Global adoption of single-shot targeted intraoperative radiotherapy (TARGIT-IORT) for breast cancer—better for patients, better for healthcare systems

Real world clinical outcomes from targeted intraoperative radiotherapy (TARGIT-IORT) during lumpectomy for breast cancer: data from a large cohort at a national cancer institute

Introduction

Randomised evidence supports the use of partial breast irradiation (PBI) with targeted intraoperative radiotherapy (TARGIT-IORT) for early stage breast cancer, but prospective data from real-world adoption of this technique is also important. The aim of this study was to determine if the outcome reported in TARGIT-A trial could be replicated in large cohort of early stage breast cancer treated with TARGIT-IORT.

Methods

This prospective observational study analysed all patients treated with TARGIT-IORT between 2004 and 2021 in a single national cancer institute. TARGIT-IORT during lumpectomy was performed according to the risk-adapted TARGIT-A protocol using the Intrabeam® device. We analysed the completeness of follow up, 5-year in-breast-tumour-recurrence (IBTR), long term local recurrence free survival, distant disease-free survival, overall survival and breast-cancer-related survival, using the Kaplan-Meier method. A covariate analysis was performed to investigate risk factors for IBTR. We also analysed high grade toxicity events.

Results

The study included 814 patients and the a median follow up was 72 months. The majority of patients (60.3%) received TARGIT-IORT as PBI modality ("exclusive IORT" group); 39.7% received additional EBRT. There was no significant difference between the 5 years IBTR for the whole study population and the "exclusive IORT" cohort (1.6% (95%CI=1.1-2.1%) and 2.5% (95%CI=1.7%-3.3%) respectively). 5 years overall survival and tumour related survival were >95%. In 21% of patients with recurrence, breast was preserved. Radiotherapy toxicity (CTCAE Grade>2) was very rare (0.9%).

Conclusions

This large single institute study found that breast cancer control and survival outcomes with TARGIT-IORT were consistent with TARGIT-A trial results. This "real world" experience confirmed that the randomised evidence showing the value of TARGIT-IORT as partial breast irradiation modality that can be replicated in routine clinical practice.

Sustainability in radiation oncology: opportunities for enhancing patient care and reducing CO2 emissions in breast cancer radiotherapy at selected German centers

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Radiotherapy often entails a substantial travel burden for patients accessing radiation oncology centers. The total travel distance for such treatments is primarily influenced by two factors: fractionation schedules and the distances traveled. Specific data on these aspects are not well documented in Germany. This study aims to quantify the travel distances for routine breast cancer patients of five radiation oncology centers located in metropolitan, urban, and rural areas of Germany and to record the CO2 emissions resulting from travel.

METHODS

We analyzed the geographic data of breast cancer patients attending their radiotherapy treatments and calculated travelling distances using Google Maps. Carbon dioxide emissions were estimated assuming a standard 40-miles-per-gallon petrol car emitting 0.168 kg of CO2 per kilometer.

RESULT

Addresses of 4198 breast cancer patients treated between 2018 and 2022 were analyzed. Our sample traveled an average of 37.2 km (minimum average: 14.2 km, maximum average: 58.3 km) for each radiation fraction. This yielded an estimated total of 6.2 kg of CO2 emissions per visit, resulting in 156.2 kg of CO2 emissions when assuming 25 visits (planning, treatment, and follow-up).

CONCLUSION

Our study highlights the environmental consequences associated with patient commutes for external-beam radiotherapy, indicating that reducing the number of treatment fractions can notably decrease CO2 emissions. Despite certain assumptions such as the mode of transport and possible inaccuracies in patient addresses, optimizing fractionation schedules not only reduces travel requirements but also achieves greater CO2 reductions while keeping improved patient outcomes as the main focus.

Facing the climate change: Is radiotherapy as green as we would like? A systematic review

PURPOSE

To focus on the ecological footprint of radiotherapy (RT), on opportunities for sustainable practices, on future research directions.

METHODS

Different databases were interrogated using the following terms: Carbon Footprint, Sustainab*, Carbon Dioxide, Radiotherapy, and relative synonyms.

RESULTS

931 records were retrieved; 15 reports were included in the review. Eight main thematic areas have been identified. Nine research works analyzed the environmental impact of photon-based external beam RT. Particle therapy was the subject of one work. Other thematic areas were brachytherapy, intra-operative RT, telemedicine, travel-related issues, and the impact of COVID-19.

CONCLUSION

This review demonstrates the strong interest in identifying novel strategies for a more environmentally friendly RT and serves as a clarion call to unveil the environmental impact of carbon footprints entwined with radiation therapy. Future research should address current gaps to guide the transition towards greener practices, reducing the environmental footprint and maintaining high-quality care.

Qualitative exploration of patients' experiences with Intrabeam TARGeted Intraoperative radioTherapy (TARGIT-IORT) and External-Beam RadioTherapy Treatment (EBRT) for breast cancer

OBJECTIVE

To gather a deep qualitative understanding of the perceived benefits and impacts of External-Beam RadioTherapy (EBRT) and TARGeted Intraoperative radioTherapy (TARGIT-IORT) using Intrabeam to assess how the treatments affected patient/care partner experiences during their cancer treatment and beyond.

DESIGN AND PARTICIPANTS

A patient-led working group was established to guide study design and to help validate findings. Patients with experience of receiving EBRT or TARGIT-IORT were purposively sampled by Hampshire Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust. These patients had been offered both regimens as per their clinical features and eligibility. Semistructured interviews were conducted with 29 patients and care partners with lived experience of either EBRT (n=12, 5-day FAST-Forward regimen and n=3, 3-week regimen) or TARGIT-IORT (n=14). Thematic analysis was then carried out by two coders generating 11 themes related to EBRT or TARGIT-IORT.

SETTING

Semistructured interviews were conducted virtually via Zoom during February and March 2023.

RESULTS

A number of procedural grievances were noted among EBRT patients. EBRT was perceived as being disruptive to normal routines (work, home and travel) and caused discomfort from side effects. TARGIT-IORT was perceived by patients and care partners as the safer option and efficient with minimal if any disruptions to quality of life. The need for timely accessible information to reduce anxieties was noted in both cohorts.

CONCLUSIONS

This qualitative study found that patients perceived EBRT as being greatly disruptive to their lives. In contrast, the one-off feature of TARGIT-IORT given while they are asleep during surgery gives them the feeling of stamping out the cancer without conscious awareness. These insights can help healthcare staff and policy-makers further justify the incorporation of the treatment favoured by these patient perceptions (TARGIT-IORT) more widely in routine practice. Further research is planned to explore TARGIT-IORT in more diverse populations and in the 35 countries where it is an established treatment option.

A Novel Endoscopic Approach for Treating Breast Cancer: Haigui-1 Hole

OBJECTIVE

Endoscopic surgery is an effective technique for preserving the nipple and areola, as well as for sentinel lymph node biopsy and breast implant reconstruction. However, the technical challenges associated with endoscopic surgery have limited its widespread adoption.

METHODS

In the normal single-port endoscopic surgery, the ultrasonic knife was accessed through the retractor. In our modified procedure, a tiny 5 mm incision was made at the lateral margin underneath the breast, serving as the second entry port for the ultrasonic scalpel, which was referred to as the "Haigui-1 hole". Preoperative and postoperative indicators such as blood loss, operative time, and postoperative drainage volume were collected. Differences between parameters were compared using Student's t test.

RESULTS

Endoscopic surgery with the assistance of the "Haigui-1 hole" led to preserved breast aesthetics with minimal scarring. Moreover, "Haigui-1 hole" surgery significantly reduced the operation time, intraoperative bleeding, and postoperative drainage volume compared to normal single-port endoscopic surgery.

CONCLUSION

The "Haigui-1 hole" procedure, which involves the addition of a second entrance to improve the maneuverability of the ultrasonic knife, is worthy of further promotion.

Intraoperative radiotherapy: An alternative to whole-breast external beam radiotherapy in the management of highly selective breast cancer: A SEER database analysis

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to verify if intraoperative radiotherapy (IORT) can achieve the same survival outcome as whole-breast external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) in early breast cancer after breast-conserving surgery (BCS), and to explore the suitable candidates that can safely receive IORT after BCS.

METHODS

Eligible post-BCS patients who received IORT or EBRT were included in the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) database from 2010 to 2018. Risk factors that affected 5-year overall survival (OS) or breast cancer specific survival (BCSS) were identified by Cox proportional hazards regression analysis. Clinical characteristics, OS, and BCSS were comparatively analyzed between the two treatment modalities.

RESULTS

The survival analysis after propensity score matching confirmed that patients who received IORT (n = 2200) had a better 5-year OS than those who received EBRT (n = 2200) (p = 0.015). However, the two groups did not differ significantly in 5-year BCSS (p = 0.381). This feature persisted even after multivariate analyses that took into account numerous clinical characteristics. Although there was no significant difference in BCSS between different subgroups of patients treated with IORT or EBRT, patients over 55 years of age, with T1, N0, non-triple negative breast cancers, hormone receptor-positive, and histologic grade II showed a better OS after receiving IORT.

CONCLUSION

In low-risk, early-stage breast cancer, IORT was not inferior to EBRT considering 5-year BCSS and OS. Considering the equivalent clinical outcome but less radiotoxicity, IORT might be a reasonable alternative to EBRT in highly selective patients undergoing BCS.

Evaluating Carbon Footprint of Proton Therapy Based on Power Consumption and Possible Mitigation Strategies

PURPOSE

There is increasing concern about rising carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions and their hazardous effect on human health. This study quantifies the energy utilization of proton therapy, assesses the corresponding carbon footprint, and discusses possible offsetting strategies toward carbon-neutral health care operations.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Patients treated between July 2020 and June 2021 using the Mevion proton system were evaluated. Current measurements were converted to kilowatts of power consumption. Patients were reviewed for disease, dose, number of fractions, and duration of beam. The Environmental Protection Agency calculator was used to convert power consumption to tons of CO2 equivalent (CO2e) for scope-based carbon footprint accounting.

RESULTS

There were 185 patients treated and a total of 5176 fractions delivered (average, 28). Power consumption was 55.8 kW in standby/night mode and 64.4 kW during BeamOn, for an annual total of 490 MWh. BeamOn time was 149.6 hours, and BeamOn consumption accounted for 2% of the machine total. Power consumption was 52 kWh per patient (breast, highest at 140 kWh; prostate, lowest at 28 kWh). Annual power consumption of the administrative areas was approximately 96 MWh, for a program total of 586 MWh. The carbon footprint for BeamOn time was 4.17 metric tons of CO2e, or 23 kg per patient course (breast cancer, 60 kg; prostate, 12 kg). The annual carbon footprint for the machine was 212.2 tons CO2e, and for the proton program, 253.7 tons CO2e, with an attributed footprint of 1372 kg CO2e per patient. The corresponding CO2e offset for the program could be 4192 new trees planted and grown for 10 years (23 trees per patient).

CONCLUSIONS

The carbon footprint varied by disease treated. On average, the carbon footprint was 23 kg of CO2e per patient and 253.7 tons of CO2e for the proton program. There are a number of reduction, mitigation, and offset strategies possible for radiation oncologists that should be explored, such as waste minimization, less treatment commuting, efficient energy use, and renewable electricity power use.

Case Report: Intraoperative radiotherapy as the new standard of care for breast cancer patients with disabling health conditions or impairments

In selected patients, intraoperative radiotherapy (IORT) offers an alternative to standard external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) while providing equivalent breast cancer control outcomes. After IORT, most patients do not require external beam radiotherapy and thus avoid the need to travel to and from a radiotherapy centre in the weeks after surgery. EBRT is associated with an increased risk of non-breast cancer mortality and poorer cosmetic outcomes while increasing patient travel time, emissions associated with travel and time spent in the hospital. Consequently, EBRT is associated with an overall reduction in quality of life compared to IORT. Patients with other on-going health conditions or clinical impairments are likely to be affected by the daily radiotherapy requirement. Should these patients be consulted during their pre-operative assessment as to options to undergo IORT? This paper describes a case of IORT and follow up in a functionally blind patient. Quality of life effects are elucidated and further support the use of IORT in selected breast cancer patients with health conditions or impairments.

Recent Advances in Optimizing Radiation Therapy Decisions in Early Invasive Breast Cancer

Adjuvant whole breast irradiation after breast-conserving surgery is a well-established treatment standard for early invasive breast cancer. Screening, early diagnosis, refinement in surgical techniques, the knowledge of new and specific molecular prognostic factors, and now the standard use of more effective neo/adjuvant systemic therapies have proven instrumental in reducing the rates of locoregional relapses. This underscores the need for reliably identifying women with such low-risk disease burdens in whom elimination of radiation from the treatment plan would not compromise oncological safety. This review summarizes the current evidence for radiation de-intensification strategies and details ongoing prospective clinical trials investigating the omission of adjuvant whole breast irradiation in molecularly defined low-risk breast cancers and related evidence supporting the potential for radiation de-escalation in HER2+ and triple-negative clinical subtypes. Furthermore, we discuss the current evidence for the de-escalation of regional nodal irradiation after neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Finally, we also detail the current knowledge of the clinical value of stromal tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes and liquid-based biomarkers as prognostic factors for locoregional relapse.

The role of radiotherapy in HER2+ early-stage breast cancer patients after breast-conserving surgery

Background

Due to radioresistance, some HER2+ patients may gain limited benefit from radiotherapy (RT) after breast-conserving surgery (BCS). This study aimed to develop an individualized nomogram to identify early-stage HER2+ patients who could omit RT after BCS.

Methods

The data of HER2+ patients with T0-2N0M0 breast cancer after BCS between 2010 and 2015 were extracted from Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER). Based on the independent prognostic factors determined by the Cox analysis in patients without RT after propensity score matching (PSM), the nomogram and risk stratification model were constructed, and then the prognosis of patients with and without RT was compared in each stratified group.

Results

A total of 10799 early-stage HER2+ patients after BCS were included. Baseline characteristics were similar between groups after PSM. Multivariate Cox analysis indicated that RT could improve overall survival (OS) (HR: 0.45, P<0.001) and breast cancer-specific survival (BCSS) (HR: 0.53, P<0.001). Age, marital status, tumor location, tumor size, and chemotherapy were identified by multivariate Cox analysis in patients without RT and were incorporated into a well-validated nomogram. The risk stratification model based on the nomogram indicated that RT was associated with improved OS (HR 0.40, P< 0.001) and BCSS (HR 0.39, P< 0.001) in the high-risk group but not in the low-risk group [OS: HR 1.04, P = 0.94; BCSS: HR 1.06, P = 0.93].

Conclusion

RT could significantly improve the OS and BCSS of HER2+ early-stage breast cancer patients after BCS on the whole. For high-risk patients, RT is an essential component of cancer therapy. However, the omission of radiotherapy may be considered for low-risk HER2+ early-stage patients. Further validation and improvement of the nomogram by prospective study or randomized controlled trials are warranted.