Search

Purpose: Limiting cardiac radiation dose is important for minimizing long-term cardiac toxicity in patients with left-sided early-stage breast cancer., Methods and Materials: Prospectively collected dosimetric data were analyzed for patients undergoing moderately hypofractionated radiation therapy to the left breast within the Michigan Radiation Oncology Quality Consortium from 2016 to 2022. The mean heart dose (MHD) goal was progressively tightened from ≤2 Gy in 2016 to MHD ≤ 1.2 Gy in 2018. In 2021, a planning target volume (PTV) coverage goal was added, and the goal MHD was reduced to ≤1 Gy. Multivariate logistic regression models were developed to assess for covariates associated with meeting the MHD goals in 2016 to 2020 and the combined MHD/PTV coverage goal in 2021 to 2022., Results: In total, 4165 patients were analyzed with a median age of 64 years. Overall average cardiac metric compliance was 91.7%. Utilization of motion management increased from 41.8% in 2016 to 2020 to 46.5% in 2021 to 2022. Similarly, use of prone positioning increased from 12.2% to 22.2% in these periods. On multivariate analysis in the 2016 to 2020 cohort, treatment with motion management (odds ratio [OR], 5.20; 95% CI, 3.59-7.54; P < .0001) or prone positioning (OR, 3.21; 95% CI, 1.85-5.57; P < .0001) was associated with meeting the MHD goal, while receipt of boost (OR, 0.25; 95% CI, 0.17-0.39; P < .0001) and omission of hormone therapy (OR, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.49-0.88; P = .0047) were associated with not meeting the MHD goal. From 2021 to 2022, treatment with motion management (OR, 1.89; 95% CI, 1.12-3.21; P = .018) or prone positioning (OR, 3.71; 95% CI, 1.73-7.95; P = .0008) was associated with meeting the combined MHD/PTV goal, while larger breast volume (≥1440 cc; OR, 0.34; 95% CI, 0.13-0.91; P = .031) was associated with not meeting the combined goal., Conclusions: In our statewide consortium, high rates of compliance with aggressive targets for limiting cardiac dose were achievable without sacrificing target coverage., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Racial disparities in survival of patients with cancer motivate research to quantify treatment disparities and evaluate multilevel determinants. Previous research has not evaluated cardiac radiation dose in large cohorts of breast cancer patients by race nor examined potential causes or implications of dose disparities., Methods: We used a statewide consortium database to consecutively sample 8750 women who received whole breast radiotherapy between 2012 and 2018. We generated laterality- and fractionation-specific models of mean heart dose. We generated patient- and facility-level models to estimate race-specific cardiac doses. We incorporated our data into models to estimate disparities in ischemic cardiac event development and death. All statistical tests were 2-sided., Results: Black and Asian race independently predicted higher mean heart dose for most laterality-fractionation groups, with disparities of up to 0.42 Gy for Black women and 0.32 Gy for Asian women (left-sided disease and conventional fractionation: 2.13 Gy for Black women vs 1.71 Gy for White women, P < .001, 2-sided; left-sided disease and accelerated fractionation: 1.59 Gy for Asian women vs 1.27 Gy for White women, P = .002). Patient clustering within facilities explained 22%-30% of the variability in heart dose. The cardiac dose disparities translated to estimated excesses of up to 2.6 cardiac events and 1.3 deaths per 1000 Black women and 0.7 cardiac events and 0.3 deaths per 1000 Asian women vs White women., Conclusions: Depending on laterality and fractionation, Asian women and Black women experience higher cardiac doses than White women. This may translate into excess radiation-associated ischemic cardiac events and deaths. Solutions include addressing inequities in baseline cardiac risk factors and facility-level availability and use of radiation technologies., (© The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Introduction To identify predictors of definitive treatment interruptions (DTI) of the neoadjuvant long-course radiotherapy (LCRT) in locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC), and to determine their impact on clinical outcomes. Methods Patients with stage II-III LARC treated between 2009-2018 were retrospectively analyzed (n=101, median FU 49.5 months). Logistic regression models evaluated the impact of relevant clinical variables on grade 3 or greater (G3+) acute toxicity, definitive treatment interruption (DTI), pCR, and definitive ostomy (dOST) rates. The secondary outcomes were LRC, MFS, PFS, CSS, and OS. Results The incidences of grade 3 and 4 toxicities were 25.3%, and 1.1%, respectively. The most common G3+ toxicities were peri-anal dermatitis (14.7%) and diarrhea (7.4%), which were more frequent in females ( p =0.040) and tumors close to the anal verge ( p =0.019). In this study, 11 patients (10.9%) developed DTI, which was associated with these G3+ events ( p <0.001). Resection occurred after 7.1 weeks (median, IQR:6.1-8.9). Downstaging occurred in 57.4% (17.8% pCR), 88% achieved negative margins and the dOST rate was 56.4%. The five-year LRC, MFS, PFS, CSS and OS were: 94.4%, 78.9%, 74.7%, 85.2% and 81.6%, respectively. DTI events did not impact any outcome. The factors associated with loco-regional failure were close/positive margins ( p <0.001) and stage ypIII (p=0.002). Conclusions: Tumors close to the anal verge and female sex were associated with increased G3+ toxicity, which was predictive of DTI. The resultant partial/complete omission of the planned boost, however, dose did not increase the chance of LR. Further studies to clarify the benefit and optimal timing to deliver the boost are warranted, especially for positive margins., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist., (Copyright © 2022, Sapienza et al.)

Purpose: Questions remain about whether moderately hypofractionated whole-breast irradiation is appropriate for patients with triple-negative breast cancer., Methods and Materials: Using the prospective database of a multicenter, collaborative quality improvement consortium, we identified patients with node-negative, triple-negative breast cancer who received whole-breast irradiation with either moderate hypofractionation or conventional fractionation. Using inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW), we compared outcomes using the Kaplan-Meier product-limit estimation method with Cox regression models estimating the hazard ratio for time-to-event endpoints between groups., Results: The sample included 538 patients treated at 18 centers in 1 state in the United States, of whom 307 received conventionally fractionated whole-breast irradiation and 231 received moderately hypofractionated whole-breast irradiation. The median follow-up time was 5.0 years (95% confidence interval [CI], 4.77-5.15 years). The 5-year IPTW estimates for freedom from local recurrence were 93.6% (95% CI, 87.8%-96.7%) in the moderate hypofractionation group and 94.4% (95% CI, 90.3%-96.8%) in the conventional fractionation group. The hazard ratio was 1.05 (95% CI, 0.51-2.17; P = .89). The 5-year IPTW estimates for recurrence-free survival were 87.8% (95% CI, 81.0%-92.4%) in the moderate hypofractionation group and 88.4% (95% CI 83.2%-92.1%) in the conventional fractionation group. The hazard ratio was 1.02 (95% CI, 0.62-1.67; P = .95). The 5-year IPTW estimates for overall survival were 96.6% (95% CI, 92.0%-98.5%) in the moderate hypofractionation group and 93.4% (95% CI, 88.7%-96.1%) in the conventional fractionation group. The hazard ratio was 0.65 (95% CI, 0.30-1.42; P = .28)., Conclusions: Analysis of outcomes in this large observational cohort of patients with triple-negative, node-negative breast cancer treated with whole-breast irradiation revealed no differences by dose fractionation. This adds evidence to support the use of moderate hypofractionation in patients with triple-negative disease., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: Simple intensity modulation of radiation therapy reduces acute toxicity compared with 2-dimensional techniques in adjuvant breast cancer treatment, but it remains unknown whether more complex or inverse-planned intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) offers an advantage over forward-planned, 3-dimensional conformal radiation therapy (3DCRT)., Methods and Materials: Using prospective data regarding patients receiving adjuvant whole breast radiation therapy without nodal irradiation at 23 institutions from 2011 to 2018, we compared the incidence of acute toxicity (moderate-severe pain or moist desquamation) in patients receiving 3DCRT versus IMRT (either inverse planned or, if forward-planned, using ≥5 segments per gantry angle). We evaluated associations between technique and toxicity using multivariable models with inverse-probability-of-treatment weighting, adjusting for treatment facility as a random effect., Results: Of 1185 patients treated with 3DCRT and conventional fractionation, 650 (54.9%) experienced acute toxicity; of 774 treated with highly segmented forward-planned IMRT, 458 (59.2%) did; and of 580 treated with inverse-planned IMRT, 245 (42.2%) did. Of 1296 patients treated with hypofractionation and 3DCRT, 432 (33.3%) experienced acute toxicity; of 709 treated with highly segmented forward-planned IMRT, 227 (32.0%) did; and of 623 treated with inverse-planned IMRT, 164 (26.3%) did. On multivariable analysis with inverse-probability-of-treatment weighting, the odds ratio for acute toxicity after inverse-planned IMRT versus 3DCRT was 0.64 (95% confidence interval, 0.45-0.91) with conventional fractionation and 0.41 (95% confidence interval, 0.26-0.65) with hypofractionation., Conclusions: This large, prospective, multicenter comparative effectiveness study found a significant benefit from inverse-planned IMRT compared with 3DCRT in reducing acute toxicity of breast radiation therapy. Future research should identify the dosimetric differences that mediate this association and evaluate cost-effectiveness., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)