Hypofractionated versus conventionally fractionated radiotherapy for ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) of the breast

Efficacy and safety analysis of hypofractionated and conventional fractionated radiotherapy in postoperative breast cancer patients

OBJECTIVES

In this meta-analysis, we conducted a comparative analysis of the safety and efficacy of hypofractionated and conventional fractionated radiotherapy in individuals who had undergone surgery for breast cancer.

METHODS

This study involved a systematic and independent review of relevant research articles published in reputable databases such as PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science. Two investigators conducted the review, which included studies published up to January 3, 2023. The quality of the eligible studies was evaluated and data were extracted using Review Manager software 5.4 (RevMan 5.4) to calculate odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs).

RESULTS

The analysis comprised 35 studies and encompassed a collective sample of 18,246 individuals diagnosed with breast cancer. We did not find a statistically significant disparity in efficacy between conventional fractionated (CF) radiotherapy and hypofractionated (HF) radiotherapy regarding local recurrence (LR; OR = 0.91, 95% CI: 0.76-1.09, P = 0.30), disease-free survival (DFS; OR = 1.20, 95% CI: 1.01-1.42, P = 0.03), and overall survival (OS; OR = 1.08, 95% CI: 0.93-1.26, P = 0.28). Concerning safety, there was no significant difference between the HF and CF regimens in terms of breast pain, breast atrophy, lymphedema, pneumonia, pulmonary fibrosis, telangiectasia, and cardiotoxicity. However, the HF regimen resulted in lower skin toxicity (OR = 0.43, 95% CI: 0.33-0.55, P < 0.01) and improved patient fatigue outcomes (OR = 0.73, 95% CI: 0.60 - 0.88, P < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

Although there is no substantial difference in LR, DFS, OS, or many other side effects between the HF and CF regimens, the HF regimen reduces skin toxicity and relieves patient fatigue. If these two issues need to be addressed in clinical situations, the HF regimen may be a superior alternative to conventional radiotherapy in postoperative breast cancer patients.

[Overall survival and survival without local recurrence in case of radiotherapy of the tumor bed of ductal carcinomas in situ of the breast: Review of the literature]

INTRODUCTION

Carcinomas in situ represent more than 15 to 20% of breast cancers. Radiotherapy of whole breast is part of the therapeutic standard and follows surgery. However, the indication of tumor bed irradiation is still controversial and heterogeneous according to international practice even though it is a very frequent clinical situation. The aim of this study is to define the indications of tumor bed irradiation in the context of ductal carcinomas in situ and to discuss accelerated partial irradiation of the breast.

METHOD

The selected papers were published between 2015 and 2020 and included as MeSH terms "ductal carcinoma in situ" and "boost" for the analysis of tumor bed irradiation, and "ductal carcinoma in situ" and "accelerated partial breast irradiation" for the analysis of accelerated partial irradiation.

RESULTS

Boost was more often performed when risk factors for local recurrence were present, such as age less than 40 or 50 years old, clinical mode of detection, tumor size greater than 15 to 20mm, high nuclear grade, presence of necrosis, positive or insufficient surgical margins, associated atypical hyperplastic lesions, and lobular carcinoma in situ. Accelerated partial irradiation is an option for favorable or intermediate prognosis CCIS, further studies involving more patients are required.

CONCLUSION

Radiotherapy of the mammary gland in the context of DCIS has shown its effectiveness in terms of local and locoregional control of the disease, thus reducing in situ and infiltrating recurrences. However, the indication of operating bed irradiation is still debated, and the practice is very heterogeneous depending on the country. Another possible alternative for patients with a favorable prognosis and a small tumor bed volume would be IPA.

Alternatives to Standard Fractionation Radiation Therapy After Lumpectomy: Hypofractionated Whole-Breast Irradiation and Accelerated Partial-Breast Irradiation

Adjuvant whole-breast irradiation (WBI) after lumpectomy has been an established standard of care for decades. Standard-fractionation WBI delivered over 5 to 7 weeks can achieve durable tumor control with low toxicity but can be inconvenient for patients and cost ineffective. Hypofractionated WBI can be completed in 3 to 4 weeks and, based on long-term randomized data, is the preferred standard of care in select patients. Accelerated partial-breast irradiation can be delivered using even shorter treatment regimens. Although the available data on accelerated partial-breast irradiation is more limited, early results suggest it is an effective alternative to WBI in select patients.

Adjuvant therapy in patients with ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast: The Pandora's box

Most patients with ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast (DCIS) are eligible for breast conservation treatment. The key management decision is whether to add radiotherapy and/or endocrine therapy to minimize the risk of a subsequent recurrence. Recent analyses indicating a lack of benefit in terms of breast cancer-associated mortality have suggested that more conservative approaches, omitting adjuvant therapy or even surgery, may be advisable in selected patients. These mortality observations are directly influenced by widespread use of mammographic screening which has opened a Pandora's box of subclinical DCIS and early invasive lesions. Confusion as to how aggressively such possibly indolent lesions should be treated has led to misunderstandings among patients and medical professionals. While awaiting further prospective evidence from clinical trials, we endorse an active treatment of DCIS as the standard of care. Our rationale is twofold: invasive recurrences are associated with an increase in breast cancer mortality, which is not the only relevant endpoint for DCIS. The benefit of complete surgical excision, adjuvant radiotherapy and endocrine treatment in preventing recurrence and invasive progression has been demonstrated in DCIS. The challenge now is how to identify DCIS patients who will not progress to invasive carcinoma even without complete excision and, at the other extreme, those patients at the highest risk who require mastectomy for local control. The current controversies over whether and which adjuvant therapy should be implemented can at least in part be addressed by developing effective doctor-patient communications that enable mutual understanding about the management of this biologically heterogeneous disease.

Trends in the use of implantable accelerated partial breast irradiation for ductal carcinoma in situ: Implications of the recent amendments to the American Society for Radiation Oncology consensus guidelines

PURPOSE

In 2009, the American Society for Radiation Oncology (ASTRO) published consensus recommendations that stated ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) patients were in a "cautionary" group for accelerated partial breast irradiation (APBI) and should not receive APBI outside of a clinical trial. However, very recently, ASTRO placed low-risk DCIS patients in the "suitable" category. Given this recent change, we aimed to use the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database to evaluate past patterns of implantable APBI (IAPBI) utilization in women with DCIS.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

The Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database was queried for patients from 2000 to 2012 with DCIS that underwent lumpectomy and adjuvant radiation therapy. Patients receiving IAPBI were differentiated from those receiving whole breast radiation therapy. Trends based on treatment year and patient demographics were collected, and multivariable logistic regression determined factors independently predictive of use of IAPBI.

RESULTS

Of 52,012 eligible patients, 49,450 (95%) underwent external beam radiation and 2562 (5%) received APBI. Though IAPBI utilization steadily increased from 2000 (0.2% of the study population) to 2008 (9.4%), it abruptly declined in 2009 (7.9%, p = 0.009) and yearly thereafter. The 40-49 age group was proportionally most associated with this decline (8.6% in 2008 to 4.3% in 2009). Factors independently associated with IAPBI receipt included increasing age, hormone receptor negative status, and women living in the South.

CONCLUSIONS

Patterns of IAPBI administration in DCIS are described. These trends are important to consider as a benchmark going forward, in light of the very recent change in ASTRO recommendations to include low-risk DCIS patients.