Effect of Supine vs Prone Breast Radiotherapy on Acute Toxic Effects of the Skin Among Women With Large Breast Size: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Randomised controlled trials on radiation dose fractionation in breast cancer: systematic review and meta-analysis with emphasis on side effects and cosmesis

OBJECTIVE

To provide a comprehensive assessment of various fractionation schemes in radiation therapy for breast cancer, with a focus on side effects, cosmesis, quality of life, risks of recurrence, and survival outcomes.

DESIGN

Systematic review and meta-analysis.

DATA SOURCES

Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (from inception to 23 October 2023).

STUDY SELECTION

Included studies were randomised controlled trials focusing on conventional fractionation (CF; daily fractions of 1.8-2 Gy, reaching a total dose of 50-50.4 Gy over 5-6 weeks), moderate hypofractionation (MHF; fraction sizes of 2.65-3.3 Gy for 13-16 fractions over 3-5 weeks), and/or ultra-hypofractionation (UHF; schedule of only 5 fractions).

DATA EXTRACTION

Two independent investigators screened studies and extracted data. Risk of bias and quality of evidence were assessed using the Cochrane Collaboration's tool and the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations) approach, respectively.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Pooled risk ratios (RRs) and hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using a random effects model. Heterogeneity was analysed using Cochran's Q test and I2 statistic. Network meta-analysis was used to integrate all available evidence.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The pre-specified primary outcome was grade ≥2 acute radiation dermatitis and late radiation therapy related side effects; secondary outcomes included cosmesis, quality of life, recurrence, and survival metrics.

RESULTS

From 1754 studies, 59 articles representing 35 trials (20 237 patients) were assessed; 21.6% of outcomes showed low risk of bias, whereas 78.4% had some concerns or high risk, particularly in outcome measurement (47.4%). The RR for grade ≥2 acute radiation dermatitis for MHF compared with CF was 0.54 (95% CI 0.49 to 0.61; P<0.001) and 0.68 (0.49 to 0.93; P=0.02) following breast conserving therapy and mastectomy, respectively. Hyperpigmentation and grade ≥2 breast shrinkage were less frequent after MHF than after CF, with RRs of 0.77 (0.62 to 0.95; P=0.02) and 0.92 (0.85 to 0.99; P=0.03), respectively, in the combined breast conserving therapy and mastectomy population. However, in the breast conserving therapy only trials, these differences in hyperpigmentation (RR 0.79, 0.60 to 1.03; P=0.08) and breast shrinkage (0.94, 0.83 to 1.07; P=0.35) were not statistically significant. The RR for grade ≥2 acute radiation dermatitis for UHF compared with MHF was 0.85 (0.47 to 1.55; P=0.60) for breast conserving therapy and mastectomy patients combined. MHF was associated with improved cosmesis and quality of life compared with CF, whereas data on UHF were less conclusive. Survival and recurrence outcomes were similar between UHF, MHF, and CF.

CONCLUSIONS

MHF shows improved safety profile, cosmesis, and quality of life compared with CF while maintaining equivalent oncological outcomes. Fewer randomised controlled trials have compared UHF with other fractionation schedules, but its safety and oncological effectiveness seem to be similar with short term follow-up. Given the advantages of reduced treatment time, enhanced convenience for patients, and potential cost effectiveness, MHF and UHF should be considered as preferred options over CF in appropriate clinical settings, with further research needed to solidify these findings.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

PROSPERO CRD42023460249.

Evidence-based summary of the prevention and management of radiation dermatitis in patients with breast cancer

Objective

Up to now there is a lack of research to summarize the relevant evidence for radiation dermatitis (RD) management in patients with breast cancer. Therefore, this study aimed to summarize the best evidence for the prevention and management of RD in patients with breast cancer.

Methods

According to the "6S" evidence pyramid model, all major databases were searched from January 2018 to February 2024: UpToDate, BMJ Best Practice, National Guideline Clearinghouse, Guidelines International Network, MedSci, Yi Maitong Guidelines, National Comprehensive Cancer Network, Oncology Nursing Society, Radiology Assistant database, Society and College of Radiographers, Australian JBI Evidence-Based Health Care Center database, Cochrane Library, PubMed, CINAHL, Embase, Web of Science, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Wangfang Data, Chinese Science and Technology Journal Database, Chinese Biology Medicine, etc.

Results

A total of 22 articles which met the inclusion criteria were included in the study, comprising six guidelines, nine systematic reviews, four evidence summaries, one clinical decision, one expert consensus, and one randomized controlled trial. We summarized 35 pieces of evidence across four aspects: influence factor, evaluation and monitoring, prevention and treatment, care and health education.

Conclusions

This study provides a comprehensive summary of the best evidence for the prevention and management of RD in patients with breast cancer. It is recommended that subsequent evidence transformation should be conducted based on specific clinical circumstances to standardize the process of clinical prevention and management of RD.

Systematic review registration

This study was registered at the Fudan University Center for Evidence-Based Nursing (Registration No. ES20244311).

Locoregional Ablative Radiation Therapy for Patients With Breast Cancer Unsuitable for Surgical Resection

PURPOSE

Patients with breast cancer who are unsuitable for surgical resection are typically managed with palliative systemic therapy alone. We report outcomes of 5-fraction ablative radiation therapy for nonresected breast cancers.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

This is a retrospective analysis of an institutional registry of patients with breast cancer who were unsuitable for resection and underwent 35 to 40 Gy/5 fractions to the primary breast tumor or regional lymph nodes from 2014 to 2021. Primary outcomes were cumulative incidence of local failure and grade ≥3 toxicity (Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events, version 5.0).

RESULTS

We reviewed 57 patients who received 61 treatment courses (median age of 81 years; range, 38-99). Unresectable tumor (10%), patient refusal (18%), medical inoperability (35%), and metastatic disease (37%) were the causes of not having surgery. Five patients (8%) had previously undergone adjuvant locoregional radiation therapy. Fifty-four percent (n = 33/61) of treatment courses targeted the breast only, 31% (n = 19/61) both the breast and lymph nodes, and 15% (n = 9/61) the lymph nodes only. Sixty-seven percent (n = 35/52) of the courses that targeted the breast were delivered with partial breast irradiation and 33% (n = 17/52) with whole breast radiation therapy (median dose of 25 Gy in 5 fractions) ± simultaneous integrated boost to the primary tumor. Most primary tumors (65%, n = 34/52) and target lymph nodes (61%, n = 17/28) were treated with a dose of 35 Gy in 5 fractions. Most treatments (52%) were delivered with intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT). Radiation therapy was delivered daily (20%), every other day (18%), twice weekly (36%), or weekly (26%). The 2-year cumulative incidence of local failure was 11.4% and grade≥3 toxicity was 15.1%. The grade ≥3 toxicity was 6.5% for IMRT treatments, versus 7.7% for non-IMRT treatments targeting partial breast or lymph nodes (hazard ratio, 1.13, P = .92), versus 38.9% for non-IMRT treatments targeting the entire breast (hazard ratio, 6.91, P = .023). All grade ≥3 toxicity cases were radiation dermatitis. No cases of brachial plexopathy were observed.

CONCLUSIONS

Thirty-five to 40 Gy in 5 fractions is a safe and effective breast stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) regimen and may be an attractive option for patients who are not surgical candidates. Highly conformal techniques (ie, IMRT or partial breast irradiation) were associated with a reduced risk of toxicity and should be the preferred treatment approaches.

Target volumes comparison between postoperative simulation magnetic resonance imaging and preoperative diagnostic magnetic resonance imaging for prone breast radiotherapy after breast-conserving surgery

BACKGROUND

This study investigated the differences in target volumes between preoperative magnetic resonance imaging (MRIpre) and postoperative MRI (MRIpost) for breast radiotherapy after breast-conserving surgery (BCS) using deformable image registration (DIR).

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Seventeen eligible patients who underwent whole-breast irradiation in the prone position after BCS were enrolled. On MRIpre, the gross tumor volume (GTV) was delineated as GTVpre, which was then expanded by 10 mm to represent the preoperative lumpectomy cavity (LC), denoted as LCpre. The LC was expanded to the clinical target volume (CTV) and planning target volume (PTV) on the MRIpre and MRIpost, denoted as CTVpre, CTVpost, PTVpre, and PTVpost, respectively. The MIM software system was used to register the MRIpre and MRIpost using DIR. Differences were evaluated regarding target volume, distance between the centers of mass (dCOM), conformity index (CI), and degree of inclusion (DI). The relationship between CILC /CIPTV and the clinical factors was also assessed.

RESULTS

Significant differences were observed in LC and PTV volumes between MRIpre and MRIpost (p < 0.0001). LCpre was 0.85 cm3 larger than LCpost, while PTVpre was 29.38 cm3 smaller than PTVpost. The dCOM between LCpre and LCpost was 1.371 cm, while that between PTVpre and PTVpost reduced to 1.348 cm. There were statistically significant increases in CI and DI for LCpost-LCpre and PTVpost-PTVpre (CI = 0.221, 0.470; DI = 0.472, 0.635). No obvious linear correlations (p > 0.05) were found between CI and GTV, primary tumor volume-to-breast volume ratio, distance from the primary tumor to the nipple and chest wall, and body mass index.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite using DIR technology, the spatial correspondence of target volumes between MRIpre and MRIpost was suboptimal. Therefore, relying solely on preoperative diagnostic MRI with DIR for postoperative LC delineation is not recommended.

Toward a Skin Dose-Area Metric Predictive of Moist Desquamation Using In Vivo Skin Dosimetry and Skin Assessments

Purpose

Moist desquamation (MD) is a concerning acute side effect of radiation therapy for breast cancer, often seen in skin folds for patients having large or pendulous breasts. In vivo skin dosimetry, clinical assessments, and patient-reported skin reactions were used to determine a relationship between dose-area metrics and the development of MD, to lend insight into skin tolerances and possibly guide future treatment planning dose constraints.

Methods and Materials

Skin dose was measured using GafChromic film on the inner surface of an early prototype carbon-fiber accessory for breast support to remove the inframammary fold in 20 patients at high risk of developing MD undergoing adjuvant whole breast radiation therapy. Prescribed doses were 42.5 Gray (Gy) in 16 fractions or 50 Gy in 25 fractions using 6 to 15 MV x-rays. To account for fraction size differences, analysis was performed using the equivalent dose in 2 Gy fractions using α/β = 11 (EQD211). MD was assessed out to 2 weeks post radiation therapy by trained therapists and by a patient-reported outcome questionnaire.

Results

Statistically significant differences in areas receiving 30 to 48 Gy (EQD211) were observed between patients who did and did not develop MD in the inframammary area. Patients receiving EQD211 maximum dose ≤ 46 Gy and ≥ 38 Gy to ≤ 50 cm2 of their breast skin did not develop MD.

Conclusions

The findings of this study offer insight into the relationship between skin toxicity and areas of skin irradiated to doses up to 50 Gy. Potential skin dose constraints to test in future studies to prevent MD are suggested.

Do Barrier Films Impact Long-Term Skin Toxicity following Whole-Breast Irradiation? Objective Follow-Up of Two Randomised Trials

Purpose: Hydrofilm, a polyurethane-based barrier film, can be used to prevent acute radiation dermatitis (RD) in adjuvant whole-breast irradiation (WBI) for breast cancer. This cost-effective prophylactic measure is currently being recommended to a growing number of patients, yet long-term safety data and its impact on late radiation-induced skin toxicity such as pigmentation changes and fibrosis have not been investigated. Methods: We objectively evaluated patients who were previously enrolled in either of two intrapatient-randomised (lateral versus medial breast halve) controlled trials on the use of Hydrofilm for RD prevention (DRKS00029665; registered on 19 July 2022). Results: Sixty-two patients (47.7% of the initial combined sample size) provided consent for this post-hoc examination, with a median follow-up time (range) of 58 (37-73) months. Following WBI, there was a significant increase in yellow skin tones of the entire breast when compared to baseline measurements before WBI (p < 0.001) and a significant increase of cutis, subcutis, and oedema thickness (p < 0.001, p < 0.001, and p = 0.004, respectively). At follow-up, there were no significant differences in either pigmentation changes or skin fibrosis between the Hydrofilm and standard of care breast halves. Conclusion: These data suggest that Hydrofilm can be safely used in the context of acute RD prevention, without affecting late side effects, supporting its widespread use.

Barrier films for the prevention of acute radiation dermatitis in breast cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

PURPOSE

Radiation dermatitis (RD) is the most common side effect of adjuvant whole-breast or chest wall irradiation, majorly impacting quality of life in numerous patients. The use of barrier films (polyurethane dressings such as Hydrofilm® and Mepitel® film remaining on the skin for the duration of the radiation treatment) has been investigated as a prophylactic measure in several prospective trials. Here, we critically appraise the available evidence behind preventive barrier film application in the context of breast cancer treatment.

METHODS

International literature was reviewed and high-quality randomised controlled trials (RCTs) were included in this meta-analysis.

RESULTS

The results of 5 RCTs (663 patients; >90% Caucasian) were analysed. Overall, barrier films lead to improved clinician- and patient-reported outcomes: fewer grade ≥2 RD (11% vs. 42%; OR = 0.16; p < 0.001) and moist desquamation (2% vs. 16%; OR = 0.12; p = 0.006), as well as less patient-reported pain (standardised mean difference [SMD] -0.51; p < 0.001), itching (SMD -0.52; p = 0.001), burning (SMD -0.41; p = 0.011), and limitations in daily activities (SMD -0.20; p = 0.007). Furthermore, barrier films have a high acceptance rate among patients, as well as a favourable cost-benefit ratio. Possible side effects due to its application are mild and mostly self-limiting. Overall, there was a lack of information on the radiation treatment techniques used.

CONCLUSION

The evidence presented in this meta-analysis suggests that barrier films are an excellent tool in the prevention of RD among Caucasian patients receiving whole-breast or chest wall irradiation. Its use should therefore be considered routinely in these patients.

Comparison of prone and supine positioning for breast cancer radiotherapy using REQUITE data: dosimetry, acute and two years physician and patient-reported outcomes

OBJECTIVE

Most patients receive whole breast radiotherapy in a supine position. However, two randomised trials showed lower acute toxicity in prone position. Furthermore, in most patients, prone positioning reduced doses to the organs at risk. To confirm these findings, we compared toxicity outcomes, photographic assessment, and dosimetry between both positions using REQUITE data.

METHODS

REQUITE is an international multi-centre prospective observational study that recruited 2069 breast cancer patients receiving radiotherapy. Data on toxicity, health-related quality of life (HRQoL), and dosimetry were collected, as well as a photographic assessment. A matched case control analysis compared patients treated prone (n = 268) versus supine (n = 493). Exact matching was performed for the use of intensity-modulated radiotherapy, boost, lymph node irradiation, chemotherapy and fractionation, and the nearest neighbour for breast volume. Primary endpoints were dermatitis at the end of radiotherapy, and atrophy and cosmetic outcome by photographic assessment at two years.

RESULTS

At the last treatment fraction, there was no significant difference in dermatitis (p = .28) or any HRQoL domain, but prone positioning increased the risk of breast oedema (p < .001). At 2 years, patients treated in prone position had less atrophy (p = .01), and higher body image (p < .001), and social functioning (p < .001) scores. The photographic assessment showed no difference in cosmesis at 2 years (p = .22). In prone position, mean heart dose (MHD) was significantly lower for left-sided patients (1.29 Gy vs 2.10 Gy, p < .001) and ipsilateral mean lung dose (MLD) was significantly lower for all patients (2.77 Gy vs 5.89 Gy, p < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

Prone radiotherapy showed lower MLD and MHD compared to supine position, although the risk of developing breast oedema during radiotherapy was higher. At 2 years the photographic assessment showed no difference in the cosmetic outcome, but less atrophy was seen in prone-treated patients and this seems to have a positive influence on the HRQoL domain of body image.

Advances in Radiotherapy for Breast Cancer

Breast cancer is the most prevalent cancer in women, and the second leading cause of cancer death in women in the United States. Radiation therapy is an important component in the multimodal management of breast cancer, including early stage and locally advanced breast cancers, as well as metastatic cases. Breast cancer radiation therapy has seen significant advancements over the past 20 years. This article discusses the latest advances in the radiotherapeutic management of breast cancer, especially focusing on the technological advances in radiation treatment planning and techniques that have exploited the understanding of radiation biology.

Not Too Little, Not Too Much: Optimizing More Versus Less Locoregional Treatment for Older Patients With Breast Cancer

Although undertreatment of older women with aggressive breast cancers has been a concern for years, there is increasing recognition that some older women are overtreated, receiving therapies unlikely to improve survival or reduce morbidity. De-escalation of surgery may include breast-conserving surgery over mastectomy for appropriate candidates and omitting or reducing extent of axillary surgery. Appropriate patients to de-escalate surgery are those with early-stage breast cancer, favorable tumor characteristics, are clinically node-negative, and who may have other major health issues. De-escalation of radiation includes reducing treatment course length through hypofractionation and ultrahypofractionation regimens, reducing treatment volumes through partial breast irradiation, omission of radiation for select patients, and reducing radiation dose to normal tissues. Shared decision making, which aims to facilitate patients making decisions concordant with their values, can guide health care providers and patients through complicated decisions optimizing breast cancer care.

Mepitel Film for the Prevention of Acute Radiation Dermatitis in Breast Cancer: A Randomized Multicenter Open-Label Phase III Trial

PURPOSE

Radiation dermatitis (RD) is common in patients undergoing breast radiotherapy. Mepitel film (MF) can reduce RD, but the results from two randomized controlled trials are conflicting. We aimed to conduct a confirmatory randomized controlled trial in patients at risk of RD.

METHODS

Patients were randomly assigned to receive MF or standard care (2:1 ratio). Patients with large breasts after lumpectomy (bra size ≥ 36 inches or cup size ≥ C) or after mastectomy were eligible. Stratification factors included surgery type, dose fractionation, and administration of boost/bolus. The primary end point was grade (G) 2 or 3 RD using the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events v5.0. Secondary end points included patient- and clinician-reported outcomes.

RESULTS

Between January 2020 and May 2022, 376 patients were included in the modified intention-to-treat analysis. The incidence of G2 or 3 RD was significantly lower in MF patients compared with standard care (n = 39/251, 15.5%; 95% CI, 11.3 to 20.6% v n = 57/125, 45.6%; 95% CI, 36.7 to 54.8% respectively, odds ratio (OR): 0.20, P < .0001). Benefits of MF remained significant in patients who developed G 3 RD (n = 7, 2.8%; 95% CI, 1.1 to 5.7% v n = 17, 13.6%; 95% CI, 8.1 to 20.9%, OR: 0.19) and moist desquamation (n = 20, 8.0%; 95% CI, 4.9 to 12.0% v n = 24, 19.2%; 95% CI, 12.7 to 27.1%, OR: 0.36). When evaluating the combined patient and health care provider score using Radiation-Induced Skin Reaction Assessment Scale, the MF arm had significantly lower scores (P < .0001). Individual items on the Radiation-Induced Skin Reaction Assessment Scale also favored the MF for both patient- and clinician-reported outcomes. Blistering/peeling, erythema, pigmentation, and edema were significantly reduced in the MF arm. Three patients removed the film prematurely because of rash (n = 2) and excessive pruritus (n = 1).

CONCLUSION

MF significantly reduces RD in patients undergoing breast radiotherapy.

Validation of a Patient-Reported Outcome Measure for Moist Desquamation among Breast Radiotherapy Patients

There has been an increasing interest in patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures in both the clinical and research settings to improve the quality of life among patients and to identify when clinical intervention may be needed. The primary purpose of this prospective study was to validate an acute breast skin toxicity PRO measure across a broad sample of patient body types undergoing radiation therapy. Between August 2018 and September 2019, 134 women undergoing adjuvant breast radiotherapy (RT) consented to completing serial PRO measures both during and post-RT treatment and to having their skin assessed by trained trial radiation therapists. There was high patient compliance, with 124 patients (92.5%) returning to the clinic post-RT for at least one staff skin assessment. Rates of moist desquamation (MD) in the infra-mammary fold (IMF) by PRO were compared with skin assessments completed by trial radiation therapists. There was high sensitivity (86.5%) and good specificity (79.4%) between PRO and staff-reported presence of MD in the IMF, and there was a moderate correlation between the peak severity of the MD reported by PRO and assessed by staff (rho = 0.61, p < 0.001). This prospective study validates a new PRO measure to monitor the presence of MD in the IMF among women receiving breast RT.