Literature DB >> 21728389

Assessment of pulmonary fibrosis after radiotherapy (RT) in breast conserving surgery: comparison between conventional external beam RT (EBRT) and intraoperative RT with electrons (ELIOT).

C Rampinelli1, M Bellomi, G B Ivaldi, M Intra, S Raimondi, S Meroni, R Orecchia, U Veronesi.   

Abstract

The aim of this study was to assess the frequency and the grade of RT-induced pulmonary fibrosis in patients who underwent EBRT compared to patients who underwent ELIOT. One-hundred-seventy-eight patients enrolled in a prospective randomized phase III trial to compare the efficacy of ELIOT (a single dose of 21 Gy prescribed at the 90% isodose) versus EBRT (50 Gy to the whole breast plus a 10 Gy boost to the tumour bed), underwent a spiral 16-detector row Computed Tomography (CT) examination to assess RT-induced pulmonary fibrosis: 83 patients in the EBRT arm and 95 in the ELIOT arm. All patients (age range 48-75 years) were affected by unicentric infiltrating carcinoma of the breast with diameter < 2.5 cm. This study was approved by our Institutional Ethical Committee and informed consent was obtained from each patient. Two observers, blinded to patient's randomization, independently evaluated each CT examination and assigned a fibrosis score (Grades 0 to 3). Inter-observer agreement for the fibrosis score was evaluated and a consensus between observers was obtained. Differences in fibrosis score between the two arms were evaluated by Chi Square test and Odds Ratio (OR) with 95% Confidence Intervals (CI). Pulmonary fibrosis was diagnosed in 42 patients (23.6%): 38 (90%) were in the EBRT arm and 4 (10%) in the ELIOT arm (p < 0.0001); twenty-six of them were Grade 1 (one ELIOT), fifteen were Grade 2 (three ELIOT) and one was Grade 3. The post-radiotherapy risk in the EBRT arm to develop at least Grade 1 fibrosis was 19 times higher than in the ELIOT one (OR: 19.20; 95%CI: 6.46-57.14) and 6 times higher to develop at least Grade 2 (OR: 5.70; 95%CI: 1.56-20.76). In conclusion, CT detected pulmonary fibrosis in patients treated with ELIOT is significantly less frequent compared to patients treated with EBRT.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21728389     DOI: 10.7785/tcrt.2012.500209

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Technol Cancer Res Treat        ISSN: 1533-0338


  6 in total

1.  Intraoperative radiation therapy delivered prior to lumpectomy for early-stage breast cancer: a single institution study.

Authors:  Wei Yu; Zhi Lin; Zhong-Jian Ju; Xi-Ru Li; Yan-Jun Zhang; Qing-Long Kong; Han-Shun Gong; Jian-Dong Wang; Lin Ma
Journal:  Am J Cancer Res       Date:  2015-06-15       Impact factor: 6.166

Review 2.  Intraoperative Electron Radiotherapy (IOERT) as an Alternative to Standard Whole Breast Irradiation: Only for Low-Risk Subgroups?

Authors:  Sergio Maluta; Stefano Dall'Oglio; Donald A Goer; Nadia Marciai
Journal:  Breast Care (Basel)       Date:  2014-05       Impact factor: 2.860

Review 3.  Intraoperative radiotherapy for breast cancer: the lasting effects of a fleeting treatment.

Authors:  Harriet B Eldredge-Hindy; Anne L Rosenberg; Nicole L Simone
Journal:  Int J Breast Cancer       Date:  2014-08-10

4.  Intraoperative Radiotherapy Is Not a Better Alternative to Whole Breast Radiotherapy as a Therapeutic Option for Early-Stage Breast Cancer.

Authors:  Linwei Wang; Min Sun; Shuailong Yang; Yuanyuan Chen; Tian Li
Journal:  Front Oncol       Date:  2021-12-16       Impact factor: 6.244

5.  Breast cancer: from "maximum tolerable" to "minimum effective" treatment.

Authors:  Umberto Veronesi; Vaia Stafyla; Alberto Luini; Paolo Veronesi
Journal:  Front Oncol       Date:  2012-10-08       Impact factor: 6.244

Review 6.  Critical research gaps and translational priorities for the successful prevention and treatment of breast cancer.

Authors:  Suzanne A Eccles; Eric O Aboagye; Simak Ali; Annie S Anderson; Jo Armes; Fedor Berditchevski; Jeremy P Blaydes; Keith Brennan; Nicola J Brown; Helen E Bryant; Nigel J Bundred; Joy M Burchell; Anna M Campbell; Jason S Carroll; Robert B Clarke; Charlotte E Coles; Gary J R Cook; Angela Cox; Nicola J Curtin; Lodewijk V Dekker; Isabel dos Santos Silva; Stephen W Duffy; Douglas F Easton; Diana M Eccles; Dylan R Edwards; Joanne Edwards; D Evans; Deborah F Fenlon; James M Flanagan; Claire Foster; William M Gallagher; Montserrat Garcia-Closas; Julia M W Gee; Andy J Gescher; Vicky Goh; Ashley M Groves; Amanda J Harvey; Michelle Harvie; Bryan T Hennessy; Stephen Hiscox; Ingunn Holen; Sacha J Howell; Anthony Howell; Gill Hubbard; Nick Hulbert-Williams; Myra S Hunter; Bharat Jasani; Louise J Jones; Timothy J Key; Cliona C Kirwan; Anthony Kong; Ian H Kunkler; Simon P Langdon; Martin O Leach; David J Mann; John F Marshall; Lesley Martin; Stewart G Martin; Jennifer E Macdougall; David W Miles; William R Miller; Joanna R Morris; Sue M Moss; Paul Mullan; Rachel Natrajan; James P B O'Connor; Rosemary O'Connor; Carlo Palmieri; Paul D P Pharoah; Emad A Rakha; Elizabeth Reed; Simon P Robinson; Erik Sahai; John M Saxton; Peter Schmid; Matthew J Smalley; Valerie Speirs; Robert Stein; John Stingl; Charles H Streuli; Andrew N J Tutt; Galina Velikova; Rosemary A Walker; Christine J Watson; Kaye J Williams; Leonie S Young; Alastair M Thompson
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res       Date:  2013-10-01       Impact factor: 6.466

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.