H. Struikmans

Impact of a Higher Radiation Dose on Local Control and Survival in Breast-Conserving Therapy of Early Breast Cancer: 10-Year Results of the Randomized Boost Versus No Boost EORTC 22881-10882 Trial

Purpose To investigate the long-term impact of a boost radiation dose of 16 Gy on local control, fibrosis, and overall survival for patients with stage I and II breast cancer who underwent breast-conserving therapy. Patients and Methods A total of 5,318 patients with microscopically complete excision followed by whole-breast irradiation of 50 Gy were randomly assigned to receive either a boost dose of 16 Gy (2,661 patients) or no boost dose (2,657 patients), with a median follow-up of 10.8 years. Results The median age was 55 years. Local recurrence was reported as the first treatment failure in 278 patients with no boost versus 165 patients with boost; at 10 years, the cumulative incidence of local recurrence was 10.2% versus 6.2% for the no boost and the boost group, respectively (P < .0001). The hazard ratio of local recurrence was 0.59 (0.46 to 0.76) in favor of the boost, with no statistically significant interaction per age group. The absolute risk reduction at 10 years per age group was the largest...

Internal Mammary and Medial Supraclavicular Irradiation in Breast Cancer

BACKGROUND The effect of internal mammary and medial supraclavicular lymph-node irradiation (regional nodal irradiation) added to whole-breast or thoracic-wall irradiation after surgery on survival among women with early-stage breast cancer is unknown. METHODS We randomly assigned women who had a centrally or medially located primary tumor, irrespective of axillary involvement, or an externally located tumor with axillary involvement to undergo either whole-breast or thoracic-wall irradiation in addition to regional nodal irradiation (nodal-irradiation group) or whole-breast or thoracic-wall irradiation alone (control group). The primary end point was overall survival. Secondary end points were the rates of disease-free survival, survival free from distant disease, and death from breast cancer. RESULTS Between 1996 and 2004, a total of 4004 patients underwent randomization. The majority of patients (76.1%) underwent breast-conserving surgery. After mastectomy, 73.4% of the patients in both groups underwent chest-wall irradiation. Nearly all patients with node-positive disease (99.0%) and 66.3% of patients with node-negative disease received adjuvant systemic treatment. At a median follow-up of 10.9 years, 811 patients had died. At 10 years, overall survival was 82.3% in the nodal-irradiation group and 80.7% in the control group (hazard ratio for death with nodal irradiation, 0.87; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.76 to 1.00; P=0.06). The rate of disease-free survival was 72.1% in the nodal-irradiation group and 69.1% in the control group (hazard ratio for disease progression or death, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.80 to 1.00; P=0.04), the rate of distant disease-free survival was 78.0% versus 75.0% (hazard ratio, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.76 to 0.98; P=0.02), and breast-cancer mortality was 12.5% versus 14.4% (hazard ratio, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.70 to 0.97; P=0.02). Acute side effects of regional nodal irradiation were modest. CONCLUSIONS In patients with early-stage breast cancer, irradiation of the regional nodes had a marginal effect on overall survival. Disease-free survival and distant disease-free survival were improved, and breast-cancer mortality was reduced. (Funded by Fonds Cancer; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00002851.).

The influence of patient, tumor and treatment factors on the cosmetic results after breast-conserving therapy in the EORTC ‘boost vs. no boost’ trial

PURPOSE To analyze the influence of different patient, tumor, and treatment parameters on the cosmetic outcome after breast-conserving therapy at 3-year follow-up. A subjective and an objective cosmetic scoring method was used and the results of both methods were compared. PATIENTS AND METHODS In EORTC trial 22881/10882, 5569 early-stage breast cancer patients were treated with tumorectomy and axillary dissection, followed by tangential fields irradiation of the breast to a dose of 50 Gy in 5 weeks, at 2 Gy per fraction. A total of 5318 patients, having a microscopically complete tumorectomy, were randomized between no further treatment and a boost of 16 Gy to the primary tumor bed. The cosmetic result at 3-year follow-up was assessed by a panel for 731 patients, and by digitizer measurements, measuring the displacement of the nipple, for 1141 patients. Univariate and multivariate analyses were used to evaluate the correlation between various patient, tumor, and treatment factors and cosmesis. RESULTS The factors associated with a worsened cosmesis according to the panel evaluation were: an inferior tumor location, a large excision volume, the presence of postoperative breast complications, and the radiotherapy boost. According to the digitizer measurements, a central/superior tumor location, a large excision volume, an increased pathological tumor size, an increased radiation dose inhomogeneity, and an increased bra cup size resulted in an increased asymmetry in nipple position. It appeared that the evaluation of the nipple position (whether by panel or by digitizer) is only moderately representative of the overall cosmetic outcome. CONCLUSION To achieve a good cosmesis, it is necessary to excise the tumor with a limited margin, to avoid postoperative complications, to assess the need for a boost in the individual patient, and to give the radiation dose as homogeneously as possible. As far as the method of evaluation is concerned, the panel evaluation is the most appropriate method for giving an overall impression of the cosmetic result after breast-conserving therapy (BCT). The use of the digitizer is recommended for comparing the cosmetic outcome of two different approaches to BCT or for analyzing cosmetic changes over time.

Radiotherapy during pregnancy: fact and fiction

Radiotherapy during pregnancy might cause harm to the developing fetus. Generally, pregnant women with malignant diseases are advised to delay radiotherapy until after delivery. However, this advice is not based on knowledge of the risks of radiation to the unborn child. In general, the expected radiation effects, such as mental retardation and organ malformations probably only arise above a threshold dose of 0.1-0.2 Gy. This threshold dose is not generally reached with curative radiotherapy during pregnancy, provided that tumours are located sufficiently far from the fetus and that precautions have been taken to protect the unborn child against leakage radiation and collimator scatter of the teletherapy machine; such precautions also reduce the risk of radiation-induced childhood cancer and leukaemia in the unborn child.

Breast carcinoma during pregnancy. International recommendations from an expert meeting.

O ne of the recommendations from an expert meeting regarding breast carcinoma treatment during pregnancy was that radiation therapy should be delayed until after delivery. However, we believe the authors have overestimated the risks of radiation therapy. The risks of irradiation have been reviewed previously by the International Commission on Radiological Protection. In general, the expected effects are malformations, a decrease in intelligence, mental retardation (deterministic effects), and cancer induction. For deterministic effects, threshold doses of 0.2 gray (Gy) have been found. An estimate of the lifetime risk of radiation-induced fatal cancer at 0.01 Gy is approximately 0.06%. Maternal breast irradiation in the first 8 weeks of organogenesis will expose the fetus to 0.05–0.15 Gy (the reference dose is 50 Gy). Toward the end of pregnancy, the fetus lies closer to the radiation field and could receive >1 Gy for the same treatment course. However, the fetal dose due to leakage radiation from the tube head of the linear accelerator and scatter from collimator and blocks can be reduced with a factor 2 to 4 by proper shielding. Therefore, in the majority of cases, the radiation dose can be kept below the threshold dose for deterministic effects. The risk of radiation-induced cancer is low, and is negligible with a lifetime risk, without irradiation, of approximately 1 in 3. A review of successful radiation therapy for breast cancer (as well as Hodgkin disease) with supplemental shielding during pregnancy was published recently. In summary, the recommendation not to irradiate a pregnant patient until after birth is not tenable. Pregnancy is not a contraindication to radiotherapy in patients with breast cancer and other cancers that develop away from the pelvis.

Impact of Pathological Characteristics on Local Relapse After Breast-Conserving Therapy: A Subgroup Analysis of the EORTC Boost Versus No Boost Trial

PURPOSE To investigate the long-term impact of pathologic characteristics and an extra boost dose of 16 Gy on local relapse, for stage I and II invasive breast cancer patients treated with breast conserving therapy (BCT). PATIENTS AND METHODS In the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer boost versus no boost trial, after whole breast irradiation, patients with microscopically complete excision of invasive tumor, were randomly assigned to receive or not an extra boost dose of 16 Gy. For a subset of 1,616 patients central pathology review was performed. RESULTS The 10-year cumulative risk of local breast cancer relapse as a first event was not significantly influenced if the margin was scored negative, close or positive for invasive tumor or ductal carcinoma in situ according to central pathology review (log-rank P = .45 and P = .57, respectively). In multivariate analysis, high-grade invasive ductal carcinoma was associated with an increased risk of local relapse (P = .026; hazard ratio [HR], 1.67), as was age younger than 50 years (P < .0001; HR, 2.38). The boost dose of 16 Gy significantly reduced the local relapse rate (P = .0006; HR, 0.47). For patients younger than 50 years old and in patients with high grade invasive ductal carcinoma, the boost dose reduced the local relapse from 19.4% to 11.4% (P = .0046; HR, 0.51) and from 18.9% to 8.6% (P = .01; HR, 0.42), respectively. CONCLUSION Young age and high-grade invasive ductal cancer were the most important risk factors for local relapse, while margin status had no significant influence. A boost dose of 16 Gy significantly reduced the negative effects of both young age and high-grade invasive cancer.

Whole-breast irradiation with or without a boost for patients treated with breast-conserving surgery for early breast cancer: 20-year follow-up of a randomised phase 3 trial

BACKGROUND Since the introduction of breast-conserving treatment, various radiation doses after lumpectomy have been used. In a phase 3 randomised controlled trial, we investigated the effect of a radiation boost of 16 Gy on overall survival, local control, and fibrosis for patients with stage I and II breast cancer who underwent breast-conserving treatment compared with patients who received no boost. Here, we present the 20-year follow-up results. METHODS Patients with microscopically complete excision for invasive disease followed by whole-breast irradiation of 50 Gy in 5 weeks were centrally randomised (1:1) with a minimisation algorithm to receive 16 Gy boost or no boost, with minimisation for age, menopausal status, presence of extensive ductal carcinoma in situ, clinical tumour size, nodal status, and institution. Neither patients nor investigators were masked to treatment allocation. The primary endpoint was overall survival in the intention-to-treat population. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02295033. FINDINGS Between May 24, 1989, and June 25, 1996, 2657 patients were randomly assigned to receive no radiation boost and 2661 patients randomly assigned to receive a radiation boost. Median follow-up was 17.2 years (IQR 13.0-19.0). 20-year overall survival was 59.7% (99% CI 56.3-63.0) in the boost group versus 61.1% (57.6-64.3) in the no boost group, hazard ratio (HR) 1.05 (99% CI 0.92-1.19, p=0.323). Ipsilateral breast tumour recurrence was the first treatment failure for 354 patients (13%) in the no boost group versus 237 patients (9%) in the boost group, HR 0.65 (99% CI 0.52-0.81, p<0.0001). The 20-year cumulative incidence of ipsilatelal breast tumour recurrence was 16.4% (99% CI 14.1-18.8) in the no boost group versus 12.0% (9.8-14.4) in the boost group. Mastectomies as first salvage treatment for ipsilateral breast tumour recurrence occurred in 279 (79%) of 354 patients in the no boost group versus 178 (75%) of 237 in the boost group. The cumulative incidence of severe fibrosis at 20 years was 1.8% (99% CI 1.1-2.5) in the no boost group versus 5.2% (99% CI 3.9-6.4) in the boost group (p<0.0001). INTERPRETATION A radiation boost after whole-breast irradiation has no effect on long-term overall survival, but can improve local control, with the largest absolute benefit in young patients, although it increases the risk of moderate to severe fibrosis. The extra radiation dose can be avoided in most patients older than age 60 years. FUNDING Fonds Cancer, Belgium.

Predictors of the risk of fibrosis at 10 years after breast conserving therapy for early breast cancer - A study based on the EORTC trial 22881-10882 'boost versus no boost'

The EORTC 22881-10882 trial in 5178 conservatively treated early breast cancer patients showed that a 16 Gy boost dose significantly improved local control, but increased the risk of breast fibrosis. To investigate predictors for the long-term risk of fibrosis, Cox regression models of the time to moderate or severe fibrosis were developed on a random set of 1797 patients with and 1827 patients without a boost, and validated in the remaining set. The median follow-up was 10.7 years. The risk of fibrosis significantly increased (P<0.01) with increasing maximum whole breast irradiation (WBI) dose and with concomitant chemotherapy, but was independent of age. In the boost arm, the risk further increased (P<0.01) if patients had post-operative breast oedema or haematoma, but it decreased (P<0.01) if WBI was given with >6 MV photons. The c-index was around 0.62. Nomograms with these factors are proposed to forecast the long-term risk of moderate or severe fibrosis.

The value of pretreatment cell kinetic parameters as predictors for radiotherapy outcome in head and neck cancer: a multicenter analysis.

PURPOSE The aim of this study was to assess the potential of pre-treatment cell kinetic parameters to predict outcome in head and neck cancer patients treated by conventional radiotherapy. MATERIALS AND METHODS Data from 11 different centers were pooled. Inclusion criteria were such that the patients received radiotherapy alone, and that the radiotherapy was given in an overall time of at least 6 weeks with a dose of at least 60 Gy. All patients received a tracer dose of either iododeoxyuridine (IdUrd) or bromodeoxyuridine (BrdUrd) intravenously prior to treatment and a tumor biopsy was taken several hours later. The cell kinetic parameters labeling index (LI), DNA synthesis time (Ts) and potential doubling time (Tpot) were subsequently calculated from flow cytometry data, obtained on the biopsies using antibodies against I/BrdUrd incorporated into DNA. Each center carried out their own flow cytometry analysis. RESULTS From the 11 centers, a total of 476 patients conforming to the inclusion criteria were analyzed. Median values for overall time and total dose were 49 days and 69 Gy, respectively. Fifty one percent of patients had local recurrences and 53% patients had died, the majority from their disease. Median follow-up was 20 months; being 30 months for surviving patients. Multivariate analysis revealed that T-stage, maximum tumor diameter, differentiation grade, N-stage, tumor localization and overall time correlated with locoregional control, in decreasing order of significance. For the cell kinetic parameters, univariate analysis showed that only LI was significantly associated with local control (P=0.02), with higher values correlating with a worse outcome. Ts showed some evidence that patients with longer values did worse, but this was not significant (P=0.06). Tpot showed no trend (P=0.8). When assessing survival in a univariate analysis, neither LI nor Tpot associated with outcome (P=0.4, 0.4, respectively). Surprisingly, Ts did correlate with survival, with longer values being worse (P=0.02). In the multivariate analysis of local control, LI lost its significance (P=0.16). CONCLUSIONS The only pretreatment kinetic parameter for which some evidence was found for an association with local control (the best end-point for testing the present hypothesis) was LI, not Tpot, and this evidence disappeared in a multivariate analysis. It therefore appears that pretreatment cell kinetic measurements carried out using flow cytometry, only provide a relatively weak predictor of outcome after radiotherapy in head and neck cancer.

Breast cancer in pregnancy: recommendations of an international consensus meeting.

PURPOSE To provide guidance for clinicians about the diagnosis, staging and treatment of breast cancer occurring during an otherwise uncomplicated pregnancy. METHODS An international expert Panel convened to address a series of questions identified by a literature review and personal experience. Issues relating to the diagnosis and management of breast cancer after delivery were outside the scope. RESULTS There is a paucity of large and/or randomized studies. Based on cohort studies, case series and case reports, the recommendations represent the best available evidence, albeit of a lower grade than is optimal. RECOMMENDATIONS In most circumstances, serious consideration should be given to the option of treating breast cancer whilst continuing with the pregnancy. Each woman should ideally be referred to a centre with sufficient expertise, given a clear explanation of treatment options. Most diagnostic and staging examinations can be performed adequately and safely during pregnancy. Treatment should however be adapted to the clinical presentation and the trimester of the pregnancy: surgery can be performed during all trimesters of pregnancy; radiotherapy can be considered during the first and second trimester but should be postponed during the third trimester; and standard chemotherapies can be used during the second and third trimester. Since neonatal morbidity mainly appears to be related to prematurity, delivery should not be induced before 37 weeks, if at all possible. CONCLUSIONS The treatment of breast cancer in pregnancy should be executed by experienced specialists in a multidisciplinary setting and should adhere as closely as possible to standard protocols.