Search

Highlights • Results of a breast cancer planning study with 4 cases conducted in the Netherlands are reported. • A guideline for evaluation of breast cancer radiotherapy treatment plans has been established. • The dosimetric parameters D98%, Dmean and D2% are adopted for target volume dose evaluation. • For the heart and lungs, Dmean is adopted as the most important dosimetric parameter., Purpose The aim was to reach consensus in The Netherlands on which parameters should be used to evaluate breast cancer radiotherapy (RT) plans. Materials and methods A Benchmark Case with delineated planning target volumes (PTVs) and Organs At Risk (OARs) was sent to all Dutch radiotherapy centres in combination with a questionnaire, with the request to generate RT plans prescribing 15 times 2.67 Gy for four different treatment indications according to the institutional irradiation technique. The plans and accompanying questionnaire answers were analysed using descriptive statistics. These results, together with a harmonisation proposal, were sent to all centres. The proposal was discussed at a meeting of the Dutch Society of Radiation Oncology breast cancer platform. Distinct parameters were accepted if consensus on them was reached. Results 19 out of 20 Dutch departments participated in this study. PTV coverage varied considerably, with D98% between 63% and 99% for the breast and between 37% and 97% for the internal mammary nodes (IMN). Also substantial OAR dose differences were observed, with e.g. mean heart doses ranging between 1.85 Gy and 5.42 Gy in case the IMN were included in the PTV. For evaluation of the PTVs D98%, D2% and Dmean were chosen to report on, with target values of ≥ 95% (90% for the PTV_IMN), ≤ 107%, and 99–101%, respectively. For OARs, consensus was reached on the parameters to be evaluated, without target values: Dmean of the heart, Dmean and V5% of the lungs, and in case of periclavicular radiotherapy V30Gy of the thyroid gland. For patients younger than 40 years a contralateral mean breast dose of ≤ 1 Gy was agreed upon. Conclusion A new Dutch consensus guideline for evaluation of breast cancer RT plans has been established.

Background Radiotherapy (RT) is part of the curative treatment of approximately 70% of breast cancer (BC) patients. Wide practice variation has been reported in RT dose, fractionation and its treatment planning for BC. To decrease this practice variation, it is essential to first gain insight into the current variation in RT treatment between institutes. This paper describes the development of the NABON Breast Cancer Audit-Radiotherapy (NBCA-R), a structural nationwide registry of BC RT data of all BC patients treated with at least surgery and RT. Methods A working group consisting of representatives of the BC Platform of the Dutch Radiotherapy Society selected a set of dose volume parameters deemed to be surrogate outcome parameters, both for tumour control and toxicity. Two pilot studies were carried out in six RT institutes. In the first pilot study, data were manually entered into a secured web-based system. In the second pilot study, an automatic Digital Imaging and Communications in Medicine (DICOM) RT upload module was created and tested. Results The NBCA-R dataset was created by selecting RT parameters describing given dose, target volumes, coverage and homogeneity, and dose to organs at risk (OAR). Entering the data was made mandatory for all Dutch RT departments. In the first pilot study (N = 1093), quite some variation was already detected. Application of partial breast irradiation varied from 0 to 17% between the 6 institutes and boost to the tumour bed from 26.5 to 70.2%. For patients treated to the left breast or chest wall only, the average mean heart dose (MHD) varied from 0.80 to 1.82 Gy; for patients treated to the breast/chest wall only, the average mean lung dose (MLD) varied from 2.06 to 3.3 Gy. In the second pilot study 6 departments implemented the DICOM-RT upload module in daily practice. Anonymised data will be available for researchers via a FAIR (Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, Reusable) framework. Conclusions We have developed a set of RT parameters and implemented registration for all Dutch BC patients. With the use of an automated upload module registration burden will be minimized. Based on the data in the NBCA-R analyses of the practice variation will be done, with the ultimate aim to improve quality of BC RT. Trial registration Retrospectively registered.

Highlights • No difference was found in decisional conflict with or without PtDA use. • Patients who used the PtDA had more knowledge, suggesting a better informed choice. • Patients who used the PtDA chose more often for a less intensive treatment. • The use of the PtDA was not significant associated with a longer consultation time., Background and Purpose In selected breast cancer patients, radiation treatment (RT) lowers the recurrence risk, with minor or no improvement of survival. In these patients, the choice to undergo RT is considered a preference-sensitive decision. To facilitate shared decision-making (SDM) for this choice, a patient decision aid was made. We aimed to evaluate the effect of the PtDA on decisional conflict. Material and methods We performed a multi-center pre- and post-intervention study (BRASA-trial). The first 214 patients made a choice without support of the PtDA; the subsequent 189 patients received a link to the PtDA. The primary endpoint was decisional conflict; secondary endpoints were perceived SDM and knowledge on treatment options. Patients filled out questionnaires immediately after, and three months after their decision. Data were analyzed with multi-level regression analysis. Results After correcting for the difference in age and educational level, the mean (±SD) decisional conflict for the intervention group (27.3 ± 11.4) was similar to the control group (26.8 ± 11.4; difference = 0.86, 95 %CI 1.67,3.36) three months after their decision. This also applied to perceived SDM. Patients exposed to the PtDA pursued additional treatment less often (45% vs 56%, odds ratio 0.59, 95 %CI 0.37,0.95) and scored significantly higher on the knowledge test (7.4 ± 2.5 vs 6.1 ± 2.7, corrected difference = 1.0, 95 %CI 0.50,1.49). There was no significant increase in consultation time. Conclusions Handing out the PtDA was not associated with improved scores in decisional conflict or perceived SDM, but it was associated with a choice for less additional treatment and better knowledge about the treatment options.

Aims: To determine the variation in radiation therapy boost use in a nationwide study following adjustment of a national guideline in 2011, as well as to address the relationship to patient, tumour and radiation therapy institutional factors.Materials and methods: All invasive breast cancers and non-invasive breast cancers (ductal carcinoma in situ; DCIS) that received external whole-breast radiation between 2011 and 2016 were selected from the Netherlands Cancer Registry. Box plots were used to evaluate variation over time and logistic regression was carried out to address other factors influencing the variation. Funnel plots were constructed, with unadjusted and adjusted data for patient and tumour factors significantly affecting the use of a boost.Results: For breast cancer patients (n = 45,207), the proportion receiving a boost and its range decreased over the years from 37.3-92.7% in 2011 to 28.3-65.4% in 2016. This trend was not observed in DCIS patients (n = 6,844). Young age, large tumours, high grade and the absence of tumour-free resection margins were associated with boost use for both breast cancer and DCIS. For breast cancer, triple-negative tumour subtype and metastatic lymph node involvement were also associated with boost use. Institutional factors did not influence the use of a boost and institutional variation remained substantial after case-mix adjustments.Conclusion: Following adjustment of a nationwide implemented guideline, variation in radiation therapy boost use decreased in patients with breast cancer but not in patients with DCIS. Several tumour and patient characteristics were associated with boost use. Substantial institutional variation could not be explained by differences in patient, tumour or predefined institutional characteristics. (C) 2018 The Royal College of Radiologists. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

The introduction of population-based breast cancer screening and implementation of digital mammography have led to an increased incidence of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) without a decrease in the incidence of advanced breast cancer. This suggests DCIS overdiagnosis exists. We hypothesize that asymptomatic, low-grade DCIS can safely be managed by active surveillance. If progression to invasive breast cancer would still occur, this will be low-grade and hormone receptor positive with excellent survival rates. Also, breast-conserving treatment will still be an option, if no prior radiotherapy has been applied. Management by active surveillance also may save many low-grade DCIS patients intensive treatment. Therefore, we will compare active surveillance with conventional treatment, being either mastectomy, wide local excision (WLE) only, or WLE plus radiotherapy, possibly followed by hormonal therapy for primary low-grade DCIS. For this, we conduct a phase III, open-label, non-inferiority, multi-center, randomized clinical trial sponsored by the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC-1401-BCG). The Dutch Centers are coordinated by the Dutch Breast Cancer Research Group (BOOG) (BOOG 2014-04). This trial is developed and implemented in close collaboration with patient advocates. Randomization will be in a 1:1 ratio among one of the following arms: (1) active surveillance or (2) standard treatment per local policy. In total, 1,240 women (≥ 45 years) will be included without prior breast cancer, but with asymptomatic, pure, low-grade DCIS, based on a minimum of tissue harvested by biopsy from calcifications detected by population-based or opportunistic screening. Assuming 25% of randomized women qualified to enroll in the study will drop out or will be excluded from per protocol evaluation, at least 1,240 women need to be randomized to obtain the 930 patients required for the evaluation of the primary endpoint. The same follow-up scheme will be applied in both study arms, i.e. annual mammography for a period of 10 years. The primary end-point is ipsilateral invasive breast tumor-free rate at 10 years. Secondary end-points are among others: overall survival, breast cancer-specific survival, mastectomy rate, patient reported outcomes and cost-effectiveness. Accrual has started in the Netherlands in February 2017 and will start internationally in over 30 centers shortly. Acknowledgements: This trial is funded by Pink Ribbon Netherlands, the Dutch Cancer Society and Dutch Cancer Society/Alpe d'HuZes, and Cancer Research UK. Citation Format: Wesseling J, Elshof LE, Tryfonidis K, Poncet C, Aalders K, van Leeuwen-Stok E, Skinner V, Loo C, Winter-Warnars G, Bleiker E, Retèl V, Pijnappel R, Bijker N, Rutgers E, van Duijnhoven F. Update of the randomized, non-inferiority LORD trial testing safety of active surveillance for women with screen-detected low risk ductal carcinoma in situ (EORTC-1401-BCG/BOOG 2014-04, DCIS) [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2017 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2017 Dec 5-9; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2018;78(4 Suppl):Abstract nr OT3-07-01.

Purpose/Objective: It is unknown whether the historically found dosimetric advantages of treating gynecologic cancer with the patient in a prone position with use of a small-bowel displacement device (belly-board) remain when volumetric arc therapy (VMAT) is used and whether these advantages depend on the necessary margin between clinical target volume (CTV) and planning target volume (PTV). The aim of this study is to determine the best patient position (prone or supine) in terms of sparing organs at risk (OAR) for various CTV-to-PTV margins and VMAT dose delivery. Methods and Materials: In an institutional review boarddapproved study, 26 patients with gynecologic cancer scheduled for primary (9) or postoperative (17) radiation therapy were scanned in a prone position on a belly-board and in a supine position on the same day. The primary tumor CTV, nodal CTV, bladder, bowel, and rectum were delineated on both scans. The PTVs were created each with a different margin for the primary tumor and nodal CTV. The VMAT plans were generated with our in-house system for automated treatment planning. For all margin combinations, the supine and prone plans were compared with consideration of all OAR dose-volume parameters but with highest priority given to bowel cavity V-45Gy (cm(3)). Results: For both groups, the prone position reduced the bowel cavity V-45Gy, in particular for nodal margins >= 10 mm (Delta V-45Gy = 23.9 +/- 10.6 cm(3)). However, for smaller margins, the advantage was much less pronounced (Delta V-45Gy = 6.5 +/- 3.0 cm(3)) and did not reach statistical significance. The rectum mean dose (D-mean) was significantly lower (Delta D-mean = 2.5 +/- 0.3 Gy) in the prone position for both patient groups and for all margins, and the bladder Dmean was significantly lower in the supine position (Delta D-mean = 2.6 +/- 0.4 Gy) only for the postoperative group. The advantage of the prone position was not present if it needed a larger margin than the supine position. Conclusion: For patients with gynecologic cancer, the historically found dosimetric advantages for the prone position remain for modern dose delivery techniques if large margins are needed. However, the advantage is lost for small margins and if the prone position needs a larger margin than the supine position. (C) 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Background: The current debate on overdiagnosis and overtreatment of screen-detected ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) urges the need for prospective studies to address this issue. A substantial number of DCIS lesions will never form a health hazard, particularly if it concerns non-to slow-growing low-grade DCIS. The LORD study aims to evaluate the safety of active surveillance in women with low-risk DCIS. Design: This is a randomised, international multicentre, open-label, phase III non-inferiority trial, led by the Dutch Breast Cancer Research Group (BOOG 2014-04) and the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC-BCG 1401). Standard treatment will be compared to active surveillance in 1240 women aged P45 years with asymptomatic, screen-detected, pure low-grade DCIS based on vacuum-assisted biopsies of microcalcifications only. Both study arms will be monitored with annual digital mammography for a period of 10 years. The primary end-point is 10-year ipsilateral invasive breast cancer free percentage. Secondary end-points include patient reported outcomes, diagnostic biopsy rate during follow-up, ipsilateral mastectomy rate and translational research. Feasibility: To explore interest in and feasibility of the LORD study we conducted a survey among EORTC and BOOG centres. A vast majority of EORTC and BOOG responding centres expressed interest in participation in the LORD study. The proposed study design is endorsed by nearly all centres. (C) 2015 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.

Ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) is a pre-invasive stage of breast cancer with a heterogeneous clinical behaviour. Since the introduction of mammographic screening programmes, the incidence of DCIS has shown a dramatic increase. Treatment should focus on the prevention of progression to invasive disease. If progression occurs, poorly differentiated DCIS frequently gives rise to grade III invasive breast cancer, whereas well differentiated DCIS more often recurs as grade I invasive disease. However, at present, validated diagnostic test are lacking to predict progression accurately. The majority of women with DCIS are suitable for breast conserving therapy. Obtaining clear surgical margins is the most important goal of a local excision. Radiotherapy is effective in reducing the risk of local recurrence with about 50 % in all subgroups of patients with DCIS. (Breast cancer specific) survival of women with DCIS is excellent, and radiotherapy does not further improve this. Future research should be directed in enabling to select women who have a high risk of--invasive--recurrence, so in which radiotherapy should be standard part of the breast conserving approach, and those women with a more indolent lesion, in which after surgery a watchful waiting approach can be followed.

Trust in the oncologist is crucial for breast cancer patients. It reduces worry, enhances decision making, and stimulates adherence. Optimal nonverbal communication by the oncologist, particularly eye contact, body posture, and smiling, presumably benefits patients’ trust. We were the first to experimentally examine (1) how the oncologist’s nonverbal behavior influences trust, and (2) individual differences in breast cancer patients’ trust. Analogue patients (APs) viewed one out of eight versions of a video vignette displaying a consultation about chemotherapy treatment. All eight versions varied only in the oncologist’s amount of eye contact (consistent vs. inconsistent), body posture (forward leaning vs. varying), and smiling (occasional smiling vs. no smiling). Primary outcome was trust in the observed oncologist (Trust in Oncologist Scale). 214 APs participated. Consistent eye contact led to stronger trust (β = −.13, p = .04). This effect was largely explained by lower educated patients, for whom the effect of consistent eye contact was stronger than for higher educated patients (β = .18, p = .01). A forward leaning body posture did not influence trust, nor did smiling. However, if the oncologist smiled more, he was perceived as more friendly (rs = .31, p

The introduction of population-based breast cancer screening and implementation of digital mammography have led to an increased incidence of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) without a decrease in the incidence of advanced breast cancer. This suggests DCIS overdiagnosis exists. We hypothesize that asymptomatic, low-grade DCIS can safely be managed by active surveillance. If progression to invasive breast cancer would still occur, this will be low-grade and hormone receptor positive with excellent survival rates. Also, breast-conserving treatment will still be an option, if no prior radiotherapy has been applied. It also may save many low-grade DCIS patients from intensive treatment. We will compare active surveillance with conventional treatment, being either wide local excision (WLE) only, WLE plus radiotherapy or mastectomy, possibly followed by hormonal therapy for primary low-grade DCIS, detected by calcifications only, in a phase III, open-label, non-inferiority, multi-center, randomized clinical trial legally supported by the Breast Cancer Group of the European Organisation for the Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC-1401-BCG). The Dutch Centers are coordinated by the BOOG Study Center (BOOG 2014-04). Randomization will be 1:1 in to one of the following arms: active surveillance or standard treatment per local policy. In total, 1240 women (≥ 45 years) with asymptomatic, pure, low-grade DCIS, based on vacuum-assisted biopsies of calcifications as detected by population-based or opportunistic screening, without prior breast cancer, will be included. Assuming 25% of randomized women qualified to enroll in the study will drop out or will be excluded from per protocol population, at least 1,240 women need to be randomized to obtain the 930 patients required for the evaluation of the primary endpoint. The same follow-up scheme will be applied in both study arms, i.e. annual mammography for a period of 10 years. The primary end-point is ipsilateral invasive breast tumor-free rate at 10 years. Secondary end-points are among others: overall survival, breast cancer-specific survival, mastectomy rate and patient reported outcomes. Accrual has started in January 2017. Acknowledgements: This trial is funded by Pink Ribbon Netherlands, the Dutch Cancer Society and Dutch Cancer Society/Alpe d’HuZes. Citation Format: Jelle Wesseling, Frederieke van Duijnhoven, Konstantinos Tryfonidis, Aleksandra Peric, Elise van Leeuwen-Stok, Nina Bijker, Lotte Elshof, Emiel Rutgers. Standard therapy versus active surveillance for low grade DCIS: the LORD trial [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2017; 2017 Apr 1-5; Washington, DC. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2017;77(13 Suppl):Abstract nr CT137. doi:10.1158/1538-7445.AM2017-CT137

BACKGROUND: To evaluate the rate of vaginal, pelvic, and distant failures and acute toxicity after postoperative vaginal vault brachytherapy (VBT) delivered by a ring applicator in women with high intermediate-risk endometrial cancer. METHODS AND MATERIALS: A total of 100 patients were treated with VBT after a total abdominal hysterectomy and bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy for a Stage IA or IB (International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics 2009) intermediate-risk endometrial cancer; 26 patients received 30-Gy low-dose-rate, 74 patients received 28-Gy pulsed-dose-rate brachytherapy. RESULTS: At a median followup of 37 months (range, 1-107), 6 (6%) patients showed failures. Three patients developed an in-field recurrence in the vaginal vault: 1 was isolate, whereas the other 2 showed simultaneous pelvic and/or distant failure. A fourth patient developed an out-of-field recurrence in the posterior vaginal wall of the proximal half of the vagina, including pelvic and distant failure. Two other patients showed only distant failure. The estimated 3-year actuarial rate of any vaginal recurrence was 2.6% (95% confidence interval, 0-6.3%). The 5-year overall survival was 84%, similar to that in the female Dutch population matched for age and date of diagnosis. The acute side effects were low, consisting mainly of the occurrence of temporary diarrhea (2%). CONCLUSION: Postoperative VBT by a ring applicator results in a low recurrence risk, survival rates comparable with the normal female population, and a very low risk of acute morbidity. (C) 2015 American Brachytherapy Society. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved

Aims To evaluate the diagnostic and therapeutic procedures which were followed in a European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) randomized clinical trial investigating the role of radiotherapy in breast-conserving treatment (BCT) for ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) of the breast. Methods The medical files of 824 of the 1010 randomized patients (82%) were reviewed during site visits to 30 participating institutes. Results Large variations occurred, particularly in the surgical procedures and histopathological work-up which were performed. Important risk factors like tumour size and margin status were poorly quantified in the medical files. Conclusions These findings emphasize the need for establishing uniform guidelines for diagnostic and therapeutic procedures for DCIS, and for clearly defined risk factors for recurrence after BCT for DCIS. Because of its randomized nature, the main question of the trial, i.e. the effect of radiotherapy on the risk of local recurrence, will not be influenced by variation. The risk of local recurrence in itself, and hence the success of BCT for DCIS, may however be influenced by the quality of the initial procedures that were conducted.

Four randomized clinical trials have shown unanimously the benefit of 50 Gy whole-breast radiotherapy in breast-conserving therapy (BCT) for ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS). The risk of both DCIS and invasive local recurrence is reduced with about 50%, and this effect is similar for all clinical and histological subgroups analyzed. Younger age and involved margin status are the most important factors for an increased risk of local recurrence. In these subgroups, even with radiotherapy, the observed local recurrence rates are more than 20% at 10 years, which is considerably higher than reported local recurrence rates after BCT for invasive breast cancer. The optimal radiotherapy dose in BCT for DCIS has yet to be established. Also, at present, a subgroup of lesions in which the recurrence rate is so low that radiotherapy can be safely omitted has not yet been identified.

The purpose of the current study was to assess the outcome of breast-conserving therapy by means of a cone excision and radiotherapy in patients with Paget disease of the nipple without associated invasive breast carcinoma.Between 1987 and 1998, 61 eligible patients were registered in the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Study 10873. The majority of patients (97%) presented without an associated palpable mass. At histologic examination, the majority (93%%) of patients had an underlying ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS); in the remaining 7%, only Paget disease was found. Treatment was comprised of a complete excision of the nipple-areolar complex including the underlying breast tissue with tumor free margins, followed by external irradiation to the whole breast (50 gray in 25 fractions). The primary endpoint was local recurrence.At a median follow-up of 6.4 years, 4 of the 61 patients developed a recurrence in the treated breast (1 patient with DCIS and 3 patients with invasive disease). One patient with an invasive local recurrence died of disseminated breast carcinoma. The 5-year local recurrence rate was 5.2% (95% confidence interval, 1.8-14.1%).Breast-conserving therapy is a feasible alternative for patients with Paget disease and a limited extent of underlying DCIS. To achieve good local control, treatment should be comprised of a complete excision of the nipple-areolar complex including the underlying disease, followed by irradiation to the whole breast.

Ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) of the breast is a disorder that has become more common since it may manifest as microcalcifications that can be detected by screening mammography. Since selected women with invasive cancer can be treated safely with breast conservation therapy it is paradoxical that total mastectomy has remained the standard treatment for DCIS. We did a randomised phase III clinical trial to investigate the role of radiotherapy after complete local excision of DCIS.Between 1986 and 1996, women with clinically or mammographically detected DCIS measuring less than or equal to 5 cm were treated by complete local excision of the lesion and then randomly assigned to either no further treatment (n=503) or to radiotherapy (n=507; 50 Gy in 5 weeks to the whole breast). The median duration of follow-up was 4.25 years (maximum 12.0 years). All analyses were by intention to treat.500 patients were followed up in the no further treatment group and 502 in the radiotherapy group. In the no further treatment group 83 women had local recurrence (44 recurrences of DCIS, and 40 invasive breast cancer). In the radiotherapy group 53 women had local recurrences (29 recurrences of DCIS, and 24 invasive breast cancer). The 4-year local relapse-free was 84% in the group treated with local excision alone compared with 91% in the women treated by local excision plus radiotherapy (log rank p=0.005; hazard ratio 0.62). Similar reductions in the risk of invasive (40%, p=0.04) and non-invasive (35%, p=0.06) local recurrence were seen.Radiotherapy after local excision for DCIS, as compared with local excision alone, reduced the overall number of both invasive and non-invasive recurrences in the ipsilateral breast at a median follow-up of 4.25 years.

The purpose of the current study was to evaluate the locoregional recurrence rate after treatment of patients with operable breast carcinoma with a modification of the Halsted radical mastectomy and the selective use of radiotherapy and to identify risk factors for locoregional recurrence.Between 1979-1987, 691 consecutive patients underwent mastectomy after a negative biopsy of the axillary apical lymph nodes. The median age of the patients was 59 years (range, 26-89 years). The clinical tumor size was2 cm in 72 patients, 2-5 cm in 387 patients, and5 cm in 169 patients; 16 patients had a T4 tumor. Surgery was comprised of a modification of the Halsted radical mastectomy, including at least part of the pectoralis major muscle and the entire pectoralis minor muscle, in 573 patients; 303 patients had positive axillary lymph nodes. Adjuvant radiotherapy to the chest wall and regional lymph nodes was given to 74 patients, whereas an additional 414 patients underwent irradiation to the internal mammary and medial supraclavicular lymph nodes. The median follow-up was 91 months.The actuarial overall survival rate was 82% at 5 years and 63% at 10 years. The 10-year chest wall and regional lymph node control rates, including patients with prior distant failures, were 95% and 94%, respectively. The only two significant prognostic factors for locoregional recurrence on multivariate analysis were lymph node status and pathologic tumor size.Excellent locoregional control can be achieved with a modified technique of radical mastectomy in patients with negative apical biopsy and the selective use of comprehensive radiotherapy. These results may serve as a reference outcome for comparison with other locoregional treatment strategies.

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.1016/j.tipsro.2021.06.004.]., (© 2021 The Author(s).)