1
|
Mutter RW, Golafshar MA, Buras MR, Comstock BP, Jacobson M, DeWees T, Remmes NB, Francis LN, Boughey JC, Ruddy KJ, McGee LA, Afzal A, Vallow LA, Furutani KM, Deufel CL, Shumway DA, Kim H, Liu MC, Degnim AC, Jakub JW, Vern-Gross TZ, Wong WW, Patel SH, Vargas CE, Stish BJ, Waddle MR, Pafundi DH, Halyard MY, Corbin KS, Hieken TJ, Park SS. Dose Deintensified 3-Day Photon, Proton, or Brachytherapy: A Nonrandomized Controlled Partial Breast Irradiation Trial. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2025; 121:352-364. [PMID: 39299551 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2024.09.019] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/12/2023] [Revised: 08/19/2024] [Accepted: 09/04/2024] [Indexed: 09/22/2024]
Abstract
PURPOSE The optimal approach for partial breast irradiation (PBI) is unknown. We investigated a novel de-intensified 3-fraction PBI regimen for photons, protons, and brachytherapy. METHODS AND MATERIALS A multicenter nonrandomized controlled trial with the primary outcome of adverse cosmesis at 3 years versus before PBI. Eligibility criteria were age ≥50 years treated with breast-conserving surgery for node-negative estrogen receptor-positive (ER+) invasive breast cancer or any ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) measuring ≤2.5 cm. Photon and proton PBI were prescribed 21.9 Gy (relative biological effectiveness) and brachytherapy 21 Gy in 3 fractions. Radiation therapy technique and adjuvant endocrine therapy were selected at physician and patient discretion. RESULTS Between June 17, 2015, and July 13, 2017, 161 eligible patients were treated with photons (56), protons (49), or brachytherapy (56). Median patient age was 66.8 years. One hundred twenty-six (78.3%) had invasive breast cancer (all ER+) and 35 (21.7%) had DCIS (88.6% ER+). Fifty-four percent of patients with invasive breast cancer and 25.8% of patients with ER+ DCIS initiated and adhered to the prescribed endocrine therapy. The proportion of patients with adverse cosmesis (by trained nurse assessment) was 14.5% at baseline and 2.3% at 3 years (difference, -12.2%; 95% CI, -100% to -6.4%). Adverse cosmesis at the last follow-up, with a median follow-up of 5 years, was 5.7% by nurse assessment, 5.6% by panel assessment of digital photographs, and 5.2% by patient self-report. There were no observed clinically meaningful changes in other patient-reported outcomes, and just 2 grade 2 or higher adverse events, both grade 2, in the brachytherapy cohort. Five-year local recurrence-free survival and progression-free survival were 98.0% and 95.5%, respectively. There were no local recurrences among 60 patients with invasive breast cancer and Ki67 ≤13.25%. CONCLUSIONS Deintensified 3-day PBI provided favorable disease control, tolerability, and cosmetic outcomes, meeting the prespecified criteria for acceptability. This approach is an attractive option for patients with small node-negative ER+ breast cancer and DCIS.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Robert W Mutter
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota; Department of Molecular Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota.
| | - Michael A Golafshar
- Division of Biostatistics and Clinical Trials, Department of Quantitative Health Sciences, Mayo Clinic, Phoenix, Arizona
| | - Matthew R Buras
- Division of Biostatistics and Clinical Trials, Department of Quantitative Health Sciences, Mayo Clinic, Phoenix, Arizona
| | - Bryce P Comstock
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota
| | - Maddi Jacobson
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota
| | - Todd DeWees
- Division of Biostatistics and Clinical Trials, Department of Quantitative Health Sciences, Mayo Clinic, Phoenix, Arizona
| | | | - Leah N Francis
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota
| | - Judy C Boughey
- Department of Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota
| | - Kathryn J Ruddy
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Phoenix, Arizona
| | - Lisa A McGee
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, Florida
| | - Arslan Afzal
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota
| | - Laura A Vallow
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, Florida
| | - Keith M Furutani
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, Florida
| | | | - Dean A Shumway
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota
| | - Haeyoung Kim
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota; Department of Radiation Oncology, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, South Korea
| | - Minetta C Liu
- Division of Medical Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota
| | - Amy C Degnim
- Department of Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota
| | - James W Jakub
- Department of Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, Florida
| | | | - William W Wong
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Phoenix, Arizona
| | - Samir H Patel
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Phoenix, Arizona
| | - Carlos E Vargas
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Phoenix, Arizona
| | - Bradley J Stish
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota
| | - Mark R Waddle
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota
| | - Deanna H Pafundi
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, Florida
| | | | | | - Tina J Hieken
- Department of Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota
| | - Sean S Park
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Qiao K, Wei Y, Tao C, Zhu J, Yuan S. Proton therapy for breast cancer: Reducing toxicity. Thorac Cancer 2024; 15:2156-2165. [PMID: 39275876 PMCID: PMC11496198 DOI: 10.1111/1759-7714.15451] [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: 03/13/2024] [Revised: 08/25/2024] [Accepted: 09/03/2024] [Indexed: 09/16/2024] Open
Abstract
Radiotherapy is a crucial component in the holistic management of breast cancer, with approximately 60% of individuals diagnosed with breast cancer requiring this treatment. As the survival rate of individuals with breast cancer has significantly increased, there is a growing focus on the long-term well-being of patients. Proton therapy (PT) is a new and rapidly developing radiotherapy method. In comparison with conventional photon therapy, PT offers the benefits of decreased radiation toxicity and increased dosage in the designated region. This can extend patients' lifespan and enhance their overall well-being. The present analysis examines the function of PT in diminishing the harmful effects of radiation in cases of breast cancer, while also providing a brief overview of the future potential and obstacles associated with PT for breast cancer.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kailin Qiao
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Shanghai Pulmonary Hospital, School of MedicineTongji UniversityShanghaiChina
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Shandong Provincial Key Laboratory of Radiation Oncology, Shandong Cancer Hospital and InstituteShandong First Medical University and Shandong Academy of Medical SciencesJinanChina
| | - Yuchun Wei
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Shandong Provincial Key Laboratory of Radiation Oncology, Shandong Cancer Hospital and InstituteShandong First Medical University and Shandong Academy of Medical SciencesJinanChina
| | - Cheng Tao
- Department of Radiation Oncology Physics & Technology, Shandong Cancer Hospital and InstituteShandong First Medical University and Shandong Academy of Medical SciencesJinanChina
| | - Jian Zhu
- Department of Radiation Oncology Physics & Technology, Shandong Cancer Hospital and InstituteShandong First Medical University and Shandong Academy of Medical SciencesJinanChina
| | - Shuanghu Yuan
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Shandong Provincial Key Laboratory of Radiation Oncology, Shandong Cancer Hospital and InstituteShandong First Medical University and Shandong Academy of Medical SciencesJinanChina
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The First Affiliated Hospital of USTC, Division of Life Sciences and MedicineUniversity of Science and Technology of ChinaHefeiChina
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Frank SJ, Das IJ, Simone CB, Davis BJ, Deville C, Liao Z, Lo SS, McGovern SL, Parikh RR, Reilly M, Small W, Schechter NR. ACR-ARS Practice Parameter for the Performance of Proton Beam Therapy. Int J Part Ther 2024; 13:100021. [PMID: 39347377 PMCID: PMC11437389 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijpt.2024.100021] [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: 02/14/2024] [Accepted: 02/15/2024] [Indexed: 10/01/2024] Open
Abstract
Purpose This practice parameter for the performance of proton beam radiation therapy was revised collaboratively by the American College of Radiology (ACR) and the American Radium Society (ARS). This practice parameter was developed to serve as a tool in the appropriate application of proton therapy in the care of cancer patients or other patients with conditions in which radiation therapy is indicated. It addresses clinical implementation of proton radiation therapy, including personnel qualifications, quality assurance (QA) standards, indications, and suggested documentation. Materials and Methods This practice parameter for the performance of proton beam radiation therapy was developed according to the process described under the heading The Process for Developing ACR Practice Parameters and Technical Standards on the ACR website (https://www.acr.org/Clinical-Resources/Practice-Parameters-and-Technical-Standards) by the Committee on Practice Parameters - Radiation Oncology of the ACR Commission on Radiation Oncology in collaboration with the ARS. Results The qualifications and responsibilities of personnel, such as the proton center Chief Medical Officer or Medical Director, Radiation Oncologist, Radiation Physicist, Dosimetrist and Therapist, are outlined, including the necessity for continuing medical education. Proton therapy standard clinical indications and methodologies of treatment management are outlined by disease site and treatment group (e.g. pediatrics) including documentation and the process of proton therapy workflow and equipment specifications. Additionally, this proton therapy practice parameter updates policies and procedures related to a quality assurance and performance improvement program (QAPI), patient education, infection control, and safety. Conclusion As proton therapy becomes more accessible to cancer patients, policies and procedures as outlined in this practice parameter will help ensure quality and safety programs are effectively implemented to optimize clinical care.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Steven J. Frank
- The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX 77030, USA
| | - Indra J. Das
- Northwestern Memorial Hospital, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, IL 60611, USA
| | | | | | - Curtiland Deville
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA
| | - Zhongxing Liao
- The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX 77030, USA
| | - Simon S. Lo
- University of Washington Medical Center, Seattle, WA 98195, USA
| | - Susan L. McGovern
- The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX 77030, USA
| | - Rahul R. Parikh
- Rutgers Cancer Institute of New Jersey, New Brunswick, NJ 08901, USA
| | | | - William Small
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Stritch School of Medicine, Cardinal Bernardin Cancer Center, Loyola University Chicago, Maguire Center, Maywood, IL 60153, USA
| | | |
Collapse
|
4
|
Shaitelman SF, Anderson BM, Arthur DW, Bazan JG, Bellon JR, Bradfield L, Coles CE, Gerber NK, Kathpal M, Kim L, Laronga C, Meattini I, Nichols EM, Pierce LJ, Poppe MM, Spears PA, Vinayak S, Whelan T, Lyons JA. Partial Breast Irradiation for Patients With Early-Stage Invasive Breast Cancer or Ductal Carcinoma In Situ: An ASTRO Clinical Practice Guideline. Pract Radiat Oncol 2024; 14:112-132. [PMID: 37977261 DOI: 10.1016/j.prro.2023.11.001] [Citation(s) in RCA: 55] [Impact Index Per Article: 55.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/11/2023] [Revised: 11/06/2023] [Accepted: 11/07/2023] [Indexed: 11/19/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE This guideline provides evidence-based recommendations on appropriate indications and techniques for partial breast irradiation (PBI) for patients with early-stage invasive breast cancer and ductal carcinoma in situ. METHODS ASTRO convened a task force to address 4 key questions focused on the appropriate indications and techniques for PBI as an alternative to whole breast irradiation (WBI) to result in similar rates of ipsilateral breast recurrence (IBR) and toxicity outcomes. Also addressed were aspects related to the technical delivery of PBI, including dose-fractionation regimens, target volumes, and treatment parameters for different PBI techniques. The guideline is based on a systematic review provided by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. Recommendations were created using a predefined consensus-building methodology and system for grading evidence quality and recommendation strength. RESULTS PBI delivered using 3-dimensional conformal radiation therapy, intensity modulated radiation therapy, multicatheter brachytherapy, and single-entry brachytherapy results in similar IBR as WBI with long-term follow-up. Some patient characteristics and tumor features were underrepresented in the randomized controlled trials, making it difficult to fully define IBR risks for patients with these features. Appropriate dose-fractionation regimens, target volume delineation, and treatment planning parameters for delivery of PBI are outlined. Intraoperative radiation therapy alone is associated with a higher IBR rate compared with WBI. A daily or every-other-day external beam PBI regimen is preferred over twice-daily regimens due to late toxicity concerns. CONCLUSIONS Based on published data, the ASTRO task force has proposed recommendations to inform best clinical practices on the use of PBI.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Simona F Shaitelman
- Department of Breast Radiation Oncology, University of Texas MD - Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas.
| | - Bethany M Anderson
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wisconsin
| | - Douglas W Arthur
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, Virginia
| | - Jose G Bazan
- Department of Radiation Oncology, City of Hope Comprehensive Cancer Center, Duarte, California
| | - Jennifer R Bellon
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute and Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Lisa Bradfield
- American Society for Radiation Oncology, Arlington, Virginia
| | - Charlotte E Coles
- Department of Oncology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom
| | - Naamit K Gerber
- Department of Radiation Oncology, New York University Grossman School of Medicine, New York, New York
| | - Madeera Kathpal
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Duke University Wake County Campus, Raleigh, North Carolina
| | - Leonard Kim
- Department of Radiation Oncology, MD - Anderson Cancer Center at Cooper, Camden, New Jersey
| | - Christine Laronga
- Department of Breast Oncology, Moffitt Cancer Center, Tampa, Florida
| | - Icro Meattini
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Florence, Florence, Italy
| | - Elizabeth M Nichols
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland
| | - Lori J Pierce
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Michigan School of Medicine, Ann Arbor, Michigan
| | - Matthew M Poppe
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Huntsman Cancer Institute, Salt Lake City, Utah
| | - Patricia A Spears
- Patient Representative, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina
| | - Shaveta Vinayak
- Department of Medical Oncology, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington
| | - Timothy Whelan
- Department of Oncology, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
| | - Janice A Lyons
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospitals Seidman Cancer Center, Cleveland, Ohio
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Freedman GM, Li T, Garver E, Shillington K, Shinkle B, Tchou JC, Fayanju OM, Lin L, Taunk NK. Five-Year Outcomes of a Phase 1/2 Trial of Accelerated Partial Breast Irradiation Using Proton Therapy for Women With Stage 0-IIA Breast Cancer. Adv Radiat Oncol 2024; 9:101334. [PMID: 38405317 PMCID: PMC10885562 DOI: 10.1016/j.adro.2023.101334] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/09/2023] [Accepted: 07/21/2023] [Indexed: 02/27/2024] Open
Abstract
Purpose We report the results of a phase 1/2 trial of external beam partial breast radiation using proton therapy. Methods and Materials Eligible patients included stage 0-IIA breast cancer pTis-T2, N0, and size ≤3 cm. Proton beam radiation was used to deliver 3.85 Gy twice daily to 38.5 Gy. The phase 1 portion determined feasibility based on criteria of successful plan creation, treatment delivery, and acute toxicity grade ≥3 in ≤20% of patients. The phase 2 portion had efficacy goals of acute toxicity grade ≥3 in ≤20% of patients and observing physician-rated cosmesis of excellent or good >85% of patients at 2 years. Results From April 2013 to March 2015, there were 12 patients enrolled onto the phase 1 portion, and the preplanned analysis of feasibility was met in all 4 required criteria. From July 2015 through December 2019 there were 28 patients with 29 treated breasts (1 bilateral) enrolled onto the phase 2 portion of the trial out of 45 originally planned. The trial was closed to accrual because of the coronavirus pandemic and not reopened. Thirty-eight breasts were treated with double-scattering and 3 pencil-beam scanning protons. The median follow-up of the 40 patients is 5.4 years (range, 2.3-8.6 years). There was 1 local recurrence. There was no grade ≥3 acute or late toxicity. At baseline all patients had physician-rated cosmesis good or excellent but at 2 years was excellent in 56%, good in 19%, and fair in 25%. Conclusions Proton-accelerated partial breast irradiation delivered with a twice-daily fractionation was feasible and associated with very low acute and long-term toxicity. However, the trial did not meet goals for cosmesis outcomes and was closed prematurely. Future study is needed to determine whether pencil-beam scanning protons or different fractionation could improve these outcomes.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Gary M. Freedman
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Perelman School of Medicine of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
- Abramson Cancer Center, The University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
| | - Taoran Li
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Perelman School of Medicine of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
| | - Elizabeth Garver
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Perelman School of Medicine of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
| | - Katherine Shillington
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Perelman School of Medicine of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
| | - Bridget Shinkle
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Perelman School of Medicine of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
| | - Julia C. Tchou
- Abramson Cancer Center, The University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
- Department of Surgery, Perelman School of Medicine of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
| | - Oluwadamilola M. Fayanju
- Abramson Cancer Center, The University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
- Department of Surgery, Perelman School of Medicine of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
| | - Lilie Lin
- Department of Radiation Oncology, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| | - Neil K. Taunk
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Perelman School of Medicine of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
- Abramson Cancer Center, The University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Song D, Zhang H, Ren C, Zhan N, Xie L, Xie W. Accelerated partial breast irradiation: Current evidence and future developments. CANCER INNOVATION 2024; 3:e106. [PMID: 38948534 PMCID: PMC11212331 DOI: 10.1002/cai2.106] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/27/2023] [Revised: 09/15/2023] [Accepted: 10/11/2023] [Indexed: 07/02/2024]
Abstract
Whole breast irradiation after breast-conserving surgery for early breast cancer has become one of the standard treatment modes for breast cancer and yields the same effect as radical surgery. Accelerated partial breast irradiation (APBI) as a substitute for whole breast irradiation for patients with early breast cancer is a hot spot in clinical research. APBI is characterised by simple high-dose local irradiation of the tumour bed in a short time, thus improving convenience for patients and saving costs. The implementation methods of APBI mainly include brachytherapy, external beam radiation therapy, and intraoperative radiotherapy. This review provides an overview of the clinical effects and adverse reactions of the main technologies of APBI and discusses the prospects for the future development of APBI.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Dandan Song
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Xiang'an Hospital of Xiamen University, Cancer Research Center, School of MedicineXiamen UniversityXiang'anXiamenChina
| | - Honghong Zhang
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Xiang'an Hospital of Xiamen University, Cancer Research Center, School of MedicineXiamen UniversityXiang'anXiamenChina
| | - Chengbo Ren
- Department of Radiation OncologyThe First Affiliated Hospital of Hebei North UniversityZhangjiakouHebeiChina
| | - Ning Zhan
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Xiang'an Hospital of Xiamen University, Cancer Research Center, School of MedicineXiamen UniversityXiang'anXiamenChina
| | - Liangxi Xie
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Xiang'an Hospital of Xiamen University, Cancer Research Center, School of MedicineXiamen UniversityXiang'anXiamenChina
| | - Wenjia Xie
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Xiang'an Hospital of Xiamen University, Cancer Research Center, School of MedicineXiamen UniversityXiang'anXiamenChina
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Choi S, Dreyfuss I, Taswell CS, Cyriac J, Butkus M, Takita C. Proton Beam Therapy for Breast Cancer. Crit Rev Oncog 2024; 29:67-82. [PMID: 38683154 DOI: 10.1615/critrevoncog.2023050319] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 05/01/2024]
Abstract
Given the radiobiological and physical properties of the proton, proton beam therapy has the potential to be advantageous for many patients compared with conventional radiotherapy by limiting toxicity and improving patient outcomes in specific breast cancer scenarios.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Seraphina Choi
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Miami Sylvester Comprehensive Cancer Center, Miami, FL, USA
| | - Isabella Dreyfuss
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Miami Sylvester Comprehensive Cancer Center, Miami, FL, USA
| | | | - Jonathan Cyriac
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Miami Sylvester Comprehensive Cancer Center, Miami, FL, USA
| | - Michael Butkus
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Miami Sylvester Comprehensive Cancer Center, Miami, FL, USA
| | | |
Collapse
|
8
|
Wu XY, Chen M, Cao L, Li M, Chen JY. Proton Therapy in Breast Cancer: A Review of Potential Approaches for Patient Selection. Technol Cancer Res Treat 2024; 23:15330338241234788. [PMID: 38389426 PMCID: PMC10894553 DOI: 10.1177/15330338241234788] [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: 09/06/2023] [Revised: 11/25/2023] [Accepted: 02/06/2024] [Indexed: 02/24/2024] Open
Abstract
Proton radiotherapy may be a compelling technical option for the treatment of breast cancer due to its unique physical property known as the "Bragg peak." This feature offers distinct advantages, promising superior dose conformity within the tumor area and reduced radiation exposure to surrounding healthy tissues, enhancing the potential for better treatment outcomes. However, proton therapy is accompanied by inherent challenges, primarily higher costs and limited accessibility when compared to well-developed photon irradiation. Thus, in clinical practice, it is important for radiation oncologists to carefully select patients before recommendation of proton therapy to ensure the transformation of dosimetric benefits into tangible clinical benefits. Yet, the optimal indications for proton therapy in breast cancer patients remain uncertain. While there is no widely recognized methodology for patient selection, numerous attempts have been made in this direction. In this review, we intended to present an inspiring summarization and discussion about the current practices and exploration on the approaches of this treatment decision-making process in terms of treatment-related side-effects, tumor control, and cost-efficiency, including the normal tissue complication probability (NTCP) model, the tumor control probability (TCP) model, genomic biomarkers, cost-effectiveness analyses (CEAs), and so on. Additionally, we conducted an evaluation of the eligibility criteria in ongoing randomized controlled trials and analyzed their reference value in patient selection. We evaluated the pros and cons of various potential patient selection approaches and proposed possible directions for further optimization and exploration. In summary, while proton therapy holds significant promise in breast cancer treatment, its integration into clinical practice calls for a thoughtful, evidence-driven strategy. By continuously refining the patient selection criteria, we can harness the full potential of proton radiotherapy while ensuring maximum benefit for breast cancer patients.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Xiao-Yu Wu
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Ruijin Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, School of Medicine, Shanghai, China
| | - Mei Chen
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Ruijin Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, School of Medicine, Shanghai, China
| | - Lu Cao
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Ruijin Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, School of Medicine, Shanghai, China
| | - Min Li
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Ruijin Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, School of Medicine, Shanghai, China
| | - Jia-Yi Chen
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Ruijin Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, School of Medicine, Shanghai, China
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Byun HK, Chang JS, Kim H, Kim J, Han MC, Kim SY, Park RH, Kim CJ, Kim YB. Cosmetic Outcome and Toxicity After Stereotactic Accelerated Partial Breast Irradiation in Early Breast Cancer: A Prospective Observational Cohort Study. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2023; 117:690-700. [PMID: 37201757 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2023.05.018] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/26/2023] [Revised: 04/19/2023] [Accepted: 05/09/2023] [Indexed: 05/20/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE The aim of this work was to prospectively evaluate the toxicity and cosmetic outcomes of 5-fraction, stereotactic, accelerated partial breast irradiation (APBI). METHODS AND MATERIALS This prospective observational cohort study enrolled women who underwent APBI for invasive carcinoma or carcinoma in situ of the breast. APBI was delivered using a CyberKnife M6 robotic radiosurgery system at 30 Gy in 5 nonconsecutive, once-daily fractions. Women undergoing whole breast irradiation (WBI) were also enrolled for comparison. Patient-reported and physician-assessed adverse events were recorded. Breast fibrosis was measured using a tissue compliance meter, and breast cosmesis was assessed using BCCT.core (an automatic, computer-based software). Outcomes were collected until 24 months posttreatment according to the study protocol. RESULTS In total, 204 patients (APBI, n = 103; WBI, n = 101) were enrolled. Regarding patient-reported outcomes, the APBI group reported significantly less skin dryness (6.9% vs 18.3%; P = .015), radiation skin reaction (9.9% vs 23.5%; P = .010), and breast hardness (8.0% vs 20.4%; P = .011) at 6 months than the WBI group. On physician assessment, the APBI group had significantly less dermatitis at 12 months (1.0% vs 7.2%; P = .027) than the WBI group. Any severe toxicities after APBI were rare in patient-reported outcomes (score ≥3, 3.0%) and physician assessments (grade ≥3, 2.0%). In the uninvolved quadrants, measured fibrosis in the APBI group was significantly lower than that in the WBI group at 6 (P = .001) and 12 (P = .029) months but not at 24 months. In the involved quadrant, measured fibrosis in the APBI group was not significantly different from that in the WBI group at any time. Cosmetic outcomes in the APBI group were mostly excellent or good (77.6%) at 24 months, and there was no significant cosmetic detriment from the baseline. CONCLUSIONS Stereotactic APBI was associated with less fibrosis in the uninvolved breast quadrants than WBI. Patients showed minimal toxicity and no detrimental effects on cosmesis after APBI.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Hwa Kyung Byun
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Yonsei Cancer Center, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, South Korea
| | - Jee Suk Chang
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Yonsei Cancer Center, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, South Korea.
| | - Hojin Kim
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Yonsei Cancer Center, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, South Korea
| | - Jihun Kim
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Gangnam Severance Hospital, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, South Korea
| | - Min Cheol Han
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Yonsei Cancer Center, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, South Korea
| | - Se Young Kim
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Yonsei Cancer Center, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, South Korea
| | - Ryeong Hwang Park
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Yonsei Cancer Center, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, South Korea
| | - Claire Jieun Kim
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Yonsei Cancer Center, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, South Korea
| | - Yong Bae Kim
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Yonsei Cancer Center, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, South Korea.
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Ruan H, Okamoto M, Ohno T, Li Y, Zhou Y. Particle radiotherapy for breast cancer. Front Oncol 2023; 13:1107703. [PMID: 37655110 PMCID: PMC10467264 DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2023.1107703] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/25/2022] [Accepted: 07/28/2023] [Indexed: 09/02/2023] Open
Abstract
Breast cancer is the most common malignant tumor in female patients. Along with surgery, radiotherapy is one of the most commonly prescribed treatments for breast cancer. Over the past few decades, breast cancer radiotherapy technology has significantly improved. Nevertheless, related posttherapy complications should not be overlooked. Common complications include dose-related coronary toxicity, radiation pneumonia, and the risk of second primary cancer of the contralateral breast. Particle radiotherapy with protons or carbon ions is widely attracting interest as a potential competitor to conventional photon radiotherapy because of its superior physical and biological characteristics. This article summarizes the results of clinical research on proton and carbon-ion radiotherapy for treating breast cancer.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Hanguang Ruan
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Gunma University, Maebashi, Japan
- Gunma University Heavy Ion Medical Center, Gunma University, Maebashi, Gunma, Japan
| | - Masahiko Okamoto
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Gunma University, Maebashi, Japan
- Gunma University Heavy Ion Medical Center, Gunma University, Maebashi, Gunma, Japan
| | - Tatsuya Ohno
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Gunma University, Maebashi, Japan
- Gunma University Heavy Ion Medical Center, Gunma University, Maebashi, Gunma, Japan
| | - Yang Li
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Harbin Medical University Cancer Hospital, Harbin, Heilongjiang, China
| | - Yuan Zhou
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Gunma University, Maebashi, Japan
- Gunma University Heavy Ion Medical Center, Gunma University, Maebashi, Gunma, Japan
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Fozza A, De Rose F, De Santis MC, Meattini I, Meduri B, D'angelo E, Dei D, Figlia V, La Rocca E, Fregatti P, Satragno C, Belgioia L, Giaj-Levra N. Technological advancements and future perspectives in breast cancer radiation therapy. Expert Rev Anticancer Ther 2023; 23:407-419. [PMID: 36960754 DOI: 10.1080/14737140.2023.2195167] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/13/2022] [Accepted: 03/21/2023] [Indexed: 03/25/2023]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Breast cancer is still one of the most common tumors worldwide and radiation therapy has a central role in the oncological pathway. Several technological options are now available with the aim to improve therapeutic index, target definition, and patient selection. AREAS COVERED In this review, we summarize current available technologies in the management of breast cancer. These advances can support the prescription of postoperative partial breast cancer treatment and preoperative stereotactic partial breast irradiation. Moreover, image-guided radiotherapy is crucial for high-quality radiation treatments. Additionally, the recent development of hybrid magnetic resonance linear accelerator can impact target volume outline procedure, adaptive planning and radiomics. Finally, artificial intelligence represents the new frontier in medicine, supporting clinicians in target definition, patient selection, and treatment planning. EXPERT OPINION In patients with breast cancer the overall level of evidence about new technologies is still low even if some advances are potentially very interesting to further development.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Alessandra Fozza
- Department of Radiation Oncology, IRCCS Ospedale Policlinico San Martino, Genova, Italy
| | | | | | - Icro Meattini
- Department of Experimental and Clinical Biomedical Sciences "M. Serio", Universityof Florence, Florence, Italy
- Radiation Oncology Unit, Oncology Department, Azienda Ospedaliero Universitaria Careggi, Florence, Italy
| | - Bruno Meduri
- Radiation Oncology Department, University Hospital of Modena, Modena, Italy
| | - Elisa D'angelo
- Radiation Oncology Department, University Hospital of Modena, Modena, Italy
| | - Damiano Dei
- Department of Experimental and Clinical Biomedical Sciences "M. Serio", Universityof Florence, Florence, Italy
- Radiation Oncology Unit, Oncology Department, Azienda Ospedaliero Universitaria Careggi, Florence, Italy
| | - Vanessa Figlia
- Advanced Radiation Oncology Department, IRCCS Sacro Cuore Don Calabria Hospital, Negrar Di Valpolicella, Italy
| | - Eliana La Rocca
- Radiation Oncology 1, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazione Tumori di Milano, Milan, Italy
| | - Piero Fregatti
- Department of Senology, IRCCS Ospedale Policlinico San Martino, Genova, Italy
- Department of Health Science (DISSAL), University of Genoa, Genoa, Italy
| | - Camilla Satragno
- Department of Experimental Medicine (DIMES), University of Genoa, Genoa, Italy
| | - Liliana Belgioia
- Department of Radiation Oncology, IRCCS Ospedale Policlinico San Martino, Genova, Italy
- Department of Health Science (DISSAL), University of Genoa, Genoa, Italy
| | - Niccolò Giaj-Levra
- Advanced Radiation Oncology Department, IRCCS Sacro Cuore Don Calabria Hospital, Negrar Di Valpolicella, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
Five Fraction External Beam Partial Breast Irradiation: A User's Guide. Am J Clin Oncol 2023; 46:16-19. [PMID: 36562691 DOI: 10.1097/coc.0000000000000964] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/24/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE Mature follow up from multiple randomized trials have demonstrated the safety and efficacy of external beam partial breast irradiation (PBI) for appropriately selected patients with early stage breast cancer. Despite this evidence, external beam PBI remains underutilized. In this user guide we outline patient selection, workflow, and address possible challenges to aid in implementation of evidence-based external beam PBI. MATERIALS AND METHODS Review of the current guidelines for PBI suitability, surgical considerations, treatment technique, simulation, contouring, and treatment planning, citing the latest published literature to support PBI utilization. RESULTS Prospective data supports the use of 30 Gy in 5 fractions delivered with intensity modulated radiation therapy on a daily or every other day basis for a significant proportion of early stage breast cancer patients. The surgical cavity must be clearly visualized on treatment planning scan, recommend 3-5 weeks post-operatively, and the recommended clinical target volume expansion on the surgical cavity is 0.5-1.0 cm. A planning target volume expansion, based on motion management and image guidance, of 0.5-1.0 cm should be used. Organ at risk dose constraints of heart V3Gy ≤10% and contralateral breast Dmax ≤1 Gy are often achievable. CONCLUSIONS Five fraction external beam PBI is a highly effective treatment with very limited toxicity for patients with early stage breast cancer following breast conserving surgery. Commonly utilized intensity modulated treatment planning techniques with plan delivery on standard linear accelerators results significant normal tissue sparing and makes implementation feasible at most radiation oncology centers.
Collapse
|
13
|
Anderson B, Arthur D, Hannoun-Levi JM, Kamrava M, Khan A, Kuske R, Scanderbeg D, Shah C, Shaitelman S, Showalter T, Vicini F, Wazer D, Yashar C. Partial breast irradiation: An updated consensus statement from the American brachytherapy society. Brachytherapy 2022; 21:726-747. [PMID: 36117086 DOI: 10.1016/j.brachy.2022.07.004] [Citation(s) in RCA: 21] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/26/2022] [Revised: 06/15/2022] [Accepted: 07/06/2022] [Indexed: 12/14/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE In recent years, results with mature follow-up have been reported for several Phase III trials randomizing women to receive whole breast irradiation (WBI) versus varying modalities of partial breast irradiation (PBI). It is important to recognize that these methods vary in terms of volume of breast tissue treated, dose per fraction, and duration of therapy. As such, clinical and technical guidelines may vary among the various PBI techniques. METHODS Members of the American Brachytherapy Society with expertise in PBI performed an extensive literature review focusing on the highest quality data available for the numerous PBI options offered in the modern era. Data were evaluated for strength of evidence and published outcomes were assessed. RESULTS The majority of women enrolled on randomized trials of WBI versus PBI have been age >45 years with tumor size <3 cm, negative margins, and negative lymph nodes. The panel also concluded that PBI can be offered to selected women with estrogen receptor negative and/or Her2 amplified breast cancer, as well as ductal carcinoma in situ, and should generally be avoided in women with extensive lymphovascular space invasion. CONCLUSIONS This updated guideline summarizes published clinical trials of PBI methods. The panel also highlights the role of PBI for women facing special circumstances, such as history of cosmetic breast augmentation or prior breast irradiation, and discusses promising novel modalities that are currently under study, such as ultrashort and preoperative PBI. Updated consensus guidelines are also provided to inform patient selection for PBI and to characterize the strength of evidence to support varying PBI modalities.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Bethany Anderson
- Department of Human Oncology, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, WI.
| | - Douglas Arthur
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VA
| | | | | | - Atif Khan
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
| | - Robert Kuske
- Arizona Breast Cancer Specialists, Scottsdale, AZ
| | - Daniel Scanderbeg
- Department of Radiation Medicine and Applied Sciences, University of California San Diego, San Diego, CA
| | - Chirag Shah
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Taussig Cancer Institute, Cleveland, OH
| | - Simona Shaitelman
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX
| | - Timothy Showalter
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Virginia School of Medicine, Charlottesville, VA
| | | | - David Wazer
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Tufts Medical Center, Boston, MA
| | - Catheryn Yashar
- Department of Radiation Medicine and Applied Sciences, University of California San Diego, San Diego, CA
| |
Collapse
|
14
|
Choi JI, Prabhu K, Hartsell WF, DeWees T, Sinesi C, Vargas C, Benda RK, Cahlon O, Chang AL. Outcomes and toxicities after proton partial breast radiotherapy for early stage, hormone receptor positive breast cancer: 3-Year results of a phase II multi-center trial. Clin Transl Radiat Oncol 2022; 37:71-77. [PMID: 36093343 PMCID: PMC9450061 DOI: 10.1016/j.ctro.2022.08.013] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/22/2022] [Accepted: 08/24/2022] [Indexed: 12/04/2022] Open
Abstract
Purpose Proton therapy (PT) for partial breast irradiation (PBI) in early-stage breast cancer can decrease morbidity versus photon PBI with superior organs-at-risk sparing. We report 3-year outcomes of the first prospective, multicenter, phase II trial of proton PBI. Methods and Materials This Proton Collaborative Group phase II trial (PCG BRE007-12) recruited women ≥ 50 years with node-negative, estrogen receptor (ER)-positive, ≤3cm, invasive ductal carcinoma (IDC) or ductal carcinoma in situ undergoing breast conserving surgery followed by proton PBI (40 Gy(RBE), 10 daily fractions). Primary endpoint was freedom from ipsilateral breast cancer recurrence. Adverse events were prospectively graded using CTCAEv4.0. Breast Cancer Treatment Outcome Scale (BCTOS) assessed patient-reported quality of life (PRQOL). Results Thirty-eight evaluable patients enrolled between 2/2013-11/2016. Median age was 67 years (range 50-79); 55 % had left-sided disease, and median tumor size was 0.9 cm. Treatment was delivered in ≥ 2 fields predominantly with uniform scanning PT (n = 37). At 35-month median follow-up (12-62), all patients were alive, and none had local, regional or distant disease progression. One patient developed an ER-negative contralateral IDC. Seven grade 2 adverse events occurred; no radiotherapy-related grade ≥ 3 toxicities occurred. Changes in BCTOS subdomain mean scores were maximum 0.36, indicating no meaningful change in PRQOL. Median heart volume receiving 5 Gy (V5Gy), lung V20Gy, and lung V10Gy were 0 %, 0 % and 0.19 %, respectively. Conclusion At 3 years, proton PBI provided 100 % cancer control for early-stage, ER-positive breast cancer. Toxicities are minimal, and PRQOL remains acceptable with continued follow-up. These findings support PT as a safe and effective PBI delivery option.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- J. Isabelle Choi
- New York Proton Center, 225 East 126th Street, New York, NY 10035, USA
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, 1275 York Ave, New York, NY 10065, USA
| | - Kiran Prabhu
- Integris Health, 5911 W. Memorial, Oklahoma City, OK 73142, USA
| | - William F. Hartsell
- Northwestern Medicine, Chicago Proton Center, 4455 Weaver Pkwy, Warrenville, IL 60555, USA
| | - Todd DeWees
- Department of Quantitative Health Sciences, Mayo Clinic, 13400 E Shea Blvd, Scottsdale, AZ 85259, USA
| | - Christopher Sinesi
- Hampton University Proton Therapy Institute, 40 Enterprise Pkwy, Hampton, VA 23666, USA
| | - Carlos Vargas
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, 5777 E Mayo Blvd, Scottsdale, AZ 85054, USA
| | - Rashmi K. Benda
- Lynn Cancer Institute, Boca Raton Regional Hospital, 701 NW 13 St, Boca Raton, FL 33486, USA
| | - Oren Cahlon
- New York Proton Center, 225 East 126th Street, New York, NY 10035, USA
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, 1275 York Ave, New York, NY 10065, USA
| | - Andrew L. Chang
- California Protons Cancer Therapy Center, 9730 Summers Ridge Rd, San Diego, CA 92121, USA
| |
Collapse
|
15
|
Hypofractionated Whole Breast Irradiation and Boost-IOERT in Early Stage Breast Cancer (HIOB): First Clinical Results of a Prospective Multicenter Trial (NCT01343459). Cancers (Basel) 2022; 14:cancers14061396. [PMID: 35326548 PMCID: PMC8946807 DOI: 10.3390/cancers14061396] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/07/2022] [Revised: 03/03/2022] [Accepted: 03/06/2022] [Indexed: 02/05/2023] Open
Abstract
Background and purpose: To investigate intraoperative electron radiation therapy (IOERT) as a tumor bed boost during breast conserving surgery (BCS) followed by hypofractionated whole breast irradiation (HWBI) on age-correlated in-breast recurrence (IBR) rates in patients with low- to high-risk invasive breast cancer. Material and methods: BCS and IOERT (11.1 Gy) preceded a HWBI (40.5 Gy) in 15 fractions. Five-year IBR-rates were compared by a sequential ratio test (SQRT) with best evidences in three age groups (35−40 y and 41−50 y: 3.6%, >50 y: 2%) in a prospective single arm design. Null hypothesis (H0) was defined to undershoot these benchmarks for proof of superiority. Results: Of 1445 enrolled patients, 326 met exclusion criteria, leaving 1119 as eligible for analysis. After a median follow-up of 50 months (range 0.7−104), we detected two local recurrences, both in the age group >50 y. With no observed IBR, superiority was demonstrated for the patient groups 41−50 and >50 y, respectively. For the youngest group (35−40 y), no appropriate statistical evaluation was yet possible due to insufficient recruitment. Conclusions: In terms of five-year IBR-rates, Boost-IOERT followed by HWBI has been demonstrated to be superior in patients older than 50 and in the age group 41−50 when compared to best published evidence until 2010.
Collapse
|
16
|
Prasad RN, Patel T, Perlow HK, Yildiz VO, Baliga S, Brownstein J, Gamez ME, Konieczkowski DJ, Royce TJ, Palmer JD. List Prices for Proton Radiation Therapy. Pract Radiat Oncol 2022; 12:e163-e168. [DOI: 10.1016/j.prro.2021.11.013] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/09/2021] [Revised: 11/03/2021] [Accepted: 11/04/2021] [Indexed: 10/18/2022]
|
17
|
Kowalchuk RO, Corbin KS, Jimenez RB. Particle Therapy for Breast Cancer. Cancers (Basel) 2022; 14:cancers14041066. [PMID: 35205814 PMCID: PMC8870138 DOI: 10.3390/cancers14041066] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/17/2022] [Revised: 02/09/2022] [Accepted: 02/14/2022] [Indexed: 02/05/2023] Open
Abstract
Particle therapy has received increasing attention in the treatment of breast cancer due to its unique physical properties that may enhance patient quality of life and reduce the late effects of therapy. In this review, we will examine the rationale for the use of proton and carbon therapy in the treatment of breast cancer and highlight their potential for sparing normal tissue injury. We will discuss the early dosimetric and clinical studies that have been pursued to date in this domain before focusing on the remaining open questions limiting the widespread adoption of particle therapy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Roman O. Kowalchuk
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN 55905, USA; (R.O.K.); (K.S.C.)
| | - Kimberly S. Corbin
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN 55905, USA; (R.O.K.); (K.S.C.)
| | - Rachel B. Jimenez
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA 02114, USA
- Correspondence:
| |
Collapse
|
18
|
Alterio D, La Rocca E, Volpe S, Camarda AM, Casbarra A, Russell-Edu W, Zerella MA, Orecchia R, Galimberti V, Veronesi P, Leonardi MC, Jereczek-Fossa BA. Hypofractionated proton therapy in breast cancer: where are we? A critical review of the literature. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2022; 192:249-263. [PMID: 35025004 DOI: 10.1007/s10549-022-06516-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/09/2021] [Accepted: 01/03/2022] [Indexed: 02/06/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE To critically review available literature on hypofractionated (≥ 3 Gy/fraction) proton therapy (PT) for breast cancer (BCa). METHODS A systematic screening of the literature was performed in April 2021 in compliance with the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses recommendations. All full-text publication written in English were considered eligible. Acute and late toxicities, oncological outcomes and dosimetric features were considered for the analysis. RESULTS Twelve publications met the inclusion criteria; all studies but one focused on accelerated partial breast irradiation (APBI). Eleven works considered post-operative patients, one referred to ABPI as a curative-intent modality. The dosimetric profile of PT compared favorably with both photon-based 3D conformal and intensity-modulated techniques, while a more extended follow-up is warranted to fully assess both the long-term toxicities and the non-inferiority of oncological outcomes. CONCLUSION Our work shows that results on PT for BCa are currently only available for APBI applications, with dosimetric analyses demonstrating a clear advantage over both 3D conformal and intensity modulated X-rays techniques, especially when ≥ 2 treatment fields were used. However, further evidence is needed to define whether such theoretical benefit translates into clinical improvements, especially in the long-term.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Daniela Alterio
- Department of Radiation Oncology, European Institute of Oncology (IEO) IRCSS, Milan, Italy
| | - Eliana La Rocca
- Department of Radiation Oncology, European Institute of Oncology (IEO) IRCSS, Milan, Italy.,Department of Oncology and Hemato-Oncology, University of Milan, Milan, Italy
| | - Stefania Volpe
- Department of Radiation Oncology, European Institute of Oncology (IEO) IRCSS, Milan, Italy. .,Department of Oncology and Hemato-Oncology, University of Milan, Milan, Italy.
| | - Anna Maria Camarda
- Department of Radiation Oncology, European Institute of Oncology (IEO) IRCSS, Milan, Italy.,Department of Oncology and Hemato-Oncology, University of Milan, Milan, Italy
| | - Alessia Casbarra
- Department of Radiation Oncology, European Institute of Oncology (IEO) IRCSS, Milan, Italy.,Department of Oncology and Hemato-Oncology, University of Milan, Milan, Italy
| | | | - Maria Alessia Zerella
- Department of Radiation Oncology, European Institute of Oncology (IEO) IRCSS, Milan, Italy
| | - Roberto Orecchia
- Scientific Directorate, European Institute of Oncology (IEO) IRCSS, Milan, Italy
| | - Viviana Galimberti
- Division of Breast Surgery, European Institute of Oncology (IEO) IRCSS, Milan, Italy
| | - Paolo Veronesi
- Division of Breast Surgery, European Institute of Oncology (IEO) IRCSS, Milan, Italy
| | | | - Barbara Alicja Jereczek-Fossa
- Department of Radiation Oncology, European Institute of Oncology (IEO) IRCSS, Milan, Italy.,Department of Oncology and Hemato-Oncology, University of Milan, Milan, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
19
|
Loap P, De Marzi L, Almeida CE, Barcellini A, Bradley J, de Santis MC, Dendale R, Jimenez R, Orlandi E, Kirova Y. Hadrontherapy techniques for breast cancer. Crit Rev Oncol Hematol 2021; 169:103574. [PMID: 34958916 DOI: 10.1016/j.critrevonc.2021.103574] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/09/2021] [Revised: 12/22/2021] [Accepted: 12/22/2021] [Indexed: 12/31/2022] Open
Abstract
Radiotherapy plays a key role in breast cancer treatment, and recent technical advances have been made to improve the therapeutic window by limiting the risk of radiation-induced toxicity or by increasing tumor control. Hadrontherapy is a form a radiotherapy relying on particle beams; compared with photon beams, particle beams have specific physical, radiobiological and immunological properties, which can be valuable in diverse clinical situations. To date, available hadrontherapy techniques for breast cancer irradiation include proton therapy, carbon ion radiation therapy, fast neutron therapy and boron neutron capture therapy. This review analyzes the current rationale and level of evidence for each hadrontherapy technique for breast cancer.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Pierre Loap
- Proton Therapy Center, Institut Curie, Orsay, France.
| | | | - Carlos Eduardo Almeida
- Department of Radiological Sciences, Rio de Janeiro State University, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
| | | | - Julie Bradley
- University of Florida Health Proton Therapy Institute, Jacksonville, FL, United States
| | | | - Remi Dendale
- Proton Therapy Center, Institut Curie, Orsay, France
| | - Rachel Jimenez
- Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, United States
| | - Ester Orlandi
- National Center for Oncological Hadrontherapy, Pavia, Italy
| | - Youlia Kirova
- Proton Therapy Center, Institut Curie, Orsay, France
| |
Collapse
|
20
|
Vicini F, Broughman J, Halima A, Mayo Z, Obi E, Al-Hilli Z, Arthur D, Wazer D, Shah C. Delivery of Adjuvant Radiation in 5 Days or Less After Lumpectomy for Breast Cancer: A Systematic Review. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2021; 112:1090-1104. [PMID: 34921906 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2021.11.026] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/27/2021] [Revised: 11/21/2021] [Accepted: 11/29/2021] [Indexed: 10/19/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Recent data have been published supporting the application of ultra-short radiation therapy (RT) regimens for women with early stage breast cancer following breast conserving surgery (BCS). What has remained controversial is whether and how to apply accelerated whole breast irradiation (AWBI) or accelerated partial breast irradiation (APBI) approaches in these patients, as well as the consideration of intraoperative RT (IORT) for this population. METHODS We performed a systematic review of the literature searching for randomized and prospective data published evaluating ultra-short RT delivered in 5-days or less with APBI, AWBI, or IORT. RESULTS We identified two randomized studies applying AWBI (n=5,011 patients) with 5 to 10 year follow up, which supported the use of ultra-short course AWBI (5 fractions in one week) as compared to hypofractionated WBI. We identified six randomized trials evaluating APBI (as compared to WBI) in 5 days or less (n= 8,415) with numerous (n=55) prospective studies as well, with the data supporting short course APBI as compared to WBI. Finally, we identified two randomized trials evaluating IORT; however, both trials demonstrated elevated rates of recurrence with IORT as compared to WBI. CONCLUSIONS The current body of data available for ultra-short adjuvant RT regimens delivered in 5-days or less after BCS overwhelming support their utilization. While data for both exists, APBI regimens have, by far, greater numbers of patients and longer follow-up as compared to AWBI. Also, given increased rates of recurrence seen with IORT with long-term follow-up, this should not be considered a standard approach at this time.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - James Broughman
- Taussig Cancer Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA
| | - Ahmed Halima
- Taussig Cancer Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA
| | - Zachary Mayo
- Taussig Cancer Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA
| | - Elizabeth Obi
- Taussig Cancer Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA
| | - Zahraa Al-Hilli
- Department of General Surgery, Digestive Diseases and Surgery Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA
| | - Douglas Arthur
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VA, USA
| | - David Wazer
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VA, USA
| | - Chirag Shah
- Taussig Cancer Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
21
|
Mutter RW, Choi JI, Jimenez RB, Kirova YM, Fagundes M, Haffty BG, Amos RA, Bradley JA, Chen PY, Ding X, Carr AM, Taylor LM, Pankuch M, Vega RBM, Ho AY, Nyström PW, McGee LA, Urbanic JJ, Cahlon O, Maduro JH, MacDonald SM. Proton Therapy for Breast Cancer: A Consensus Statement From the Particle Therapy Cooperative Group Breast Cancer Subcommittee. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2021; 111:337-359. [PMID: 34048815 PMCID: PMC8416711 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2021.05.110] [Citation(s) in RCA: 52] [Impact Index Per Article: 13.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/21/2020] [Revised: 05/12/2021] [Accepted: 05/17/2021] [Indexed: 12/23/2022]
Abstract
Radiation therapy plays an important role in the multidisciplinary management of breast cancer. Recent years have seen improvements in breast cancer survival and a greater appreciation of potential long-term morbidity associated with the dose and volume of irradiated organs. Proton therapy reduces the dose to nontarget structures while optimizing target coverage. However, there remain additional financial costs associated with proton therapy, despite reductions over time, and studies have yet to demonstrate that protons improve upon the treatment outcomes achieved with photon radiation therapy. There remains considerable heterogeneity in proton patient selection and techniques, and the rapid technological advances in the field have the potential to affect evidence evaluation, given the long latency period for breast cancer radiation therapy recurrence and late effects. In this consensus statement, we assess the data available to the radiation oncology community of proton therapy for breast cancer, provide expert consensus recommendations on indications and technique, and highlight ongoing trials' cost-effectiveness analyses and key areas for future research.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Robert W Mutter
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota.
| | - J Isabelle Choi
- Department of Radiation Oncology, New York Proton Center and Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - Rachel B Jimenez
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Youlia M Kirova
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Institut Curie, Paris, France
| | - Marcio Fagundes
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Miami Cancer Institute, Miami, Florida
| | - Bruce G Haffty
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Rutgers Cancer Institute of New Jersey, New Brunswick, New Jersey
| | - Richard A Amos
- Proton and Advanced Radiotherapy Group, Department of Medical Physics and Biomedical Engineering, University College London, London, United Kingdom
| | - Julie A Bradley
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Florida, Jacksonville, Florida
| | - Peter Y Chen
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Beaumont Health, Royal Oak, Michigan
| | - Xuanfeng Ding
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Beaumont Health, Royal Oak, Michigan
| | - Antoinette M Carr
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Beaumont Health, Royal Oak, Michigan
| | - Leslie M Taylor
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Beaumont Health, Royal Oak, Michigan
| | - Mark Pankuch
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Northwestern Medicine Proton Center, Warrenville, Illinois
| | | | - Alice Y Ho
- Department of Radiation Oncology, New York Proton Center and Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - Petra Witt Nyström
- The Skandion Clinic, Uppsala, Sweden and the Danish Centre for Particle Therapy, Aarhus, Denmark
| | - Lisa A McGee
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic Hospital, Phoenix, Arizona
| | - James J Urbanic
- Department of Radiation Medicine and Applied Sciences, UC San Diego Health, Encinitas, California
| | - Oren Cahlon
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - John H Maduro
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
| | - Shannon M MacDonald
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts
| |
Collapse
|
22
|
Choi JI, Fox J, Bakst R, Hasan S, Press RH, Chhabra AM, Yeh B, Simone CB, Cahlon O. Proton Therapy for Partial Breast Irradiation: Rationale and Considerations. J Pers Med 2021; 11:289. [PMID: 33918662 PMCID: PMC8069416 DOI: 10.3390/jpm11040289] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/03/2021] [Revised: 04/06/2021] [Accepted: 04/06/2021] [Indexed: 11/17/2022] Open
Abstract
In an era of continued advancements in personalized medicine for the treatment of breast cancer, select patients with early stage breast cancer may be uniquely poised to benefit from partial breast irradiation (PBI) delivered with proton therapy. PBI presents an opportunity to improve quality of life during treatment with a significantly shorter treatment duration. By targeting less non-target breast tissue, excess radiation exposure and resulting toxicities are also reduced. Proton therapy represents a precision radiotherapy technology that builds on these advantages by further limiting the normal tissue exposure to unnecessary radiation dose not only to uninvolved breast tissue but also the underlying thoracic organs including the heart and lungs. Herein, we present a concise review of the rationale for the use of proton therapy for PBI, evidence available to date, and practical considerations in the implementation and use of proton therapy for this indication.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- J. Isabelle Choi
- Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, Department of Radiation Oncology, New York, NY 10065, USA; (C.B.S.II); (O.C.)
- New York Proton Center, New York, NY 10035, USA; (J.F.); (R.B.); (S.H.); (R.H.P.); (A.M.C.); (B.Y.)
| | - Jana Fox
- New York Proton Center, New York, NY 10035, USA; (J.F.); (R.B.); (S.H.); (R.H.P.); (A.M.C.); (B.Y.)
- Montefiore Medical Center, Department of Radiation Oncology, New York, NY 10467, USA
| | - Richard Bakst
- New York Proton Center, New York, NY 10035, USA; (J.F.); (R.B.); (S.H.); (R.H.P.); (A.M.C.); (B.Y.)
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY 10029, USA
| | - Shaakir Hasan
- New York Proton Center, New York, NY 10035, USA; (J.F.); (R.B.); (S.H.); (R.H.P.); (A.M.C.); (B.Y.)
- Montefiore Medical Center, Department of Radiation Oncology, New York, NY 10467, USA
| | - Robert H. Press
- New York Proton Center, New York, NY 10035, USA; (J.F.); (R.B.); (S.H.); (R.H.P.); (A.M.C.); (B.Y.)
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY 10029, USA
| | - Arpit M. Chhabra
- New York Proton Center, New York, NY 10035, USA; (J.F.); (R.B.); (S.H.); (R.H.P.); (A.M.C.); (B.Y.)
| | - Brian Yeh
- New York Proton Center, New York, NY 10035, USA; (J.F.); (R.B.); (S.H.); (R.H.P.); (A.M.C.); (B.Y.)
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY 10029, USA
| | - Charles B. Simone
- Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, Department of Radiation Oncology, New York, NY 10065, USA; (C.B.S.II); (O.C.)
- New York Proton Center, New York, NY 10035, USA; (J.F.); (R.B.); (S.H.); (R.H.P.); (A.M.C.); (B.Y.)
| | - Oren Cahlon
- Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, Department of Radiation Oncology, New York, NY 10065, USA; (C.B.S.II); (O.C.)
- New York Proton Center, New York, NY 10035, USA; (J.F.); (R.B.); (S.H.); (R.H.P.); (A.M.C.); (B.Y.)
| |
Collapse
|