One Year Follow-up and Toxicity Review in a Series of 6 Patients Receiving Stereotactic Arrhythmia Radioablation for Ventricular Tachycardia

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE(S)

Stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) to arrhythmogenic scar regions defined by noninvasive cardiac mapping has recently been described for patients with treatment refractory ventricular tachycardia (VT). Long-term outcomes and both intra- and extra-cardiac toxicities are not well described in this patient population. We report the outcomes following at least 1-year post-treatment along with toxicity for 6 patients treated with this technique in our institution.

MATERIALS/METHODS

A total of 6 patients treated between 2019 and 2022 with refractory VT with previously failed ablations and at least one anti-arrhythmic drug was treated at our institution. All were treated with 25 Gy in a single fraction to the suspected arrhythmogenic scar. Cardiac microstructure contouring was done following the atlas by Duane et al. 2017. Implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) interrogation was performed regularly by the treating cardiologist to assess the number of VT and ICD events, and, patients were seen immediately following SBRT, and at 3, 6, and 12 months respectively. Computed tomography of the chest was done at 3 months to assess for radiation induced pneumonitis and transthoracic echocardiograms were done as per the cardiologist's discretion. Radiation toxicity was evaluated using CTCAE v5.0.

RESULTS

The median follow-up time for the 6 evaluated patients is 24 months. Three patients (50%) remained VT free during the one-year period post SBRT. Two of these patients remain VT free and are either on reduced or discontinued anti-arrhythmic drugs, while another failed at 24 months in an area of the arrhythmogenic substrate that was intentionally not irradiated due to organ at risk safety concerns. Among those that failed, the median time to failure was 4 months (range 3-5 months). All 6 patients tolerated treatment with no immediate acute side effects. Three (50%) of patients had no acute clinical or radiographic side effects. Grade 1 esophagitis, grade 1 fatigue, and grade 1 cough was reported in 1 (17%) patient each (all different patients), and 1 patient required hospitalization 4 months after SBRT for a heart failure exacerbation (potentially SBRT related). One patient (17%) died within 3 months following treatment but their death was not attributed to radiation treatment. No cardiac microstructure toxicity has been reported to date.

CONCLUSION

Despite increasing reports in the literature, there are no established criteria to predict success for SBRT in the context of treatment-refractory VT, or the optimal treatment dose for success, making it difficult to identify optimal patients. Current limited evidence suggests that this technique may be a relatively safe approach to provide an acute reduction in VT burden for those refractory to standard of care and has an acceptable acute toxicity profile however longer term follow-up is required. Long term toxicity, specifically to cardiac microstructures, and dose optimization is currently are the focus of ongoing study.

Targeted Intraoperative Radiation Therapy during Breast-Conserving Surgery for Patients with Early Stage Breast Cancer: A Phase II Single Center Prospective Trial

Purpose

Patients with early stage breast cancer (ESBC) are conventionally treated with breast-conserving surgery (BCS) followed by whole-breast external beam radiation therapy (EBRT). The emergence of targeted intraoperative radiation therapy (TARGIT) with Intrabeam has been used as a therapeutic alternative for patients with risk-adapted ESBC. Here we present our radiation therapy toxicities (RTT), postoperative complications (PC), and short-term outcomes of the prospective phase II trial at the McGill University Health Center.

Methods and Materials

Patients aged ≥50 years with biopsy-proven hormone receptor-positive, grade 1 or 2, invasive ductal carcinoma of the breast, cT1N0, were eligible for the study. Enrolled patients underwent BCS followed by immediate TARGIT of 20 Gy in 1 fraction. Upon final pathology, patients with low-risk breast cancer (LRBC) received no further EBRT, and those with high-risk breast cancer (HRBC) received further 15 to 16 fractions of whole breast EBRT. HRBC criteria included pathologic tumor size >2 cm, grade 3, positive lympho-vascular invasion, multifocal disease, close margins (<2 mm), or positive nodal disease.

Results

A total of 61 patients with ESBC were enrolled in the study; upon final pathology, 40 (65.6%) had LRBC, and 21 (34.4%) had HRBC. The median follow-up was 3.9 years. The most common HRBC criteria were close margins in 66.6% (n = 14) and lymphovascular invasion in 28.6% (n = 6). No grade 4 RTT were observed in either group. The most common PC were seroma and cellulitis for both groups. The rate of locoregional recurrence was 0% in both groups. The overall survival in LRBC was 97.5% and in HRBC 95.2% with no significant differences. Deaths were nonbreast cancer related.

Conclusions

In patients with ESBC undergoing BCS, the use of TARGIT shows low rates of RTT and PC complications. Moreover, our short-term outcomes show no significant difference at 3.9 years median follow-up for locoregional recurrence or overall survival between groups of patients receiving TARGIT alone or TARGIT followed by EBRT. Of all patients, 34.4% required further EBRT, most commonly due to close margins.

Omitting Radiotherapy after Breast-Conserving Surgery in Luminal A Breast Cancer

BACKGROUND

Adjuvant radiotherapy is prescribed after breast-conserving surgery to reduce the risk of local recurrence. However, radiotherapy is inconvenient, costly, and associated with both short-term and long-term side effects. Clinicopathologic factors alone are of limited use in the identification of women at low risk for local recurrence in whom radiotherapy can be omitted. Molecularly defined intrinsic subtypes of breast cancer can provide additional prognostic information.

METHODS

We performed a prospective cohort study involving women who were at least 55 years of age, had undergone breast-conserving surgery for T1N0 (tumor size <2 cm and node negative), grade 1 or 2, luminal A-subtype breast cancer (defined as estrogen receptor positivity of ≥1%, progesterone receptor positivity of >20%, negative human epidermal growth factor receptor 2, and Ki67 index of ≤13.25%), and had received adjuvant endocrine therapy. Patients who met the clinical eligibility criteria were registered, and Ki67 immunohistochemical analysis was performed centrally. Patients with a Ki67 index of 13.25% or less were enrolled and did not receive radiotherapy. The primary outcome was local recurrence in the ipsilateral breast. In consultation with radiation oncologists and patients with breast cancer, we determined that if the upper boundary of the two-sided 90% confidence interval for the cumulative incidence at 5 years was less than 5%, this would represent an acceptable risk of local recurrence at 5 years.

RESULTS

Of 740 registered patients, 500 eligible patients were enrolled. At 5 years after enrollment, recurrence was reported in 2.3% of the patients (90% confidence interval [CI], 1.3 to 3.8; 95% CI, 1.2 to 4.1), a result that met the prespecified boundary. Breast cancer occurred in the contralateral breast in 1.9% of the patients (90% CI, 1.1 to 3.2), and recurrence of any type was observed in 2.7% (90% CI, 1.6 to 4.1).

CONCLUSIONS

Among women who were at least 55 years of age and had T1N0, grade 1 or 2, luminal A breast cancer that were treated with breast-conserving surgery and endocrine therapy alone, the incidence of local recurrence at 5 years was low with the omission of radiotherapy. (Funded by the Canadian Cancer Society and the Canadian Breast Cancer Foundation; LUMINA ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01791829.).

Looking Back: International Practice Patterns in Breast Radiation Oncology From a Case-Based Survey Across 54 Countries During the First Surge of the COVID-19 Pandemic

PURPOSE

The COVID-19 pandemic has profoundly affected cancer care worldwide, including radiation therapy (RT) for breast cancer (BC), because of risk-based resource allocation. We report the evolution of international breast RT practices during the beginning of the pandemic, focusing on differences in treatment recommendations between countries.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Between July and November 2020, a 58-question survey was distributed to radiation oncologists (ROs) through international professional societies. Changes in RT decision making during the first surge of the pandemic were evaluated across six hypothetical scenarios, including the management of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS), early-stage, locally advanced, and metastatic BC. The significance of changes in responses before and during the pandemic was examined using chi-square and McNemar-Bowker tests.

RESULTS

One thousand one hundred three ROs from 54 countries completed the survey. Incomplete responses (254) were excluded from the analysis. Most respondents were from the United States (285), Japan (117), Italy (63), Canada (58), and Brazil (56). Twenty-one percent (230) of respondents reported treating at least one patient with BC who was COVID-19-positive. Approximately 60% of respondents reported no change in treatment recommendation during the pandemic, except for patients with metastatic disease, for which 57.7% (636/1,103; P < .0005) changed their palliative practice. Among respondents who noted a change in their recommendation during the first surge of the pandemic, omitting, delaying, and adopting short-course RT were the most frequent changes, with most transitioning to moderate hypofractionation for DCIS and early-stage BC.

CONCLUSION

Early in the COVID-19 pandemic, significant changes in global RT practice patterns for BC were introduced. The impact of published results from the FAST FORWARD trial supporting ultrahypofractionation likely confounded the interpretation of the pandemic's independent influence on RT delivery.

Safety of CDK4/6 Inhibitors Combined with Radiotherapy in Patients with Metastatic Breast Cancer: A Review of the Literature

Recent evidence suggests that cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 (CDK4/6) inhibitors significantly improve progression-free survival and overall survival among metastatic breast cancer patients. However, given the effects on cell cycle arrest, there is potential for CDK4/6 inhibitors and radiotherapy (RT) to work synergistically, enhancing the effect and toxicities of RT. A comprehensive review of the literature on the combination of RT and CDK4/6 inhibitors was performed with 19 eligible studies included in the final analysis. A total of 373 patients who received radiotherapy combined with CDK4/6 inhibitors were evaluated across 9 retrospective studies, 4 case reports, 3 case series, and 3 letters to the editor. The CDK4/6 inhibitor used, RT target, and RT technique were assessed in terms of toxicities. This literature review demonstrates generally limited toxicities with the combination of CDK4/6 inhibitors and palliative radiotherapy to metastatic breast cancer patients. The current evidence is nonetheless limited, and further results of ongoing prospective clinical trials will help clarify whether these treatments can be safely combined.

Special issue. De-escalation of loco-regional treatment in breast cancer: Time to find the balance? Partial breast irradiation

Breast cancer is the most common cancer in women worldwide. Over the past few decades, remarkable progress has been made in understanding the biology and pathology of breast cancer. A personalized conservative approach has been currently adopted addressing the patient's individual risk of relapse. After postoperative whole breast irradiation for early-stage breast cancer, a rate of recurrences outside the initial tumour bed lower than 4% was observed. Thus, the highest benefits of breast irradiation seem to result from the dose delivered to the tissue neighbouring the tumour bed. Nonetheless, reducing treatment morbidity while maintaining radiation therapy's ability to decrease local recurrences is an important challenge in treating patients with radiation therapy. In this regard, strategies such as partial-breast irradiation have been developed to reduce toxicity without compromising oncologic outcomes. According to the national and international published guidelines, clinical oncologists can refer to specific dose/fractionation schedules and eligible criteria. However, there are still some areas of open questions. Breast cancer represents a multidisciplinary paradigm; it should be considered a heterogeneous disease where a "one-treatment-fits-all" approach cannot be considered an appropriate option. This is a wide overview on the main partial breast irradiation advantages, risks, timings, techniques, and available recommendations. We aim to provide practical findings to support clinical decision-making, exploring future perspectives, towards a balance for optimisation of breast cancer.

Cutaneous T-cell lymphoma developing in surgical scars post cardiac surgery: A case study

Cutaneous T-cell lymphomas are a class of non-Hodgkin lymphomas characterized by the infiltration of malignant T cells into the skin. Their precise pathogenesis remains incompletely understood, but persistent and specific antigen stimulation of skin-homing CD4+ memory T cells by external or internal factors, combined with an inflammatory cytokine-rich tissue microenvironment, may be critical in the development of cutaneous T-cell lymphomas. We present herein a case of primary cutaneous T-cell lymphoma arising in two surgical scars that developed 6 months post-operatively and were successfully treated with external beam radiotherapy. This case highlights the notion that primary cutaneous T-cell lymphoma can develop locally at the site of injury/foreign body within a relatively short time post trauma/surgery. This work contributes to the literature of cutaneous T-cell lymphomas arising after a trauma, surgery, or a foreign body.

Remote Follow-up of Self-isolating Patients With COVID-19 Using a Patient Portal: Protocol for a Mixed Methods Pilot Study (Opal-COVID Study)

Background

People with COVID-19 are instructed to self-isolate at home. During self-isolation, they may experience anxiety and insufficient care. Patient portals can allow patients to self-monitor and remotely share their health status with health care professionals, but little data are available on their feasibility.

Objective

This paper presents the protocol of the Opal-COVID Study. Its objectives are to assess the implementation of the Opal patient portal for distance monitoring of self-isolating patients with COVID-19, identify influences on the intervention’s implementation, and describe service and patient outcomes of this intervention.

Methods

This mixed methods pilot study aims to recruit 50 patient participants with COVID-19 tested at the McGill University Health Centre (Montreal, Canada) for 14 days of follow-up. With access to an existing patient portal through a smartphone app, patients will complete a daily self-assessment of symptoms, vital signs, and mental health monitored by a nurse, and receive teleconsultations as needed. Study questionnaires will be administered to collect data on sociodemographic characteristics, medical background, implementation outcomes (acceptability, usability, and respondent burden), and patient satisfaction. Coordinator logbook entries will inform on feasibility outcomes, namely, on recruitment, retention, and fidelity, as well as on the frequency and nature of contacts with health care professionals. The statistical analyses for objectives 1 (implementation outcomes), 3 (service outcomes), and 4 (patient outcomes) will evaluate the effects of time and sociodemographic characteristics on the outcomes. For objectives 1 (implementation outcomes) and 4 (patient outcomes), the statistical analyses will also examine the attainment of predefined success thresholds. As for the qualitative analyses, for objective 2 (influences on implementation), semistructured qualitative interviews will be conducted with 4 groups of stakeholders (ie, patient participants, health care professionals, technology developers, and study administrators) and submitted for content analysis, guided by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research to help identify barriers to and facilitators of implementation. For objective 3 (service outcomes), reasons for contacting health care professionals through Opal will also be submitted for content analysis.

Results

Between December 2020 and March 2021, a total of 51 patient participants were recruited. Qualitative interviews were conducted with 39 stakeholders from April to September 2021. Delays were experienced owing to measures taken at the McGill University Health Centre to address COVID-19. The quantitative and qualitative analyses began in May 2022. As of June 2022, a total of 2 manuscripts (on the implementation and the patient outcomes) were being prepared, and 3 conference presentations had been given on the study’s methods.

Conclusions

This protocol is designed to generate multidisciplinary knowledge on the implementation of a patient portal–based COVID-19 care intervention and will lead to a comprehensive understanding of feasibility, stakeholder experience, and influences on implementation that may prove useful for scaling up similar interventions.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04978233; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04978233

International Registered Report Identifier (IRRID)

DERR1-10.2196/35760

LUMINA: A prospective trial omitting radiotherapy (RT) following breast conserving surgery (BCS) in T1N0 luminal A breast cancer (BC)

LBA501

Background: Adjuvant breast RT is usually prescribed following BCS to reduce the risk of local recurrence (LR). However, this treatment is inconvenient, costly, and associated with acute and late toxicity. Traditional clinical pathological factors (CPFs) alone are limited in their ability to identify women with a low enough risk of LR to omit RT. Molecular defined intrinsic subtypes of BC provide additional prognostic information with luminal A having the lowest risk of recurrence. A retrospective analysis of a previous trial suggested that women >60 years with luminal A grade 1-2 T1N0 BC treated by BCS and endocrine therapy alone had a low rate of LR ( JCO 2015; 33:2035). The utility of identifying luminal A subtype combined with CPFs has not been prospectively evaluated for its ability to guide RT decision-making. Methods: A prospective multicenter cohort study was performed. Eligibility criteria were: women ≥ 55 years; having undergone BCS for grade 1-2 T1N0 BC; ≥ 1mm margins of excision; luminal A subtype (defined as: ER ≥ 1%, PR>20%, HER2 negative and Ki67 ≤ 13.25%); and treated with adjuvant endocrine therapy. ER, PR and HER2 were performed locally as per ASCO guidelines. Patients meeting clinical eligibility with ER ≥ 1%, PR>20%, HER2 negative BC were registered and had Ki67 immunohistochemistry performed centrally in one of three Canadian laboratories using International Ki67 Working Group methods. Proficiency testing between laboratories was performed yearly. Patients with Ki67 ≤ 13.25% were enrolled in the trial and were assigned to not receive RT. The primary outcome was LR defined as time from enrollment to any invasive or non-invasive cancer in the ipsilateral breast. Assuming a 5-year LR rate of 3.5%, 500 patients were required to show that the upper bound of a two sided 90% (one-sided 95%) confidence interval (CI) was <5%. Patients were followed every six months for the first two years and then yearly. The probability of LR was estimated using the cumulative incidence function with death as a competing risk. Secondary outcomes were contralateral BC; relapse free survival (RFS) based on any recurrence; disease free survival (DFS) based on any recurrence, second cancer or death; and overall survival (OS). Results: From August 2013 to July 2017, 501 of 727 registered patients from 26 centers had a Ki67 ≤ 13.25% and were enrolled. Median follow-up was 5 years. Median age was 67 and 442 (88%) patients were <75 years. Median tumor size was 1.1 cm. The 5-year rate of LR satisfied our pre-specified boundary (see Table). Conclusions: Women ≥ 55 years with grade 1-2 T1N0 luminal A BC following BCS treated with endocrine therapy alone had very low rates of LR at 5 years and are candidates for omission of RT. Clinical trial information: NCT01791829. [Table: see text]

Trimodal therapy vs. radical cystectomy for muscle-invasive bladder cancer: A Canadian cost-effectiveness analysis

INTRODUCTION

Trimodal therapy (TMT) is a suitable alternative to neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) and radical cystectomy (RC) for patients with muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC). In this study, we conducted a cost-effectiveness evaluation of RC±NAC vs. TMT for MIBC in the universal and publicly funded Canadian healthcare system.

METHODS

We developed a Markov model with Monte-Carlo microsimulations. Rates and probabilities of transitioning within different health states (e.g., cure, locoregional recurrence, distant metastasis, death) were input in the model after a scoped literature review. Two main scenarios were considered: 1) academic center; and 2) populational-level. Results were reported in life-years gained (LYG), quality-adjusted life years (QALY), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). A sensitivity analysis was performed.

RESULTS

A total of 20 000 patients were simulated. For the academic center model, TMT was associated with increased effectiveness (both in LYG and QALY) at a higher cost compared to RC±NAC at five and 10 years. This resulted in an ICER of $19 746/QALY per patient undergoing the TMT strategy at 10 years of followup. For the populational-level model, RC±NAC was associated with higher effectiveness at 10 years, with an ICER of $3319/QALY per patient. This study was limited by heterogeneity within the studies used to build the model.

CONCLUSIONS

In this study, TMT performed in academic centers was cost-effective compared to RC±NAC, with higher effectiveness at a higher cost. On the other hand, RC±NAC was considered cost-effective compared to TMT at the populational-level. Further studies are needed to confirm these results.

Understanding the Risks and Benefits of a Patient Portal Configured for HIV Care: Patient and Healthcare Professional Perspectives

Background: Like other chronic viral illnesses, HIV infection necessitates consistent self-management and adherence to care and treatment, which in turn relies on optimal collaboration between patients and healthcare professionals (HCPs), including physicians, nurses, pharmacists, and clinical care coordinators. By providing people living with HIV (PLHIV) with access to their personal health information, educational material, and a communication channel with HCPs, a tailored patient portal could support their engagement in care. Our team intends to implement a patient portal in HIV-specialized clinics in Canada and France. We sought to understand the perceived risks and benefits among PLHIV and HCPs of patient portal use in HIV clinical care. Methods: This qualitative study recruited PLHIV and HIV-specialized HCPs, through maximum variation sampling and purposeful sampling, respectively. Semi-structured focus group discussions (FGDs) were held separately with PLHIV and HCPs between August 2019 and January 2020. FGDs were recorded, transcribed, coded using NVivo 12 software, and analyzed using content analysis. Results: A total of twenty-eight PLHIV participated in four FGDs, and thirty-one HCPs participated in six FGDs. PLHIV included eighteen men, nine women, and one person identifying as other; while, HCPs included ten men, twenty women, and one person identifying as other. A multi-disciplinary team of HCPs were included, involving physicians, nurses, pharmacists, social workers, and clinical coordinators. Participants identified five potential risks: (1) breach of confidentiality, (2) stress or uncertainty, (3) contribution to the digital divide, (4) dehumanization of care, and (5) increase in HCPs’ workload. They also highlighted four main benefits of using a patient portal: (1) improvement in HIV self-management, (2) facilitation of patient visits, (3) responsiveness to patient preferences, and (4) fulfillment of current or evolving patient needs. Conclusion: PLHIV and HCPs identified both risks and benefits of using a patient portal in HIV care. By engaging stakeholders and understanding their perspectives, the configuration of a patient portal can be optimized for end-users and concerns may be mitigated during its implementation.

Implementation of an electronic patient-reported measure of barriers to antiretroviral therapy adherence with the Opal patient portal: Protocol for a mixed method type 3 hybrid pilot study at a large Montreal HIV clinic

BACKGROUND

Adherence to antiretroviral therapy (ART) remains problematic. Regular monitoring of its barriers is clinically recommended, however, patient-provider communication around adherence is often inadequate. Our team thus decided to develop a new electronically administered patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) of barriers to ART adherence (the I-Score) to systematically capture this data for physician consideration in routine HIV care. To prepare for a controlled definitive trial to test the I-Score intervention, a pilot study was designed. Its primary objectives are to evaluate patient and physician perceptions of the I-Score intervention and its implementation strategy.

METHODS

This one-arm, 6-month study will adopt a mixed method type 3 implementation-effectiveness hybrid design and be conducted at the Chronic Viral Illness Service of the McGill University Health Centre (Montreal, Canada). Four HIV physicians and 32 of their HIV patients with known or suspected adherence problems will participate. The intervention will involve having patients complete the I-Score through a smartphone application (Opal), before meeting with their physician. Both patients and physicians will have access to the I-Score results, for consideration during the clinic visits at Times 1, 2 (3 months), and 3 (6 months). The implementation strategy will focus on stakeholder involvement, education, and training; promoting the intervention's adaptability; and hiring an Application Manager to facilitate implementation. Implementation, patient, and service outcomes will be collected (Times 1-2-3). The primary outcome is the intervention's acceptability to patients and physicians. Qualitative data obtained, in part, through physician focus groups (Times 2-3) and patient interviews (Times 2-3) will help evaluate the implementation strategy and inform any methodological adaptations.

DISCUSSION

This study will help plan a definitive trial to test the efficacy of the I-Score intervention. It will generate needed data on electronic PROM interventions in routine HIV care that will help improve understanding of conditions for their successful implementation.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT04702412; https://clinicaltrials.gov/.

Delivering Cancer Care During a Pandemic: Patient and Healthcare Staff Experience in a High-Volume Radiation Oncology Department

Purpose/Objective(s)

Materials/Methods

Results

Conclusion

The Financial Impact on Reimbursement of Moderately Hypofractionated Postoperative Radiation Therapy for Breast Cancer: An International Consortium Report

AIMS

Moderately hypofractionated breast irradiation has been evaluated in several prospective studies, resulting in wide acceptance of shorter treatment protocols for postoperative breast irradiation. Reimbursement for radiation therapy varies between private and public systems and between countries, impacting variably financial considerations in the use of hypofractionation. The aim of this study was to evaluate the financial impact of moderately hypofractionated breast irradiation by reimbursement system in different countries.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The study was designed by an international group of radiation oncologists. A web-questionnaire was distributed to representatives from each country. The participants were asked to involve the financial consultant at their institution.

RESULTS

Data from 13 countries from all populated continents were collected (Europe: Denmark, France, Italy, the Netherlands, Spain, UK; North America: Canada, USA; South America: Brazil; Africa: South Africa; Oceania: Australia; Asia: Israel, Taiwan). Clinicians and/or departments in most of the countries surveyed (77%) receive remuneration based on the number of fractions delivered to the patient. The financial loss per patient estimated resulting from applying moderately hypofractionated breast irradiation instead of conventional fractionation ranged from 5-10% to 30-40%, depending on the healthcare provider.

CONCLUSION

Although a generalised adoption of moderately hypofractionated breast irradiation would allow for a considerable reduction in social and economic burden, the financial loss for the healthcare providers induced by fee-for-service remuneration may be a factor in the slow uptake of these regimens. Therefore, fee-for-service reimbursement may not be preferable for radiation oncology. We propose that an alternative system of remuneration, such as bundled payments based on stage and diagnosis, may provide more value for all stakeholders.

Barriers to Use of Remote Monitoring Technologies Used to Support Patients With COVID-19: Rapid Review

Background

The COVID-19 pandemic has acted as a catalyst for the development and adoption of a broad range of remote monitoring technologies (RMTs) in health care delivery. It is important to demonstrate how these technologies were implemented during the early stages of this pandemic to identify their application and barriers to adoption, particularly among vulnerable populations.

Objective

The purpose of this knowledge synthesis was to present the range of RMTs used in delivering care to patients with COVID-19 and to identify perceived benefits of and barriers to their use. The review placed a special emphasis on health equity considerations.

Methods

A rapid review of published research was conducted using Embase, MEDLINE, and QxMD for records published from the inception of COVID-19 (December 2019) to July 6, 2020. Synthesis involved content analysis of reported benefits of and barriers to the use of RMTs when delivering health care to patients with COVID-19, in addition to health equity considerations.

Results

Of 491 records identified, 48 publications that described 35 distinct RMTs were included in this review. RMTs included use of existing technologies (eg, videoconferencing) and development of new ones that have COVID-19–specific applications. Content analysis of perceived benefits generated 34 distinct codes describing advantages of RMTs, mapped to 10 themes overall. Further, 52 distinct codes describing barriers to use of RMTs were mapped to 18 themes. Prominent themes associated with perceived benefits included a lower burden of care (eg, for hospitals, health care practitioners; 28 records), reduced infection risk (n=33), and support for vulnerable populations (n=14). Prominent themes reflecting barriers to use of RMTs included equity-related barriers (eg, affordability of technology for users, poor internet connectivity, poor health literacy; n=16), the need for quality “best practice” guidelines for use of RMTs in clinical care (n=12), and the need for additional resources to develop and support new technologies (n=11). Overall, 23 of 48 records commented on equity characteristics that stratify health opportunities and outcomes, including general characteristics that vary over time (eg, age, comorbidities; n=17), place of residence (n=11), and socioeconomic status (n=7).

Conclusions

Results of this rapid review highlight the breadth of RMTs being used to monitor and inform treatment of COVID-19, the potential benefits of using these technologies, and existing barriers to their use. Results can be used to prioritize further efforts in the implementation of RMTs (eg, developing “best practice” guidelines for use of RMTs and generating strategies to improve equitable access for marginalized populations).

Acceptability of a Patient Portal (Opal) in HIV Clinical Care: A Feasibility Study

Opal (opalmedapps.com), a patient portal in use at the Cedars Cancer Centre of the McGill University Health Centre (MUHC) (Montreal, Canada), gives cancer patients access to their medical records, collects information on patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), and has demonstrated patient satisfaction with care. This feasibility study aims to evaluate Opal's potential acceptability in the context of HIV care. People living with HIV (PLWH) and their healthcare providers (HCPs) completed cross-sectional surveys from August 2019 to February 2020 at large HIV centers, including the Chronic Viral Illness Service of the MUHC, and other HIV clinical sites in Montreal and Paris, France. This study comprised 114 PLWH (mean age 48 years old, SD = 12.4), including 74% men, 24% women, and 2% transgender or other; and 31 HCPs (mean age 46.5 years old, SD = 11.4), including 32% men, 65% women, and 3% other. Ownership of smartphones and tablets was high (93% PLWH, 96% HCPs), and participants were willing to use Opal (74% PLWH, 68% HCPs). Participants were interested in most Opal functions and PROMs, particularly PROMs capturing quality of life (89% PLWH, 77% HCPs), experience of healthcare (86% PLWH, 97% HCPs), and HIV self-management (92% PLWH, 97% HCPs). This study suggests Opal has high acceptability and potential usefulness as perceived by PLWH and HCPs.

The use of moderately hypofractionated post-operative radiation therapy for breast cancer in clinical practice: A critical review

Post-operative radiation therapy (RT) reduces loco-regional recurrence rates and mortality in most patients with non-metastatic breast cancer. The aim of this critical review is to provide an overview of the applicability of moderately hypofractionated RT for breast cancer patients, focusing on factors influencing clinical decision-making. An international group of radiation oncologists agreed to assess, integrate, and interpret the existing evidence into a practical report to guide clinicians in their daily management of breast cancer patients. We conclude that moderately hypofractionated RT to the breast, chest wall (with/without breast reconstruction), and regional lymph nodes is at least as safe and effective as conventionally fractionated regimens and could be considered as the treatment option for the vast majority of the patients.For those who are still concerned about its generalised application, we recommend participating in ongoing trials comparing moderately hypofractionated RT to conventionally fractionated RT for breast cancer patients in some clinical circumstances.

The use of moderately hypofractionated post-operative radiation therapy for breast cancer in clinical practice: A critical review

Post-operative radiation therapy (RT) reduces loco-regional recurrence rates and mortality in most patients with non-metastatic breast cancer. The aim of this critical review is to provide an overview of the applicability of moderately hypofractionated RT for breast cancer patients, focusing on factors influencing clinical decision-making. An international group of radiation oncologists agreed to assess, integrate, and interpret the existing evidence into a practical report to guide clinicians in their daily management of breast cancer patients. We conclude that moderately hypofractionated RT to the breast, chest wall (with/without breast reconstruction), and regional lymph nodes is at least as safe and effective as conventionally fractionated regimens and could be considered as the treatment option for the vast majority of the patients.For those who are still concerned about its generalised application, we recommend participating in ongoing trials comparing moderately hypofractionated RT to conventionally fractionated RT for breast cancer patients in some clinical circumstances.

The impact on clinical outcomes of post-operative radiation therapy delay after neoadjuvant chemotherapy in patients with breast cancer: A multicentric international study

Introduction

Radiation therapy (RT) is frequently used for post-operative treatment in breast cancer (BC) patients who received preoperative systemic therapy (PST) and surgery. Nevertheless, the optimal timing to start RT is unclear.

Material and methods

Data from BC patients who underwent chemotherapy as PST, breast surgery and RT at 3 Institutions in Brazil and Canada from 2008 to 2014 were evaluated. Patients were classified into three groups regarding to the time to initiation of RT after surgery: <8 weeks, 8–16 weeks and >16 weeks.

Results

A total of 1029 women were included, most of them (59.1%; N = 608) had clinical stage III. One hundred and forty-one patients initiated RT within 8 weeks, 663 between 8 and 16 weeks and 225 beyond 16 weeks from surgery. With a median follow-up of 32 months, no differences in disease-free survival (DFS), overall survival and locoregional recurrence-free survival (LRRFS) were observed of time to indicated RT (<8 weeks versus 8–16 weeks versus >16 weeks). However, in luminal subtype patients (46.5%; N = 478), initiation of RT up to 8 weeks after surgery was associated with better LRRFS (<8 weeks versus >16 weeks: HR 0.22; 95%CI 0.05–0.86; p = 0.03), with a tendency to a better DFS (<8 weeks versus >16 weeks: HR 0.50; 95%CI 0.25–1.00).

Conclusion

RT initiated up to 8 weeks after surgery was related to better LRRFS in luminal BC patients who underwent PST. Our results suggest that early start of RT is important for these patients.

•

RT is used for treatment in breast cancer patients who received chemotherapy as preoperative systemic therapy (PST).

•

The optimal timing to start RT is unclear.

•

RT initiated up to 8 weeks after surgery was related to better local control in luminal BC patients who underwent PST.

Tumour response 3 months after neoadjuvant single-fraction radiotherapy for low-risk breast cancer

Introduction

Standard treatment for early-stage invasive breast cancer (bca) consists of breast-conserving surgery and several weeks of adjuvant radiotherapy (rt). Neoadjuvant single-fraction rt is a novel approach for early-stage bca. We sought to investigate the effect of delaying surgery after neoadjuvant rt with respect to the rate of pathologic response (pr).

Methods

Women 65 years of age or older with a new diagnosis of stage i luminal A bca were eligible for inclusion. A single 20 Gy dose to the primary breast tumour was given, followed by breast-conserving surgery 3 months later. The primary endpoint was the pr rate assessed by microscopic evaluation using the Miller-Payne system.

Results

To date, 10 patients have been successfully treated. Median age of the patients was 72 years (range: 65-84 years). In 8 patients, neoadjuvant rt resulted in a tumour pr with median residual cellularity of 3%. No immediate rt complications other than mild dermatitis were noted.

Conclusions

This study demonstrates a method for delivering single-fraction rt that can lead to a high level of pr in most patients. Continued accrual to this study and subsequent trials are needed to determine the feasibility, safety, and role of this novel technique in the management of early-stage bca.

Dynamic Neutrophil-to-Lymphocyte Ratio: A Novel Prognosis Measure for Triple-Negative Breast Cancer

BACKGROUND

The neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) is a measure of systemic inflammation and a prognostic factor for multiple malignancies. This study assesses the value of the NLR as an independent prognostic marker in triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) and explores the association between dynamic NLR changes and patient outcomes.

METHODS

The study retrospectively analyzed a prospectively maintained database including patients 18 to 80 years old with TNBC treated at the authors' institution between 2006 to 2016. Clinical and demographic data were collected, including blood test results and treatments received. Age at diagnosis, stage of disease, and NLR scores were tested for association with overall and disease-free survival in uni- and multivariate Cox models.

RESULTS

The inclusion criteria were met by 329 women with a median age of 58. Most of the patients had early-stage disease (30.1% with stage 1 and 47% with stage 2 malignancy). An NLR higher than 2.84 at diagnosis was associated with decreased overall survival (hazard ratio [HR], 1.8; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.023-3.176), whereas an NLR higher than 7.82 at any time during the follow-up period was a strong predictor of 5-year mortality (HR, 10.76; 95% CI, 4.193-26.58), independent of age or stage of disease. Patients who experienced recurrence had a higher NLR than their counterparts during the 6 months before recurrence. The NLR also significantly rose during the final 18 months of life (p < 0.01).

CONCLUSION

The NLR is an important prognostic marker in TNBC, both at diagnosis and during the course of the disease. Moreover, dynamic changes in NLR strongly correlate with disease recurrence and the time of death.

Computed tomography-based virtual simulation versus ultrasound-based clinical setup in electron breast boost radiotherapy: Methodology for CT-based electron virtual simulation

PURPOSE

To compare clinical setup using ultrasound (U/S)-delineated target versus computed tomography (CT) virtual simulation using CT-outlined target in breast electron boost. To describe a methodology for electron virtual simulation and collision testing with the treatment planning system (TPS).

METHODS

The two techniques were compared in a prospective study on 12 patients, who were treated using a clinical setup. Target definition was performed by both U/S and CT imaging. The U/S-based target was made visible on CT images by placing a radio-opaque wire on U/S skin markings. The dose distribution of the clinical setup was reproduced in the TPS using the actual electron patient treatment parameters. A CT-based TPS virtual simulation/dose optimization was compared to the clinical setup technique.

RESULTS

Mean beam aperture was larger by 16.3 cm² (p = 0.011) for U/S compared to CT-outlined target. Target mean depth difference (CT minus U/S) was 0.03 cm (p = 0.875). Target coverage at depth was adequate in all cases with CT-based simulation while under/overcovering the target at depth by more than 5 mm in 2 out of 12 cases with clinical setup. Mean target V_90% was 98.5% (CT-based simulation) and 84.4% (clinical setup). Ipsilateral lung/breast were better spared with CT-based simulation. To date, the methodology for CT virtual simulation was applied on 152 patients and collision was avoided in all cases.

CONCLUSIONS

CT-based simulation and target delineation allows for improved definition of the en-face electron field with less amount of normal tissue irradiated while including the entire target with an adequate margin and optimal electron energy.

Statin Use and Risk of Vascular Events Among Cancer Patients After Radiotherapy to the Thorax, Head, and Neck

Background

This study aimed to explore whether statins reduce radiation‐induced vascular complications in cancer patients postradiotherapy to the thorax, head, and neck.

Methods and Results

We conducted a retrospective cohort study within a provincial linked database of 5718 cardiac patients with thorax and head or neck cancer having undergone radiotherapy between 2000 and 2011. One thousand five hundred fifty‐two patients were identified as nonstatin users and 4166 as statin users. The primary outcome of interest was the composite of cerebrovascular (transient ischemic attack, and fatal or nonfatal stroke) or cardiovascular events (fatal or nonfatal myocardial infarction). Time‐dependent Cox proportional hazard analyses were performed. The crude event rate was 10.31% for nonusers and 9.03% for statin users (hazard ratio of 0.92 [95% CI 0.76–1.10, P=0.3451]), over a mean time to event/censoring of 534±687 days for nonusers and 594±706 days for the statin users. After adjusting for age, sex, prior history of stroke/transient ischemic attack or myocardial infarction, diabetes mellitus, dyslipidemia, atrial fibrillation, chronic kidney disease, heart failure, and hypertension, statin use postradiotherapy was associated with a nonsignificant 15% relative risk reduction, but a strong trend toward reducing the primary outcome (hazard ratio=0.85 95% CI 0.69–1.04, P=0.0811). The use of statins was associated with a significant reduction of 32% for the outcome of stroke alone (hazard ratio=0.68, 95% CI 0.48–0.98, P=0.0368).

Conclusions

Statin use post radiation therapy was associated with a significant reduction in stroke, with a trend toward significantly reducing cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events.

Design and Development of a Person-Centered Patient Portal Using Participatory Stakeholder Co-Design

Background

Patient portals are increasingly accepted as part of standard medical care. However, to date, most patient portals provide just passive access to medical data. The use of modern technology such as smartphones and data personalization algorithms offers the potential to make patient portals more person-centered and enabling.

Objective

The aim of this study is to share our experience in designing and developing a person-centered patient portal following a participatory stakeholder co-design approach.

Methods

Our stakeholder co-design approach comprised 6 core elements: (1) equal coleadership, including a cancer patient on treatment; (2) patient preference determination; (3) security, governance, and legal input; (4) continuous user evaluation and feedback; (5) continuous staff input; and (6) end-user testing. We incorporated person-centeredness by recognizing that patients should decide for themselves their level of medical data access, all medical data should be contextualized with explanatory content, and patient educational material should be personalized and timely.

Results

Using stakeholder co-design, we built, and are currently pilot-testing, a person-centered patient portal smartphone app called Opal.

Conclusions

Inclusion of all stakeholders in the design and development of patient-facing software can help ensure that the necessary elements of person-centeredness, clinician acceptability, and informatics feasibility are achieved.

Are radiation oncologists following guidelines? An audit of practice in patients with uncomplicated bone metastases

•

At our center single fraction radiotherapy is used in accordance with guidelines.

•

Patient age, performance status and tumor histology influence treatment choice.

•

We added a quality indicator to our performance dashboard to improve adherence.

•

This strategy can be used in other complex practices and improve quality of care.

Background

Best-practice guidelines recommend single-fraction (SFRT) instead of multi-fraction radiation therapy (MFRT) for uncomplicated symptomatic bone metastases. SFRT is comparable to MFRT in relieving pain, convenient for patients, and cost-effective. Patterns of practice in Canada reveal that SFRT is underused, with significant variability across the country. We audited SFRT use and studied factors that may influence treatment decisions at a large academic tertiary care center in Quebec, Canada.

Methods

Patients who received radiotherapy for uncomplicated bone metastases between February 2014 and March 2015 were reviewed. Age, gender, primary histology, site of metastases and performance status were identified as potential factors affecting fractionation. These were explored by Fisher's test on univariate analysis and logistic regression for multivariate analysis. Retreatment rates were analyzed with cumulative incidence and compared with Gray's test.

Results

254 radiotherapy courses were administered to 165 patients, 85.4% of which were delivered using a single fraction of 8 Gy. Patients age less than 70 years and those with breast histology were more likely to receive MFRT (p = 0.04; p = 0.0046). Performance status (ECOG) was a significant predictor of fractionation because of high correlations between young age, breast histology, and ECOG status (p = 0.03). Follow-up was too short in 40% of patients to derive definitive conclusions on retreatment.

Conclusions

In accordance with current guidelines, our audit confirms that use of SFRT in patients with uncomplicated bone metastases at our center is high. We identified that patient age, primary histology, and performance status influenced fractionation. Incorporation of this quality indicator into our performance dashboard will allow assessment of retreatment differences and other criteria that may also influence treatment choice.

Development of a person-centered patient portal in oncology using stakeholder co-design

221

Background: Patient portals are software products that provide care recipients (patients) with access to some or all of their personal health information (PHI) within a healthcare institution’s electronic medical record (EMR). Most patient portals are just that–windows into an EMR. However, in today’s connected world, a patient portal can offer much more than just access to PHI. By exploiting modern technology and by recognizing that care recipients are people with complex needs that extend beyond just the delivery of care, patient portals can be person-centered. Such person-centered needs include: the ability to plan ahead and know one’s position in a waiting list, to feel in control of one’s own care, to understand one’s treatment options, and to share in all decision-making about one’s care. Methods: We used stakeholder co-design, involving care recipients, care providers (clinicians) and technical experts at all levels, to design and develop a person-centered patient portal from within the healthcare system. Results: Our mobile-friendly patient portal, known as Opal (opalmedapps.com), contains the following: One-stop multi-speciality and multi-institutional operation; Appointment schedule with personalized appointment preparation guidelines; Appointment check-in and waiting room management tools; Monitoring of step-by-step radiotherapy treatment planning; Access to PHI contextualized with explanatory information; Access to personalized educational materials; Patient-reported outcomes questionnaires with response visualizations; An automated rules-based system to minimize clinician workload; Triggered notifications to alert patients and clinicians to actionable events. Conclusions: Opal is currently in beta release involving a small number of oncology patients at our centre who are providing feedback about its use and usefulness. Their initial feedback is very positive and enthusiastic. A full pilot study is starting by July 2018.

Interest of Supportive and Barrier Protective Skin Care Products in the Daily Prevention and Treatment of Cutaneous Toxicity During Radiotherapy for Breast Cancer

Purpose:

As many as 50% of patients with cancer develop acute skin reactions to some degree with radiotherapy. Proactive skin care is often recommended to minimise these skin reactions and maintain the integrity of the epidermal barrier; nevertheless, no consensual guidelines are systematically used. This multicentre, observational, prospective study evaluated the tolerability and benefit of supportive and barrier protective skin care products in preventing radiotherapy-induced skin reactions in 253 women initiating radiotherapy (exclusive or adjuvant) for breast cancer.

Methods:

Patients received a kit of 5 commercially available skin care products before the first radiotherapy treatment. The following variables were assessed: cutaneous adverse events, investigator-assessed skin reactions (oedema, erythema, dryness, desquamation) before and after radiotherapy course, investigator, and patient opinion on products benefit. Results were analysed by frequency of product use (heavy versus low).

Results:

Average age was 60 years (range: 34-85). Over 92% of patients reported good to excellent tolerance on irradiated skin for each product. During the 6-week radiotherapy period, we observed that heavy product users had less skin reactions than the low users, particularly within 10 days of radiotherapy initiation (8% versus 18%; p = .031). Positive physician’s opinion on product use was more frequent for high (66.6%) versus low (32%) users. Patient-assessed patient benefit index was generally >1, indicating relevant treatment benefit, with a tendency for better benefit in high versus low users.

Conclusions:

These results support recommendations to use skin care products to minimise the impact of secondary cutaneous reactions with radiotherapy cancer treatment.

Development and implementation of a radiation therapy incident learning system compatible with local workflow and a national taxonomy

PURPOSE

Collaborative incident learning initiatives in radiation therapy promise to improve and standardize the quality of care provided by participating institutions. However, the software interfaces provided with such initiatives must accommodate all participants and thus are not optimized for the workflows of individual radiation therapy centers. This article describes the development and implementation of a radiation therapy incident learning system that is optimized for a clinical workflow and uses the taxonomy of the Canadian National System for Incident Reporting - Radiation Treatment (NSIR-RT).

METHODS

The described incident learning system is a novel version of an open-source software called the Safety and Incident Learning System (SaILS). A needs assessment was conducted prior to development to ensure SaILS (a) was intuitive and efficient (b) met changing staff needs and (c) accommodated revisions to NSIR-RT. The core functionality of SaILS includes incident reporting, investigations, tracking, and data visualization. Postlaunch modifications of SaILS were informed by discussion and a survey of radiation therapy staff.

RESULTS

There were 240 incidents detected and reported using SaILS in 2016 and the number of incidents per month tended to increase throughout the year. An increase in incident reporting occurred after switching to fully online incident reporting from an initial hybrid paper-electronic system. Incident templating functionality and a connection with our center's oncology information system were incorporated into the investigation interface to minimize repetitive data entry. A taskable actions feature was also incorporated to document outcomes of incident reports and has since been utilized for 36% of reported incidents.

CONCLUSIONS

Use of SaILS and the NSIR-RT taxonomy has improved the structure of, and staff engagement with, incident learning in our center. Software and workflow modifications informed by staff feedback improved the utility of SaILS and yielded an efficient and transparent solution to categorize incidents with the NSIR-RT taxonomy.

Creation of an educational quality improvement program for radiation oncology residents

PURPOSE

Quality improvement (QI) is a pillar of good clinical governance and is at the center of modern health care. The Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada mandated, in CanMeds 2015, that QI should be taught and the competencies assessed in all postgraduate residency programs. The objective is to report on the feasibility and impact of teaching QI to radiation oncology residents at a single institution.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

A QI team consisting of a clinical fellow, 3 staff physicians, and an expert in QI methods was created within our Department of Radiation Oncology. QI teaching took place in a longitudinal manner, with approximately 12 hours of direct faculty teaching. A mandatory curriculum divided into foundation and intermediate and advanced competencies was devised. Phase 1 teaching, delivered during 2 academic half-days, consisted of didactic lectures, practical workshops, and self-directed online modules. Phase 2 required intermediate-year residents to complete a 9-month QI project. A QI day hosted by the department invited QI experts to teach and enabled residents to present their work, with merit prizes awarded. Our program evaluation used validated assessment tools (self-assessment, QI knowledge-based assessments, and balanced score cards) before and after curriculum implementation and answers quantified using satisfaction indices (SI).

RESULTS

Subjective and objective assessments demonstrated improvements in residents' QI knowledge acquisition following curriculum implementation. Those who had completed a project (n = 4) had greater confidence with QI methodology compared with those who had completed phase 1 alone (n = 2) (mean SI, 53% precurriculum to 66.5% and 90%). The majority lacked previous QI teaching and knowledge, but learner attitudes improved (SI, 50%-70%) and 91% of colleagues were enthusiastic about the program being implemented.

CONCLUSION

We have demonstrated that implementation of a QI curriculum for radiation oncology residents is feasible and that early results suggesting improvements of attitude and knowledge are positive. We anticipate that the QI skills gained will enable the residents to elevate the quality of their practice throughout their subsequent careers.

Association of Radiotherapy Boost for Ductal Carcinoma In Situ With Local Control After Whole-Breast Radiotherapy

Importance

The use of a radiotherapy (RT) boost to the tumor bed after whole-breast RT (WBRT) for ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) is largely extrapolated from invasive cancer data, but robust evidence specific to DCIS is lacking.

Objective

To compare ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence (IBTR) in women with DCIS treated with vs without the RT boost after breast-conserving surgery and WBRT.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This retrospective analysis pooled deidentified patient-level data from 10 academic institutions in the United States, Canada, and France from January 1, 1980, through December 31, 2010. All patients had newly diagnosed pure DCIS (no microinvasion), underwent breast-conserving surgery, and received WBRT with or without the boost with a minimum of 5 years of follow-up required for inclusion in the analysis. Given the limited events after WBRT, an a priori power analysis was conducted to estimate the DCIS sample size needed to detect the anticipated benefit of the boost. Data were uniformly recoded at the host institution and underwent primary and secondary reviews before analysis. Sample size calculations (ratio of patients who received the boost dose to those who did not, 2:1; α = .05; power = 80%) estimated that 2982 cases were needed to detect a difference of at least 3%. The final analysis included 4131 patients (2661 in the boost group and 1470 in the no-boost group) with a median follow-up of 9 years and media boost dose of 14 Gy. Data were collected from July 2011 through February 2014 and analyzed from March 2014 through August 2015.

Interventions

Radiotherapy boost vs no boost.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence.

Results

The analysis included 4131 patients (median [SD] age, 56.1 [10.9] years; range, 24-88 years). Patients with positive margins, unknown estrogen receptor status, and comedo necrosis were more likely to have received an RT boost. For the entire cohort, the boost was significantly associated with lower IBTR (hazard ratio [HR], 0.73; 95% CI, 0.57-0.94; P = .01) and with IBTR-free survival (boost vs no-boost groups) of 97.1% (95% CI, 0.96-0.98) vs 96.3% (95% CI, 0.95-0.97) at 5 years, 94.1% (95% CI, 0.93-0.95) vs 92.5% (95% CI, 0.91-0.94) at 10 years, and 91.6% (95% CI, 0.90-0.93) vs 88.0% (95% CI, 0.85-0.91) at 15 years. On multivariable analysis accounting for confounding factors, the boost remained significantly associated with reduced IBTR (HR compared with no boost, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.50-0.91; P = .01) independent of age and tamoxifen citrate use.

Conclusions and Relevance

This patient-level analysis suggests that the RT boost confers a statistically significant benefit in decreasing IBTR across all DCIS age groups, similar to that seen in patients with invasive breast cancer. These findings suggest that a DCIS RT boost to the tumor bed could be considered to provide an added incremental benefit in decreasing IBTR after a shared discussion between the patient and her radiation oncologist.

Postoperative Radiation Therapy after Nipple-Sparing or Skin-Sparing Mastectomy: A Survey of European, North American, and South American Practices

Skin sparing mastectomy, a surgical procedure sparing a large portion of the overlying skin of the breast, and nipple-sparing mastectomy, sparing the whole nipple-areolar complex, are increasingly used, although their oncologic efficacy remains unclear. The aim of this study was to assess the radiation oncologists' opinions regarding the indications of radiation therapy (RT) after skin-sparing mastectomy and nipple-sparing mastectomy. Radiation oncology members of four national and international societies were invited to complete a questionnaire comprising of 22 questions to assess their opinions regarding RT indications in the context of skin-sparing and nipple-sparing mastectomy. A total of 298 radiation oncologists answered the questionnaire. 90.9% of respondents affirmed that breast cancer is one of their specializations. The majority declared that post-mastectomy RT is indicated for early-stage (stages I and II) breast cancer patients who present with risk factors for recurrence after skin-sparing or nipple-sparing mastectomy (87.2% and 80.2%, respectively). All suggested risk factors (tumor size, lymph node involvement, extracapsular extension, lymphovascular space invasion, positive surgical margins, triple negative tumor, multicentric tumor, and age) were considered as major elements (important or very important). There is no consensus regarding the necessity of evaluating residual breast tissue or the definition of residual breast tissue after mastectomy. All classic factors were considered as major elements, potentially influencing the decision to advice or not postoperative RT. Many uncertainties remain about the indications for RT after skin-sparing mastectomy or nipple-sparing mastectomy.