Search

Radiotherapy plays an essential role in the treatment of breast cancer (BC). Recent advances in treatment technology and radiobiological knowledge have a major impact in BC patients with locoregional disease as the majority are now long-term survivors. Over the last three decades, intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT), volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) and deep inspiration breath-hold (DIBH) techniques, together with the increasing adoption of moderately hypofractionated and ultra-hypofractionated treatment schedules as well as the possibility to offer partial breast radiotherapy to a well-defined patient subset have significantly changed radiotherapy for BC patients. As dose-volume constraints (DVCs) have to be adapted to these new treatment paradigms we have reviewed available evidence-based data concerning dose-constraints for the main organs at risk (OARs) that apply to the treatment of whole breast/chest wall radiotherapy, whole breast/chest wall radiotherapy including regional nodal irradiation (RNI) and partial breast irradiation (PBI), for the most relevant fractionation schedules that have been introduced recently. This narrative review provides a comprehensive summary that may help to harmonize treatment planning strategies., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Aim: To assess the rate of positive non-sentinel lymph nodes (non-SLNs) after neoadjuvant systemic therapy (NAST) in breast cancer (BC) following positive sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB)., Materials and Methods: From institutional database, 265 consecutive patients receiving NAST for cT1-3, any N, M0 BC between 2001 and 2018 were identified. Patients presented clinically negative axilla before surgery and were candidate for SLNB. Following metastatic SLNB, completion axillary lymph node dissection (AxLND) was performed. Non-SLNs rate was investigated using multivariate (MV) logistic regression models. The distribution of non-SLNs across the axilla was observed., Results: Positive non-SLNs were found in 62.3% of cases and showed no correlation with SLN metastasis size. At MV, statistically significant variables associated with non-SLNs were older age (p = 0.025), clinically positive lymph nodes (p = 0.002), SLN extracapsular extension (ECE, p = 0.001), and higher ratio of positive SLNs/total SLNs (p = 0.016). ECE and higher nodal ratio were independent predictors of III axillary level positivity. By categorizing patients in intermediate- and high-risk groups using the study variables, positive non-SLNs were found in the range of 23-56% across the three axillary levels, rates which did not support radiotherapy volume de-escalation. The III axillary level lower involvement (6.3%) was better identified with the RAPCHEM trial criteria based on the ypN status after AxLND., Conclusions: Involved non-SLNs rate following positive SLNB after NAST is nearly double the rate observed after primary surgery, supporting some intervention on the axilla. If AxLND is limited to I and II level, the involvement of the III level up to 31% of the cases seems to require some additional treatment, while the omission in selected cases needs further investigation., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Aim: To evaluate reconstruction failure (RF) rate in patients receiving implant-based immediate breast reconstruction (IBR) and hypofractionated (HF) postmastectomy radiation therapy (PMRT)., Materials and Methods: Stage II-III breast cancer patients, treated with HF-PMRT using intensity modulated radiotherapy were stratified in two groups according to IBR: single-stage direct-to-implant (DTI-group) and two-stage expander and implant (TE/I-group). Irradiated patients were matched with non-irradiated ones who underwent the same IBR during the same period. Prescription dose was 40.05 Gy/15 fractions to chest wall and infra/supraclavicular nodal region. Primary endpoint was RF defined as the need of major revisional surgery (MaRS) for implant removal or conversion to autologous reconstruction. Secondary endpoint was the rate of minor revisional surgeries (MiRS) including implant repositioning or substitution with another implant., Results: One hundred and seven irradiated patients (62 in TE/I-group, 45 in DTI-group) were matched with 107 non-irradiated subjects. Median follow-up was 4.2 years (0.1-6.1) In the TE/I setting, MaRS was performed in 8/62 irradiated patients (12.9%) of the irradiated TE/I group compared to 1/62 (1.6%) non-irradiated subjects (p = 0.015). In the DTI setting, MaRs occurred in 3/45 irradiated patients (6.7%) compared to 1/45 non-irradiated ones (2.2%) (p = 0.35). Overall MaRS rate was 10.3% in the irradiated group. MiRS was performed in 35.6% and 31.1% of the irradiated and non-irradiated DTI-groups (p = 0.65), respectively, and in 12.9% and 8.1% of the irradiated and non-irradiated TE/I groups (p = 0.38), respectively., Conclusions: Compared to the non-irradiated counterparts, the TE/I group showed higher rate of RF, while no statistically significant difference was observed for the DTI group. The use of hypofractionation and IMRT to implant-based IBR did not seem to increase the risk of RF which appeared to be in line with the literature., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)