program, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre (A.W.F., F.-F.L.), the Department of Pathology, University of Toronto (A.B.), and the Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Toronto and Sunnybrook Odette Cancer Centre (E.R.), Toronto, the Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Ottawa and Ottawa Regional Cancer Centre, Ottawa (L.C.), the Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Toronto and Royal Victoria Regional Health Centre, Barrie, ON (C.S.), the Department of Radiation Oncology, Laurentian University and Radiation Treatment Program, Northeast Cancer Centre, Health Sciences North, Sudbury, ON (J.B.), the Department of Radiation Oncology, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Sherbrooke, Sherbrooke, QC (S. Provencher), the Department of Radiation Oncology, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Québec-Université Laval, Quebec, QC (V.T.), the Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathobiology, and the Radiation Medicine Program, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, Toronto (A.M.M.), the Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, University of British Columbia, and the BC Cancer Agency, Vancouver (Z.K.), the Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Manitoba and Cancer Care Manitoba, Winnipeg (M.A.A.), the Department of Radiation Oncology, University of British Columbia and Radiation Therapy Program, BC Cancer Agency, Vancouver (K.D.V.), the Department of Radiation Oncology, McGill University, Montreal (T.H.), and the Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, University of British Columbia, Vancouver (T.O.N.) - all in Canada
| | - K David Voduc
- From the Department of Oncology, McMaster University and the Division of Radiation Oncology, Juravinski Cancer Centre at Hamilton Health Sciences, Hamilton, ON (T.J.W., I.S.D., J.R.W.), the Division of Radiation Oncology, Department of Surgery, University of British Columbia and Radiation Therapy Program, BC Cancer Agency, Victoria (S.S.), the Department of Oncology, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON (S. Parpia, G.P., M.N.L.), the Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Toronto, and the Radiation Medicine Program, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre (A.W.F., F.-F.L.), the Department of Pathology, University of Toronto (A.B.), and the Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Toronto and Sunnybrook Odette Cancer Centre (E.R.), Toronto, the Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Ottawa and Ottawa Regional Cancer Centre, Ottawa (L.C.), the Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Toronto and Royal Victoria Regional Health Centre, Barrie, ON (C.S.), the Department of Radiation Oncology, Laurentian University and Radiation Treatment Program, Northeast Cancer Centre, Health Sciences North, Sudbury, ON (J.B.), the Department of Radiation Oncology, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Sherbrooke, Sherbrooke, QC (S. Provencher), the Department of Radiation Oncology, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Québec-Université Laval, Quebec, QC (V.T.), the Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathobiology, and the Radiation Medicine Program, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, Toronto (A.M.M.), the Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, University of British Columbia, and the BC Cancer Agency, Vancouver (Z.K.), the Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Manitoba and Cancer Care Manitoba, Winnipeg (M.A.A.), the Department of Radiation Oncology, University of British Columbia and Radiation Therapy Program, BC Cancer Agency, Vancouver (K.D.V.), the Department of Radiation Oncology, McGill University, Montreal (T.H.), and the Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, University of British Columbia, Vancouver (T.O.N.) - all in Canada
| | - Tarek Hijal
- From the Department of Oncology, McMaster University and the Division of Radiation Oncology, Juravinski Cancer Centre at Hamilton Health Sciences, Hamilton, ON (T.J.W., I.S.D., J.R.W.), the Division of Radiation Oncology, Department of Surgery, University of British Columbia and Radiation Therapy Program, BC Cancer Agency, Victoria (S.S.), the Department of Oncology, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON (S. Parpia, G.P., M.N.L.), the Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Toronto, and the Radiation Medicine Program, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre (A.W.F., F.-F.L.), the Department of Pathology, University of Toronto (A.B.), and the Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Toronto and Sunnybrook Odette Cancer Centre (E.R.), Toronto, the Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Ottawa and Ottawa Regional Cancer Centre, Ottawa (L.C.), the Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Toronto and Royal Victoria Regional Health Centre, Barrie, ON (C.S.), the Department of Radiation Oncology, Laurentian University and Radiation Treatment Program, Northeast Cancer Centre, Health Sciences North, Sudbury, ON (J.B.), the Department of Radiation Oncology, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Sherbrooke, Sherbrooke, QC (S. Provencher), the Department of Radiation Oncology, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Québec-Université Laval, Quebec, QC (V.T.), the Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathobiology, and the Radiation Medicine Program, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, Toronto (A.M.M.), the Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, University of British Columbia, and the BC Cancer Agency, Vancouver (Z.K.), the Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Manitoba and Cancer Care Manitoba, Winnipeg (M.A.A.), the Department of Radiation Oncology, University of British Columbia and Radiation Therapy Program, BC Cancer Agency, Vancouver (K.D.V.), the Department of Radiation Oncology, McGill University, Montreal (T.H.), and the Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, University of British Columbia, Vancouver (T.O.N.) - all in Canada
| | - Ian S Dayes
- From the Department of Oncology, McMaster University and the Division of Radiation Oncology, Juravinski Cancer Centre at Hamilton Health Sciences, Hamilton, ON (T.J.W., I.S.D., J.R.W.), the Division of Radiation Oncology, Department of Surgery, University of British Columbia and Radiation Therapy Program, BC Cancer Agency, Victoria (S.S.), the Department of Oncology, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON (S. Parpia, G.P., M.N.L.), the Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Toronto, and the Radiation Medicine Program, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre (A.W.F., F.-F.L.), the Department of Pathology, University of Toronto (A.B.), and the Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Toronto and Sunnybrook Odette Cancer Centre (E.R.), Toronto, the Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Ottawa and Ottawa Regional Cancer Centre, Ottawa (L.C.), the Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Toronto and Royal Victoria Regional Health Centre, Barrie, ON (C.S.), the Department of Radiation Oncology, Laurentian University and Radiation Treatment Program, Northeast Cancer Centre, Health Sciences North, Sudbury, ON (J.B.), the Department of Radiation Oncology, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Sherbrooke, Sherbrooke, QC (S. Provencher), the Department of Radiation Oncology, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Québec-Université Laval, Quebec, QC (V.T.), the Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathobiology, and the Radiation Medicine Program, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, Toronto (A.M.M.), the Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, University of British Columbia, and the BC Cancer Agency, Vancouver (Z.K.), the Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Manitoba and Cancer Care Manitoba, Winnipeg (M.A.A.), the Department of Radiation Oncology, University of British Columbia and Radiation Therapy Program, BC Cancer Agency, Vancouver (K.D.V.), the Department of Radiation Oncology, McGill University, Montreal (T.H.), and the Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, University of British Columbia, Vancouver (T.O.N.) - all in Canada
| | - Gregory Pond
- From the Department of Oncology, McMaster University and the Division of Radiation Oncology, Juravinski Cancer Centre at Hamilton Health Sciences, Hamilton, ON (T.J.W., I.S.D., J.R.W.), the Division of Radiation Oncology, Department of Surgery, University of British Columbia and Radiation Therapy Program, BC Cancer Agency, Victoria (S.S.), the Department of Oncology, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON (S. Parpia, G.P., M.N.L.), the Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Toronto, and the Radiation Medicine Program, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre (A.W.F., F.-F.L.), the Department of Pathology, University of Toronto (A.B.), and the Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Toronto and Sunnybrook Odette Cancer Centre (E.R.), Toronto, the Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Ottawa and Ottawa Regional Cancer Centre, Ottawa (L.C.), the Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Toronto and Royal Victoria Regional Health Centre, Barrie, ON (C.S.), the Department of Radiation Oncology, Laurentian University and Radiation Treatment Program, Northeast Cancer Centre, Health Sciences North, Sudbury, ON (J.B.), the Department of Radiation Oncology, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Sherbrooke, Sherbrooke, QC (S. Provencher), the Department of Radiation Oncology, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Québec-Université Laval, Quebec, QC (V.T.), the Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathobiology, and the Radiation Medicine Program, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, Toronto (A.M.M.), the Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, University of British Columbia, and the BC Cancer Agency, Vancouver (Z.K.), the Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Manitoba and Cancer Care Manitoba, Winnipeg (M.A.A.), the Department of Radiation Oncology, University of British Columbia and Radiation Therapy Program, BC Cancer Agency, Vancouver (K.D.V.), the Department of Radiation Oncology, McGill University, Montreal (T.H.), and the Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, University of British Columbia, Vancouver (T.O.N.) - all in Canada
| | - James R Wright
- From the Department of Oncology, McMaster University and the Division of Radiation Oncology, Juravinski Cancer Centre at Hamilton Health Sciences, Hamilton, ON (T.J.W., I.S.D., J.R.W.), the Division of Radiation Oncology, Department of Surgery, University of British Columbia and Radiation Therapy Program, BC Cancer Agency, Victoria (S.S.), the Department of Oncology, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON (S. Parpia, G.P., M.N.L.), the Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Toronto, and the Radiation Medicine Program, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre (A.W.F., F.-F.L.), the Department of Pathology, University of Toronto (A.B.), and the Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Toronto and Sunnybrook Odette Cancer Centre (E.R.), Toronto, the Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Ottawa and Ottawa Regional Cancer Centre, Ottawa (L.C.), the Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Toronto and Royal Victoria Regional Health Centre, Barrie, ON (C.S.), the Department of Radiation Oncology, Laurentian University and Radiation Treatment Program, Northeast Cancer Centre, Health Sciences North, Sudbury, ON (J.B.), the Department of Radiation Oncology, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Sherbrooke, Sherbrooke, QC (S. Provencher), the Department of Radiation Oncology, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Québec-Université Laval, Quebec, QC (V.T.), the Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathobiology, and the Radiation Medicine Program, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, Toronto (A.M.M.), the Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, University of British Columbia, and the BC Cancer Agency, Vancouver (Z.K.), the Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Manitoba and Cancer Care Manitoba, Winnipeg (M.A.A.), the Department of Radiation Oncology, University of British Columbia and Radiation Therapy Program, BC Cancer Agency, Vancouver (K.D.V.), the Department of Radiation Oncology, McGill University, Montreal (T.H.), and the Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, University of British Columbia, Vancouver (T.O.N.) - all in Canada
| | - Torsten O Nielsen
- From the Department of Oncology, McMaster University and the Division of Radiation Oncology, Juravinski Cancer Centre at Hamilton Health Sciences, Hamilton, ON (T.J.W., I.S.D., J.R.W.), the Division of Radiation Oncology, Department of Surgery, University of British Columbia and Radiation Therapy Program, BC Cancer Agency, Victoria (S.S.), the Department of Oncology, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON (S. Parpia, G.P., M.N.L.), the Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Toronto, and the Radiation Medicine Program, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre (A.W.F., F.-F.L.), the Department of Pathology, University of Toronto (A.B.), and the Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Toronto and Sunnybrook Odette Cancer Centre (E.R.), Toronto, the Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Ottawa and Ottawa Regional Cancer Centre, Ottawa (L.C.), the Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Toronto and Royal Victoria Regional Health Centre, Barrie, ON (C.S.), the Department of Radiation Oncology, Laurentian University and Radiation Treatment Program, Northeast Cancer Centre, Health Sciences North, Sudbury, ON (J.B.), the Department of Radiation Oncology, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Sherbrooke, Sherbrooke, QC (S. Provencher), the Department of Radiation Oncology, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Québec-Université Laval, Quebec, QC (V.T.), the Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathobiology, and the Radiation Medicine Program, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, Toronto (A.M.M.), the Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, University of British Columbia, and the BC Cancer Agency, Vancouver (Z.K.), the Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Manitoba and Cancer Care Manitoba, Winnipeg (M.A.A.), the Department of Radiation Oncology, University of British Columbia and Radiation Therapy Program, BC Cancer Agency, Vancouver (K.D.V.), the Department of Radiation Oncology, McGill University, Montreal (T.H.), and the Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, University of British Columbia, Vancouver (T.O.N.) - all in Canada
| | - Mark N Levine
- From the Department of Oncology, McMaster University and the Division of Radiation Oncology, Juravinski Cancer Centre at Hamilton Health Sciences, Hamilton, ON (T.J.W., I.S.D., J.R.W.), the Division of Radiation Oncology, Department of Surgery, University of British Columbia and Radiation Therapy Program, BC Cancer Agency, Victoria (S.S.), the Department of Oncology, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON (S. Parpia, G.P., M.N.L.), the Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Toronto, and the Radiation Medicine Program, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre (A.W.F., F.-F.L.), the Department of Pathology, University of Toronto (A.B.), and the Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Toronto and Sunnybrook Odette Cancer Centre (E.R.), Toronto, the Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Ottawa and Ottawa Regional Cancer Centre, Ottawa (L.C.), the Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Toronto and Royal Victoria Regional Health Centre, Barrie, ON (C.S.), the Department of Radiation Oncology, Laurentian University and Radiation Treatment Program, Northeast Cancer Centre, Health Sciences North, Sudbury, ON (J.B.), the Department of Radiation Oncology, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Sherbrooke, Sherbrooke, QC (S. Provencher), the Department of Radiation Oncology, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Québec-Université Laval, Quebec, QC (V.T.), the Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathobiology, and the Radiation Medicine Program, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, Toronto (A.M.M.), the Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, University of British Columbia, and the BC Cancer Agency, Vancouver (Z.K.), the Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Manitoba and Cancer Care Manitoba, Winnipeg (M.A.A.), the Department of Radiation Oncology, University of British Columbia and Radiation Therapy Program, BC Cancer Agency, Vancouver (K.D.V.), the Department of Radiation Oncology, McGill University, Montreal (T.H.), and the Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, University of British Columbia, Vancouver (T.O.N.) - all in Canada
| |
Collapse
|
28
|
Rodin D, Sutradhar R, Jerzak KJ, Hahn E, Nguyen L, Castelo M, Fatiregun O, Fong C, Mata DGMM, Trebinjac S, Paszat L, Rakovitch E. Impact of non-adherence to endocrine therapy on recurrence risk in older women with stage I breast cancer after breast-conserving surgery. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2023:10.1007/s10549-023-06989-x. [PMID: 37326765 DOI: 10.1007/s10549-023-06989-x] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/13/2023] [Accepted: 05/24/2023] [Indexed: 06/17/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE We examined the impact of non-adherence to adjuvant endocrine therapy (ET) on the risk and site of recurrence among older women with early stage, hormone receptor positive (HR+) breast cancer (EBC). METHODS A population-based cohort of women age ≥ 65 years with T1N0 HR + EBC who were diagnosed between 2010 and 2016 and treated with breast-conserving surgery (BCS) + ET was identified. Treatment and outcomes were ascertained through linkage with administrative databases. ET non-adherence was examined as a time-dependent covariate in multivariable cause-specific Cox regression models to evaluate its effect on the risks of ipsilateral local recurrence (LR), contralateral breast cancer, and distant metastases. RESULTS The population cohort includes 2637 women; 73% (N = 1934) received radiation (RT) + ET and 27% (N = 703) received ET alone. At a median follow-up of 8.14 years, the first event was LR in 3.6% of women treated with ET alone and 1.4% for those treated with RT + ET (p < 0.001); the risk of distant metastases was < 1% in both groups. The proportion of time adherent to ET was 69.0% among those treated with RT + ET and 62.8% for those treated with ET alone. On multivariable analysis, increasing proportion of time non-adherent to ET was associated with increased risk of LR ((HR = 1.52 per 20% increase in time; 95%CI 1.25, 1.85; p < 0.001), contralateral BC (HR = 1.55; 95%CI 1.30, 1.84; p < 0.001), and distant metastases (HR = 1.44; 95%CI 1.08, 1.94; p = 0.01) but absolute risks were low. CONCLUSION Non-adherence to adjuvant ET was associated with an increased risk of recurrence, but absolute recurrence rates were low.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Danielle Rodin
- Radiation Medicine Program, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, Toronto, ON, Canada
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | - Rinku Sutradhar
- Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences, Toronto, ON, Canada
- Dalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | - Katarzyna J Jerzak
- Department of Medical Oncology, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | - Ezra Hahn
- Radiation Medicine Program, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, Toronto, ON, Canada
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | - Lena Nguyen
- Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | - Matthew Castelo
- Division of General Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada
- Institute of Health Policy, Management and Evaluation, Dalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | - Omolara Fatiregun
- Institute of Health Policy, Management and Evaluation, Dalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | - Cindy Fong
- Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | | | - Sabina Trebinjac
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | - Lawrence Paszat
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada
- Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences, Toronto, ON, Canada
- Dalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | - Eileen Rakovitch
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.
- Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences, Toronto, ON, Canada.
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, ON, Canada.
| |
Collapse
|
29
|
English K, Alcorn SR, Tran HT, Smith KL, Wilkinson M, Hirose KT, O'Donnell M, Croog V, Wright JL. Adjuvant treatment decisions among adults aged 65 years and older with early-stage hormone receptor positive breast cancer seen in a simple multidisciplinary clinic versus standard consultation. J Geriatr Oncol 2023; 14:101503. [PMID: 37126898 DOI: 10.1016/j.jgo.2023.101503] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/11/2022] [Revised: 03/15/2023] [Accepted: 04/12/2023] [Indexed: 05/03/2023]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Randomized studies support de-escalation of adjuvant therapy for a target population of older adults ≥65 years with stage I, estrogen-receptor (ER) positive breast cancer after breast conserving surgery. We sought to evaluate the impact of a simplified multidisciplinary clinic (s-MDC) in this population by comparing treatment patterns and patient perceptions of adjuvant radiation therapy (RT) and hormone therapy (HT) between patients seen in s-MDC vs. standard consultations. MATERIALS AND METHODS Medical records were retrospectively reviewed for patients in the above target population who underwent surgery between August 2020 and May 2022 at our institution. Two cohorts were included: (1) patients seen in s-MDC, and (2) patients seen in standard clinic separately by medical and radiation oncology (non-s-MDC cohort). The non-s-MDC patients declined, could not attend, and/or were not referred to the s-MDC. Patients in the s-MDC cohort were prospectively administered validated questionnaires to evaluate patient reported data including the Decision Autonomy Preference Scale (DAPS), e-Prognosis, and Medical Maximizing-Minimizing Scale (MMS). Chi square, t-tests, and non-parametric equivalents compared demographics, and logistic regression evaluated RT and HT use and survey score outcomes between cohorts. RESULTS A total of 127 patients met inclusion criteria, with 33 s-MDC and 94 non-s-MDC patients. There was no difference between the cohorts in age, margin status, histology, grade, or focality. In the s-MDC cohort there were significantly more patients without sentinel lymph node biopsy (71.3% vs 42.4%, p = 0.003) and mean tumor size was smaller (0.69 vs. 0.96 cm, p < 0.003), and Charlson comborbidity index (CCI) was higher (5.21 vs 4.96, p = 0.038). There was no significant difference in receipt of RT (65% s-MDC vs 77% standard; odds ratio [OR] = 0.55, p = 0.189), HT (78% ss-MDC vs 72% standard; OR = 1.36, p = 0.513), or both (50% s-MDC vs 59% standard; OR = 0.7, p = 0.429). The s-MDC cohort was significantly more likely to undergo accelerated (vs. standard hypofractionated) RT (70% vs 39%; OR = 3.59, p = 0.020). In s-MDC patients with completed questionnaires (n = 33), all whose selected "mostly patient (n=6)" based decision making by DAPS chose RT while all "mostly doctor (n=1)" chose no RT. Based on e-Prognosis, there were lower odds of RT for increasing Schonberg score/ higher 10 yr mortality risk (OR 0.600, p = 0.048). MMS score ≥ 40 ("maximizer") was strongly linked with the use of RT (OR 18.57, p = 0.011). DISCUSSION For adults ≥65 years with early stage, ER positive breast cancer, s-MDC participation was not significantly associated with lower use of adjuvant RT or HT versus standard consultation but was significantly associated with shorter RT courses. DAPS and MMS results indicate that patient treatment preference may be predictable, highlighting an opportunity to tailor consultation discussions and recommendations based on intrinsic patient preferences and individual goals.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Keara English
- The Johns Hopkins Department of Radiation Oncology, 401 North Broadway, Weinberg Building, Suite 1440, Baltimore, MD 21287, United States of America
| | - Sara R Alcorn
- The Johns Hopkins Department of Radiation Oncology, 401 North Broadway, Weinberg Building, Suite 1440, Baltimore, MD 21287, United States of America
| | - Hanh-Tam Tran
- The Johns Hopkins Department of Radiation Oncology, 401 North Broadway, Weinberg Building, Suite 1440, Baltimore, MD 21287, United States of America
| | - Karen Lisa Smith
- The Johns Hopkins Department of Radiation Oncology, 401 North Broadway, Weinberg Building, Suite 1440, Baltimore, MD 21287, United States of America
| | - Mary Wilkinson
- The Johns Hopkins Department of Radiation Oncology, 401 North Broadway, Weinberg Building, Suite 1440, Baltimore, MD 21287, United States of America
| | - Kelly Tadken Hirose
- The Johns Hopkins Department of Radiation Oncology, 401 North Broadway, Weinberg Building, Suite 1440, Baltimore, MD 21287, United States of America
| | - Maureen O'Donnell
- The Johns Hopkins Department of Radiation Oncology, 401 North Broadway, Weinberg Building, Suite 1440, Baltimore, MD 21287, United States of America
| | - Victoria Croog
- The Johns Hopkins Department of Radiation Oncology, 401 North Broadway, Weinberg Building, Suite 1440, Baltimore, MD 21287, United States of America
| | - Jean L Wright
- The Johns Hopkins Department of Radiation Oncology, 401 North Broadway, Weinberg Building, Suite 1440, Baltimore, MD 21287, United States of America.
| |
Collapse
|
30
|
Rogowski P, Schönecker S, Konnerth D, Schäfer A, Pazos M, Gaasch A, Niyazi M, Boelke E, Matuschek C, Haussmann J, Braun M, Pölcher M, Würstlein R, Harbeck N, Belka C, Corradini S. Adjuvant Therapy for Elderly Breast Cancer Patients after Breast-Conserving Surgery: Outcomes in Real World Practice. Cancers (Basel) 2023; 15:2334. [PMID: 37190263 PMCID: PMC10137115 DOI: 10.3390/cancers15082334] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/16/2023] [Revised: 04/14/2023] [Accepted: 04/15/2023] [Indexed: 05/17/2023] Open
Abstract
We aimed to evaluate the standard of care of adjuvant radiotherapy (RT) after breast-conserving surgery (BCS) in elderly female patients (≥65 years) treated outside of clinical trials and to identify potential factors related to the omission of RT and the interaction with endocrine therapy (ET). All women treated with BCS at two major breast centers between 1998 and 2014 were evaluated. Data were provided by the Tumor Registry Munich. Survival analyses were conducted using the Kaplan-Meier method. Prognostic factors were identified using multivariate Cox regression analysis. The median follow-up was 88.4 months. Adjuvant RT was performed in 82% (2599/3171) of patients. Irradiated patients were younger (70.9 vs. 76.5 years, p < 0.001) and were more likely to receive additional chemotherapy (p < 0.001) and ET (p = 0.014). Non-irradiated patients more often had non-invasive DCIS tumors (pTis: 20.3% vs. 6.8%, p < 0.001) and did not undergo axillary surgery (no axillary surgery: 50.5% vs. 9.5%, p < 0.001). Adjuvant RT was associated with improved locoregional tumor control after BCS in invasive tumors (10-year local recurrence-free survival (LRFS): 94.0% vs. 75.1%, p < 0.001, 10-year lymph node recurrence-free survival (LNRFS): 98.1% vs. 93.1%, p < 0.001). Multivariate analysis confirmed significant benefits for local control with postoperative RT. Furthermore, RT led to increased locoregional control even in patients who received ET (10-year LRFS 94.8% with ET + RT vs. 78.1% with ET alone, p < 0.001 and 10-year LNRFS: 98.2% vs. 95.0%, p = 0.003). Similarly, RT alone had significantly better locoregional control rates compared to ET alone (10-year LRFS 92.6% with RT alone vs. 78.1% with ET alone, p < 0.001 and 10-year LNRFS: 98.0% vs. 95.0%, p = 0.014). The present work confirms the efficacy of postoperative RT for breast carcinoma in elderly patients (≥65 years) treated in a modern clinical setting outside of clinical trials, even in patients who receive ET.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Paul Rogowski
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital LMU, 81377 Munich, Germany
| | - Stephan Schönecker
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital LMU, 81377 Munich, Germany
| | - Dinah Konnerth
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital LMU, 81377 Munich, Germany
| | - Annemarie Schäfer
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital LMU, 81377 Munich, Germany
| | - Montserrat Pazos
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital LMU, 81377 Munich, Germany
| | - Aurélie Gaasch
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital LMU, 81377 Munich, Germany
| | - Maximilian Niyazi
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital LMU, 81377 Munich, Germany
- German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), 81377 Munich, Germany
| | - Edwin Boelke
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heinrich Heine University, 40225 Dusseldorf, Germany
| | - Christiane Matuschek
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heinrich Heine University, 40225 Dusseldorf, Germany
| | - Jan Haussmann
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heinrich Heine University, 40225 Dusseldorf, Germany
| | - Michael Braun
- Breast Centre, Red Cross Hospital, 80634 Munich, Germany
| | - Martin Pölcher
- Breast Centre, Red Cross Hospital, 80634 Munich, Germany
| | - Rachel Würstlein
- Breast Centre, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, CCC Munich LMU, University Hospital LMU, 81377 Munich, Germany
| | - Nadia Harbeck
- Breast Centre, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, CCC Munich LMU, University Hospital LMU, 81377 Munich, Germany
| | - Claus Belka
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital LMU, 81377 Munich, Germany
- German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), 81377 Munich, Germany
| | - Stefanie Corradini
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital LMU, 81377 Munich, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
31
|
Rassy E, Filleron T, Viansone A, Lacroix-Triki M, Rivera S, Desmoulins I, Serin D, Canon JL, Campone M, Gonçalves A, Levy C, Cottu P, Petit T, Eymard JC, Debled M, Bachelot T, Dalenc F, Roca L, Lemonnier J, Delaloge S, Pistilli B. Pattern and risk factors of isolated local relapse among women with hormone receptor-positive and HER2-negative breast cancer and lymph node involvement: 10-year follow-up analysis of the PACS 01 and PACS 04 trials. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2023; 199:371-379. [PMID: 36988749 DOI: 10.1007/s10549-023-06912-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/27/2023] [Accepted: 03/12/2023] [Indexed: 03/30/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE We aimed to determine the pattern of isolated local recurrences (ILR) in women with stage II-III hormone receptor-positive and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 breast cancer (HR + /HER2-BC) after 10-year follow-up. METHODS UNICANCER-PACS 01 and PACS 04 trials included 5,008 women with T1-T3 and N1-N3 to evaluate the efficacy of different anthracycline ± taxanes-containing regimens after modified mastectomy or lumpectomy plus axillary lymph node dissection. We analyzed the data from 2,932 women with HR + /HER2- BC to evaluate the cumulative incidence of ILR and describe the factors associated with ILR. RESULTS After a median follow-up of 9.1 years (95% CI 9.0-9.2 years), the cumulative incidence of ILR increased steadily between 1 and 10 years from 0.2% to 2.5%. The multivariable analysis showed that older age (subhazard ratios [sHR] = 0.95, 95% CI 0.92-0.99) and mastectomy (sHR = 0.39, 95% CI 0.17-0.86) were associated with lower risk of ILR, and no adjuvant endocrine therapy (sHR = 2.73, 95% CI 1.32 7-5.67) with increased risk of ILR. CONCLUSION In this population of high-risk patients with localized HR + /HER2- BC, the risk of ILR was low but remained constant over 10 years. Younger age at diagnosis, breast-conserving surgery, and adjuvant endocrine therapy were independent risk factors of ILR.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Elie Rassy
- Department of Cancer Medicine, University of Paris Saclay, Gustave Roussy, Villejuif, France
| | - Thomas Filleron
- BiostatisticsDepartment, Institut Claudius Regaud, IUCT-Oncopole, Toulouse, France
| | - Alessandro Viansone
- Department of Cancer Medicine, University of Paris Saclay, Gustave Roussy, Villejuif, France
| | - Magali Lacroix-Triki
- Department of Biopathology, University of Paris Saclay, Roussy, Villejuif, France
| | - Sofia Rivera
- Department of Radiation Therapy, University of Paris Saclay, Gustave Roussy, Villejuif, France
| | | | - Daniel Serin
- Department of Medical Oncology, Institut Sainte-Catherine, Avignon, France
| | - Jean Luc Canon
- Department of Medical Oncology, Grand Hôpital de Charleroi, Charleroi, Belgium
| | - Mario Campone
- Department of Medical Oncology, Institut de Cancérologie de l'Ouest, Site René Gauducheau, Site Hospitalier Nord, Saint-Herblain, France
| | - Anthony Gonçalves
- Department of Medical Oncology, Institut Paoli-Calmettes, Marseille, France
| | - Christelle Levy
- Department of Medical Oncology, Centre François Baclesse, Caen, France
| | - Paul Cottu
- Department of Medical Oncology, Institut Curie, Paris, France
| | - Thierry Petit
- Department of Medical Oncology, Centre Paul Strauss, Strasbourg, France
| | | | - Marc Debled
- Department of Medical Oncology, Institut Bergonié, Bordeaux, France
| | - Thomas Bachelot
- Department of Medical Oncology, Centre Leon Berard, Lyon, France
| | - Florence Dalenc
- Department of Medical Oncology, Institut Claudius Regaud, Institut Universitaire Cancer Toulouse-Oncopole, Toulouse, France
| | - Lise Roca
- Institut Régional du Cancer de Montpellier, Parc Euromédecine, Montpellier, France
| | | | - Suzette Delaloge
- Department of Cancer Medicine, University of Paris Saclay, Gustave Roussy, Villejuif, France
| | - Barbara Pistilli
- Department of Cancer Medicine, University of Paris Saclay, Gustave Roussy, Villejuif, France.
| |
Collapse
|
32
|
Sjöström M, Fyles A, Liu FF, McCready D, Shi W, Rey-McIntyre K, Chang SL, Feng FY, Speers CW, Pierce LJ, Holmberg E, Fernö M, Malmström P, Karlsson P. Development and Validation of a Genomic Profile for the Omission of Local Adjuvant Radiation in Breast Cancer. J Clin Oncol 2023; 41:1533-1540. [PMID: 36599119 PMCID: PMC10022846 DOI: 10.1200/jco.22.00655] [Citation(s) in RCA: 19] [Impact Index Per Article: 19.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/17/2022] [Revised: 08/07/2022] [Accepted: 11/18/2022] [Indexed: 01/06/2023] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE Adjuvant radiotherapy (RT) is used for women with early-stage invasive breast cancer treated with breast-conserving surgery. However, some women with low risk of recurrence may safely be spared RT. This study aimed to identify these women using a molecular-based approach. METHODS We analyzed two randomized trials of women with node-negative invasive breast cancer to ± RT following breast-conserving surgery: SweBCG91-RT (stage I-II, no adjuvant systemic therapy) and Princess Margaret (age 50 years or older, T1-T2, adjuvant tamoxifen). Transcriptome-wide profiling was performed (Affymetrix Human Exon 1.0 ST microarray). Patients with estrogen receptor-positive/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative tumors and with gene expression data were included. The SweBCG91-RT cohort was divided into training (N = 243) and validation (N = 354) cohorts. A 16-gene signature named Profile for the Omission of Local Adjuvant Radiation (POLAR) was trained to predict locoregional recurrence (LRR) using elastic net regression. POLAR was then validated in the SweBCG91-RT validation cohort and the Princess Margaret cohort (N = 132). RESULTS Patients categorized as POLAR low-risk without RT had a 10-year LRR of 6% (95% CI, 2 to 16) and 7% (0 to 27) in SweBCG91-RT and Princess Margaret cohorts, respectively. There was no significant benefit from RT in POLAR low-risk patients (hazard ratio [HR], 1.1 [0.39 to 3.4], P = .81, and HR, 1.5 [0.14 to 16], P = .74, respectively). Patients categorized as POLAR high-risk had a significant decreased risk of LRR with RT (HR, 0.43 [0.24 to 0.78], P = .0055, and HR, 0.25 [0.07 to 0.92], P = .038, respectively). An exploratory analysis testing for interaction between RT and POLAR in the combined validation cohort was performed (P = .066). CONCLUSION The novel POLAR genomic signature on the basis of LRR biology may identify patients with a low risk of LRR despite not receiving RT, and thus may be candidates for RT omission.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Martin Sjöström
- Division of Oncology, Department of Clinical Sciences Lund, Lund University, Lund, Sweden
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA
| | - Anthony Fyles
- Princess Margaret Cancer Centre and University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | - Fei-Fei Liu
- Princess Margaret Cancer Centre and University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | - David McCready
- Princess Margaret Cancer Centre and University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | - Wei Shi
- Princess Margaret Cancer Centre and University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | | | | | - Felix Y. Feng
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA
| | - Corey W. Speers
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI
| | - Lori J. Pierce
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI
| | - Erik Holmberg
- Department of Oncology, Institute of Clinical Sciences, Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden
| | - Mårten Fernö
- Division of Oncology, Department of Clinical Sciences Lund, Lund University, Lund, Sweden
| | - Per Malmström
- Division of Oncology, Department of Clinical Sciences Lund, Lund University, Lund, Sweden
- Department of Haematology, Oncology and Radiation Physics, Skåne University Hospital, Lund, Sweden
| | - Per Karlsson
- Department of Oncology, Institute of Clinical Sciences, Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden
| |
Collapse
|
33
|
Affiliation(s)
- Alice Y Ho
- From the Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC (A.Y.H.); and the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute and Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston (J.R.B.)
| | - Jennifer R Bellon
- From the Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC (A.Y.H.); and the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute and Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston (J.R.B.)
| |
Collapse
|
34
|
Kunkler IH, Williams LJ, Jack WJL, Cameron DA, Dixon JM. Breast-Conserving Surgery with or without Irradiation in Early Breast Cancer. N Engl J Med 2023; 388:585-594. [PMID: 36791159 DOI: 10.1056/nejmoa2207586] [Citation(s) in RCA: 128] [Impact Index Per Article: 128.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/17/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Limited level 1 evidence is available on the omission of radiotherapy after breast-conserving surgery in older women with hormone receptor-positive early breast cancer receiving adjuvant endocrine therapy. METHODS We performed a phase 3 randomized trial of the omission of irradiation; the trial population included women 65 years of age or older who had hormone receptor-positive, node-negative, T1 or T2 primary breast cancer (with tumors ≤3 cm in the largest dimension) treated with breast-conserving surgery with clear excision margins and adjuvant endocrine therapy. Patients were randomly assigned to receive whole-breast irradiation (40 to 50 Gy) or no irradiation. The primary end point was local breast cancer recurrence. Regional recurrence, breast cancer-specific survival, distant recurrence as the first event, and overall survival were also assessed. RESULTS A total of 1326 women were enrolled; 658 were randomly assigned to receive whole-breast irradiation and 668 to receive no irradiation. The median follow-up was 9.1 years. The cumulative incidence of local breast cancer recurrence within 10 years was 9.5% (95% confidence interval [CI], 6.8 to 12.3) in the no-radiotherapy group and 0.9% (95% CI, 0.1 to 1.7) in the radiotherapy group (hazard ratio, 10.4; 95% CI, 4.1 to 26.1; P<0.001). Although local recurrence was more common in the group that did not receive radiotherapy, the 10-year incidence of distant recurrence as the first event was not higher in the no-radiotherapy group than in the radiotherapy group, at 1.6% (95% CI, 0.4 to 2.8) and 3.0% (95% CI, 1.4 to 4.5), respectively. Overall survival at 10 years was almost identical in the two groups, at 80.8% (95% CI, 77.2 to 84.3) with no radiotherapy and 80.7% (95% CI, 76.9 to 84.3) with radiotherapy. The incidence of regional recurrence and breast cancer-specific survival also did not differ substantially between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS Omission of radiotherapy was associated with an increased incidence of local recurrence but had no detrimental effect on distant recurrence as the first event or overall survival among women 65 years of age or older with low-risk, hormone receptor-positive early breast cancer. (Funded by the Chief Scientist Office of the Scottish Government and the Breast Cancer Institute, Western General Hospital, Edinburgh; ISRCTN number, ISRCTN95889329.).
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ian H Kunkler
- From the University of Edinburgh (I.H.K., L.J.W., D.A.C., J.M.D.) and Western General Hospital (W.J.L.J.) - both in Edinburgh
| | - Linda J Williams
- From the University of Edinburgh (I.H.K., L.J.W., D.A.C., J.M.D.) and Western General Hospital (W.J.L.J.) - both in Edinburgh
| | - Wilma J L Jack
- From the University of Edinburgh (I.H.K., L.J.W., D.A.C., J.M.D.) and Western General Hospital (W.J.L.J.) - both in Edinburgh
| | - David A Cameron
- From the University of Edinburgh (I.H.K., L.J.W., D.A.C., J.M.D.) and Western General Hospital (W.J.L.J.) - both in Edinburgh
| | - J Michael Dixon
- From the University of Edinburgh (I.H.K., L.J.W., D.A.C., J.M.D.) and Western General Hospital (W.J.L.J.) - both in Edinburgh
| |
Collapse
|
35
|
Johnston SRD. Adjuvant Systemic Therapy for Postmenopausal, Hormone Receptor-Positive Early Breast Cancer. Hematol Oncol Clin North Am 2023; 37:89-102. [PMID: 36435616 DOI: 10.1016/j.hoc.2022.08.011] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/24/2022]
Abstract
There is now a deeper understanding of the biology of hormone receptor-positive (HR+) early breast cancer (EBC) that can be used to inform assessment of risk and prognosis, and also guide more effective adjuvant systemic therapies. For postmenopausal HR+ EBC endocrine therapy remains the mainstay of treatment with extended duration up to 10 years for some, the addition of targeted CDK 4/6 inhibitors for those with node-positive high-risk disease, and de-escalation of chemotherapy use for those in whom it is unlikely to be of benefit. As such, systemic adjuvant therapy is now highly tailored and individualized.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Stephen R D Johnston
- Department of Medicine, Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, Fulham Road, Chelsea, London, SW3 6JJ, UK.
| |
Collapse
|
36
|
Yu CX. Radiotherapy of early‐stage breast cancer. PRECISION RADIATION ONCOLOGY 2023. [DOI: 10.1002/pro6.1183] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/30/2023] Open
Affiliation(s)
- Cedric X. Yu
- Radiation Oncology University of Maryland School of Medicine Baltimore Maryland USA
- Xcision Medical Systems Columbia Maryland USA
| |
Collapse
|
37
|
Krecko LK, Lautner MA, Wilke LG. Clinical Trials That Have Informed the Modern Management of Breast Cancer. Surg Oncol Clin N Am 2023; 32:27-46. [PMID: 36410920 DOI: 10.1016/j.soc.2022.07.004] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/06/2022]
Abstract
Randomized controlled trials have informed the historical evolution of breast cancer management, distilling operative and nonoperative treatments to achieve disease control and improve survival while maximizing quality of life and minimizing complications. The authors describe landmark trials investigating and influencing the following aspects of breast cancer care: extent of breast surgery; axillary management; neoadjuvant and adjuvant therapies; and selection of chemotherapy versus endocrine therapy via application of genomic assays.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Laura K Krecko
- Department of Surgery, University of Wisconsin Hospital and Clinics, 600 Highland Avenue K4/642, Madison, WI 53792, USA. https://twitter.com/LauraKrecko
| | - Meeghan A Lautner
- Department of Surgery, University of Wisconsin Hospital and Clinics, 600 Highland Avenue K4/624, Madison, WI 53792, USA. https://twitter.com/mlautnermd
| | - Lee G Wilke
- Department of Surgery, University of Wisconsin Hospital and Clinics, 600 Highland Avenue K4/624, Madison, WI 53792, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
38
|
Shah C, Leonardi MC. Accelerated Partial Breast Irradiation: An Opportunity for Therapeutic De-escalation. Am J Clin Oncol 2023; 46:2-6. [PMID: 36255336 DOI: 10.1097/coc.0000000000000945] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/04/2023]
Abstract
Partial breast irradiation (PBI) has been demonstrated to have comparable outcomes to whole breast irradiation based on multiple randomized trials with long-term follow-up. However, despite the strength of the data available, PBI remains underutilized despite being an appropriate option for many women diagnosed with early-stage breast cancer. This is significant, as PBI offers the potential to reduce toxicities and shorten treatment duration without impacting outcomes; in addition, for low-risk patients, PBI alone is being investigated as an alternative to endocrine therapy alone. Modern PBI can be delivered with multiple techniques, and advances in treatment planning have allowed for improved therapeutic ratios compared with earlier techniques; one such approach is utilizing stereotactic body radiation therapy approaches allowing for smaller target margins and therefore lower breast doses. Moving forward, studies are ongoing evaluating the use of radiation alone including PBI as compared with endocrine therapy alone, with prospective studies evaluating stereotactic body radiation therapy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Chirag Shah
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Taussig Cancer Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH
| | - Maria C Leonardi
- Department of Radiotherapy, IEO European Institute of Oncology, IRCCS, Milano, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
39
|
Beyer SJ, Tallman M, Jhawar SR, White JR, Bazan JG. The Prognostic and Predictive Value of Genomic Assays in Guiding Adjuvant Breast Radiation Therapy. Biomedicines 2022; 11:biomedicines11010098. [PMID: 36672606 PMCID: PMC9855532 DOI: 10.3390/biomedicines11010098] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/16/2022] [Revised: 12/16/2022] [Accepted: 12/21/2022] [Indexed: 01/01/2023] Open
Abstract
Many patients with non-metastatic breast cancer benefit from adjuvant radiation therapy after lumpectomy or mastectomy on the basis of many randomized trials. However, there are many patients that have such low risks of recurrence after surgery that de-intensification of therapy by either reducing the treatment volume or omitting radiation altogether may be appropriate options. On the other hand, dose intensification may be necessary for more aggressive breast cancers. Until recently, these treatment decisions were based solely on clinicopathologic factors. Here, we review the current literature on the role of genomic assays as prognostic and/or predictive biomarkers to help guide adjuvant radiation therapy decision-making.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sasha J. Beyer
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, OH 43210, USA
| | - Miranda Tallman
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, OH 43210, USA
| | - Sachin R. Jhawar
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, OH 43210, USA
| | - Julia R. White
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Kansas Medical Center, Kansas City, KS 66160, USA
| | - Jose G. Bazan
- Department of Radiation Oncology, City of Hope Comprehensive Cancer Center, Duarte, CA 91010, USA
- Correspondence:
| |
Collapse
|
40
|
Hintelmann K, Petersen C, Borgmann K. Radiotherapeutic Strategies to Overcome Resistance of Breast Cancer Brain Metastases by Considering Immunogenic Aspects of Cancer Stem Cells. Cancers (Basel) 2022; 15:211. [PMID: 36612206 PMCID: PMC9818478 DOI: 10.3390/cancers15010211] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/01/2022] [Revised: 12/23/2022] [Accepted: 12/27/2022] [Indexed: 12/31/2022] Open
Abstract
Breast cancer is the most diagnosed cancer in women, and symptomatic brain metastases (BCBMs) occur in 15-20% of metastatic breast cancer cases. Despite technological advances in radiation therapy (RT), the prognosis of patients is limited. This has been attributed to radioresistant breast cancer stem cells (BCSCs), among other factors. The aim of this review article is to summarize the evidence of cancer-stem-cell-mediated radioresistance in brain metastases of breast cancer from radiobiologic and radiation oncologic perspectives to allow for the better interpretability of preclinical and clinical evidence and to facilitate its translation into new therapeutic strategies. To this end, the etiology of brain metastasis in breast cancer, its radiotherapeutic treatment options, resistance mechanisms in BCSCs, and effects of molecularly targeted therapies in combination with radiotherapy involving immune checkpoint inhibitors are described and classified. This is considered in the context of the central nervous system (CNS) as a particular metastatic niche involving the blood-brain barrier and the CNS immune system. The compilation of this existing knowledge serves to identify possible synergistic effects between systemic molecularly targeted therapies and ionizing radiation (IR) by considering both BCSCs' relevant resistance mechanisms and effects on normal tissue of the CNS.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Katharina Hintelmann
- Department of Radiotherapy and Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, 20246 Hamburg, Germany
- Laboratory of Radiobiology and Experimental Radiooncology, Center of Oncology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, 20246 Hamburg, Germany
| | - Cordula Petersen
- Department of Radiotherapy and Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, 20246 Hamburg, Germany
| | - Kerstin Borgmann
- Laboratory of Radiobiology and Experimental Radiooncology, Center of Oncology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, 20246 Hamburg, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
41
|
Ward MC, Recht A, Vicini F, Al-Hilli Z, Asha W, Chadha M, Abraham A, Thaker N, Khan AJ, Keisch M, Shah C. Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Ultra-Hypofractionated Whole Breast Radiation Therapy Alone Versus Hormone Therapy Alone or Combined Treatment for Low-Risk ER-Positive Early Stage Breast Cancer in Women Aged 65 Years and Older. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2022:S0360-3016(22)03678-1. [PMID: 36586492 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2022.12.028] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/28/2022] [Revised: 11/28/2022] [Accepted: 12/17/2022] [Indexed: 12/30/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE The optimal management of early-stage, low-risk, hormone-positive breast cancer in older women remains controversial. Recent trials have shown that 5-fraction ultrahypofractionated whole-breast irradiation (U-WBI) has similar outcomes to longer courses, reducing the cost and inconvenience of treatment. We performed a cost-utility analysis to compare U-WBI to hormone therapy alone or their combination. METHODS AND MATERIALS We simulated 3 different treatment approaches for women age 65 years or older with pT1-2N0 ER-positive invasive ductal carcinoma treated with lumpectomy with negative margins using a Markov microsimulation model. The strategies were U-WBI performed with a 3-dimensional conformal technique over 5 fractions without a boost ("radiation therapy [RT] alone"), adjuvant hormone therapy (anastrozole for 5 years) without RT ("aromatase-inhibitor [AI] alone"), or the combination of the 2. The combination strategy was calibrated to match trial results, and the relative effectiveness of the RT alone and AI alone strategies were inferred from previous randomized trials. The primary endpoint was the cost-effectiveness of the 3 strategies over a lifetime horizon as measured by the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER), with a value of $100,000/quality-adjusted life-year deemed "cost-effective." RESULTS The model results compared with the prespecified target outcomes. On average, RT alone was the least expensive strategy ($14,775), with AI alone slightly more ($14,998), and combination therapy the costliest ($19,802). RT alone dominated AI alone (the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio [ICER] -$5089). Combination therapy, compared with RT alone, was slightly more expensive than our definition of cost-effective (ICER $113,468) but was cost-effective compared with AI alone (ICER $54,451). Probabilistic sensitivity analysis demonstrated RT alone to be cost-effective in 50% of trials, with combination therapy in 36% and AI alone in 14%. CONCLUSIONS U-WBI alone appears the more cost-effective de-escalation strategy for these low-risk patients, compared with AI alone. Combining U-WBI and AI appears more costly but may be preferred by some patients.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Matthew C Ward
- Levine Cancer Institute, Atrium Health, Charlotte, North Carolina; Southeast Radiation Oncology Group, Charlotte, North Carolina
| | - Abram Recht
- Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Frank Vicini
- 21st Century Oncology, Farmington Hills, Michigan
| | - Zahraa Al-Hilli
- Department of Breast Surgery, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio
| | - Wafa Asha
- Taussig Cancer Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio
| | - Manjeet Chadha
- Ichan School of Medicine at Mt. Sinai, New York, New York
| | - Abel Abraham
- Taussig Cancer Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio
| | | | - Atif J Khan
- Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | | | - Chirag Shah
- Taussig Cancer Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio.
| |
Collapse
|
42
|
McDuff SGR, Blitzblau RC. Optimizing Adjuvant Treatment Recommendations for Older Women with Biologically Favorable Breast Cancer: Short-Course Radiation or Long-Course Endocrine Therapy? Curr Oncol 2022; 30:392-400. [PMID: 36661681 PMCID: PMC9857309 DOI: 10.3390/curroncol30010032] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/14/2022] [Revised: 12/16/2022] [Accepted: 12/20/2022] [Indexed: 12/28/2022] Open
Abstract
Omission of radiotherapy among older women taking 5 years of adjuvant endocrine therapy following breast conserving surgery for early-stage, hormone sensitive breast cancers is well-studied. However, endocrine therapy toxicities are significant, and many women have difficulty tolerating endocrine therapy, particularly elderly patients with comorbidities. Omission of endocrine therapy among women receiving adjuvant radiation is less well-studied, but available randomized and non-randomized data suggest that this approach may confer equivalent local control and survival for select patients. Herein we review available randomized and non-randomized outcome data for women treated with radiation monotherapy and emphasize the need for future prospective, randomized studies of endocrine therapy omission.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Susan G. R. McDuff
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Duke Cancer Center, Durham, NC 27710, USA
| | | |
Collapse
|
43
|
Purswani JM, Hardy-Abeloos C, Perez CA, Kwa MJ, Chadha M, Gerber NK. Radiation in Early-Stage Breast Cancer: Moving beyond an All or Nothing Approach. Curr Oncol 2022; 30:184-195. [PMID: 36661664 PMCID: PMC9858412 DOI: 10.3390/curroncol30010015] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/15/2022] [Revised: 12/12/2022] [Accepted: 12/20/2022] [Indexed: 12/24/2022] Open
Abstract
Radiotherapy omission is increasingly considered for selected patients with early-stage breast cancer. However, with emerging data on the safety and efficacy of radiotherapy de-escalation with partial breast irradiation and accelerated treatment regimens for low-risk breast cancer, it is necessary to move beyond an all-or-nothing approach. Here, we review existing data for radiotherapy omission, including the use of age, tumor subtype, and multigene profiling assays for selecting low-risk patients for whom omission is a reasonable strategy. We review data for de-escalated radiotherapy, including partial breast irradiation and acceleration of treatment time, emphasizing these regimens' decreasing biological and financial toxicities. Lastly, we review evidence of omission of endocrine therapy. We emphasize ongoing research to define patient selection, treatment delivery, and toxicity outcomes for de-escalated adjuvant therapies better and highlight future directions.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Juhi M. Purswani
- Department of Radiation Oncology, NYU Grossman School of Medicine, New York, NY 10016, USA
| | - Camille Hardy-Abeloos
- Department of Radiation Oncology, NYU Grossman School of Medicine, New York, NY 10016, USA
| | - Carmen A. Perez
- Department of Radiation Oncology, NYU Grossman School of Medicine, New York, NY 10016, USA
| | - Maryann J. Kwa
- Department of Medical Oncology, NYU Grossman School of Medicine, New York, NY 10016, USA
| | - Manjeet Chadha
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY 10029, USA
| | - Naamit K. Gerber
- Department of Radiation Oncology, NYU Grossman School of Medicine, New York, NY 10016, USA
| |
Collapse
|
44
|
Naoum GE, Taghian AG. Endocrine Treatment for 5 Years or Radiation for 5 Days for Patients With Early Breast Cancer Older Than 65 Years: Can We Do It Right? J Clin Oncol 2022; 41:2331-2336. [PMID: 36538740 DOI: 10.1200/jco.22.02171] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/24/2022] Open
Affiliation(s)
- George E. Naoum
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Northwestern University Memorial Hospital, Chicago, IL
| | - Alphonse G. Taghian
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA
| |
Collapse
|
45
|
Gail MH, Jatoi I. Tools for Contralateral Prophylactic Mastectomy Decision Making. J Clin Oncol 2022; 40:3653-3659. [PMID: 35759730 PMCID: PMC9622574 DOI: 10.1200/jco.21.02782] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/01/2021] [Revised: 03/25/2022] [Accepted: 05/24/2022] [Indexed: 01/08/2023] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE Women with unilateral breast cancer are increasingly opting for the removal of not only the involved breast, but also for the removal of the opposite uninvolved breast (contralateral prophylactic mastectomy [CPM]), although the risk of contralateral breast cancer (CBC) has decreased in recent years. Models to predict the absolute risk of CBC can help a woman decide whether to undergo CPM. Our objective is to illustrate that a better decision can be made if the patient and doctor also have estimates of the absolute risks of regional and distant recurrences and mortality from non-breast cancer causes. MATERIALS AND METHODS We based our analyses on two published models for CBC and published information on the hazards of regional and distant recurrences and non-breast cancer mortality. Assuming that CPM eliminates CBC but has no effect on other events, we calculated how much CPM reduces a woman's CBC risk and total risk from all these events for 10 hypothetical women with various subtypes of breast cancer and risk factors. RESULTS The risk of CBC and total risk vary greatly, depending on the breast cancer subtype. In some cases, a decision for or against CPM can be based on CBC risk alone, but in others, additional consideration of total risk may cause a woman to decline CPM. CONCLUSION There is a potential to develop more informative tools for deciding on CPM. Realizing this potential will require more and better data to validate existing models of absolute CBC risk and to characterize the hazards of regional and distant recurrences and deaths from non-breast cancer causes for women with various subtypes of breast cancers and risk factors.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Mitchell H. Gail
- Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, Rockville, MD
| | - Ismail Jatoi
- Division of Surgical Oncology and Endocrine Surgery, University of Texas Health, San Antonio, TX
| |
Collapse
|
46
|
Shen K, Yao L, Zhu J, Gu X, Wang J, Qian W, Zheng Z, Fu D, Wu S. Impact of adjuvant chemotherapy on T1N0M0 breast cancer patients: a propensity score matching study based on SEER database and external cohort. BMC Cancer 2022; 22:863. [PMID: 35941565 PMCID: PMC9358893 DOI: 10.1186/s12885-022-09952-z] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/06/2021] [Accepted: 07/25/2022] [Indexed: 12/05/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND There is no clear consensus on the benefits of adjuvant chemotherapy for tumor-node-metastasis (TNM) stage T1 (T1N0M0) breast cancer (BC). Our study investigated the effects of adjuvant chemotherapy on T1N0M0 BC patients. METHODS Seventy-five thousand one hundred thirty-nine patients diagnosed with T1N0M0 BC were selected from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database. Multivariate Cox analyses were performed to investigate the effects of adjuvant chemotherapy on T1a, T1b, and T1cN0M0 BC, including various tumor grades, and four molecular subtypes. Propensity score matching (PSM) was used to eliminate confounding factors and further compare the results between adjuvant chemotherapy and no adjuvant chemotherapy. Additionally, 545 T1N0M0 BC patients treated at the Northern Jiangsu People's Hospital were included as an independent external validation cohort. Univariate and multivariate Cox analyses were used to confirm the effects of adjuvant chemotherapy in T1a, T1b, and T1cN0M0 BC. Survival curves for the different tumor grades and molecular subtypes were plotted using the Kaplan-Meier method. RESULTS Adjuvant chemotherapy demonstrated a statistically significant improvement in overall survival (OS) in T1b and T1c BC, but not in T1a BC. Within T1b BC, adjuvant chemotherapy was found to have effects on grade III, and hormone receptor + (HoR +)/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 + (HER2 +), HoR-/HER2 + , and HoR-/HER2- molecular subtypes, respectively. Adjuvant chemotherapy was beneficial to OS for grade II/III and T1c BC. Identical results were obtained after PSM. We also obtained similar results with external validation cohort, except that adjuvant chemotherapy made a difference in grade II and T1b BC of the external validation dataset. CONCLUSIONS Partial T1N0M0 BC patients with grade III T1bN0M0, patients with tumor grade II and III T1cN0M0, and excluding those with HoR + /HER2- subtype tumors, could obtain OS benefits from adjuvant chemotherapy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kaiwen Shen
- Department of General Surgery, Traditional Chinese Medicine Hospital of Kunshan, Suzhou, 215000, Jiangsu, China
| | - Longdi Yao
- Department of General Surgery, Changxing Hospital of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Huzhou, 313100, Zhejiang, China
| | - Jingyuan Zhu
- Department of General Surgery, Traditional Chinese Medicine Hospital of Kunshan, Suzhou, 215000, Jiangsu, China
| | - Ximing Gu
- Department of General Surgery, Traditional Chinese Medicine Hospital of Kunshan, Suzhou, 215000, Jiangsu, China
| | - Jie Wang
- Department of General Surgery, Traditional Chinese Medicine Hospital of Kunshan, Suzhou, 215000, Jiangsu, China
| | - Wei Qian
- Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing, 211166, Jiangsu, China
| | - Zhijian Zheng
- Department of General Surgery, The First People's Hospital of Wenling, Wenling, 317500, Zhejiang, China
| | - Deyuan Fu
- Department of Thyroid and Breast Surgery, Northern Jiangsu People's Hospital, Yangzhou University Medical Academy, Guangling District, Nantong Xi Road, Yangzhou, 225001, Jiangsu, China.
| | - Song Wu
- Department of Thyroid and Breast Surgery, The First People's Hospital of Wenling, Chuanan Nan Road, Chengxi Street, Wenling, 317500, Zhejiang, China.
| |
Collapse
|
47
|
Matar R, Sevilimedu V, Gemignani ML, Morrow M. Impact of Endocrine Therapy Adherence on Outcomes in Elderly Women with Early-Stage Breast Cancer Undergoing Lumpectomy Without Radiotherapy. Ann Surg Oncol 2022; 29:4753-4760. [PMID: 35461424 PMCID: PMC10208089 DOI: 10.1245/s10434-022-11728-5] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/02/2022] [Accepted: 03/21/2022] [Indexed: 02/05/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND National Comprehensive Center Network guidelines recommend radiotherapy (RT) omission in women age ≥ 70 years with estrogen receptor-positive (ER+), cN0, T1 tumors post-lumpectomy if they receive endocrine therapy (ET). However, little is known about the impact of poor adherence on locoregional recurrence (LRR) in elderly women forgoing RT. METHODS Women age ≥ 70 years with pT1-2 ER+ breast cancer undergoing lumpectomy without RT from 2004 to 2019 were identified from a prospectively maintained database. ET adherence, calculated as treatment duration over follow-up time up to 5 years, was determined by chart review. We compared clinicopathologic characteristics and rates of LRR between women with high adherence (≥ 80%), low adherence (< 80%), and no ET. RESULTS Of 968 women (27 bilateral cancers), adherence was high in 676 (70%) and low in 162 (17%); 130 (13%) took no ET. Younger age and use of aromatase inhibitor were associated with high adherence. On multivariable analysis, tumor size (hazard ratio [HR] 1.67, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.03-2.68, p = 0.04) and high adherence (HR 0.13, 95% CI 0.07-0.26, p < 0.001) were significantly associated with LRR. At 53 months median follow-up, the 5-year rate of LRR was 3.1% (95% CI 2.4-3.9%) with high adherence, 14.7% (95% CI 11.7-17.7%) with low adherence, and 17.9% (95% CI 13.9-21.8%) with no ET (p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS Although adherence to ET was high overall, in the 30% of women with low adherence or no ET, LRR rates were significantly increased. Counseling regarding the distinct toxicities of ET and RT can help patients choose the therapy to which they will likely adhere to.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Regina Matar
- Breast Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Varadan Sevilimedu
- Biostatistics Service, Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Mary L Gemignani
- Breast Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Monica Morrow
- Breast Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
48
|
Klimberg VS. Keynote Address at the ASBrS 2022 Annual Meeting Low-Risk Breast Cancer: When Is Local Therapy Enough? Ann Surg Oncol 2022; 29:6094-6098. [PMID: 35907998 DOI: 10.1245/s10434-022-12125-8] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/22/2022] [Accepted: 04/27/2022] [Indexed: 11/18/2022]
Abstract
Surgery, radiation, and chemotherapy have all been used to de-escalate the treatment of breast cancer patients. Despite its impact on local recurrence, systemic endocrine therapy (ET) has yet to be de-escalated, even though it has substantial adverse effects and a lower quality of life (QoL) over 5-10 years. The 21-gene recurrence score (RS) and MammaPrint have been used to identify subgroups of younger patients whose long-term survival is unaffected by adjuvant ET. Local treatment only, with de-escalation of long-term systemic ET for patients aged 50-69 with RS < 11, appears not to impact OS and should have an anticipated improvement in QoL.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- V Suzanne Klimberg
- Department of Surgery, University of Texas Medical Branch, Galveston, TX, USA. .,MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
49
|
Tailoring the Omission of Radiotherapy for Early-Stage Breast Cancer Based on Tumor Biology. Semin Radiat Oncol 2022; 32:198-206. [DOI: 10.1016/j.semradonc.2022.01.006] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/23/2022]
|
50
|
Harbeck N, Burstein HJ, Hurvitz SA, Johnston S, Vidal GA. A look at current and potential treatment approaches for hormone receptor-positive, HER2-negative early breast cancer. Cancer 2022; 128 Suppl 11:2209-2223. [PMID: 35536015 DOI: 10.1002/cncr.34161] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/13/2021] [Revised: 01/31/2022] [Accepted: 02/03/2022] [Indexed: 11/10/2022]
Abstract
The heterogeneity of hormone receptor (HR)-positive, HER2-negative early breast cancers reinforces the importance of individualized, risk-adapted treatment approaches. Numerous factors contribute to the risk for recurrence, including clinical tumor features, individual biomarkers, and genomic risk. Current standard approaches for patients with HR-positive, HER2-negative, early stage disease focus on endocrine therapy and chemotherapy. The specific treatment regimen and duration of adjuvant therapy should be selected based on accurate risk assessment, tolerability of available therapies, and consideration for patient preferences. For patients with high-risk features, such as highly proliferative tumors, large tumor size, and significant nodal involvement, the risk for recurrence remains clinically significant despite appropriate adjuvant treatment with current standards of care. This has driven investigation into novel treatment approaches, including the addition of cyclin-dependent kinase 4 and 6 inhibitors to adjuvant endocrine therapy. Cyclin-dependent kinase 4 and 6 inhibition has demonstrated significant efficacy in patients with high-risk, HR-positive, HER2-negative, nonmetastatic breast cancer and now offers a new strategy to greatly improve outcomes in this difficult to treat patient population.; LAY SUMMARY: Hormone receptor (HR)-positive, HER2-negative early breast cancers are highly diverse and need to be managed differently for individual patients. The use of adjuvant endocrine therapy and chemotherapy should be driven by a patient's risk for recurrence, preferences, and risk for side effects. Patients with high-risk tumors have a persistently elevated risk for recurrence despite current standards of care. Emerging cyclin-dependent kinase 4 and 6 inhibitors are highly effective when added to endocrine therapy in high-risk, HR-positive early breast cancer and have the potential to improve patient outcomes in this difficult to treat patient population.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Nadia Harbeck
- Breast Center, Department of Obstetrics & Gynecology and CCCMunich, LMU University Hospital, Munich, Germany
| | - Harold J Burstein
- Dana Farber Cancer Institute, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Sara A Hurvitz
- Breast Cancer Clinical Research Program, Division of Hematology/Oncology, David Geffen School of Medicine at the University of California Los Angeles (UCLA), Los Angeles, California.,Santa Monica-UCLA Outpatient Hematology/Oncology Practice, Santa Monica, California
| | - Stephen Johnston
- The Institute of Cancer Research, The Royal Marsden National Health Service Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom
| | - Gregory A Vidal
- Clinical Research, Division of Breast Cancer, West Cancer Center and Research Institute, Memphis, Tennessee.,Department of Hematology/Oncology, The University of Tennessee Health Science Center, Memphis, Tennessee
| |
Collapse
|