1
|
Hannoun-Levi JM, Gimeno Morales M, Gal J, Anchuelo J, Guinot JL, Gaztañaga M, Meszaros N, Polgar C, Strnad V, Schiappa R, Gutierrez C. Very accelerated partial breast irradiation in 1 or 2 days: Late toxicity and early oncological outcome of the GEC-ESTRO VAPBI cohort. Radiother Oncol 2024; 194:110217. [PMID: 38460552 DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2024.110217] [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: 01/06/2024] [Revised: 03/05/2024] [Accepted: 03/05/2024] [Indexed: 03/11/2024]
Abstract
PURPOSE To analyze late toxicity after very accelerated partial breast irradiation (VAPBI) for low-risk breast cancer. MATERIALS Methods: In this retrospective, observational, international multicenter study (HDH F20220713143949), patients with low-risk breast cancer underwent lumpectomy + vAPBI (high-dose rate multicatheter interstitial brachytherapy-MIBT). VAPBI was performed with 4(4x6.2 Gy/2d), 3(3x7.45 Gy/2d) or 1 fraction (1x16Gy or 1x18Gy/1d). Primary endpoint was late toxicity. Secondary endpoints were cumulative incidence of breast cancer local relapse (LR) and distant metastatic relapse (DMR) and specific (SS) and overall (OS) survivals. Prognostic factors for late toxicity were analyzed. RESULTS From 01/2012 to 06/2022, 516 pts with early breast cancer were enrolled. Median follow-up was 44 months [95 %CI 39-46]. Median age was 71 years [40-100]. Median tumor size was 12 mm [1-35]. VAPBI delivered 1, 3 and 4 fractions for 205pts (39.7 %), 167pts (32.4 %) and 144pts (28 %) respectively. 221 late toxicity events were observed in 168pts (32.6 %) (Fibrosis, dyschromia, pain and telangiectasia). Grade 2 and 3 late toxicities were observed in 7.2 and 0.6 % respectively (no G4) with no difference between 1 and ≥ 2 treatment days. CTV > 50 cc (p = 0.007) and V150 > 40 % (p = 0.027) were prognostic factors for G ≥ 2 late toxicity. Four-year cumulative incidence rates of LR and DMR were 2 % [95 %CI 0-3] and 1 % [95 %CI 0-2] respectively. CONCLUSIONS VAPBI based on 1 or ≥ 2 days of MIBT represents an attractive de-escalation of irradiation approach for low-risk breast cancer. Late toxicity profile appears acceptable while early oncological outcome shows encouraging local control. Longer follow-up is warranted in order to confirm these preliminary results.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jean-Michel Hannoun-Levi
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Antoine Lacassagne Cancer Center, University Côte d'Azur, 33 avenue Valombrose, 06189 Nice Cedex 2, Nice, France.
| | - Marta Gimeno Morales
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Clínica Universidad de Navarra, Pamplona, Spain
| | - Jocelyn Gal
- Department of Statistics, Antoine Lacassagne Cancer Center - University of Côte d'Azur, Nice, France
| | - Javier Anchuelo
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Hospital Universitario Marques de Valdecilla, Santander, Spain
| | - Jose-Luis Guinot
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Instituto Valenciano de Oncologia, Valencia, Spain
| | - Miren Gaztañaga
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Hospital Clínico San Carlos, Madrid, Spain
| | - Norbert Meszaros
- Department of Oncology, Semmelweis University, Budapest, Hungary
| | - Csaba Polgar
- National Institute of Oncology and National Tumor Biology Laboratory, Budapest, Hungary; Department of Oncology, Semmelweis University, Budapest, Hungary
| | - Vratislav Strnad
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Erlangen University Hospital, Erlangen, Germany
| | - Renaud Schiappa
- Department of Statistics, Antoine Lacassagne Cancer Center - University of Côte d'Azur, Nice, France
| | - Cristina Gutierrez
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Catalan Institute of Oncology, Barcelona, Spain
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Ocanto A, Torres L, Montijano M, Rincón D, Fernández C, Sevilla B, Gonsalves D, Teja M, Guijarro M, Glaría L, Hernánz R, Zafra-Martin J, Sanmamed N, Kishan A, Alongi F, Moghanaki D, Nagar H, Couñago F. MR-LINAC, a New Partner in Radiation Oncology: Current Landscape. Cancers (Basel) 2024; 16:270. [PMID: 38254760 PMCID: PMC10813892 DOI: 10.3390/cancers16020270] [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: 12/17/2023] [Revised: 01/03/2024] [Accepted: 01/05/2024] [Indexed: 01/24/2024] Open
Abstract
Technological advances in radiation oncology are oriented towards improving treatment precision and tumor control. Among these advances, magnetic-resonance-image-guided radiation therapy (MRgRT) stands out, with technological advances to deliver targeted treatments adapted to a tumor's anatomy on the day while minimizing incidental exposure to organs at risk, offering an unprecedented therapeutic advantage compared to X-ray-based IGRT delivery systems. This new technology changes the traditional workflow in radiation oncology and requires an evolution in team coordination to administer more precise treatments. Once implemented, it paves the way for newer indication for radiation therapy to safely deliver higher doses than ever before, with better preservation of healthy tissues to optimize patient outcomes. In this narrative review, we assess the technical aspects of the novel linear accelerators that can deliver MRgRT and summarize the available published experience to date, focusing on oncological results and future challenges.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Abrahams Ocanto
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Hospital Universitario San Francisco de Asís, GenesisCare, 28002 Madrid, Spain; (L.T.); (M.M.); (D.R.); (C.F.); (B.S.); (D.G.); (M.T.); (M.G.); (L.G.); (R.H.); (F.C.)
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Hospital Universitario Vithas La Milagrosa, GenesisCare, 28010 Madrid, Spain
| | - Lisselott Torres
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Hospital Universitario San Francisco de Asís, GenesisCare, 28002 Madrid, Spain; (L.T.); (M.M.); (D.R.); (C.F.); (B.S.); (D.G.); (M.T.); (M.G.); (L.G.); (R.H.); (F.C.)
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Hospital Universitario Vithas La Milagrosa, GenesisCare, 28010 Madrid, Spain
| | - Miguel Montijano
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Hospital Universitario San Francisco de Asís, GenesisCare, 28002 Madrid, Spain; (L.T.); (M.M.); (D.R.); (C.F.); (B.S.); (D.G.); (M.T.); (M.G.); (L.G.); (R.H.); (F.C.)
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Hospital Universitario Vithas La Milagrosa, GenesisCare, 28010 Madrid, Spain
| | - Diego Rincón
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Hospital Universitario San Francisco de Asís, GenesisCare, 28002 Madrid, Spain; (L.T.); (M.M.); (D.R.); (C.F.); (B.S.); (D.G.); (M.T.); (M.G.); (L.G.); (R.H.); (F.C.)
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Hospital Universitario Vithas La Milagrosa, GenesisCare, 28010 Madrid, Spain
| | - Castalia Fernández
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Hospital Universitario San Francisco de Asís, GenesisCare, 28002 Madrid, Spain; (L.T.); (M.M.); (D.R.); (C.F.); (B.S.); (D.G.); (M.T.); (M.G.); (L.G.); (R.H.); (F.C.)
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Hospital Universitario Vithas La Milagrosa, GenesisCare, 28010 Madrid, Spain
| | - Beatriz Sevilla
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Hospital Universitario San Francisco de Asís, GenesisCare, 28002 Madrid, Spain; (L.T.); (M.M.); (D.R.); (C.F.); (B.S.); (D.G.); (M.T.); (M.G.); (L.G.); (R.H.); (F.C.)
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Hospital Universitario Vithas La Milagrosa, GenesisCare, 28010 Madrid, Spain
| | - Daniela Gonsalves
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Hospital Universitario San Francisco de Asís, GenesisCare, 28002 Madrid, Spain; (L.T.); (M.M.); (D.R.); (C.F.); (B.S.); (D.G.); (M.T.); (M.G.); (L.G.); (R.H.); (F.C.)
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Hospital Universitario Vithas La Milagrosa, GenesisCare, 28010 Madrid, Spain
| | - Macarena Teja
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Hospital Universitario San Francisco de Asís, GenesisCare, 28002 Madrid, Spain; (L.T.); (M.M.); (D.R.); (C.F.); (B.S.); (D.G.); (M.T.); (M.G.); (L.G.); (R.H.); (F.C.)
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Hospital Universitario Vithas La Milagrosa, GenesisCare, 28010 Madrid, Spain
| | - Marcos Guijarro
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Hospital Universitario San Francisco de Asís, GenesisCare, 28002 Madrid, Spain; (L.T.); (M.M.); (D.R.); (C.F.); (B.S.); (D.G.); (M.T.); (M.G.); (L.G.); (R.H.); (F.C.)
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Hospital Universitario Vithas La Milagrosa, GenesisCare, 28010 Madrid, Spain
| | - Luis Glaría
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Hospital Universitario San Francisco de Asís, GenesisCare, 28002 Madrid, Spain; (L.T.); (M.M.); (D.R.); (C.F.); (B.S.); (D.G.); (M.T.); (M.G.); (L.G.); (R.H.); (F.C.)
| | - Raúl Hernánz
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Hospital Universitario San Francisco de Asís, GenesisCare, 28002 Madrid, Spain; (L.T.); (M.M.); (D.R.); (C.F.); (B.S.); (D.G.); (M.T.); (M.G.); (L.G.); (R.H.); (F.C.)
| | - Juan Zafra-Martin
- Group of Translational Research in Cancer Immunotherapy, Centro de Investigaciones Médico-Sanitarias (CIMES), Instituto de Investigación Biomédica de Málaga (IBIMA), Universidad de Málaga (UMA), 29010 Málaga, Spain;
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Hospital Universitario Virgen de la Victoria, 29010 Málaga, Spain
| | - Noelia Sanmamed
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Hospital Universitario Clínico San Carlos, 28040 Madrid, Spain;
| | - Amar Kishan
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of California, Los Angeles, CA 90095, USA;
| | - Filippo Alongi
- Advanced Radiation Oncology Department, Cancer Care Center, IRCCS Sacro Cuore Don Calabria Hospital, 37024 Negrar, Italy;
- University of Brescia, 25121 Brescia, Italy
| | - Drew Moghanaki
- UCLA Department of Radiation Oncology, University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA 90095, USA;
| | - Himanshu Nagar
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Weill Cornell Medicine, New York, NY 10065, USA;
| | - Felipe Couñago
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Hospital Universitario San Francisco de Asís, GenesisCare, 28002 Madrid, Spain; (L.T.); (M.M.); (D.R.); (C.F.); (B.S.); (D.G.); (M.T.); (M.G.); (L.G.); (R.H.); (F.C.)
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Hospital Universitario Vithas La Milagrosa, GenesisCare, 28010 Madrid, Spain
- GenesisCare, 28043 Madrid, Spain
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Miljanic M, Nwachukwu C, Rahimi A. Definitive ablative stereotactic partial breast irradiation in early stage inoperable breast cancer. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol 2023; 149:15553-15559. [PMID: 37648809 DOI: 10.1007/s00432-023-05053-x] [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: 05/15/2023] [Accepted: 06/28/2023] [Indexed: 09/01/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE This case series and literature review aims to investigate the efficacy and safety of definitive ablative radiation therapy as a treatment modality for non-operable patients with early stage breast cancer. We present two cases demonstrating the potential of this approach to achieve durable responses. METHODS We assessed the long-term response of two non-operable patients diagnosed with Stage II (cT2N0M) and Stage IA (T1bN0M0) invasive ductal carcinoma (IDC), who were deemed unfit for surgery due to significant co-morbid conditions. Definitive ablative radiation therapy was administered using stereotactic partial breast irradiation with ablative doses delivered in either a single fraction or two fractions. Serial imaging was conducted to assess treatment response and monitor adverse events. RESULTS Both patients exhibited notable treatment responses following definitive ablative radiation therapy. The first patient, an 84-year-old woman, experienced a 69% reduction in tumor size over a follow-up period exceeding 2 years. The second patient, an 87-year-old woman, achieved complete resolution of disease on imaging, with no signs of progression even 26 month post-treatment. Both patients tolerated the treatment well, without significant treatment-related adverse events. CONCLUSIONS Our case series suggests that definitive ablative radiation therapy may serve as a safe and effective treatment option for non-operable patients with early stage breast cancer. The observed durable treatment responses and minimal toxicity support the potential of this approach. Furthermore, a longer interval between ablative radiation therapy and surgery may enhance treatment response, potentially leading to increased complete pathologic response rates.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Mihailo Miljanic
- Department of Radiation Oncology at University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, 2280 Inwood Road, Dallas, TX, USA.
| | - Chika Nwachukwu
- Department of Radiation Oncology at University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, 2280 Inwood Road, Dallas, TX, USA
| | - Assal Rahimi
- Department of Radiation Oncology at University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, 2280 Inwood Road, Dallas, TX, USA
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Masi L, Doro R, Di Cataldo V, Francolini G, Zani M, Visani L, Meattini I, Livi L. Preoperative single fraction breast radiotherapy: Intra-fraction geometric uncertainties and dosimetric implications. Phys Med 2023; 112:102638. [PMID: 37441821 DOI: 10.1016/j.ejmp.2023.102638] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/23/2023] [Revised: 06/12/2023] [Accepted: 07/04/2023] [Indexed: 07/15/2023] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE A preoperative breast robotic radiosurgery trial was concluded in our centre. Purposes of the present study were to evaluate retrospectively over the enrolled patients: i) respiratory patterns ii) tracking uncertainties iii) necessity of respiratory compensation iv) tracking errors dosimetric effects. METHODS 22 patients were treated in 21 Gy single fraction using CyberKnife (CK) respiratory modelling and tracking (SynchronyResp) and data extracted from log-files. Respiratory motion and baseline drifts (BD) were analyzed. SynchronyResp uncertainties were computed and compared with errors simulated for CK fiducial tracking without respiratory compensation. Plans were perturbed by tracking errors and perturbed doses calculated on the planning CT scan in order to simulate the dosimetric consequences of intra-fraction errors. RESULTS After BD correction, respiratory amplitudes were below 5.5 mm except one value of 8 mm. 50% of patients showed BD above 3 mm. Standard deviations of SynchronyResp errors remained within 2.1 mm. Standard deviations of tracking errors without respiratory compensation were comparable and below 2.5 mm. Using a 3 mm PTV margin, perturbed CTV coverage was below 95% (93.7%) just for one patient. The latter case presented a large CTV-Skin interface. Perturbed OAR doses were always judged clinically acceptable. CONCLUSION Intra-fraction geometric uncertainties and their effects were quantified for breast neoadjuvant CK treatments. Data indicated that in the majority of cases respiratory compensation may be disabled without increasing uncertainties and reducing treatment time, provided that fiducial intra-fraction tracking is performed to account for BD. Dosimetric effects are mostly not clinically relevant.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Laura Masi
- Department of Medical Physics and Radiation Oncology, IFCA, Florence, Italy.
| | - Raffaela Doro
- Department of Medical Physics and Radiation Oncology, IFCA, Florence, Italy
| | - Vanessa Di Cataldo
- Radiation Oncology Unit, Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria Careggi Florence, Italy
| | - Giulio Francolini
- Radiation Oncology Unit, Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria Careggi Florence, Italy
| | - Margherita Zani
- Medical Physics Unit, Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria Careggi Florence, Italy
| | - Luca Visani
- Department of Medical Physics and Radiation Oncology, IFCA, Florence, Italy; Radiation Oncology Unit, Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria Careggi Florence, Italy
| | - Icro Meattini
- Radiation Oncology Unit, Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria Careggi Florence, Italy; Department of Experimental and Clinical Biomedical Sciences 'Mario Serio', University of Florence, Florence, Italy
| | - Lorenzo Livi
- Radiation Oncology Unit, Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria Careggi Florence, Italy; Department of Experimental and Clinical Biomedical Sciences 'Mario Serio', University of Florence, Florence, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Vijayakumar S, Nittala MR, Buddala V, Mobit P, Duggar WN, Yang CC, Lirette ST, Mundra E, Ahmed HZ, Berry SM, Craft BS, Woods WC, Otts J, Rahimi A, Dobbs T. Real World and Public Health Perspectives of Intraoperative Radiotherapy in Early-Stage Breast Cancer: A Multidisciplinary Analysis Beyond the Statistical Facts. Cureus 2023; 15:e36432. [PMID: 37025715 PMCID: PMC10072193 DOI: 10.7759/cureus.36432] [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] [Accepted: 03/20/2023] [Indexed: 04/08/2023] Open
Abstract
Breast conservation therapy (BCT) (usually a lumpectomy plus radiotherapy (RT)) has become a standard alternative to radical mastectomy in early-stage breast cancers with equal, if not higher, survival rates. The established standard of the RT component of the BCT had been about six weeks of Monday through Friday external beam RT to the whole breast (WBRT). Recent clinical trials have shown that partial breast radiation therapy (PBRT) to the region surrounding the lumpectomy cavity with shorter courses can result in equal local control, survival, and slightly improved cosmetic outcomes. Intraoperative RT (IORT) wherein RT is administered at the time of operation for BCT to the lumpectomy cavity as a single-fraction RT is also considered PBRT. The advantage of IORT is that weeks of RT are avoided. However, the role of IORT as part of BCT has been controversial. The extreme views go from "I will not recommend to anyone" to "I can recommend to all early-stage favorable patients." These divergent views are due to difficulty in interpreting the clinical trial results. There are two modalities of delivering IORT, namely, the use of low-energy 50 kV beams or electron beams. There are several retrospective, prospective, and two randomized clinical trials comparing IORT versus WBRT. Yet, the opinions are divided. In this paper, we try to bring clarity and consensus from a highly broad-based multidisciplinary team approach. The multidisciplinary team included breast surgeons, radiation oncologists, medical physicists, biostatisticians, public health experts, nurse practitioners, and medical oncologists. We show that there is a need to more carefully interpret and differentiate the data based on electron versus low-dose X-ray modalities; the randomized study results have to be extremely carefully dissected from biostatistical points of view; the importance of the involvement of patients and families in the decision making in a very transparent and informed manner needs to be emphasized; and the compromise some women may be willing to accept between 2-4% potential increase in local recurrence (as interpreted by some of the investigators in IORT randomized studies) versus mastectomy. We conclude that, ultimately, the choice should be that of women with detailed facts of the pros and cons of all options being presented to them from the angle of patient/family-focused care. Although the guidelines of various professional societies can be helpful, they are only guidelines. The participation of women in IORT clinical trials is still needed, and as genome-based and omics-based fine-tuning of prognostic fingerprints evolve, the current guidelines need to be revisited. Finally, the use of IORT can help rural, socioeconomically, and infrastructure-deprived populations and geographic regions as the convenience of single-fraction RT and the possibility of breast preservation are likely to encourage more women to choose BCT than mastectomy. This option can also likely lead to more women choosing to get screened for breast cancer, thus enabling the diagnosis of breast cancer at an earlier stage and improving the survival outcomes.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Mary R Nittala
- Radiation Oncology, University of Mississippi Medical Center, Jackson, USA
| | - Vedanth Buddala
- Radiation Oncology, University of Mississippi Medical Center, Jackson, USA
| | - Paul Mobit
- Radiation Oncology, University of Mississippi Medical Center, Jackson, USA
| | - William N Duggar
- Radiation Oncology, University of Mississippi Medical Center, Jackson, USA
| | - Claus Chunli Yang
- Radiation Oncology, University of Mississippi Medical Center, Jackson, USA
| | | | - Eswar Mundra
- Radiation Oncology, University of Mississippi Medical Center, Jackson, USA
| | - Hiba Z Ahmed
- Radiation Oncology, University of Mississippi Medical Center, Jackson, USA
| | - Scott M Berry
- Surgery, University of Mississippi Medical Center, Jackson, USA
| | - Barbara S Craft
- Medicine, University of Mississippi Medical Center, Jackson, USA
| | - William C Woods
- Radiation Oncology, University of Mississippi Medical Center, Jackson, USA
| | - Jeremy Otts
- Radiation Oncology, University of Mississippi Medical Center, Jackson, USA
| | - Asal Rahimi
- Radiation Oncology, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, USA
| | - Thomas Dobbs
- Population Health, University of Mississippi Medical Center, Jackson, USA
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Montalvo SK, Collins B, Vicini F, Rahimi A. Stereotactic Partial Breast Irradiation: What Does the Future Hold? Am J Clin Oncol 2023; 46:20-24. [PMID: 36477344 DOI: 10.1097/coc.0000000000000970] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/13/2022]
Abstract
Breast irradiation has evolved significantly over the last several decades. Accelerated partial breast and stereotactic breast irradiation have evolved as strategies to reduce irradiated volumes, preserve appropriate oncologic control, and improve cosmetic outcome. The sequencing and/or combination of stereotactic partial breast irradiation with novel systemic agents is of great interest to the oncologic community. Here we explore the landscape of modern trials and opine on the future of partial breast irradiation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Steven K Montalvo
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Harold C. Simmons Cancer Center, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX
| | - Brian Collins
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Tampa General Hospital, Tampa, FL
| | - Frank Vicini
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Genesis Care, Farmington Hills, MI
| | - Asal Rahimi
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Harold C. Simmons Cancer Center, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Shah C, Leonardi MC. Accelerated Partial Breast Irradiation: An Opportunity for Therapeutic De-escalation. Am J Clin Oncol 2023; 46:2-6. [PMID: 36255336 DOI: 10.1097/coc.0000000000000945] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/04/2023]
Abstract
Partial breast irradiation (PBI) has been demonstrated to have comparable outcomes to whole breast irradiation based on multiple randomized trials with long-term follow-up. However, despite the strength of the data available, PBI remains underutilized despite being an appropriate option for many women diagnosed with early-stage breast cancer. This is significant, as PBI offers the potential to reduce toxicities and shorten treatment duration without impacting outcomes; in addition, for low-risk patients, PBI alone is being investigated as an alternative to endocrine therapy alone. Modern PBI can be delivered with multiple techniques, and advances in treatment planning have allowed for improved therapeutic ratios compared with earlier techniques; one such approach is utilizing stereotactic body radiation therapy approaches allowing for smaller target margins and therefore lower breast doses. Moving forward, studies are ongoing evaluating the use of radiation alone including PBI as compared with endocrine therapy alone, with prospective studies evaluating stereotactic body radiation therapy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Chirag Shah
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Taussig Cancer Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH
| | - Maria C Leonardi
- Department of Radiotherapy, IEO European Institute of Oncology, IRCCS, Milano, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Jaysing A, Lischalk JW, Sanchez A, Mendez C, May P, Solan A, Witten M, Logman Z, Haas JA. Robotic Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy for the Adjuvant Treatment of Early-Stage Breast Cancer: Outcomes of a Large Single-Institution Study. Adv Radiat Oncol 2022; 8:101095. [PMID: 36845620 PMCID: PMC9943783 DOI: 10.1016/j.adro.2022.101095] [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: 05/11/2022] [Accepted: 09/22/2022] [Indexed: 12/13/2022] Open
Abstract
Purpose Advancements in breast radiation therapy offer innumerable benefits to patients and the health care system. Despite promising outcomes, clinicians remain hesitant about long-term side effects and disease control with accelerated partial breast radiation therapy (APBI). Herein, we review the long-term outcomes of patients with early-stage breast cancer treated with adjuvant stereotactic partial breast irradiation (SAPBI). Methods and Materials This retrospective study examined outcomes of patients who received diagnoses of early-stage breast cancer treated with adjuvant robotic SAPBI. All patients were eligible for standard ABPI and underwent lumpectomy, followed by fiducial placement in preparation for SAPBI. Using fiducial and respiratory tracking to maintain a precise dose distribution throughout the course of treatment, patients received 30 Gy in 5 fractions on consecutive days. Follow-up occurred at routine intervals to evaluate disease control, toxicity, and cosmesis. Toxicity and cosmesis were characterized using the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 5.0 and Harvard Cosmesis Scale, respectively. Results Patients (N = 50) were a median age of 68.5 years at the time of treatment. The median tumor size was 7.2 mm, 60% had an invasive cell type, and 90% were estrogen receptor positive, progesterone receptor positive, or both. Patients (n = 49) were followed for a median of 4.68 years for disease control and 1.25 years for cosmesis and toxicity. One patient experienced local recurrence, 1 patient experienced grade 3+ late toxicity, and 44 patients demonstrated excellent cosmesis. Conclusions To our knowledge, this is the largest retrospective analysis with the longest follow-up time for disease control among patients with early breast cancer treated with robotic SAPBI. With follow-up time for cosmesis and toxicity comparable to that of previous studies, results of the present cohort advance our understanding of the excellent disease control, excellent cosmesis, and limited toxicity that can be achieved by treating select patients with early-stage breast cancer with robotic SAPBI.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Anna Jaysing
- Department of Radiation Oncology, New York University Long Island School of Medicine, New York, New York
| | - Jonathan W. Lischalk
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Perlmutter Cancer Center at New York University Langone Hospital – Long Island, Mineola, New York
- Corresponding author: Jonathan W. Lischalk, MD
| | - Astrid Sanchez
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Perlmutter Cancer Center at New York University Langone Hospital – Long Island, Mineola, New York
| | - Christopher Mendez
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Perlmutter Cancer Center at New York University Langone Hospital – Long Island, Mineola, New York
| | - Phoebe May
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Perlmutter Cancer Center at New York University Langone Hospital – Long Island, Mineola, New York
| | - Amy Solan
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Perlmutter Cancer Center at New York University Langone Hospital – Long Island, Mineola, New York
| | - Matthew Witten
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Perlmutter Cancer Center at New York University Langone Hospital – Long Island, Mineola, New York
| | - Zhanna Logman
- Department of Surgery, New York University Langone Hospital – Long Island, Mineola, New York
| | - Jonathan A. Haas
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Perlmutter Cancer Center at New York University Langone Hospital – Long Island, Mineola, New York
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Anderson B, Arthur D, Hannoun-Levi JM, Kamrava M, Khan A, Kuske R, Scanderbeg D, Shah C, Shaitelman S, Showalter T, Vicini F, Wazer D, Yashar C. Partial breast irradiation: An updated consensus statement from the American brachytherapy society. Brachytherapy 2022; 21:726-747. [PMID: 36117086 DOI: 10.1016/j.brachy.2022.07.004] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/26/2022] [Revised: 06/15/2022] [Accepted: 07/06/2022] [Indexed: 12/14/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE In recent years, results with mature follow-up have been reported for several Phase III trials randomizing women to receive whole breast irradiation (WBI) versus varying modalities of partial breast irradiation (PBI). It is important to recognize that these methods vary in terms of volume of breast tissue treated, dose per fraction, and duration of therapy. As such, clinical and technical guidelines may vary among the various PBI techniques. METHODS Members of the American Brachytherapy Society with expertise in PBI performed an extensive literature review focusing on the highest quality data available for the numerous PBI options offered in the modern era. Data were evaluated for strength of evidence and published outcomes were assessed. RESULTS The majority of women enrolled on randomized trials of WBI versus PBI have been age >45 years with tumor size <3 cm, negative margins, and negative lymph nodes. The panel also concluded that PBI can be offered to selected women with estrogen receptor negative and/or Her2 amplified breast cancer, as well as ductal carcinoma in situ, and should generally be avoided in women with extensive lymphovascular space invasion. CONCLUSIONS This updated guideline summarizes published clinical trials of PBI methods. The panel also highlights the role of PBI for women facing special circumstances, such as history of cosmetic breast augmentation or prior breast irradiation, and discusses promising novel modalities that are currently under study, such as ultrashort and preoperative PBI. Updated consensus guidelines are also provided to inform patient selection for PBI and to characterize the strength of evidence to support varying PBI modalities.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Bethany Anderson
- Department of Human Oncology, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, WI.
| | - Douglas Arthur
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VA
| | | | | | - Atif Khan
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
| | - Robert Kuske
- Arizona Breast Cancer Specialists, Scottsdale, AZ
| | - Daniel Scanderbeg
- Department of Radiation Medicine and Applied Sciences, University of California San Diego, San Diego, CA
| | - Chirag Shah
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Taussig Cancer Institute, Cleveland, OH
| | - Simona Shaitelman
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX
| | - Timothy Showalter
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Virginia School of Medicine, Charlottesville, VA
| | | | - David Wazer
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Tufts Medical Center, Boston, MA
| | - Catheryn Yashar
- Department of Radiation Medicine and Applied Sciences, University of California San Diego, San Diego, CA
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Takanen S, Pinnarò P, Farina I, Sperati F, Botti C, Vici P, Soriani A, Marucci L, Sanguineti G. Stereotactic partial breast irradiation in primary breast cancer: A comprehensive review of the current status and future directions. Front Oncol 2022; 12:953810. [PMID: 36313648 PMCID: PMC9606691 DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2022.953810] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/26/2022] [Accepted: 09/26/2022] [Indexed: 11/13/2022] Open
Abstract
In selected low-risk breast cancer patients, accelerated partial breast irradiation (APBI) may represent an alternative option to the whole breast irradiation to reduce the volume of irradiated breast and total treatment duration. In the last few years, preliminary data from clinical trials showed that stereotactic partial breast radiotherapy may have the advantage to be less invasive compared to other APBI techniques, with preliminary good results in terms of local toxicity and cosmesis: the use of magnetic resonance, fiducial markers in the tumor bed, and new breast devices support both a precise definition of the target and radiation planning.Systematic review registrationhttps://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42021257856, identifier CRD42021257856.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Silvia Takanen
- Radiation Oncology, Istituto di Ricovero e Cura a Carattere Scientifico (IRCCS) Regina Elena National Cancer Institute, Rome, Italy
- *Correspondence: Silvia Takanen, ; Ilaria Farina,
| | - Paola Pinnarò
- Radiation Oncology, Istituto di Ricovero e Cura a Carattere Scientifico (IRCCS) Regina Elena National Cancer Institute, Rome, Italy
| | - Ilaria Farina
- Radiation Oncology, Istituto di Ricovero e Cura a Carattere Scientifico (IRCCS) Regina Elena National Cancer Institute, Rome, Italy
- *Correspondence: Silvia Takanen, ; Ilaria Farina,
| | - Francesca Sperati
- Biostatistics, Istituto di Ricovero e Cura a Carattere Scientifico (IRCCS) Regina Elena National Cancer Institute, Rome, Italy
| | - Claudio Botti
- Surgery, Istituto di Ricovero e Cura a Carattere Scientifico (IRCCS) Regina Elena National Cancer Institute, Rome, Italy
| | - Patrizia Vici
- Phase IV Studies, Istituto di Ricovero e Cura a Carattere Scientifico (IRCCS) Regina Elena National Cancer Institute, Rome, Italy
| | - Antonella Soriani
- Physics, Istituto di Ricovero e Cura a Carattere Scientifico (IRCCS) Regina Elena National Cancer Institute, Rome, Italy
| | - Laura Marucci
- Radiation Oncology, Istituto di Ricovero e Cura a Carattere Scientifico (IRCCS) Regina Elena National Cancer Institute, Rome, Italy
| | - Giuseppe Sanguineti
- Radiation Oncology, Istituto di Ricovero e Cura a Carattere Scientifico (IRCCS) Regina Elena National Cancer Institute, Rome, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Hannoun-Levi JM, Guinot JL, Gutierrez C, Polgar C, Strnad V. In Regard to Rahimi et al. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2022; 113:474-475. [PMID: 35569484 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2022.02.033] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/08/2022] [Accepted: 02/22/2022] [Indexed: 10/18/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Jean-Michel Hannoun-Levi
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Antoine Lacassagne Cancer Centre, University of Côte d'Azur, Nice, France
| | - José-Luis Guinot
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Valencia Institute of Oncology, Valencia, Spain
| | - Cristina Gutierrez
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Catalan Institute of Oncology, Barcelona, Spain
| | - Csaba Polgar
- Center of Radiotherapy, National Institute of Oncology, Budapest, Hungary;; Department of Oncology, Semmelweis University, Budapest, Hungary
| | - Vratislav Strnad
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Erlangen University Hospital, Erlangen, Germany
| | | |
Collapse
|