Health-related quality of life after breast-conserving surgery and intraoperative radiotherapy for breast cancer using low-kilovoltage X-rays

Intraoperative Radiotherapy as a Tumour-Bed Boost Combined with Whole Breast Irradiation Versus Conventional Radiotherapy in Patients with Early-Stage Breast Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

There is no definitive answer regarding the efficacy of intraoperative radiotherapy (IORT) as a tumour bed boost for patients with early-stage breast cancer. The purpose of this meta-analysis was to summarise the available evidence and explore the efficacy and safety of IORT combined with whole breast irradiation (WBI) versus conventional radiotherapy in women with early-stage breast cancer who underwent breast-conserving surgery.

METHODS

The PUBMED, MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library databases were searched from inception to December 31, 2022. We collected studies on the efficacy, cosmetic outcome, and safety of IORT boost combined with WBI compared with those of conventional radiotherapy in patients with early-stage breast cancer after breast-conserving surgery. Two authors independently performed the literature selection and data extraction. The quality of the randomised, controlled trials (RCTs) was assessed according to the PEDro scale. The quality of non-RCTs was assessed according to the Methodological Index for Non-Randomised Studies. Risk ratios (RRs) for the local recurrence rate (LRR), distant metastasis rate (DMR), disease-free survival (DFS), cosmetic outcome, and toxicity were pooled using fixed or random effects models. Meta-analysis of the included studies was performed by using RevMan 5.3 software.

RESULTS

Nine studies, including one RCT and eight non-RCTs, with a total of 3219 patients were included. In terms of LRR, there was no significant benefit of IORT boost+WBI over conventional radiotherapy (with or without the tumour bed boost) (RR = 0.77, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.54-1.09, P = 0.14), but a trend towards benefit could be identified. There was a significant reduction in DMR in the IORT boost+WBI group (RR = 0.63, 95% CI: 0.46-0.85, P = 0.003) and a significant improvement in DFS (RR = 0.40, 95% CI: 0.25-0.65, P = 0.0002). Exploratory subgroup analysis showed that the DMR and DFS of the electron boost group were significantly better than those of conventional radiotherapy group, and there was a tendency for LRR to improve in the electron boost group. However, the LRR, DMR, and DFS did not effectively improve in the x-ray boost group. In terms of appearance and toxicity, there were no significant differences in cosmetic outcome, fibrosis, and hyperpigmentation between the two groups (RR = 0.99, 95% CI: 0.91-1.07, P = 0.78; RR = 1.02, 95% CI: 0.41-2.56, P = 0.96; RR = 0.42, 95% CI: 0.10-1.72, P = 0.23), but the incidence of oedema was significantly reduced in the IORT boost+WBI group (RR = 0.27, 95% CI: 0.13-0.59, P = 0.0009).

CONCLUSIONS

IORT boost+WBI is more effective than conventional radiotherapy after breast-conserving surgery in patients with early-stage breast cancer, and electron boost exhibits better efficacy than x-ray boost. In addition, the cosmetic and safety profiles of IORT boost+WBI are not inferior to those of conventional radiotherapy.

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

Purpose

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

Materials/Methods

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

Results

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

Conclusion

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

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

OBJECTIVES

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE

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

Intraoperative Radiotherapy Is Not a Better Alternative to Whole Breast Radiotherapy as a Therapeutic Option for Early-Stage Breast Cancer

Objective

Intraoperative radiotherapy (IORT) in early-stage breast cancer has been studied over the years. However, it has not been demonstrated whether IORT is more suitable as a therapeutic option for early-stage breast cancer than whole breast radiotherapy (WBRT). Therefore, we performed a meta-analysis to compare the efficacy and safety of IORT to those of WBRT as therapeutic options for early-stage breast cancer patients receiving breast-conserving surgery (INPLASY2020120008).

Methods

PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases were searched from inception to October 2021. Computerized and manual searches were adopted to identify eligible randomized control trials from online databases. Risk ratio (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated by random-effect models to assess the relative risk. Potential publication bias was quantified by Begg’s and Egger’s tests.

Results

Based on our inclusion criteria, 10 randomized control trials involving 5,698 patients were included in this meta-analysis. This meta-analysis showed that the IORT group was associated with a higher local recurrence risk (RR = 2.111, 95% CI, 1.130–3.943, p = 0.0191), especially in the long-term follow-up subgroup or published after 2020 subgroup or Caucasian subgroup (RR = 2.404, 95% CI, 1.183–4.885, p = 0.0154). Subgroup analysis showed that the IORT group had a higher recurrence risk than the WBRT group in the polycentric randomized controlled trial subgroup (RR = 1.213, 95% CI, 1.030–1.428, p = 0.0204). Pooled analysis showed that there was no statistically significant difference in overall survival, recurrence-free survival, distant metastasis-free survival, and cancer-specific survival between IORT and WBRT groups. Additionally, the risk of skin toxicity was reduced, but the incidences of fat toxicity, edema, and scar calcification were significantly increased in the patients who underwent IORT in comparison to those who underwent WBRT.

Conclusion

This meta-analysis revealed that IORT was not a better alternative to WBRT. More large-scale and well-designed clinical trials with longer follow-up periods are encouraged to further investigate the value of IORT.

Systematic Review Registration

https://inplasy.com/inplasy-2020-12-0008/.

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

Introduction

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

Methods

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

Results

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

Conclusions

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

Health-related quality of life of early-stage breast cancer patients after different radiotherapy regimens

Purpose

To evaluate and compare health-related quality of life (HRQL) of women with early-stage breast cancer (BC) treated with different radiotherapy (RT) regimens.

Methods

Data were collected from five prospective cohorts of BC patients treated with breast-conserving surgery and different RT regimens: intraoperative RT (IORT, 1 × 23.3 Gy; n = 267), external beam accelerated partial breast irradiation (EB-APBI, 10 × 3.85 Gy; n = 206), hypofractionated whole breast irradiation(hypo-WBI, 16 × 2.67 Gy; n = 375), hypo-WBI + boost(hypo-WBI-B, 21–26 × 2.67 Gy; n = 189), and simultaneous WBI + boost(WBI-B, 28 × 2.3 Gy; n = 475).

Women ≥ 60 years with invasive/in situ carcinoma ≤ 30 mm, cN0 and pN0-1a were included. Validated EORTC QLQ-C30/BR23 questionnaires were used to asses HRQL. Multivariable linear regression models adjusted for confounding (age, comorbidity, pT, locoregional treatment, systemic therapy) were used to compare the impact of the RT regimens on HRQL at 12 and 24 months. Differences in HRQL over time (3–24 months) were evaluated using linear mixed models.

Results

There were no significant differences in HRQL at 12 months between groups except for breast symptoms which were better after IORT and EB-APBI compared to hypo-WBI at 12 months (p < 0.001). Over time, breast symptoms, fatigue, global health status and role functioning were significantly better after IORT and EB-APBI than hypo-WBI. At 24 months, HRQL was comparable in all groups.

Conclusion

In women with early-stage breast cancer, the radiotherapy regimen did not substantially influence long-term HRQL with the exception of breast symptoms. Breast symptoms are more common after WBI than after IORT or EB-APBI and improve slowly until no significant difference remains at 2 years posttreatment.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s10549-021-06314-4.

Intraoperative Radiotherapy for Breast Cancer in Elderly Women

PURPOSE

To evaluate outcomes and postoperative toxicities after intraoperative radiotherapy (IORT) in elderly women.

POPULATION

Women older than 65 years, with infiltrating ductal breast cancer ≤3 cm, expressing estrogen receptor (ER+) without Her2 overexpression, and with negative axillary nodes.

TREATMENT

Treatment consisted of partial mastectomy with a sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) procedure; in case of positive SLNB, IORT was cancelled. IORT consisted in a total dose of 20 Gy in 1 fraction delivered at the surface of the applicator with the Intrabeam® technique.

RESULTS

IORT was planned to be administered to a total of 225 patients but was cancelled for 34 patients during surgery. Thus 191 patients were analyzed; mean age was 76 years, with 57 patients (30%) >80 years. Despite inclusion criteria, 15 had lobular carcinoma and 7 were triple negative. With a median follow-up of 40 months, we observed only 1 local recurrence, located in the skin over the initial tumor. The 5-year local relapse rate was 1.7%. A wound healing delay (>15 days) was observed in 21 patients (11%). Sixty-six patients (35%) had postoperative complications, mainly grade 2, resolving within a few days. Two patients needed surgical drainage for local abscesses. Long-term (>1 year) cosmetic outcome was evaluated in 120 patients and was judged excellent or good in 102 (91%).

CONCLUSION

IORT can be safely given to elderly women, with a good local control rate and without major toxicities.

The Role of Intraoperative Radiation in Early-stage Breast Cancer

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

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

PURPOSE

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

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

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

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

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

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

Intraoperative Radiotherapy for Breast Cancer

Intraoperative radiotherapy (IORT) for early stage breast cancer is a technique for partial breast irradiation. There are several technologies in clinical use to perform breast IORT. Regardless of technique, IORT generally refers to the delivery of a single dose of radiation to the periphery of the tumor bed in the immediate intraoperative time frame, although some protocols have performed IORT as a second procedure. There are two large prospective randomized trials establishing the safety and efficacy of breast IORT in early stage breast cancer patients with sufficient follow-up time on thousands of women. The advantages of IORT for partial breast irradiation include: direct visualization of the target tissue ensuring treatment of the high-risk tissue and eliminating the risk of marginal miss; the use of a single dose coordinated with the necessary surgical excision thereby reducing omission of radiation and the selection of mastectomy for women without access to a radiotherapy facility or unable to undergo several weeks of daily radiation; favorable toxicity profiles; patient convenience and cost savings; radiobiological and tumor microenvironment conditions which lead to enhanced tumor control. The main disadvantage of IORT is the lack of final pathologic information on the tumor size, histology, margins, and nodal status. When unexpected findings on final pathology such as positive margins or positive sentinel nodes predict a higher risk of local or regional recurrence, additional whole breast radiation may be indicated, thereby reducing some of the convenience and low-toxicity advantages of sole IORT. However, IORT as a tumor bed boost has also been studied and appears to be safe with acceptable toxicity. IORT has potential efficacy advantages related to overall survival related to reduced cardiopulmonary radiation doses. It may also be very useful in specific situations, such as prior to oncoplastic reconstruction to improve accuracy of adjuvant radiation delivery, or when used as a boost in higher risk patients to improve tumor control. Ongoing international clinical trials are studying these uses and follow-up data are accumulating on completed studies.

Intraoperative Radiation for Breast Cancer with Intrabeam™: Factors Associated with Decreased Operative Times in Patients Having IORT for Breast Cancer

Introduction

Intraoperative radiation with Intrabeam™ (IORT) for breast cancer is a newer technology recently implemented into the operating room (OR). This procedure requires time and coordination between the surgeon and radiation oncologist, who both perform their treatments in a single operative setting. We evaluated the surgeons at our center, who perform IORT and their OR times to examine changes in OR times following implementation of this new surgical procedure. We hypothesized that IORT is a technique for which timing could be improved with the increasing number of cases performed.

Methods

A prospectively maintained IRB approved database was queried for OR times (incision and close) in patients who underwent breast conserving surgery (BCS), sentinel lymph node biopsy with and without IORT using the Intrabeam™ system at our institution from 2011 to 2015. The total OR times were compared for each surgeon individually and over time. Next, the OR times of each surgeon were compared to each other. Continuous variables were summarized and then a prediction model was created using IORT time, OR time, surgeon, and number of cases performed.

Results

There were five surgeons performing IORT at our institution during this time period with a total of 96 cases performed. There was a significant difference observed in baseline surgeon-specific OR time for BSC (p = 0.03) as well as for BCS with IORT (p < 0.05), attributable to surgeon experience. The average BCS times were faster than the BCS plus IORT procedure times for all surgeons. The overall mean OR time for the entire combined surgical and radiation procedure was 135.5 min. The most common applicator sizes used were the 3.5 and 4 cm, yielding an average 21 min IORT time. Applicator choice did not differ over time (p = 0.189). After adjusting for IORT time and surgeon, the prediction model estimated that surgeons decreased the total BCS plus IORT OR time at a rate of −4.5 min per each additional 10 cases performed.

Conclusion

Surgeon experience and applicator size are related to OR times for performing IORT for breast cancer. OR time for IORT in breast cancer treatment can be improved over time, even among experienced surgeons.

A multi-institutional analysis of intraoperative radiotherapy for early breast cancer: Does age matter?

BACKGROUND

Single-session intraoperative radiation therapy (IORT) minimizes treatment demands associated with traditional whole breast radiation therapy (WBRT) but outcomes on local disease control and morbidity among the elderly is limited.

METHODS

A multi-institutional retrospective registry was established from 19 centers utilizing IORT from 2007 to 2013. Patient, tumor, and treatment variables were analyzed for ages <70 and ≥70.

RESULTS

We evaluated 686 patients (<70 = 424; ≥70 = 262) who were margin and lymph node negative. Patients <70 were more likely to have longer operative time, oncoplastic closure, higher rates of IORT used as planned boost, and receive chemotherapy and post-operative WBRT. Wound complication rates were low and not significantly different between age groups. Median follow-up was 1.06 (range 0.51-1.9) years for < 70 and 1.01 (range 0.5-1.68) years for ≥ 70. There were 5 (0.73%) breast recurrences (4 in <70 and 1 ≥ 70, p = 0.65) and no axillary recurrences during follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

IORT was associated with a low rate of wound complication and local recurrence on short-term follow-up in this cohort.

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

PURPOSE

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

METHODS AND MATERIALS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

Is current clinical practice modified about intraoperative breast irradiation?

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

Intraoperative radiotherapy for breast cancer: the lasting effects of a fleeting treatment

In well-selected patients who choose to pursue breast conservation therapy (BCT) for early-stage breast cancer, partial breast irradiation (PBI) delivered externally or intraoperatively, may be a viable alternative to conventional whole breast irradiation. Two large, contemporary randomized trials have demonstrated breast intraoperative radiotherapy (IORT) to be noninferior to whole breast external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) when assessing for ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence in select patients. Additionally, IORT and other PBI techniques are likely to be more widely adopted in the future because they improve patient convenience by offering an accelerated course of treatment. Coupled with these novel techniques for breast radiotherapy (RT) are distinct toxicity profiles and unique cosmetic alterations that differ from conventional breast EBRT and have the potential to impact disease surveillance and patient satisfaction. This paper will review the level-one evidence for treatment efficacy as well as important secondary endpoints like RT toxicity, breast cosmesis, quality of life, patient satisfaction, and surveillance mammography following BCT with IORT.

A cohort analysis to identify eligible patients for intraoperative radiotherapy (IORT) of early breast cancer

BACKGROUND

Since the results from the randomized TARGIT A trial were published, intraoperative radiotherapy (IORT) is used more often. IORT can be provided as accelerated partial breast irradiation (APBI) or as a boost. The definition of suitable patients for IORT as APBI differs between different national societies (e.g. ESTRO and ASTRO) and different inclusion criteria of trials and so does the eligibility of patients. This analysis identifies eligible patients for IORT according to available consensus statements and inclusion criteria of the ongoing TARGIT trials.

METHODS

Between 01/03 - 12/09, 1505 breast cancer cases were treated at the breast cancer center at the University Medical Center Mannheim. Complete data sets for age, stage (T, N, and M), histology and hormone receptor status were available in 1108 cases. Parameters to identify eligible patients are as follows: ESTRO: >50 years, invasive ductal carcinoma/other favorable histology (IDC), T1-2 (≤3 cm), N0, any hormone receptor status, M0; ASTRO: ≥60 years, IDC, T1, N0, positive estrogen hormone receptor status, M0; TARGIT E "elderly", risk adapted radiotherapy with IORT followed by external beam radiotherapy in case of risk factors in final histopathology, phase II: ≥70 years, IDC, T1, N0, any hormone receptor status, M0; TARGIT C "consolidation", risk adapted radiotherapy, phase IV: ≥50 years, IDC, T1, N0, positive hormone receptor status, M0; TARGIT BQR "boost quality registry": every age, every histology, T1-2 (max. 3.5 cm), any hormone receptor status, N0/+, M0/+.

RESULTS

Out of the 1108 cases, 379 cases (34.2%) were suitable for IORT as APBI regarding the ESTRO and 175 (15.8%) regarding the ASTRO consensus statements. 82 (7.4%) patients were eligible for the TARGIT E trial, 258 (23.3%) for the TARGIT C trial and 671 (60.6%) for the TARGIT BQR registry. According to the consensus statements of ASTRO (45.1%) and ESTRO (41.4%) about half of the eligible patients were treated with IORT as APBI. From the eligible patients fulfilling the criteria for IORT boost (35%) about one third was eventually treated.

CONCLUSIONS

Patient selection for IORT should be restrictive. For IORT as APBI the TARGIT trials are even more restrictive including patients than the ESTRO and ASTRO consensus statements.

Prospective study of local control and late radiation toxicity after intraoperative radiation therapy boost for early breast cancer

PURPOSE

To report the local recurrence rate and late toxicity of intraoperative radiation therapy (IORT) boost to the tumor bed using the Intrabeam System followed by external-beam whole-breast irradiation (WBI) in women with early-stage breast cancer in a prospective single-institution study.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Women with breast cancer≤3 cm were recruited between February 2003 and May 2005. After breast-conserving surgery, a single dose of 5 Gy IORT boost was delivered using 50-kV x-rays to a depth of 10 mm from the applicator surface. This was followed by WBI to a total dose of 50 Gy in 25 fractions. Patients were reviewed at regular, predefined intervals. Late toxicities were recorded using the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group/European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Late Radiation Morbidity Scoring systems.

RESULTS

Fifty-five patients completed both IORT boost and external-beam WBI. Median follow-up was 3.3 years (range, 1.4-4.1 years). There was no reported locoregional recurrence or death. One patient developed distant metastases. Grade 2 and 3 subcutaneous fibrosis was detected in 29 (53%) and 8 patients (15%), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of IORT as a tumor bed boost using kV x-rays in breast-conserving therapy was associated with good local control but a clinically significant rate of grade 2 and 3 subcutaneous fibrosis.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of intraoperative radiation therapy for early-stage breast cancer

BACKGROUND

Shortened courses of radiation therapy have been shown to be similarly effective to whole-breast external-beam radiation therapy (WB-EBRT) in terms of local control. We sought to analyze, from a societal perspective, the cost-effectiveness of two radiation strategies for early-stage invasive breast cancer: single-dose intraoperative radiation therapy (IORT) and the standard 6-week course of WB-EBRT.

METHODS

We developed a Markov decision-analytic model to evaluate these treatment strategies in terms of life expectancy, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), costs, and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio over 10 years.

RESULTS

IORT single-dose intraoperative radiation therapy was the dominant, more cost-effective strategy, providing greater quality-adjusted life years at a decreased cost compared with 6-week WB-EBRT. The model was sensitive to health state utilities and recurrence rates, but not costs. IORT was either the preferred or dominant strategy across all sensitivity analyses. The two-way sensitivity analyses demonstrate the need to accurately determine utility values for the two forms of radiation treatment and to avoid indiscriminate use of IORT.

CONCLUSIONS

With less cost and greater QALYs than WB-EBRT, IORT is the more valuable strategy. IORT offers a unique example of new technology that is less costly than the current standard of care option but offers similar efficacy. Even when considering the capital investment for the equipment ($425 K, low when compared with the investments required for robotic surgery or high-dose-rate brachytherapy), which could be recouped after 3-4 years conservatively, these results support IORT as a change in practice for treating early-stage invasive breast cancer.

Clinical aspects of intraoperative radiotherapy in early breast cancer: short-term complications after IORT in women treated with low energy x-rays

Background

To assess postoperative complications, clinical outcome and histological findings in patients undergoing intraoperative radiotherapy with low energy x-rays for early breast cancer.

Methods

We retrospectively analysed data of 208 women who underwent intraoperative irradiation during breast conserving surgery (BCS) between 2002 and 2007. Demographic, clinical and surgical parameters as well as short-term complications within the first postoperative week and histological findings were evaluated. Toxicities were assessed using the CTC/EORTC Score.

Results

Postoperative complications were rare and the immediate toxicity low, without any grade 3/4 acute toxicity. The most frequent postoperative side effects were suggillation (24%) and palpable seroma (17.3%). In 78.6% of the axillary seroma and in 25% of the breast seroma a needle aspiration was inevitable. Erythema grade I-II of the breast was found in 27 women (13%); whereas in 7 patients (3.4%), mastitis was confirmed. In 57.7% of the cases, the pathological assessment revealed ductal invasive breast cancer and tumour size ranged between 0.1 and 4.5 cm (mean = 1.6 cm).

Conclusion

IORT using Intrabeam^® during BCS is safe, although it is associated with postoperative adverse events such as seroma. These should be mentioned and explained to women in detail during the preoperative discussion. This explicitly clinical description is useful for daily clinical practice; especially for giving a detailed analysis of the postoperative side effects during preoperative counselling.

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

BACKGROUND

Intraoperative radiotherapy (IORT) is a new treatment approach for early stage breast cancer. This study reports on the effects of IORT on radiation-related quality of life (QoL) parameters.

METHODS

Two hundred and thirty women with stage I-III breast cancer (age, 31 to 84 years) were entered into the study. A single-center subgroup of 87 women from the two arms of the randomized phase III trial TARGIT-A (TARGeted Intra-operative radioTherapy versus whole breast radiotherapy for breast cancer) was analyzed. Furthermore, results were compared to non-randomized control groups: n = 90 receiving IORT as a tumor bed boost followed by external beam whole breast radiotherapy (EBRT) outside of TARGIT-A (IORT-boost), and n = 53 treated with EBRT followed by an external-beam boost (EBRT-boost). QoL was collected using the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaires C30 (QLQ-C30) and BR23 (QLQ-BR23). The mean follow-up period in the TARGIT-A groups was 32 versus 39 months in the non-randomized control groups.

RESULTS

Patients receiving IORT alone reported less general pain (21.3 points), breast (7.0 points) and arm (15.1 points) symptoms, and better role functioning (78.7 points) as patients receiving EBRT (40.9; 19.0; 32.8; and 60.5 points, respectively, P < 0.01). Patients receiving IORT alone also had fewer breast symptoms than TARGIT-A patients receiving IORT followed by EBRT for high risk features on final pathology (IORT-EBRT; 7.0 versus 29.7 points, P < 0.01). There were no significant differences between TARGIT-A patients receiving IORT-EBRT compared to non-randomized IORT-boost or EBRT-boost patients and patients receiving EBRT without a boost.

CONCLUSIONS

In the randomized setting, important radiation-related QoL parameters after IORT were superior to EBRT. Non-randomized comparisons showed equivalent parameters in the IORT-EBRT group and the control groups.

Are mammographic changes in the tumor bed more pronounced after intraoperative radiotherapy for breast cancer? Subgroup analysis from a randomized trial (TARGIT-A)

Intraoperative radiotherapy (IORT) with low-energy x-rays is increasingly used in breast-conserving therapy (BCT). Previous non-randomized studies have observed mammographic changes in the tumor bed to be more pronounced after IORT. The purpose of this study was to reassess the postoperative changes in a randomized single-center subgroup of patients from a multicenter trial (TARGIT-A). In this subgroup (n = 48) 27 patients received BCT with IORT, 21 patients had BCT with standard whole-breast radiotherapy serving as controls. Overall 258 postoperative mammograms (median follow-up 4.3 years, range 3-8) were retrospectively evaluated by two radiologists in consensus focusing on changes in the tumor bed. Fat necroses showed to be significantly more frequent (56% versus 24%) and larger (8.7 versus 1.6 sq cm, median) after IORT than those in controls. Scar calcifications were also significantly more frequent after IORT (63% versus 19%). The high incidence of large fat necroses in our study confirms previous study findings. However, the overall higher incidence of calcifications in the tumor bed after IORT represents a new finding, requiring further attention.

Late radiation toxicity after intraoperative radiotherapy (IORT) for breast cancer: results from the randomized phase III trial TARGIT A

The randomized phase III trial TARGIT A showed non-inferiority regarding local control after intraoperative radiotherapy (IORT 20 Gy which was followed by whole breast radiotherapy (WBRT) in patients with risk factors only) in comparison to standard WBRT (50-56 Gy) after breast-conserving surgery in selected patients. This is the first analysis of long-term toxicities in the setting of TARGIT. Between 02/2002 and 12/2008, 305 patients were treated within TARGIT A (Arm A: n = 34 IORT, n = 20 IORT + WBRT for risk factors; Arm B WBRT: n = 55) or received IORT as a planned boost (control group: n = 196) at a single center. Toxicity was assessed according to the LENT SOMA scales. No significant differences were seen between Arm A and Arm B regarding fibrosis, breast edema, retraction, ulceration, lymphedema, hyperpigmentation, and pain. Arm A had significantly less telangiectases compared to Arm B (p = 0.049). In the subanalysis (Arm A IORT vs. Arm A IORT + WBRT vs. Arm B), fibrosis had a cumulative rate of 5.9 versus 37.5 versus 18.4 %, respectively (38.2 % IORT boost control group), at 3 years. No telangiectases were seen after IORT alone (0 % Arm A IORT vs. 17.5 % Arm A IORT + WBRT vs. 17.7 % Arm B). The hazard ratio of higher grade toxicity as first event was 0.46 (95 % CI, 0.26-0.83) for Arm A IORT as compared to Arm B (p = 0.010). No recurrences were seen after a median follow-up of 40 months (Arm A) and 42 months (Arm B). With its very low chronic skin toxicity rates and outstanding long-term results regarding toxicity and local control, IORT with 50 kV X-rays is a safe and effective method for treatment of selected breast cancer patients.

Intraoperative radiotherapy during breast-conserving surgery using a miniature x-ray generator (Intrabeam®): theoretical and experimental background and clinical experience

Breast cancer is currently the most frequent indication for intraoperative radiotherapy with increasing numbers worldwide. Intraoperative radiotherapy can be used as a tumor bed boost followed by whole breast radiotherapy, or as a distinct form of accelerated partial breast irradiation in selected patients. This article summarizes the theoretical background including pattern of recurrence and distribution of tumor cell foci in the breast and discusses the rationale for intraoperative radiotherapy, especially using a miniature x-ray generator (Intrabeam(®)). The concepts of how to avoid geographic and temporal miss by giving radiotherapy during surgery to the open wound cavity are described. Experimental and clinical experience is presented based on in vitro experiments and more than 300 treated patients in a single department with mature follow-up.

Estimated effects of potential interventions to prevent decreases in self-rated health among breast cancer survivors

PURPOSE

To estimate the effect of hypothetical changes in modifiable predictors on the incidence of fair-to-poor self-rated health (SRH) in breast cancer survivors.

METHODS

In 2007-2008, we interviewed 832 breast cancer survivors 1 year after diagnosis (baseline) and 1 year later. First, multivariable logistic regression models estimated the association between the predictors (sociodemographic factors, access to medical care, comorbid conditions, psychosocial factors, perceived neighborhood conditions, cancer-related behaviors, clinical factors) and SRH. Second, we estimated the probabilities of fair-to-poor SRH for values of the predictors for each breast cancer survivor. Third, we estimated the population-wide effect of potential changes in modifiable predictors on the incidence of fair-to-poor SRH.

RESULTS

A total of 7.6% of participants (92.4% white; mean age, 58.0 years) whose SRH was rated good-to-excellent at baseline reported fair-to-poor SRH 1 year later. The largest potential reduction in incidence of fair-to-poor SRH could be obtained by eliminating surgical side effects (27.8% reduction) and comorbidity (21.8% reduction) and by engaging in any physical activity (19.6% reduction).

CONCLUSIONS

A significant portion of the decline in SRH can be avoided by reducing surgical side effects, preventing comorbidity, and improving physical activity with the use of evidence-based strategies.