1
|
Piroth MD, Krug D, Baumann R, Strnad V, Borm K, Combs S, Corradini S, Duma MN, Dunst J, Fastner G, Feyer P, Fietkau R, Harms W, Hehr T, Hörner-Rieber J, Matuschek C, Schmeel C, Budach W. Implant-based reconstruction and adjuvant radiotherapy in breast cancer patients-current status and DEGRO recommendations. Strahlenther Onkol 2025; 201:353-367. [PMID: 39786586 PMCID: PMC11928413 DOI: 10.1007/s00066-024-02334-3] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/01/2024] [Accepted: 11/10/2024] [Indexed: 01/12/2025]
Abstract
PURPOSE The aim of this review is to give an overview of the results of prospective and retrospective studies using allogenic reconstruction and postmastectomy radiotherapy (PMRT) in breast cancer and to make recommendations regarding this interdisciplinary approach. MATERIALS AND METHODS A PubMed search was conducted to extract relevant articles from 2000 to 2024. The search was performed using the following terms: (breast cancer) AND (reconstruction OR implant OR expander) AND (radiotherapy OR radiation). Data from the literature on allogenic breast reconstruction and radiation are presented and discussed in relation to toxicity and cosmesis. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS Breast reconstruction is also feasible if PMRT is necessary. Patients need to be informed about the relevant risk of capsular fibrosis and implant failure. A planned reconstruction is no reason to forgo PMRT nor is an indication for PMRT a reason to forego implant-based breast reconstruction if desired by the patient. It is important to provide detailed information here to enable shared decision-making. There is still no clear consensus regarding implant-based reconstruction (IBR) and PMRT. However, in clinical practice, both a one-stage (immediate "implant-direct" IBR) procedure with PMRT up to the final implant and a two-stage (immediate-delayed IBR) procedure with PMRT up to the tissue expander (TE) and later exchange of the TE are used; both approaches have their specific advantages and disadvantages. Depending on patient-specific factors and the surgeon's experience and estimates, both IBR procedures are also possible in combination with PMRT. When using a TE/implant approach, completing skin stretching by adequately filling the expander before PMRT may be favorable. This approach is particularly practical when adjuvant chemotherapy is planned but may lead to postponement of radiotherapy when primary systemic therapy is given. According to the latest data, moderate hypofractionation also appears to be safe in the context of the IBR approach. It is important to have a closely coordinated interdisciplinary approach and to fully inform patients about the increased rate of potential side effects.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- M D Piroth
- Department of Radiation Oncology, HELIOS University Hospital Wuppertal, Witten/Herdecke University, Heusnerstraße 40, 42283, Wuppertal, Germany.
| | - D Krug
- Department of Radiotherapy and Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany
| | - R Baumann
- Department of Radiation Oncology, St. Marien-Krankenhaus, Siegen, Germany
| | - V Strnad
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Erlangen, Erlangen, Germany
| | - K Borm
- TUM School of Medicine, Department of Radiation Oncology, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - S Combs
- TUM School of Medicine, Department of Radiation Oncology, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany
- Partner Site Munich, Deutsches Konsortium für Translationale Krebsforschung (DKTK), Munich, Germany
- Department of Radiation Medicine (IRM), Helmholtz Zentrum München (HMGU), Neuherberg, Germany
| | - S Corradini
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - M N Duma
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Helios Clinics of Schwerin-University Campus of MSH Medical School Hamburg, Schwerin, Germany
- Department for Human Medicine, MSH Medical School Hamburg, Hamburg, Germany
| | - J Dunst
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Schleswig-Holstein, Kiel, Germany
| | - G Fastner
- Department of Radiotherapy and Radio-Oncology, University Hospital Salzburg, Landeskrankenhaus, Paracelsus Medical University, Salzburg, Austria
| | - P Feyer
- Formerly Department of Radiation Oncology, Vivantes Hospital Neukölln, Berlin, Germany
| | - R Fietkau
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Erlangen, Erlangen, Germany
| | - W Harms
- Department of Radiation Oncology, St. Claraspital, Basel, Switzerland
| | - T Hehr
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Marienhospital Stuttgart, Stuttgart, Germany
| | - J Hörner-Rieber
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf, Germany
| | - C Matuschek
- Department of Radiotherapy and Radiation Oncology, Bielefeld University, Medical School and University Medical Center OWL, Campus Klinikum Mitte, Bielefeld, Germany
| | - C Schmeel
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Bonn, Bonn, Germany
| | - W Budach
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Bao YQ, Yu TH, Huang W, Mao QF, Tu GJ, Li B, Yi A, Li JG, Rao J, Zhang HW, Jiang CL. Simultaneous integrated boost intensity-modulated radiotherapy post breast-conserving surgery: clinical efficacy, adverse effects, and cosmetic outcomes in breast cancer patients. Breast Cancer 2024; 31:726-734. [PMID: 38705942 PMCID: PMC11194202 DOI: 10.1007/s12282-024-01588-0] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/02/2024] [Accepted: 04/21/2024] [Indexed: 05/07/2024]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Simultaneous integrated boost intensity-modulated radiotherapy (SIB-IMRT) is an innovative technique delivering a higher dose to the tumor bed while irradiating the entire breast. This study aims to assess the clinical outcomes, adverse effects, and cosmetic results of SIB-IMRT following breast-conserving surgery in breast cancer patients. METHODS We conducted a retrospective analysis of 308 patients with stage 0-III breast cancer who underwent breast-conserving surgery and SIB-IMRT from January 2016 to December 2020. The prescribed doses included 1.85 Gy/27 fractions to the whole breast and 2.22 Gy/27 fractions or 2.20 Gy/27 fractions to the tumor bed. Primary endpoints included overall survival (OS), local-regional control (LRC), distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS), acute and late toxicities, and cosmetic outcomes. RESULTS The median follow-up time was 36 months. The 3-year OS, LRC, and DMFS rates were 100%, 99.6%, and 99.2%, respectively. Five patients (1.8%) experienced local recurrence or distant metastasis, and one patient succumbed to distant metastasis. The most common acute toxicity was grade 1-2 skin reactions (91.6%). The most common late toxicity was grade 0-1 skin and subcutaneous tissue reactions (96.7%). Five patients (1.8%) developed grade 1-2 upper limb lymphedema, and three patients (1.1%) had grade 1 radiation pneumonitis. Among the 262 patients evaluated for cosmetic outcomes at least 2 years post-radiotherapy, 96.9% achieved excellent or good results, while 3.1% had fair or poor outcomes. CONCLUSIONS SIB-IMRT after breast-conserving surgery in breast cancer patients demonstrated excellent clinical efficacy, mild acute and late toxicities, and satisfactory cosmetic outcomes in our study. SIB-IMRT appears to be a feasible and effective option for breast cancer patients suitable for breast-conserving surgery.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Yong-Qiang Bao
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Jiangxi Cancer Hospital, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Nanchang Medical College, Jiangxi Cancer Institute, Nanchang, 330029, Jiangxi, China
- Medical Oncology, Nanchang People's Hospital, Nanchang People's Hospital Affiliated of Nanchang Medical College, Nanchang, 330009, Jiangxi, China
| | - Teng-Hua Yu
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Jiangxi Cancer Hospital, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Nanchang Medical College, Jiangxi Cancer Institute, Nanchang, 330029, Jiangxi, China
| | - Wei Huang
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Shandong Cancer Hospital and Institute, Shandong First Medical University and Shandong Academy of Medical Sciences, Jinan, 250117, Shandong, China
| | - Qing-Feng Mao
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Jiangxi Cancer Hospital, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Nanchang Medical College, Jiangxi Cancer Institute, Nanchang, 330029, Jiangxi, China
| | - Gan-Jie Tu
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Jiangxi Cancer Hospital, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Nanchang Medical College, Jiangxi Cancer Institute, Nanchang, 330029, Jiangxi, China
| | - Bin Li
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Jiangxi Cancer Hospital, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Nanchang Medical College, Jiangxi Cancer Institute, Nanchang, 330029, Jiangxi, China
| | - An Yi
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Jiangxi Cancer Hospital, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Nanchang Medical College, Jiangxi Cancer Institute, Nanchang, 330029, Jiangxi, China
| | - Jin-Gao Li
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Jiangxi Cancer Hospital, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Nanchang Medical College, Jiangxi Cancer Institute, Nanchang, 330029, Jiangxi, China
| | - Jun Rao
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Jiangxi Cancer Hospital, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Nanchang Medical College, Jiangxi Cancer Institute, Nanchang, 330029, Jiangxi, China.
| | - Huai-Wen Zhang
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Jiangxi Cancer Hospital, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Nanchang Medical College, Jiangxi Cancer Institute, Nanchang, 330029, Jiangxi, China.
| | - Chun-Ling Jiang
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Jiangxi Cancer Hospital, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Nanchang Medical College, Jiangxi Cancer Institute, Nanchang, 330029, Jiangxi, China.
- Key Laboratory of Personalized Diagnosis and Treatment of Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma, Medical College of Nanchang University, Nanchang, 330029, Jiangxi, China.
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Forster T, Köhler C, Dorn M, Häfner MF, Arians N, König L, Harrabi SB, Schlampp I, Weykamp F, Meixner E, Lang K, Heinrich V, Weidner N, Hüsing J, Wallwiener M, Golatta M, Hennigs A, Heil J, Hof H, Krug D, Debus J, Hörner-Rieber J. Noninferiority of Local Control and Comparable Toxicity of Intensity Modulated Radiation Therapy With Simultaneous Integrated Boost in Breast Cancer: 5-Year Results of the IMRT-MC2 Phase III Trial. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2023; 117:857-868. [PMID: 37244626 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2023.05.035] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/22/2023] [Revised: 05/09/2023] [Accepted: 05/19/2023] [Indexed: 05/29/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE The IMRT-MC2 trial was conducted to demonstrate the noninferiority of conventionally fractionated intensity modulated radiation therapy with a simultaneous integrated boost to 3-dimensional conformal radiation therapy with a sequential boost for adjuvant breast radiation therapy. METHODS AND MATERIALS A total of 502 patients were randomized between 2011 and 2015 for the prospective, multicenter, phase III trial (NCT01322854). Five-year results of late toxicity (late effects normal tissue task force-subjective, objective, management, and analytical), overall survival, disease-free survival, distant disease-free survival, cosmesis (Harvard scale), and local control (noninferiority margin at hazard ratio [HR] of 3.5) were analyzed after a median follow-up of 62 months. RESULTS The 5-year local control rate for the intensity modulated radiation therapy with simultaneous integrated boost arm was non-inferior to the control arm (98.7% vs 98.3%, respectively; HR, 0.582; 95% CI, 0.119-2.375; P = .4595). Furthermore, there was no significant difference in overall survival (97.1% vs 98.3%, respectively; HR, 1.235; 95% CI, 0.472-3.413; P = .6697), disease-free survival (95.8% vs 96.1%, respectively; HR, 1.130; 95% CI, 0.487-2.679; P = .7758), and distant disease-free survival (97.0% vs 97.8%, respectively; HR, 1.667; 95% CI, 0.575-5.434; P = .3601). After 5 years, late toxicity evaluation and cosmetic assessment further showed no significant differences between treatment arms. CONCLUSIONS The 5-year results of the IMRT-MC2 trial provide strong evidence that the application of conventionally fractionated simultaneous integrated boost irradiation for patients with breast cancer is both safe and effective, with noninferior local control compared with 3-dimensional conformal radiation therapy with sequential boost.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Tobias Forster
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany; Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg, Germany; National Center for Tumor Diseases, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Clara Köhler
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Melissa Dorn
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Matthias Felix Häfner
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany; Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg, Germany; National Center for Tumor Diseases, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Nathalie Arians
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany; Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg, Germany; National Center for Tumor Diseases, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Laila König
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany; Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg, Germany; National Center for Tumor Diseases, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Semi Ben Harrabi
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany; Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg, Germany; National Center for Tumor Diseases, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Ingmar Schlampp
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany; Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg, Germany; National Center for Tumor Diseases, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Fabian Weykamp
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany; Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg, Germany; National Center for Tumor Diseases, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Eva Meixner
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany; Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg, Germany; National Center for Tumor Diseases, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Kristin Lang
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany; Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg, Germany; National Center for Tumor Diseases, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Vanessa Heinrich
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Eberhard-Karls-University Tuebingen, Tuebingen, Germany
| | - Nicola Weidner
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Eberhard-Karls-University Tuebingen, Tuebingen, Germany
| | - Johannes Hüsing
- Division of Biostatistics, Coordination Centre for Clinical Trials, University of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Markus Wallwiener
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Michael Golatta
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - André Hennigs
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Jörg Heil
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Holger Hof
- Strahlentherapie Rhein-Pfalz, Neustadt, Germany
| | - David Krug
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany; Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg, Germany; National Center for Tumor Diseases, Heidelberg, Germany; Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Schleswig Holstein, Kiel, Germany
| | - Jürgen Debus
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany; Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg, Germany; National Center for Tumor Diseases, Heidelberg, Germany; Clinical Cooperation Unit Radiation Oncology, German Cancer Research Center, Heidelberg, Germany; Heidelberg Ion-Beam Therapy Center, Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany; German Cancer Consortium, partner site Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Juliane Hörner-Rieber
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany; Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg, Germany; National Center for Tumor Diseases, Heidelberg, Germany; Clinical Cooperation Unit Radiation Oncology, German Cancer Research Center, Heidelberg, Germany.
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Mondragon LL, Lopez HP, Diaz AF, Lio IA, Guzman AO. Beyond the heart in hypofractionated radiotherapy and in the transition from 3D to IMRT/VMAT. Rep Pract Oncol Radiother 2023; 28:478-484. [PMID: 37795223 PMCID: PMC10547416 DOI: 10.5603/rpor.a2023.0053] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/12/2022] [Accepted: 07/19/2023] [Indexed: 10/06/2023] Open
Abstract
Background The knowledge of the risks induced by radiation with hypofractionation regimens has only recently been estimated together with its implementation as a management standard. However, the dose to other risk organs with intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) or volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) is not clear, that is why this is only a reference study of radiation doses to organs at risk in hypofractionation in our center. Materials and methods We completed a retrospective and observational analysis of 1398 patients treated with adjuvant hypofractionated radiotherapy from 2015 to 2018, using the clinical records and dose-volume histogram of patients treated with moderate hypofractionated adjuvant radiotherapy. To analyze the institutional experience on the dosimetry of the esophagus and liver as risk organs in the use of moderate adjuvant hypofractionated radiotherapy in breast cancer. Results The dosimetry of the esophagus was 3271 cGy DMax, 177 cGy DMed, 68 cGy D50%, 500 cGy DcMAX with 3D RT and 4124 cGy DMax, 1242 cGy DMed, 934.50 cGy D50%, 3213 cGy DcMAX with IMRT/VMAT and the dosimetry for the liver was for right breast cancer 466 cGy DMed, 102 cGy D50% and 8% V20, for left breast cancer 22 cGy DMed, 6.10 cGy D50% and 0.3% V20. Conclusion The statistically significant differences in irradiation show the lack of consensus on the optimal restrictions in hypofractionation regimens to reduce clinical sequela; consequently, the variability in the specification of each radiation oncologist is observed; standardization in our center can lead to improvement in the quality of treatments.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Lorena Lio Mondragon
- Department of Radiotherapy, National Medical Center XXI Century, Instituto Mexicano del Seguro Social, México City, México
| | - Hidralba Pérez Lopez
- Department of Radiotherapy, National Medical Center XXI Century, Instituto Mexicano del Seguro Social, México City, México
| | - Adolfo Fernández Diaz
- Department of Radiotherapy, National Medical Center XXI Century, Instituto Mexicano del Seguro Social, México City, México
| | - Iván Avilés Lio
- Department of Radiotherapy, National Medical Center XXI Century, Instituto Mexicano del Seguro Social, México City, México
| | - Alejandro Olmos Guzman
- Department of Radiotherapy, National Medical Center of Bajío, Instituto Mexicano del Seguro Social, León, Guanajuato, México
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Saifi O, Bachir B, Panoff J, Poortmans P, Zeidan YH. Post-mastectomy Radiation Therapy in HER-2 Positive Breast Cancer after Primary Systemic Therapy: Pooled Analysis of TRYPHAENA and NeoSphere Trials. Radiother Oncol 2023; 184:109668. [PMID: 37030399 DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2023.109668] [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: 01/31/2023] [Revised: 03/27/2023] [Accepted: 03/31/2023] [Indexed: 04/10/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE The role of post-mastectomy radiation therapy (PMRT) following primary systemic therapy (PST) in HER-2 positive breast cancer (Her2+BC) remains poorly understood. The current study evaluates PMRT based on the pathological response to PST in Her2+BC. METHODS AND MATERIALS TRYPHAENA and NeoSphere are randomized phase II trials that investigated PST for Her2+BC. Our study is a pooled analysis of both trials, including 312 node-positive patients treated with HER-2 targeted PST followed by mastectomy with or without PMRT. The primary endpoint is loco-regional recurrence-free survival (LRRFS). RESULTS Our analysis included 172 (55%) patients who achieved complete nodal pathological response (ypN0) and 140 (45%) patients who did not. Patients with ypN0 had a 5-year LRRFS of 97% in both, the PMRT and no PMRT, groups (p=0.94). Patients with ypN+ had 5-year LRRFS of 89% in the PMRT group and 82% in the no PMRT group (p=0.17). Patients with ypN1 (n=62) disease who received PMRT (n=40) had a 5-year LRRFS of 85% as compared to 89% in those who did not (n=22); (p=0.60). A significant LRRFS difference was noted in patients with ypN2-3 (n=78) disease who received PMRT (n=53) compared to those who did not (n=25) (5-year LRRFS 92% vs. 75%; p=0.019). On multivariate analysis, clinical nodal disease at diagnosis and ypN0 were significantly associated with loco-regional recurrence (LRR). CONCLUSIONS Her2+BC patients who achieve ypN0 after PST have excellent locoregional-control which supports de-escalation of PMRT. In contrast, patients with ypN2-3 disease derive significant benefit from PMRT. Clinical nodal stage at presentation and ypN0 status are significantly associated with LRR risk in Her2+BC.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Omran Saifi
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, FL, USA
| | - Bachir Bachir
- Faculty of Medicine, American University of Beirut, Beirut, Lebanon
| | - Joseph Panoff
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Baptist Health of South Florida, Miami, FL, USA
| | - Philip Poortmans
- Iridium Netwerk, Wilrijk-Antwerp, Belgium; University of Antwerp, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Wilrijk-Antwerp, Belgium
| | - Youssef H Zeidan
- Faculty of Medicine, American University of Beirut, Beirut, Lebanon; Lynn Cancer Institute, Baptist Health of South Florida, Boca Raton, FL.
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Momin S, Lei Y, McCall NS, Zhang J, Roper J, Harms J, Tian S, Lloyd MS, Liu T, Bradley JD, Higgins K, Yang X. Mutual enhancing learning-based automatic segmentation of CT cardiac substructure. Phys Med Biol 2022; 67. [PMID: 35447610 PMCID: PMC9148580 DOI: 10.1088/1361-6560/ac692d] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/18/2021] [Accepted: 04/21/2022] [Indexed: 11/12/2022]
Abstract
Abstract
Objective. Current segmentation practice for thoracic cancer RT considers the whole heart as a single organ despite increased risks of cardiac toxicities from irradiation of specific cardiac substructures. Segmenting up to 15 different cardiac substructures can be a very time-intensive process, especially due to their different volume sizes and anatomical variations amongst different patients. In this work, a new deep learning (DL)-based mutual enhancing strategy is introduced for accurate and automatic segmentation, especially of smaller substructures such as coronary arteries. Approach. Our proposed method consists of three subnetworks: retina U-net, classification module, and segmentation module. Retina U-net is used as a backbone network architecture that aims to learn deep features from the whole heart. Whole heart feature maps from retina U-net are then transferred to four different sets of classification modules to generate classification localization maps of coronary arteries, great vessels, chambers of the heart, and valves of the heart. Each classification module is in sync with its corresponding subsequent segmentation module in a bootstrapping manner, allowing them to share their encoding paths to generate a mutual enhancing strategy. We evaluated our method on three different datasets: institutional CT datasets (55 subjects) 2) publicly available Multi-Modality Whole Heart Segmentation (MM-WHS) challenge datasets (120 subjects), and Automated Cardiac Diagnosis Challenge (ACDC) datasets (100 subjects). For institutional datasets, we performed five-fold cross-validation on training data (45 subjects) and performed inference on separate hold-out data (10 subjects). For each subject, 15 cardiac substructures were manually contoured by a resident physician and evaluated by an attending radiation oncologist. For the MM-WHS dataset, we trained the network on 100 datasets and performed an inference on a separate hold-out dataset with 20 subjects, each with 7 cardiac substructures. For ACDC datasets, we performed five-fold cross-validation on 100 datasets, each with 3 cardiac substructures. We compared the proposed method against four different network architectures: 3D U-net, mask R-CNN, mask scoring R-CNN, and proposed network without classification module. Segmentation accuracies were statistically compared through dice similarity coefficient, Jaccard, 95% Hausdorff distance, mean surface distance, root mean square distance, center of mass distance, and volume difference. Main results. The proposed method generated cardiac substructure segmentations with significantly higher accuracy (P < 0.05) for small substructures, especially for coronary arteries such as left anterior descending artery (CA-LADA) and right coronary artery (CA-RCA) in comparison to four competing methods. For large substructures (i.e. chambers of the heart), our method yielded comparable results to mask scoring R-CNN method, resulting in significantly (P < 0.05) improved segmentation accuracy in comparison to 3D U-net and mask R-CNN. Significance. A new DL-based mutual enhancing strategy was introduced for automatic segmentation of cardiac substructures. Overall results of this work demonstrate the ability of the proposed method to improve segmentation accuracies of smaller substructures such as coronary arteries without largely compromising the segmentation accuracies of larger substructures. Fast and accurate segmentations of up to 15 substructures can possibly be used as a tool to rapidly generate substructure segmentations followed by physicians’ reviews to improve clinical workflow.
Collapse
|
7
|
Fourati N, Charfeddine S, Chaffai I, Dhouib F, Farhat L, Boukhris M, Abid L, Kammoun S, Mnejja W, Daoud J. Subclinical left ventricle impairment following breast cancer radiotherapy: Is there an association between segmental doses and segmental strain dysfunction? Int J Cardiol 2021; 345:130-136. [PMID: 34687800 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijcard.2021.10.026] [Citation(s) in RCA: 14] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/12/2021] [Revised: 09/22/2021] [Accepted: 10/15/2021] [Indexed: 12/12/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Cardiotoxicity following breast cancer radiotherapy (RT) represents one of the most redoubtable toxicities. The Global longitudinal strain measurement (GLS) based on 2D speckle tracking imaging (STI) allows detection of left ventricular (LV) dysfunction at a subclinical stage. The aim of this prospective study was to detect patients at risk of cardiotoxicity using echocardiographic parameters and to determine the association between segmental RT doses and early cardiac toxicity. MATERIAL AND METHODS The STI was performed prior to RT and at 3, 6 and 12 months after. The association between subclinical LV dysfunction, defined as a reduction of GLS more than 10% from the initial value, radiation doses to different LV segments and non-radiation factors were performed based on multivariate analyses. RESULTS From June 2017 to August 2018, a total of 103 female patients were included. Sixty patients had left sided RT. Seven patients (7.8%) developed a GSL impairment. The segmental alterations predominated in the anteroseptal and apical LV segments. The mean Dmean in altered segments was significantly higher than in non-altered segments (6.7 ± 8.8Gy-7.8 ± 8.9Gy vs 4.9 ± 7.9-5.4 ± 8.2Gy; p < 0.05). Age > 55 years and obesity were important confounding factors that should be considered during radiotherapy planning. CONCLUSION The results of our study show that radiation dose is correlated with the subclinical LV segments' alteration. Global heart delineation seems to be insufficient during the breast radiotherapy planning. Segmental delineation of the LV may be an interesting alternative to limit segmental doses and to reduce the risk of subclinical alterations. A mean dose of 5Gy could be proposed in exposed heart segment.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- N Fourati
- Radiotherapy Department, Habib Bourguiba Hospital, Medical School University of Sfax, Sfax, Tunisia; Research Laboratory Medical Oncology and Oncology Radiotherapy LR19ES14, Tunisia.
| | - S Charfeddine
- Cardiology Department, Hedi Chaker Hospital, Medical School University of Sfax, Sfax, Tunisia; Research Unity of Heart Failure UR17ES37, Tunisia
| | - I Chaffai
- Radiotherapy Department, Habib Bourguiba Hospital, Medical School University of Sfax, Sfax, Tunisia; Research Laboratory Medical Oncology and Oncology Radiotherapy LR19ES14, Tunisia
| | - F Dhouib
- Radiotherapy Department, Habib Bourguiba Hospital, Medical School University of Sfax, Sfax, Tunisia; Research Laboratory Medical Oncology and Oncology Radiotherapy LR19ES14, Tunisia
| | - L Farhat
- Radiotherapy Department, Habib Bourguiba Hospital, Medical School University of Sfax, Sfax, Tunisia; Research Laboratory Medical Oncology and Oncology Radiotherapy LR19ES14, Tunisia
| | - M Boukhris
- Cardiology Division, Hospital Center University of Montreal, Quebec, Canada
| | - L Abid
- Cardiology Department, Hedi Chaker Hospital, Medical School University of Sfax, Sfax, Tunisia; Research Unity of Heart Failure UR17ES37, Tunisia
| | - S Kammoun
- Cardiology Department, Hedi Chaker Hospital, Medical School University of Sfax, Sfax, Tunisia; Research Unity of Heart Failure UR17ES37, Tunisia
| | - W Mnejja
- Radiotherapy Department, Habib Bourguiba Hospital, Medical School University of Sfax, Sfax, Tunisia; Research Laboratory Medical Oncology and Oncology Radiotherapy LR19ES14, Tunisia
| | - J Daoud
- Radiotherapy Department, Habib Bourguiba Hospital, Medical School University of Sfax, Sfax, Tunisia; Research Laboratory Medical Oncology and Oncology Radiotherapy LR19ES14, Tunisia
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Mäurer M, Pachmann K, Wendt T, Schott D, Wittig A. Prospective Monitoring of Circulating Epithelial Tumor Cells (CETC) Reveals Changes in Gene Expression during Adjuvant Radiotherapy of Breast Cancer Patients. ACTA ACUST UNITED AC 2021; 28:3507-3524. [PMID: 34590615 PMCID: PMC8482075 DOI: 10.3390/curroncol28050302] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/20/2021] [Revised: 08/22/2021] [Accepted: 09/03/2021] [Indexed: 11/27/2022]
Abstract
Circulating epithelial tumor cells (CETC) are considered to be responsible for the formation of metastases. Therefore, their importance as prognostic and/or predictive markers in breast cancer is being intensively investigated. Here, the reliability of single cell expression analyses in isolated and collected CETC from whole blood samples of patients with early-stage breast cancer before and after radiotherapy (RT) using the maintrac® method was investigated. Single-cell expression analyses were performed with qRT-PCR on a panel of selected genes: GAPDH, EpCAM, NANOG, Bcl-2, TLR 4, COX-2, PIK3CA, Her-2/neu, Vimentin, c-Met, Ki-67. In all patients, viable CETC were detected prior to and at the end of radiotherapy. In 7 of the 9 (77.8%) subjects examined, the CETC number at the end of the radiotherapy series was higher than before. The majority of genes analyzed showed increased expression after completion of radiotherapy compared to baseline. Procedures and methods used in this pilot study proved to be feasible. The method is suitable for further investigation of the underlying molecular biological mechanisms occurring in cells surviving radiotherapy and possibly the development of radiation resistance.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Matthias Mäurer
- Department of Radiotherapy and Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Jena, Bachstraße 18, 07743 Jena, Germany; (T.W.); (A.W.)
- Correspondence:
| | - Katharina Pachmann
- Transfusion Center Bayreuth, Kurpromenade 2, 95448 Bayreuth, Germany; (K.P.); (D.S.)
| | - Thomas Wendt
- Department of Radiotherapy and Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Jena, Bachstraße 18, 07743 Jena, Germany; (T.W.); (A.W.)
| | - Dorothea Schott
- Transfusion Center Bayreuth, Kurpromenade 2, 95448 Bayreuth, Germany; (K.P.); (D.S.)
| | - Andrea Wittig
- Department of Radiotherapy and Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Jena, Bachstraße 18, 07743 Jena, Germany; (T.W.); (A.W.)
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Forster T, Hommertgen A, Häfner MF, Arians N, König L, Harrabi SB, Schlampp I, Köhler C, Meixner E, Heinrich V, Weidner N, Hüsing J, Sohn C, Heil J, Golatta M, Hof H, Krug D, Debus J, Hörner-Rieber J. Quality of life after simultaneously integrated boost with intensity-modulated versus conventional radiotherapy with sequential boost for adjuvant treatment of breast cancer: 2-year results of the multicenter randomized IMRT-MC2 trial. Radiother Oncol 2021; 163:165-176. [PMID: 34480960 DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2021.08.019] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/30/2021] [Revised: 08/24/2021] [Accepted: 08/26/2021] [Indexed: 10/20/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND We recently published 2-year results of the prospective, randomized IMRT-MC2 trial, showing non-inferior local control and cosmesis in breast cancer patients after conventionally fractionated intensity-modulated radiotherapy with simultaneously integrated boost (IMRT-SIB), compared to 3D-conformal radiotherapy with sequential boost (3D-CRT-seqB). Here, we report on 2-year quality of life results. PATIENTS AND METHODS 502 patients were enrolled and randomized to IMRT-SIB (50.4 Gy in 1.8 Gy fractions with a 64.4 Gy SIB to the tumor bed) or to 3D-CRT-seqB (50.4 Gy in 1.8 Gy fractions, followed by a sequential boost of 16 Gy in 2 Gy fractions). For quality of life (QoL) assessment, patients completed the QLQ-C30 and QLQ-BR23 questionnaires at baseline, 6 weeks and 2 years after radiotherapy. RESULTS Significant differences between treatment arms were seen 6 weeks after radiotherapy for pain (22.3 points for IMRT vs. 27.0 points for 3D-CRT-seqB; p = 0.033) and arm symptoms (18.1 points for IMRT vs. 23.6 points for 3D-CRT-seqB; p = 0.013), both favoring IMRT-SIB. Compared to baseline values, both arms showed significant improvement in global score (IMRT: p = 0.009; 3D-CRT: p = 0.001) after 2 years, with slight deterioration on the role (IMRT: p = 0.008; 3-D-CRT: p = 0.001) and social functioning (IMRT: p = 0.013, 3D-CRT: p = 0.001) as well as the future perspectives scale (IMRT: p = 0.003; 3D-CRT: p = 0.0034). CONCLUSION This is the first randomized phase III trial demonstrating that IMRT-SIB was associated with slightly superior QoL compared to 3-D-CRT-seqB. These findings further support the clinical implementation of SIB in adjuvant breast cancer treatment.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Tobias Forster
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Germany; Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO), Germany; National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Adriane Hommertgen
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Germany; Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO), Germany; National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Matthias Felix Häfner
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Germany; Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO), Germany; National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Nathalie Arians
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Germany; Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO), Germany; National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Laila König
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Germany; Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO), Germany; National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Semi Ben Harrabi
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Germany; Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO), Germany; National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Ingmar Schlampp
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Germany; Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO), Germany; National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Clara Köhler
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Germany
| | - Eva Meixner
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Germany; Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO), Germany; National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Vanessa Heinrich
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Eberhard-Karls-University Tuebingen, Germany
| | - Nicola Weidner
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Eberhard-Karls-University Tuebingen, Germany
| | - Johannes Hüsing
- Division of Biostatistics, Coordination Centre for Clinical Trials, University of Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Christof Sohn
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University of Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Jörg Heil
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University of Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Michael Golatta
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University of Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Holger Hof
- Strahlentherapie Rhein-Pfalz, Neustadt, Germany
| | - David Krug
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Germany; Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO), Germany; National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), Heidelberg, Germany; Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Schleswig Holstein, Kiel, Germany
| | - Jürgen Debus
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Germany; Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO), Germany; National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), Heidelberg, Germany; Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Schleswig Holstein, Kiel, Germany; Clinical Cooperation Unit Radiation Oncology, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany; Heidelberg Ion-Beam Therapy Center (HIT), Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Germany
| | - Juliane Hörner-Rieber
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Germany; Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO), Germany; National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), Heidelberg, Germany; Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Schleswig Holstein, Kiel, Germany; German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), partner site, Heidelberg, Germany.
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Hörner-Rieber J, Forster T, Hommertgen A, Haefner MF, Arians N, König L, Harrabi SB, Schlampp I, Weykamp F, Lischalk JW, Heinrich V, Weidner N, Hüsing J, Sohn C, Heil J, Hof H, Krug D, Debus J. Intensity Modulated Radiation Therapy (IMRT) With Simultaneously Integrated Boost Shortens Treatment Time and Is Noninferior to Conventional Radiation Therapy Followed by Sequential Boost in Adjuvant Breast Cancer Treatment: Results of a Large Randomized Phase III Trial (IMRT-MC2 Trial). Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2020; 109:1311-1324. [PMID: 33321192 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2020.12.005] [Citation(s) in RCA: 32] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/10/2020] [Revised: 12/01/2020] [Accepted: 12/04/2020] [Indexed: 01/02/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE In the modern era, improvements in radiation therapy techniques have paved the way for simultaneous integrated boost irradiation in adjuvant breast radiation therapy after breast conservation surgery. Nevertheless, randomized trials supporting the noninferiority of this treatment to historical standards of care approach are lacking. METHODS A prospective, multicenter, randomized phase 3 trial (NCT01322854) was performed to analyze noninferiority of conventional fractionated intensity modulated radiation therapy with simultaneous integrated boost (IMRT-SIB) to 3-D conformal radiation therapy with sequential boost (3-D-CRT-seqB) for breast cancer patients. Primary outcomes were local control (LC) rates at 2 and 5 years (noninferiority margin at hazard ratio [HR] of 3.5) as well as cosmetic results 6 weeks and 2 years after radiation therapy (evaluated via photo documentation calculating the relative breast retraction assessment [pBRA] score [noninferiority margin of 1.25]). RESULTS A total of 502 patients were randomly assigned from 2011 to 2015. After a median follow-up of 5.1 years, the 2-year LC for the IMRT-SIB arm was noninferior to the 3-D-CRT-seqB arm (99.6% vs 99.6%, respectively; HR, 0.602; 95% CI, 0.123-2.452; P = .487). In addition, noninferiority was also shown for cosmesis after IMRT-SIB and 3-D-CRT-seqB at both 6 weeks (median pBRA, 9.1% vs 9.1%) and 2 years (median pBRA, 10.4% vs 9.8%) after radiation therapy (95% CI, -0.317 to 0.107 %; P = .332). Cosmetic assessment according to the Harvard scale by both the patient and the treating physician as well as late-toxicity evaluation with the late effects normal tissues- subjective, objective, management, analytic criteria, a score for the evaluation of long-term adverse effects in normal tissue, revealed no significant differences between treatment arms. In addition, there was no difference in overall survival rates (99.6% vs 99.6%; HR, 3.281; 95% CI: -0.748 to 22.585; P = .148) for IMRT-SIB and 3-D-CRT-seqB, respectively. CONCLUSIONS To our knowledge, this is the first prospective trial reporting the noninferiority of IMRT-SIB versus 3-D-CRT-seqB with respect to cosmesis and LC at 2 years of follow-up. This treatment regimen considerably shortens adjuvant radiation therapy times without compromising clinical outcomes.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Juliane Hörner-Rieber
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany; Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg, Germany; National Center for Tumor Diseases, Heidelberg, Germany; Clinical Cooperation Unit Radiation Oncology, German Cancer Research Center, Heidelberg, Germany.
| | - Tobias Forster
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany; Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg, Germany; National Center for Tumor Diseases, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Adriane Hommertgen
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany; Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg, Germany; National Center for Tumor Diseases, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Matthias F Haefner
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany; Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg, Germany; National Center for Tumor Diseases, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Nathalie Arians
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany; Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg, Germany; National Center for Tumor Diseases, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Laila König
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany; Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg, Germany; National Center for Tumor Diseases, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Semi B Harrabi
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany; Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg, Germany; National Center for Tumor Diseases, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Ingmar Schlampp
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany; Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg, Germany; National Center for Tumor Diseases, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Fabian Weykamp
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany; Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg, Germany; National Center for Tumor Diseases, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Jonathan W Lischalk
- Perlmutter Cancer Center, Lagone Medical Center, New York University, New York, New York
| | - Vanessa Heinrich
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Eberhard-Karls-University Tuebingen, Tuebingen, Germany
| | - Nicola Weidner
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Eberhard-Karls-University Tuebingen, Tuebingen, Germany
| | - Johannes Hüsing
- Division of Biostatistics, Coordination Centre for Clinical Trials, University of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Christof Sohn
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Jörrg Heil
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Holger Hof
- Strahlentherapie Rhein-Pfalz, Neustadt, Germany
| | - David Krug
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany; Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg, Germany; National Center for Tumor Diseases, Heidelberg, Germany; Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Schleswig Holstein, Kiel, Germany
| | - Jürgen Debus
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany; Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg, Germany; National Center for Tumor Diseases, Heidelberg, Germany; Clinical Cooperation Unit Radiation Oncology, German Cancer Research Center, Heidelberg, Germany; Heidelberg Ion-Beam Therapy Center, Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany; German Cancer Consortium, partner site Heidelberg, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Borm KJ, Oechsner M, Düsberg M, Buschner G, Wolfgang W, Combs SE, Duma MN. Effect of hypofractionation on the incidental axilla dose during tangential field radiotherapy in breast cancer. Strahlenther Onkol 2020; 196:771-778. [PMID: 32488292 PMCID: PMC7450000 DOI: 10.1007/s00066-020-01636-6] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/19/2019] [Accepted: 05/09/2020] [Indexed: 11/30/2022]
Abstract
Objective Tangential field irradiation in breast cancer potentially treats residual tumor cells in the axilla after sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB). In recent years, hypofractionated radiotherapy has gained importance and currently represents the recommended standard in adjuvant breast cancer treatment for many patients. So far, the impact of hypofractionation on the effect of incidental lymph node irradiation has not be addressed. Materials and methods Biological effective dose (BED) and tumor control probability (TCP) were estimated for four different hypofractionated radiation schemes (42.50 Gy in 16 fractions [Fx]; 40.05 Gy in 15 Fx; 27 Gy in 5 Fx; and 26 in 5 Fx) and compared to conventional fractionation (50 Gy in 25 Fx). For calculation of BED and TCP, a previously published radiobiological model with an α/β ratio of 4 Gy was used. The theoretical BED and TCP for incidental irradiation between 0 and 100% of the prescribed dose were evaluated. Subsequently, we assessed BED and TCP in 431 axillary lymph node metastases. Results The extent of incidental lymph node irradiation and the fractionation scheme have a direct impact on BED and TCP. The estimated mean TCP in the axillary nodes ranged from 1.5 ± 6.4% to 57.5 ± 22.9%, depending on the patient’s anatomy and the fractionation scheme. Hypofractionation led to a significant reduction of mean TCP of lymph node metastases for all schedules. Conclusion Our data indicate that hypofractionation might affect the effectiveness of incidental radiotherapy in the axilla. This is particularly relevant for patients with positive sentinel lymph nodes who receive SLNB only.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kai J Borm
- Department of RadiationOncology, Technical University Munich, Medical School, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Munich, Germany
| | - Markus Oechsner
- Department of RadiationOncology, Technical University Munich, Medical School, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Munich, Germany
| | - Mathias Düsberg
- Department of RadiationOncology, Technical University Munich, Medical School, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Munich, Germany
| | - Gabriel Buschner
- Department of Nuclear Medicine, Technical University Munich, Medical School, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Munich, Germany
| | - Weber Wolfgang
- Department of Nuclear Medicine, Technical University Munich, Medical School, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Munich, Germany
| | - Stephanie E Combs
- Department of RadiationOncology, Technical University Munich, Medical School, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Munich, Germany.,Deutsches Konsortium für Translationale Krebsforschung (DKTK)-Partner Site Munich, Munich, Germany.,Institute of Radiation Medicine, Helmholtzzentrum München, Ingolstaedter Landstr. 1, 85764, Neuherberg, Germany
| | - Marciana N Duma
- Department of RadiationOncology, Technical University Munich, Medical School, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Munich, Germany. .,Department of Radiotherapy and Radiation Oncology, Friedrich Schiller University Hospital, Bachstraße 18, 07743, Jena, Germany.
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
Krug D, Baumann R, Budach W, Duma MN, Dunst J, Feyer P, Fietkau R, Haase W, Harms W, Hehr T, Piroth MD, Sedlmayer F, Souchon R, Wenz F, Sauer R. Commercially Available Gene Expression Assays as Predictive Tools for Adjuvant Radiotherapy? A Critical Review. Breast Care (Basel) 2020; 15:118-126. [PMID: 32398980 DOI: 10.1159/000505656] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/30/2019] [Accepted: 12/23/2019] [Indexed: 12/17/2022] Open
Abstract
Background Gene expression assays are increasingly used for decision-making regarding adjuvant chemotherapy in patients with hormone receptor-positive, HER2-negative breast cancer. There are some clinical situations in which there is also a need for better prognostic and predictive markers to better estimate the amount of benefit from adjuvant radiotherapy. The rising availability of gene expression analyses prompts the question whether their results can also be used to guide clinical decisions regarding adjuvant radiation. Summary Multiple studies suggest a correlation between results from gene expression assays and locoregional recurrence rates. Only few publications addressed the predictive value of results from gene expression analysis for the role of adjuvant radiotherapy in different settings. Key Messages To date, the available evidence on the possible predictive value of gene expression assays for radiotherapy does not support their inclusion into the decision-making process for adjuvant radiation. This is due to methodological weaknesses and limitations regarding patient selection, the nonrandomized design of all studies in terms of radiotherapy use, and limited availability of tissue from prospective trials. Thus, utilization of the present knowledge for clinical indication of radiotherapy should be very cautious.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- David Krug
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Schleswig-Holstein, Kiel, Germany
| | - René Baumann
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Schleswig-Holstein, Kiel, Germany.,Department of Radiation Oncology, St. Marien-Krankenhaus, Siegen, Germany
| | - Wilfried Budach
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf, Germany
| | - Marciana Nona Duma
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Jena, Jena, Germany
| | - Jürgen Dunst
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Schleswig-Holstein, Kiel, Germany
| | | | | | - Wulf Haase
- St.-Vincentius-Hospital, Karlsruhe, Germany
| | | | - Thomas Hehr
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Marienhospital Stuttgart, Stuttgart, Germany
| | - Marc D Piroth
- HELIOS University Hospital Wuppertal, Witten/Herdecke University, Wuppertal, Germany
| | | | | | | | - Rolf Sauer
- University Hospital Erlangen, Erlangen, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
13
|
Fastner G, Sedlmayer F, Widder J, Metz M, Geinitz H, Kapp K, Fesl C, Sölkner L, Greil R, Jakesz R, Kwasny W, Heck D, Bjelic-Radisic V, Balic M, Stöger H, Wieder U, Zwrtek R, Semmler D, Horvath W, Melbinger-Zeinitzer E, Wiesholzer M, Wette V, Gnant M. Endocrine therapy with or without whole breast irradiation in low-risk breast cancer patients after breast-conserving surgery: 10-year results of the Austrian Breast and Colorectal Cancer Study Group 8A trial. Eur J Cancer 2020; 127:12-20. [PMID: 31962198 DOI: 10.1016/j.ejca.2019.11.024] [Citation(s) in RCA: 17] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/05/2019] [Revised: 11/16/2019] [Accepted: 11/21/2019] [Indexed: 11/25/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE To investigate long-term results of patients with hormonal receptor-positive breast cancer treated with breast-conserving surgery (BCS) and consecutive endocrine therapy (ET) with or without whole breast irradiation (WBI). METHODS AND MATERIALS Within the 8 A trial of the Austrian Breast and Colorectal Cancer Study Group, a total of 869 patients received ET after BCS which was randomly followed by WBI (n = 439, group 1) or observation (n = 430, group 2). WBI was applied up to a mean total dosage of 50 Gy (+/- 10 Gy boost) in conventional fractionation. RESULTS After a median follow-up of 9.89 years, 10 in-breast recurrences (IBRs) were observed in group 1 and 31 in group 2, resulting in a 10-year local recurrence-free survival (LRFS) of 97.5% and 92.4%, respectively (p = 0.004). This translated into significantly higher rates for disease-free survival (DFS): 94.5% group 1 vs 88.4% group 2, p = 0.0156. For distant metastases-free survival (DMFS) and overall survival (OS), respective 10-year rates amounted 96.7% and 86.6% for group 1 versus 96.4% and 87.6%, for group 2 (ns). WBI (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.27, p < 0.01) and tumour grading (HR: 3.76, p = 0.03) were found as significant predictors for IBR in multiple cox regression analysis. CONCLUSIONS After a median follow-up of 10 years, WBI resulted in a better local control and DFS compared with ET alone. The omission of WBI and tumour grading, respectively, were the only negative predictors for LRFS.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Gerd Fastner
- Department of Radiotherapy and Radio-Oncology, Paracelsus Medical University, University Hospital Salzburg, Landeskrankenhaus, Salzburg, Austria.
| | - Felix Sedlmayer
- Department of Radiotherapy and Radio-Oncology, Paracelsus Medical University, University Hospital Salzburg, Landeskrankenhaus, Salzburg, Austria.
| | - Joachim Widder
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
| | - Martina Metz
- Department of Radiooncology and Radiotherapy, Wiener Neustadt Hospital, Wiener Neustadt, Austria.
| | - Hans Geinitz
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Ordensklinikum Linz Barmherzige Schwestern, Linz, Austria.
| | - Karin Kapp
- Department of Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology, Comprehensive Cancer Center (CCC), Medical University of Graz, Graz, Austria.
| | - Christian Fesl
- Austrian Breast and Colorectal Cancer Study Group, Vienna, Austria.
| | - Lidija Sölkner
- Austrian Breast and Colorectal Cancer Study Group, Vienna, Austria.
| | - Richard Greil
- Department of Medical Oncology, Paracelsus Medical University, Salzburg, Austria.
| | - Raimund Jakesz
- Department of Medical Oncology, Paracelsus Medical University, Salzburg, Austria.
| | - Werner Kwasny
- Department of Surgery, Wiener Neustadt Hospital, Wiener Neustadt, Austria.
| | - Dietmar Heck
- Department of Surgery, Ordensklinikum Linz Barmherzige Schwestern, Linz, Austria.
| | - Vesna Bjelic-Radisic
- Breast Unit, Universtiy Hospital Wuppertal, University Witten/Herdecke, Witten, Germany.
| | - Marija Balic
- Department of Internal Medicine, Division of Oncology, Medical University of Graz, Graz, Austria.
| | - Herbert Stöger
- Department of Internal Medicine, Division of Oncology, Medical University of Graz, Graz, Austria.
| | - Ursula Wieder
- Department of Surgery, Hanusch Spital, Vienna, Austria.
| | - Ronald Zwrtek
- Department of Surgery, Mistelbach Hospital, Mistelbach, Austria.
| | - Dagmar Semmler
- Department of Surgery, Mistelbach Hospital, Mistelbach, Austria.
| | | | | | - Martin Wiesholzer
- Department of Internal Medicine I, Division of Nephrology and Hematology, University Hospital St. Poelten, Karl Landsteiner University of Health Sciences, St. Pölten, Austria.
| | - Viktor Wette
- Department of Surgery, Krankenhaus der Barmherzigen Brüder St Veit an der Glan, St. Veit an der Glan, Austria.
| | - Michael Gnant
- Austrian Breast and Colorectal Cancer Study Group, Vienna, Austria; Department of Surgery and Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
| |
Collapse
|
14
|
Wu S, Wang J, Lei J, Lian C, Hua L, Zhou J, He Z. Prognostic validation and therapeutic decision-making of the AJCC eighth pathological prognostic staging for T3N0 breast cancer after mastectomy. Clin Transl Med 2020; 10:125-136. [PMID: 32508053 PMCID: PMC7240839 DOI: 10.1002/ctm2.3] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/25/2020] [Revised: 02/26/2020] [Accepted: 02/26/2020] [Indexed: 11/11/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND T3N0 breast cancer might be a distinct clinical and biological entity, with higher heterogeneity and presenting diverse responses to locoregional and systemic therapy. The aim of the current study was to validate the prognostic effect and assess the treatment decision-making of the American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) eighth pathological prognostic staging in T3N0 breast cancer after mastectomy. METHODS We retrospectively included 2465 patients with stage T3N0 breast cancer who had undergone mastectomy between 2010 and 2014 using the data from Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results program. The primary endpoint of this study was breast cancer-specific survival (BCSS). RESULTS Of the entire cohort, 76.0% of patients in the seventh AJCC staging system were restaged to the eighth AJCC pathological prognostic staging system. A total of 1431 (58.1%) and 1175 (47.7%) of them received chemotherapy and postmastectomy radiotherapy (PMRT), respectively. Pathological staging was an independent prognostic factor for BCSS. Using pathological prognostic stage IA as the reference, BCSS gradually became worse with increased hazard ratios. The 5-years BCSS was 96.9%, 95.5%, 91.1%, 85.6%, and 75.5% in pathological prognostic stage IA, IB, IIA, IIB, and IIIA breast cancers, respectively (P < .001). In pathological prognostic stage IA, IB, and IIA breast cancers, the receipt of PMRT or chemotherapy was not correlated with better BCSS. However, PMRT was correlated with better BCSS in pathological prognostic stage IIB disease (P = .006), but not in pathological prognostic IIIA disease. Moreover, chemotherapy was correlated with better BCSS in pathological prognostic stage IIIA disease (P = .006), but not in pathological prognostic stage IIB disease. CONCLUSIONS The eighth AJCC pathological prognostic staging system provides more risk stratification of T3N0 breast cancers after mastectomy and might affect individualized decision-making for chemotherapy and PMRT in this patient subset.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- San‐Gang Wu
- Department of Radiation OncologyThe First Affiliated Hospital of Xiamen UniversityTeaching Hospital of Fujian Medical UniversityXiamenPeople's Republic of China
| | - Jun Wang
- Department of Radiation OncologyThe First Affiliated Hospital of Xiamen UniversityTeaching Hospital of Fujian Medical UniversityXiamenPeople's Republic of China
| | - Jian Lei
- Department of Obstetrics and GynecologyThe First Affiliated Hospital of Xiamen UniversityTeaching Hospital of Fujian Medical UniversityXiamenPeople's Republic of China
| | - Chen‐Lu Lian
- Department of Radiation OncologyThe First Affiliated Hospital of Xiamen UniversityTeaching Hospital of Fujian Medical UniversityXiamenPeople's Republic of China
| | - Li Hua
- Department of Obstetrics and GynecologyThe First Affiliated Hospital of Xiamen UniversityTeaching Hospital of Fujian Medical UniversityXiamenPeople's Republic of China
| | - Juan Zhou
- Department of Obstetrics and GynecologyThe First Affiliated Hospital of Xiamen UniversityTeaching Hospital of Fujian Medical UniversityXiamenPeople's Republic of China
| | - Zhen‐Yu He
- Department of Radiation OncologyState Key Laboratory of Oncology in South ChinaCollaborative Innovation Center of Cancer MedicineSun Yat‐sen University Cancer CenterGuangzhouPeople's Republic of China
| |
Collapse
|
15
|
Radiotherapy after skin-sparing mastectomy with immediate breast reconstruction in intermediate-risk breast cancer. Strahlenther Onkol 2019; 195:949-963. [DOI: 10.1007/s00066-019-01507-9] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/17/2019] [Accepted: 07/26/2019] [Indexed: 10/26/2022]
|
16
|
Piroth MD, Baumann R, Budach W, Dunst J, Feyer P, Fietkau R, Haase W, Harms W, Hehr T, Krug D, Röser A, Sedlmayer F, Souchon R, Wenz F, Sauer R. Heart toxicity from breast cancer radiotherapy : Current findings, assessment, and prevention. Strahlenther Onkol 2018; 195:1-12. [PMID: 30310926 PMCID: PMC6329735 DOI: 10.1007/s00066-018-1378-z] [Citation(s) in RCA: 140] [Impact Index Per Article: 20.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/12/2018] [Accepted: 09/20/2018] [Indexed: 12/13/2022]
Abstract
Background Late cardiac toxicities caused by (particularly left-sided) breast radiotherapy (RT) are now recognized as rare but relevant sequelae, which has prompted research on risk structure identification and definition of threshold doses to heart subvolumes. The aim of the present review was to critically discuss the clinical evidence on late cardiac reactions based on dose-dependent outcome reports for mean heart doses as well as doses to cardiac substructures. Methods A literature review was performed to examine clinical evidence on radiation-induced heart toxicities. Mean heart doses and doses to cardiac substructures were focused upon based on dose-dependent outcome reports. Furthermore, an overview of radiation techniques for heart protection is given and non-radiotherapeutic aspects of cardiotoxicity in the multimodal setting of breast cancer treatment are discussed. Results Based on available findings, the DEGRO breast cancer expert panel recommends the following constraints: mean heart dose <2.5 Gy; DmeanLV (mean dose left ventricle) < 3 Gy; V5LV (volume of LV receiving ≥5 Gy) < 17%; V23LV (volume of LV receiving ≥23 Gy) < 5%; DmeanLAD (mean dose left descending artery) < 10 Gy; V30LAD (volume of LAD receiving ≥30 Gy) < 2%; V40LAD (volume of LAD receiving ≥40 Gy) < 1%. Conclusion In addition to mean heart dose, breast cancer RT treatment planning should also include constraints for cardiac subvolumes such as LV and LAD. The given constraints serve as a clinicians’ aid for ensuring adequate heart protection. The individual decision between sufficient protection of cardiac structures versus optimal target volume coverage remains in the physician’s hand. The risk of breast cancer-specific mortality and a patient’s cardiac risk factors must be individually weighed up against the risk of radiation-induced cardiotoxicity.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Marc D. Piroth
- Helios University Hospital Wuppertal, Witten/Herdecke University, Heusnerstraße 40, 42283 Wuppertal, Germany
| | - René Baumann
- St. Marien-Krankenhaus Siegen, Siegen, Germany
- University Hospital Schleswig-Holstein, Kiel, Germany
| | - Wilfried Budach
- Heinrich-Heine-University Hospital Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf, Germany
| | - Jürgen Dunst
- University Hospital Schleswig-Holstein, Kiel, Germany
| | - Petra Feyer
- Vivantes Hospital Neukoelln, Berlin, Germany
| | | | - Wulf Haase
- formerly St.-Vincentius-Hospital Karlsruhe, Karlsruhe, Germany
| | | | - Thomas Hehr
- Marienhospital Stuttgart, Stuttgart, Germany
| | - David Krug
- University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany
- Heidelberg Institute for Radiation Oncology (HIRO), National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology (NCRO), Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Arnd Röser
- Helios University Hospital Wuppertal, Witten/Herdecke University, Heusnerstraße 40, 42283 Wuppertal, Germany
| | - Felix Sedlmayer
- Paracelsus Medical University Hospital Salzburg, Salzburg, Austria
| | | | - Frederik Wenz
- University Hospital Mannheim, Medical Faculty, Heidelberg University, Mannheim, Germany
| | - Rolf Sauer
- University Hospital Erlangen, Erlangen, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
17
|
Dose variability in different lymph node levels during locoregional breast cancer irradiation: the impact of deep-inspiration breath hold. Strahlenther Onkol 2018; 195:13-20. [PMID: 30143814 DOI: 10.1007/s00066-018-1350-y] [Citation(s) in RCA: 13] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/30/2018] [Accepted: 08/10/2018] [Indexed: 10/28/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE Aim of the present analysis was to evaluate the movement and dose variability of the different lymph node levels of node-positive breast cancer patients during adjuvant radiotherapy (RT) with regional nodal irradiation (RNI) in deep-inspiration breath hold (DIBH). METHODS Thirty-five consecutive node-positive breast cancer patients treated from October 2016 to February 2018 receiving postoperative RT of the breast or chest wall including RNI of the supra-/infraclavicular lymph node levels (corresponding to levels IV, III, Rotter LN (interpectoral), and some parts of level II) were analyzed. To evaluate the lymph node level movement, a center of volume (COV) was obtained for each lymph node level for free-breathing (FB) and DIBH plans. Geometric shifts and dose differences between FB and DIBH were analyzed. RESULTS A significant movement of the COV in anterior (y) and cranial (z) dimensions was observed for lymph node levels I-II and Rotter lymph nodes (p < 0.001) due to DIBH. Only minor changes in the lateral dimension (x axis) were observed, without reaching significance for levels III, IV, and internal mammary. There was a significant difference in the mean dose of level I (DIBH vs. FB: 38.2 Gy/41.3 Gy, p < 0.001) and level II (DIBH vs. FB: 45.9 Gy/47.2 Gy, p < 0.001), while there was no significant difference in level III (p = 0.298), level IV (p = 0.476), or internal mammary nodes (p = 0.471). CONCLUSION A significant movement of the axillary lymph node levels was observed during DIBH in anterior and cranial directions for node-positive breast cancer patients in comparison to FB. The movement leads to a significant dose reduction in level I and level II.
Collapse
|
18
|
Neoadjuvant chemotherapy for breast cancer-background for the indication of locoregional treatment. Strahlenther Onkol 2018; 194:797-805. [PMID: 29974132 DOI: 10.1007/s00066-018-1329-8] [Citation(s) in RCA: 13] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/17/2018] [Accepted: 06/16/2018] [Indexed: 02/06/2023]
Abstract
Neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) has been widely adopted into the multidisciplinary management of breast cancer. The prognostic impact of treatment response has been clearly demonstrated. However, the impact of treatment response on the indication for adjuvant radiotherapy is unclear. This review summarizes important implications of NACT and treatment response on the risk of recurrence and locoregional multidisciplinary management from the standpoint of radiation oncology.
Collapse
|