Search

Background: For women with ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS), radiation therapy after conservative surgery lowers the risk of recurrence. However, emerging evidence suggests that radiation therapy confers only a marginal absolute benefit for older women with DCIS. In a cohort of older women with DCIS, we sought to determine whether radiation therapy was associated with a clinically significant benefit. Methods: Using the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER)-Medicare database from January 1, 1992, through December 31, 1999, we identified 3409 women aged 66 years or older treated with conservative surgery for DCIS. A proportional hazards model tested whether radiation therapy was associated with a lower risk of a combined outcome, defined as a subsequent ipsilateral in situ or invasive breast cancer reported by SEER and/or a subsequent mastectomy reported by Medicare claims. The 5-year event risk was determined for patients without and with high-risk features, which were defined as at least one of the following: age 66-69 years, tumor larger than 2.5 cm, comedo histology, and/or high grade. All statistical tests were two-sided. Results: Radiation therapy was associated with a lower risk for each component of the combined outcome (hazard ratio = 0.32, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.24 to 0.44). For high-risk patients, the 5-year event risk was 13.6% without radiation therapy versus 3.8% with radiation therapy (difference = 9.8%, 95% CI = 6.5 to 13.2; P

Background: Women with breast cancer who are treated with adjuvant radiation have a decreased risk of local recurrence but an increased risk of mortality from ischemic heart disease. Patients with left-sided breast tumors receive a higher dose of radiation to the heart than patients with right-sided tumors. Because radiation techniques have improved over time, we investigated whether the risk of death from ischemic heart disease alter adjuvant breast radiotherapy decreased over time. Methods: We used the 12-registry 1973-2000 data-set from the National Cancer Institute's Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) program. Women (n = 27 283) treated with adjuvant radiation for breast cancer diagnosed in 1973-1989 were included in the study. Ischemic heart disease mortality was calculated at 15 years and compared for women diagnosed during 1973-1979, 1980-1984, and 1985-1989. Cox proportional hazards models were used to calculate the hazard of death from ischemic heart disease for women diagnosed 1973-1988 and censored at 12 years. All statistical tests were two-sided. Results: There were no differences in age, race/ethnicity, disease stage, or follow-up time between the 13998 women with left-sided and 13285 with right-sided cancer. For women diagnosed in 1973-1979, there was a statistically significant difference in 15-year mortality from ischemic heart disease between patients with left-sided (13.1%, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 11.6 to 14.6) and those with right-sided (10.2%, 95% CI = 8.9 to 11.5) breast cancer (P = .02); no such difference was found for women diagnosed in 1980-1984 (9.4%, [95% CI = 8.1 to 10.6] versus 8.7% [95% CI = 7.4 to 10.0], respectively, P = .64) or 1985-1989 (5.8% [95% CI = 4.8 to 6.8] versus 5.2% [95% CI = 4.4 to 5.9], respectively, P = .98). In the Cox model, the hazard ratio [HR] for ischemic heart disease mortality for women with left-sided versus women with right-sided disease was 1.50 (95% CI = 1.19 to 1.87) in 1979. With each succeeding year after 1979, the hazard of death from ischemic heart disease for women with left-sided versus those with right-sided disease declined by 6% (HR = 0.94, 95% CI = 0.91 to 0.98). Conclusions: Risk of death from ischemic heart disease associated with radiation for breast cancer has substantially decreased over time.

Background: Taxane-based chemotherapy has been associated with an increased risk of radiation pneumonitis in patients with breast cancer. To obtain additional information about this association, we investigated the association between paclitaxel chemotherapy and radiation pneumonitis in patients participating in a phase III randomized study. Methods: Five hundred and twenty-four breast cancer patients were prospectively and randomly assigned to receive either four cycles of paclitaxel followed by four cycles of 5-fluorouracil, doxorubicin, cyclophosphamide (FAC) or eight cycles of FAC. One hundred and eighty-nine of these patients (100 in the paclitaxel-FAC group and 89 in the FAC group) subsequently underwent radiation therapy in our institution and had medical records available to review for pulmonary symptoms. In addition, a radiologist who was unaware of the type of treatment scored chest x-ray changes after radiation treatment. Crude rates of radiation pneumonitis were compared with chi-square or Fisher's exact test, and actuarial rates were assessed with Kaplan-Meier and log-rank tests. All statistical tests were two-sided. Results: No difference in the rate of clinically relevant radiation pneumonitis was observed between the two groups (5.0% in the paclitaxel-FAC group versus 4.5% in the FAC group; difference = 0.5%, 95% CI = -6.6% to 5.5%; P = 1.00). Oral steroids for pneumonitis were taken by two patients in the paclitaxel-FAC group but by none in the FAC group, and no patient was hospitalized for or died of radiation pneumonitis. The paclitaxel-FAC group (39.3%) had a higher rate of radiographic changes after irradiation than the FAC group (23.7%; difference = 15.6%, 95% CI = -0.11% to 28.8%; P = .034). Conclusion: Patients with breast cancer treated with sequential paclitaxel, FAC, and radiation therapy appeared to have a very low rate of clinically relevant radiation pneumonitis that was no different from that of patients treated with FAC alone. [J Natl Cancer Inst 2004;96: 1676-81]

Fifty-three patients with locally advanced salivary gland malignant neoplasm were treated with fast neutron radiation therapy. All patients received treatment for gross inoperable, residual unresectable, or recurrent disease - clinical situations in which results using photon irradiation were suboptimal. With a median follow-up of 42 months and a minimum follow-up of 1 year, locoregional tumor control in the treatment field was achieved in 92% (48 of 52) of patients. An additional eight patients had regional failures outside the treatment field, resulting in an overall locoregional tumor control rate of 77% (40 of 52). The 5-year actuarial locoregional control rates were 65% overall and 75% in patients with node-positive disease. Grouping patients according to prior treatment status, actuarial 5-year locoregional control rates were 92% for patients treated definitively (without a prior surgical procedure), 63% for those treated postoperatively for gross residual disease, and 51% for those treated for recurrent disease after a surgical procedure. The P values associated with these differences were 0.12 and 0.01, respectively. There were no instances of radiation-induced facial nerve damage. This study suggests that neutron irradiation alone should be the therapy of choice in the treatment of advanced-stage salivary gland tumors and that surgery should be limited to those patients in whom disease-free margins can be obtained. The potential morbidity of a debulking surgical procedure before neutron irradiation is not warranted by an improvement in locoregional control over that achievable with neutron therapy alone. Cancer 1992; 69:2779-2788.

To link to full-text access for this article, visit this link: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jacr.2007.04.008 Byline: Thomas A. Buchholz (a), William H. McBride (b), James D. Cox (a) Keywords: Physician-scientist; career development; radiation oncology Abstract: The field of radiation oncology is currently attracting a high number of accomplished MD and PhD graduates who have aspirations of pursuing physician-scientist career paths. This good fortune comes at a time when radiation oncology is in need of professionals interested in contributing to the exciting advances in treatment technologies and molecular oncology and in helping translate advances in these areas into benefits for patients. Although the profession of radiation oncology has done an outstanding job of attracting excellent residents and providing appropriate environments for their continued academic development during residency training, the profession has not fully prepared an infrastructure for accepting these highly qualified individuals into physician-scientist faculty positions. It is very important that radiation oncology develop a more comprehensive strategy to address this need. Doing so will ensure the preservation and growth of the profession. Author Affiliation: (a) The University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas. (b) David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California.