Search

Purpose: The Radiation Therapy Oncology Group 9804 study identified good-risk patients with ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS), a breast cancer diagnosis found frequently in mammographically detected cancers, to test the benefit of radiotherapy (RT) after breast-conserving surgery compared with observation., Patients and Methods: This prospective randomized trial (1998 to 2006) in women with mammographically detected low- or intermediate-grade DCIS, measuring less than 2.5 cm with margins ≥ 3 mm, compared RT with observation after surgery. The study was designed for 1,790 patients but was closed early because of lower than projected accrual. Six hundred thirty-six patients from the United States and Canada were entered; tamoxifen use (62%) was optional. Ipsilateral local failure (LF) was the primary end point; LF and contralateral failure were estimated using cumulative incidence, and overall and disease-free survival were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method., Results: Median follow-up time was 7.17 years (range, 0.01 to 11.33 years). Two LFs occurred in the RT arm, and 19 occurred in the observation arm. At 7 years, the LF rate was 0.9% (95% CI, 0.0% to 2.2%) in the RT arm versus 6.7% (95% CI, 3.2% to 9.6%) in the observation arm (hazard ratio, 0.11; 95% CI, 0.03 to 0.47; P < .001). Grade 1 to 2 acute toxicities occurred in 30% and 76% of patients in the observation and RT arms, respectively; grade 3 or 4 toxicities occurred in 4.0% and 4.2% of patients, respectively. Late RT toxicity was grade 1 in 30%, grade 2 in 4.6%, and grade 3 in 0.7% of patients., Conclusion: In this good-risk subset of patients with DCIS, with a median follow-up of 7 years, the LF rate was low with observation but was decreased significantly with the addition of RT. Longer follow-up is planned because the timeline for LF in this setting seems protracted., (© 2015 by American Society of Clinical Oncology.)

Neoadjuvant therapy for breast cancer has been increasingly used in recent years as first-line treatment for operable breast cancer-serving as both a management strategy and a research tool. In addition to the established clinical benefits of down-staging more locally advanced cancers and improving breast-conservation rates, investigators have recognized the potential advantages of this approach in developing new therapies. Preoperative systemic therapy provides the opportunity for in vivo assessment of pharmacodynamic markers to assess biologic effects and allows new compounds to be tested in a more responsive, treatment-naive population. In addition, early surrogates of response, such as pathologic complete response (pCR) and residual cancer burden, provide proximate measures that correlate with long-term outcomes, thus potentially shortening the time needed to identify effective adjuvant therapies. Despite the advantages of neoadjuvant therapy for research and clinical practice, its use is characterized by persistent controversy and healthy debate regarding how to optimally use research findings and when to integrate them into the standard of care for daily management. Among the controversies surrounding neoadjuvant therapy use are questions about defining the best endpoint for assessing treatment efficacy, deciding when results from research should be used in daily clinical practice, and how the growing use of neoadjuvant therapy affects locoregional treatments.

Breast radiotherapy after lumpectomy is considered standard for nearly all patients with invasive breast cancer and is recommended for many patients after lumpectomy for ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS). However, there is recognition that lumpectomy alone can achieve optimal cancer control for some patients with invasive breast cancer and DCIS. Patients with breast cancers with lower risk of recurrence are less likely to derive benefit from breast radiotherapy. This review will focus on defining populations of patients with invasive breast cancer and DCIS with a low risk of recurrence post-lumpectomy and the evidence supporting omission of breast radiotherapy post-lumpectomy.

Purpose: Brachytherapy is a method for delivering partial-breast irradiation after breast-conserving surgery (BCS). It is currently used in the community setting, although its efficacy has yet to be validated in prospective comparative trials. Frequency and factors influencing use have not been previously identified., Methods: In a nationwide database of 6,882 Medicare beneficiaries (age ≥ 65 years) with private supplemental insurance (MarketScan Medicare Supplemental), claims codes identified patients treated with brachytherapy versus external-beam radiation after BCS for incident breast cancer (diagnosed from 2001 to 2006). Logistic regression modeled predictors of brachytherapy use., Results: Frequency of brachytherapy use as an alternative to external-beam radiation after BCS increased over time (< 1% in 2001, 2% in 2002, 3% in 2003, 5% in 2004, 8% in 2005, 10% in 2006; P < .001). Increased use correlated temporally with US Food and Drug Administration approval and Medicare reimbursement of brachytherapy technology. Brachytherapy use was more likely in women with lymph node-negative disease (odds ratio [OR], 2.19; 95% CI, 1.17 to 4.11) or axillary surgery (OR, 1.74; 95% CI, 1.23 to 2.44). Brachytherapy use was also more likely in women with non-health maintenance organization insurance (OR, 1.81; 95% CI, 1.24 to 2.64) and in areas with higher median income (OR, 1.58; 95% CI, 1.05 to 2.38), lower density of radiation oncologists (OR, 1.78; 95% CI, 1.11 to 2.86), or higher density of surgeons (OR, 1.57; 95% CI, 1.07 to 2.31)., Conclusion: Despite ongoing questions regarding efficacy, breast brachytherapy was rapidly incorporated into the care of older, insured patients. In our era of frequently emerging novel technologies yet growing demands to optimize costs and outcomes, results provide insight into how clinical, policy, and socioeconomic factors influence new technology diffusion into conventional care.