Comparison of Radiation With or Without Concurrent Trastuzumab for HER2-Positive Ductal Carcinoma In Situ Resected by Lumpectomy: A Phase III Clinical Trial

PURPOSE

Preclinical studies report that trastuzumab (T) can boost radiotherapy (RT) effectiveness. The primary aim of the B-43 trial was to assess the efficacy of RT alone vs concurrent RT plus T in preventing recurrence of ipsilateral breast cancer (IBTR) in women with ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Eligibility: Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status 0 or 1, DCIS resected by lumpectomy, known estrogen receptor (ER) and/or progesterone receptor (PgR), and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) status by centralized testing. Whole-breast RT was given concurrently with T. Stratification was by menopausal status, adjuvant endocrine therapy plan, and nuclear grade. Definitive intent-to-treat primary analysis was to be conducted when either 163 IBTR events occurred or all accrued patients were on study ≥ 5 years.

RESULTS

There were 2,014 participants who were randomly assigned. Median follow-up time as of December 31, 2019, was 79.2 months. At primary definitive analysis, 114 IBTR events occurred: RT arm, 63 and RT plus T arm, 51 (hazard ratio [HR], 0.81; 95% CI, 0.56 to 1.17; P value = .26). There were 34 who were invasive: RT arm, 18 and RT plus T arm, 20 (HR, 1.11; 95% CI, 0.59 to 2.10; P value = .71). Seventy-six were DCIS: RT arm, 45 and RT plus T arm, 31 (HR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.43 to 1.08; P value = .11). Annual IBTR event rates were: RT arm, 0.99%/y and RT plus T arm, 0.79%/y. The study did not reach the 163 protocol-specified events, so the definitive analysis was triggered by all patients having been on study for ≥ 5 years.

CONCLUSION

Addition of T to RT did not achieve the objective of 36% reduction in IBTR rate but did achieve a modest but statistically nonsignificant reduction of 19%. Nonetheless, this trial had negative results. Further exploration of RT plus T is needed in HER2-positive DCIS before its routine delivery in patients with DCIS resected by lumpectomy.

Primary results of NRG Oncology / NSABP B-43: Phase III trial comparing concurrent trastuzumab (T) and radiation therapy (RT) with RT alone for women with HER2-positive ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) after lumpectomy

508

Background: Preclinical studies report that T can boost RT effectiveness. The primary aim of this trial assessed the efficacy of concurrent T + RT vs RT alone in preventing recurrence of ipsilateral breast cancer, ipsilateral skin cancer, or ipsilateral DCIS (IBTR) in women with DCIS. Methods: Eligibility: Women ≥18 yrs, ECOG performance status 0 or 1, DCIS resected by lumpectomy, and clear margins. Whole-breast RT after randomization was with 25+ fractions or accelerated with 16-17 fractions. RT boost was allowed. Centralized HER2 testing and ER and/or PR were required before entry. Stratification was by menopausal status, adjuvant endocrine therapy plan, and nuclear grade. T was given at 8 mg/kg IV within 1 wk before and 5 days after RT began (Dose 1) and at 6 mg/kg IV 3 wks after Dose 1 (Dose 2). Definitive intent-to-treat primary analysis was to be conducted when either 163 IBTR events were recorded or when all accrued pts were on study for ≥5 yrs. Results: 2014 pts were randomized (11/9/08 to 12/8/14);1998 (99.2%) had follow-up information. Median follow-up time on 12/31/19 was 79.2 mos. 2001 pts had RT information, 1965 (98.2%) completed RT: 988 (98.3%) in the RT arm and 977 (98.1%) in the RT+T arm. 996 pts had T compliance information in the RT+T arm, 939 (94.3%) completed two doses of T, 25 (2.5%) had one dose of T, and 32 (3.2%) did not receive T. At primary definitive analysis, 114 IBTR events occurred: 63 in the RT arm and 51 in the RT+T arm (HR = 0.81 [95% CI: 0.56-1.17], p-value = 0.26). 38 were invasive: 18 in the RT arm and 20 in the RT+T arm (HR = 1.11 [95% CI: 0.59-2.10], p-value = 0.74). 76 were DCIS: 45 in the RT arm and 31 in the RT+T arm (HR = 0.68 [95% CI: 0.43-1.08], p-value = 0.10). Annual IBTR event rates were 0.99%/yr in the RT group and 0.80%/yr in the RT+T group. There were 288 events of any kind [iDFS-DCIS] (DFS): 155 in the RT arm and 133 in the RT+T arm (HR = 0.84 [95% CI: 0.66-1.05], p-value = 0.13) and 48 deaths: 26 in the RT arm and 22 in the RT+T arm (OS HR = 0.85 [95% CI: 0.48-1.51], p = 0.59). The study did not reach the 163 protocol-specified events, so the definitive analysis was triggered by all pts having been on study for ≥5 years. Conclusions: The addition of T to RT did not achieve the protocol objective of 36% reduction in the IBTR rate but did achieve a modest, statistically non-significant reduction of 19%. Support: U10-180868, -180822, UG1-189867; Genentech. The authors thank Elaina Harper and Marlon Jones for data management. Clinical trial information: NCT00769379 .

Long-term primary results of accelerated partial breast irradiation after breast-conserving surgery for early-stage breast cancer: a randomised, phase 3, equivalence trial

BACKGROUND

Whole-breast irradiation after breast-conserving surgery for patients with early-stage breast cancer decreases ipsilateral breast-tumour recurrence (IBTR), yielding comparable results to mastectomy. It is unknown whether accelerated partial breast irradiation (APBI) to only the tumour-bearing quadrant, which shortens treatment duration, is equally effective. In our trial, we investigated whether APBI provides equivalent local tumour control after lumpectomy compared with whole-breast irradiation.

METHODS

We did this randomised, phase 3, equivalence trial (NSABP B-39/RTOG 0413) in 154 clinical centres in the USA, Canada, Ireland, and Israel. Adult women (>18 years) with early-stage (0, I, or II; no evidence of distant metastases, but up to three axillary nodes could be positive) breast cancer (tumour size ≤3 cm; including all histologies and multifocal breast cancers), who had had lumpectomy with negative (ie, no detectable cancer cells) surgical margins, were randomly assigned (1:1) using a biased-coin-based minimisation algorithm to receive either whole-breast irradiation (whole-breast irradiation group) or APBI (APBI group). Whole-breast irradiation was delivered in 25 daily fractions of 50 Gy over 5 weeks, with or without a supplemental boost to the tumour bed, and APBI was delivered as 34 Gy of brachytherapy or 38·5 Gy of external bream radiation therapy in 10 fractions, over 5 treatment days within an 8-day period. Randomisation was stratified by disease stage, menopausal status, hormone-receptor status, and intention to receive chemotherapy. Patients, investigators, and statisticians could not be masked to treatment allocation. The primary outcome of invasive and non-invasive IBTR as a first recurrence was analysed in the intention-to-treat population, excluding those patients who were lost to follow-up, with an equivalency test on the basis of a 50% margin increase in the hazard ratio (90% CI for the observed HR between 0·667 and 1·5 for equivalence) and a Cox proportional hazard model. Survival was assessed by intention to treat, and sensitivity analyses were done in the per-protocol population. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT00103181.

FINDINGS

Between March 21, 2005, and April 16, 2013, 4216 women were enrolled. 2109 were assigned to the whole-breast irradiation group and 2107 were assigned to the APBI group. 70 patients from the whole-breast irradiation group and 14 from the APBI group withdrew consent or were lost to follow-up at this stage, so 2039 and 2093 patients respectively were available for survival analysis. Further, three and four patients respectively were lost to clinical follow-up (ie, survival status was assessed by phone but no physical examination was done), leaving 2036 patients in the whole-breast irradiation group and 2089 in the APBI group evaluable for the primary outcome. At a median follow-up of 10·2 years (IQR 7·5-11·5), 90 (4%) of 2089 women eligible for the primary outcome in the APBI group and 71 (3%) of 2036 women in the whole-breast irradiation group had an IBTR (HR 1·22, 90% CI 0·94-1·58). The 10-year cumulative incidence of IBTR was 4·6% (95% CI 3·7-5·7) in the APBI group versus 3·9% (3·1-5·0) in the whole-breast irradiation group. 44 (2%) of 2039 patients in the whole-breast irradiation group and 49 (2%) of 2093 patients in the APBI group died from recurring breast cancer. There were no treatment-related deaths. Second cancers and treatment-related toxicities were similar between the two groups. 2020 patients in the whole-breast irradiation group and 2089 in APBI group had available data on adverse events. The highest toxicity grade reported was: grade 1 in 845 (40%), grade 2 in 921 (44%), and grade 3 in 201 (10%) patients in the APBI group, compared with grade 1 in 626 (31%), grade 2 in 1193 (59%), and grade 3 in 143 (7%) in the whole-breast irradiation group.

INTERPRETATION

APBI did not meet the criteria for equivalence to whole-breast irradiation in controlling IBTR for breast-conserving therapy. Our trial had broad eligibility criteria, leading to a large, heterogeneous pool of patients and sufficient power to detect treatment equivalence, but was not designed to test equivalence in patient subgroups or outcomes from different APBI techniques. For patients with early-stage breast cancer, our findings support whole-breast irradiation following lumpectomy; however, with an absolute difference of less than 1% in the 10-year cumulative incidence of IBTR, APBI might be an acceptable alternative for some women.

FUNDING

National Cancer Institute, US Department of Health and Human Services.

Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in NRG oncology/NSABP B-39/RTOG 0413: A randomized phase III study of conventional whole breast irradiation (WBI) versus partial breast irradiation (PBI) in stage 0, I, or II breast cancer

508

Background: PBI is an alternative to WBI, with potentially greater therapy (tx) compliance, and better integration with chemotherapy (CTX). NSABP B-39/RTOG 0413 clinical outcome results from 2018 did not show equivalence of PBI to WBI in local tumor control; PBI was statistically inferior, but with clinically small differences. PBI may be an acceptable alternative to WBI for some women. Understanding cosmesis and quality of life (QOL) treatment outcomes is important. Methods: B-39/0413 included a prospective QOL substudy with PRO evaluation of breast cancer treatment outcomes (cosmesis, function, pain) and fatigue using BCTOS and SF-36 vitality scales. Secondary QOL parameters included treatment related symptoms, perceived convenience of care, and the BPI pain scale. The study sample was stratified by CTX or not, as CTX is given before WBI but after PBI. PRO assessments occurred before randomization, the last day of adjuvant tx [CTX or radiation], 4 wks later, and 6, 12, 24, and 36 mo later. Primary aims included comparisons of change in fatigue from baseline to end of tx and equivalency of change in cosmesis from baseline to 36 mo for PBI v WBI. Separate analyses were done for CTX and non-CTX pts, controlling for axillary dissection. Each comparison used α=0.0125. Planned sample size was 964. Results: From 3-23-05 to 5-27-09, 975 pts were enrolled in the PRO study; 950 had follow-up data. 504 did not receive CTX and 446 received CTX. In non-CTX pts, PBI had less fatigue (p=0.011) and did not meet criteria for cosmesis equivalence (97.5% CI, -0.02 to 0.22; ∆=0.20). In CTX pts, PBI had worse fatigue (p=0.011) and equivalent cosmesis to WBI (97.5% CI, -0.09 to 0.21; ∆=0.24). In both groups, PBI pts reported less pain at end of tx. In non-CTX pts, PBI had more pain at 36 mo but in CTX pts, there was no difference. Convenience of care and treatment related symptom outcomes will be presented. Conclusions: In non-CTX pts, PBI is more convenient with less fatigue and slightly poorer cosmesis at 36 mo. Cosmesis was equivalent at 36 mo in CTX pts. Support: U10CA180868, -180822, UG1CA189867. Clinical trial information: NCT00103181.

Abstract GS4-04: Primary results of NSABP B-39/RTOG 0413 (NRG Oncology): A randomized phase III study of conventional whole breast irradiation (WBI) versus partial breast irradiation (PBI) for women with stage 0, I, or II breast cancer

Background: Conventional WBI after lumpectomy for early-stage breast cancer decreases ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence (IBTR), yielding comparable results to mastectomy. Accelerated PBI appears effective in reducing IBTR by treating only the tumor bed area. As the majority of IBTR occur at or in the vicinity of the tumor bed, we hypothesized that PBI would be as effective as WBI in controlling IBTR. The primary aim of NSABP B-39/RTOG 0413 was to determine if PBI provides equivalent local tumor control post lumpectomy compared to WBI in pts with early-stage breast cancer. The equivalency test was based on a 50% margin of increase in the hazard ratio (HR=1.5). Secondary endpoints included: overall survival (OS), recurrence-free interval (RFI), distant disease-free interval (DDFI), and toxicity.

Methods: Eligible pts had lumpectomy with histologically-free margins and 0-3 positive axillary nodes. Pts were stratified by stage, menopausal status, hormone receptor status, and intent to receive chemotherapy and then randomized to PBI or WBI. PBI was 10 fractions of 3.4-3.85 Gy, given twice daily with either brachytherapy or 3D external beam radiation. WBI was 50 Gy in 2 Gy fractions given daily with a sequential boost to the surgical cavity. Follow-up was every 6 mos for 5 yrs and then annually. All analyses were by intent-to-treat.

Results: From 3-21-05 to 4-16-13, 4216 pts were randomized: 2107 PBI; 2109 WBI. 61% were postmenopausal; 81% were hormone receptor-positive; 29% intended to receive chemotherapy. Stage distribution was: DCIS, 24%; invasive pN0, 65%; invasive pN1, 10%. As of 7-31-18, median follow-up was 10.2 yrs. There were 161 IBTRs as first events: 90 PBI v 71 WBI (HR 1.22; 90%CI 0.94-1.58). Per protocol-defined margin, to declare PBI and WBI equivalent regarding IBTR risk, the 90% CI for the observed HR had to lie entirely between 0.667 and 1.5. The percent of pts IBTR-free at 10 yrs was 95.2% PBI v 95.9% WBI. A statistically significant difference in the 10-yr RFI rate favored WBI (91.9% PBI v 93.4% WBI; HR 1.32; 95%CI 1.04-1.68; p=0.02). No statistically significant differences existed between PBI and WBI in DDFI (HR 1.31; 95%CI 0.91-1.91; p=0.15), OS (HR 1.10; 95%CI 0.90-1.35; p=0.35), or DFS (HR 1.12; 95%CI 0.98-1.29; p=0.11). Grade 3 toxicity was 9.6% PBI v 7.1% WBI, and grade 4-5 toxicity was 0.5% v 0.3%, respectively.

Discussion: PBI did not meet the criteria for equivalence to WBI in controlling IBTR based on the upper limit of the hazard ratio confidence interval. However, the absolute difference in 10-yr rate of IBTR was <1% (4.8% PBI v 4.1% WBI). The risk of an RFI event was statistically significantly higher for PBI compared to WBI, but the absolute difference in 10-yr RFI rate was also small (8.1% PBI v 6.6% WBI). DDFI, OS, and DFS were not statistically different for PBI v WBI. Grade 3-5 toxicities, although low, were more common for PBI than WBI. The trial population was heterogeneous, ranging from Stage 0-2 breast cancer, and outcome by risk categories are being analyzed.

Support: U10CA180868, -180822, UG1CA189867.

Citation Format: Vicini FA, Cecchini RS, White JR, Julian TB, Arthur DW, Rabinovitch RA, Kuske RR, Parda DS, Ganz PA, Scheier MF, Winter KA, Paik S, Kuerer HM, Vallow LA, Pierce LJ, Mamounas EP, Costantino JP, Bear HD, Germaine I, Gustafson G, Grossheim L, Petersen IA, Hudes RS, Curran, Jr. WJ, Wolmark N. Primary results of NSABP B-39/RTOG 0413 (NRG Oncology): A randomized phase III study of conventional whole breast irradiation (WBI) versus partial breast irradiation (PBI) for women with stage 0, I, or II breast cancer [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2018 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2018 Dec 4-8; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2019;79(4 Suppl):Abstract nr GS4-04.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of radiofrequency ablation (RFA) and stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) in patients with isolated hepatic metastases from colorectal cancer (CRC)

639

Background: Systemic therapy combined with surgery may prolong survival of patients with isolated hepatic metastases from CRC, however, only 10-25% are resectable. We applied a Markov model to estimate and compare cost effectiveness for the two competing treatments of SBRT and RFA in management of unresectable isolated hepatic metastases. Methods: We developed a multistate Markov decision model with probabilistic sensitivity analysis to simulate a randomized controlled trial for SBRT and RFA and compare respective cost effectiveness (in dollars per quality adjusted life years, or QALY). Model assumptions were based on extensive literature search of utilities and recurrence risks, including published data from our institution. Costs were taken from the 2013 Medicare reimbursement tables. In order to reflect reported patient selection variability across literature, two mortality rates due to hepatic metastases were considered for both treatment modalities: 50% probability of death in 1.5 years and 60% in 5 years. Sensitivity analysis was performed to model uncertainty in these parameters. Results: For patients with 5-year life expectancy, Markov cohort analysis demonstrated QALY-adjusted survival advantage of SBRT over RFA with QALY 4.35 vs. 3.89 respectively. This difference was marginal for patients with 1.5-year life expectancy. Physician-hour involvement was less in SBRT group. The incremental cost adjusted effectiveness (Cost/QALY) for SBRT over RFA was $2,379 in the 5-year life expectancy cohort, and $2,216 for SBRT over RFA in the 1.5-year cohort. Sensitivity analysis demonstated robustness of these results across a range of utility values, costs, recurrence rates, and procedure-related morbidity. Conclusions: In comparison to RFA, SBRT was more cost-effective modality for unresectable or potentially resectable hepatic metastases over a wide range of treatment and disease assumptions, including recurrence rates, and procedure-related morbidity. Additionally, SBRT is a relatively fast outpatient procedure requiring less physician-hour involvement.

Stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) with or without surgery for primary and metastatic liver tumors

360

Background: We report on the outcome and toxicity of liver SBRT alone or in combination with surgery for inoperable primary and metastatic liver tumors. Methods: Patients with up to four isolated hepatic metastases (sum of tumor diameters ≤ 8cm) and individual tumor diameter ≤ 9 cm received SBRT at 46.8Gy ± 3.7 in 4-6 fractions. In patients with hepatic cirrhosis, liver dose constraints were imposed exclusively on residual functional liver volume defined on SPECT during SBRT treatment planning. The primary end point was local control with at least 6 months of radiographic followup, and secondary end points were toxicity and survival. Results: Between 2007-2014, 120 lesions in 91 patients with either unresectable primary (n = 43) or metastatic liver cancer (n = 48) completed liver SBRT to 36-60 Gy delivered in 4 to 6 treatment fractions, with a mean BED of 197 Gy3 (range 108 – 300 Gy3). Median followup was 20.3 months (range 1.9 - 64.1). Fourteen patients underwent liver transplant with SBRT as a bridging therapy or for tumor downsizing. Eight patients completed hepatic resections in combination with planned SBRT for unresectable tumors. Two-year local control was 96% for hepatoma and 93.8% for metastases; it was 100% for lesions ≤ 4cm. Ten of 14 transplanted patients developed complete pathological response with median time to transplant of 5.7 months (range 1.7 – 23.3). No incidence of grade > 2 treatment toxicity was observed. There was no accelerated Child-Pugh class migration from A to B or from B to C. There were no operative or perioperative complications in patients who received SBRT prior to liver transplant or in combination with planned hepatectomy. Two-year overall survival was 82.3% (hepatoma) and 64.3% (metastases). Conclusions: In this retrospective analysis we demonstrate that liver SBRT alone or in combination with surgery is safe and effective for the treatment of isolated inoperable hepatic malignancies and provides excellent local control rates with minimal toxicity.

Capecitabine and oxaliplatin in the preoperative multimodality treatment of rectal cancer: surgical end points from National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project trial R-04

PURPOSE

The optimal chemotherapy regimen administered concurrently with preoperative radiation therapy (RT) for patients with rectal cancer is unknown. National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project trial R-04 compared four chemotherapy regimens administered concomitantly with RT.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients with clinical stage II or III rectal cancer who were undergoing preoperative RT (45 Gy in 25 fractions over 5 weeks plus a boost of 5.4 Gy to 10.8 Gy in three to six daily fractions) were randomly assigned to one of the following chemotherapy regimens: continuous intravenous infusional fluorouracil (CVI FU; 225 mg/m(2), 5 days per week), with or without intravenous oxaliplatin (50 mg/m(2) once per week for 5 weeks) or oral capecitabine (825 mg/m(2) twice per day, 5 days per week), with or without oxaliplatin (50 mg/m(2) once per week for 5 weeks). Before random assignment, the surgeon indicated whether the patient was eligible for sphincter-sparing surgery based on clinical staging. The surgical end points were complete pathologic response (pCR), sphincter-sparing surgery, and surgical downstaging (conversion to sphincter-sparing surgery).

RESULTS

From September 2004 to August 2010, 1,608 patients were randomly assigned. No significant differences in the rates of pCR, sphincter-sparing surgery, or surgical downstaging were identified between the CVI FU and capecitabine regimens or between the two regimens with or without oxaliplatin. Patients treated with oxaliplatin experienced significantly more grade 3 or 4 diarrhea (P < .001).

CONCLUSION

Administering capecitabine with preoperative RT achieved similar rates of pCR, sphincter-sparing surgery, and surgical downstaging compared with CVI FU. Adding oxaliplatin did not improve surgical outcomes but added significant toxicity. The definitive analysis of local tumor control, disease-free survival, and overall survival will be performed when the protocol-specified number of events has occurred.

A genetic algorithm for variable selection in logistic regression analysis of radiotherapy treatment outcomes

A given outcome of radiotherapy treatment can be modeled by analyzing its correlation with a combination of dosimetric, physiological, biological, and clinical factors, through a logistic regression fit of a large patient population. The quality of the fit is measured by the combination of the predictive power of this particular set of factors and the statistical significance of the individual factors in the model. We developed a genetic algorithm (GA), in which a small sample of all the possible combinations of variables are fitted to the patient data. New models are derived from the best models, through crossover and mutation operations, and are in turn fitted. The process is repeated until the sample converges to the combination of factors that best predicts the outcome. The GA was tested on a data set that investigated the incidence of lung injury in NSCLC patients treated with 3DCRT. The GA identified a model with two variables as the best predictor of radiation pneumonitis: the V30 (p=0.048) and the ongoing use of tobacco at the time of referral (p=0.074). This two-variable model was confirmed as the best model by analyzing all possible combinations of factors. In conclusion, genetic algorithms provide a reliable and fast way to select significant factors in logistic regression analysis of large clinical studies.

EUCLID: an outcome analysis tool for high-dimensional clinical studies

Treatment management decisions in three-dimensional conformal radiation therapy (3DCRT) and intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) are usually made based on the dose distributions in the target and surrounding normal tissue. These decisions may include, for example, the choice of one treatment over another and the level of tumour dose escalation. Furthermore, biological predictors such as tumour control probability (TCP) and normal tissue complication probability (NTCP), whose parameters available in the literature are only population-based estimates, are often used to assess and compare plans. However, a number of other clinical, biological and physiological factors also affect the outcome of radiotherapy treatment and are often not considered in the treatment planning and evaluation process. A statistical outcome analysis tool, EUCLID, for direct use by radiation oncologists and medical physicists was developed. The tool builds a mathematical model to predict an outcome probability based on a large number of clinical, biological, physiological and dosimetric factors. EUCLID can first analyse a large set of patients, such as from a clinical trial, to derive regression correlation coefficients between these factors and a given outcome. It can then apply such a model to an individual patient at the time of treatment to derive the probability of that outcome, allowing the physician to individualize the treatment based on medical evidence that encompasses a wide range of factors. The software's flexibility allows the clinicians to explore several avenues to select the best predictors of a given outcome. Its link to record-and-verify systems and data spreadsheets allows for a rapid and practical data collection and manipulation. A wide range of statistical information about the study population, including demographics and correlations between different factors, is available. A large number of one- and two-dimensional plots, histograms and survival curves allow for an easy visual analysis of the population. Several visual and analytical methods are available to quantify the predictive power of the multivariate regression model. The EUCLID tool can be readily integrated with treatment planning and record-and-verify systems.

Patient dose and image quality from mega-voltage cone beam computed tomography imaging

The evolution of ever more conformal radiation delivery techniques makes the subject of accurate localization of increasing importance in radiotherapy. Several systems can be utilized including kilo-voltage and mega-voltage cone-beam computed tomography (MV-CBCT), CT on rail or helical tomography. One of the attractive aspects of mega-voltage cone-beam CT is that it uses the therapy beam along with an electronic portal imaging device to image the patient prior to the delivery of treatment. However, the use of a photon beam energy in the mega-voltage range for volumetric imaging degrades the image quality and increases the patient radiation dose. To optimize image quality and patient dose in MV-CBCT imaging procedures, a series of dose measurements in cylindrical and anthropomorphic phantoms using an ionization chamber, radiographic films, and thermoluminescent dosimeters was performed. Furthermore, the dependence of the contrast to noise ratio and spatial resolution of the image upon the dose delivered for a 20-cm-diam cylindrical phantom was evaluated. Depending on the anatomical site and patient thickness, we found that the minimum dose deposited in the irradiated volume was 5-9 cGy and the maximum dose was between 9 and 17 cGy for our clinical MV-CBCT imaging protocols. Results also demonstrated that for high contrast areas such as bony anatomy, low doses are sufficient for image registration and visualization of the three-dimensional boundaries between soft tissue and bony structures. However, as the difference in tissue density decreased, the dose required to identify soft tissue boundaries increased. Finally, the dose delivered by MV-CBCT was simulated using a treatment planning system (TPS), thereby allowing the incorporation of MV-CBCT dose in the treatment planning process. The TPS-calculated doses agreed well with measurements for a wide range of imaging protocols.

Low Locoregional Recurrence Rate Among Node-Negative Breast Cancer Patients With Tumors 5 cm or Larger Treated by Mastectomy, With or Without Adjuvant Systemic Therapy and Without Radiotherapy: Results From Five National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project Randomized Clinical Trials

Purpose

Lymph node (LN) –negative breast cancer tumors ≥ 5 cm occur infrequently, and their optimal management is not well defined. In this study, we assess patterns of locoregional failure (LRF) in LN-negative patients who underwent mastectomy, either with or without adjuvant chemotherapy or hormonal therapy and without postmastectomy radiation therapy (PMRT).

Patients and Methods

Of 8,878 breast cancer patients enrolled onto National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project B-13, B-14, B-19, B-20, and B-23 node-negative trials, 313 had tumors that were 5 cm or larger (median, 5.5 cm; range, 5.0 to 15.5 cm) at pathology and were treated by mastectomy. Median follow-up time was 15.1 years. Therapy included adjuvant chemotherapy in 34.2% of patients; tamoxifen in 21.1%; chemotherapy plus tamoxifen in 19.2%; and no systemic therapy in 25.5%.

Results

Twenty-eight patients experienced LRF. The overall 10-year cumulative incidences of isolated LRF, LRF with and without distant failure (DF), and DF alone as first event were 7.1%, 10.0%, and 23.6%, respectively. Cumulative incidences for isolated LRF as first event for patients with tumors of 5 cm or more than 5 cm were 7.0% and 7.2%, respectively (P = .9). For patients who underwent no systemic treatment, chemotherapy alone, tamoxifen alone, or chemotherapy plus tamoxifen, the incidences were 12.6%, 5.6%, 4.6%, and 5.3%, respectively (P = .2). The majority of failures occurred on the chest wall (24 of 28 patients). Multivariate analysis did not identify significant prognostic factors for LRF.

Conclusion

In patients with LN-negative tumors ≥ 5 cm who are treated by mastectomy with or without adjuvant systemic therapy and no PMRT, LRF as first event remains low. PMRT should not be routinely used for these patients.

Multidisciplinary treatment of synchronous primary rectal and prostate cancers

BACKGROUND

A 58-year-old Caucasian man with a history of irritable bowel syndrome and occasional rectal bleeding presented with a 4-week history of progressive, bright red blood per rectum. A digital rectal examination revealed a 3 cm distal, midrectal mass. Laboratory tests showed an elevated serum prostate-specific antigen of 32 ng/ml but other physical and medical examinations were unremarkable.

INVESTIGATIONS

Digital rectal examination, colonoscopy, rectal mass biopsy, endorectal ultrasound, transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy, CT scan and MRI.

DIAGNOSIS

Clinical stage III (T3N1M0), moderately differentiated adenocarcinoma of the rectum and clinical stage II (T1cN0M0) adenocarcinoma of the prostate.

MANAGEMENT

Intensity-modulated radiation therapy, chemoradiation, chemotherapy, hormone therapy and surgery.

Treatment of female urethral carcinoma in medically inoperable patients using external beam irradiation and high dose rate intracavitary brachytherapy

PURPOSE

We developed and present our experience with high dose rate brachytherapy for treatment of carcinoma of the urethra in medically inoperable women.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Since 1991, 4 women with localized urethral cancer, medically unable to undergo resection or interstitial implantation, were treated with external beam and high dose rate intracavitary implantation rather than external beam irradiation alone. The fractionated implants were delivered with a high dose rate remote afterloader using a shielded vaginal applicator and modified urethral catheter. The urethral catheter was inserted through the lumen of a 20F Foley tube to improve depth dose. Homogeneous dose distribution was achieved and customized to the individual patient.

RESULTS

All high dose rate brachytherapy treatments were given at the clinic without use of sedation or anesthesia. Treatment was well tolerated, and all patients maintained voluntary urinary function and local control at 12 to 55 months after therapy. Chronic morbidity due to urethral, bladder, vaginal or rectal injury, including urethral stenosis, necrosis or fistula, was not noted. Isodose distributions were compared among this technique, interstitial implantation and external beam radiotherapy alone.

CONCLUSIONS

Although we prefer interstitial implantation as the boost technique for women with urethral cancer, high dose rate brachytherapy is a reasonable option for medically inoperable patients. This outpatient treatment is well tolerated, preserves voluntary urinary function and enhances quality of life.

Neoplastic transformation of a human prostate epithelial cell line by the v-Ki-ras oncogene

Investigations of mechanisms of human prostate carcinogenesis are limited by the unavailability of a suitable in vitro model system. We have demonstrated that an immortal, but nontumorigenic, human epithelial cell line (267B1) established from fetal prostate tissue can be malignantly transformed by a biological carcinogen, and can serve as a useful model for investigations of the progression steps of carcinogenesis. Activated Ki-ras was introduced into 267B1 cells by infection with the Kirsten murine sarcoma virus. Morphological alterations and anchorage-independent growth were observed; when cells were injected into nude mice, poorly differentiated adenocarcinomas developed. These findings represent the first evidence of malignant transformation of human prostate epithelial cells in culture, and support a role for Ki-ras activation in a multistep process for prostate neoplastic transformation.