Boost IORT in Breast Cancer: Body of Evidence

Parallel pathways: A chronicle of evolution in rectal and breast cancer surgery

In this editorial, we have analyzed the historical evolution of rectal and breast cancer surgery, focusing on the progressive reduction of demolitive approaches and the increasing use of more conservative strategies, accompanied by a growing emphasis on perioperative treatments aimed at enhancing surgical outcomes. All of these changes have been made possible due to an increased awareness and understanding of oncological diseases and improved perioperative treatments.

Efficacy and Tolerance of IMRT Boost Compared to IORT Boost in Early Breast Cancer: A German Monocenter Study

The aim of this retrospective study is to compare the two boost subgroups, IORT or IMRT, in terms of overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), cosmesis, and acute and late toxicity. It shall be shown whether and which of the boost techniques offers better results with respect to the facial points, since there are already many studies on applying boost to the tumor bed after/during breast conserving surgery, and there are few which compare the different techniques. For this comparison, two subgroups of 76 patients each (n = 152), treated between 2002 and 2015, were enrolled in the study. In one subgroup, the 9 Gy boost was intraoperatively administered after complete removal of the primary tumor, while the other subgroup received the boost of 8.4 Gy percutaneously and simultaneously integrated into the tumor bed after breast conserving surgery. Both subgroups have subsequently undergone whole breast irradiation (WBI) of 50.4/50 Gy in 1.8−2 Gy per fraction. OS and the incidence of late toxicity did not differ between the two subgroups and no risk factor was found regarding PFS. Acute toxicities initially occurred significantly less (p < 0.001) in the IORT subgroup; however, after WBI took place, this difference vanished. Therefore, boost application by means of IORT or IMRT can be considered equivalent.

Nontarget and Out-of-Field Doses from Electron Beam Radiotherapy

In clinical radiotherapy, the most important aspects are the dose distribution in the target volume and healthy organs, including out-of-field doses in the body. Compared to photon beam radiation, dose distribution in electron beam radiotherapy has received much less attention, mainly due to the limited range of electrons in tissues. However, given the growing use of electron intraoperative radiotherapy and FLASH, further study is needed. Therefore, in this study, we determined out-of-field doses from an electron beam in a phantom model using two dosimetric detectors (diode E and cylindrical Farmer-type ionizing chamber) for electron energies of 6 MeV, 9 MeV and 12 MeV. We found a clear decrease in out-of-field doses as the distance from the field edge and depth increased. The out-of-field doses measured with the diode E were lower than those measured with the Farmer-type ionization chamber at each depth and for each electron energy level. The out-of-field doses increased when higher energy megavoltage electron beams were used (except for 9 MeV). The out-of-field doses at shallow depths (1 or 2 cm) declined rapidly up to a distance of 3 cm from the field edge. This study provides valuable data on the deposition of radiation energy from electron beams outside the irradiation field.

Intra-Operative Electron Radiation Therapy (IOERT) Anticipated Boost in Breast Cancer Treatment: An Italian Multicenter Experience

In breast cancer, the use of a boost to the tumor bed can improve local control. The aim of this research is to evaluate the safety and efficacy of the boost with intra-operative electron radiotherapy (IOERT) in patients with early-stage breast cancer undergoing conservative surgery and postoperative whole breast irradiation (WBI). The present retrospective multicenter large data were collected between January 2011 and March 2018 in 8 Italian Radiation Oncology Departments. Acute and late toxicity, objective (obj) and subjective (subj) cosmetic outcomes, in-field local control (LC), out-field LC, disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) were evaluated. Overall, 797 patients were enrolled. IOERT-boost was performed in all patients during surgery, followed by WBI. Acute toxicity (≥G2) occurred in 179 patients (22.46%); one patient developed surgical wound infection (G3). No patients reported late toxicity ≥ G2. Obj-cosmetic result was excellent in 45%, good in 35%, fair in 20% and poor in 0% of cases. Subj-cosmetic result was excellent in 10%, good in 20%, fair in 69% and poor in 0.3% of cases. Median follow-up was 57 months (range 12-109 months). At 5 years, in-field LC was 99.2% (95% CI: 98-99.7); out-field LC 98.9% (95% CI: 97.4-99.6); DFS 96.2% (95% CI: 94.2-97.6); OS 98.6% (95% CI: 97.2-99.3). In conclusion, IOERT-boost appears to be safe, providing excellent local control for early-stage breast cancer. The safety and long-term efficacy&nbsp;should encourage use of this treatment, with the potential to reduce local recurrence.

Intraoperative radiotherapy boost as part of breast-conservation therapy for breast cancer: a single-institution retrospective analysis

Background

There are currently no data from randomized controlled trials on the use of intraoperative radiotherapy (IORT) as a tumor bed boost as part of a breast-conservation approach for breast cancer. This study retrospectively reviewed the safety and efficacy of IORT as a boost treatment at a tertiary cancer center.

Methods

From 2015 to 2019, patients underwent breast-conserving surgery with axillary lymph node staging and a single dose of 20 Gy IORT with 50-kV photons, followed by whole-breast irradiation (WBI) and adjuvant systemic therapy (if applicable). Patients were followed for assessment of acute and late toxicities (using the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 5.0) at 3–6-month intervals. Outcomes included ipsilateral (IBTR) and contralateral breast progression-free survival (CBE), distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS), and overall survival (OS).

Results

Median follow-up for the 214 patients was 28 (range 2–59) months. Most patients had T1 disease (n = 124) and were clinically node negative. Only few patients had high-grade and/or triple-negative disease. The vast majority of patients underwent sentinel node biopsy, and 32 (15%) required re-resection for initially positive margins. Finally, all tumor bed margins were clear. Nine (4.2%) and 48 (22.4%) patients underwent neoadjuvant and adjuvant chemotherapy, respectively. WBI was predominantly performed as conventionally fractionated WBI (n = 187, 87.4%), and the median time from BCS to WBI was 54.5 days. IORT was delivered with a single dose of 20 Gy. The median WBI dose was 50 Gy (range 29.4–50.4 Gy). No patients experienced grade 4 events; acute grade 3 toxicities were limited to 17 (8%) cases of radiation dermatitis. Postoperative toxicities were mild. After WBI only one case of late grade ≥ 2 events was reported. There were two recurrences in the tumor bed and one contralateral breast event.

Conclusion

This investigation provides additional preliminary data supporting the using of IORT in the boost setting and corroborates the existing literature. These encouraging results should be prospectively validated by the eventual publication of randomized studies such as TARGIT‑B.

IOERT versus external beam electrons for boost radiotherapy in stage I/II breast cancer: 10-year results of a phase III randomized study

Background

Intraoperative radiotherapy with electrons (IOERT) boost could be not inferior to external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) boost in terms of local control and tissue tolerance. The aim of the study is to present the long-term follow-up results on local control, esthetic evaluation, and toxicity of a prospective study on early-stage breast cancer patients treated with breast-conserving surgery with an IOERT boost of 10 Gy (experimental group) versus 5 × 2 Gy EBRT boost (standard arm). Both arms received whole-breast irradiation (WBI) with 50 Gy (2 Gy single dose).

Methods

A single-institution phase III randomized study to compare IOERT versus EBRT boost in early-stage breast cancer was conducted as a non-inferiority trial. Primary endpoints were the evaluation of in-breast true recurrences (IBTR) and out-field local recurrences (LR) as well as toxicity and cosmetic results. Secondary endpoints were overall survival (OS), disease-free survival (DFS), and patient’s grade of satisfaction with cosmetic outcomes.

Results

Between 1999 and 2004, 245 patients were randomized: 133 for IOERT and 112 for EBRT. The median follow-up was 12 years (range 10–16 years). The cumulative risk of IBTR at 5–10 years was 0.8% and 4.3% after IOERT, compared to 4.2% and 5.3% after EBRT boost (p = 0.709). The cumulative risk of out-field LR at 5–10 years was 4.7% and 7.9% for IOERT versus 5.2% and 10.3% for EBRT (p = 0.762). All of the IOERT arm recurrences were observed at > 100 months’ follow-up, whereas the mean time to recurrence in the EBRT group was earlier (55.2 months) (p < 0.05). No late complications associated with IOERT were observed. The overall cosmetic results were scored as good or excellent in physician and patient evaluations for both IOERT and EBRT. There were significantly better scores for IOERT at all time points in physician and patient evaluations with the greatest difference at the end of EBRT (p = 0.006 objective and p = 0.0004 subjective) and most narrow difference at 12 months after the end of EBRT (p = 0.08 objective and p = 0.04 subjective analysis).

Conclusion

A 10-Gy IOERT boost during breast-conserving surgery provides high local control rates without significant morbidity. Although not significantly superior to external beam boosts, the median time to local recurrences after IOERT is prolonged by more than 4 years.

First Intraoperative Radiation Therapy Center in Africa: First 2 Years in Operation, Including COVID-19 Experiences

PURPOSE

There is a shortage of radiation therapy service centers in low- to middle-income countries. TARGIT–intraoperative radiation therapy (IORT) may offer a viable alternative to improve radiation treatment efficiency and alleviate hospital patient loads. The Breast Care Unit in Johannesburg became the first facility in Africa to offer TARGIT-IORT, and the purpose of this study was to present a retrospective review of patients receiving IORT at this center between November 2017 and May 2020.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patient selection criteria were based mainly on the latest American Society of Radiation Oncology guidelines. Selection criteria included early-stage breast carcinoma (luminal A) and luminal B with negative upfront sentinel lymph node biopsy that negated external-beam radiation therapy (EBRT). Patient characteristics, reasons for choosing IORT, histology, and use of oncoplastic surgery that resulted in complications were recorded.

RESULTS

One hundred seven patients successfully received IORT/TARGIT-IORT. Mean age was 60.8 years (standard deviation, 9.3 years). A total of 73.8% of patients presented with luminal A, 15.0% with luminal B, and 5.6% with triple-negative cancer. One patient who presented with locally advanced breast cancer (T4N2) opted for IORT as a boost in addition to planned EBRT. Eighty-seven patients underwent wide local excision (WLE) with mastopexy, and 12 underwent WLE with parenchymal. Primary reasons for selecting IORT/TARGIT-IORT were distance from the hospital (43.9%), choice (40.2%), and age (10.3%).

CONCLUSION

This retrospective study of IORT/TARGIT-IORT performed in Africa confirms its viability, with low complication rates and no detrimental effects with breast conservation, resulting in positive acceptance and the potential to reduce Oncology Center patient loads. Limitations of the study include the fact that only short-term data on local recurrence were available. Health and socioeconomic value models must still be addressed in the African setting.

Electron radiotherapy (IOERT) for applications outside of the breast: Dosimetry and influence of tissue inhomogeneities

PURPOSE

The purpose of study is to investigate the dosimetry of electron intraoperative radiotherapy (IOERT) of the Intraop Mobetron 2000 mobile LINAC in treatments outside of the breast. After commissioning and external validation of dosimetry, we report in vivo results of measurements for treatments outside the breast in a large patient cohort, and investigate if the presence of inhomogeneities can affect in vivo measurements.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Applicator factors and profile curves were measured with a stereotactic diode. The applicators factors of the 6 cm flat and beveled applicators were also confirmed with radiochromic films, parallel-plate ion chamber and by an external audit performed with ThermoLuminescent Dosimeters (TLDs). The influence of bone on dose was investigated by using radiochromic films attached to an insert equivalent to cortical bone, immersed in the water phantom. In vivo dosimetry was performed on 126 patients treated with IOERT using metal oxide-silicon semiconductor field effect transistors (MOSFETs) placed on the tumor bed.

RESULTS

Relatively small differences were found among different detectors for measurements of applicator factors. In the external audit, the agreement with the TLD was mostly within ±0.2%. The largest increase of dose due to the presence of cortical bone insert was +6.0% with energy 12 MeV and 3 cm applicator. On average, in vivo dose was significantly (+3.1%) larger than prescribed dose.

CONCLUSION

IOERT in applications outside the breast results in low discrepancies between in vivo and prescribed doses, which can be also explained with the presence of tissue inhomogeneity.

Wound fluids collected postoperatively from patients with breast cancer induce epithelial to mesenchymal transition but intraoperative radiotherapy impairs this effect by activating the radiation-induced bystander effect

Wound fluids (WF) are believed to play a role in the local recurrences by inducing an inflammatory process in scar tissue area. Given that most local relapse in primary breast cancer patients occur within the scar tissue area, researchers have investigated whether localized radiotherapy, such as intraoperative radiotherapy (IORT), could be more effective than postoperative RT in inhibiting local tumor recurrence. The epithelial-mesenchymal transition (EMT) program plays a critical role in promoting metastasis in epithelium-derived carcinoma. Given this background the main aim of the present study was to determine the mechanisms by which IORT decreases the tumorigenic potential of WF. We assumed that postoperative fluids from patients would activate the radiation-induced bystander effect (RIBE) in treated cells, thus altering the tumor microenvironment. To confirm this hypothesis, WF collected from patients after breast conserving surgery (BCS) alone, after BCS followed by IORT treatment or WF from BCS patients together with RIBE medium were incubated with MCF7 and MDA-MB-468 cells. Changes in the CSC phenotype, in EMT program and potential to migrate were performed to determine the possible role of WF on the migration of breast cancer cells. Our findings show that wound fluids stimulate the CSC phenotype and EMT program in breast cancer cell lines. This effect was partially abrogated when the cells were incubated in wound fluids collected from patients after breast-conserving surgery followed by IORT. Additionally, we confirmed the role of radiation-induced bystander effect in altering the properties of the WF to induce the CSC phenotype and EMT program.

Patient preferences regarding intraoperative versus external beam radiotherapy for early breast cancer and the impact of socio-demographic factors

PURPOSE

Patient comfort and preference have steadily gained attention in radio-oncologic treatment of breast cancer. Therefore, the purpose of this investigation was to further explore patient preferences in choosing between intraoperative radiotherapy (IORT) and external beam radiotherapy (EBRT).

METHODS

We prospectively analysed data of 101 women, who were candidates for breast-conserving surgery with adjuvant radiotherapy. A two-part video was shown to patients: an educational section about EBRT/IORT, followed by a preference elicitation section focusing on additional accepted risk (AAR) of recurrence after either treatment. Furthermore, participants completed a questionnaire to identify factors that influence patient preference of radiation modality.

RESULTS

The data demonstrate that 42.5% of patients would accept additional risk of recurrence for IORT versus 9% AAR for EBRT, while 48.5% of patients would not accept any additional risk, yet would choose IORT over EBRT if risks of recurrence were equivalent. When combining patient preferences and the results from the questionnaire, no single socio-economic/-demographic factor was found to significantly correlate with AAR of IORT.

CONCLUSION

Our study confirms the existence of subgroups of breast cancer patients who would accept an additional risk of recurrence associated with choice of radiation modality to receive a single dose of IORT as adjuvant radiotherapy for breast cancer instead of EBRT over several weeks; yet our data fail to identify a single factor significantly associated with these patient preferences and, therefore, helpful for individualised decision-making processes.

Intraoperative Radiotherapy for Breast Cancer

Intraoperative radiotherapy (IORT) for early stage breast cancer is a technique for partial breast irradiation. There are several technologies in clinical use to perform breast IORT. Regardless of technique, IORT generally refers to the delivery of a single dose of radiation to the periphery of the tumor bed in the immediate intraoperative time frame, although some protocols have performed IORT as a second procedure. There are two large prospective randomized trials establishing the safety and efficacy of breast IORT in early stage breast cancer patients with sufficient follow-up time on thousands of women. The advantages of IORT for partial breast irradiation include: direct visualization of the target tissue ensuring treatment of the high-risk tissue and eliminating the risk of marginal miss; the use of a single dose coordinated with the necessary surgical excision thereby reducing omission of radiation and the selection of mastectomy for women without access to a radiotherapy facility or unable to undergo several weeks of daily radiation; favorable toxicity profiles; patient convenience and cost savings; radiobiological and tumor microenvironment conditions which lead to enhanced tumor control. The main disadvantage of IORT is the lack of final pathologic information on the tumor size, histology, margins, and nodal status. When unexpected findings on final pathology such as positive margins or positive sentinel nodes predict a higher risk of local or regional recurrence, additional whole breast radiation may be indicated, thereby reducing some of the convenience and low-toxicity advantages of sole IORT. However, IORT as a tumor bed boost has also been studied and appears to be safe with acceptable toxicity. IORT has potential efficacy advantages related to overall survival related to reduced cardiopulmonary radiation doses. It may also be very useful in specific situations, such as prior to oncoplastic reconstruction to improve accuracy of adjuvant radiation delivery, or when used as a boost in higher risk patients to improve tumor control. Ongoing international clinical trials are studying these uses and follow-up data are accumulating on completed studies.

ANXA1 inhibits miRNA-196a in a negative feedback loop through NF-kB and c-Myc to reduce breast cancer proliferation

MiRNAs are endogenous ~22 nt RNAs which play critical regulatory roles in a wide range of biological and pathological processes, which can act as oncogenes or tumor suppressor genes depending on their target genes. We have recently shown that ANXA1 inhibits the expression of miRNAs including miR196a. Here, we show that miR196a was highly expressed in ER+ MCF-7 breast cancer cells when compared to normal mammary gland cells, with expression levels negatively correlating to ANXA1. ANXA1 inhibits the biogenesis of oncogenic miR-196a by suppressing primary-miR196a indirectly through the stimulation of c-myc and NFkB expression and activity in breast cancer cells. In a negative feedback loop, miR-196a directly inhibits ANXA1 and enhances breast cancer cell proliferation in vitro. Finally, miR196a promotes breast tumor growth in vivo. This study reports a novel regulatory circuit between ANXA1, NF-kB, c-myc and miR-196a which regulates breast cancer cell proliferation and tumor growth.

Wound fluids affect miR-21, miR-155 and miR-221 expression in breast cancer cell lines, and this effect is partially abrogated by intraoperative radiation therapy treatment

Breast cancer is the most common malignant disease occurring in women. Conservative breast cancer surgery followed by radiation therapy is currently the standard treatment for this type of cancer. The majority of metastases occur within the scar, which initiated a series of studies. As a result, clinical trials aimed to assess whether localized radiotherapy, as intraoperative radiotherapy (IORT), may more effective in inhibiting the formation of local recurrence compared with the standard postoperative whole breast radiotherapy. The present study determined the role of postoperative wound fluids (WFs) from patients diagnosed with breast cancer subsequent to breast conserving surgery or breast conserving surgery followed by IORT on the expression of three microRNAs (miRNAs), consisting of miR-21, miR-155 and miR-221, in distinct breast cancer cell lines that represent the general subtypes of breast cancer. It was determined that the miRNAs responsible for breast cancer progression, induction of tumorigenesis and enrichment of the cancer stem cell phenotype, which is responsible for resistance to tumor therapy, were highly upregulated in the human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive breast cancer SK-BR-3 cell line following stimulation with WFs. It is worth emphasizing, that those changes were more significant in WFs collected from patients after surgery alone. The BT-549 cell line showed altered expression only of miR-155 following incubation with WFs. Notably, this change was not associated with IORT. Additionally, it was indicated that both WFs and RT-WF strongly downregulated the expression of miR-21, miR-155 and miR-221 in basal/epithelial and luminal subtypes of breast cancer. It was concluded that the present study contributes to an increased understanding of the role of surgical WFs and IORT treatment in the regulation of miRNA expression. This may enable the development of the current knowledge of breast cancer biology subsequent to IORT treatment and substantially to improve the therapy in the future.

Therapeutic analysis of Intrabeam-based intraoperative radiation therapy in the treatment of unicentric breast cancer lesions utilizing a spherical target volume model

It is postulated that the outcomes in treating breast cancer with intraoperative radiotherapy (IORT) would be affected by the residual cancer cell distribution within the tumor bed. The three-dimensional (3D) radiation doses of Intrabeam^TM (IB) IORT with a 4-cm spherical applicator at the energy of 50 and 40 kV were calculated. The modified linear quadratic model (MLQ) was used to estimate the radiobiological responses of the cancer cells and interspersed normal tissues with various radiosensitivities. By comparing the average survival fraction of normal tissues in IB-IORT and uniform dose treatment for the same level of cancer cell killing, the therapeutic ratios (TRs) were derived. The equivalent uniform dose (EUD) was found to increase with the prescription dose and decrease with the cancer cell infiltrating distance. For 50 kV beam at the 20 Gy prescription dose, the EUDs are 18.03, 16.49 and 13.56, 11. 29, and 9.28 Gy respectively, for 1.5, 3.0, 6.0, 9, and 15.0 mm of the cancer cell infiltrating distance into surrounding tissue. The dose rate of 50 kV is at least 1.87× higher than that of 40 kV beam. The EUDs of 50 kV beam are up to 15% higher than that of the 40 kV beam. The TR increases with the prescription dose, but decreases with the distance of cancer cell infiltration distance. Average TRs of 50 kV beam are up to 30% larger than that of 40 kV beam. In conclusion, IB-IORT can provide a possible therapeutic advantage on sparing more normal tissue compared with the External Beam IORT (EB-IORT) for shallowly populated unicentric breast lesion. Our data suggest that IB-IORT dose size should be adjusted based on the individual patient's cancer cell infiltrating distance for delivering an effective dose, one dose-fits-all regimen may have undertreated some patients with large cancer infiltrating distance.

Breast cancer

Breast cancer is one of the three most common cancers worldwide. Early breast cancer is considered potentially curable. Therapy has progressed substantially over the past years with a reduction in therapy intensity, both for locoregional and systemic therapy; avoiding overtreatment but also undertreatment has become a major focus. Therapy concepts follow a curative intent and need to be decided in a multidisciplinary setting, taking molecular subtype and locoregional tumour load into account. Primary conventional surgery is not the optimal choice for all patients any more. In triple-negative and HER2-positive early breast cancer, neoadjuvant therapy has become a commonly used option. Depending on clinical tumour subtype, therapeutic backbones include endocrine therapy, anti-HER2 targeting, and chemotherapy. In metastatic breast cancer, therapy goals are prolongation of survival and maintaining quality of life. Advances in endocrine therapies and combinations, as well as targeting of HER2, and the promise of newer targeted therapies make the prospect of long-term disease control in metastatic breast cancer an increasing reality.

Present state and issues in IORT Physics

Literature was reviewed to assess the physical aspects governing the present and emerging technologies used in intraoperative radiation therapy (IORT). Three major technologies were identified: treatment with electrons, treatment with external generators of kV X-rays and electronic brachytherapy. Although also used in IORT, literature on brachytherapy with radioactive sources is not systematically reviewed since an extensive own body of specialized literature and reviews exists in this field. A comparison with radioactive sources is made in the use of balloon catheters for partial breast irradiation where these are applied in almost an identical applicator technique as used with kV X-ray sources. The physical constraints of adaption of the dose distribution to the extended target in breast IORT are compared. Concerning further physical issues, the literature on radiation protection, commissioning, calibration, quality assurance (QA) and in-vivo dosimetry of the three technologies was reviewed. Several issues were found in the calibration and the use of dosimetry detectors and phantoms for low energy X-rays which require further investigation. The uncertainties in the different steps of dose determination were estimated, leading to an estimated total uncertainty of around 10-15% for IORT procedures. The dose inhomogeneity caused by the prescription of electrons at 90% and by the steep dose gradient of kV X-rays causes additional deviations from prescription dose which must be considered in the assessment of dose response in IORT.

Current controversies in radiotherapy for breast cancer

Multimodal treatment approaches have substantially improved the outcome of breast cancer patients in the last decades. Radiotherapy is an integral component of multimodal treatment concepts used in curative and palliative intention in numerous clinical situations from precursor lesions such as ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) to advanced breast cancer. This review addresses current controversial topics in radiotherapy with special consideration of DCIS, accelerated partial breast irradiation (APBI) and regional nodal irradiation (RNI) and provides an update on the clinical practice guidelines of the Breast Cancer Expert Panel of the German Society of Radiation Oncology (DEGRO).

Intraoperative radiotherapy (IORT) as boost in breast cancer

The term IORT (intraoperative radiotherapy) is currently used for various techniques that show huge differences in dose delivery and coverage of the tissue at risk. The largest evidence for boost IORT preceding whole breast irradiation (WBI) originates from intraoperative electron treatments (IOERT) with single doses around 10 Gy. At median follow-up periods at 6 years, outstandingly low local recurrence rates of less than 1% are observed. Higher local relapse rates were described for G3 tumors and triple negative breast cancers as well as for IORT following primary systemic treatment for locally advanced tumors. Even there, long term (>5y) local tumor control rates mostly beyond 95% were maintained. Compared to other boost methods, an intraoperative treatment has evident advantages in terms of precision (by avoiding a “spatial and/or temporal miss”), cosmetic outcome and patient comfort. Direct visualisation of a tumor bed during surgery guarantees for an accurate dose delivery, which has additionally gained importance in times of primary reconstruction techniques after lumpectomy, since IORT is performed before breast tissue including parts of the tumor bed is mobilized for plastic purposes. As a consequence of direct tissue exposure without distension by hematoma/seroma, IORT allows for small treatment volumes and complete skin sparing, both having a positive effect on late tissue tolerance and, hence, cosmetic appearance. Boost IORT marginally prolongs the surgical procedure, while significantly shortening postoperative radiotherapy. Its combination with external beam radiotherapy to the whole breast (WBI) is currently tested in two multicentric prospective trials: as kV-IORT in the multicentric TARGIT-B (oost) study, and as IOERT in the HIOB trial (3 weeks hypofractionated WBI preceded by IORT electron boost).

Effect of surgical wound fluids after intraoperative electron radiotherapy on the cancer stem cell phenotype in a panel of human breast cancer cell lines

The wound healing process after surgery alters the area surrounding the original tumor and around the scar, and the modified microenvironment is more favorable for tumor recurrence. Intraoperative radiotherapy (IORT) is one of the more novel strategies in breast cancer (BC) treatment. Irradiation during surgery has effects on the tumor microenvironment, abrogating the proliferative cascade induced by surgical wound healing. The aim of the present study was to determine the effect of surgical wound fluids from IOERT treatment (RT-WF) compared with wound fluids from conservative-breast surgery only (WF) on the cancer stem cell phenotype in a panel of BC cell lines. Post-operative wound fluids were derived from patients with BC who underwent a tumor resection (quadrantectomy) plus intraoperative electron radiotherapy using a single dose of ≤10 Gy on the tumor bed and surrounding tissues, or from those who underwent a tumor resection without IOERT. Cell lines were incubated with 10% wound fluids, and after 4 days, the cluster of differentiation (CD)44⁺/CD24^-/low phenotype and aldehyde dehydrogenase 1 (ALDH1) activity were determined by flow cytometry. The two types of fluid each affected the CD44⁺/CD24^-/low phenotype. The results varied markedly between each cell line, even for the same histological subtypes. RT-WF decreased the CD44⁺/CD24^-/low populations in the basal-like BT-549 and MDA-MB-468 cell lines, whereas in the luminal type MCF7 cell line, the two fluids inhibited these populations. The HER-OE subtypes harbored a minimal CD44⁺/CD24^-/low population, but the growth of SK-BR-3 was stimulated by the two post-operative fluids. WF exhibited a stronger effect on ALDH1 activity compared with RT-WF. The stimulatory effect was dependent on the histological subtype of the cell line and the strongest dependence was observed in luminal subtypes characterized by low dehydrogenase activity in the control group. The present results enable a better understanding of the mechanism of recurrence and metastases following BC surgery. With respect to histological phenotype, its effect on tumor progression, either local or systemic, strongly suggests the requirement for further research and clinical validation.

Comparison of seroma production in breast conserving surgery with or without intraoperative radiotherapy as tumour bed boost

INTRODUCTION

One of the most common complications in breast conserving surgery is seroma formation. The origin of seroma formation remains unclear. While intraoperative radiotherapy (IORT) has been shown to be an alternative to whole breast irradiation, the influence on seroma production is unclear. Therefore, this analysis compares seroma production in patients with breast conserving surgery with or without IORT as tumour bed boost during breast conserving surgery.

METHOD

A retrospective analysis of seroma production in patients with nodal-negative (pN0sn) pT1/2 primary breast cancer treated between September 2010 and October 2013 at the Breast Cancer Centre, University Hospital Ulm was performed. Patients with neoadjuvant chemotherapy, previous breast/axillary surgery or more than one intervention were excluded. IORT was applied as a tumour bed boost with 50-kV X-rays (Intra beam(®)) delivering 9 Gy at the applicator surface. Seroma formation was measured using wound drains placed in breast and in axilla.

RESULTS

Data of 152 patients (99 -IORT; 53 +IORT) were available for analysis. No significant differences between patients with or without IORT with regard to seroma production and number of days until drain removal were found (all p > 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Patients with IORT encountered no increased seroma production and removal of the drains was not delayed compared to patients with breast conserving surgery only. Our results indicate that IORT does not increase the seroma production compared to surgery alone.

Our intraoperative boost radiotherapy experience and applications

OBJECTIVE

To present our experience since November 2013, and case selection criteria for intraoperative boost radiotherapy (IObRT) that significantly reduces the local recurrence rate after breast conserving surgery in patients with breast cancer.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Patients who were suitable for IObRT were identified within the group of patients who were selected for breast conserving surgery at our breast council. A MOBETRON (mobile linear accelerator for IObRT) was used for IObRt during surgery.

RESULTS

Patients younger than 60 years old with <3 cm invasive ductal cancer in one focus (or two foci within 2 cm), with a histologic grade of 2-3, and a high possibility of local recurrence were admitted for IObRT application. Informed consent was obtained from all participants. Lumpectomy and sentinel lymph node biopsy was performed and advancement flaps were prepared according to the size and inclination of the conus following evaluation of tumor size and surgical margins by pathology. Distance to the thoracic wall was measured, and a radiation oncologist and radiation physicist calculated the required dose. Anesthesia was regulated with slower ventilation frequency, without causing hypoxia. The skin and incision edges were protected, the field was radiated (with 6 MeV electron beam of 10 Gy) and the incision was closed. In our cases, there were no major postoperative surgical or early radiotherapy related complications.

CONCLUSION

The completion of another stage of local therapy with IObRT during surgery positively effects sequencing of other treatments like chemotherapy, hormonotherapy and radiotherapy, if required. IObRT increases disease free and overall survival, as well as quality of life in breast cancer patients.

Evaluation of LiF:Mg,Ti (TLD-100) for Intraoperative Electron Radiation Therapy Quality Assurance

BACKGROUND

Purpose of the present work was to investigate thermoluminescent dosimeters (TLDs) response to intraoperative electron radiation therapy (IOERT) beams. In an IOERT treatment, a large single radiation dose is delivered with a high dose-per-pulse electron beam (2-12 cGy/pulse) during surgery. To verify and to record the delivered dose, in vivo dosimetry is a mandatory procedure for quality assurance. The TLDs feature many advantages such as a small detector size and close tissue equivalence that make them attractive for IOERT as in vivo dosimeters.

METHODS

LiF:Mg,Ti dosimeters (TLD-100) were irradiated with different IOERT electron beam energies (5, 7 and 9 MeV) and with a 6 MV conventional photon beam. For each energy, the TLDs were irradiated in the dose range of 0-10 Gy in step of 2 Gy. Regression analysis was performed to establish the response variation of thermoluminescent signals with dose and energy.

RESULTS

The TLD-100 dose-response curves were obtained. In the dose range of 0-10 Gy, the calibration curve was confirmed to be linear for the conventional photon beam. In the same dose region, the quadratic model performs better than the linear model when high dose-per-pulse electron beams were used (F test; p<0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrates that the TLD dose response, for doses ≤10 Gy, has a parabolic behavior in high dose-per-pulse electron beams. TLD-100 can be useful detectors for IOERT patient dosimetry if a proper calibration is provided.

Techniques for intraoperative radiation therapy for early-stage breast carcinoma

ABSTRACT 

Intraoperative radiation therapy (IORT) is a method of accelerated partial breast irradiation developed to replace other longer courses of radiotherapy with a single radiation session administered at the time of breast-conserving surgery. The purpose of this review is to summarize the advantages and disadvantages of breast IORT techniques that are currently available, as well to consider potential alternative techniques for breast IORT or ultra-short course breast radiotherapy. Furthermore, we highlight the published outcomes for the IORT treatment approaches including: electron therapy, superficial photon therapy and other techniques. Potential future directions of IORT are explored including novel IORT techniques utilizing intraoperative brachytherapy with in-room imaging and rapid treatment planning.

Is IORT ready for roll-out?

Two large randomised controlled trials of intraoperative radiotherapy (IORT) in breast-conserving surgery (TARGIT-A and ELIOT) have been published 14 years after their launch. Neither the TARGIT-A trial nor the ELIOT trial results have changed the current clinical practice for the use of IORT. The in-breast local recurrence rate (LRR) after IORT met the pre-specified non-inferiority margins in both trials and was 3.3% in TARGIT-A and 4.4% in the ELIOT trial. In both trials, the pre-specified estimates for local recurrence (LR) with external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) significantly overestimated actual LRR. In the TARGIT-A trial, LR with EBRT was estimated at the outset to be 6%, and in the ELIOT trial, it was estimated to be 3%. Surprisingly, LRR in the EBRT groups has been found to be significantly lower, 1.3% in the EBRT arm of the TARGIT-A and 0.4% in the EBRT arm of the ELIOT trial, respectively. Median follow-up was 2.4 years for the TARGIT-A trial and 5.8 years for the ELIOT trial. However, the initial cohort of patients in the TARGIT-A trial (reported in 2010) now have a median follow-up of 3.8 years and data on LR were available at 5 years follow-up on 35% of patients (18% who received IORT). Although further follow-up will increase confidence with the data, it will also further delay clinical implementation. By carefully weighing the risks and benefits of a single-fraction radiation treatment with patients, IORT should be offered within agreed and strict protocols. Patients deemed at low risk of LR or those deemed suitable for partial breast irradiation, according to the GEC-ESTRO and ASTRO recommendations, could be considered as candidates for IORT. These guidelines apply to all partial breast irradiation techniques, and more specific guidelines for IORT would assist clinicians.