1
|
Goerdt L, Pömsl J, Kraus-Tiefenbacher U, Brück V, Kaiser C, Keymer R, Abo-Madyan Y, Fleckenstein K, Berlit S, Tuschy B, Sütterlin M, Wenz F, Sperk E. Oncological outcomes of breast cancer patients after planned IORT boost with low-kV x-rays-results of the TARGIT BQR prospective phase IV trial. Strahlenther Onkol 2025:10.1007/s00066-025-02412-0. [PMID: 40387868 DOI: 10.1007/s00066-025-02412-0] [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: 01/10/2025] [Accepted: 04/29/2025] [Indexed: 05/20/2025]
Abstract
PURPOSE The TARGIT BQR (boost quality registry) phase IV trial investigates clinical outcomes of breast cancer patients with standard external-beam radiotherapy (EBRT) of the whole breast and intraoperative radiotherapy (IORT) with low-kV x‑rays as an anticipated tumor bed boost in a real-world setting. METHODS Intraoperative radiotherapy was performed immediately after breast-conserving surgery in one fraction. External-beam radiotherapy and systemic treatment were given according to the German S3 guideline for breast cancer and local tumor board recommendations. Outcome parameters were death, local recurrence, metastasis, local lymph node recurrence, and ipsilateral and contralateral invasive breast cancer. Kaplan-Meier estimates were used to calculate overall survival, metastasis-free survival, local recurrence-free survival, and disease-free survival. RESULTS From 10 centers, 1133 patients were recruited. This analysis included 871 patients with 879 cancers, with a median follow-up of 36 months (up to 12 years). An IORT boost was performed in 82% and whole-breast irradiation in 84%. Overall survival was 98.4% after 3 years, 96.8% after 5 years, and 95.4% after 10 years (16 deaths; 1.8%). Metastasis and local recurrence occurred in 11 patients each (1.3%). At 5 years, the local control rate was 97.4% and local recurrence-free survival was 94.4%. Ipsilateral breast cancer occurred in 2 patients, contralateral breast cancer in 3 patients, and local lymph node recurrence in 2 patients. Disease-free survival was 92.9% after 5 years and 82.6% after 10 years. CONCLUSION This phase IV trial confirms previously reported outcomes on upfront IORT boost, with excellent disease-control outcomes.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Lukas Goerdt
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University Medical Center Mannheim, Medical Faculty Mannheim, Heidelberg University, Mannheim, Germany
| | - Janina Pömsl
- Department of Pediatric and Adolescent Medicine, Medical Faculty, University of Augsburg, Augsburg, Germany
| | | | | | - Christina Kaiser
- University Medical Center Bonn, Medical Faculty Bonn, Bonn University, Bonn, Germany
| | | | - Yasser Abo-Madyan
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Mannheim, Medical Faculty Mannheim, Heidelberg University, Mannheim, Germany
| | - Katharina Fleckenstein
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Mannheim, Medical Faculty Mannheim, Heidelberg University, Mannheim, Germany
| | - Sebastian Berlit
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, RKH Klinikum Ludwigsburg, Ludwigsburg, Germany
| | - Benjamin Tuschy
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University Medical Center Mannheim, Medical Faculty Mannheim, Heidelberg University, Mannheim, Germany
| | - Marc Sütterlin
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University Medical Center Mannheim, Medical Faculty Mannheim, Heidelberg University, Mannheim, Germany
| | | | - Elena Sperk
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Mannheim, Medical Faculty Mannheim, Heidelberg University, Mannheim, Germany.
- Mannheim Cancer Center, University Medical Center Mannheim, Medical Faculty Mannheim, Heidelberg University, Theodor-Kutzer-Ufer 1-3, Mannheim, Germany.
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Poppe MM, Boucher K, Gaffney DK, Brownson KE, Smith G, Howell JN, Ticona FF, Kim J, Burt L, Cannon D, Kokeny K. NOVEMBER, A Phase 2 Trial of a 9-Day Course of Whole Breast Radiation Therapy With a Simultaneous Lumpectomy Boost for Early-Stage Breast Cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2025:S0360-3016(25)00348-7. [PMID: 40314623 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2025.03.078] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/23/2024] [Revised: 03/19/2025] [Accepted: 03/26/2025] [Indexed: 05/03/2025]
Abstract
PURPOSE/OBJECTIVES A phase 2 prospective noninferiority trial evaluating a novel 9 fraction course of whole breast radiation and simultaneous lumpectomy boost. MATERIALS AND METHODS Tis and T1-3N0 patients enrolled to receive 3420 cGy radiation to the breast with 3960 cGy to the lumpectomy cavity. The primary endpoint was averaged photographic cosmetic scores at 24 months with a hypothesis of >70% good to excellent cosmetic breast scoring 24 months after completing radiation, assuming a baseline excellent/good cosmetic scoring of 80% with an 80% power, α = 0.1. RESULTS From 2018 to 2020, with institutional review board approval, 103 patients were enrolled. Patients had mostly invasive ductal carcinoma (75%), tumor size ≤ 2cm (88%), negative margins (92%), no lympho-vascular invasion (80%), and estrogen receptor positive (85%). Patients had a mean age of 59.5 years (33-82). With a mean follow-up of 51 months, there were no local recurrences and 1 patient with both regional (axilla) and distant (brain) recurrence. Twenty-four-month post-radiation therapy (RT) cosmetic photos were 68% excellent/good, and 32% fair/poor. The null hypothesis was not rejected with one-sided 95% exact binomial confidence interval of 59.1% (59.1%-100%). There were no reported late ≥grade 3 radiation toxicity events and only 4 patients with late grade 2 events. Patient-reported outcomes utilizing the Breast-Q survey revealed breast satisfaction in 85% of women. CONCLUSIONS We demonstrate an effective novel 9 fraction whole breast + lumpectomy boost radiation schedule. This trial uses one of the shortest published radiation schedules for a lumpectomy boost. Although we did not meet our prespecified cosmetic endpoint, no significant cosmetic change from baseline was seen in 80% of patients. We demonstrate excellent local control, and patient-reported satisfaction with low RT-related toxicity. We hope to move this concept forward in a randomized trial against the 5-day United Kingdom (UK) Fast Forward regimen, inclusive of a simultaneous lumpectomy cavity boost.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Matthew M Poppe
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Huntsman Cancer Institute, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah.
| | - Kenneth Boucher
- Huntsman Cancer Institute, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah; Department of Medicine, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah
| | - David K Gaffney
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Huntsman Cancer Institute, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah
| | - Kirstyn E Brownson
- Department of Medicine, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah; Department of Surgery, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah
| | - Gina Smith
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Huntsman Cancer Institute, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah
| | - Jackson N Howell
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Huntsman Cancer Institute, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah
| | - Federico F Ticona
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Huntsman Cancer Institute, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah
| | - Jaewhan Kim
- Department of Physical Therapy, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah
| | - Lindsay Burt
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Huntsman Cancer Institute, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah
| | - Donald Cannon
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Huntsman Cancer Institute, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah
| | - Kristine Kokeny
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Huntsman Cancer Institute, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Chen P, Ren L, Guo Y, Sun Y. Boosting antitumor immunity in breast cancers: Potential of adjuvants, drugs, and nanocarriers. Int Rev Immunol 2025; 44:141-164. [PMID: 39611269 DOI: 10.1080/08830185.2024.2432499] [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: 05/13/2024] [Revised: 10/05/2024] [Accepted: 11/17/2024] [Indexed: 11/30/2024]
Abstract
Despite advancements in breast cancer treatment, therapeutic resistance, and tumor recurrence continue to pose formidable challenges. Therefore, a deep knowledge of the intricate interplay between the tumor and the immune system is necessary. In the pursuit of combating breast cancer, the awakening of antitumor immunity has been proposed as a compelling avenue. Tumor stroma in breast cancers contains multiple stromal and immune cells that impact the resistance to therapy and also the expansion of malignant cells. Activating or repressing these stromal and immune cells, as well as their secretions can be proposed for exhausting resistance mechanisms and repressing tumor growth. NK cells and T lymphocytes are the prominent components of breast tumor immunity that can be triggered by adjuvants for eradicating malignant cells. However, stromal cells like endothelial and fibroblast cells, as well as some immune suppressive cells, consisting of premature myeloid cells, and some subsets of macrophages and CD4+ T lymphocytes, can dampen antitumor immunity in favor of breast tumor growth and therapy resistance. This review article aims to research the prospect of harnessing the power of drugs, adjuvants, and nanoparticles in awakening the immune reactions against breast malignant cells. By investigating the immunomodulatory properties of pharmacological agents and the synergistic effects of adjuvants, this review seeks to uncover the mechanisms through which antitumor immunity can be triggered. Moreover, the current review delineates the challenges and opportunities in the translational journey from bench to bedside.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ping Chen
- Pharmacy Department, Zibo Central Hospital, Zibo, Shandong, China
| | - Lei Ren
- Pharmacy Department, Zibo Central Hospital, Zibo, Shandong, China
| | - Youwei Guo
- Pharmacy Department, Zibo Central Hospital, Zibo, Shandong, China
| | - Yan Sun
- Pharmacy Department, Zibo Central Hospital, Zibo, Shandong, China
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Hanna SA, Mota BS, de Moraes FY, Marta GN, Carvalho HDA, Riera R. Intensity-modulated radiation therapy for early-stage breast cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. SAO PAULO MED J 2024; 143:e2023324. [PMID: 39774728 PMCID: PMC11655040 DOI: 10.1590/1516-3180.2023.0324.r1.03072024] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/14/2023] [Revised: 04/29/2024] [Accepted: 07/03/2024] [Indexed: 01/11/2025] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Radiation therapy (RT) is a standard treatment for non-metastatic breast cancer and is associated with acute and late toxicities. Intensity-modulated RT (IMRT) may decrease toxicity and is convenient for patients. OBJECTIVES To assess the efficacy and safety of IMRT in women with early stage breast cancer. DESIGN AND SETTING Systematic review study; Multi-institutional centers. METHODS Seven databases were searched. Randomized controlled trials (RCT) comparing IMRT with any "non-IMRT" strategies were included. Primary outcomes were local control and acute toxicity. Cochrane Handbook was use to plan and conduct the review, and PRISMA 2020 was used to report results. RESULTS Five RCT involving 2,556 women (n = 1,283 IMRT; n = 1,274 control arm) were included. Baseline characteristics were similar between trials and arms. Local relapse-free survival rates were not different (hazard-ratio [HR] 0.62; 95%confidence interval [CI] -0.38 to 1.62; P > 0.05); however, IMRT reduced the overall acute toxicity (RR 0.69, 95%CI 0.58 to 0.82; P < 0.00001) and acute moist desquamation (risk-ratio [RR] 0.71, 95%CI 0.60 to 0.82; P < 0.00001). Lymphedema and pneumonitis rates, and survival outcomes were not affected by IMRT. The 2-year telangiectasia rate was decreased with IMRT (RR 0.66, 95%CI 0.47 to 0.93; P = 0.02); however, edema, pain, pigmentation, or fibrosis remained unaffected. IMRT did not improve cosmesis. CONCLUSIONS IMRT improved acute toxicity and lowered telangiectasia rates, without affecting oncological and aesthetic outcomes. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION This review was registered at Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2013, Issue 3. Art. No.: CD010420. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD010420.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Samir Abdallah Hanna
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Hospital Sírio-Libanês, São Paulo (SP), Brazil
| | - Bruna Salani Mota
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Instituto do Câncer do Estado de São Paulo (ICESP/HCFMUSP), São Paulo (SP), Brazil
| | - Fabio Ynoe de Moraes
- Department of Oncology, Division of Radiation Oncology, Kingston General Hospital, Queen’s University, Kingston, Ontario, Canada
| | - Gustavo Nader Marta
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Hospital Sírio-Libanês, São Paulo (SP), Brazil
| | - Heloísa de Andrade Carvalho
- Department of Radiology and Oncology, Radiotherapy Division, Hospital das Clínicas da Faculdade de Medicina (HCFMUSP), Universidade de São Paulo (USP), São Paulo (SP), Brazil
| | - Rachel Riera
- Professor, Discipline of Evidence-Based Medicine, Escola Paulista de Medicina (EPM), Universidade Federal de São Paulo (Unifesp), São Paulo, SP, Brazil; Consultant, Centre of Health Technology Assessment, Hospital Sírio-Libanês, São Paulo (SP), Brazil
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
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
|
6
|
Goerdt L, Schnaubelt R, Kraus-Tiefenbacher U, Brück V, Bauer L, Dinges S, von der Assen A, Meye H, Kaiser C, Weiss C, Clausen S, Schneider F, Abo-Madyan Y, Fleckenstein K, Berlit S, Tuschy B, Sütterlin M, Wenz F, Sperk E. Acute and Long-Term Toxicity after Planned Intraoperative Boost and Whole Breast Irradiation in High-Risk Patients with Breast Cancer-Results from the Targeted Intraoperative Radiotherapy Boost Quality Registry (TARGIT BQR). Cancers (Basel) 2024; 16:2067. [PMID: 38893184 PMCID: PMC11171237 DOI: 10.3390/cancers16112067] [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: 04/30/2024] [Revised: 05/22/2024] [Accepted: 05/24/2024] [Indexed: 06/21/2024] Open
Abstract
In the context of breast cancer treatment optimization, this study prospectively examines the feasibility and outcomes of utilizing intraoperative radiotherapy (IORT) as a boost in combination with standard external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) for high-risk patients. Different guidelines recommend such a tumor bed boost in addition to whole breast irradiation with EBRT for patients with risk factors for local breast cancer recurrence. The TARGIT BQR (NCT01440010) is a prospective, multicenter registry study aimed at ensuring the quality of clinical outcomes. It provides, for the first time, data from a large cohort with a detailed assessment of acute and long-term toxicity following an IORT boost using low-energy X-rays. Inclusion criteria encompassed tumors up to 3.5 cm in size and preoperative indications for a boost. The IORT boost, administered immediately after tumor resection, delivered a single dose of 20 Gy. EBRT and systemic therapy adhered to local tumor board recommendations. Follow-up for toxicity assessment (LENT SOMA criteria: fibrosis, teleangiectasia, retraction, pain, breast edema, lymphedema, hyperpigmentation, ulceration) took place before surgery, 6 weeks to 90 days after EBRT, 6 months after IORT, and then annually using standardized case report forms (CRFs). Between 2011 and 2020, 1133 patients from 10 centers were preoperatively enrolled. The planned IORT boost was conducted in 90%, and EBRT in 97% of cases. Median follow-up was 32 months (range 1-120, 20.4% dropped out), with a median age of 61 years (range 30-90). No acute grade 3 or 4 toxicities were observed. Acute side effects included erythema grade 1 or 2 in 4.4%, palpable seroma in 9.1%, punctured seroma in 0.3%, and wound healing disorders in 2.1%. Overall, chronic teleangiectasia of any grade occurred in 16.2%, fibrosis grade ≥ 2 in 14.3%, pain grade ≥ 2 in 3.4%, and hyperpigmentation in 1.1%. In conclusion, a tumor bed boost through IORT using low-energy X-rays is a swift and feasible method that demonstrates low rates in terms of acute or long-term toxicity profiles in combination with whole breast irradiation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Lukas Goerdt
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University Medical Center Mannheim, Medical Faculty Mannheim, Heidelberg University, 68167 Mannheim, Germany; (L.G.)
| | - Robert Schnaubelt
- Radiation Oncology, MVZ Rheinland Klinikum Neuss, 41462 Neuss, Germany
| | - Uta Kraus-Tiefenbacher
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Krankenhaus Nordwest, 60488 Frankfurt am Main, Germany
| | - Viktoria Brück
- Breast Center, Asklepios Klinik Barmbek, 22307 Hamburg, Germany
| | - Lelia Bauer
- Breast Center, GRN Klinik Weinheim, 69469 Weinheim, Germany
| | - Stefan Dinges
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Städtisches Klinikum Lüneburg, 21339 Lüneburg, Germany
| | - Albert von der Assen
- Breast Center, Department of Senology, Franziskus Hospital Harderberg—Niels Stensen Kliniken, 49124 Georgsmarienhütte, Germany
| | - Heidrun Meye
- Department of Radiation Oncology, MVZ Gesundheit Nordhessen, 34125 Kassel, Germany
| | - Christina Kaiser
- University Medical Center Bonn, Medical Faculty Bonn, Bonn University, 53113 Bonn, Germany
| | - Christel Weiss
- Department of Medical Biometry, University Medical Center Mannheim, Medical Faculty Mannheim, Heidelberg University, 68167 Mannheim, Germany
| | - Sven Clausen
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Mannheim, Medical Faculty Mannheim, Heidelberg University, 68167 Mannheim, Germany
| | - Frank Schneider
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Mannheim, Medical Faculty Mannheim, Heidelberg University, 68167 Mannheim, Germany
| | - Yasser Abo-Madyan
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Mannheim, Medical Faculty Mannheim, Heidelberg University, 68167 Mannheim, Germany
| | - Katharina Fleckenstein
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Mannheim, Medical Faculty Mannheim, Heidelberg University, 68167 Mannheim, Germany
| | - Sebastian Berlit
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University Medical Center Mannheim, Medical Faculty Mannheim, Heidelberg University, 68167 Mannheim, Germany; (L.G.)
| | - Benjamin Tuschy
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University Medical Center Mannheim, Medical Faculty Mannheim, Heidelberg University, 68167 Mannheim, Germany; (L.G.)
| | - Marc Sütterlin
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University Medical Center Mannheim, Medical Faculty Mannheim, Heidelberg University, 68167 Mannheim, Germany; (L.G.)
| | - Frederik Wenz
- University Hospital Freiburg, 79106 Freiburg, Germany
| | - Elena Sperk
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Mannheim, Medical Faculty Mannheim, Heidelberg University, 68167 Mannheim, Germany
- Mannheim Cancer Center, University Medical Center Mannheim, Medical Faculty Mannheim, Heidelberg University, 68167 Mannheim, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Jin K, Luo J, Yu X, Guo X. Hypofractionated radiotherapy with simultaneous tumor bed boost (Hi-RISE) in breast cancer patients receiving upfront breast-conserving surgery: study protocol for a phase III randomized controlled trial. Radiat Oncol 2024; 19:62. [PMID: 38802888 PMCID: PMC11131299 DOI: 10.1186/s13014-024-02449-y] [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: 02/03/2024] [Accepted: 05/09/2024] [Indexed: 05/29/2024] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND The effectiveness and safety of moderately hypofractionated radiotherapy (HFRT) in patients undergoing breast-conserving surgery (BCS) has been demonstrated in several pivotal randomized trials. However, the feasibility of applying simultaneous integrated boost (SIB) to the tumor bed and regional node irradiation (RNI) using modern radiotherapy techniques with HFRT needs further evaluation. METHODS This prospective, multi-center, randomized controlled, non-inferiority phase III trial aims to determine the non-inferiority of HFRT combined with SIB (HFRTsib) compared with conventional fractionated radiotherapy with sequential boost (CFRTseq) in terms of five-year locoregional control rate in breast cancer patients undergoing upfront BCS. A total of 2904 participants will be recruited and randomized in a 1:1 ratio into the HFRTsib and CFRTseq groups. All patients will receive whole breast irradiation, and those with positive axillary nodes will receive additional RNI, including internal mammary irradiation. The prescribed dose for the HFRTsib group will be 40 Gy in 15 fractions, combined with a SIB of 48 Gy in 15 fractions to the tumor bed. The CFRTseq group will receive 50 Gy in 25 fractions, with a sequential boost of 10 Gy in 5 fractions to the tumor bed. DISCUSSION This trial intends to assess the effectiveness and safety of SIB combined with HFRT in early breast cancer patients following BCS. The primary endpoint is locoregional control, and the results of this trial are expected to offer crucial evidence for utilizing HFRT in breast cancer patients after BCS. TRIAL REGISTRATION This trial was registered at ClincalTrials.gov (NCT04025164) on July 18, 2019.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kairui Jin
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Department of Oncology, Shanghai Medical College, Shanghai Clinical Research Center for Radiation Oncology, Shanghai Key Laboratory of Radiation Oncology, Fudan University Shanghai Cancer Center, Fudan University, 270 DongAn Road, Shanghai, 200032, China
| | - Jurui Luo
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Ren Ji Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, 200127, China
| | - Xiaoli Yu
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Department of Oncology, Shanghai Medical College, Shanghai Clinical Research Center for Radiation Oncology, Shanghai Key Laboratory of Radiation Oncology, Fudan University Shanghai Cancer Center, Fudan University, 270 DongAn Road, Shanghai, 200032, China.
| | - Xiaomao Guo
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Department of Oncology, Shanghai Medical College, Shanghai Clinical Research Center for Radiation Oncology, Shanghai Key Laboratory of Radiation Oncology, Fudan University Shanghai Cancer Center, Fudan University, 270 DongAn Road, Shanghai, 200032, China.
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Billaudeau A, Costa E, Vu-Bezin J. Scripting a planning avoidance structure to perform simultaneous integrated boost breast on Halcyon linear accelerators. Med Dosim 2024; 49:328-331. [PMID: 38744604 DOI: 10.1016/j.meddos.2024.04.003] [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: 02/02/2024] [Revised: 03/27/2024] [Accepted: 04/09/2024] [Indexed: 05/16/2024]
Abstract
When planning a simultaneous integrated boost in breast treatment with sliding window intensity-modulated radiotherapy, the use of an oblique anterior field can be advantageous. To limit the irradiation to the tumor bed on the oblique anterior field, we use the "fixed jaw" option during optimization in Eclipse (v15.6, Varian Medical System). However, this option is not available for Halcyon (Varian Medical System) linear accelerators because the beam-defining collimator is only composed of a dual-layer multileaf collimator (MLC) without any jaw collimator. Hence, the optimizer opens the leaves on all target volumes, and leaves facing the heart or medullary canal may be opened on the oblique anterior field. To avoid this unacceptable behavior, we created an avoidance structure using the Eclipse Scripting Application Programming Interface (ESAPI) to force the optimizer to close the leaves when facing critical organs at risk. The avoidance structure was the whole body of the patient subtracted from every beam path used: the tangential fields collimated to the breast planning target volume (PTV) and the oblique anterior field collimated to the tumor bed PTV. The ESAPI has a built-in method that returns a table of points, drawing the outline of a structure at the isocenter plane of a beam. We used this method to build the avoidance structure. We planned 6 breast cancer patients using this structure, and we were able to meet all dosimetric constraints. All MLC leaves were fully closed outside the tumor bed PTV for the oblique anterior field.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Annabelle Billaudeau
- Institut Curie, service de physique médicale, département d'oncologie radiothérapie, Paris, France
| | - Emilie Costa
- Institut Curie, service de physique médicale, département d'oncologie radiothérapie, Paris, France
| | - Jérémi Vu-Bezin
- Institut Curie, service de physique médicale, département d'oncologie radiothérapie, Paris, France.
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Laughlin BS, Corbin KS, Toesca DAS, Thorpe CS, Golafshar MA, Pockaj B, Cronin P, McGee LA, Halyard MY, Mutter RW, Keole SR, Park SS, Shumway DA, Vern-Gross TZ, Vallow L, Wong WW, DeWees TA, Vargas CE. Physician- and Patient-Reported Outcomes of the MC1635 Phase 3 Trial of Ultrahypofractionated Versus Moderately Hypofractionated Adjuvant Radiation Therapy After Breast-Conserving Surgery. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2024; 118:1049-1059. [PMID: 37914139 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2023.10.018] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/16/2023] [Revised: 09/21/2023] [Accepted: 10/14/2023] [Indexed: 11/03/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE Our aim was to report physician- and patient-reported outcomes of patients with localized breast cancer treated with moderate versus ultrahypofractionated whole breast irradiation (WBI) after breast-conserving surgery (BCS). METHODS AND MATERIALS Between February 2018 and February 2020, patients with localized breast cancer (pT0-3 pN0-1 M0) were offered participation in a phase 3 randomized clinical trial assessing adjuvant moderate hypofractionation (MHF) to 40 Gy in 15 fractions versus ultrahypofractionation (UHF) to 25 Gy in 5 fractions after BCS, with an optional simultaneously integrated boost. Toxicities, cosmesis, and quality of life were assessed at baseline, end of treatment (EOT), and 3 months, 1 year, 2 years, and 3 years from irradiation using validated metric tools. RESULTS One hundred seven patients were randomized to MHF (n = 54) or UHF (n = 53) adjuvant WBI. The median follow-up was 42.8 months. Grade 2 radiation dermatitis was experienced by 4 patients (7.4%) in the MHF arm and 2 patients (3.7%) in the UHF arm at EOT (P = .726). No grade 3 or higher toxicities were observed. Deterioration of cosmesis by physician assessment was observed in 2 (6.7%) patients treated in the UHF arm and 1 (1.9%) patient treated in the MHF arm at EOT (P = .534), whereas at 3 months, only 1 (1.8%) patient treated in the MHF arm demonstrated deterioration of cosmesis (P = .315). At EOT, 91% and 94% of patients reported excellent/good cosmesis among those treated with MHF and UHF regimens, respectively (P = .550). At 3 months, more patients within the MHF arm reported excellent/good cosmesis compared with those in the UHF arm (100% vs 91%; P = .030). However, the difference in patient-reported cosmesis disappeared at the 1-, 2-, and 3-year time points. CONCLUSIONS UHF WBI showed similar treatment-related late toxicities and similar provider-scored cosmesis compared with MHF radiation in patients treated adjuvantly after BCS.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | | | - Cameron S Thorpe
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Sanford Health, Fargo, North Dakota
| | - Michael A Golafshar
- Department of Qualitative Health Sciences, Section of Biostatistics, Mayo Clinic, Scottsdale, Arizona
| | - Barbara Pockaj
- Department of General Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Phoenix, Arizona
| | - Patricia Cronin
- Department of General Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Phoenix, Arizona
| | - Lisa A McGee
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Phoenix, Arizona
| | | | - Robert W Mutter
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota
| | - Sameer R Keole
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Phoenix, Arizona
| | - Sean S Park
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota
| | - Dean A Shumway
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota
| | | | - Laura Vallow
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, Florida
| | - William W Wong
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Phoenix, Arizona
| | - Todd A DeWees
- Department of Qualitative Health Sciences, Section of Biostatistics, Mayo Clinic, Scottsdale, Arizona
| | - Carlos E Vargas
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Phoenix, Arizona.
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Walls GM, Bergom C. Late Pulmonary Side Effects: Contemporary Breast Radiation Does Not Take Our Breath Away. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2024; 118:1078-1080. [PMID: 38401968 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2023.11.021] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/02/2023] [Accepted: 11/11/2023] [Indexed: 02/26/2024]
Affiliation(s)
- Gerard M Walls
- Patrick G Johnston Centre for Cancer Research, Queen's University Belfast, Belfast, Northern Ireland; Department of Radiation Oncology, Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis, St. Louis, Missouri
| | - Carmen Bergom
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis, St. Louis, Missouri.
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Choi MS, Chang JS, Kim K, Kim JH, Kim TH, Kim S, Cha H, Cho O, Choi JH, Kim M, Kim J, Kim TG, Yeo SG, Chang AR, Ahn SJ, Choi J, Kang KM, Kwon J, Koo T, Kim MY, Choi SH, Jeong BK, Jang BS, Jo IY, Lee H, Kim N, Park HJ, Im JH, Lee SW, Cho Y, Lee SY, Chang JH, Chun J, Lee EM, Kim JS, Shin KH, Kim YB. Assessment of deep learning-based auto-contouring on interobserver consistency in target volume and organs-at-risk delineation for breast cancer: Implications for RTQA program in a multi-institutional study. Breast 2024; 73:103599. [PMID: 37992527 PMCID: PMC10700624 DOI: 10.1016/j.breast.2023.103599] [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: 09/18/2023] [Revised: 10/30/2023] [Accepted: 11/09/2023] [Indexed: 11/24/2023] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE To quantify interobserver variation (IOV) in target volume and organs-at-risk (OAR) contouring across 31 institutions in breast cancer cases and to explore the clinical utility of deep learning (DL)-based auto-contouring in reducing potential IOV. METHODS AND MATERIALS In phase 1, two breast cancer cases were randomly selected and distributed to multiple institutions for contouring six clinical target volumes (CTVs) and eight OAR. In Phase 2, auto-contour sets were generated using a previously published DL Breast segmentation model and were made available for all participants. The difference in IOV of submitted contours in phases 1 and 2 was investigated quantitatively using the Dice similarity coefficient (DSC) and Hausdorff distance (HD). The qualitative analysis involved using contour heat maps to visualize the extent and location of these variations and the required modification. RESULTS Over 800 pairwise comparisons were analysed for each structure in each case. Quantitative phase 2 metrics showed significant improvement in the mean DSC (from 0.69 to 0.77) and HD (from 34.9 to 17.9 mm). Quantitative analysis showed increased interobserver agreement in phase 2, specifically for CTV structures (5-19 %), leading to fewer manual adjustments. Underlying IOV differences causes were reported using a questionnaire and hierarchical clustering analysis based on the volume of CTVs. CONCLUSION DL-based auto-contours improved the contour agreement for OARs and CTVs significantly, both qualitatively and quantitatively, suggesting its potential role in minimizing radiation therapy protocol deviation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Min Seo Choi
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea
| | - Jee Suk Chang
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea
| | - Kyubo Kim
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Ewha Womans University College of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea; Department of Radiation Oncology, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seongnam, Republic of Korea
| | - Jin Hee Kim
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Dongsan Medical Center, Keimyung University School of Medicine, Daegu, Republic of Korea
| | - Tae Hyung Kim
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Nowon Eulji Medical Center, Eulji University School of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea
| | - Sungmin Kim
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Dong-A University Hospital, Dong-A University College of Medicine, Busan, Republic of Korea
| | - Hyejung Cha
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Yonsei University Wonju College of Medicine, Wonju, Republic of Korea
| | - Oyeon Cho
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Ajou University School of Medicine, Suwon, Republic of Korea
| | - Jin Hwa Choi
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Chung-Ang University Hospital, Seoul, Republic of Korea
| | - Myungsoo Kim
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Incheon St Mary's Hospital, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea, Seoul, Republic of Korea
| | - Juree Kim
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Ilsan CHA Medical Center, CHA University School of Medicine, Goyang, Republic of Korea
| | - Tae Gyu Kim
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Samsung Changwon Hospital, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Changwon, Republic of Korea
| | - Seung-Gu Yeo
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Soonchunhyang University College of Medicine, Soonchunhyang University Hospital, Bucheon, Republic of Korea
| | - Ah Ram Chang
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Soonchunhyang University College of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea
| | - Sung-Ja Ahn
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Chonnam National University Medical School, Gwangju, Republic of Korea
| | - Jinhyun Choi
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Jeju National University Hospital, Jeju University College of Medicine, Republic of Korea
| | - Ki Mun Kang
- Gyeongsang National University Changwon Hospital, Gyeongsang National University College of Medicine, Jinju, Republic of Korea
| | - Jeanny Kwon
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Chungnam National University School of Medicine, Daejeon, Republic of Korea
| | - Taeryool Koo
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Hallym University Sacred Heart Hospital, Hallym University College of Medicine, Anyang, Republic of Korea
| | - Mi Young Kim
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Kyungpook National University Chilgok Hospital, Daegu, Republic of Korea
| | - Seo Hee Choi
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Yongin Severance Hospital, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Yongin, Republic of Korea
| | - Bae Kwon Jeong
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Gyeongsang National University Hospital, Gyeongsang National University College of Medicine, Jinju, Republic of Korea
| | - Bum-Sup Jang
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea
| | - In Young Jo
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Soonchunhyang University Hospital, Cheonan, Republic of Korea
| | - Hyebin Lee
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Kangbuk Samsung Hospital, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea
| | - Nalee Kim
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea
| | - Hae Jin Park
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Hanyang University College of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea
| | - Jung Ho Im
- Department of Radiation Oncology, CHA Bundang Medical Center, CHA University School of Medicine, Seongnam, Republic of Korea
| | - Sea-Won Lee
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Eunpyeong St. Mary's Hospital, Catholic University of Korea College of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea
| | - Yeona Cho
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Gangnam Severance Hospital, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea
| | - Sun Young Lee
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Chonbuk National University Hospital, Jeonju, Republic of Korea
| | - Ji Hyun Chang
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea
| | - Jaehee Chun
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea
| | - Eung Man Lee
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Ewha Womans University College of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea
| | - Jin Sung Kim
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea.
| | - Kyung Hwan Shin
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea.
| | - Yong Bae Kim
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
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
|
13
|
Unterkirhere O, Stenger-Weisser A, Kaever A, Hoeng L, Jeller D, Logaritsch P, Glanzmann C, Studer G. Single-Institution Prospective Evaluation of Moderately Hypofractionated Whole-Breast Radiation Therapy With Simultaneous Integrated Boost With or Without Lymphatic Drainage Irradiation After Breast-Conserving Surgery. Adv Radiat Oncol 2023; 8:101270. [PMID: 38047219 PMCID: PMC10692289 DOI: 10.1016/j.adro.2023.101270] [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: 05/03/2023] [Accepted: 05/12/2023] [Indexed: 12/05/2023] Open
Abstract
Purpose We report treatment outcomes for patients who received adjuvant moderate hypofractionated whole-breast radiation therapy with simultaneous integrated boost (SIB-mhWBRT) after breast-conserving surgery. Methods and Materials SIB-mhWBRT for patients with breast cancer was introduced in our department in July 2017. This prospective evaluation includes 424 consecutive patients treated with SIB-mhWBRT for stage I-III invasive breast cancer (n = 391) and/or ductal carcinoma in situ (n = 33) until December 2021. SIB-mhWBRT was applied with 40 Gy in 15 daily fractions over 3 weeks according to the START B trial, with an SIB dose to the tumor bed of 48 Gy according to Radiation Therapy Oncology Group 1005/UK-IMPORT-HIGH, delivered as 3-dinemsional conformal radiation therapy (RT; n = 402), intensity modulated RT (n = 4), or volumetric modulated arc therapy (n = 18). The mean patient age was 60 years (range, 27-88). Since May 2018, patients with indications for lymphatic pathway RT were included (n = 62). Baseline parameters and follow-up data were recorded and reported, including objective assessment of treatment-related outcomes and subjective patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs). Results Mean/median follow-up was 29/33 months (range, 2-60). Acute toxicity grade 0, 1, 2, and 3 was observed in 25.0%, 61.4%, 13.3%, and 0%, respectively, at the completion of RT. Data of 281, 266, 243, 172, and 58 patients were available for 6-month and 1-, 2-, 3-, and 4-year follow-up, respectively. Grade 2 late effects were identified in 8.5%, 6.0%, 4.9%, 2.2%, and 10.2% and grade 3 in 2.8%, 1.1%, 1.2%, 0%, and 0% of patients at 6-month and 1-, 2-, 3-, and 4-year follow-up, respectively. Medical treatment of breast edema was the only grade 3 late effect observed. PROM cosmesis results were evaluated as excellent-good, fair, and poor in 97.2%, 2.5%, and 0.4%; 96.5%, 3.1%, and 0.4%; 97.4%, 2.2%, and 0.4%; 97.5%, 2.5%, and 0%; and 96.5%, 3.5%, and 0.0% at 6 months and 1, 2, 3, and 4 years post-RT, respectively. For all patients, the 3-year overall, cancer-specific, and disease-free survival rates were 98.2%, 99.1%, and 95.9%, respectively. Three-year risk of any locoregional recurrence was 0.6%. No mortality or relapse was observed in patients with ductal carcinoma in situ. Conclusions SIB-mhWBRT demonstrated very favorable side effect profiles and cosmesis/PROMs. Three-year results demonstrate excellent locoregional control. This short-term regimen offers substantial patient comfort and improves institutional efficacy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Olga Unterkirhere
- Radiation Oncology Department, Kantonsspital Luzern, Lucerne, Switzerland
| | | | | | - Laura Hoeng
- Radiation Oncology Department, Kantonsspital Luzern, Lucerne, Switzerland
| | - David Jeller
- Radiation Oncology Department, Kantonsspital Luzern, Lucerne, Switzerland
| | | | | | - Gabriela Studer
- Radiation Oncology Department, Kantonsspital Luzern, Lucerne, Switzerland
- Faculty of Health Sciences and Medicine, University of Lucerne, Lucerne, Switzerland
| |
Collapse
|
14
|
Krug D, Dunst J. [Moderate hypofractionated adjuvant radiotherapy with simultaneous integrated boost for breast cancer]. Strahlenther Onkol 2023; 199:1033-1035. [PMID: 37698593 PMCID: PMC10598182 DOI: 10.1007/s00066-023-02144-z] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 08/16/2023] [Indexed: 09/13/2023]
Affiliation(s)
- David Krug
- Klinik für Strahlentherapie/Radioonkologie, UKSH, Campus Kiel, Kiel, Deutschland
| | - Jürgen Dunst
- Klinik für Strahlentherapie/Radioonkologie, UKSH, Campus Kiel, Kiel, Deutschland.
| |
Collapse
|
15
|
Montero A, Ciérvide R, Cañadillas C, Álvarez B, García-Aranda M, Alonso R, López M, Chen-Zhao X, Alonso L, Valero J, Sánchez E, Hernando O, García de Acilu P, Fernandez-Letón P, Rubio C. Acute skin toxicity of ultra-hypofractionated whole breast radiotherapy with simultaneous integrated boost for early breast cancer. Clin Transl Radiat Oncol 2023; 41:100651. [PMID: 37388711 PMCID: PMC10300060 DOI: 10.1016/j.ctro.2023.100651] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/13/2023] [Revised: 05/18/2023] [Accepted: 06/04/2023] [Indexed: 07/01/2023] Open
Abstract
Background Whole-breast irradiation (WBI) after breast conserving surgery (BCS) is indicated to improve loco-regional control and survival. Former studies showed that addition of tumor bed boost in all age groups significantly improved local control although no apparent impact on overall survival but with an increased risk of worse cosmetic outcome. Even though shortened regimens in 3 weeks are considered the standard, recent studies have shown the non-inferiority of a treatment regimen of 5 fractions in one-week in both locoregional control and toxicity profile, although simultaneous integrated boost (SIB) in this setting has been scarcely studied. Materials and Methods From March-2020 to March-2022, 383 patients with early breast cancer diagnosis and a median age of 56 years-old (range 30-99)were included in a prospective registry of ultra-hypofractionated WBI up to a total dose of 26 Gy in 5.2 Gy/fraction with a SIB of 29 Gy in 5.8 Gy/fraction in 272 patients (71%), 30-31 Gy in 6-6.2 Gy/fraction in 111 patients (29%) with close/focally affected margins. Radiation treatment was delivered by conformal 3-D technique in 366 patients (95%), VMAT in 16patients (4%) and conformal 3-D with deep inspiration breath hold (DIBH) in 4patients (1%). Ninety-three per cent of patients received endocrine therapy and 43% systemic or targeted chemotherapy. Development of acute skin complications was retrospectively reviewed. Results With a median follow-up of 18 months (range 7-31), all patients are alive without evidence of local, regional or distant relapse. Acute tolerance was acceptable, with null o mild toxicity: 182 (48%) and 15 (4%) patients developed skin toxicity grade 1 and 2 respectively; 9 (2%) and 2 (0.5%) patients breast edema grade 1and 2 respectively. No other acute toxicities were observed. We also evaluated development of early delayed complications and observed grade 1 breast edema in 6 patients (2%); grade 1 hyperpigmentation in 20 patients (5%); and grade 1 and 2 breast induration underneath boost region in 10(3%) and 2 patients (0.5%) respectively. We found a statistically significant correlation between the median PTVWBI and presence of skin toxicity (p = 0.028) as well as a significant correlation between late hyperpigmentation with the median PTVBOOST (p = 0.007) and the ratio PTVBOOST/PTVWBI (p = 0.042). Conclusion Ultra-hypofractionated WBI + SIB in 5 fractions over one-week is feasible and well tolerated, although longer follow-up is necessary to confirm these results.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Angel Montero
- Department of Radiation Oncology, HM Hospitales, Madrid, Spain
- Facultad de Ciencias de la Salud, Universidad Camilo José Cela, Madrid, Spain
| | - Raquel Ciérvide
- Department of Radiation Oncology, HM Hospitales, Madrid, Spain
| | | | - Beatriz Álvarez
- Department of Radiation Oncology, HM Hospitales, Madrid, Spain
| | | | - Rosa Alonso
- Department of Radiation Oncology, HM Hospitales, Madrid, Spain
| | - Mercedes López
- Department of Radiation Oncology, HM Hospitales, Madrid, Spain
| | - Xin Chen-Zhao
- Department of Radiation Oncology, HM Hospitales, Madrid, Spain
| | - Leyre Alonso
- Department of Medical Physics, HM Hospitales, Madrid, Spain
| | - Jeannete Valero
- Department of Radiation Oncology, HM Hospitales, Madrid, Spain
| | - Emilio Sánchez
- Department of Radiation Oncology, HM Hospitales, Madrid, Spain
| | - Ovidio Hernando
- Department of Radiation Oncology, HM Hospitales, Madrid, Spain
| | | | | | - Carmen Rubio
- Department of Medical Physics, HM Hospitales, Madrid, Spain
| |
Collapse
|
16
|
Coles CE, Haviland JS, Kirby AM, Griffin CL, Sydenham MA, Titley JC, Bhattacharya I, Brunt AM, Chan HYC, Donovan EM, Eaton DJ, Emson M, Hopwood P, Jefford ML, Lightowlers SV, Sawyer EJ, Syndikus I, Tsang YM, Twyman NI, Yarnold JR, Bliss JM. Dose-escalated simultaneous integrated boost radiotherapy in early breast cancer (IMPORT HIGH): a multicentre, phase 3, non-inferiority, open-label, randomised controlled trial. Lancet 2023; 401:2124-2137. [PMID: 37302395 DOI: 10.1016/s0140-6736(23)00619-0] [Citation(s) in RCA: 39] [Impact Index Per Article: 19.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/21/2022] [Revised: 02/17/2023] [Accepted: 03/17/2023] [Indexed: 06/13/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND A tumour-bed boost delivered after whole-breast radiotherapy increases local cancer-control rates but requires more patient visits and can increase breast hardness. IMPORT HIGH tested simultaneous integrated boost against sequential boost with the aim of reducing treatment duration while maintaining excellent local control and similar or reduced toxicity. METHODS IMPORT HIGH is a phase 3, non-inferiority, open-label, randomised controlled trial that recruited women after breast-conserving surgery for pT1-3pN0-3aM0 invasive carcinoma from radiotherapy and referral centres in the UK. Patients were randomly allocated to receive one of three treatments in a 1:1:1 ratio, with computer-generated random permuted blocks used to stratify patients by centre. The control group received 40 Gy in 15 fractions to the whole breast and 16 Gy in 8 fractions sequential photon tumour-bed boost. Test group 1 received 36 Gy in 15 fractions to the whole breast, 40 Gy in 15 fractions to the partial breast, and 48 Gy in 15 fractions concomitant photon boost to the tumour-bed volume. Test group 2 received 36 Gy in 15 fractions to the whole breast, 40 Gy in 15 fractions to the partial breast, and 53 Gy in 15 fractions concomitant photon boost to the tumour-bed volume. The boost clinical target volume was the clip-defined tumour bed. Patients and clinicians were not masked to treatment allocation. The primary endpoint was ipsilateral breast tumour relapse (IBTR) analysed by intention to treat; assuming 5% 5-year incidence with the control group, non-inferiority was predefined as 3% or less absolute excess in the test groups (upper limit of two-sided 95% CI). Adverse events were assessed by clinicians, patients, and photographs. This trial is registered with the ISRCTN registry, ISRCTN47437448, and is closed to new participants. FINDINGS Between March 4, 2009, and Sept 16, 2015, 2617 patients were recruited. 871 individuals were assigned to the control group, 874 to test group 1, and 872 to test group 2. Median boost clinical target volume was 13 cm3 (IQR 7 to 22). At a median follow-up of 74 months there were 76 IBTR events (20 for the control group, 21 for test group 1, and 35 for test group 2). 5-year IBTR incidence was 1·9% (95% CI 1·2 to 3·1) for the control group, 2·0% (1·2 to 3·2) for test group 1, and 3·2% (2·2 to 4·7) for test group 2. The estimated absolute differences versus the control group were 0·1% (-0·8 to 1·7) for test group 1 and 1·4% (0·03 to 3·8) for test group 2. The upper confidence limit for test group 1 versus the control group indicated non-inferiority for 48 Gy. Cumulative 5-year incidence of clinician-reported moderate or marked breast induration was 11·5% for the control group, 10·6% for test group 1 (p=0·40 vs control group), and 15·5% for test group 2 (p=0·015 vs control group). INTERPRETATION In all groups 5-year IBTR incidence was lower than the 5% originally expected regardless of boost sequencing. Dose-escalation is not advantageous. 5-year moderate or marked adverse event rates were low using small boost volumes. Simultaneous integrated boost in IMPORT HIGH was safe and reduced patient visits. FUNDING Cancer Research UK.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Joanne S Haviland
- Clinical Trials and Statistics Unit, Institute of Cancer Research, Sutton, UK
| | - Anna M Kirby
- Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust and Institute of Cancer Research, Sutton, UK
| | - Clare L Griffin
- Clinical Trials and Statistics Unit, Institute of Cancer Research, Sutton, UK
| | - Mark A Sydenham
- Clinical Trials and Statistics Unit, Institute of Cancer Research, Sutton, UK
| | - Jenny C Titley
- Clinical Trials and Statistics Unit, Institute of Cancer Research, Sutton, UK
| | - Indrani Bhattacharya
- Department of Oncology and Radiotherapy, Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Cambridge, UK
| | - A Murray Brunt
- School of Medicine, University of Keele, Keele, UK; University Hospitals of North Midlands NHS Trust, Stoke-on-Trent, UK
| | - H Y Charlie Chan
- Department of Breast Surgery, Nuffield Health Cheltenham Hospital, Cheltenham, UK
| | - Ellen M Donovan
- Centre for Vision, Speech and Signal Processing, University of Surrey, Guildford, UK
| | - David J Eaton
- Department of Medical Physics, Guy's and St Thomas' Hospitals, London, UK
| | - Marie Emson
- Clinical Trials and Statistics Unit, Institute of Cancer Research, Sutton, UK
| | - Penny Hopwood
- Clinical Trials and Statistics Unit, Institute of Cancer Research, Sutton, UK
| | | | | | - Elinor J Sawyer
- Guy Cancer Centre School of Cancer and Pharmaceutical Sciences, Guy's and St Thomas' Foundation Trust, Kings College London, London, UK
| | - Isabel Syndikus
- Department of Radiotherapy, Clatterbridge Cancer Centre, Bebington, UK
| | - Yat M Tsang
- Radiotherapy Trials QA Group, Mount Vernon Cancer Centre, Northwood, UK
| | - Nicola I Twyman
- Department of Medical Physics, Addenbrooke's Hospital, Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Cambridge, UK
| | - John R Yarnold
- Department of Radiotherapy and Imaging, Institute of Cancer Research, Sutton, UK
| | - Judith M Bliss
- Clinical Trials and Statistics Unit, Institute of Cancer Research, Sutton, UK
| |
Collapse
|
17
|
Stoian R, Exner JPH, Gainey M, Erbes T, Gkika E, Popp I, Spohn SKB, Krug D, Juhasz-Böss I, Grosu AL, Sprave T. Comparison of intraoperative radiotherapy as a boost vs. simultaneously integrated boosts after breast-conserving therapy for breast cancer. Front Oncol 2023; 13:1210879. [PMID: 37409247 PMCID: PMC10318399 DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2023.1210879] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/23/2023] [Accepted: 05/30/2023] [Indexed: 07/07/2023] Open
Abstract
Background Currently, there are no data from randomized trials on the use of intraoperative radiotherapy (IORT) as a tumor bed boost in women at high risk of local recurrence. The aim of this retrospective analysis was to compare the toxicity and oncological outcome of IORT or simultaneous integrated boost (SIB) with conventional external beam radiotherapy (WBI) after breast conserving surgery (BCS). Methods Between 2009 and 2019, patients were treated with a single dose of 20 Gy IORT with 50 kV photons, followed by WBI 50 Gy in 25 or 40.05 in 15 fractions or WBI 50 Gy with SIB up to 58.80-61.60 Gy in 25-28 fractions. Toxicity was compared after propensity score matching. Overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Results A 1:1 propensity-score matching resulted in an IORT + WBI and SIB + WBI cohort of 60 patients, respectively. The median follow-up for IORT + WBI was 43.5 vs. 32 months in the SIB + WBI cohort. Most women had a pT1c tumor: IORT group 33 (55%) vs. 31 (51.7%) SIB group (p = 0.972). The luminal-B immunophenotype was most frequently diagnosed in the IORT group 43 (71.6%) vs. 35 (58.3%) in the SIB group (p = 0.283). The most reported acute adverse event in both groups was radiodermatitis. In the IORT cohort, radiodermatitis was grade 1: 23 (38.3%), grade 2: 26 (43.3%), and grade 3: 6 (10%) vs. SIB cohort grade 1: 3 (5.1%), grade 2: 21 (35%), and grade 3: 7 (11.6%) without a meaningful difference (p = 0.309). Fatigue occurred more frequently in the IORT group (grade 1: 21.7% vs. 6.7%; p = 0.041). In addition, intramammary lymphedema grade 1 occurred significantly more often in the IORT group (11.7% vs. 1.7%; p = 0.026). Both groups showed comparable late toxicity. The 3- and 5-year local control (LC) rates were each 98% in the SIB group vs. 98% and 93% in the IORT group (LS: log rank p = 0.717). Conclusion Tumor bed boost using IORT and SIB techniques after BCS shows excellent local control and comparable late toxicity, while IORT application exhibits a moderate increase in acute toxicity. These data should be validated by the expected publication of the prospective randomized TARGIT-B study.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Raluca Stoian
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital of Freiburg, Robert-Koch-Strasse, Freiburg, Germany
- German Cancer Consortium (DKTK) Partner Site Freiburg, German Cancer Research Center (dkfz), Neuenheimer Feld, Heidelberg, Germany
- Faculty of Medicine, University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany
| | - Jan-Philipp Harald Exner
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital of Freiburg, Robert-Koch-Strasse, Freiburg, Germany
- German Cancer Consortium (DKTK) Partner Site Freiburg, German Cancer Research Center (dkfz), Neuenheimer Feld, Heidelberg, Germany
- Faculty of Medicine, University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany
| | - Mark Gainey
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital of Freiburg, Robert-Koch-Strasse, Freiburg, Germany
- German Cancer Consortium (DKTK) Partner Site Freiburg, German Cancer Research Center (dkfz), Neuenheimer Feld, Heidelberg, Germany
- Faculty of Medicine, University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany
| | - Thalia Erbes
- Faculty of Medicine, University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Medical Center, University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany
| | - Eleni Gkika
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital of Freiburg, Robert-Koch-Strasse, Freiburg, Germany
- German Cancer Consortium (DKTK) Partner Site Freiburg, German Cancer Research Center (dkfz), Neuenheimer Feld, Heidelberg, Germany
- Faculty of Medicine, University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany
| | - Ilinca Popp
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital of Freiburg, Robert-Koch-Strasse, Freiburg, Germany
- German Cancer Consortium (DKTK) Partner Site Freiburg, German Cancer Research Center (dkfz), Neuenheimer Feld, Heidelberg, Germany
- Faculty of Medicine, University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany
| | - Simon K. B. Spohn
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital of Freiburg, Robert-Koch-Strasse, Freiburg, Germany
- German Cancer Consortium (DKTK) Partner Site Freiburg, German Cancer Research Center (dkfz), Neuenheimer Feld, Heidelberg, Germany
- Faculty of Medicine, University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany
| | - David Krug
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Schleswig-Holstein, Arnold-Heller-Str., Kiel, Germany
| | - Ingolf Juhasz-Böss
- Faculty of Medicine, University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Medical Center, University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany
| | - Anca-Ligia Grosu
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital of Freiburg, Robert-Koch-Strasse, Freiburg, Germany
- German Cancer Consortium (DKTK) Partner Site Freiburg, German Cancer Research Center (dkfz), Neuenheimer Feld, Heidelberg, Germany
- Faculty of Medicine, University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany
| | - Tanja Sprave
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital of Freiburg, Robert-Koch-Strasse, Freiburg, Germany
- German Cancer Consortium (DKTK) Partner Site Freiburg, German Cancer Research Center (dkfz), Neuenheimer Feld, Heidelberg, Germany
- Faculty of Medicine, University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
18
|
Poojari A, Sapru S, Khurana R, Rastogi M, Hadi R, Gandhi AK, Mishra S, Srivastava A, Bharati A. Whole-breast irradiation with lumpectomy cavity boost and regional nodal irradiation: Dosimetric comparison of 3D-CRT using sequential boost and dual partial-arc VMAT using simultaneous integrated boost. PRECISION RADIATION ONCOLOGY 2023; 7:118-127. [PMID: 40337265 PMCID: PMC11934988 DOI: 10.1002/pro6.1203] [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: 01/28/2023] [Revised: 05/14/2023] [Accepted: 05/17/2023] [Indexed: 05/09/2025] Open
Abstract
Objective To compare volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) with simultaneous tumor bed boost (dpSIB-VMAT) to the whole breast and regional nodal irradiation (RNI) against standard three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy plus RNI with sequential tumor bed boost (3D-CRT-seqB). Methods Thirty patients who underwent breast cancer surgery (BCS) with axillary lymph node dissection (ALND) were enrolled. Two plans were generated for each case: (1) dpSIB-VMAT, and (2) 3D-CRT-seqB plans. Planning target volume (PTV)-Breast and PTV-Nodes were prescribed at a dose of 50 Gy in 25 fractions in both plans. PTV-Boost was prescribed at a dose of 60 Gy in 25 fractions simultaneously in the dpSIB-VMAT plans, whereas it was planned sequentially in the 3D-CRT-seqB plans at 10 Gy in 5 fractions. Dosimetric parameters were compared between the two plans. Results Both plans achieved the target coverage. Dmean of the heart was lower with dpSIB-VMAT in left-sided cases (7.17 ± 0.66 Gy vs. 10.12 ± 2.91 Gy; t = 4.02; p = 0.001). Ipsilateral mean lung dose (15.87 ± 1.40 Gy vs. 19.82 ± 3.20 Gy; t = 6.30; p<0.001) was significantly lower but mean doses of the contralateral breast (4.30 ± 1.76 Gy vs. 1.48 ± 0.76 Gy; t = -7.84; p<0.001), contralateral lung (3.86 ± 1.21 Gy vs. 0.96 ± 0.25 Gy; t = -13.13; p<0.001) and esophagus (13.11 ± 2.63 Gy vs. 10.32 ± 3.56 Gy; t = -6.65; p<0.001) were relatively higher with dpSIB-VMAT. Conclusion Dosimetrically, dpSIB-VMAT reduced doses to the ipsilateral lung and heart (in left breast but not right breast cases) compared to 3D-CRT-seqB plans for adequate target coverage.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Avinash Poojari
- Radiation OncologyDr Ram Manohar Lohia Institute of Medical Sciences
| | - Shantanu Sapru
- Radiation OncologyDr Ram Manohar Lohia Institute of Medical Sciences
| | - Rohini Khurana
- Radiation OncologyDr Ram Manohar Lohia Institute of Medical Sciences
| | - Madhup Rastogi
- Radiation OncologyDr Ram Manohar Lohia Institute of Medical Sciences
| | - Rahat Hadi
- Radiation OncologyDr Ram Manohar Lohia Institute of Medical Sciences
| | | | - Surendra Mishra
- Radiation OncologyDr Ram Manohar Lohia Institute of Medical Sciences
| | - Anoop Srivastava
- Radiation OncologyDr Ram Manohar Lohia Institute of Medical Sciences
| | - Avinav Bharati
- Radiation OncologyDr Ram Manohar Lohia Institute of Medical Sciences
| |
Collapse
|
19
|
Zheng T, Shi X, Nie S, Yin L, Zhu J, Yu E, Shen H, Mo F. Effects of Chinese herbal diet on hematopoiesis, immunity, and intestines of mice exposed to different doses of radiation. Heliyon 2023; 9:e15473. [PMID: 37131450 PMCID: PMC10149268 DOI: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e15473] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/12/2023] [Revised: 03/20/2023] [Accepted: 04/11/2023] [Indexed: 05/04/2023] Open
Abstract
Radiotherapy causes a series of side effects in patients with malignant tumors. Polygonati Rhizoma, Achyranthis Bidentatae Radix, and Epimedii Folium are all traditional Chinese herbs with varieties of functions such as anti-radiation and immune regulation. In this study, the above three herbs were used as a herbal diet to study their effects on the hematopoietic, immune, and intestinal systems of mice exposed to three doses of radiation. Our study showed that the diet had no radiation-protective effect on the hematopoietic and immune systems. However, at the radiation dose of 4 Gy and 8 Gy, the diet showed an obvious radiation-protective effect on intestinal crypts. At the dose of 8 Gy, we also found that the Chinese herbal diet had an anti-radiation effect on reducing the loss of the inhibitory nNOS+ neurons in the intestine. That provides a new diet for relieving the symptoms of hyperperistalsis and diarrhea in patients after radiotherapy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Tianyu Zheng
- Department of Naval Nutrition and Food Hygiene, Faculty of Naval Medicine, Naval Medical University, 800 Xiangyin Road, Shanghai 200433, China
| | - Xiaohui Shi
- Department of Colorectal Surgery, The First Affiliated Hospital of Naval Medical University, 800 Xiangyin Road, Shanghai 200433, China
| | - Shuang Nie
- Department of Naval Nutrition and Food Hygiene, Faculty of Naval Medicine, Naval Medical University, 800 Xiangyin Road, Shanghai 200433, China
| | - Lifeng Yin
- Department of Naval Nutrition and Food Hygiene, Faculty of Naval Medicine, Naval Medical University, 800 Xiangyin Road, Shanghai 200433, China
| | - Jian Zhu
- Department of Naval Nutrition and Food Hygiene, Faculty of Naval Medicine, Naval Medical University, 800 Xiangyin Road, Shanghai 200433, China
| | - Enda Yu
- Department of Colorectal Surgery, The First Affiliated Hospital of Naval Medical University, 800 Xiangyin Road, Shanghai 200433, China
| | - Hui Shen
- Department of Naval Nutrition and Food Hygiene, Faculty of Naval Medicine, Naval Medical University, 800 Xiangyin Road, Shanghai 200433, China
- Corresponding author. Department of Naval Nutrition and Food Hygiene, Faculty of Naval Medicine, Naval Medical University, 800 Xiangyin Rd, Shanghai 200433, China.
| | - Fengfeng Mo
- Department of Colorectal Surgery, The First Affiliated Hospital of Naval Medical University, 800 Xiangyin Road, Shanghai 200433, China
- Corresponding author. Department of Naval Nutrition and Food Hygiene, Faculty of Naval Medicine, Naval Medical University, 800 Xiangyin Rd, Shanghai 200433, China.
| |
Collapse
|
20
|
Klusen ST, Peiler A, Schmidt GP, Kiechle ME, Muench S, Asadpour R, Combs SE, Borm KJ. Simultaneous integrated boost within the lymphatic drainage system in breast cancer: A single center study on toxicity and oncologic outcome. Front Oncol 2023; 13:989466. [PMID: 37091150 PMCID: PMC10117929 DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2023.989466] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/08/2022] [Accepted: 03/23/2023] [Indexed: 04/08/2023] Open
Abstract
Background and purposeIn breast cancer patients, the increasing de-escalation of axillary surgery and the improving resolution of diagnostic imaging results in a more frequent detection of residual, radiographically suspect lymph nodes (sLN) after surgery. If resection of the remaining suspect lymph nodes is not feasible, a simultaneous boost to the lymph node metastases (LN-SIB) can be applied. However, literature lacks data regarding the outcome and safety of this technique.Materials and methodsWe included 48 patients with breast cancer and sLN in this retrospective study. All patients received a LN-SIB. The median dose to the breast or chest wall and the lymph node system was 50.4 Gy in 28 fractions. The median dose of the LN-SIB was 58.8 Gy / 2.1 Gy (56-63 Gy / 2-2.25 Gy). The brachial plexus was contoured in every case and the dose within the plexus PRV (+0.3-0.5mm) was limited to an EQD2 of 59 Gy. All patients received structured radiooncological and gynecological follow-up by clinically experienced physicians. Radiooncological follow-ups were at baseline, 6 weeks, 3 months, 6 months and subsequent annually after irradiation.ResultsThe median follow-up time was 557 days and ranged from 41 to 3373 days. Overall, 28 patients developed I°, 18 patients II° and 2 patients III° acute toxicity. There were no severe late side effects (≥ III°) observed during the follow-up period. The most frequent chronic side effect was fatigue. One patient (2.1 %) developed pain and mild paresthesia in the ipsilateral arm after radiotherapy. After a follow-up of 557 days (41 to 3373 days), in 8 patients a recurrence was observed (16.7%). In 4 patients the recurrence involved the regional lymph node system. Hence, local control in the lymph node drainage system after a median follow-up of 557 days was 91.6 %.ConclusionIf surgical re-dissection of residual lymph nodes is not feasible or refused by the patient, LN-SIB-irradiation can be considered as a potential treatment option. However, patients need to be informed about a higher risk of regional recurrence compared to surgery and an additional risk of acute and late toxicity compared to adjuvant radiotherapy without regional dose escalation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sophie T. Klusen
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Technical University Munich, Medical School, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Munich, Germany
| | - Antonia Peiler
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Technical University Munich, Medical School, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Munich, Germany
| | - Georg P. Schmidt
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Technical University Munich, Medical School, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Munich, Germany
| | - Marion E. Kiechle
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Technical University Munich, Medical School, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Munich, Germany
| | - Stefan Muench
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Technical University Munich, Medical School, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Munich, Germany
| | - Rebecca Asadpour
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Technical University Munich, Medical School, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Munich, Germany
| | - Stephanie E. Combs
- Department of Radiation Oncology, 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, Munich, Germany
| | - Kai J. Borm
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Technical University Munich, Medical School, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Munich, Germany
- *Correspondence: Kai J. Borm,
| |
Collapse
|
21
|
Lee CT, Ruth K, Patel S, Bleicher R, Sigurdson E, Weiss S, Hayes S, Anderson P, Wong JK. Factors Associated with Reconstruction Failure and Major Complications After Postmastectomy Radiation to a Reconstructed Breast. Pract Radiat Oncol 2023; 13:122-131. [PMID: 36332800 PMCID: PMC10684027 DOI: 10.1016/j.prro.2022.09.005] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/19/2022] [Revised: 09/12/2022] [Accepted: 09/22/2022] [Indexed: 11/17/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE Postmastectomy radiation therapy is known to increase risk of complications in the reconstruction setting. We aim to identify the variables associated with reconstruction failure and other major complications. METHODS AND MATERIALS A prospectively collected institutional database was queried for patients with up to stage IIIC breast cancer treated from 2000 to 2017, undergoing mastectomy, immediate implant or autologous tissue reconstruction, and radiation to the reconstructed breast within 1 year of surgery. Reconstruction failure was defined as complication requiring surgical revision or implant removal. Additional major complications were defined as any infection, contracture, necrosis, or fibrosis. Covariates of interest included age, body mass index, smoking status, stage, hormone receptor and HER2 status, systemic therapy timing, radiation technique, nodal irradiation, and interval between surgery and start of postmastectomy radiation therapy. Differences in complication rates were assessed with χ² or Fisher exact tests. Competing risk regression was used to estimate hazard ratios; covariates were included one at a time to avoid over adjustment. RESULTS A total of 206 reconstructed breasts in 202 patients resulted from our initial query, with 139 treated with intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) and 67 treated with conventional radiation therapy (CRT). Median follow-up was 45 months (range, 4-210 months); patient cohorts were generally similar. Eight patients were excluded from toxicity analysis for insufficient follow-up (<2 years). Overall, reconstruction failure and major complication rates were significantly lower in the IMRT group. Reconstruction failure rates were 3.0% for IMRT versus 16.4% for CRT (P = .002), and major complication rates were 6.8% for IMRT versus 24.6% for CRT (P < .001). On univariate analysis, CRT was significantly predictive of implant failure (hazard ratio, 5.54; P = .003) and increased complication rates (hazard ratio, 3.83; P = .001). Significance persisted on multivariable analysis. Survival outcomes were similar, with no difference in 2 year overall survival (P = .12) and local recurrence (P = .41). CONCLUSIONS Using IMRT may improve reconstruction outcomes over CRT, with significantly lower reconstruction failure and complication rates without compromising local control or survival.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Charles T Lee
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Fox Chase Cancer Center, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
| | - Karen Ruth
- Department of Biostatistics and Bioinformatics, Fox Chase Cancer Center, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
| | - Sameer Patel
- Department of Plastic Surgery, Fox Chase Cancer Center, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
| | - Richard Bleicher
- Department of Surgical Oncology, Fox Chase Cancer Center, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
| | - Elin Sigurdson
- Department of Surgical Oncology, Fox Chase Cancer Center, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
| | - Stephanie Weiss
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Fox Chase Cancer Center, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
| | - Shelly Hayes
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Fox Chase Cancer Center, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
| | - Penny Anderson
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Fox Chase Cancer Center, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
| | - J Karen Wong
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Fox Chase Cancer Center, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
| |
Collapse
|
22
|
Kolářová I, Melichar B, Vaňásek J, Sirák I, Petera J, Horáčková K, Pohanková D, Šinkorová Z, Hošek O, Vošmik M. Special Techniques of Adjuvant Breast Carcinoma Radiotherapy. Cancers (Basel) 2022; 15:298. [PMID: 36612294 PMCID: PMC9818986 DOI: 10.3390/cancers15010298] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/27/2022] [Revised: 12/23/2022] [Accepted: 12/28/2022] [Indexed: 01/03/2023] Open
Abstract
Modern radiotherapy techniques are designed to permit reduced irradiation of healthy tissue, resulting in a diminished risk of adverse effects and shortened recovery times. Several randomized studies have demonstrated the benefits of increased dosage to the tumor bed area in combination with whole breast irradiation (WBI). Conventional WBI treatment following breast-conserving procedures, which required 5-7 weeks of daily treatments, has been reduced to 3-4 weeks when using hyperfractionated regimens. The dosage administration improves local control, albeit with poorer cosmesis. The method of accelerated partial breast irradiation (APBI) shortens the treatment period whilst reducing the irradiated volume. APBI can be delivered using intraoperative radiation, brachytherapy, or external beam radiotherapy. Currently available data support the use of external beam partial breast irradiation in selected patients. Modern radiotherapy techniques make it possible to achieve favorable cosmesis in most patients undergoing immediate breast reconstruction surgery, and studies confirm that current methods of external beam radiation allow an acceptable coverage of target volumes both in the reconstructed breast and in the regional lymphatic nodes.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Iveta Kolářová
- Department of Oncology and Radiotherapy, Faculty of Medicine in Hradec Králové and University Hospital Hradec Králové, Charles University, 500 05 Hradec Králové, Czech Republic
- Faculty of Health Studies, Pardubice University, 532 10 Pardubice, Czech Republic
| | - Bohuslav Melichar
- Department of Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry, Palacky University and University Hospital Olomouc, 779 00 Olomouc, Czech Republic
| | - Jaroslav Vaňásek
- Faculty of Health Studies, Pardubice University, 532 10 Pardubice, Czech Republic
- Oncology Centre, Multiscan, 532 03 Pardubice, Czech Republic
| | - Igor Sirák
- Department of Oncology and Radiotherapy, Faculty of Medicine in Hradec Králové and University Hospital Hradec Králové, Charles University, 500 05 Hradec Králové, Czech Republic
| | - Jiří Petera
- Department of Oncology and Radiotherapy, Faculty of Medicine in Hradec Králové and University Hospital Hradec Králové, Charles University, 500 05 Hradec Králové, Czech Republic
| | - Kateřina Horáčková
- Faculty of Health Studies, Pardubice University, 532 10 Pardubice, Czech Republic
| | - Denisa Pohanková
- Department of Oncology and Radiotherapy, Faculty of Medicine in Hradec Králové and University Hospital Hradec Králové, Charles University, 500 05 Hradec Králové, Czech Republic
| | - Zuzana Šinkorová
- Department of Radiobiology, Faculty of Military Health Sciences, University of Defence, 500 01 Hradec Králové, Czech Republic
| | - Oldřich Hošek
- Faculty of Health Studies, Pardubice University, 532 10 Pardubice, Czech Republic
| | - Milan Vošmik
- Department of Oncology and Radiotherapy, Faculty of Medicine in Hradec Králové and University Hospital Hradec Králové, Charles University, 500 05 Hradec Králové, Czech Republic
| |
Collapse
|
23
|
Oymak E, Bozca R, Guler OC, Onal C. Contralateral breast radiation doses in breast cancer patients treated with helical tomotherapy. Med Dosim 2022; 48:61-66. [PMID: 36572598 DOI: 10.1016/j.meddos.2022.11.002] [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: 04/11/2022] [Revised: 11/27/2022] [Accepted: 11/30/2022] [Indexed: 12/25/2022]
Abstract
We aimed to evaluate contralateral breast doses calculated with a Treatment Planning System (TPS) and verified with metal oxide semiconductor field effect transistor (MOSFET) detectors in patients with early-stage breast cancer (BC) who received helical tomotherapy (HT) after breast-conserving surgery. The dosimetric data of 30 patients (15 left-sided and 15 right-sided) with BC treated with 50.4 Gy to the whole breast and 64.4 Gy to the tumor bed in 28 fractions were analyzed. TPS doses were calculated and MOSFET doses were measured in the contralateral breast (CB) at cranial, caudal, and midpoint and 2 cm lateral to the central point. TPS and MOSFET doses were compared in the entire cohort as well as by tumor location (inner vs outer quadrant) and planning target volume of the breast (<1200 cc vs ≥1200 cc). The average doses at superior, inferior, central, and lateral points calculated with the TPS were 0.26 ± 0.15 cGy, 0.21 ± 0.09 cGy, 0.65 ± 0.14 cGy, and 0.50 ± 0.11 cGy, respectively, and were 0.37 ± 0.16 cGy, 0.34 ± 0.12 cGy, 0.60 ± 0.18 cGy, and 0.34 ± 0.15 cGy, respectively in MOSFET readings. Except for the central point, TPS-calculated doses and MOSFET readings were differed. The doses to the CB in patients with inner and outer quadrant tumors were not significantly different. In patients with large breasts, MOSFET doses were higher at superior and lateral points than TPS doses, but TPS doses were greater at inferior points. MOSFET readings were higher than TPS calculated doses in patients with inner or outer quadrant tumors in small or large breast volumes. The dose calculated by the TPS and that measured by MOSFET differed by a very small amount. The maximum dose to the CB administered at the midpoint was 1.8 Gy, as calculated using the TPS and confirmed using MOSFET detectors, in patients with early-stage BC undergoing breast-only radiotherapy with HT.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ezgi Oymak
- Division of Radiation Oncology, Iskenderun Gelisim Hospital, Hatay, Turkey
| | - Recep Bozca
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Baskent University Faculty of Medicine Adana Dr Turgut Noyan Research and Treatment Center, Adana, Turkey
| | - Ozan Cem Guler
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Baskent University Faculty of Medicine Adana Dr Turgut Noyan Research and Treatment Center, Adana, Turkey
| | - Cem Onal
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Baskent University Faculty of Medicine Adana Dr Turgut Noyan Research and Treatment Center, Adana, Turkey; Department of Radiation Oncology, Baskent University Faculty of Medicine, Ankara, Turkey.
| |
Collapse
|
24
|
Maria P, Theodoros S, Anna Z, Michael P, Vassilis K, Kalliopi P. Synchronous bilateral chest wall irradiation with regional nodal irradiation: A literature review of techniques and a case study. Phys Med 2022; 101:50-61. [PMID: 35961182 DOI: 10.1016/j.ejmp.2022.07.005] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/19/2022] [Revised: 06/03/2022] [Accepted: 07/26/2022] [Indexed: 10/15/2022] Open
Abstract
The optimal radiotherapy technique for patients requiring both breasts or chest walls simultaneous irradiation with or without regional nodal irradiation is currently under investigation. In the last decade several publications present case reports and case series of patients treated with adjuvant radiotherapy in both breasts or chest walls for synchronous bilateral breast cancer (SBBC) with modern radiotherapy techniques. This article presents a systematic review of relevant literature as well as a case report of a SBBC patient who received bilateral chest wall radiotherapy with regional nodal irradiation at our institution with Truebeam - Edge Linear Accelerator. Solid evidence is provided that the practice of avoiding adjuvant radiotherapy in SBBC out of fear of toxicity with older radiotherapy techniques is outdated. Modern techniques can safely and effectively deliver treatment to patients requiring both sides irradiation and even in mastectomy patients in need of regional nodal irradiation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Protopapa Maria
- Mediterraneo General Hospital, Radiation Oncology and Radiosurgery Department, Ilias st. 8-12, Glyfada, Greece.
| | - Stroumbinis Theodoros
- Mediterraneo General Hospital, Radiation Oncology and Radiosurgery Department, Ilias st. 8-12, Glyfada, Greece
| | - Zygogianni Anna
- National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Medical School, 1st Dpt of Radiology, RT Unit, Aretaieion University Hospital, Greece
| | - Psarras Michael
- Mediterraneo General Hospital, Radiation Oncology and Radiosurgery Department, Ilias st. 8-12, Glyfada, Greece
| | - Kouloulias Vassilis
- National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Medical School, 2nd Dpt of Radiology, RT Unit, ATTIKON University Hospital, Greece
| | - Platoni Kalliopi
- National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Medical School, 2nd Dpt of Radiology, RT Unit, ATTIKON University Hospital, Greece; National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Medical School, 2nd Dpt of Radiology, Medical Physics Unit, ATTIKON University Hospital, Greece
| |
Collapse
|
25
|
Pfaffendorf C, Vonthein R, Krockenberger-Ziegler K, Dellas K, Schreiber A, Uhlemann D, Dinges S, Würschmidt F, Andreas P, Weinstrauch E, Eilf K, Rades D, Höller U, Combs SE, Kazmierczak R, Fehlauer F, Schreck U, Zimmer J, Dunst J, Krug D. Hypofractionation with simultaneous integrated boost after breast-conserving surgery: Long term results of two phase-II trials. Breast 2022; 64:136-142. [PMID: 35691249 PMCID: PMC9190051 DOI: 10.1016/j.breast.2022.05.008] [Citation(s) in RCA: 11] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/25/2022] [Revised: 05/29/2022] [Accepted: 05/30/2022] [Indexed: 11/24/2022] Open
Abstract
Purpose Methods Results Conclusion Hypofractionated breast radiotherapy with SIB was safe and feasible. The local control rate at 5 years was 99.6%. The rate of late grade 3 toxicity was 0.7%.
Collapse
|
26
|
Early Outcome, Cosmetic Result and Tolerability of an IOERT-Boost Prior to Adjuvant Whole-Breast Irradiation. Cancers (Basel) 2022; 14:cancers14153636. [PMID: 35892894 PMCID: PMC9332060 DOI: 10.3390/cancers14153636] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/03/2022] [Revised: 07/21/2022] [Accepted: 07/22/2022] [Indexed: 02/01/2023] Open
Abstract
Background/Aims: Due to its favorable dose distribution and targeting of the region at highest risk of recurrence due to direct visualization of tumor bed, intraoperative electron radiation therapy (IOERT) is used as part of a breast-conserving treatment approach. The aim of this study was to analyze tumor control and survival, as well as the toxicity profile, and cosmetic outcomes in patients irradiated with an IOERT boost for breast cancer. Materials and Methods: 139 Patients treated at our institution between January 2010 and January 2015 with a single boost dose of 10 Gy to the tumor bed during breast-conserving surgery followed by whole-breast irradiation were retrospectively analyzed. Results: 139 patients were included in this analysis. The median age was 54 years (range 28−83 years). The preferred surgical strategy was segmental resection with sentinel lymphonodectomy (66.5%) or axillary dissection (23.1%). Regarding adjuvant radiotherapy, the vast majority received 5 × 1.8 Gy to 50.4 Gy. At a median follow-up of 33.6 months, recurrence-free and overall survival were 95.5% and 94.9%, respectively. No patient developed an in-field recurrence. Seven patients (5.0%) died during the follow-up period, including two patients due to disease recurrence (non-in-field). High-grade (CTCAE > 2) perioperative adverse events attributable to IOERT included wound healing disorder (N = 1) and hematoma (N = 1). High-grade late adverse events (LENT-SOMA grade III) were reported only in one patient with fat necrosis. Low-grade late adverse events (LENT-SOMA grade I-II) included pain (18.0%), edema (10.5%), fibrosis (21%), telangiectasia (4.5%) and pigmentation change (23.0%). The mean breast retraction assessment score was 1.66 (0−6). Both patients and specialists rated the cosmetic result “excellent/good” in 84.8% and 87.9%, respectively. Conclusion: Our study reports favorable data on the cosmetic outcome as well as the acute and early long-term tolerability for patients treated with an IOERT boost. Our oncologic control rates are comparable to the previous literature. However, prospective investigations on the role of IOERT in comparison to other boost procedures would be desirable.
Collapse
|
27
|
Vakaet V, Deseyne P, Schoepen M, Stouthandel M, Post G, Speleers B, Van Greveling A, Monten C, Mareel M, Van Hulle H, Paelinck L, De Gersem W, De Neve W, Vandecasteele K, Veldeman L. Prone Breast and Lymph Node Irradiation in 5 or 15 Fractions: A Randomized 2 × 2 Design Comparing Dosimetry, Acute Toxicity, and Set-Up Errors. Pract Radiat Oncol 2022; 12:324-334. [PMID: 35717049 DOI: 10.1016/j.prro.2022.01.017] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/16/2021] [Revised: 11/20/2021] [Accepted: 01/18/2022] [Indexed: 10/18/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE Prone whole breast irradiation results in lower dose to organs at risk compared with supine position, especially lung dose. However, the adoption of prone position for whole breast irradiation + lymph node irradiation remains limited and data on lymph node irradiation in 5 fractions are lacking. Although the study was ended prematurely for the primary endpoint (breast retraction at 2 years), we decided to report acute toxicity for prone and supine positions and 5 and 15 fractions. Additionally, dosimetry and set-up accuracy between prone and supine positions were evaluated. METHODS AND MATERIALS A randomized open-label factorial 2 × 2 design was used for an acute toxicity comparison between prone and supine positions and 5 and 15 fractions. The primary endpoint of the trial was breast retraction 2 years after treatment. In total, 57 patients were evaluated. Dosimetry and set-up errors were compared between prone and supine positions. All patients were positioned on either our in -house developed prone crawl breast couch or a Posirest-2 (Civco). RESULTS No difference in acute toxicity between prone and supine positions was found, but 5 fractions did result in a lower risk of desquamation (15% vs 41%; P = .04). Prone positioning resulted in lower mean ipsilateral lung dose (2.89 vs 4.89 Gy; P < .001), mean thyroid dose (3.42 vs 6.61 Gy; P = .004), and mean contralateral breast dose (0.41 vs 0.54 Gy; P = .007). No significant difference in mean heart dose (0.90 vs 1.07 Gy; P = .22) was found. Set-up accuracy was similar between both positions. CONCLUSIONS Unfortunately, the primary endpoint of the trial was not met due to premature closure of the trial. Acceleration in 5 fractions resulted in a lower risk of desquamation. Prone positioning did not influence acute toxicity or set-up accuracy, but did result in lower ipsilateral mean lung dose, thyroid dose, and contralateral breast dose.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Vincent Vakaet
- Department of Human Structure and Repair, Ghent University Hospital, Ghent, Belgium; Department of Radiation Oncology, Ghent University Hospital, Ghent, Belgium.
| | - Pieter Deseyne
- Department of Human Structure and Repair, Ghent University Hospital, Ghent, Belgium; Department of Radiation Oncology, Ghent University Hospital, Ghent, Belgium
| | - Max Schoepen
- Department of Human Structure and Repair, Ghent University Hospital, Ghent, Belgium; Department of Industrial Systems Engineering and Product Design, Kortrijk, Belgium
| | - Michael Stouthandel
- Department of Human Structure and Repair, Ghent University Hospital, Ghent, Belgium
| | - Giselle Post
- Department of Human Structure and Repair, Ghent University Hospital, Ghent, Belgium
| | - Bruno Speleers
- Department of Human Structure and Repair, Ghent University Hospital, Ghent, Belgium
| | | | - Christel Monten
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Ghent University Hospital, Ghent, Belgium
| | - Marcus Mareel
- Department of Human Structure and Repair, Ghent University Hospital, Ghent, Belgium
| | - Hans Van Hulle
- Department of Human Structure and Repair, Ghent University Hospital, Ghent, Belgium
| | - Leen Paelinck
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Ghent University Hospital, Ghent, Belgium
| | - Werner De Gersem
- Department of Human Structure and Repair, Ghent University Hospital, Ghent, Belgium
| | - Wilfried De Neve
- Department of Human Structure and Repair, Ghent University Hospital, Ghent, Belgium
| | - Katrien Vandecasteele
- Department of Human Structure and Repair, Ghent University Hospital, Ghent, Belgium; Department of Radiation Oncology, Ghent University Hospital, Ghent, Belgium
| | - Liv Veldeman
- Department of Human Structure and Repair, Ghent University Hospital, Ghent, Belgium; Department of Radiation Oncology, Ghent University Hospital, Ghent, Belgium
| |
Collapse
|
28
|
Forster T, Köhler C, Dorn M, Häfner MF, Arians N, König L, Harrabi SB, Schlampp I, Meixner E, Heinrich V, Weidner N, Golatta M, Hennigs A, Heil J, Hof H, Krug D, Debus J, Hörner-Rieber J. Methods of Esthetic Assessment after Adjuvant Whole-Breast Radiotherapy in Breast Cancer Patients: Evaluation of the BCCT.core Software and Patients' and Physicians' Assessment from the Randomized IMRT-MC2 Trial. Cancers (Basel) 2022; 14:cancers14123010. [PMID: 35740675 PMCID: PMC9221255 DOI: 10.3390/cancers14123010] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/16/2022] [Revised: 06/14/2022] [Accepted: 06/15/2022] [Indexed: 01/27/2023] Open
Abstract
Simple Summary To validate the BCCT.core software, the present analysis compares the esthetics assessment by the software in relation to patients’ and physicians’ rating in breast cancer patients after surgery and adjuvant radiotherapy. Agreement rates of the different assessments and their correlation with breast asymmetry indices were evaluated. The assessments of the software and the physicians were significantly correlated with all asymmetry indices, while for patients’ self-assessment, this general correlation was first seen after 2 years. Only a slight agreement between the BCCT.core software and the physicians’ or patients’ assessment was seen, while a moderate and substantial agreement was detected between the physicians’ and the patients’ assessments. The BCCT.core software is a reliable tool to measure asymmetries, but may not sufficiently evaluate the esthetic outcome as perceived by patients. It may be more appropriate for a long-term follow-up, when symmetry seems to increase in importance. Abstract The present analysis compares the esthetics assessment by the BCCT.core software in relation to patients’ and physicians’ ratings, based on the IMRT-MC2 trial. Within this trial, breast cancer patients received breast-conserving surgery (BCS) and adjuvant radiotherapy. At the baseline, 6 weeks, and 2 years after radiotherapy, photos of the breasts were assessed by the software and patients’ and physicians’ assessments were performed. Agreement rates of the assessments and their correlation with breast asymmetry indices were evaluated. The assessments of the software and the physicians were significantly correlated with asymmetry indices. Before and 6 weeks after radiotherapy, the patients’ self-assessment was only correlated with the lower breast contour (LBC) and upward nipple retraction (UNR), while after 2 years, there was also a correlation with other indices. Only a slight agreement between the BCCT.core software and the physicians’ or patients’ assessment was seen, while a moderate and substantial agreement was detected between the physicians’ and the patients’ assessment after 6 weeks and 2 years, respectively. The BCCT.core software is a reliable tool to measure asymmetries, but may not sufficiently evaluate the esthetic outcome as perceived by patients. It may be more appropriate for a long-term follow-up, when symmetry appears to increase in importance.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Tobias Forster
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, 69120 Heidelberg, Germany; (T.F.); (C.K.); (M.D.); (M.F.H.); (N.A.); (L.K.); (S.B.H.); (I.S.); (E.M.); (D.K.); (J.D.)
- Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO), 69120 Heidelberg, Germany
- National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), Heidelberg University Hospital, 69120 Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Clara Köhler
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, 69120 Heidelberg, Germany; (T.F.); (C.K.); (M.D.); (M.F.H.); (N.A.); (L.K.); (S.B.H.); (I.S.); (E.M.); (D.K.); (J.D.)
| | - Melissa Dorn
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, 69120 Heidelberg, Germany; (T.F.); (C.K.); (M.D.); (M.F.H.); (N.A.); (L.K.); (S.B.H.); (I.S.); (E.M.); (D.K.); (J.D.)
| | - Matthias Felix Häfner
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, 69120 Heidelberg, Germany; (T.F.); (C.K.); (M.D.); (M.F.H.); (N.A.); (L.K.); (S.B.H.); (I.S.); (E.M.); (D.K.); (J.D.)
- Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO), 69120 Heidelberg, Germany
- National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), Heidelberg University Hospital, 69120 Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Nathalie Arians
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, 69120 Heidelberg, Germany; (T.F.); (C.K.); (M.D.); (M.F.H.); (N.A.); (L.K.); (S.B.H.); (I.S.); (E.M.); (D.K.); (J.D.)
- Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO), 69120 Heidelberg, Germany
- National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), Heidelberg University Hospital, 69120 Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Laila König
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, 69120 Heidelberg, Germany; (T.F.); (C.K.); (M.D.); (M.F.H.); (N.A.); (L.K.); (S.B.H.); (I.S.); (E.M.); (D.K.); (J.D.)
- Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO), 69120 Heidelberg, Germany
- National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), Heidelberg University Hospital, 69120 Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Semi Ben Harrabi
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, 69120 Heidelberg, Germany; (T.F.); (C.K.); (M.D.); (M.F.H.); (N.A.); (L.K.); (S.B.H.); (I.S.); (E.M.); (D.K.); (J.D.)
- Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO), 69120 Heidelberg, Germany
- National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), Heidelberg University Hospital, 69120 Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Ingmar Schlampp
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, 69120 Heidelberg, Germany; (T.F.); (C.K.); (M.D.); (M.F.H.); (N.A.); (L.K.); (S.B.H.); (I.S.); (E.M.); (D.K.); (J.D.)
- Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO), 69120 Heidelberg, Germany
- National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), Heidelberg University Hospital, 69120 Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Eva Meixner
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, 69120 Heidelberg, Germany; (T.F.); (C.K.); (M.D.); (M.F.H.); (N.A.); (L.K.); (S.B.H.); (I.S.); (E.M.); (D.K.); (J.D.)
- Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO), 69120 Heidelberg, Germany
- National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), Heidelberg University Hospital, 69120 Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Vanessa Heinrich
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Eberhard-Karls-University Tuebingen, 72070 Tuebingen, Germany; (V.H.); (N.W.)
| | - Nicola Weidner
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Eberhard-Karls-University Tuebingen, 72070 Tuebingen, Germany; (V.H.); (N.W.)
| | - Michael Golatta
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University of Heidelberg, 69115 Heidelberg, Germany; (M.G.); (A.H.); (J.H.)
| | - André Hennigs
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University of Heidelberg, 69115 Heidelberg, Germany; (M.G.); (A.H.); (J.H.)
| | - Jörg Heil
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University of Heidelberg, 69115 Heidelberg, Germany; (M.G.); (A.H.); (J.H.)
| | - Holger Hof
- Strahlentherapie Rhein-Pfalz, 67433 Neustadt, Germany;
| | - David Krug
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, 69120 Heidelberg, Germany; (T.F.); (C.K.); (M.D.); (M.F.H.); (N.A.); (L.K.); (S.B.H.); (I.S.); (E.M.); (D.K.); (J.D.)
- Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO), 69120 Heidelberg, Germany
- National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), Heidelberg University Hospital, 69120 Heidelberg, Germany
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Schleswig Holstein, 24105 Kiel, Germany
| | - Jürgen Debus
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, 69120 Heidelberg, Germany; (T.F.); (C.K.); (M.D.); (M.F.H.); (N.A.); (L.K.); (S.B.H.); (I.S.); (E.M.); (D.K.); (J.D.)
- Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO), 69120 Heidelberg, Germany
- National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), Heidelberg University Hospital, 69120 Heidelberg, Germany
- Clinical Cooperation Unit Radiation Oncology, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), 69120 Heidelberg, Germany
- Heidelberg Ion-Beam Therapy Center (HIT), Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, 69120 Heidelberg, Germany
- German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Partner Site Heidelberg, Heidelberg University Hospital, 69120 Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Juliane Hörner-Rieber
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, 69120 Heidelberg, Germany; (T.F.); (C.K.); (M.D.); (M.F.H.); (N.A.); (L.K.); (S.B.H.); (I.S.); (E.M.); (D.K.); (J.D.)
- Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO), 69120 Heidelberg, Germany
- National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), Heidelberg University Hospital, 69120 Heidelberg, Germany
- Clinical Cooperation Unit Radiation Oncology, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), 69120 Heidelberg, Germany
- Correspondence: ; Tel.: +49-6221-56-8201; Fax: +49-6221-5353
| |
Collapse
|
29
|
Allali S, Carton M, Sarrade T, Querel O, Jacquet A, Rivera S, Ghannam Y, Peignaux K, Guilbert P, Chara-Brunaud C, Blanchecotte J, Pasquier D, Racadot S, Bourgier C, Labib A, Geffrelot J, Benyoucef A, Paris F, Cottu P, André F, Kirova Y. CANTO-RT: Skin toxicities evaluation of a multicenter large prospective cohort of irradiated patients for early-stage breast cancer. Int J Cancer 2022; 151:1098-1108. [PMID: 35489021 DOI: 10.1002/ijc.34057] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/01/2022] [Revised: 04/02/2022] [Accepted: 04/15/2022] [Indexed: 11/09/2022]
Abstract
Skin damage is the most common and most important toxicity during and after radiotherapy. Its assessment and understanding of the factors influencing its occurrence, is a major issue in the management of patients irradiated for an early breast cancer CANTO is a prospective clinical cohort study of 10 150 patients with stage I-III BC treated from 2012-2017 in 26 cancer centers. In this study, we used CANTO-RT, a sub-cohort of CANTO, including 3480 patients who received RT. We are focus on specifical skin toxicities: Erythema, fibrosis, telangiectasia, and cutaneous pigmentation The prevalence of toxicities of interest varied over time, so at M3-6, 41.1% of patients had erythema while 24.8% of patients had fibrosis. At M12 and M36, the prevalence of erythema decreased respectively while fibrosis remains stable. The prevalence of telangiectasia increases from 1% to 7.1% from M3-6 to M36. After adjustments, we showed an association between the occurrence of skin erythema and obesity; the type of surgery; the presence of axillary dissection; the use of taxane-based CT and the 3DvsIMRT irradiation technique. Regarding fibrosis, an association is found, at M3-6, with age at diagnosis, obesity, tobacco, and the use of boost. Only obesity and the type of surgery received by the patient remained statistically significant at M12 and M36. In this study we identified several risk factors for acute and late skin. The use of a boost was mainly related to the occurrence of fibrosis while the use of IMRT-type technique decreased the occurrence of skin erythema.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | - François Paris
- Centre de Recherche en Cancérologie Immunologie Nantes Angers (CRCINA) UMR Inserm 1232, Université de Nantes, Nantes
| | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
30
|
Chang JS, Chang JH, Kim N, Kim YB, Shin KH, Kim K. Intensity Modulated Radiotherapy and Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy in the Treatment of Breast Cancer: An Updated Review. J Breast Cancer 2022; 25:349-365. [DOI: 10.4048/jbc.2022.25.e37] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/12/2022] [Revised: 07/16/2022] [Accepted: 07/24/2022] [Indexed: 11/30/2022] Open
Affiliation(s)
- Jee Suk Chang
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
| | - Ji Hyun Chang
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
| | - Nalee Kim
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
| | - Yong Bae Kim
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
| | - Kyung Hwan Shin
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
| | - Kyubo Kim
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Ewha Womans University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
| |
Collapse
|
31
|
Fastner G, Krug D, Meattini I, Gruber G, Poortmans P. Expert Discussion: Hypofractionated Radiation Therapy - Standard for All Indications? Breast Care (Basel) 2021; 17:224-231. [PMID: 35707177 PMCID: PMC9149542 DOI: 10.1159/000521552] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/16/2021] [Accepted: 12/16/2021] [Indexed: 11/19/2022] Open
Affiliation(s)
- Gerd Fastner
- Department of Radiotherapy and Radio-Oncology, Paracelsus Medical University, University Hospital Salzburg, Landeskrankenhaus Salzburg, Salzburg, Austria
- *Gerd Fastner,
| | - David Krug
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Schleswig Holstein, Kiel, Germany
| | - Icro Meattini
- Department of Experimental and Clinical Biomedical Sciences ”M. Serio”, University of Florence, Florence, Italy
- Radiation Oncology Unit, Oncology Department, Azienda Ospedaliero Universitaria Careggi, Florence, Italy
| | - Günther Gruber
- Institute of Radiotherapy, Klinik Hirslanden, Zurich, Switzerland
- University of Berne, Berne, Switzerland
| | - Philip Poortmans
- Iridium Netwerk, Wilrijk-Antwerp, Belgium
- University of Antwerp, Wilrijk-Antwerp, Belgium
| |
Collapse
|
32
|
Allali S, Kirova Y. Radiodermatitis and Fibrosis in the Context of Breast Radiation Therapy: A Critical Review. Cancers (Basel) 2021; 13:cancers13235928. [PMID: 34885037 PMCID: PMC8656525 DOI: 10.3390/cancers13235928] [Citation(s) in RCA: 15] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/08/2021] [Revised: 11/20/2021] [Accepted: 11/22/2021] [Indexed: 11/18/2022] Open
Abstract
Simple Summary Skin toxicity is the main complication during irradiation in the management of early-stage breast cancer. In some cases, it may cause treatment to stop. These toxicities may be acute (mainly radiodermatitis) and/or late (mainly fibrosis). Their understandings, their mechanisms of occurrence, as well as their management is indispensable in order to improve the management of these patients. Through this study we propose to provide a clear picture of these toxicities in relation to the modalities of radiotherapy, advances in their quantification, and management to help practitioners improve their knowledge and clinical practices on this topic. Abstract Background: Radiation therapy has been progressively improved in order to maintain a satisfactory tumour response, while reducing toxicity. We will review the incidence of radiodermatitis and fibrosis according to the various radiation and fractionation techniques. We will then focus on the various methods used to manage, prevent, and quantify this toxicity. Method: More than 1753 articles were identified using the various search terms. We selected 53 articles to answer the questions addressed in this study according to criteria set in advance. Result: The literature reports lower acute toxicity with IMRT compared to 3DCRT, but no significant differences in terms of late toxicities. Partial breast irradiation appears to be less effective in terms of local control with a higher rate of late toxicity. Intra operative radiation therapy appears to provide good results in terms of both local control and late toxicity. The hypofractionation has equivalent efficacy and safety to the normofractionated regimen, but with lower rates of radiodermatitis and fibrosis. The adddition of a boost, particularly a sequential boost, increases the risk of fibrosis and radiodermatitis during treatment. Conclusion: The development of IMRT has significantly reduced acute toxicity and has improved tolerability during treatment. Modified fractionation has reduced treatment time, as well as adverse effects.
Collapse
|
33
|
Systematic quantitative evaluation of Plan-IQ for intensity-modulated radiation therapy after modified radical mastectomy. Sci Rep 2021; 11:21879. [PMID: 34750457 PMCID: PMC8575920 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-021-01305-3] [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: 05/21/2021] [Accepted: 10/19/2021] [Indexed: 12/02/2022] Open
Abstract
Radiotherapy (RT) is one of the main treatment strategies of breast cancer. It is challenging to design RT plans that can completely cover the target area while protecting organs at risk (OAR). The Plan-IQ feasibility tool can estimate the best sparing dose of OAR before optimizing the Plan. A systematic quantitative evaluation of the quality change of intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) using the Plan-IQ feasibility tool was performed for modified radical mastectomy in this study. We selected 50 patients with breast cancer treated with IMRT. All patients received the same dose in the planning target volume (PTV). The plans are categorized into two groups, with each patient having one plan in each group: the clinically accepted normal plan group (NP group) and the repeat plan group (RP group). An automated planning strategy was generated using a Plan-IQ feasibility dose volume histogram (FDVH) in RP group. These plans were assessed according to the dosimetry parameters. A detailed scoring strategy was based on the RTOG9804 report and 2018 National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines, combined with clinical experience. PTV coverage in both groups was achieved at 100% of the prescribed dose. Except for the thyroid coverage, the dose limit of organs at risk (OAR) in RP group was significantly better than that in NP group. In the scoring analysis, the total scores of RP group decreased compared to that of NP group (P < 0.05), and the individual scores of PTV and OAR significantly changed. PTV scores in RP group decreased (P < 0.01); however, OAR scores improved (P < 0.01). The Plan-IQ FDVH was useful for evaluating a class solution for IMRT planning. Plan-IQ can automatically help physicians design the best OAR protection plan, which sacrifices part of PTV, but still meets clinical requirements.
Collapse
|
34
|
Neoadjuvant Concurrent Radiotherapy and Chemotherapy in Early Breast Cancer Patients: Long-Term Results of a Prospective Phase II Trial. Cancers (Basel) 2021; 13:cancers13205107. [PMID: 34680257 PMCID: PMC8534073 DOI: 10.3390/cancers13205107] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/20/2021] [Revised: 10/06/2021] [Accepted: 10/08/2021] [Indexed: 11/16/2022] Open
Abstract
Background: Neoadjuvant concurrent radiochemotherapy makes it possible to increase the breast conservation rate. This study reports the long term outcome of this treatment. Methods: From 2001 to 2003, 59 women with T2-3 N0-2 M0 invasive breast cancer (BC) not amenable to upfront breast conserving treatment (BCS) were included in this prospective, non-randomized phase II study. Chemotherapy (CT) consisted of four cycles of continuous 5-FU infusion and Vinorelbine. Starting concurrently with the second CT cycle, normofractionated RT was delivered to the breast and LN. Breast surgery was then performed. Results: Median follow-up (FU) was 13 years [3-18]. BCS was performed in 41 (69%) patients and mastectomy in 18 patients, with pathological complete response rate of 27%. Overall and distant-disease free survivals rates at 13 years were 70.9% [95% CI 59.6-84.2] and 71.5% [95% CI 60.5-84.5] respectively. Loco regional and local controls rates were 83.4% [95% CI 73.2-95.0] and 92.1% [95% CI 83.7-100], respectively. Late toxicity (CTCAE-V3) was assessed in 51 patients (86%) with a median follow-up of 13 years. Fifteen presented grade 2 fibrosis (29.4%), 8 (15.7%) had telangiectasia, and 1 had radiodermatitis. Conclusions: This combined treatment provided high long-term local control rates with limited side-effects.
Collapse
|
35
|
Franceschini D, Fogliata A, Spoto R, Dominici L, Lo Faro L, Franzese C, Comito T, Lobefalo F, Reggiori G, Cozzi L, Sagona A, Gentile D, Scorsetti M. Long term results of a phase II trial of hypofractionated adjuvant radiotherapy for early-stage breast cancer with volumetric modulated arc therapy and simultaneous integrated boost. Radiother Oncol 2021; 164:50-56. [PMID: 34537289 DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2021.09.006] [Citation(s) in RCA: 19] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/21/2021] [Revised: 09/01/2021] [Accepted: 09/09/2021] [Indexed: 11/28/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE to report toxicity and cosmetic outcome with a median follow-up of 6 years of a phase II trial of hypofractionated radiotherapy with volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) and simultaneous integrated boost (SIB) for early-stage breast cancer after conservative surgery. MATERIALS AND METHODS From August 2010 to September 2014, patients requiring adjuvant radiotherapy for early-stage breast cancer were treated according to a phase I-II protocol with SIB to 40.5 and 48 Gy to the breast and the boost region, respectively, with VMAT technique. The primary endpoint evaluated the treatment feasibility regarding adherence to required dose constraints for target, heart and lungs. Acute and late toxicity, local and distant control were secondary endpoints. RESULTS 450 patients were included in the trial and analysed after a median follow-up of 6 years. Acute toxicity was already presented in a previous paper. Regarding late toxicity, 93% of patients had no skin alteration at five years, while 5.3% and 1.3% did record G1 and G2 residual toxicity, respectively. Cosmetic outcome was scored good or excellent in almost all cases (97.2%), fair only in 2.3% of patients. Residual tenderness in the irradiated breast was reported by 10% of patients. Cosmesis and breast pain improved during follow-up. Two cases of G2 pneumonitis and two cases of ischemic cardiopathy were registered during follow-up. Five cases presented local recurrence in the homolateral breast, four patients had a new primary cancer in the contralateral breast, while distant metastasis developed in 7 patients. CONCLUSION After more than six years, hypofractionated VMAT with SIB for adjuvant radiotherapy in early-stage breast cancer patients remains a safe and effective approach. Mature data on skin toxicity and cosmetic outcome are encouraging. However, longer follow-up is required to evaluate local control, cardiac toxicity and secondary carcinogenesis.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- D Franceschini
- IRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital, Department of Radiotherapy and Radiosurgery, Milan-Rozzano, Italy
| | - A Fogliata
- IRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital, Department of Radiotherapy and Radiosurgery, Milan-Rozzano, Italy.
| | - R Spoto
- IRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital, Department of Radiotherapy and Radiosurgery, Milan-Rozzano, Italy
| | - L Dominici
- IRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital, Department of Radiotherapy and Radiosurgery, Milan-Rozzano, Italy
| | - L Lo Faro
- IRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital, Department of Radiotherapy and Radiosurgery, Milan-Rozzano, Italy
| | - C Franzese
- IRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital, Department of Radiotherapy and Radiosurgery, Milan-Rozzano, Italy; Department of Biomedical Sciences, Humanitas University, Milan-Pieve Emanuele, Italy
| | - T Comito
- IRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital, Department of Radiotherapy and Radiosurgery, Milan-Rozzano, Italy
| | - F Lobefalo
- IRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital, Department of Radiotherapy and Radiosurgery, Milan-Rozzano, Italy
| | - G Reggiori
- IRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital, Department of Radiotherapy and Radiosurgery, Milan-Rozzano, Italy
| | - L Cozzi
- IRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital, Department of Radiotherapy and Radiosurgery, Milan-Rozzano, Italy; Department of Biomedical Sciences, Humanitas University, Milan-Pieve Emanuele, Italy
| | - A Sagona
- IRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital, Breast Unit, Milan-Rozzano, Italy
| | - D Gentile
- Department of Biomedical Sciences, Humanitas University, Milan-Pieve Emanuele, Italy; IRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital, Breast Unit, Milan-Rozzano, Italy
| | - M Scorsetti
- IRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital, Department of Radiotherapy and Radiosurgery, Milan-Rozzano, Italy; Department of Biomedical Sciences, Humanitas University, Milan-Pieve Emanuele, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
36
|
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
|
37
|
Ditsch N, Kolberg-Liedtke C, Friedrich M, Jackisch C, Albert US, Banys-Paluchowski M, Bauerfeind I, Blohmer JU, Budach W, Dall P, Fallenberg EM, Fasching PA, Fehm T, Gerber B, Gluz O, Harbeck N, Heil J, Huober J, Kreipe HH, Krug D, Kühn T, Kümmel S, Loibl S, Lüftner D, Lux MP, Maass N, Mundhenke C, Nitz U, Park-Simon TW, Reimer T, Rhiem K, Rody A, Schmidt M, Schneeweiss A, Schütz F, Sinn HP, Solbach C, Solomayer EF, Stickeler E, Thomssen C, Untch M, Witzel I, Wöckel A, Müller V, Janni W, Thill M. AGO Recommendations for the Diagnosis and Treatment of Patients with Early Breast Cancer: Update 2021. Breast Care (Basel) 2021; 16:214-227. [PMID: 34248462 DOI: 10.1159/000516419] [Citation(s) in RCA: 31] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/07/2021] [Accepted: 04/09/2021] [Indexed: 12/12/2022] Open
Affiliation(s)
- Nina Ditsch
- Klinik für Frauenheilkunde und Geburtshilfe, Universitätsklinikum Augsburg, Augsburg, Germany
| | | | - Michael Friedrich
- Klinik für Frauenheilkunde und Geburtshilfe, Helios Klinikum Krefeld, Krefeld, Germany
| | - Christian Jackisch
- Klinik für Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe, Sana Klinikum Offenbach GmbH, Offenbach, Germany
| | - Ute-Susann Albert
- Klinik für Frauenheilkunde und Geburtshilfe, Universitätsklinikum Würzburg, Würzburg, Germany
| | - Maggie Banys-Paluchowski
- Klinik für Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe, Universitätsklinikum Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Lübeck, Lübeck, Germany.,Medizinische Fakultät, Heinrich-Heine-Universität Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf, Germany
| | - Ingo Bauerfeind
- Frauenklinik, Klinikum Landshut gemeinnützige GmbH, Landshut, Germany
| | - Jens-Uwe Blohmer
- Klinik für Gynäkologie mit Brustzentrum des Universitätsklinikums der Charité, Berlin, Germany
| | - Wilfried Budach
- Strahlentherapie, Radiologie Düsseldorf, Universitätsklinikum Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf, Germany
| | - Peter Dall
- Frauenklinik, Städtisches Klinikum Lüneburg, Lüneburg, Germany
| | - Eva M Fallenberg
- Institut für klinische Radiologie, Klinikum der Universität München, Campus Großhadern, Munich, Germany
| | | | - Tanja Fehm
- Klinik für Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe, Universitätsklinikum Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf, Germany
| | - Bernd Gerber
- Universitätsfrauenklinik und Poliklinik am Klinikum Südstadt, Rostock, Germany
| | - Oleg Gluz
- Brustzentrum, Evangelisches Krankenhaus Bethesda, Mönchengladbach, Germany
| | - Nadia Harbeck
- Brustzentrum, Klinik für Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe, Klinikum der Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität, Munich, Germany
| | - Jörg Heil
- Klinik für Frauenheilkunde und Geburtshilfe, Sektion Senologie, Universitätsklinikum Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Jens Huober
- Brustzentrum, Kantonsspital St. Gallen, St. Gallen, Switzerland
| | | | - David Krug
- Klinik für Strahlentherapie, Universitätsklinikum Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Kiel, Kiel, Germany
| | - Thorsten Kühn
- Klinik für Frauenheilkunde und Geburtshilfe, Klinikum Esslingen, Esslingen, Germany
| | - Sherko Kümmel
- Klinik für Senologie, Evangelische Kliniken Essen Mitte, Essen, Germany
| | - Sibylle Loibl
- German Breast Group Forschungs GmbH, Frankfurt, Germany
| | - Diana Lüftner
- Medizinische Klinik mit Schwerpunkt Hämatologie, Onkologie und Tumorimmunologie, Charité, Berlin, Germany
| | - Michael P Lux
- Kooperatives Brustzentrum Paderborn, Klinik für Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe, Frauenklinik St. Louise, Paderborn und St. Josefs-Krankenhaus, Salzkotten, St. Vincenz-Krankenhaus GmbH, Paderborn, Germany
| | - Nicolai Maass
- Klinik für Frauenheilkunde und Geburtshilfe, Universitätsklinikum Augsburg, Augsburg, Germany
| | - Christoph Mundhenke
- Klinik für Frauenheilkunde und Geburtshilfe, Universitätsklinikum Essen, Essen, Germany
| | - Ulrike Nitz
- Brustzentrum, Evangelisches Krankenhaus Bethesda, Mönchengladbach, Germany
| | - Tjoung-Won Park-Simon
- Klinik für Frauenheilkunde und Geburtshilfe, Helios Klinikum Krefeld, Krefeld, Germany
| | - Toralf Reimer
- Universitätsfrauenklinik und Poliklinik am Klinikum Südstadt, Rostock, Germany
| | - Kerstin Rhiem
- Klinik für Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe, Sana Klinikum Offenbach GmbH, Offenbach, Germany
| | - Achim Rody
- Klinik für Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe, Universitätsklinikum Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Lübeck, Lübeck, Germany
| | - Marcus Schmidt
- Klinik für Frauenheilkunde und Geburtshilfe, Universitätsklinikum Würzburg, Würzburg, Germany
| | - Andreas Schneeweiss
- Klinik für Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe, Universitätsklinikum Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Lübeck, Lübeck, Germany
| | - Florian Schütz
- Medizinische Fakultät, Heinrich-Heine-Universität Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf, Germany
| | - Hans-Peter Sinn
- Frauenklinik, Klinikum Landshut gemeinnützige GmbH, Landshut, Germany
| | - Christine Solbach
- Strahlentherapie, Radiologie Düsseldorf, Universitätsklinikum Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf, Germany
| | | | - Elmar Stickeler
- Institut für klinische Radiologie, Klinikum der Universität München, Campus Großhadern, Munich, Germany
| | | | - Michael Untch
- Klinik für Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe, Universitätsklinikum Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf, Germany
| | - Isabell Witzel
- Universitätsfrauenklinik und Poliklinik am Klinikum Südstadt, Rostock, Germany
| | - Achim Wöckel
- Klinik für Frauenheilkunde und Geburtshilfe, Universitätsklinikum Würzburg, Würzburg, Germany
| | - Volkmar Müller
- Universitätsfrauenklinik und Poliklinik am Klinikum Südstadt, Rostock, Germany
| | - Wolfgang Janni
- Brustzentrum, Evangelisches Krankenhaus Bethesda, Mönchengladbach, Germany
| | - Marc Thill
- Brustzentrum, Klinik für Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe, Klinikum der Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität, Munich, Germany
| |
Collapse
|