Search

Simple Summary: In order to avoid side effects from treatment, patients suffering from breast cancer with a lower risk of relapse might forgo radiation therapy to the whole breast or endocrine therapy after surgery. In this analysis, we compared these two options regarding the risk of breast cancer relapse with the help of direct trials and a network that analyzed one of the two options. We found that both treatment options have similar long-term cancer outcomes and should be considered equally effective. Background: Multiple randomized trials have established adjuvant endocrine therapy (ET) and whole breast irradiation (WBI) as the standard approach after breast-conserving surgery (BCS) in early-stage breast cancer. The omission of WBI has been studied in multiple trials and resulted in reduced local control with maintained survival rates and has therefore been adapted as a treatment option in selected patients in several guidelines. Omitting ET instead of WBI might also be a valuable option as both treatments have distinctly different side effect profiles. However, the clinical outcomes of BCS + ET vs. BCS + WBI have not been formally analyzed. Methods: We performed a systematic literature review searching for randomized trials comparing BCS + ET vs. BCS + WBI in low-risk breast cancer patients with publication dates after 2000. We excluded trials using any form of chemotherapy, regional nodal radiation and mastectomy. The meta-analysis was performed using a two-step process. First, we extracted all available published event rates and the effect sizes for overall and breast-cancer-specific survival (OS, BCSS), local (LR) and regional recurrence, disease-free survival, distant metastases-free interval, contralateral breast cancer, second cancer other than breast cancer and mastectomy-free interval as investigated endpoints and compared them in a network meta-analysis. Second, the published individual patient data from the Early Breast Cancer Trialists' Collaborative Group (EBCTCG) publications were used to allow a comparison of OS and BCSS. Results: We identified three studies, including a direct comparison of BCS + ET vs. BCS + WBI (n = 1059) and nine studies randomizing overall 7207 patients additionally to BCS only and BCS + WBI + ET resulting in a four-arm comparison. In the network analysis, LR was significantly lower in the BCS + WBI group in comparison with the BCS + ET group (HR = 0.62; CI-95%: 0.42–0.92; p = 0.019). We did not find any differences in OS (HR = 0.93; CI-95%: 0.53–1.62; p = 0.785) and BCSS (OR = 1.04; CI-95%: 0.45–2.41; p = 0.928). Further, we found a lower distant metastasis-free interval, a higher rate of contralateral breast cancer and a reduced mastectomy-free interval in the BCS + WBI-arm. Using the EBCTCG data, OS and BCSS were not significantly different between BCS + ET and BCS + WBI after 10 years (OS: OR = 0.85; CI-95%: 0.59–1.22; p = 0.369) (BCSS: OR = 0.72; CI-95%: 0.38–1.36; p = 0.305). Conclusion: Evidence from direct and indirect comparison suggests that BCS + WBI might be an equivalent de-escalation strategy to BCS + ET in low-risk breast cancer. Adverse events and quality of life measures have to be further compared between these approaches. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Simple Summary: The treatment of elderly patients with breast cancer often deviates from guideline recommendations due to comorbidities, expected side effects, and patient preference. We investigated the standard of care of postoperative radiotherapy after breast-conserving surgery in elderly patients (≥65 years) treated outside of clinical trials, potential factors related to the omission of radiotherapy, and the interaction with endocrine therapy. Overall, three thousand one hundred seventy-one women treated at two major breast centers were evaluated. Postoperative radiotherapy was performed in 82% of these cases. The irradiated patients were younger and more likely to receive additional endocrine therapy and chemotherapy. Patients who did not receive radiotherapy were significantly more likely to have non-invasive DCIS tumors and did not undergo axillary surgery. Radiotherapy was associated with improved locoregional tumor control, even in patients receiving endocrine therapy. Patients treated with radiotherapy alone had significantly better locoregional control than with endocrine therapy alone. In conclusion, the present work confirms the efficacy of postoperative radiotherapy in the elderly, even in patients receiving endocrine therapy. We aimed to evaluate the standard of care of adjuvant radiotherapy (RT) after breast-conserving surgery (BCS) in elderly female patients (≥65 years) treated outside of clinical trials and to identify potential factors related to the omission of RT and the interaction with endocrine therapy (ET). All women treated with BCS at two major breast centers between 1998 and 2014 were evaluated. Data were provided by the Tumor Registry Munich. Survival analyses were conducted using the Kaplan–Meier method. Prognostic factors were identified using multivariate Cox regression analysis. The median follow-up was 88.4 months. Adjuvant RT was performed in 82% (2599/3171) of patients. Irradiated patients were younger (70.9 vs. 76.5 years, p < 0.001) and were more likely to receive additional chemotherapy (p < 0.001) and ET (p = 0.014). Non-irradiated patients more often had non-invasive DCIS tumors (pTis: 20.3% vs. 6.8%, p < 0.001) and did not undergo axillary surgery (no axillary surgery: 50.5% vs. 9.5%, p < 0.001). Adjuvant RT was associated with improved locoregional tumor control after BCS in invasive tumors (10-year local recurrence-free survival (LRFS): 94.0% vs. 75.1%, p < 0.001, 10-year lymph node recurrence-free survival (LNRFS): 98.1% vs. 93.1%, p < 0.001). Multivariate analysis confirmed significant benefits for local control with postoperative RT. Furthermore, RT led to increased locoregional control even in patients who received ET (10-year LRFS 94.8% with ET + RT vs. 78.1% with ET alone, p < 0.001 and 10-year LNRFS: 98.2% vs. 95.0%, p = 0.003). Similarly, RT alone had significantly better locoregional control rates compared to ET alone (10-year LRFS 92.6% with RT alone vs. 78.1% with ET alone, p < 0.001 and 10-year LNRFS: 98.0% vs. 95.0%, p = 0.014). The present work confirms the efficacy of postoperative RT for breast carcinoma in elderly patients (≥65 years) treated in a modern clinical setting outside of clinical trials, even in patients who receive ET. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Simple Summary: This retrospective analysis reports on the treatment outcomes of women diagnosed with high-risk breast cancer treated with chemotherapy in combination with radiotherapy before the surgical removal of the tumor. It is well established that the lack of visible tumor cells in the pathological tumors analysis by the time of surgery (known as pathological complete response, pCR) is a factor that improves survival without the tumor reappearing in the body. However, it is unknown whether that is only true when giving systemic therapy or when pCR is achieved with the help of radiotherapy. We collected patient information and survival times to analyze the outcome in our patient group. We found that women with a pCR treated with chemotherapy in combination with radiotherapy can expect favorable long-term survival. This was true across different types of breast cancer and chemotherapy substances. Background: Neoadjuvant radiotherapy (naRT) in addition to neoadjuvant chemotherapy (naCT) has been used for locally advanced, inoperable breast cancer or to allow breast conserving surgery (BCS). Retrospective analyses suggest that naRT + naCT might result in an improvement in pathological complete response (pCR rate and disease-free survival). pCR is a surrogate parameter for improved event-free and overall survival (OS) and allows for the adaption of the post-neoadjuvant therapy regimens. However, it is not clear whether pCR achieved with the addition of naRT has the same prognostic value. Patients and methods: We performed a retrospective re-analysis of 356 patients (cT1-cT4/cN0-N+) treated with naRT and naCT with a long-term follow-up. Patients underwent naRT on the breast and regional lymph nodes combined with a boost to the primary tumor. Chemotherapy with different agents was given either sequentially or concomitantly to naRT. We used the Cox proportional hazard regression model to estimate the effect of pCR in our cohort in different subgroups as well as chemotherapy protocols. Clinical response markers correlating with OS were also analyzed. Results: For patients with median follow-ups of 20 years, 10 years, 15 years, 20 years, and 25 years, OS rates were 69.7%, 60.6%, 53.1%, and 45.1%, respectively. pCR was achieved in 31.1% of patients and associated with a significant improvement in OS (HR = 0.58; CI-95%: 0.41–0.80; p = 0.001). The prognostic impact of pCR was evident across breast cancer subtypes and chemotherapy regimens. Multivariate analysis showed that age, clinical tumor and nodal stage, chemotherapy, and pCR were prognostic for OS. Conclusion: NaCT and naRT prior to surgical resection achieve good long-term survival in high-risk breast cancer. pCR after naRT maintains its prognostic value in breast cancer subtypes and across different subgroups. pCR driven by naRT and naCT independently influences long-term survival. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Simple Summary: Our study with 139 breast cancer patients treated with intraoperative radiotherapy reports favorable data on the cosmetic outcome as well as the acute and early long-term side effects. Our oncologic control rates are comparable to the previous literature. Background/Aims: Due to its favorable dose distribution and targeting of the region at highest risk of recurrence due to direct visualization of tumor bed, intraoperative electron radiation therapy (IOERT) is used as part of a breast-conserving treatment approach. The aim of this study was to analyze tumor control and survival, as well as the toxicity profile, and cosmetic outcomes in patients irradiated with an IOERT boost for breast cancer. Materials and Methods: 139 Patients treated at our institution between January 2010 and January 2015 with a single boost dose of 10 Gy to the tumor bed during breast-conserving surgery followed by whole-breast irradiation were retrospectively analyzed. Results: 139 patients were included in this analysis. The median age was 54 years (range 28–83 years). The preferred surgical strategy was segmental resection with sentinel lymphonodectomy (66.5%) or axillary dissection (23.1%). Regarding adjuvant radiotherapy, the vast majority received 5 × 1.8 Gy to 50.4 Gy. At a median follow-up of 33.6 months, recurrence-free and overall survival were 95.5% and 94.9%, respectively. No patient developed an in-field recurrence. Seven patients (5.0%) died during the follow-up period, including two patients due to disease recurrence (non-in-field). High-grade (CTCAE > 2) perioperative adverse events attributable to IOERT included wound healing disorder (N = 1) and hematoma (N = 1). High-grade late adverse events (LENT-SOMA grade III) were reported only in one patient with fat necrosis. Low-grade late adverse events (LENT-SOMA grade I-II) included pain (18.0%), edema (10.5%), fibrosis (21%), telangiectasia (4.5%) and pigmentation change (23.0%). The mean breast retraction assessment score was 1.66 (0–6). Both patients and specialists rated the cosmetic result "excellent/good" in 84.8% and 87.9%, respectively. Conclusion: Our study reports favorable data on the cosmetic outcome as well as the acute and early long-term tolerability for patients treated with an IOERT boost. Our oncologic control rates are comparable to the previous literature. However, prospective investigations on the role of IOERT in comparison to other boost procedures would be desirable. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: The aim of the present study was to estimate the impact of the addition of internal mammary chain (IMC) irradiation in node-positive left-sided breast cancer (BC) patients undergoing regional nodal irradiation (RNI) and comparatively evaluate excess relative and absolute risks of radiation-induced lung cancer/BC and ischaemic heart disease for intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) versus 3D conformal radiotherapy (3D-CRT). Methods: Four treatment plans were created (3D-CRT and IMRT –/+ IMC) for each of the 10 evaluated patients, and estimates of excess relative risk (ERR) and 10-year excess absolute risk (EAR) were calculated for radiation-induced lung cancer/BC and coronary events using linear, linear-exponential and plateau models. Results: The addition of IMC irradiation to RNI significantly increased the dose exposure of the heart, lung and contralateral breast using both techniques, increasing ERR for secondary lung cancer (58 vs. 44%, p = 0.002), contralateral BC (49 vs. 31%, p = 0.002) and ischaemic heart disease (41 vs. 27%, p = 0.002, IMRT plans). IMRT significantly reduced the mean cardiac dose and mean lung dose as compared to 3D-CRT, decreasing ERR for major coronary events (64% 3D-CRT vs. 41% IMRT, p = 0.002) and ERR for secondary lung cancer (75 vs. 58%, p = 0.004) in IMC irradiation, without a significant impact on secondary contralateral BC risks. Conclusion: Although IMC irradiation has been shown to increase survival rates in node-positive BC patients, it increased dose exposure of organs at risk in left-sided BC, resulting in significantly increased risks for secondary lung cancer/contralateral BC and ischaemic heart disease. In this setting, the adoption of IMRT seems advantageous when compared to 3D-CRT. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Radiation therapy is an integral part of the multidisciplinary management of breast cancer. Regional lymph node irradiation in younger trials seems to provide superior target coverage as well as a reduction in long-term toxicity resulting in a small benefit in the overall survival rate. For partial breast irradiation there are now two large trials available which support the role of partial breast irradiation in low risk breast cancer patients. Multiple randomized trials have established that a sequentially applied dose to the tumor bed improves local control with the cost of worse cosmetic results. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The international standard of care for the treatment of high-risk breast cancer (BC) consists of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) and surgery followed by adjuvant whole breast/chest wall irradiation. In this setting, the time interval from the start of NACT to the end of radiotherapy (RT) is usually postponed to 6 months or longer. In addition to this, a high percentage of capsular fibrosis may occur when breast implants are irradiated. Most of these disadvantages could be avoided by using preoperative RT (PRT). PRT is already the standard of care in several other tumor entities (rectal cancer, esophagus carcinoma, lung cancer, and soft tissue sarcoma). Nevertheless, PRT in BC has been tested in several trials, but randomized prospective trials using modern radiation technology and systemic therapies are lacking. The available evidence summarized in this review indicates that PRT may improve survival and reduce long-term toxicity in patients with a higher risk of recurrence and should be consequently tested in a randomized trial. Summary: Prospective, randomized trials concerning PRT in high-risk BC are needed. We plan to conduct a NeoRad trial (NACT followed by PRT in high-risk BC). Key Messages: Prospective, randomized studies concerning PRT in high-risk BC are needed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Strahlentherapie und Onkologie is the property of Springer Nature and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The standard of care for early-stage breast cancer (BC) consists of breast-conserving surgery followed by postoperative irradiation. Recently, the concept of changing the usual sequence of treatment components in BC RT has been investigated. Potential advantages of preoperative RT in BC include a possible tumor downstaging with improved surgical cosmetic outcomes, accurate tumor site identification and better target volume delineation. Furthermore, preoperative RT could serve as a tool for treatment stratification for de-escalation of treatments in the event of pathological complete response. The present literature review analyzed the available clinical data regarding the potential impact of preoperative RT. Overall, available clinical evidence of preoperative RT in BC remains limited, deriving mostly from retrospective case series. Nevertheless, the experiences prove the feasibility of the preoperative RT approach and confirm the efficacy in almost all analyzed studies, including experiences using higher prescription RT doses or RT in combination with systemic therapy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article offers questions and answers concerning the challenges in radiotherapy including what treatment can be recommended after complete pathological response after neoadjuvant chemotherapy in initially node positive breast cancer; and regarding the internal mammary lymphatics.

Purpose: Aim of the present analysis was to evaluate the movement and dose variability of the different lymph node levels of node-positive breast cancer patients during adjuvant radiotherapy (RT) with regional nodal irradiation (RNI) in deep-inspiration breath hold (DIBH).Methods: Thirty-five consecutive node-positive breast cancer patients treated from October 2016 to February 2018 receiving postoperative RT of the breast or chest wall including RNI of the supra-/infraclavicular lymph node levels (corresponding to levels IV, III, Rotter LN (interpectoral), and some parts of level II) were analyzed. To evaluate the lymph node level movement, a center of volume (COV) was obtained for each lymph node level for free-breathing (FB) and DIBH plans. Geometric shifts and dose differences between FB and DIBH were analyzed.Results: A significant movement of the COV in anterior (y) and cranial (z) dimensions was observed for lymph node levels I-II and Rotter lymph nodes (p < 0.001) due to DIBH. Only minor changes in the lateral dimension (x axis) were observed, without reaching significance for levels III, IV, and internal mammary. There was a significant difference in the mean dose of level I (DIBH vs. FB: 38.2 Gy/41.3 Gy, p < 0.001) and level II (DIBH vs. FB: 45.9 Gy/47.2 Gy, p < 0.001), while there was no significant difference in level III (p = 0.298), level IV (p = 0.476), or internal mammary nodes (p = 0.471).Conclusion: A significant movement of the axillary lymph node levels was observed during DIBH in anterior and cranial directions for node-positive breast cancer patients in comparison to FB. The movement leads to a significant dose reduction in level I and level II. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Radiation therapy (RT) for breast cancer has dramatically changed over the past years, leading to individualized risk-adapted treatment strategies. Historically, the choice of RT regimen was limited to conventional fractionation protocols using standard tangential fields. Nowadays, technological and technical improvements in modern RT have added a variety of other RT modalities, different fractionation schedules, and individualised treatment volumes to the portfolio of breast RT. This review aims to give a short overview on the main topics which have recently found their way into clinical practice: hypofractionated treatment protocols, accelerated partial breast irradiation (APBI) for low-risk patients, deep inspiration breath hold (DIBH) for maximal heart protection, extent of regional nodal irradiation for high-risk patients, and the implementation of new radiation techniques such as intensity modulated RT (IMRT) and volumetric modulated RT (VMAT). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose The objective of the present population-based study was to evaluate the role and effectiveness of postmastectomy radiation therapy (PMRT) in clinical practice. Methods The study included 16,675 patients diagnosed with invasive breast cancer from 1988 to 2012 and resident within the catchment area of the Munich Cancer Registry. Use of PMRT, local recurrence-free survival (LRFS), cumulative incidence of time to local recurrence, relative survival and conditional overall survival (cOS), were analysed for different time periods (1988–1997 and 1998–2012). Results Variables favouring the use of PMRT on multivariate logistic regression analysis included young age, large tumour size, positive resection margin and positive nodal status. Over time, a significant increase of PMRT was registered for patients with ⩾4 positive lymph nodes. Moreover, the present findings track a less frequent use of PMRT in elderly patients. After adjusting for age, tumour characteristics and therapies, the Cox regression analysis for LRFS identified PMRT as an independent predictor for improved local control (HR: 2.145; 95% CI: 1.787–2.574, p < 0.0001). Patients with 1–3 involved lymph nodes had a 10-year cumulative incidence of local recurrence of 13.7% following mastectomy, compared to 6.5% following PMRT ( p = 0.0001). Comparable findings were obtained for patients presenting with ⩾4 positive lymph nodes. All effects were smaller or extinct in elderly patients aged ⩾70 years. On multivariate analysis for cOS, no significant advantage for PMRT could be detected (HR: 1.084; 95% CI: 0.986–1.191, p = 0.095). Conclusion The present study was useful in providing an overview on trends in the adoption of PMRT over a 25-year period. An increase in the use of PMRT from 1988 to 2012 was observed, especially in high-risk patients with ⩾4 positive lymph nodes. Patients selected for PMRT had an improved local control and an equivalent relative survival compared to patients who had no indication for PMRT. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose The purpose of this retrospective outcome study was to validate the effectiveness of postoperative radiotherapy in breast conserving therapy (BCT) and to evaluate possible causes for omission of radiotherapy after breast conserving surgery (BCS) in a non-trial population. Methods Data were provided by the population-based Munich Cancer Registry. The study included epidemiological data of 30.811 patients diagnosed with breast cancer from 1998 to 2012. The effect of omitting radiotherapy was analysed using Kaplan–Meier-estimates and Cox proportional hazard regression. Variables predicting omission of radiotherapy were analysed using multivariate logistic regression. Results Use of postoperative radiotherapy after BCS was associated with significant improvements in local control and survival. 10-year loco-regional recurrence-free-survival was 90.8% with postoperative radiotherapy vs. 77.6% with surgery alone ( p < 0.001). 10-year overall survival rates were 55.2% with surgery alone vs. 82.2% following postoperative radiotherapy ( p < 0.001). Variables predicting omission of postoperative radiotherapy included advanced age (women ⩾80 years; OR: 0.082; 95% CI: 0.071–0.094, p < 0.001). Conclusions This study shows a decrease in local control and a survival disadvantage if postoperative radiotherapy after breast conserving surgery is omitted in an unselected cohort of primary breast cancer patients. Due to its epidemiological nature, it cannot answer the question in whom postoperative radiotherapy can be safely omitted. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Simple Summary: In the treatment of patients with breast cancer, post-neoadjuvant approaches represent an attractive opportunity to improve patient outcomes by stratifying adjuvant treatment according to tumor response. Thus, these concepts represent a step towards our vision of individualized adaptive tumor treatment. Although apparently in its early stages, increasing evidence indicates an important change to our historical treatment strategies. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy enables close monitoring of tumor response in patients with breast cancer. Being able to assess tumor response during treatment provides an opportunity to evaluate new therapeutic strategies. Thus, for triple-negative breast tumors, it was demonstrated that additional immunotherapy could improve prognosis compared with chemotherapy alone. Furthermore, adjuvant therapy can be escalated or de-escalated correspondingly. The CREATE-X trial randomly assigned HER2-negative patients with residual tumor after neoadjuvant therapy to either observation or capecitabine. In HER2-negative patients with positive BRCA testing, the OlympiA study randomly assigned patients to either observation or olaparib. HER2-positive patients without pathologic remission were randomly assigned to trastuzumab or trastuzumab–emtansine within the KATHERINE study. These studies were all able to show an improvement in oncologic outcome associated with the escalation of therapy in patients presenting with residual tumor after neoadjuvant treatment. On the other hand, this individualization of therapy may also offer the possibility to de-escalate treatment, and thereby reduce morbidity. Among WSG-ADAPT HER2+/HR-, HER2-positive patients achieved comparable results without chemotherapy after complete remission following neoadjuvant treatment. In summary, the concept of post-neoadjuvant therapy constitutes a great opportunity for individualized cancer treatment, potentially improving outcome. In this review, the most important trials of post-neoadjuvant therapy are compiled and discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Simple Summary: This meta-analysis compares the treatment results of partial-breast radiotherapy to those of whole-breast radiotherapy after breast conserving surgery in early-stage breast cancer. The results show that the tumor is slightly more likely to recur in the operated breast after partial radiotherapy compared to radiation therapy to the whole breast. These additional recurrences are located away from the original tumor bed. The technique by which partial-breast radiotherapy is applied also appears to affect the likeliness of tumor regrowth. Intraoperative radiation, given during the removal of the tumor, might lead to more relapses compared to other techniques. Partial-breast treatment also led to more lymph node recurrences in a very small number of patients. However, rates of distant relapses were not increased. We were unable to identify a specific subgroup that was most suitable for partial-breast irradiation. The differences between treatment of partial- and whole-breast radiotherapy are small when the patient groups and the radiation technique are appropriately selected. Purpose/Objective: The standard treatment for localized low-risk breast cancer is breast-conserving surgery, followed by adjuvant radiotherapy and appropriate systemic therapy. As the majority of local recurrences occur at the site of the primary tumor, numerous trials have investigated partial-breast irradiation (PBI) instead of whole-breast treatment (WBI) using a multitude of irradiation techniques and fractionation regimens. This meta-analysis addresses the impact on disease-specific endpoints, such as local and regional control, as well as disease-free survival of PBI compared to that of WBI in published randomized trials. Material and Methods: We conducted a systematic literature review and searched for randomized trials comparing WBI and PBI in early-stage breast cancer with publication dates after 2009. The meta-analysis was based on the published event rates and the effect sizes for available oncological endpoints of at least two trials reporting on them. We evaluated in-breast tumor recurrences (IBTR), local recurrences at the primary site and elsewhere in the ipsilateral breast, regional recurrences (RR), distant metastasis-free interval (DMFI), disease-free survival (DFS), contralateral breast cancer (CBC), and second primary cancer (SPC). Furthermore, we aimed to assess the impact of different PBI techniques and subgroups on IBTR. We performed all statistical analyses using the inverse variance heterogeneity model to pool effect sizes. Results: For the intended meta-analysis, we identified 13 trials (overall 15,561 patients) randomizing between PBI and WBI. IBTR was significantly higher after PBI (OR = 1.66; CI-95%: 1.07–2.58; p = 0.024) with an absolute difference of 1.35%. We detected significant heterogeneity in the analysis of the PBI technique with intraoperative radiotherapy resulting in higher local relapse rates (OR = 3.67; CI-95%: 2.28–5.90; p < 0.001). Other PBI techniques did not show differences to WBI in IBTR. Both strategies were equally effective at the primary tumor site, but PBI resulted in statistically more IBTRs elsewhere in the ipsilateral breast. IBTRs after WBI were more likely to be located at the primary tumor bed, whereas they appeared equally distributed within the breast after PBI. RR was also more frequent after PBI (OR = 1.75; CI-95%: 1.07–2.88; p < 0.001), yet we did not detect any differences in DMFI (OR = 1.08; CI-95%: 0.89–1.30; p = 0.475). DFS was significantly longer in patients treated with WBI (OR = 1.14; CI-95%: 1.02–1.27; p = 0.003). CBC and SPC were not different in the test groups (OR = 0.81; CI-95%: 0.65–1.01; p = 0.067 and OR = 1.09; CI-95%: 0.85–1.40; p = 0.481, respectively). Conclusion: Limiting the target volume to partial-breast radiotherapy appears to be appropriate when selecting patients with a low risk for local and regional recurrences and using a suitable technique. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Although the organ preservation strategy by breast-conserving surgery (BCS) followed by radiation therapy (BCT) has revolutionized the treatment approach of early stage breast cancer (BC), the choice between treatment options in this setting can still vary according to patient preferences. The aim of the present study was to compare the oncological outcome of mastectomy versus breast-conserving therapy in patients treated in a modern clinical setting outside of clinical trials. 7565 women diagnosed with early invasive BC (pT1/2pN0/1) between 1998 and 2014 were included in this study (median follow-up: 95.2 months). In order to reduce selection bias and confounding, a subgroup analysis of a matched 1:1 case-control cohort consisting of 1802 patients was performed (median follow-up 109.4 months). After adjusting for age, tumor characteristics and therapies, multivariable analysis for local recurrence-free survival identified BCT as an independent predictor for improved local control (hazard ratio [HR]:1.517; 95%confidence interval:1.092–2.108, p = 0.013) as compared to mastectomy alone in the matched cohort. Ten-year cumulative incidence (CI) of lymph node recurrences was 2.0% following BCT, compared to 5.8% in patients receiving mastectomy (p < 0.001). Similarly, 10-year distant-metastasis-free survival (89.4% vs. 85.5%, p = 0.013) was impaired in patients undergoing mastectomy alone. This translated into improved survival in patients treated with BCT (10-year overall survival (OS) estimates 85.3% vs. 79.3%, p < 0.001), which was also significant on multivariable analysis (p = 0.011). In conclusion, the present study showed that patients treated with BCS followed by radiotherapy had an improved outcome compared to radical mastectomy alone. Specifically, local control, distant control, and overall survival were significantly better using the conservative approach. Thus, as a result of the present study, physicians should encourage patients to receive BCS with radiotherapy rather than mastectomy, whenever it is medically feasible and appropriate. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

• Breath hold techniques can efficiently reduce dose to organs at risk. • Patient compliance is essential to ensure reproducibility. • Image guidance should aim to capture interfraction and intrafraction variations. • Careful implementation is required to manage uncertainties. The use of breath-hold techniques in radiotherapy, such as deep-inspiration breath hold, is increasing although guidelines for clinical implementation are lacking. In these recommendations, we aim to provide an overview of available technical solutions and guidance for best practice in the implementation phase. We will discuss specific challenges in different tumour sites including factors such as staff training and patient coaching, accuracy, and reproducibility. In addition, we aim to highlight the need for further research in specific patient groups. This report also reviews considerations for equipment, staff training and patient coaching, as well as image guidance for breath-hold treatments. Dedicated sections for specific indications, namely breast cancer, thoracic and abdominal tumours are also included. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Highlights • Heart exposure is a major cardiac risk factor in left-sided breast cancer survivors. • Deep inspiration breath-hold (DIBH) significantly reduces the exposure of the heart. • Patients with high cardiovascular risk and favourable tumour prognosis benefit most. • Risk modelling showed that age has only minor impact on the related cardiac risk. Abstract Purpose Aim of the current comparative modelling study was to estimate the individual radiation-induced risk for death of ischaemic heart disease (IHD) under free breathing (FB) and deep inspiration breath-hold (DIBH) in a real-world population. Materials and methods Eighty-nine patients with left-sided early breast cancer were enrolled in the prospective SAVE-HEART study. For each patient three-dimensional conformal treatment plans were created in FB and DIBH and corresponding radiation-induced risks of IHD mortality were estimated based on expected survival, individual IHD risk factors and the relative radiation-induced risk. Results With the use of DIBH, mean heart doses were reduced by 35% (interquartile range: 23–46%) as compared to FB. Mean expected years of life lost (YLL) due to radiation-induced IHD mortality were 0.11 years in FB, and 0.07 years in DIBH. YLL were remarkably independent of age at treatment in patients with a favourable tumour prognosis. DIBH led to more pronounced reductions in YLL in patients with high baseline risk (0.08 years for upper vs 0.02 years for lower quartile), with favourable tumour prognosis (0.05 years for patients without vs 0.02 years for those with lymph-node involvement), and in patients with high mean heart doses in FB (0.09 years for doses >3 Gy vs 0.02 years for doses <1.5 Gy). Conclusion Ideally, the DIBH technique should be offered to all patients with left-sided breast cancer. However, highest benefits are expected for patients with a favourable tumour prognosis, high mean heart dose or high baseline IHD risk, independent of their age. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]