Search

Background and Purpose: Locoregional breast cancer recurrence is characterized by a high rate of systemic and local re-recurrence. Data on concurrent radiochemotherapy (RCT) in these cases are scarce. The purpose of this study was to evaluate feasibility, toxicity and efficacy of local control of a radiotherapy combined with a chemotherapy containing a taxane., Patients and Methods: Between May 1999 and November 2004, 36 women referred to the authors' clinic because of locoregional breast cancer recurrence that was either inoperable (n = 29) or resected (n = 7) received concurrent irradiation and taxane monotherapy weekly (TAX/RT; n = 28: paclitaxel 90 mg/m(2), n = 24, or docetaxel 35 mg/m(2), n = 4) or taxane + cisplatin therapy (TAX/CIS/RT; n = 8; paclitaxel 135 mg/m(2) d1 and cisplatin 20 mg/m(2) d1-5 q28)., Results: Comparing TAX/RT with TAX/CIS/RT, the complete remission rate in patients with macroscopic tumor prior to RCT was significantly higher for TAX/RT than for TAX/CIS/RT (7/19 vs. 0/8; p = 0.046), but overall remission rates were comparable, i.e., partial remission: 11/20 versus 6/8 cases, stable disease (no change): 1/20 versus 2/8 cases, and response rate: 95% versus 75%, respectively. The cumulative local recurrence-free survival rate at 1 and 2 years post-treatment was 83% and 68% and that of systemic recurrence-free survival 56% and 29%, respectively. The main toxic reactions of third-degree and higher were dermatitis in TAX/RT (57% vs. 11% for TAX/CIS/RT) and leukocytopenia in TAX/CIS/RT (62% vs. 7% for TAX/RT)., Conclusion: Concurrent irradiation and taxane chemotherapy weekly, in particular with paclitaxel, is recommended due to response and acceptable side effects for treatment of inoperable locoregional breast cancer recurrence.

Although the majority of breast cancer patients are clinically node-negative (cN0) at diagnosis, 15-20% will have a metastatic sentinel lymph node (SLN, pN1(sn)). While a less radical approach regarding axillary surgery in cN0 patients with a positive SLN biopsy is advocated, the limitations of 5 published trials on axillary management in pN1(sn) are discussed intensely in the literature and support the performance of ongoing validation and extension trials, especially considering the lack of data in the setting of mastectomy. As locoregional radiotherapy has a significant effect on both recurrence and survival, a standardization of locoregional radiotherapy in the situation of SLN biopsy alone in pN1(sn) patients has to be defined in the future, and de-escalation trials should embrace a truly multidisciplinary approach. This is also of utmost importance considering the fact that high-volume nodal disease requires an intensified adjuvant chemotherapy strategy to which patients omitting axillary dissection cannot be stratified. Finally, there is mounting evidence that the therapeutic role of extensive axillary surgery in low-volume nodal disease is negligible, and multidisciplinary and translational efforts must be undertaken to individualize treatment in order to gain a reasonable balance between necessary staging information and unnecessary treatment-related morbidity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The impact of treatment for the primary tumor on distant metastases and survival in primary metastatic breast cancer patients is controversial. Previous retrospective studies and meta-analyses suggested a survival benefit for the removal of the primary tumor. Early follow-up data from 2 prospectively randomized trials presented at San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium 2013 could not confirm this. Only a very small subgroup of patients with solitary bone metastases seemed to profit from surgery, while patients with multiple visceral metastases showed a worse prognosis with initial surgery. There are no studies available with the primary aim to investigate the impact of axillary lymph node surgery or locoregional radiotherapy on the survival of stage IV breast cancer patients. Based on current data, locoregional treatment in primary metastatic breast cancer should not be recommended in patients with asymptomatic primary tumor as a matter of routine. More solid conclusion of the impact of primary tumor treatment in stage IV breast cancer patients on their prognosis will be reached with the completion of the ongoing prospectively randomized trials. Until these studies are completed, locoregional therapy, which can provoke additional morbidity in a metastatic setting with limited live expectancy, is exclusively indicated for palliative reasons. © 2014 S. Karger GmbH, Freiburg [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Simple Summary: Currently, the optimal axillary surgical approach for breast cancer patients with initial node-positive disease and conversion to clinically node-negative status after primary systemic therapy is unclear. The aim of our study was to evaluate the clinical impact of removing the initially most suspicious, labeled axillary lymph node in addition to the sentinel lymph node. Metastatic target lymph nodes were found in five out of 63 patients (7.9%), while the sentinel lymph node was either tumor-free or not detected. The removal of the target lymph node influenced the adjuvant systemic therapy in only one case (1.6%). However, complete axillary dissection was indicated in all five cases. Furthermore, with fewer than three sentinel lymph nodes removed, the target lymph node reduced the false-negative rate to less than 10%. We therefore conclude that although the target lymph node has a minor impact on adjuvant systemic therapy, it is relevant for surgical axillary management. Purpose: To assess the impact of the removal of the target lymph node (TLN) on therapy after the completion of primary systemic therapy (PST) in initially node-positive breast cancer patients. Methods: Pooled data analysis of participants of the prospective CLIP- and TATTOO-study at the University of Rostock was performed. Results: A total of 75 patients were included; 63 of them (84.0%) converted to clinically node-negative after PST. Both TLN and sentinel lymph node (SLN) were identified in 41 patients (51.2%). In five out of 63 patients (7.9%), the TLN was metastatic after PST and the SLN was either tumor-free or not detected. Axillary lymph node dissection (ALND) was conducted in all five patients. In one patient, systemic therapy recommendation was influenced by the TLN; adjuvant radiotherapy was influenced by the TLN in zero patients. For patients with fewer than three removed SLNs, the FNR was 28.6% for the SLN biopsy alone and 7.1% for targeted axillary dissection (TAD). Conclusions: Removal of the TLN in addition to the SLN after PST has only minimal impact on the type of adjuvant systemic therapy and radiotherapy. However, the extent of axillary surgery was relevantly affected and FNR was improved by TAD. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Within their niche, adipose-derived stem cells (ADSCs) are essential for homeostasis as well as for regeneration. Therefore, the interest of physicians is to use ADSCs as a tool for radiation oncology and regenerative medicine. To investigate related risks, this study analyses the radiation response of adult stem cells isolated from the adipose tissue of the female breast. To avoid donor-specific effects, ADSCs isolated from breast reduction mammoplasties of 10 donors were pooled and used for the radiobiological analysis. The clonogenic survival fraction assay was used to classify the radiation sensitivity in comparison to a more radiation-sensitive (ZR-75-1), moderately sensitive (MCF-7), and resistant (MCF10A) cell lines. Afterwards, cytotoxicity and genotoxicity of irradiation on ADSCs were investigated. On the basis of clonogenic cell survival rates of ADSCs after irradiation, we assign ADSCs an intermediate radiation sensitivity. Furthermore, a high repair capacity of double-strand breaks is related to an altered cell cycle arrest and increased expression of cyclin-dependent kinase (CDK) inhibitor p21. ADSCs isolated from breast tissue exhibit intermediate radiation sensitivity, caused by functional repair mechanisms. Therefore, we propose ADSCs to be a promising tool in radiation oncology. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article focuses on the use different strategies to treat the local disease recurrence and metastatic breast cancer to be able to prolong and maintain good quality of life for breast cancer patients in the U.S. The breast-preserving surgery and interstitial radiotherapy as some of the options used over mastectomy. On the other hand, physicians focus on reducing the tumor-related symptoms for metastatic breast cancer considering the absence of treatment.

• Detailed evaluation of received radiotherapy in the randomized SENOMAC trial. • Inclusion of level I in the target more common after sentinel node biopsy only. • Significant dose in axillary level I regardless of inclusion in target volume. • No dose difference to axillary target volumes between randomization groups. • Inclusion of axillary level I raised dose to the humeral head. Recommendations for regional radiotherapy (RT) of sentinel lymph node (SLN)-positive breast cancer are debated. We here report a RT quality assessment of the SENOMAC trial. The SENOMAC trial randomized clinically node-negative breast cancer patients with 1–2 SLN macrometastases to completion axillary lymph node dissection (cALND) or SLN biopsy only between 2015–2021. Adjuvant RT followed national guidelines. RT plans for patients included in Sweden and Denmark until June 2019 were collected (N = 1176) and compared to case report forms (CRF). Dose to level I (N = 270) and the humeral head (N = 321) was analyzed in detail. CRF-data and RT plans agreed in 99.3 % (breast/chest wall) and in 96.6 % of patients (regional RT). Congruence for whether level I was an intended RT target was lower (78 %). In accordance with Danish national guidelines, level I was more often an intended target in the SLN biopsy only arm (N = 334/611, 55 %,) than in the cALND arm (N = 174/565, 31 %,). When an intended target, level I received prescribed dose to 100 % (IQR 98–100 %) of the volume. However, even when not an intended target, full dose was delivered to > 80 % of level I (IQR 75–90 %). The intentional inclusion of level I in the target volume more than doubled the dose received by ≥ 50 % of the humeral head. Congruence between CRF data and RT plans was excellent. Level I received a high dose coverage even when not intentionally included in the target. Including level I in target significantly increased dose to the humeral head. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: After publication of the radiation field design in the American College of Surgeons Oncology Group Z0011 trial, a radiation therapy quality assurance review was integrated into the Intergroup-Sentinel-Mamma (INSEMA) trial. We aimed to investigate the role of patient characteristics, extent of axillary surgery, and radiation techniques for dose distribution in ipsilateral axillary levels.Methods and Materials: INSEMA (NCT02466737) has randomized 5542 patients who underwent breast-conserving surgery. Of these, 276 patients from 108 radiation therapy facilities were included in the central review, using the planning records of the first 3 patients treated at each site.Results: Of the 276 patients, 41 had major deviations (ie, no axillary contouring or submission of insufficient records) leading to exclusion. A total of 235 (85.1%) radiation therapy planning records were delineated according to the INSEMA protocol, including 9 (3.8%) cases with minor deviations. At least 25% of INSEMA patients were unintentionally treated with ≥95% of the prescribed breast radiation dose in axillary level I. Approximately 50% of patients were irradiated with a median radiation dose of more than 85% of prescription dose in level I. Irradiated volumes and applied doses were significantly lower in levels II and III compared with level I. However, 25% of patients still received a median radiation dose of ≥75% of prescription dose to level II. Subgroup analysis revealed a significant association between incidental radiation dose in the axilla and obesity. Younger age, boost application, and fractionation schedule showed no impact on axillary dose distribution.Conclusions: Assuming ≥80% of prescribed breast dose as the optimal dose for curative radiation of low-volume disease in axillary lymph nodes, at least 50% of reviewed INSEMA patients received an adequate dose in level I, even with contemporary 3-dimensional techniques. Dose coverage was much less in axillary levels II and III, and far below therapeutically relevant doses. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: To obtain long-term data on local tumor control after treatment of invasive breast cancer by breast-conserving surgery and adjuvant radiotherapy (RT), in consideration of the interstitial high-dose-rate boost technique. Patients and Methods: A total of 263 women with 268 mammary carcinomas (International Union Against Cancer Stage I-IIB) who had undergone breast-conserving surgery and adjuvant RT between 1990 and 1994 were included. The potential risk factors for local recurrence-free survival were investigated. Results: During a median follow-up period of 94 months, 27 locoregional recurrences, 25 of which were in breast, were diagnosed. The cumulative rate of in-breast recurrence was 4.1% ± 1.4% at 5 years of follow-up and 9.9% ± 2.4% at 10 years. The multivariate analysis identified medial tumor location and delayed RT (defined as an interval of >2 months between surgery and the start of RT) as significant risk factors for in-breast recurrence in the overall study population. Medial tumor location vs. lateral/central location (hazard ratio, 2.48; 95% confidence interval, 1.06–5.84) resulted in a cumulative in-breast recurrence rate of 22.5% ± 8.3% vs. 6.9% ± 2.3% at 10 years. Delayed RT (hazard ratio, 2.84; 95% confidence interval, 1.13–7.13) resulted in a cumulative in-breast recurrence rate of 18.5% ± 6.2% vs. 6.8% ± 2.4% at 10 years. The multivariate analysis also showed that the risk of in-breast recurrence was lower after high-dose-rate boost therapy than after external beam boost therapy in patients with laterally/centrally located tumors (hazard ratio, 3.25; 95% confidence interval, 0.91–11.65). Conclusion: Tumor location, interval between surgery and RT, and boost technique might influence local control of breast cancer treated by breast-conserving surgery and RT. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]