1
|
Kim N, Cho WK, Park W, Lee JE, Nam SJ, Kim SW, Yu J, Chae BJ, Lee SK, Ryu JM, Ko ES, Kim H. Outcomes of whole breast radiation therapy in Asian breast cancer patients with prior cosmetic implants. Breast Cancer 2024; 31:391-400. [PMID: 38368487 DOI: 10.1007/s12282-024-01547-9] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/20/2023] [Accepted: 01/16/2024] [Indexed: 02/19/2024]
Abstract
BACKGROUND As breast augmentation has become more popular, an increasing number of women with augmented breasts require treatment for breast cancer. This study aimed to assess the outcomes of postoperative whole breast radiation therapy (WB-RT) in Asian patients with breast cancer who underwent prior cosmetic breast implantation. METHODS We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of 61 patients with breast cancer who had prior cosmetic breast implants (prior-CBI) and underwent breast-conserving surgery (BCS) and WB-RT between 2015 and 2020. The median implant volume was 238.8 cc, with a median interval of 84.7 months between the prior-CBI and BCS. WB-RT was administered with either conventional fractionation (CF-RT) at 50 Gy in 25 fractions (N = 36) or hypofractionation (HF-RT) at 42.6 Gy in 16 fractions (N = 25). The incidences of implant-related complications (IRC) and their contributing factors were analyzed. RESULTS After a median follow-up of 43.5 months, the 3-year cumulative incidences of IRC and implant loss were 17.2% and 4.9%, respectively. Among the four (6.6%) patients who opted for implant removal after RT, three were potentially related to RT-related capsular contracture. There was no difference in the 3-year cumulative IRC rates following CF-RT and HF-RT (12.2% and 26.7%, respectively; p = 0.120). The risk factors for IRC included a larger implant size (> 260 cc) and a higher ratio of breast tissue to implant volume. CONCLUSIONS This study demonstrated a favorable safety profile of WB-RT for treatment of breast cancer in Asian women with prior-CBI. The integration of HF-RT following BCS was thought to be a feasible approach.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Nalee Kim
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, 81 Irwon-Ro, Gangnam-Gu, Seoul, 06351, Republic of Korea
| | - Won Kyung Cho
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, 81 Irwon-Ro, Gangnam-Gu, Seoul, 06351, Republic of Korea
| | - Won Park
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, 81 Irwon-Ro, Gangnam-Gu, Seoul, 06351, Republic of Korea
| | - Jeong Eon Lee
- Division of Breast Surgery, Department of Surgery, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea
| | - Seok Jin Nam
- Division of Breast Surgery, Department of Surgery, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea
| | - Seok Won Kim
- Division of Breast Surgery, Department of Surgery, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea
| | - Jonghan Yu
- Division of Breast Surgery, Department of Surgery, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea
| | - Byung Joo Chae
- Division of Breast Surgery, Department of Surgery, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea
| | - Sei Kyung Lee
- Division of Breast Surgery, Department of Surgery, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea
| | - Jai-Min Ryu
- Division of Breast Surgery, Department of Surgery, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea
| | - Eun Sook Ko
- Department of Radiology, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea
| | - Haeyoung Kim
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, 81 Irwon-Ro, Gangnam-Gu, Seoul, 06351, Republic of Korea.
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Huang EY, Ho MW, Wang YM. Dosimetric Correlation of Acute Radiation Dermatitis in Patients With Breast Cancer Undergoing Hypofractionated Proton Beam Therapy Using Pencil Beam Scanning. J Breast Cancer 2024; 27:27.e14. [PMID: 38769685 DOI: 10.4048/jbc.2024.0012] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/06/2024] [Revised: 02/24/2024] [Accepted: 03/31/2024] [Indexed: 05/22/2024] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE Pencil-beam scanning (PBS) is a modern delivery technique used in proton beam therapy (PBT) to reduce normal tissue reactions. No dosimetric correlation between dermatitis and PBS has been reported for breast cancer. The current study aimed to investigate the factors associated with grade 2 or higher dermatitis in patients with breast cancer undergoing PBT using PBS. METHODS The medical data of 42 patients with breast cancer who underwent adjuvant radiotherapy between December 2019 and September 2023 were reviewed. All patients received hypofractionated radiotherapy (HFRT), either 26 Gy (relative biological effectiveness [RBE])/five fractions or 40.05 or 43.5 Gy (RBE)/15 fractions, for the whole breast/chest wall with or without nodal irradiation. The duration of acute radiation dermatitis was defined as within 90 days from the start of radiotherapy. The Kaplan-Meier method and Cox proportional hazards model were used for univariate and multivariate analyses of the actuarial rates of grade 2-3 dermatitis. RESULTS Twenty-two (52.4%) and 20 (47.6%) patients were diagnosed with grade 1 and 2 dermatitis, respectively. Multivariate analysis revealed a clinical target volume (CTV) ≥ of 320 cc (p = 0.035) and a skin dose of D10cc ≥ 38.3 Gy (RBE) (p = 0.009) as independent factors of grade 2 dermatitis. The 10-week cumulative grade 2 dermatitis rates were 88.2%, 39.4%, and 8.3% (p < 0.001) for patients with both high, either high, and neither high CTV and D10cc, respectively. CONCLUSION To the best of our knowledge, this is the first study on dosimetric correlations for dermatitis in patients with breast cancer who underwent hypofractionated PBT using PBS. In the era of HFRT, skin dose modulation using PBS may reduce the incidence of dermatitis.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Eng-Yen Huang
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Kaohsiung Chang Gung Memorial Hospital and Chang Gung University College of Medicine, Kaohsiung, Taiwan
- Proton and Radiation Therapy Center, Kaohsiung Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Kaohsiung, Taiwan
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Kaohsiung Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, School of Medicine, College of Medicine, National Sun Yat-Sen University, Taiwan
- School of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Chang Gung University, Taoyuan, Taiwan
| | - Meng Wei Ho
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Kaohsiung Chang Gung Memorial Hospital and Chang Gung University College of Medicine, Kaohsiung, Taiwan
- Proton and Radiation Therapy Center, Kaohsiung Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Kaohsiung, Taiwan
| | - Yu-Ming Wang
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Kaohsiung Chang Gung Memorial Hospital and Chang Gung University College of Medicine, Kaohsiung, Taiwan
- Proton and Radiation Therapy Center, Kaohsiung Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Kaohsiung, Taiwan
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Kaohsiung Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, School of Medicine, College of Medicine, National Sun Yat-Sen University, Taiwan
- School of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Chang Gung University, Taoyuan, Taiwan.
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Berlin E, Yegya-Raman N, Hollawell C, Haertter A, Fosnot J, Rhodes S, Seol SW, Gentile M, Li T, Freedman GM, Taunk NK. Breast Reconstruction Complications After Postmastectomy Proton Radiation Therapy for Breast Cancer. Adv Radiat Oncol 2024; 9:101385. [PMID: 38495035 PMCID: PMC10943514 DOI: 10.1016/j.adro.2023.101385] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/08/2023] [Accepted: 10/03/2023] [Indexed: 03/19/2024] Open
Abstract
Purpose Our purpose was to report complications requiring surgical intervention among patients treated with postmastectomy proton radiation therapy (PMPRT) for breast cancer in the setting of breast reconstruction (BR). Methods and Materials Patients enrolled on a prospective proton registry who underwent BR with immediate autologous flap, tissue expander (TE), or implant in place during PMPRT (50/50.4 Gy +/- chest wall boost) were eligible. Major reconstruction complication (MRC) was defined as a complication requiring surgical intervention. Absolute reconstruction failure was an MRC requiring surgical removal of BR. A routine revision (RR) was a plastic surgery refining cosmesis of the BR. Kaplan-Meier method was used to assess disease outcomes and MRC. Cox regression was used to assess predictors of MRC. Results Seventy-three courses of PMPRT were delivered to 68 women with BR between 2013 and 2021. Median follow-up was 42.1 months. Median age was 47 years. Fifty-six (76.7%) courses used pencil beam scanning PMPRT. Of 73 BR, 29 were flaps (39.7%), 30 implants (41.1%), and 14 TE (19.2%) at time of irradiation. There were 20 (27.4%) RR. There were 9 (12.3%) MRC among 5 implants, 2 flaps, and 2 TE, occurring a median of 29 months from PMPRT start. Three-year freedom from MRC was 86.9%. Three (4.1%) of the MRC were absolute reconstruction failure. Complications leading to MRC included capsular contracture in 5, fat necrosis in 2, and infection in 2. On univariable analysis, BR type, boost, proton technique, age, and smoking status were not associated with MRC, whereas higher body mass index trended toward significance (hazard ratio, 1.07; 95% CI, 0.99-1.16; P = .10). Conclusions Patients undergoing PMPRT to BR had a 12.3% incidence of major complications leading to surgical intervention, and total loss of BR was rare. MRC rates were similar among reconstruction types. Minor surgery for RR is common in our practice.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | | | | | - Joshua Fosnot
- Division of Plastic Surgery, Department of Surgery, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
4
|
Choi S, Dreyfuss I, Taswell CS, Cyriac J, Butkus M, Takita C. Proton Beam Therapy for Breast Cancer. Crit Rev Oncog 2024; 29:67-82. [PMID: 38683154 DOI: 10.1615/critrevoncog.2023050319] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 05/01/2024]
Abstract
Given the radiobiological and physical properties of the proton, proton beam therapy has the potential to be advantageous for many patients compared with conventional radiotherapy by limiting toxicity and improving patient outcomes in specific breast cancer scenarios.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Seraphina Choi
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Miami Sylvester Comprehensive Cancer Center, Miami, FL, USA
| | - Isabella Dreyfuss
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Miami Sylvester Comprehensive Cancer Center, Miami, FL, USA
| | | | - Jonathan Cyriac
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Miami Sylvester Comprehensive Cancer Center, Miami, FL, USA
| | - Michael Butkus
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Miami Sylvester Comprehensive Cancer Center, Miami, FL, USA
| | | |
Collapse
|
5
|
Gao RW, Mullikin TC, Aziz KA, Afzal A, Smith NL, Routman DM, Gergelis KR, Harmsen WS, Remmes NB, Tseung HSWC, Shiraishi SS, Boughey JC, Ruddy KJ, Harless CA, Garda AE, Waddle MR, Park SS, Shumway DA, Corbin KS, Mutter RW. Postmastectomy Intensity Modulated Proton Therapy: 5-Year Oncologic and Patient-Reported Outcomes. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2023; 117:846-856. [PMID: 37244627 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2023.05.036] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/02/2023] [Revised: 05/10/2023] [Accepted: 05/19/2023] [Indexed: 05/29/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE To report oncologic, physician-assessed, and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) for a group of women homogeneously treated with modern, skin-sparing multifield optimized pencil-beam scanning proton (intensity modulated proton therapy [IMPT]) postmastectomy radiation therapy (PMRT). METHODS AND MATERIALS We reviewed consecutive patients who received unilateral, curative-intent, conventionally fractionated IMPT PMRT between 2015 and 2019. Strict constraints were applied to limit the dose to the skin and other organs at risk. Five-year oncologic outcomes were analyzed. Patient-reported outcomes were evaluated as part of a prospective registry at baseline, completion of PMRT, and 3 and 12 months after PMRT. RESULTS A total of 127 patients were included. One hundred nine (86%) received chemotherapy, among whom 82 (65%) received neoadjuvant chemotherapy. The median follow-up was 4.1 years. Five-year locoregional control was 98.4% (95% CI, 93.6-99.6), and overall survival was 87.9% (95% CI, 78.7-96.5). Acute grade 2 and 3 dermatitis was seen in 45% and 4% of patients, respectively. Three patients (2%) experienced acute grade 3 infection, all of whom had breast reconstruction. Three late grade 3 adverse events occurred: morphea (n = 1), infection (n = 1), and seroma (n = 1). There were no cardiac or pulmonary adverse events. Among the 73 patients at risk for PMRT-associated reconstruction complications, 7 (10%) experienced reconstruction failure. Ninety-five patients (75%) enrolled in the prospective PRO registry. The only metrics to increase by >1 point were skin color (mean change: 5) and itchiness (2) at treatment completion and tightness/pulling/stretching (2) and skin color (2) at 12 months. There was no significant change in the following PROs: bleeding/leaking fluid, blistering, telangiectasia, lifting, arm extension, or bending/straightening the arm. CONCLUSIONS With strict dose constraints to skin and organs at risk, postmastectomy IMPT was associated with excellent oncologic outcomes and PROs. Rates of skin, chest wall, and reconstruction complications compared favorably to previous proton and photon series. Postmastectomy IMPT warrants further investigation in a multi-institutional setting with careful attention to planning techniques.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Robert W Gao
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota
| | - Trey C Mullikin
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Duke Cancer Center, Durham, North Carolina
| | - Khaled A Aziz
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota
| | - Arslan Afzal
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota
| | - Na L Smith
- Sanford Cancer Center, Sioux Falls, South Dakota
| | - David M Routman
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota
| | | | - William S Harmsen
- Department of Biomedical Statistics and Informatics, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota
| | | | | | | | - Judy C Boughey
- Division of Breast and Melanoma Surgical Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota
| | - Kathryn J Ruddy
- Division of Medical Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota
| | | | - Allison E Garda
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota
| | - Mark R Waddle
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota
| | - Sean S Park
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota
| | - Dean A Shumway
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota
| | | | - Robert W Mutter
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota.
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Yang Y, Gergelis KR, Shen J, Afzal A, Mullikin TC, Gao RW, Aziz K, Shumway DA, Corbin KS, Liu W, Mutter RW. Study of linear energy transfer effect on rib fracture in breast patients receiving pencil-beamscanning proton therapy. ArXiv 2023:arXiv:2310.20527v1. [PMID: 37961731 PMCID: PMC10635309] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Grants] [Download PDF] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/15/2023]
Abstract
Purpose To study the effect of proton linear energy transfer (LET) on rib fracture in breast cancer patients treated with pencil-beam scanning proton therapy (PBS) using a novel tool of dose-LET volume histogram (DLVH). Methods From a prospective registry of patients treated with post-mastectomy proton therapy to the chest wall and regional lymph nodes for breast cancer between 2015 and 2020, we retrospectively identified rib fracture cases detected after completing treatment. Contemporaneously treated control patients that did not develop rib fracture were matched to patients 2:1 considering prescription dose, boost location, reconstruction status, laterality, chest wall thickness, and treatment year.The DLVH index, V(d, l), defined as volume(V) of the structure with at least dose(d) and LET(l), was calculated. DLVH plots between the fracture and control group were compared. Conditional logistic regression (CLR) model was used to establish the relation of V(d, l) and the observed fracture at each combination of d and l. The p-value derived from CLR model shows the statistical difference between fracture patients and the matched control group. Using the 2D p-value map derived from CLR model, the DLVH features associated with the patient outcomes were extracted. Results Seven rib fracture patients were identified, and fourteen matched patients were selected for the control group. The median time from the completion of proton therapy to rib fracture diagnosis was 12 months (range 5 to 14 months). Two patients had grade 2 symptomatic rib fracture while the remaining 5 were grade 1 incidentally detected on imaging. The derived p-value map demonstrated larger V(0-36Gy[RBE], 4.0-5.0 keV/μm) in patients experiencing fracture (p<0.1). For example, the p value for V(30 Gy[RBE], 4.0 keV/um) was 0.069. Conclusions In breast cancer patients receiving PBS, a larger volume of chest wall receiving moderate dose and high LET may result in increased risk of rib fracture.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Yunze Yang
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Phoenix, AZ 85054, USA
| | - Kimberly R Gergelis
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN 55905, USA
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Rochester School of Medicine and Dentistry, Rochester, NY 14642, USA
| | - Jiajian Shen
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Phoenix, AZ 85054, USA
| | - Arslan Afzal
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN 55905, USA
| | - Trey C Mullikin
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Duke Cancer Institute, Durham, NC 27710
| | - Robert W Gao
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN 55905, USA
| | - Khaled Aziz
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN 55905, USA
| | - Dean A Shumway
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN 55905, USA
| | - Kimberly S Corbin
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN 55905, USA
| | - Wei Liu
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Phoenix, AZ 85054, USA
| | - Robert W Mutter
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN 55905, USA
- Department of Pharmacology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN 55905, USA
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Mutter RW, Giri S, Fruth BF, Remmes NB, Boughey JC, Harless CA, Ruddy KJ, McGee LA, Afzal A, Gao RW, Shumway DA, Vern-Gross TZ, Villarraga HR, Kenison SL, Kang Y, Wong WW, Stish BJ, Merrell KW, Yan ES, Park SS, Corbin KS, Vargas CE. Conventional versus hypofractionated postmastectomy proton radiotherapy in the USA (MC1631): a randomised phase 2 trial. Lancet Oncol 2023; 24:1083-1093. [PMID: 37696281 PMCID: PMC10591844 DOI: 10.1016/s1470-2045(23)00388-1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/06/2023] [Revised: 07/26/2023] [Accepted: 08/02/2023] [Indexed: 09/13/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Proton therapy is under investigation in breast cancer as a strategy to reduce radiation exposure to the heart and lungs. So far, studies investigating proton postmastectomy radiotherapy (PMRT) have used conventional fractionation over 25-28 days, but whether hypofractionated proton PMRT is feasible is unclear. We aimed to compare conventional fractionation and hypofractionation in patients with indications for PMRT, including those with immediate breast reconstruction. METHODS We did a randomised phase 2 trial (MC1631) at Mayo Clinic in Rochester (MN, USA) and Mayo Clinic in Arizona (Phoenix, AZ, USA) comparing conventional fractionated (50 Gy in 25 fractions of 2 Gy [relative biological effectiveness of 1·1]) and hypofractionated (40·05 Gy in 15 fractions of 2·67 Gy [relative biological effectiveness of 1·1]) proton PMRT. All patients were treated with pencil-beam scanning. Eligibility criteria included age 18 years or older, an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-2, and breast cancer resected by mastectomy with or without immediate reconstruction with indications for PMRT. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to either conventional fractionation or hypofractionation, with presence of immediate reconstruction (yes vs no) as a stratification factor, using a biased-coin minimisation algorithm. Any patient who received at least one fraction of protocol treatment was evaluable for the primary endpoint and safety analyses. The primary endpoint was 24-month complication rate from the date of first radiotherapy, defined as grade 3 or worse adverse events occurring from 90 days after last radiotherapy or unplanned surgical interventions in patients with immediate reconstruction. The inferiority of hypofractionation would not be ruled out if the upper bound of the one-sided 95% CI for the difference in 24-month complication rate between the two groups was greater than 10%. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02783690, and is closed to accrual. FINDINGS Between June 2, 2016, and Aug 23, 2018, 88 patients were randomly assigned (44 to each group), of whom 82 received protocol treatment (41 in the conventional fractionation group and 41 in the hypofractionation group; median age of 52 years [IQR 44-64], 79 [96%] patients were White, two [2%] were Black or African American, one [1%] was Asian, and 79 [96%] were not of Hispanic ethnicity). As of data cutoff (Jan 30, 2023), the median follow-up was 39·3 months (IQR 37·5-61·2). The median mean heart dose was 0·54 Gy (IQR 0·30-0·72) for the conventional fractionation group and 0·49 Gy (0·25-0·64) for the hypofractionation group. Within 24 months of first radiotherapy, 14 protocol-defined complications occurred in six (15%) patients in the conventional fractionation group and in eight (20%) patients in the hypofractionation group (absolute difference 4·9% [one-sided 95% CI 18·5], p=0·27). The complications in the conventionally fractionated group were contracture (five [12%] of 41 patients]) and fat necrosis (one [2%] patient) requiring surgical intervention. All eight protocol-defined complications in the hypofractionation group were due to infections, three of which were acute infections that required surgical intervention, and five were late infections, four of which required surgical intervention. All 14 complications were in patients with immediate expander or implant-based reconstruction. INTERPRETATION After a median follow-up of 39·3 months, non-inferiority of the hypofractionation group could not be established. However, given similar tolerability, hypofractionated proton PMRT appears to be worthy of further study in patients with and without immediate reconstruction. FUNDING The Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, the Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Phoenix, AZ, USA, and the US National Cancer Institute.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Robert W Mutter
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA.
| | - Sharmila Giri
- Division of Clinical Trials and Biostatistics, Department of Quantitative Health Sciences, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA
| | - Briant F Fruth
- Division of Clinical Trials and Biostatistics, Department of Quantitative Health Sciences, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA
| | | | | | | | - Kathryn J Ruddy
- Division of Medical Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA
| | - Lisa A McGee
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Phoenix, AZ, USA
| | - Arslan Afzal
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA
| | - Robert W Gao
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA
| | - Dean A Shumway
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA
| | | | | | | | - Yixiu Kang
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Phoenix, AZ, USA
| | - William W Wong
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Phoenix, AZ, USA
| | - Bradley J Stish
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA
| | | | - Elizabeth S Yan
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA
| | - Sean S Park
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA
| | | | - Carlos E Vargas
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Phoenix, AZ, USA
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Affiliation(s)
- Anna M Kirby
- Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust & Institute of Cancer Research, Sutton, UK
| | - Francesca Holt
- Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, UK
| | - Carolyn W Taylor
- Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, UK
| | - Joanne S Haviland
- Centre for Evaluation and Methods, Wolfson Institute of Population Health, Queen Mary University of London, UK
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
9
|
Nangia S, Burela N, Noufal MP, Patro K, Wakde MG, Sharma DS. Proton therapy for reducing heart and cardiac substructure doses in Indian breast cancer patients. Radiat Oncol J 2023; 41:69-80. [PMID: 37403349 DOI: 10.3857/roj.2023.00073] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/25/2023] [Accepted: 04/10/2023] [Indexed: 07/06/2023] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE Indians have a higher incidence of cardiovascular diseases, often at a younger age, than other ethnic groups. This higher baseline risk requires consideration when assessing additional cardiac morbidity of breast cancer treatment. Superior cardiac sparing is a critical dosimetric advantage of proton therapy in breast cancer radiotherapy. We report here the heart and cardiac-substructure doses and early toxicities in breast cancer patients treated post-operatively with proton therapy in India's first proton therapy center. MATERIALS AND METHODS We treated twenty breast cancer patients with intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT) from October 2019 to September 2022, eleven after breast conservation, nine following mastectomy, and appropriate systemic therapy, when indicated. The most prescribed dose was 40 GyE to the whole breast/chest wall and 48 GyE by simultaneous integrated boost to the tumor bed and 37.5 GyE to appropriate nodal volumes, delivered in 15 fractions. RESULTS Adequate coverage was achieved for clinical target volume (breast/chest wall), i.e., CTV40, and regional nodes, with 99% of the targets receiving 95% of the prescribed dose (V95% > 99%). The mean heart dose was 0.78 GyE and 0.87 GyE for all and left breast cancer patients, respectively. The mean left anterior descending artery (LAD) dose, LAD D0.02cc, and left ventricle dose were 2.76, 6.46, and 0.2 GyE, respectively. Mean ipsilateral lung dose, V20Gy, V5Gy, and contralateral breast dose (Dmean) were 6.87 GyE, 14.6%, 36.4%, and 0.38 GyE, respectively. CONCLUSION The dose to heart and cardiac substructures is lower with IMPT than published photon therapy data. Despite the limited access to proton therapy at present, given the higher cardiovascular risk and coronary artery disease prevalence in India, the cardiac sparing achieved using this technique merits consideration for wider adoption in breast cancer treatment.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sapna Nangia
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Apollo Proton Cancer Centre, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India
| | - Nagarjuna Burela
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Apollo Proton Cancer Centre, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India
| | - M P Noufal
- Department of Medical Physics, Apollo Proton Cancer Centre, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India
| | - Kartikeswar Patro
- Department of Medical Physics, Apollo Proton Cancer Centre, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India
| | - Manoj Gulabrao Wakde
- Department of Medical Physics, Apollo Proton Cancer Centre, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India
| | - Dayanada S Sharma
- Department of Medical Physics, Apollo Proton Cancer Centre, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Sayan M, Hathout L, Kilic SS, Jan I, Gilles A, Hassell N, Kowzun M, George M, Potdevin L, Kumar S, Sinkin J, Agag R, Haffty BG, Ohri N. Reconstructive complications and early toxicity in breast cancer patients treated with proton-based postmastectomy radiation therapy. Front Oncol 2023; 13:1067500. [PMID: 36741008 PMCID: PMC9895832 DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2023.1067500] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/11/2022] [Accepted: 01/09/2023] [Indexed: 01/22/2023] Open
Abstract
Background Postmastectomy radiation therapy (PMRT) decreases the risk of locoregional recurrence and increases overall survival rates in patients with high-risk node positive breast cancer. While the number of breast cancer patients treated with proton-based PMRT has increased in recent years, there is limited data on the use of proton therapy in the postmastectomy with reconstruction setting. In this study, we compared acute toxicities and reconstructive complications in patients treated with proton-based and photon-based PMRT. Methods A retrospective review of our institutional database was performed to identify breast cancer patients treated with mastectomy with implant or autologous reconstruction followed by PMRT from 2015 to 2020. Baseline clinical, disease, and treatment related factors were compared between the photon-based and proton-based PMRT groups. Early toxicity outcomes and reconstructive complications following PMRT were graded by the treating physician. Results A total of 11 patients treated with proton-based PMRT and 26 patients treated with photon-based PMRT were included with a median follow-up of 7.4 months (range, 0.7-33 months). Six patients (55%) in the proton group had a history of breast cancer (3 ipsilateral and 3 contralateral) and received previous RT 38 months ago (median, range 7-85). There was no significant difference in mean PMRT (p = 0.064) and boost dose (p = 0.608) between the two groups. Grade 2 skin toxicity was the most common acute toxicity in both groups (55% and 73% in the proton and photon group, respectively) (p = 0.077). Three patients (27%) in the proton group developed grade 3 skin toxicity. No Grade 4 acute toxicity was reported in either group. Reconstructive complications occurred in 4 patients (36%) in the proton group and 8 patients (31%) in photon group (p = 0.946). Conclusions Acute skin toxicity remains the most frequent adverse event in both proton- and photon-based PMRT. In our study, reconstructive complications were not significantly higher in patients treated with proton- versus photon-based PMRT. Longer follow-up is warranted to assess late toxicities.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Mutlay Sayan
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, United States,Department of Radiation Oncology, Brigham and Women’s Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, United States,*Correspondence: Mutlay Sayan,
| | - Lara Hathout
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Rutgers Cancer Institute of New Jersey, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, NJ, United States
| | - Sarah S. Kilic
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Taussig Cancer Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, United States
| | - Imraan Jan
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Rutgers Cancer Institute of New Jersey, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, NJ, United States
| | - Ambroise Gilles
- Division of Plastic Surgery, Departments of Surgery, Rutgers Cancer Institute of New Jersey, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, NJ, United States
| | - Natalie Hassell
- Division of Plastic Surgery, Departments of Surgery, Rutgers Cancer Institute of New Jersey, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, NJ, United States
| | - Maria Kowzun
- Departments of Surgical Oncology, Rutgers Cancer Institute of New Jersey, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, NJ, United States
| | - Mridula George
- Departments of Medicine, Rutgers Cancer Institute of New Jersey, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, NJ, United States
| | - Lindsay Potdevin
- Departments of Surgical Oncology, Rutgers Cancer Institute of New Jersey, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, NJ, United States
| | - Shicha Kumar
- Departments of Surgical Oncology, Rutgers Cancer Institute of New Jersey, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, NJ, United States
| | - Jeremy Sinkin
- Division of Plastic Surgery, Departments of Surgery, Rutgers Cancer Institute of New Jersey, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, NJ, United States
| | - Richard Agag
- Division of Plastic Surgery, Departments of Surgery, Rutgers Cancer Institute of New Jersey, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, NJ, United States
| | - Bruce G. Haffty
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Rutgers Cancer Institute of New Jersey, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, NJ, United States
| | - Nisha Ohri
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Rutgers Cancer Institute of New Jersey, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, NJ, United States
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Zhang L, Zheng J, Mu J, Gao Y, Li G. Risk Factors for Postoperative Complications Following Aesthetic Breast Surgery: A Retrospective Cohort Study of 4973 Patients in China. Aesthetic Plast Surg 2022; 46:2629-39. [PMID: 35922669 DOI: 10.1007/s00266-022-03030-2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/17/2022] [Accepted: 07/16/2022] [Indexed: 12/13/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND The popularity of aesthetic breast surgery in China results in greater demand for assessing risk factors for complications and mortality. OBJECTIVES To determine the incidence and independent risk factors for postoperative complications following aesthetic breast surgery in China. METHODS A retrospective cohort study on 4973 patients who had aesthetic breast surgery between 2012 and 2021 was performed. Postoperative complications include minor complications (incision healing impaired, hematoma, or fat liquefaction) and surgical site infection (SSI), which were recorded within 30 days after surgery. The follow-up time was expanded to 1 year only after prosthesis implantation procedures. Potential risk factors including age, weight, length of hospital stay, operation time, volume resection, incision location, and other clinical profile information were evaluated. RESULTS Among 4973 patients who underwent aesthetic breast surgery, the minor complication rate was 0.54%, and SSI was 0.68%. Augmentation with prosthesis implantation had the highest SSI rate (4.23%), which was significantly associated with increasing age (relative risk [RR] 1.12; P < 0.01) and periareolar incision (RR 5.87, P < 0.01). After augmentation with autologous fat transplantation, postoperative antibiotic use (RR 6.65, P < 0.01) was an independent risk factor for SSI. After adjusting for weight, volume resection over 1500 g (RR 14.7, P < 0.01) was an independent risk factor for SSI of reduction-mastopexy surgery. The complication rate of reduction mammaplasty (1.01%) and gynecomastia correction was lower (0.75%), and there was no record of complication in mastopexy procedures (n = 161). CONCLUSION The incidence of postoperative complications following aesthetic breast surgery is low. Risk factors for complications mainly include increasing age, perioperative antibiotic use, periareolar incision, and extensive volume resection. Much more attention should be focused on those high-risk patients in clinical practice to decrease breast infection. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE IV This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266 .
Collapse
|
12
|
Laughlin BS, Bhangoo RS, Niska JR, Thorpe CS, Girardo ME, Anderson JD, Kosiorek HE, McGee LA, Hartsell WF, Chang JH, Rossi CJ, Tsai HK, Choi IJ, Vargas CE. Proton therapy for isolated local regional recurrence of breast cancer after mastectomy alone. Front Oncol 2022; 12:925078. [DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2022.925078] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/21/2022] [Accepted: 11/10/2022] [Indexed: 11/29/2022] Open
Abstract
Purpose/ObjectivesTo assess adverse events (AEs) and disease-specific outcomes after proton therapy for isolated local-regional recurrence (LRR) of breast cancer after mastectomy without prior radiotherapy (RT).Materials/MethodsPatients were identified from a multi-institutional prospective registry and included if diagnosed with invasive breast cancer, initially underwent mastectomy without adjuvant RT, experienced an LRR, and subsequently underwent salvage treatment, including proton therapy. Follow-up and cancer outcomes were measured from the date of RT completion.ResultsNineteen patients were included. Seventeen patients were treated with proton therapy to the chest wall and comprehensive regional lymphatics (17/19, 90%). Maximum grade AE was grade 2 in 13 (69%) patients and grade 3 in 4 (21%) patients. All patients with grade 3 AE received > 60 GyE (p=0.04, Spearman correlation coefficient=0.5). At the last follow-up, 90% of patients were alive with no LRR or distant recurrence.ConclusionsFor breast cancer patients with isolated LRR after initial mastectomy without adjuvant RT, proton therapy is well-tolerated in the salvage setting with excellent loco-regional control. All grade 3 AEs occurred in patients receiving > 60 GyE.
Collapse
|
13
|
Santos A, Penfold S, Gorayski P, Le H. The Role of Hypofractionation in Proton Therapy. Cancers (Basel) 2022; 14:2271. [PMID: 35565400 DOI: 10.3390/cancers14092271] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/19/2022] [Revised: 04/22/2022] [Accepted: 04/27/2022] [Indexed: 12/07/2022] Open
Abstract
Hypofractionated radiotherapy is an attractive approach for minimizing patient burden and treatment cost. Technological advancements in external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) delivery and image guidance have resulted in improved targeting and conformality of the absorbed dose to the disease and a reduction in dose to healthy tissue. These advances in EBRT have led to an increasing adoption and interest in hypofractionation. Furthermore, for many treatment sites, proton beam therapy (PBT) provides an improved absorbed dose distribution compared to X-ray (photon) EBRT. In the past 10 years there has been a notable increase in reported clinical data involving hypofractionation with PBT, reflecting the interest in this treatment approach. This review will discuss the reported clinical data and radiobiology of hypofractionated PBT. Over 50 published manuscripts reporting clinical results involving hypofractionation and PBT were included in this review, ~90% of which were published since 2010. The most common treatment regions reported were prostate, lung and liver, making over 70% of the reported results. Many of the reported clinical data indicate that hypofractionated PBT can be well tolerated, however future clinical trials are still needed to determine the optimal fractionation regime.
Collapse
|
14
|
Garda AE, Hunzeker AE, Michel AK, Fattahi S, Shiraishi S, Remmes NB, Schultz HL, Harmsen WS, Shumway DA, Yan ES, Park SS, Mutter RW, Corbin KS. Intensity Modulated Proton Therapy for Bilateral Breast or Chest Wall and Comprehensive Nodal Irradiation for Synchronous Bilateral Breast Cancer: Initial Clinical Experience and Dosimetric Comparison. Adv Radiat Oncol 2022; 7:100901. [PMID: 35647397 PMCID: PMC9133394 DOI: 10.1016/j.adro.2022.100901] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/04/2021] [Accepted: 01/09/2022] [Indexed: 12/14/2022] Open
Abstract
Purpose Synchronous bilateral breast cancer (SBBC) poses distinct challenges for radiation therapy planning. We report our proton therapy experience in treating patients with SBBC. We also provide a dosimetric comparison of intensity modulated proton therapy (IMPT) versus photon therapy. Methods and Materials Patients with SBBC who received IMPT at our institution were retrospectively analyzed. The clinical target volume (CTV) included the breast or chest wall and comprehensive regional lymph nodes, including axilla, supraclavicular fossa, and the internal mammary chain. Intensity modulated proton therapy and volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) plans were generated with the goal that 90% of the CTV would recieve at least 90% of the prescription dose (D90>=90%). Comparisons between modalities were made using the Wilcoxon signed rank test. Physician-reported acute toxic effects and photography were collected at baseline, end of treatment, and each follow-up visit. Results Between 2015 and 2018, 11 patients with SBBC were treated with IMPT. The prescription was 50 Gy in 25 fractions. The median CTV D90 was 99.9% for IMPT and 97.6% for VMAT (P = .001). The mean heart dose was 0.7 Gy versus 7.2 Gy (P = .001), the total lung mean dose was 7.8 Gy versus 17.3 Gy (P = .001), and the total lung volume recieving 20 Gy was 13.0% versus 27.4% (P = .001). The most common acute toxic effects were dermatitis (mostly grade 1-2 with 1 case of grade 3) and grade 1 to 2 fatigue. The most common toxic effects at the last-follow up (median, 32 months) were grade 1 skin hyperpigmentation, superficial fibrosis, and extremity lymphedema. No nondermatologic or nonfatigue adverse events of grade >1 were recorded. Conclusions Bilateral breast and/or chest wall and comprehensive nodal IMPT is technically feasible and associated with low rates of severe acute toxic effects. Treatment with IMPT offered improved target coverage and normal-tissue sparing compared with photon therapy. Long-term follow-up is ongoing to assess efficacy and toxic effects.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Allison E. Garda
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota
| | | | - Ann K. Michel
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota
| | - Sayeh Fattahi
- Mayo Clinic Alix School of Medicine, Rochester, Minnesota
| | - Satomi Shiraishi
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota
| | | | | | - W. Scott Harmsen
- Division of Biomedical Statistics and Informatics, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota
| | - Dean A. Shumway
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota
| | - Elizabeth S. Yan
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota
| | - Sean S. Park
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota
| | - Robert W. Mutter
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota
| | | |
Collapse
|
15
|
Fattahi S, Mullikin TC, Aziz KA, Afzal A, Smith NL, Francis LN, Scott Harmsen W, Routman DM, Remmes NB, Ahmed SK, Shumway DA, Park SS, Mutter RW, Corbin KS. Proton therapy for the treatment of inflammatory breast cancer. Radiother Oncol 2022. [DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2022.04.008] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/10/2022] [Revised: 04/07/2022] [Accepted: 04/08/2022] [Indexed: 11/24/2022]
|
16
|
Fuglsang Jensen M, Stick LB, Høyer M, Kronborg CJS, Lorenzen EL, Mortensen HR, Nyström PW, Petersen SE, Randers P, Thai LMH, Yates ES, Offersen BV. Proton therapy for early breast cancer patients in the DBCG proton trial: planning, adaptation, and clinical experience from the first 43 patients. Acta Oncol 2022; 61:223-230. [PMID: 34632922 DOI: 10.1080/0284186x.2021.1986229] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/14/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND The Danish Breast Cancer Group (DBCG) Proton Trial randomizes breast cancer patients selected on high mean heart dose (MHD) or high lung dose (V20Gy/V17Gy) in the photon plan between photon and proton therapy. This study presents the proton plans and adaptation strategy for the first 43 breast cancer patients treated with protons in Denmark. MATERIAL AND METHODS Forty-four proton plans (one patient with bilateral cancer) were included; 2 local and 42 loco-regional including internal mammary nodes (IMN). Nineteen patients had a mastectomy and 25 a lumpectomy. The prescribed dose was either 50 Gy in 25 fractions (n = 30) or 40 Gy in 15 fractions (n = 14) wherefrom five received simultaneous integrated boost to the tumor bed. Using 2-3 en face proton fields, single-field optimization, robust optimization and a 5 cm range shifter ensured robustness towards breathing motion, setup- and range uncertainties. An anatomical evaluation was performed by evaluating the dose after adding/removing 3 mm and 5 mm tissue to/from the body-outline and used to define treatment tolerances for anatomical changes. RESULTS The nominal and robust criteria were met for all patients except two. The median MHD was 1.5 Gy (0.5-3.4 Gy, 50 Gy) and 1.1 Gy (0.0-1.5 Gy, 40 Gy). The anatomical evaluations showed how 5 mm shrinkage approximately doubled the MHD while 5 mm swelling reduced target coverage of the IMN below constraints. Ensuring 3-5 mm robustness toward swelling was prioritized but not always achieved by robust optimization alone emphasizing the need for a distal margin. Twenty-eight patients received plan adaptation, eight patients received two, and one received five. CONCLUSION This proton planning strategy ensured robust treatment plans within a pre-defined level of acceptable anatomical changes that fulfilled the planning criteria for most of the patients and ensured low MHD.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | - Morten Høyer
- Danish Centre for Particle Therapy, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark
| | | | | | | | - Petra Witt Nyström
- Danish Centre for Particle Therapy, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark
- Department of Oncology, Uppsala University Hospital, Uppsala, Sweden
| | | | - Pia Randers
- Danish Centre for Particle Therapy, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark
| | - Linh My Hoang Thai
- Danish Centre for Particle Therapy, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark
| | | | - Birgitte Vrou Offersen
- Danish Centre for Particle Therapy, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark
- Department of Oncology, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark
- Department of Experimental Clinical Oncology, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark
| |
Collapse
|
17
|
Loap P, De Marzi L, Almeida CE, Barcellini A, Bradley J, de Santis MC, Dendale R, Jimenez R, Orlandi E, Kirova Y. Hadrontherapy techniques for breast cancer. Crit Rev Oncol Hematol 2021; 169:103574. [PMID: 34958916 DOI: 10.1016/j.critrevonc.2021.103574] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/09/2021] [Revised: 12/22/2021] [Accepted: 12/22/2021] [Indexed: 12/31/2022] Open
Abstract
Radiotherapy plays a key role in breast cancer treatment, and recent technical advances have been made to improve the therapeutic window by limiting the risk of radiation-induced toxicity or by increasing tumor control. Hadrontherapy is a form a radiotherapy relying on particle beams; compared with photon beams, particle beams have specific physical, radiobiological and immunological properties, which can be valuable in diverse clinical situations. To date, available hadrontherapy techniques for breast cancer irradiation include proton therapy, carbon ion radiation therapy, fast neutron therapy and boron neutron capture therapy. This review analyzes the current rationale and level of evidence for each hadrontherapy technique for breast cancer.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Pierre Loap
- Proton Therapy Center, Institut Curie, Orsay, France.
| | | | - Carlos Eduardo Almeida
- Department of Radiological Sciences, Rio de Janeiro State University, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
| | | | - Julie Bradley
- University of Florida Health Proton Therapy Institute, Jacksonville, FL, United States
| | | | - Remi Dendale
- Proton Therapy Center, Institut Curie, Orsay, France
| | - Rachel Jimenez
- Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, United States
| | - Ester Orlandi
- National Center for Oncological Hadrontherapy, Pavia, Italy
| | - Youlia Kirova
- Proton Therapy Center, Institut Curie, Orsay, France
| |
Collapse
|
18
|
Zugasti A, Hontanilla B. The Impact of Adjuvant Radiotherapy on Immediate Implant-based Breast Reconstruction Surgical and Satisfaction Outcomes: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open 2021; 9:e3910. [PMID: 34765389 DOI: 10.1097/GOX.0000000000003910] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/10/2021] [Accepted: 09/10/2021] [Indexed: 12/31/2022]
Abstract
Adjuvant radiotherapy could be a necessary step in the oncological treatment for breast cancer. However, radiotherapy may have negative effects on implant-based immediate breast reconstruction. The aim of this study was to determine the impact of adjuvant radiation therapy on surgical results and patient-reported satisfaction outcomes in women undergoing immediate implant-based breast reconstruction. Methods A systematic search in PubMed was conducted on September 2019 and updated on April 2021. The risk of bias of the included studies was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Assessment Form for Observational Studies. RevMan 5 was used for statistical analysis. We obtained relative risks to determine the complication incidence and mean differences for 2-year BREAST-Q scores. Results Fourteen studies were included. A total of 11,958 implant-based immediate reconstructions were performed, 2311 received postmastectomy radiation therapy, and 9647 were considered as control group. Surgical complications, reoperation rates, and reconstruction failure were significantly higher among irradiated breasts. Significantly lower BREAST-Q scores were reported by irradiated women receiving radiotherapy. Conclusions This systematic review and meta-analysis combines reconstruction complication rates with aesthetic and patient-reported satisfaction outcomes. Adjuvant radiotherapy is consistently associated with greater complication rates and poorer aesthetic and satisfaction outcomes. The magnitude of association is significantly lower when the reconstruction is based on autologous tissues.
Collapse
|
19
|
Mutter RW, Choi JI, Jimenez RB, Kirova YM, Fagundes M, Haffty BG, Amos RA, Bradley JA, Chen PY, Ding X, Carr AM, Taylor LM, Pankuch M, Vega RBM, Ho AY, Nyström PW, McGee LA, Urbanic JJ, Cahlon O, Maduro JH, MacDonald SM. Proton Therapy for Breast Cancer: A Consensus Statement From the Particle Therapy Cooperative Group Breast Cancer Subcommittee. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2021; 111:337-359. [PMID: 34048815 PMCID: PMC8416711 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2021.05.110] [Citation(s) in RCA: 35] [Impact Index Per Article: 11.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/21/2020] [Revised: 05/12/2021] [Accepted: 05/17/2021] [Indexed: 12/23/2022]
Abstract
Radiation therapy plays an important role in the multidisciplinary management of breast cancer. Recent years have seen improvements in breast cancer survival and a greater appreciation of potential long-term morbidity associated with the dose and volume of irradiated organs. Proton therapy reduces the dose to nontarget structures while optimizing target coverage. However, there remain additional financial costs associated with proton therapy, despite reductions over time, and studies have yet to demonstrate that protons improve upon the treatment outcomes achieved with photon radiation therapy. There remains considerable heterogeneity in proton patient selection and techniques, and the rapid technological advances in the field have the potential to affect evidence evaluation, given the long latency period for breast cancer radiation therapy recurrence and late effects. In this consensus statement, we assess the data available to the radiation oncology community of proton therapy for breast cancer, provide expert consensus recommendations on indications and technique, and highlight ongoing trials' cost-effectiveness analyses and key areas for future research.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Robert W Mutter
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota.
| | - J Isabelle Choi
- Department of Radiation Oncology, New York Proton Center and Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - Rachel B Jimenez
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Youlia M Kirova
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Institut Curie, Paris, France
| | - Marcio Fagundes
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Miami Cancer Institute, Miami, Florida
| | - Bruce G Haffty
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Rutgers Cancer Institute of New Jersey, New Brunswick, New Jersey
| | - Richard A Amos
- Proton and Advanced Radiotherapy Group, Department of Medical Physics and Biomedical Engineering, University College London, London, United Kingdom
| | - Julie A Bradley
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Florida, Jacksonville, Florida
| | - Peter Y Chen
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Beaumont Health, Royal Oak, Michigan
| | - Xuanfeng Ding
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Beaumont Health, Royal Oak, Michigan
| | - Antoinette M Carr
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Beaumont Health, Royal Oak, Michigan
| | - Leslie M Taylor
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Beaumont Health, Royal Oak, Michigan
| | - Mark Pankuch
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Northwestern Medicine Proton Center, Warrenville, Illinois
| | | | - Alice Y Ho
- Department of Radiation Oncology, New York Proton Center and Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - Petra Witt Nyström
- The Skandion Clinic, Uppsala, Sweden and the Danish Centre for Particle Therapy, Aarhus, Denmark
| | - Lisa A McGee
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic Hospital, Phoenix, Arizona
| | - James J Urbanic
- Department of Radiation Medicine and Applied Sciences, UC San Diego Health, Encinitas, California
| | - Oren Cahlon
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - John H Maduro
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
| | - Shannon M MacDonald
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts
| |
Collapse
|
20
|
Dahn HM, Boersma LJ, de Ruysscher D, Meattini I, Offersen BV, Pignol JP, Aristei C, Belkacemi Y, Benjamin D, Bese N, Coles CE, Franco P, Ho A, Hol S, Jagsi R, Kirby AM, Marrazzo L, Marta GN, Moran MS, Nichol AM, Nissen HD, Strnad V, Zissiadis YE, Poortmans P, Kaidar-Person O. The use of bolus in postmastectomy radiation therapy for breast cancer: A systematic review. Crit Rev Oncol Hematol 2021; 163:103391. [PMID: 34102286 DOI: 10.1016/j.critrevonc.2021.103391] [Citation(s) in RCA: 16] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/23/2021] [Revised: 05/28/2021] [Accepted: 06/01/2021] [Indexed: 11/21/2022] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE Post mastectomy radiation therapy (PMRT) reduces locoregional recurrence (LRR) and breast cancer mortality for selected patients. Bolus overcomes the skin-sparing effect of external-beam radiotherapy, ensuring adequate dose to superficial regions at risk of local recurrence (LR). This systematic review summarizes the current evidence regarding the impact of bolus on LR and acute toxicity in the setting of PMRT. RESULTS 27 studies were included. The use of bolus led to higher rates of acute grade 3 radiation dermatitis (pooled rates of 9.6% with bolus vs. 1.2% without). Pooled crude LR rates from thirteen studies (n = 3756) were similar with (3.5%) and without (3.6%) bolus. CONCLUSIONS Bolus may be indicated in cases with a high risk of LR in the skin, but seems not to be necessary for all patients. Further work is needed to define the role of bolus in PMRT.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Hannah M Dahn
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Dalhousie University, Halifax, Canada.
| | - Liesbeth J Boersma
- Department of Radiation Oncology (Maastro), GROW School for Oncology, Maastricht University Medical Centre+, Maastricht, the Netherlands.
| | - Dirk de Ruysscher
- Department of Radiation Oncology (Maastro), GROW School for Oncology, Maastricht University Medical Centre+, Maastricht, the Netherlands.
| | - Icro Meattini
- Department of Experimental and Clinical Biomedical Sciences "M. Serio", University of Florence, Radiation Oncology Unit - Oncology Department, Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria Careggi, Florence, Italy.
| | - Birgitte V Offersen
- Department of Experimental Clinical Oncology, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark.
| | | | - Cynthia Aristei
- Radiation Oncology Section Department of Medicine and Surgery, University of Perugia and Perugia General Hospital, Perugia, Italy.
| | - Yazid Belkacemi
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Henri Mondor Breast Center, University of Paris-Est (UPEC), Creteil, France; INSERM Unit 955, Team 21. IMRB, Creteil, France.
| | - Dori Benjamin
- Department of Physics, Radiation Oncology, Sheba medical Center, Ramat Gan, Israel.
| | - Nuran Bese
- Department of Clinical Senology, Research Institute of Senology Acibadem, Istanbul, Turkey.
| | | | - Pierfrancesco Franco
- Department of Translational Medicine, University of Eastern Piedmont, Novara, Italy; Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital "Maggiore della Carità, Novara, Italy.
| | - Alice Ho
- Harvard Medical School, Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, USA.
| | - Sandra Hol
- Instituut Verbeeten, Tilburg, the Netherlands.
| | - Reshma Jagsi
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA.
| | - Anna M Kirby
- Department of Radiotherapy, Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust and Institute of Cancer Research, Sutton, UK.
| | - Livia Marrazzo
- Medical Physics Unit, Careggi University Hospital, Florence, Italy.
| | - Gustavo N Marta
- Department of Radiation Oncology - Hospital Sírio-Libanês, São Paulo, Brazil.
| | | | - Alan M Nichol
- Department of Radiation Oncology, BC Cancer - Vancouver, Vancouver, BC, Canada.
| | | | - Vratislav Strnad
- Dept. of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Erlangen, Erlangen, Germany.
| | | | - Philip Poortmans
- Iridium Netwerk and University of Antwerp, Wilrijk Antwerp, Belgium.
| | - Orit Kaidar-Person
- Sheba Medical Center, Ramat Gan, Israel GROW-School for Oncology and Developmental Biology or GROW (Maastro), Maastricht University, Maastricht, the Netherlands; Sackler School of Medicine, Tel-Aviv University, Tel-Aviv, Israel.
| |
Collapse
|
21
|
Luo W, Ali YF, Liu C, Wang Y, Liu C, Jin X, Zhou G, Liu NA. Particle Therapy for Breast Cancer: Benefits and Challenges. Front Oncol 2021; 11:662826. [PMID: 34026640 PMCID: PMC8131859 DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2021.662826] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/01/2021] [Accepted: 04/07/2021] [Indexed: 01/06/2023] Open
Abstract
Hadron therapy with protons and carbon ions is widely attracting interest as a potential competitor of conventional photon radiotherapy. Exquisite dose distribution of charged particles allows for a higher local control of the tumor and lower probability of damage to nearby healthy tissues. Heavy ions have presumed biological advantages rising from their high-linear energy transfer (LET) characteristics, including greater cell-killing effectiveness and reduced heterogeneity dependence of radiation response. Although these advantages are clear and supported by data, only 18.0% of proton and carbon ion radiotherapy (CIRT) facilities in Europe are treating breast cancers. This review summarizes the physical and radiobiological properties of charged particles, clinical use of particle beam for breast cancer, and suggested approaches to overcome technical and financial challenges.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Wanrong Luo
- State Key Laboratory of Radiation Medicine and Protection, School of Radiation Medicine and Protection, Collaborative Innovation Center of Radiological Medicine of Jiangsu Higher Education Institutions, Soochow University, Suzhou, China
| | - Yasser F Ali
- State Key Laboratory of Radiation Medicine and Protection, School of Radiation Medicine and Protection, Collaborative Innovation Center of Radiological Medicine of Jiangsu Higher Education Institutions, Soochow University, Suzhou, China.,Biophysics Lab, Physics Department, Faculty of Science, Al-Azhar University, Cairo, Egypt
| | - Chong Liu
- State Key Laboratory of Radiation Medicine and Protection, School of Radiation Medicine and Protection, Collaborative Innovation Center of Radiological Medicine of Jiangsu Higher Education Institutions, Soochow University, Suzhou, China
| | - Yuchen Wang
- State Key Laboratory of Radiation Medicine and Protection, School of Radiation Medicine and Protection, Collaborative Innovation Center of Radiological Medicine of Jiangsu Higher Education Institutions, Soochow University, Suzhou, China
| | - Caorui Liu
- State Key Laboratory of Radiation Medicine and Protection, School of Radiation Medicine and Protection, Collaborative Innovation Center of Radiological Medicine of Jiangsu Higher Education Institutions, Soochow University, Suzhou, China
| | - Xiaoni Jin
- State Key Laboratory of Radiation Medicine and Protection, School of Radiation Medicine and Protection, Collaborative Innovation Center of Radiological Medicine of Jiangsu Higher Education Institutions, Soochow University, Suzhou, China
| | - Guangming Zhou
- State Key Laboratory of Radiation Medicine and Protection, School of Radiation Medicine and Protection, Collaborative Innovation Center of Radiological Medicine of Jiangsu Higher Education Institutions, Soochow University, Suzhou, China
| | - Ning-Ang Liu
- State Key Laboratory of Radiation Medicine and Protection, School of Radiation Medicine and Protection, Collaborative Innovation Center of Radiological Medicine of Jiangsu Higher Education Institutions, Soochow University, Suzhou, China
| |
Collapse
|
22
|
Aristei C, Perrucci E, Alì E, Marazzi F, Masiello V, Saldi S, Ingrosso G. Personalization in Modern Radiation Oncology: Methods, Results and Pitfalls. Personalized Interventions and Breast Cancer. Front Oncol 2021; 11:616042. [PMID: 33816246 PMCID: PMC8012886 DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2021.616042] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/10/2020] [Accepted: 02/02/2021] [Indexed: 12/31/2022] Open
Abstract
Breast cancer, the most frequent malignancy in women worldwide, is a heterogeneous group of diseases, characterized by distinct molecular aberrations. In precision medicine, radiation oncology for breast cancer aims at tailoring treatment according to tumor biology and each patient’s clinical features and genetics. Although systemic therapies are personalized according to molecular sub-type [i.e. endocrine therapy for receptor-positive disease and anti-human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) therapy for HER2-positive disease] and multi-gene assays, personalized radiation therapy has yet to be adopted in the clinical setting. Currently, attempts are being made to identify prognostic and/or predictive factors, biomarkers, signatures that could lead to personalized treatment in order to select appropriate patients who might, or might not, benefit from radiation therapy or whose radiation therapy might be escalated or de-escalated in dosages and volumes. This overview focuses on what has been achieved to date in personalized post-operative radiation therapy and individual patient radiosensitivity assessments by means of tumor sub-types and genetics.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Cynthia Aristei
- Radiation Oncology Section, University of Perugia and Perugia General Hospital, Perugia, Italy
| | | | - Emanuele Alì
- Radiation Oncology Section, University of Perugia, Perugia, Italy
| | - Fabio Marazzi
- Radiation Oncology Department, Fondazione Policlinico A. Gemelli IRCCS, Rome, Italy
| | - Valeria Masiello
- Radiation Oncology Department, Fondazione Policlinico A. Gemelli IRCCS, Rome, Italy
| | - Simonetta Saldi
- Radiation Oncology Section, Perugia General Hospital, Perugia, Italy
| | - Gianluca Ingrosso
- Radiation Oncology Section, University of Perugia and Perugia General Hospital, Perugia, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
23
|
Stick LB, Lorenzen EL, Yates ES, Anandadas C, Andersen K, Aristei C, Byrne O, Hol S, Jensen I, Kirby AM, Kirova YM, Marrazzo L, Matías-Pérez A, Nielsen MMB, Nissen HD, Oliveros S, Verhoeven K, Vikström J, Offersen BV. Selection criteria for early breast cancer patients in the DBCG proton trial - The randomised phase III trial strategy. Clin Transl Radiat Oncol 2021; 27:126-131. [PMID: 33659716 PMCID: PMC7892790 DOI: 10.1016/j.ctro.2021.01.012] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/03/2020] [Revised: 01/27/2021] [Accepted: 01/31/2021] [Indexed: 01/27/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE Adjuvant radiotherapy of internal mammary nodes (IMN) improves survival in high-risk early breast cancer patients but inevitably leads to more dose to heart and lung. Target coverage is often compromised to meet heart/lung dose constraints. We estimate heart and lung dose when target coverage is not compromised in consecutive patients. These estimates are used to guide the choice of selection criteria for the randomised Danish Breast Cancer Group (DBCG) Proton Trial. MATERIALS AND METHODS 179 breast cancer patients already treated with loco-regional IMN radiotherapy from 18 European departments were included. If the clinically delivered treatment plan did not comply with defined target coverage requirements, the plan was modified retrospectively until sufficient coverage was reached. The choice of selection criteria was based on the estimated number of eligible patients for different heart and lung dose thresholds in combination with proton therapy capacity limitations and dose-response relationships for heart and lung. RESULTS Median mean heart dose was 3.0 Gy (range, 1.1-8.2 Gy) for left-sided and 1.4 Gy (0.4-11.5 Gy) for right-sided treatment plans. Median V17Gy/V20Gy (hypofractionated/normofractionated plans) for ipsilateral lung was 31% (9-57%). The DBCG Radiotherapy Committee chose mean heart dose ≥ 4 Gy and/or lung V17Gy/V20Gy ≥ 37% as thresholds for inclusion in the randomised trial. Using these thresholds, we estimate that 22% of patients requiring loco-regional IMN radiotherapy will be eligible for the trial. CONCLUSION The patient selection criteria for the DBCG Proton Trial are mean heart dose ≥ 4 Gy and/or lung V17Gy/V20Gy ≥ 37%.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Line Bjerregaard Stick
- Department of Oncology, Rigshospitalet, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark
- Niels Bohr Institute, Faculty of Science, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark
- Danish Centre for Particle Therapy, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark
| | | | | | - Carmel Anandadas
- Department of Clinical Oncology, The Christie Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK
| | - Karen Andersen
- Department of Radiotherapy, Herlev & Gentofte Hospital, Herlev, Denmark
| | - Cynthia Aristei
- Department of Medicine and Surgery, Radiation Oncology Section, University of Perugia & Perugia General Hospital, Perugia, Italy
| | - Orla Byrne
- Department of Medical Physics, Addenbrooke’s Hospital, Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Cambridge, UK
| | - Sandra Hol
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Institute Verbeeten, Tilburg, the Netherlands
| | - Ingelise Jensen
- Department of Medical Physics, Aalborg University Hospital, Aalborg, Denmark
| | - Anna M. Kirby
- Department of Radiotherapy, The Royal Marsden Hospital NHS Foundation Trust & Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK
| | | | - Livia Marrazzo
- Department of Medical Physics, Careggi University Hospital, Florence, Italy
| | | | | | | | - Sileida Oliveros
- Department of Oncology, Oxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Oxford, UK
| | - Karolien Verhoeven
- Department of Radiation Oncology (Maastro), GROW School for Oncology, Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht, the Netherlands
| | - Johan Vikström
- Department of Radiotherapy, Stavanger University Hospital, Stavanger, Norway
| | - Birgitte Vrou Offersen
- Danish Centre for Particle Therapy, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark
- Department of Experimental Clinical Oncology & Department of Oncology, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark
| |
Collapse
|
24
|
Yang G, Chang JS, Shin KH, Kim JH, Park W, Kim H, Kim K, Lee IJ, Yoon WS, Cha J, Lee KC, Kim JH, Choi JH, Ahn SJ, Ha B, Lee SY, Lee DS, Lee J, Shin SO, Kim YB. Post-mastectomy radiation therapy in breast reconstruction: a patterns of care study of the Korean Radiation Oncology Group. Radiat Oncol J 2020; 38:236-243. [PMID: 33389980 PMCID: PMC7785842 DOI: 10.3857/roj.2020.00738] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/27/2020] [Revised: 11/15/2020] [Accepted: 11/25/2020] [Indexed: 01/04/2023] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE The details of breast reconstruction and radiation therapy (RT) vary between institutions; therefore, we sought to investigate the practice patterns of radiation oncologists who specialize in breast cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS We identified the practice patterns and inter-hospital variations from a multi-center cohort of women with breast cancer who underwent post-mastectomy RT (PMRT) to the reconstructed breast at 16 institutions between 2015 and 2016. The institutions were requested to contour the target volume and produce RT plans for one representative case with five different clinical scenarios and answer questionnaires which elicited infrastructural information. We assessed the inter-institutional variations in RT in terms of the target, normal organ delineation, and dose-volume histograms. RESULTS Three hundred fourteen patients were included; 99% of them underwent immediate reconstruction. The most irradiated material was tissue expander (36.9%) followed by transverse rectus abdominis musculocutaneous flap (23.9%) and silicone implant (12.1%). In prosthetic-based reconstruction with tissue expander, most patients received PMRT following partial deflation. Conventional fractionation and hypofractionation RT were used in 66.6% and 33.4% patients, respectively (commonest: 40.05 Gy in 15 fractions [17.5%]). Furthermore, 15.6% of the patients received boost RT and 53.5% were treated with bolus. Overall, 15 physicians responded to the questionnaires and six submitted their contours and RT plans. There was a significant variability in target delineations and RT plans between physicians, and between clinical scenarios. CONCLUSION Adjuvant RT following post-mastectomy reconstruction has become a common practice in Korea. The details vary significantly between institutions, which highlights an urgent need for standard protocol in this clinical setting.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Gowoon Yang
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Yonsei Cancer Center, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
| | - Jee Suk Chang
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Yonsei Cancer Center, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
| | - Kyung Hwan Shin
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
| | - Jin Ho Kim
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
| | - Won Park
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
| | - Haeyoung Kim
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
| | - Kyubo Kim
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Ewha Womans University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
| | - Ik Jae Lee
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Gangnam Severance Hospital, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
| | - Won Sup Yoon
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Korea University Ansan Hospital, Korea University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
| | - Jihye Cha
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Wonju Severance Christian Hospital, Yonsei University Wonju College of Medicine, Wonju, Korea
| | - Kyu-Chan Lee
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Gachon University Gil Medical Center, Incheon, Korea
| | - Jin Hee Kim
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Keimyung University Dongsan Medical Center, Keimyung University School of Medicine, Daegu, Korea
| | - Jin Hwa Choi
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Chung-Ang University Hospital, Seoul, Korea
| | - Sung-Ja Ahn
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Chonnam National University Hwasun Hospital, Chonnam National University Medical School, Hwasun, Korea
| | - Boram Ha
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Hallym University Dongtan Sacred Heart Hospital, Hwasung, Korea
| | - Sun Young Lee
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Chonbuk National University Hospital, Jeonju, Korea
| | - Dong Soo Lee
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Uijeongbu St. Mary’s Hospital, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea, Uijeongbu, Korea
| | - Jeongshim Lee
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Inha University Hospital, Inha University School of Medicine, Incheon, Korea
| | - Sei One Shin
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Andong Medical Group Andong Hospital, Andong, Korea
| | - Yong Bae Kim
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Yonsei Cancer Center, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
| |
Collapse
|
25
|
Oladeru OT, Dunn SA, Vanbenthuysen LT, Depauw N, Ho AY. New Frontiers in Hypofractionation for Regional Nodal Irradiation in Breast Cancer. Curr Breast Cancer Rep 2020. [DOI: 10.1007/s12609-020-00385-w] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/29/2022]
|
26
|
Choi KH, Ahn SJ, Jeong JU, Yu M, Kim JH, Jeong BK, Lee JH, Kim SH, Lee JH. Postoperative radiotherapy with intensity-modulated radiation therapy versus 3-dimensional conformal radiotherapy in early breast cancer: A randomized clinical trial of KROG 15-03. Radiother Oncol 2020; 154:179-186. [PMID: 32980384 DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2020.09.043] [Citation(s) in RCA: 21] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/08/2020] [Revised: 09/17/2020] [Accepted: 09/21/2020] [Indexed: 11/29/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE To investigate the safety and efficacy of intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) for early breast cancer compared with 3-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3D-CRT) in a prospective and randomized trial. METHODS AND MATERIALS From March 2015 to February 2018, 693 patients with pT1-2N0M0 early breast cancer who underwent breast-conserving surgery were enrolled and randomly assigned into IMRT and 3D-CRT. The primary endpoint was 3-year locoregional recurrence-free survival (LRRFS). The secondary endpoints were recurrence-free survival, overall survival, acute toxicity, target coverage index, irradiation dose to organs at risk, and fatigue inventory. The radiation dose for the 3D-CRT arm was 59.4 Gy in 33 fractions for 6.5 weeks. It was 57.4 Gy in 28 fractions with simultaneous integrated boost for 5.5 weeks for the IMRT arm. RESULTS Of 693 patients, 349 and 344 patients received 3D-CRT and IMRT, respectively. There was no significant difference in LRRFS between the two arms. Conformity index of planning target volume was significantly superior in the IMRT arm than the 3D-CRT arm (p < 0.001). The mean lung dose and V5-V50 for the ipsilateral lung were significantly lower in the IMRT arm than the 3D-CRT arm (all p < 0.05). The incidence of grade 2 or higher dermatitis was significantly lower in the IMRT arm (p = 0.009). CONCLUSION Compared to 3D-CRT, IMRT showed similar results in locoregional tumor control but superior results in planning target volume coverage. When IMRT is used in breast cancer, the irradiation dose to an ipsilateral lung and skin toxicity can be reduced.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kyu Hye Choi
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Seoul St. Mary's Hospital, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea, Seoul, Republic of Korea
| | - Sung Ja Ahn
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Chonnam National University Hospital, Chonnam National University School of Medicine, Gwangju, Republic of Korea
| | - Jae Uk Jeong
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Chonnam National University Hospital, Chonnam National University School of Medicine, Gwangju, Republic of Korea
| | - Mina Yu
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Bucheon St. Mary's Hospital, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea, Seoul, Republic of Korea
| | - Jin Hee Kim
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Dongsan Medical Center, Keimyung University School of Medicine, Daegu, Republic of Korea
| | - Bae Kwon Jeong
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Gyeongsang National University Hospital, Gyeongsang National University School of Medicine, Jinju, Republic of Korea
| | - Joo Hwan Lee
- Department of Radiation Oncology, St. Vincent's Hospital, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea, Seoul, Republic of Korea
| | - Sung Hwan Kim
- Department of Radiation Oncology, St. Vincent's Hospital, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea, Seoul, Republic of Korea
| | - Jong Hoon Lee
- Department of Radiation Oncology, St. Vincent's Hospital, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea, Seoul, Republic of Korea.
| |
Collapse
|
27
|
Ho AY, Wright JL, Blitzblau RC, Mutter RW, Duda DG, Norton L, Bardia A, Spring L, Isakoff SJ, Chen JH, Grassberger C, Bellon JR, Beriwal S, Khan AJ, Speers C, Dunn SA, Thompson A, Santa-Maria CA, Krop IE, Mittendorf E, King TA, Gupta GP. Optimizing Radiation Therapy to Boost Systemic Immune Responses in Breast Cancer: A Critical Review for Breast Radiation Oncologists. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2020; 108:227-241. [PMID: 32417409 PMCID: PMC7646202 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2020.05.011] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/04/2020] [Revised: 04/24/2020] [Accepted: 05/07/2020] [Indexed: 12/13/2022]
Abstract
Immunotherapy using immune checkpoint blockade has revolutionized the treatment of many types of cancer. Radiation therapy (RT)-particularly when delivered at high doses using newer techniques-may be capable of generating systemic antitumor effects when combined with immunotherapy in breast cancer. These systemic effects might be due to the local immune-priming effects of RT resulting in the expansion and circulation of effector immune cells to distant sites. Although this concept merits further exploration, several challenges need to be overcome. One is an understanding of how the heterogeneity of breast cancers may relate to tumor immunogenicity. Another concerns the need to develop knowledge and expertise in delivery, sequencing, and timing of RT with immunotherapy. Clinical trials addressing these issues are under way. We here review and discuss the particular opportunities and issues regarding this topic, including the design of informative clinical and translational studies.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Alice Y Ho
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts.
| | - Jean L Wright
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Johns Hopkins Cancer Center, Brooklandville, Maryland
| | - Rachel C Blitzblau
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Duke Cancer Center, Durham, North Carolina
| | - Robert W Mutter
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota
| | - Dan G Duda
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Larry Norton
- Department of Medical Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - Aditya Bardia
- Department of Medical Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Laura Spring
- Department of Medical Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Steven J Isakoff
- Department of Medical Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Jonathan H Chen
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Clemens Grassberger
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Jennifer R Bellon
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Dana Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Sushil Beriwal
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Pittsburgh Cancer Center, Pittsburgh, Pennslyvania
| | - Atif J Khan
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - Corey Speers
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan
| | - Samantha A Dunn
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Alastair Thompson
- Department of Surgical Oncology, Baylor College of Medicine Medical Center, Houston, Texas
| | - Cesar A Santa-Maria
- Department of Oncology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland
| | - Ian E Krop
- Department of Medical Oncology, Dana Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Elizabeth Mittendorf
- Department of Surgical Oncology, Dana Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Tari A King
- Department of Surgical Oncology, Dana Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Gaorav P Gupta
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina
| |
Collapse
|
28
|
O'Connor RÍ, Kiely PA, Dunne CP. The relationship between post-surgery infection and breast cancer recurrence. J Hosp Infect 2020; 106:522-535. [PMID: 32800825 DOI: 10.1016/j.jhin.2020.08.004] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/10/2020] [Accepted: 08/06/2020] [Indexed: 02/06/2023]
Abstract
Breast cancer is the second most prevalent form of cancer in women worldwide, with surgery remaining the standard treatment. The adverse impact of the surgery remains controversial. It has been suggested that systemic factors during the postoperative period may increase the risk of recurrence, specifically surgical site infection (SSI). The aim of this review was to critically appraise current published literature regarding the influence of SSIs, after primary breast cancer surgery, on breast cancer recurrence, and to delve into potential links between these. This systematic review adopted two approaches: to identify the incidence rates and risk factors related to SSI after primary breast cancer surgery; and, secondly, to examine breast cancer recurrence following SSI occurrence. Ninety-nine studies with 484,605 patients were eligible in the SSI-focused searches, and 53 studies with 17,569 patients for recurrence-focused. There was a 13.07% mean incidence of SSI. Six-hundred and thirty-eight Gram-positive and 442 Gram-negative isolates were identified, with methicillin-susceptible Staphylococcus aureus and Escherichia coli most commonly identified. There were 2077 cases of recurrence (11.8%), with 563 cases of local recurrence, 1186 cases of distant and 25 cases which recurred both locally and distantly. Five studies investigated the association between SSI and breast cancer recurrence with three concluding that an association did exist. In conclusion, there is association between SSI and adverse cancer outcomes, but the cellular link between them remains elusive. Confounding factors of retrospective study design, surgery type and SSI definition make results challenging to compare and interpret. A standardized prospective study with appropriate statistical power is justified.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- R Í O'Connor
- School of Medicine, University of Limerick, Ireland; Health Research Institute, University of Limerick, Ireland; Bernal Institute, University of Limerick, Ireland
| | - P A Kiely
- School of Medicine, University of Limerick, Ireland; Health Research Institute, University of Limerick, Ireland; Bernal Institute, University of Limerick, Ireland; Centre for Interventions in Infection, Inflammation & Immunity (4i), University of Limerick, Limerick, Ireland
| | - C P Dunne
- School of Medicine, University of Limerick, Ireland; Health Research Institute, University of Limerick, Ireland; Centre for Interventions in Infection, Inflammation & Immunity (4i), University of Limerick, Limerick, Ireland.
| |
Collapse
|
29
|
Affiliation(s)
- Dean A Shumway
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN
| | - Adeyiza O Momoh
- Section of Plastic Surgery, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI
| | - Michael S Sabel
- Department of Surgery, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI
| | - Reshma Jagsi
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI
| |
Collapse
|
30
|
Naoum GE, Salama L, Niemierko A, Vieira BL, Belkacemi Y, Colwell AS, Winograd J, Smith B, Ho A, Taghian AG. Single Stage Direct-to-Implant Breast Reconstruction Has Lower Complication Rates Than Tissue Expander and Implant and Comparable Rates to Autologous Reconstruction in Patients Receiving Postmastectomy Radiation. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2020; 106:514-524. [DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2019.11.008] [Citation(s) in RCA: 37] [Impact Index Per Article: 9.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/28/2019] [Revised: 10/31/2019] [Accepted: 11/03/2019] [Indexed: 01/03/2023]
|
31
|
Agafonoff S, Kundu N, Schwarz G, Shah C. Immediate Implant Reconstruction in Patients Undergoing Radiation Therapy: Opportunities and Challenges. Ann Surg Oncol 2020; 27:963-965. [DOI: 10.1245/s10434-019-08172-3] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/30/2019] [Indexed: 11/18/2022]
|
32
|
Mutter RW, Jethwa KR, Wan Chan Tseung HS, Wick SM, Kahila MMH, Viehman JK, Shumway DA, Corbin KS, Park SS, Remmes NB, Whitaker TJ, Beltran CJ. Incorporation of Biologic Response Variance Modeling Into the Clinic: Limiting Risk of Brachial Plexopathy and Other Late Effects of Breast Cancer Proton Beam Therapy. Pract Radiat Oncol 2019; 10:e71-e81. [PMID: 31494289 PMCID: PMC7734652 DOI: 10.1016/j.prro.2019.08.011] [Citation(s) in RCA: 13] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/18/2019] [Revised: 07/30/2019] [Accepted: 08/29/2019] [Indexed: 12/25/2022]
Abstract
Purpose: The relative biologic effectiveness (RBE) rises with increasing linear energy transfer toward the end of proton tracks. Presently, there is no consensus on how RBE heterogeneity should be accounted for in breast cancer proton therapy treatment planning. Our purpose was to determine the dosimetric consequences of incorporating a brachial plexus (BP) biologic dose constraint and to describe other clinical implications of biologic planning. Methods and Materials: We instituted a biologic dose constraint for the BP in the context of MC1631, a randomized trial of conventional versus hypofractionated postmastectomy intensity modulated proton therapy (IMPT). IMPT plans of 13 patients treated before the implementation of the biologic dose constraint (cohort A) were compared with IMPT plans of 38 patients treated on MC1631 after its implementation (cohort B) using (1) a commercially available Eclipse treatment planning system (RBE = 1.1); (2) an in-house graphic processor unit-based Monte Carlo physical dose simulation (RBE = 1.1); and (3) an in-house Monte Carlo biologic dose (MCBD) simulation that assumes a linear relationship between RBE and dose-averaged linear energy transfer (product of RBE and physical dose = biologic dose). Results: Before implementation of a BP biologic dose constraint, the Eclipse mean BP D0.01 cm3 was 107%, and the MCBD estimate was 128% (ie, 64 Gy [RBE = biologic dose] in 25 fractions for a 50-Gy [RBE = 1.1] prescription), compared with 100.0% and 116.0%, respectively, after the implementation of the constraint. Implementation of the BP biologic dose constraint did not significantly affect clinical target volume coverage. MCBD plans predicted greater internal mammary node coverage and higher heart dose than Eclipse plans. Conclusions: Institution of a BP biologic dose constraint may reduce brachial plexopathy risk without compromising target coverage. MCBD plan evaluation provides valuable information to physicians that may assist in making clinical judgments regarding relative priority of target coverage versus normal tissue sparing.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Robert W Mutter
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota.
| | - Krishan R Jethwa
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota
| | | | - Stephanie M Wick
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota
| | | | - Jason K Viehman
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota
| | - Dean A Shumway
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota
| | | | - Sean S Park
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota
| | | | | | - Chris J Beltran
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota
| |
Collapse
|
33
|
Mutter RW. ESTRO ACROP consensus guideline for target volume delineation in the setting of postmastectomy radiation therapy after implant-based immediate reconstruction for early stage breast cancer. Radiother Oncol 2019; 141:329-330. [PMID: 31451284 DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2019.07.019] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/21/2019] [Revised: 07/01/2019] [Accepted: 07/12/2019] [Indexed: 11/25/2022]
|