Search

Purpose: Radiation dermatitis (RD) is a side effect experienced by many patients undergoing radiotherapy (RT) for breast cancer. In the present study, the Edmonton Symptom Assessment System (ESAS), a validated patient-reported symptom screening tool, was used to determine the impacts of RT-induced skin outcomes on ESAS items. Patient- and treatment-related factors and skin treatments to manage RD symptoms, were assessed for association with ESAS scores. Methods: Patient and treatment characteristics were collected retrospectively for breast cancer patients treated with adjuvant RT between December 2013 and November 2015. Prospective data was collected through clinician-reported surveys. Linear regression analyses were performed to detect the relationship between patient-reported ESAS scores and clinician-reported RD symptoms. Results: A total of 857 patients were included in the analysis. Moderate to severe scores were commonly reported for fatigue (n=412, 48%), wellbeing (n=386, 45%) and anxiety (n=266, 31%). Oral analgesic use was associated with ESAS fatigue, drowsiness, pain, nausea, lack of appetite, shortness of breath, and wellbeing (p Conclusions: The ESAS accurately reflects symptoms of fatigue, anxiety, and wellbeing for breast cancer patients undergoing RT. Our study, however, found no association between ESAS scores and RD severity, which may reflect the shortcomings of the ESAS in assessing symptom burden. Further research is necessary to warrant the development of a new site-specific symptom screening tool for use in RT for breast cancer. Micro Abstract: The Edmonton Symptom Assessment System (ESAS) is a routinely used patient-reported symptom scoring tool. In our patient population, ESAS fatigue, anxiety, and wellbeing were accurately captured. However, ESAS items showed no correlation with radiation dermatitis (RD) severity, despite the high prevalence of RD. As such, the development of a new patient-reported tool is warranted to adequately assess burden of RD.

Background The adoption of hypofractionated radiotherapy (HFRT) into clinical practice varies widely despite randomized trials and guidelines supporting its equivalence to conventional fractionated radiotherapy (CFRT) for certain patient populations. We assessed the use of HFRT at a single institution from 2011 to 2018, as well as time-savings calculations. Patients and Methods A retrospective cohort study was conducted for patients with breast cancer receiving adjuvant radiotherapy by HFRT or CFRT. Trends in HFRT use (≤ 16 fractions) were stratified according to 4 subgroups: tangential breast RT, locoregional breast RT, tangential chest wall RT, and locoregional chest wall RT. Treatment time savings were approximated using the institutional median treatment time. Results A total of 5190 patients were included. HFRT use in all subgroups increased from 2011 to 2018. Tangential breast HFRT alone increased from 62.2% in 2011 to 96.9% in 2018. Locoregional breast HFRT and tangential chest wall HFRT use increased from less than 10% in 2011 to 76.2% and 76.9% in 2018. In locoregional chest wall RT, HFRT use of 44.9% was observed in 2018. Increased use of locoregional HFRT was mainly due to institutional policy changes. Time-savings calculations showed that 4002 hours of treatment or an additional 1402 HFRT courses could have been administered if all patients received HFRT. Conclusion The use of HFRT at our center increased in all patient subgroups. More evidence and guidelines for patients receiving chest wall or locoregional HFRT are required because the use of HFRT remains low in these patient cohorts.