1
|
Lazzari G, Benevento I, Montagna A, D’Andrea B, De Marco G, Castaldo G, Bianculli A, Tucciariello R, Metallo V, Solazzo AP. Breast Cancer Adjuvant Radiotherapy in Up-Front to Chemotherapy: Is There a Worthwhile Benefit? A Preliminary Report. BREAST CANCER (DOVE MEDICAL PRESS) 2024; 16:359-367. [PMID: 39050764 PMCID: PMC11268516 DOI: 10.2147/bctt.s471345] [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: 03/29/2024] [Accepted: 06/27/2024] [Indexed: 07/27/2024]
Abstract
Purpose We administered a new breast cancer (BC) adjuvant therapy sequence that delivered postoperative radiotherapy (PORT) before chemotherapy (CT). Our aim was to assess the gain in time to start PORT and the G2-G3 acute-subacute toxicity rate of whole breast adjuvant hypofractionated radiotherapy (AH-RT) administered up-front to the third-generation adjuvant CT (A-CT) in high-risk nodal positive BC in a preliminary report at 2 years. Methods This retrospective study analysed the duration of treatment and safety of AH-RT administered up-front to A-CT in high-risk nodal positive BC patients (pts). Data on 45 pts treated between 2022-2023 were collected. All pts underwent the third-generation A-CT after AH-RT 15-5 fractions with or without a boost. Acute toxicity was scored according to CTCAE v5.0 for skin, pulmonary, and cardiac adverse events. Univariate and multivariate analyses were conducted to assess significant prognosticators for skin/lung/heart acute toxicities in the AH-RT 5-15 fractions arms and CT (p < 0.005). Results A reduction in the time to PORT initiation and overall adjuvant treatment time was recorded. RT was initiated 5 median weeks after surgery, and A-CT was performed 9 median weeks after surgery. The median duration of the entire adjuvant treatment was 35 weeks after surgery. At 6 months mean follow-up, no significant differences in G2-G3 toxicity were noted between the different hypofractionated RT arms, irrespective of the CT schedules, irradiated volumes, or boost (SIB or sequential) in univariate and multivariate analyses. In the multivariate analysis, no significant effects in CT schedules and AH-RT 5-15 arms for skin/lung acute toxicities (p = 0.077 and p = 0.68; 0.67 and 0.87, respectively) were recorded. Conclusion As a new PORT approach in BC, AH-RT up-front to the third-generation A-CT appeared safe with a low acute toxicity profile, providing an advantage in shortening the time from surgery to PORT initiation and the overall adjuvant treatment time.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Grazia Lazzari
- Radiation Oncology Unit, IRCCS, CROB, Rionero in Vulture, PZ, Italy
| | - Ilaria Benevento
- Radiation Oncology Unit, IRCCS, CROB, Rionero in Vulture, PZ, Italy
| | | | - Barbara D’Andrea
- Radiation Oncology Unit, IRCCS, CROB, Rionero in Vulture, PZ, Italy
| | | | | | - Antonella Bianculli
- Physic Unit, Radiation Oncology Unit, IRCCS, CROB, Rionero in Vulture, PZ, Italy
| | | | - Vito Metallo
- Radiation Oncology Unit, IRCCS, CROB, Rionero in Vulture, PZ, Italy
| | | |
Collapse
|
2
|
Schaverien MV, Singh P, Smith BD, Qiao W, Akay CL, Bloom ES, Chavez-MacGregor M, Chu CK, Clemens MW, Colen JS, Ehlers RA, Hwang RF, Joyner MM, Largo RD, Mericli AF, Mitchell MP, Shuck JW, Tamirisa N, Tripathy D, Villa MT, Woodward WA, Zacharia R, Kuerer HM, Hoffman KE. Premastectomy Radiotherapy and Immediate Breast Reconstruction: A Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA Netw Open 2024; 7:e245217. [PMID: 38578640 PMCID: PMC10998161 DOI: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2024.5217] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/26/2023] [Accepted: 02/08/2024] [Indexed: 04/06/2024] Open
Abstract
Importance Premastectomy radiotherapy (PreMRT) is a new treatment sequence to avoid the adverse effects of radiotherapy on the final breast reconstruction while achieving the benefits of immediate breast reconstruction (IMBR). Objective To evaluate outcomes among patients who received PreMRT and regional nodal irradiation (RNI) followed by mastectomy and IMBR. Design, Setting, and Participants This was a phase 2 single-center randomized clinical trial conducted between August 3, 2018, and August 2, 2022, evaluating the feasibility and safety of PreMRT and RNI (including internal mammary lymph nodes). Patients with cT0-T3, N0-N3b breast cancer and a recommendation for radiotherapy were eligible. Intervention This trial evaluated outcomes after PreMRT followed by mastectomy and IMBR. Patients were randomized to receive either hypofractionated (40.05 Gy/15 fractions) or conventionally fractionated (50 Gy/25 fractions) RNI. Main Outcome and Measures The primary outcome was reconstructive failure, defined as complete autologous flap loss. Demographic, treatment, and outcomes data were collected, and associations between multiple variables and outcomes were evaluated. Analysis was performed on an intent-to-treat basis. Results Fifty patients were enrolled. Among 49 evaluable patients, the median age was 48 years (range, 31-72 years), and 46 patients (94%) received neoadjuvant systemic therapy. Twenty-five patients received 50 Gy in 25 fractions to the breast and 45 Gy in 25 fractions to regional nodes, and 24 patients received 40.05 Gy in 15 fractions to the breast and 37.5 Gy in 15 fractions to regional nodes, including internal mammary lymph nodes. Forty-eight patients underwent mastectomy with IMBR, at a median of 23 days (IQR, 20-28.5 days) after radiotherapy. Forty-one patients had microvascular autologous flap reconstruction, 5 underwent latissimus dorsi pedicled flap reconstruction, and 2 had tissue expander placement. There were no complete autologous flap losses, and 1 patient underwent tissue expander explantation. Eight of 48 patients (17%) had mastectomy skin flap necrosis of the treated breast, of whom 1 underwent reoperation. During follow-up (median, 29.7 months [range, 10.1-65.2 months]), there were no locoregional recurrences or distant metastasis. Conclusions and Relevance This randomized clinical trial found PreMRT and RNI followed by mastectomy and microvascular autologous flap IMBR to be feasible and safe. Based on these results, a larger randomized clinical trial of hypofractionated vs conventionally fractionated PreMRT has been started (NCT05774678). Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02912312.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Mark V. Schaverien
- Division of Surgery, Department of Plastic Surgery, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston
| | - Puneet Singh
- Division of Surgery, Department of Breast Surgical Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston
| | - Benjamin D. Smith
- Division of Radiation Oncology, Department of Breast Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston
| | - Wei Qiao
- Department of Biostatistics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston
| | - Catherine L. Akay
- Division of Surgery, Department of Breast Surgical Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston
| | - Elizabeth S. Bloom
- Division of Radiation Oncology, Department of Breast Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston
| | - Mariana Chavez-MacGregor
- Division of Cancer Medicine, Department of Breast Medical Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston
| | - Carrie K. Chu
- Division of Surgery, Department of Plastic Surgery, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston
| | - Mark W. Clemens
- Division of Surgery, Department of Plastic Surgery, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston
| | - Jessica S. Colen
- Division of Surgery, Department of Breast Surgical Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston
| | - Richard A. Ehlers
- Division of Surgery, Department of Breast Surgical Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston
| | - Rosa F. Hwang
- Division of Surgery, Department of Breast Surgical Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston
| | - Melissa M. Joyner
- Division of Radiation Oncology, Department of Breast Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston
| | - Rene D. Largo
- Division of Surgery, Department of Plastic Surgery, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston
| | - Alexander F. Mericli
- Division of Surgery, Department of Plastic Surgery, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston
| | - Melissa P. Mitchell
- Division of Radiation Oncology, Department of Breast Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston
| | - John W. Shuck
- Division of Surgery, Department of Plastic Surgery, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston
| | - Nina Tamirisa
- Division of Surgery, Department of Breast Surgical Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston
| | - Debasish Tripathy
- Division of Cancer Medicine, Department of Breast Medical Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston
| | - Mark T. Villa
- Division of Surgery, Department of Plastic Surgery, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston
| | - Wendy A. Woodward
- Division of Surgery, Department of Breast Surgical Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston
| | - Rensi Zacharia
- Division of Radiation Oncology, Department of Breast Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston
| | - Henry M. Kuerer
- Division of Surgery, Department of Breast Surgical Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston
| | - Karen E. Hoffman
- Division of Radiation Oncology, Department of Breast Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Abdel-Razeq H, Mansour A, Edaily S, Dayyat A. Delays in Initiating Anti-Cancer Therapy for Early-Stage Breast Cancer-How Slow Can We Go? J Clin Med 2023; 12:4502. [PMID: 37445537 DOI: 10.3390/jcm12134502] [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: 05/18/2023] [Revised: 06/26/2023] [Accepted: 07/02/2023] [Indexed: 07/15/2023] Open
Abstract
Breast cancer is the most commonly diagnosed cancer among women worldwide, and is a leading cause of cancer-related deaths. When diagnosed at an early stage, appropriate and timely treatment results in a high cure rate and better quality of life. Delays in initiating anti-cancer therapy, including surgical resection, adjuvant/neoadjuvant chemotherapy and radiation therapy are commonly encountered, even in developed health care systems. Existing comorbidities that mandate referral to other services, genetic counseling and testing that may dictate the extent and type of anti-cancer therapy and insurance coverage, are among the most commonly cited factors. However, delays can be unavoidable; for over three years, health care systems across the globe were busy dealing with the unprecedented COVID-19 pandemic. War across hot zones around the globe resulted in millions of refugees; most of them have no access to cancer care, and when/where available, there may be significant delays. Thus, cancer patients across the globe will probably continue to suffer from significant delays in diagnosis and appropriate treatment. Many retrospective reports showed significant negative impacts on different aspects of treatment outcomes and on patients' psychosocial wellbeing and productivity. In this paper, we review the available data on the impact of delays in initiating appropriate treatment on the outcomes of patients with early-stage breast cancer.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Hikmat Abdel-Razeq
- Department of Internal Medicine, King Hussein Cancer Center, Amman 11941, Jordan
- Department of Internal Medicine, School of Medicine, The University of Jordan, Amman 11942, Jordan
| | - Asem Mansour
- Department of Radiology, King Hussein Cancer Center, Amman 11941, Jordan
| | - Sarah Edaily
- Department of Internal Medicine, King Hussein Cancer Center, Amman 11941, Jordan
| | - Abdulmajeed Dayyat
- Department of Radiation Oncology, King Hussein Cancer Center, Amman 11941, Jordan
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Dalhousie University, Halifax, NS B3H 4R2, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Raman KS, Ninomiya MM, Bovill ES, Doherty C, Macadam SA, Laeken NV, Isaac KV. Temporal Sequencing of Multimodal Treatment in Immediate Breast Reconstruction and Implications for Wait Times: A Regional Canadian Cross-Sectional Study. Plast Surg (Oakv) 2023. [DOI: 10.1177/22925503231152261] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/10/2023] Open
Abstract
Introduction: Treatment of breast cancer requires a multimodal approach with numerous independent specialists. Immediate breast reconstruction (IBR) adds another layer of coordination to comprehensive breast cancer care. To optimize health outcomes for patients seeking IBR, it is essential to efficiently coordinate the temporal sequence of care modalities inclusive of reconstruction. Methods: In this cross-sectional study, patients undergoing IBR following complete or partial mastectomy at one health centre from 2015 to 2021 were included. Patients were categorized into two main groups defined by the first treatment modality received, namely surgery first and Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy. Primary outcome measures were wait times for diagnostic investigations, initiation of treatment, and transitions between therapeutic modalities. Results: Of 195 patients, 158 underwent surgery first, and 37 underwent neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Median wait time from first consultation to first treatment initiated in the neoadjuvant cohort was shorter by 11.5 days as compared to the Surgery First cohort (21.5 +/− 19 vs 33.0 +/− 28 days; P = 0.001). Twenty-three (82%) of the surgery first and 11 (38%) of the neoadjuvant cohort patients waited longer than 8 weeks for initiation of radiotherapy ( P = 0.001). Following surgical intervention, the majority of patients failed to meet target benchmarks for transition to chemotherapy ( n = 25, 53%) and transition to radiotherapy ( n = 26, 93%; P < 0.001). Conclusion: Patients undergoing IBR may incur delays in the setting of upfront surgery and in transitioning to adjuvant therapies. In the setting of breast reconstruction, further efforts are required to achieve target wait-times in multimodal breast cancer care.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Karanvir S. Raman
- Department of Surgery, Division of Plastic Surgery, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
| | - Maya Morton Ninomiya
- Department of Surgery, Division of Plastic Surgery, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
| | - Esta S. Bovill
- Department of Surgery, Division of Plastic Surgery, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
| | - Christopher Doherty
- Department of Surgery, Division of Plastic Surgery, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
| | - Sheina A. Macadam
- Department of Surgery, Division of Plastic Surgery, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
| | - Nancy Van Laeken
- Department of Surgery, Division of Plastic Surgery, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
| | - Kathryn V. Isaac
- Department of Surgery, Division of Plastic Surgery, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Chen SY, Sun GY, Tang Y, Jing H, Song YW, Jin J, Liu YP, Zhao XR, Song YC, Chen B, Qi SN, Tang Y, Lu NN, Li N, Fang H, Li YX, Wang SL. Timing of postmastectomy radiotherapy following adjuvant chemotherapy for high-risk breast cancer: A post hoc analysis of a randomised controlled clinical trial. Eur J Cancer 2022; 174:153-164. [PMID: 35998550 DOI: 10.1016/j.ejca.2022.07.023] [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: 05/27/2022] [Revised: 07/16/2022] [Accepted: 07/21/2022] [Indexed: 11/03/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE To investigate the appropriate timing of radiotherapy (RT) after mastectomy and adjuvant chemotherapy for women with high-risk breast cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS Post hoc analyses of 584 patients with stage II and III breast cancer from a randomised controlled clinical trial were performed. All patients underwent mastectomy followed by sequential chemotherapy and RT. The optimal cut-off values for the surgery-RT interval (SRI) and the chemotherapy-RT interval (CRI) for overall survival (OS) were determined using the hazard ratio for continuous predictors. The locoregional recurrence (LRR), distant metastasis (DM), disease-free survival (DFS), and OS rates were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Multivariate analyses were performed using Cox proportional hazards regression. RESULTS Median follow-up time was 83.5 months. Median SRI and CRI were 168 and 27 days, respectively. An SRI of >210 days was independently associated with higher DM (HR 2.65, 95% CI: 1.49-4.71; HR 2.78, 95% CI 1.51-5.26), lower OS (HR 2.44, 95% CI: 1.28-4.54; HR 2.50, 95% CI: 1.41-4.35), and lower DFS (HR 2.57, 95% CI: 1.45-4.57; HR 2.70, 95% CI: 1.45-5.00) than SRI of <180 or 180-210 days. Furthermore, a CRI of more than 42 days was independently associated with higher DM (HR 1.89, 95% CI: 1.17-3.06; HR 1.96, 95% CI: 1.19-3.22), lower OS (HR 2.44, 95% CI: 1.41-4.35; HR 1.92, 95% CI: 1.10-3.33), and lower DFS (HR 1.84, 95% CI: 1.14-2.96; HR 1.82, 95% CI: 1.12-2.94) than a CRI of <28 or 28-42 days. However, SRI and CRI had no significant effect on LRR. CONCLUSIONS Based on the present findings, the timing of the initiation of RT both after mastectomy and after the completion of adjuvant chemotherapy is crucial for patients with high-risk breast cancer.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Si-Ye Chen
- Department of Radiation Oncology, National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing 100021, China
| | - Guang-Yi Sun
- Department of Radiation Oncology, National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing 100021, China
| | - Yu Tang
- Department of Radiation Oncology, National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing 100021, China; Department of Clinical Trials Center, National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing 100021, China
| | - Hao Jing
- Department of Radiation Oncology, National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing 100021, China
| | - Yong-Wen Song
- Department of Radiation Oncology, National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing 100021, China
| | - Jing Jin
- Department of Radiation Oncology, National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing 100021, China
| | - Yue-Ping Liu
- Department of Radiation Oncology, National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing 100021, China
| | - Xu-Ran Zhao
- Department of Radiation Oncology, National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing 100021, China
| | - Yu-Chun Song
- Department of Radiation Oncology, National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing 100021, China
| | - Bo Chen
- Department of Radiation Oncology, National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing 100021, China
| | - Shu-Nan Qi
- Department of Radiation Oncology, National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing 100021, China
| | - Yuan Tang
- Department of Radiation Oncology, National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing 100021, China
| | - Ning-Ning Lu
- Department of Radiation Oncology, National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing 100021, China
| | - Ning Li
- Department of Radiation Oncology, National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing 100021, China
| | - Hui Fang
- Department of Radiation Oncology, National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing 100021, China.
| | - Ye-Xiong Li
- Department of Radiation Oncology, National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing 100021, China; State Key Laboratory of Molecular Oncology, National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing 100021, China.
| | - Shu-Lian Wang
- Department of Radiation Oncology, National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing 100021, China.
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Thiruchelvam PTR, Leff DR, Godden AR, Cleator S, Wood SH, Kirby AM, Jallali N, Somaiah N, Hunter JE, Henry FP, Micha A, O'Connell RL, Mohammed K, Patani N, Tan MLH, Gujral D, Ross G, James SE, Khan AA, Rusby JE, Hadjiminas DJ, MacNeill FA. Primary radiotherapy and deep inferior epigastric perforator flap reconstruction for patients with breast cancer (PRADA): a multicentre, prospective, non-randomised, feasibility study. Lancet Oncol 2022; 23:682-690. [PMID: 35397804 PMCID: PMC9630150 DOI: 10.1016/s1470-2045(22)00145-0] [Citation(s) in RCA: 18] [Impact Index Per Article: 9.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/06/2021] [Revised: 02/01/2022] [Accepted: 02/28/2022] [Indexed: 12/20/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Radiotherapy before mastectomy and autologous free-flap breast reconstruction can avoid adverse radiation effects on healthy donor tissues and delays to adjuvant radiotherapy. However, evidence for this treatment sequence is sparse. We aimed to explore the feasibility of preoperative radiotherapy followed by skin-sparing mastectomy and deep inferior epigastric perforator (DIEP) flap reconstruction in patients with breast cancer requiring mastectomy. METHODS We conducted a prospective, non-randomised, feasibility study at two National Health Service trusts in the UK. Eligible patients were women aged older than 18 years with a laboratory diagnosis of primary breast cancer requiring mastectomy and post-mastectomy radiotherapy, who were suitable for DIEP flap reconstruction. Preoperative radiotherapy started 3-4 weeks after neoadjuvant chemotherapy and was delivered to the breast, plus regional nodes as required, at 40 Gy in 15 fractions (over 3 weeks) or 42·72 Gy in 16 fractions (over 3·2 weeks). Adverse skin radiation toxicity was assessed preoperatively using the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group toxicity grading system. Skin-sparing mastectomy and DIEP flap reconstruction were planned for 2-6 weeks after completion of preoperative radiotherapy. The primary endpoint was the proportion of open breast wounds greater than 1 cm width requiring a dressing at 4 weeks after surgery, assessed in all participants. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02771938, and is closed to recruitment. FINDINGS Between Jan 25, 2016, and Dec 11, 2017, 33 patients were enrolled. At 4 weeks after surgery, four (12·1%, 95% CI 3·4-28·2) of 33 patients had an open breast wound greater than 1 cm. One (3%) patient had confluent moist desquamation (grade 3). There were no serious treatment-related adverse events and no treatment-related deaths. INTERPRETATION Preoperative radiotherapy followed by skin-sparing mastectomy and immediate DIEP flap reconstruction is feasible and technically safe, with rates of breast open wounds similar to those reported with post-mastectomy radiotherapy. A randomised trial comparing preoperative radiotherapy with post-mastectomy radiotherapy is required to precisely determine and compare surgical, oncological, and breast reconstruction outcomes, including quality of life. FUNDING Cancer Research UK, National Institute for Health Research.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Daniel R Leff
- Department of Breast Surgery, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, London, UK; BioSurgery and Surgical Technology, Department of Surgery, Imperial College London, London, UK
| | - Amy R Godden
- Department of Breast Surgery, Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
| | - Susan Cleator
- Department of Clinical Oncology, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, London, UK
| | - Simon H Wood
- Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, London, UK
| | | | - Navid Jallali
- Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, London, UK
| | | | - Judith E Hunter
- Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, London, UK
| | - Francis P Henry
- Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, London, UK
| | - Aikaterini Micha
- Department of Breast Surgery, Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
| | - Rachel L O'Connell
- Department of Breast Surgery, Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
| | | | - Neill Patani
- Department of Breast Surgery, University College London Hospitals NHS Trust, London, UK
| | - Melissa L H Tan
- Department of Breast Surgery, Birmingham City Hospital, Birmingham, UK
| | - Dorothy Gujral
- Department of Clinical Oncology, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, London, UK
| | | | - Stuart E James
- Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
| | - Aadil A Khan
- Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
| | - Jennifer E Rusby
- Department of Breast Surgery, Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK; The Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK
| | | | - Fiona A MacNeill
- Department of Breast Surgery, Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Coronavirus disease 2019 and radiation oncology-survey on the impact of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 pandemic on health care professionals in radiation oncology. Strahlenther Onkol 2022; 198:346-353. [PMID: 35195733 PMCID: PMC8864974 DOI: 10.1007/s00066-022-01903-8] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/12/2021] [Accepted: 01/23/2022] [Indexed: 11/14/2022]
Abstract
Background The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic has changed the lives of most humans worldwide. The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of the SARS-CoV‑2 pandemic on health care professionals (HCPs) in radiation oncology facilities. Methods We distributed an online survey to HCPs in radiation oncology (physicians, medical physics experts, radiology assistants/radiation therapists, nurses, and administrative personnel). The survey was completed by 334 participants between May 23 and June 9, 2020. Results In 66.2% of the cases, HCPs reported a shortage of protective clothing. The protective measures were regarded as very reasonable by 47.4%, while 0.8% regarded them as not reasonable (rather reasonable: 44.0%; less reasonable 7.8%). 29.0% of the participants had children who needed care. The most frequently used care options were public emergency childcare (36.1%) and private childcare (e.g. relatives/friends). HCPs reported about additional work burden (fully agreed: 27.2%, rather agreed: 34.4%, less agreed: 28.2%, not agreed: 10.2%), and reduced work satisfaction (fully agreed: 11.7%, rather agreed: 29.6%, less agreed: 39.8%, not agreed: 18.9%). 12.9% and 29.0% of the participants were fully or rather mentally strained (less mentally strained: 44.0%, not mentally strained: 14.1%). Conclusion We must learn from this pandemic how to prepare for further outbreaks and similar conditions. This includes the vast availability of protective clothing and efficient tracing of infection chains among the HCPs, but also secured childcare programs and experienced mental health support are crucial. Further, work satisfaction and appreciation by employers is essential. Supplementary Information The online version of this article (10.1007/s00066-022-01903-8) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
Collapse
|
8
|
Vanderpuye V, Dadzie MA, Huo D, Olopade OI. Assessment of Breast Cancer Management in Sub-Saharan Africa. JCO Glob Oncol 2021; 7:1593-1601. [PMID: 34843373 PMCID: PMC8624034 DOI: 10.1200/go.21.00282] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/11/2022] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE To document progress and bottlenecks in breast cancer management in sub-Saharan Africa, subsequent to a 2013 pilot survey conducted through the African Organization for Research and Treatment in Cancer (AORTIC) network. METHODS An anonymous survey of breast cancer management was conducted in 2018 among AORTIC members. Results concerning respondent specialty, access to tumor boards, treatment accessibility, diagnostic services, and factors influencing treatment outcomes were compared with the 2013 findings. RESULTS Thirty-seven respondents from 30 facilities in 21 sub-Saharan Africa countries responded. The majority (92%) were clinical oncologists. Radiotherapy facilities were available in 70% of facilities. Seventy-eight percent of these had linear accelerators, and 42% had cobalt60 machines. Eighty percent of facilities had multidisciplinary tumor boards. Immunohistochemistry was routinely performed in 74% of facilities, computed tomography scan in 90%, bone scan in 16%, and positron emission tomography scans in 5%. Anthracyclines, taxanes, tamoxifen, letrozole, anastrozole, and zoledronic acid were available in the majority; trastuzumab, fertility, and genetic counseling were available in 66%, 58%, and 16%, respectively. There were a 50% increase in oncologist respondents over 2013 and a > 50% increase in radiotherapy facilities, particularly linear accelerators. Availability of trastuzumab, aromatase inhibitors, and taxanes increased. Immunohistochemistry capacity remained the same, whereas facilities harvesting at least 10 axillary lymph nodes increased. Bone scan facilities decreased. Responses suggested improved diagnostic services, systemic therapies, and radiotherapy. Sociocultural and economic barriers, system delays, and advanced stage at presentation remain. CONCLUSION Clinicians in sub-Saharan Africa have basic tools to improve breast cancer outcomes, recording positive strides in domains such as radiotherapy and systemic therapy. Socioeconomic and cultural barriers and system delays persist. Workforce expansion must be prioritized to improve quality of care to improve outcomes. This study highlights the current state of breast cancer management in Sub Saharan Africa, documenting key advancements , challenges and bottlenecks encountered in the sub region. Aside the major aspects of management, pertinent areas such as multidisciplinary tumour board engagements, fertility , genetic counselling and factors affecting outcome were explored. Majority of institutions manage breast cancer patients within a multidisciplinary setting using standard treatment guidelines. The high out of pocket cost of cancer treatment and advanced stage at presentation transcends in many sub Saharan countries negatively impacting outcomes. These results should serve as a benchmark to stakeholders , to guide urgent interventions required to further improve outcomes.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Verna Vanderpuye
- National Centre for Radiotherapy, Oncology and Nuclear Medicine, Korle Bu Teaching Hospital, Accra, Ghana
| | - Mary-Ann Dadzie
- National Centre for Radiotherapy, Oncology and Nuclear Medicine, Korle Bu Teaching Hospital, Accra, Ghana
| | - Dezheng Huo
- Department of Public Health Sciences, University of Chicago, Chicago, IL
| | | |
Collapse
|
9
|
You KY, Zou WL, Ding L, Bi ZF, Yao HR. Large Tumor Size is an Indicator for the Timely Administration of Adjuvant Radiotherapy in Luminal Breast Cancer with Positive Lymph Node. Cancer Manag Res 2021; 13:1325-1332. [PMID: 33603478 PMCID: PMC7884945 DOI: 10.2147/cmar.s293470] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/24/2020] [Accepted: 01/25/2021] [Indexed: 11/23/2022] Open
Abstract
Purpose The optimum timing of adjuvant radiotherapy for breast cancer patients who had undergone surgery remains unclear. The present study aimed to identify the clinical factors which could assist the selecting of time interval (TI) between surgery and adjuvant radiotherapy in luminal breast cancer with lymph node metastasis. Patients and Methods This retrospective study included 1054 luminal breast cancer patients with lymph node metastasis, diagnosed between May 2004 and December 2014, and treated with surgery followed by adjuvant therapy. Overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) were compared between patients in the short and long TI groups. Multivariate analysis was performed to examine clinical factors associated with DFS. Subgroups analysis was further performed based on the significant predictors of DFS to explore the association of TI and tumor prognosis. Results For the whole group of patients, there was no difference in OS and DFS between patients with long and short TI. Multivariate analysis showed that age, N stage and tumor size were significant predictors of DFS. Subgroup analysis demonstrated that neither age nor N stage were informative in TI selection; in contrast, in patients with large tumors, a short TI was associated with better DFS than a long TI. In patients with small tumors, there was no significant association between TI and tumor prognosis. In the multivariable analysis, TI was independent predictor of DFS and local recurrence-free survival in patients with large tumors. Conclusion Large tumor size is an indicator for the timely administration of adjuvant radiotherapy in luminal breast cancer with positive lymph node.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kai-Yun You
- Guangdong Provincial Key Laboratory of Malignant Tumor Epigenetics and Gene Regulation, Medical Research Center, Sun Yat-Sen Memorial Hospital, Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou, People's Republic of China.,RNA Biomedical Institute, Sun Yat-Sen Memorial Hospital, Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou, People's Republic of China.,Department of Radiation Oncology, Sun Yat-Sen Memorial Hospital, Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou, People's Republic of China
| | - Wei-Liang Zou
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Sun Yat-Sen Memorial Hospital, Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou, People's Republic of China
| | - Lin Ding
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Sun Yat-Sen Memorial Hospital, Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou, People's Republic of China
| | - Zhuo-Fei Bi
- Guangdong Provincial Key Laboratory of Malignant Tumor Epigenetics and Gene Regulation, Medical Research Center, Sun Yat-Sen Memorial Hospital, Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou, People's Republic of China.,RNA Biomedical Institute, Sun Yat-Sen Memorial Hospital, Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou, People's Republic of China.,Department of Radiation Oncology, Sun Yat-Sen Memorial Hospital, Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou, People's Republic of China
| | - He-Rui Yao
- Guangdong Provincial Key Laboratory of Malignant Tumor Epigenetics and Gene Regulation, Medical Research Center, Sun Yat-Sen Memorial Hospital, Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou, People's Republic of China.,RNA Biomedical Institute, Sun Yat-Sen Memorial Hospital, Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou, People's Republic of China.,Department of Oncology, Sun Yat-Sen Memorial Hospital, Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou, People's Republic of China.,Breast Tumor Center, Sun Yat-Sen Memorial Hospital, Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou, People's Republic of China
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Marazzi F, Tagliaferri L, Masiello V, Moschella F, Colloca GF, Corvari B, Sanchez AM, Capocchiano ND, Pastorino R, Iacomini C, Lenkowicz J, Masciocchi C, Patarnello S, Franceschini G, Gambacorta MA, Masetti R, Valentini V. GENERATOR Breast DataMart-The Novel Breast Cancer Data Discovery System for Research and Monitoring: Preliminary Results and Future Perspectives. J Pers Med 2021; 11:jpm11020065. [PMID: 33498985 PMCID: PMC7911086 DOI: 10.3390/jpm11020065] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/30/2020] [Revised: 01/18/2021] [Accepted: 01/20/2021] [Indexed: 02/07/2023] Open
Abstract
Background: Artificial Intelligence (AI) is increasingly used for process management in daily life. In the medical field AI is becoming part of computerized systems to manage information and encourage the generation of evidence. Here we present the development of the application of AI to IT systems present in the hospital, for the creation of a DataMart for the management of clinical and research processes in the field of breast cancer. Materials and methods: A multidisciplinary team of radiation oncologists, epidemiologists, medical oncologists, breast surgeons, data scientists, and data management experts worked together to identify relevant data and sources located inside the hospital system. Combinations of open-source data science packages and industry solutions were used to design the target framework. To validate the DataMart directly on real-life cases, the working team defined tumoral pathology and clinical purposes of proof of concepts (PoCs). Results: Data were classified into “Not organized, not ‘ontologized’ data”, “Organized, not ‘ontologized’ data”, and “Organized and ‘ontologized’ data”. Archives of real-world data (RWD) identified were platform based on ontology, hospital data warehouse, PDF documents, and electronic reports. Data extraction was performed by direct connection with structured data or text-mining technology. Two PoCs were performed, by which waiting time interval for radiotherapy and performance index of breast unit were tested and resulted available. Conclusions: GENERATOR Breast DataMart was created for supporting breast cancer pathways of care. An AI-based process automatically extracts data from different sources and uses them for generating trend studies and clinical evidence. Further studies and more proof of concepts are needed to exploit all the potentials of this system.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Fabio Marazzi
- Dipartimento di Diagnostica per Immagini, Radioterapia Oncologica ed Ematologia, UOC di Radioterapia Oncologica, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario “A. Gemelli” IRCCS, 00186 Rome, Italy; (F.M.); (L.T.); (G.F.C.); (B.C.); (M.A.G.); (V.V.)
| | - Luca Tagliaferri
- Dipartimento di Diagnostica per Immagini, Radioterapia Oncologica ed Ematologia, UOC di Radioterapia Oncologica, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario “A. Gemelli” IRCCS, 00186 Rome, Italy; (F.M.); (L.T.); (G.F.C.); (B.C.); (M.A.G.); (V.V.)
| | - Valeria Masiello
- Dipartimento di Diagnostica per Immagini, Radioterapia Oncologica ed Ematologia, UOC di Radioterapia Oncologica, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario “A. Gemelli” IRCCS, 00186 Rome, Italy; (F.M.); (L.T.); (G.F.C.); (B.C.); (M.A.G.); (V.V.)
- Correspondence:
| | - Francesca Moschella
- Dipartimento di Scienze della Salute della Donna e del Bambino e di Sanità Pubblica, UOC di Chirurgia Senologica, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario “A. Gemelli” IRCCS, 00186 Roma, Italy; (F.M.); (A.M.S.); (G.F.); (R.M.)
| | - Giuseppe Ferdinando Colloca
- Dipartimento di Diagnostica per Immagini, Radioterapia Oncologica ed Ematologia, UOC di Radioterapia Oncologica, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario “A. Gemelli” IRCCS, 00186 Rome, Italy; (F.M.); (L.T.); (G.F.C.); (B.C.); (M.A.G.); (V.V.)
| | - Barbara Corvari
- Dipartimento di Diagnostica per Immagini, Radioterapia Oncologica ed Ematologia, UOC di Radioterapia Oncologica, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario “A. Gemelli” IRCCS, 00186 Rome, Italy; (F.M.); (L.T.); (G.F.C.); (B.C.); (M.A.G.); (V.V.)
| | - Alejandro Martin Sanchez
- Dipartimento di Scienze della Salute della Donna e del Bambino e di Sanità Pubblica, UOC di Chirurgia Senologica, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario “A. Gemelli” IRCCS, 00186 Roma, Italy; (F.M.); (A.M.S.); (G.F.); (R.M.)
| | - Nikola Dino Capocchiano
- Istituto di Radiologia, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, 00186 Rome, Italy; (N.D.C.); (J.L.)
| | - Roberta Pastorino
- Fondazione Policlinico Universitario “A. Gemelli” IRCCS, 00186 Roma, Italy; (R.P.); (C.I.); (C.M.); (S.P.)
| | - Chiara Iacomini
- Fondazione Policlinico Universitario “A. Gemelli” IRCCS, 00186 Roma, Italy; (R.P.); (C.I.); (C.M.); (S.P.)
| | - Jacopo Lenkowicz
- Istituto di Radiologia, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, 00186 Rome, Italy; (N.D.C.); (J.L.)
| | - Carlotta Masciocchi
- Fondazione Policlinico Universitario “A. Gemelli” IRCCS, 00186 Roma, Italy; (R.P.); (C.I.); (C.M.); (S.P.)
| | - Stefano Patarnello
- Fondazione Policlinico Universitario “A. Gemelli” IRCCS, 00186 Roma, Italy; (R.P.); (C.I.); (C.M.); (S.P.)
| | - Gianluca Franceschini
- Dipartimento di Scienze della Salute della Donna e del Bambino e di Sanità Pubblica, UOC di Chirurgia Senologica, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario “A. Gemelli” IRCCS, 00186 Roma, Italy; (F.M.); (A.M.S.); (G.F.); (R.M.)
- Istituto di Semeiotica Chirurgica, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, 00186 Rome, Italy
| | - Maria Antonietta Gambacorta
- Dipartimento di Diagnostica per Immagini, Radioterapia Oncologica ed Ematologia, UOC di Radioterapia Oncologica, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario “A. Gemelli” IRCCS, 00186 Rome, Italy; (F.M.); (L.T.); (G.F.C.); (B.C.); (M.A.G.); (V.V.)
- Istituto di Radiologia, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, 00186 Rome, Italy; (N.D.C.); (J.L.)
| | - Riccardo Masetti
- Dipartimento di Scienze della Salute della Donna e del Bambino e di Sanità Pubblica, UOC di Chirurgia Senologica, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario “A. Gemelli” IRCCS, 00186 Roma, Italy; (F.M.); (A.M.S.); (G.F.); (R.M.)
- Istituto di Semeiotica Chirurgica, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, 00186 Rome, Italy
| | - Vincenzo Valentini
- Dipartimento di Diagnostica per Immagini, Radioterapia Oncologica ed Ematologia, UOC di Radioterapia Oncologica, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario “A. Gemelli” IRCCS, 00186 Rome, Italy; (F.M.); (L.T.); (G.F.C.); (B.C.); (M.A.G.); (V.V.)
- Istituto di Radiologia, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, 00186 Rome, Italy; (N.D.C.); (J.L.)
| |
Collapse
|