Adjuvant whole breast radiotherapy with simultaneous integrated boost to tumor bed with intensity modulated radiotherapy technique in elderly breast cancer patients

Practice of Tumor Bed Boost in Patients after Oncoplastic Breast-Conserving Surgery

The practice of boost to the tumor bed after treatment with oncoplastic breast-conserving surgery (BCS) remains variable. Using a survey, the present study evaluated the current practice of tumor bed boost administered in women after oncoplastic BCS. Actively practicing radiation oncologists across India were sent a questionnaire on the practice of adjuvant whole-breast radiotherapy and tumor bed boost after oncoplastic BCS via email and encouraged to participate. Of the 54 radiation oncologists who participated, most (98.1%) used a linear accelerator for radiotherapy. Hypofractionation was preferred by 59.26%, standard fractionation by 7.41%, and the remaining selected the fractionation strategy based on various patient factors. In addition, 83.33% participants reported that they always planned tumor boost, 51.85% preferred photons for the boost, and 75.93% administered sequential boost. The most common dose for the boost was 12.5 Gy in five fractions (40.74%). Most participants (77.78%) revealed that they used a combination of methods for identifying the tumor bed. With respect to clip placement, most surgeons (96%) at the participants' centers placed ≥ 4 clips at the tumor site, with both the base and margins being preferred by surgeons (81.48%) for placement. Finally, 12.96% participants revealed that the surgeons always involved them during surgical planning, whereas 7.4% participants reported that they always included the surgeons during radiotherapy planning, suggesting that radiation oncologists and oncoplastic surgeons do not involve each other during surgical and radiotherapy planning, possibly leading to suboptimal treatment. This may be attributed to the absence of guidelines regarding boost practices after oncoplastic BCS.

The clinical outcome of postoperative radiotherapy using hybrid planning technique in left breast cancer after breast-conserving surgery

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this study is to observe the preliminary clinical outcome and acute toxicity of hybrid intensity modulated radiotherapy and volumetric modulated arc therapy planning technique with simultaneous integrated boost (SIB).

METHODS

From November 2015 to December 2018, 149 female patients with left-side breast cancer who underwent adjuvant radiotherapy with hybrid IMRT and VMAT planning technique with SIB were reviewed retrospectively. The primary endpoint was acute toxicities and the secondary endpoints were local recurrence-free survival (LRFS), distant metastasis-freesurvival (DMFS), disease-free survival (DFS), and overall survival (OS).

RESULTS

The median age was 52 years old and median follow-up was 43.4 months. Eighty-six percent of patients had acute grade 0 to grade1 dermatitis and 14% had grade 2 dermatitis. No acute radiation pneumonitis, esophagitis, or cardiovascular events were recorded during follow-up. The 3-year LRFS, DMFS, DFS, and OS rates were 95.1%, 95.1%, 90.3%, and 97.9%, respectively. The subgroup analysis revealed that patients with lymphovascular invasion had more local recurrence rate and worse DFS rate. Patients with advanced N stage had the trend of worse DMFS.

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, the hybrid IMRT and VMAT technique is feasible, safe and has less acute radiation related toxicities in SIB postoperative radiotherapy for left-sided breast cancer.

Intraoperative radiotherapy versus whole-breast external beam radiotherapy, and other factors associated with the prognosis of early breast cancer treated with breast-conserving surgery and radiotherapy: a retrospective study from SEER database

BACKGROUND

This study was aimed to investigate the prognostic factors of early breast cancer treated with breast-conserving surgery (BCS) and radiotherapy. Besides, we focused our attention exclusively on the comparison of the impact on prognosis between intraoperative radiotherapy (IORT) and whole-breast external beam radiotherapy (EBRT).

METHODS

An observational cohort study was performed on patients with Tis-2 N0-1 M0 breast cancer from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database who treated with BCS and radiotherapy. Cox regression analysis, Kaplan-Meier analysis, and propensity score matching (PSM) were used to estimate risk factors for overall survival (OS) and breast cancer-specific survival (BCSS).

RESULTS

Of the 98,614 early breast cancer patients treated with BCS and radiotherapy, 97,164 (98.5%) patients underwent EBRT and 1,450 (1.5%) underwent IORT. Multivariable Cox regression analysis showed that early breast cancer patients with age ≥65, poor marital status, lack of medical insurance, histological grade III/IV (SEER 4 grades), high T stage, high N stage, and TNBC were associated with a decreased OS/BCSS, whereas ER-positive and PR-positive were associated with an improved OS/BCSS. No significant difference was observed in survival between IORT and EBRT groups (P=0.213 for OS, P=0.180 for BCSS), or between intraoperative beam radiation and intraoperative radioactive implants groups (P=0.319 for OS, P=0.972 for BCSS).

CONCLUSIONS

Our study can help clinicians identify patients with poor prognosis after breast-conserving therapy. IORT may be an alternative to EBRT for early breast cancer patients who are unable to complete the long-term postoperative radiation treatment. Beam radiation and radioactive implants are both ideal alternatives for patients who choose IORT.