Search

Purpose: We have previously shown that delivering targeted radiotherapy to the tumour bed intraoperatively is feasible and desirable. In this study, we report on the feasibility, safety, and long-term efficacy of TARGeted Intraoperative radioTherapy (Targit), using the Intrabeam system. Methods and Materials: A total of 300 cancers in 299 unselected patients underwent breast-conserving surgery and Targit as a boost to the tumor bed. After lumpectomy, a single dose of 20 Gy was delivered intraoperatively. Postoperative external beam whole-breast radiotherapy excluded the usual boost. We also performed a novel individualized case control (ICC) analysis that computed the expected recurrences for the cohort by estimating the risk of recurrence for each patient using their characteristics and follow-up period. Results: The treatment was well tolerated. The median follow up was 60.5 months (range, 10–122 months). Eight patients have had ipsilateral recurrence: 5-year Kaplan Meier estimate for ipsilateral recurrence is 1.73% (SE 0.77), which compares well with that seen in the boosted patients in the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer study (4.3%) and the UK STAndardisation of breast RadioTherapy study (2.8%). In a novel ICC analysis of 242 of the patients, we estimated that there should be 11.4 recurrences; in this group, only 6 recurrences were observed. Conclusions: Lumpectomy and Targit boost combined with external beam radiotherapy results in a low local recurrence rate in a standard risk patient population. Accurate localization and the immediacy of the treatment that has a favorable effect on tumour microenvironment may contribute to this effect. These long-term data establish the long-term safety and efficacy of the Targit technique and generate the hypothesis that Targit boost might be superior to an external beam boost in its efficacy and justifies a randomized trial. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: External beam radiation therapy (EBRT) following wide local excision of the primary tumor is the standard treatment in early breast cancer. In some circumstances this procedure is not possible or is contraindicated or difficult. The purpose of this study was to determine the safety and efficacy of targeted intraoperative radiotherapy (TARGIT) when EBRT is not feasible. Methods and Materials: We report our experience with TARGIT in three centers (Australia, Germany, and the United Kingdom) between 1999 and 2008. Patients at these centers received a single radiation dose of 20 Gy to the breast tissue in contact with the applicator (or 6 Gy at 1-cm distance), as they could not be given EBRT and were keen to avoid mastectomy. Results: Eighty patients were treated with TARGIT. Reasons for using TARGIT were 21 patients had previously received EBRT, and 31 patients had clinical reasons such as systemic lupus erythematosus, motor neuron disease, Parkinson''s disease, ankylosing spondylitis, morbid obesity, and cardiovascular or severe respiratory disease. Three of these patients received percutaneous radiotherapy without surgery; 28 patients were included for compelling personal reasons, usually on compassionate grounds. After a median follow-up of 38 months, only two local recurrences were observed, an annual local recurrence rate of 0.75% (95% confidence interval, 0.09%–2.70%). Conclusions: While we await the results of the randomized trial (over 2,000 patients have already been recruited), TARGIT is an acceptable option but only in highly selected cases that cannot be recruited in the trial and in whom EBRT is not feasible/possible. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Purpose: Patients undergoing breast-conserving surgery were offered boost radiotherapy with targeted intraoperative radiotherapy (TARGIT) using the Intrabeam system to test the feasibility, safety, and efficacy of the new approach. Methods and Materials: We treated 302 cancers in 301 unselected patients. This was not a low-risk group. One-third of patients (98/301) were younger than 51 years of age. More than half of the tumors (172, 57%) were between 1 cm and 2 cm, and one-fifth (62, 21%) were >2 cm; 29% (86) had a Grade 3 tumor and, in 29% (87), axillary lymph nodes contained metastasis. After primary surgery, 20 Gy was delivered intraoperatively to the surface of the tumor bed, followed by external-beam radiotherapy (EBRT), but excluding the usual boost. Results: The treatment was well tolerated. The follow-up ranged from 3 to 80 months (164 and 90 patients completed 2 and 3 years follow-up, respectively). Four patients (1.3%) had local recurrence. The Kaplan-Meier estimate of local recurrence is 2.6% (SE = 1.7) at 5 years. This compares favorably with the 4.3% recurrence rate in boosted patients from the EORTC boost study, in which only 8.1% patients were node-positive, as opposed to 29% in our series. Conclusion: Targeted intraoperative radiotherapy combined with EBRT results in a low local recurrence rate. This could be attributed to both accurate targeting and timeliness of the treatment. These data support the need for a randomized trial to test whether the TARGIT boost is superior to conventional external boost, especially in high-risk women. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Purpose: With earlier detection and more effective treatment, mortality from breast cancer continues to fall and it has become increasingly important to reduce the toxicity of treatments. Partial-breast radiation therapy, which focuses radiation to the tumor bed, may achieve this aim. We analyzed mortality differences in randomized trials of partial-breast irradiation (PBI).Methods and Materials: We included data from published randomized trials of PBI (alone or as part of a risk-adapted approach) versus whole-breast irradiation (WBI) for invasive breast cancer suitable for breast-conserving therapy. We identified trials using PubMed and Google searches with the terms "partial breast irradiation" OR "intraoperative radiotherapy" OR "IMRT" OR ("accelerated" AND "radiation") AND "randomised/randomized," as well as through discussion with colleagues in the field. We calculated the proportion of patients who had events in each randomized arm at 5 years' follow-up and created a forest plot using Stata, version 14.1.Results: We identified 9 randomized trials of PBI versus WBI in invasive breast cancer; 5-year outcomes were available for non-breast cancer mortality in 5 trials (n=4489) and for breast cancer mortality in 4 trials (n=4231). The overall mortality was 4.9%. There was no detectable heterogeneity between the trials for any of the outcomes. There was no difference in the proportion of patients dying of breast cancer (difference, 0.000% [95% confidence interval (CI), -0.7 to +0.7]; P=.999). Non-breast cancer mortality with PBI was lower than with WBI (difference, 1.1% [95% CI, -2.1% to -0.2%]; P=.023). Total mortality with PBI was also lower than with WBI (difference, 1.3% [95% CI, -2.5% to 0.0%]; P=.05).Conclusions: Use of PBI instead of WBI in selected patients results in a lower 5-year non-breast cancer and overall mortality, amounting to a 25% reduction in relative terms. This information should be included when breast-conserving therapy is proposed to a patient. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]