Literature DB >> 2616812

Cosmetic evaluation of breast conserving treatment for mammary cancer. 2. A quantitative analysis of the influence of radiation dose, fractionation schedules and surgical treatment techniques on cosmetic results.

E Van Limbergen1, A Rijnders, E van der Schueren, T Lerut, R Christiaens.   

Abstract

The effects of surgical treatment techniques, radiation doses and fraction sizes on cosmetic outcome were analysed in a population of 161 patients with stage I and II breast cancer treated with breast conserving surgery and a wide range of radiotherapy doses. In 142 patients also quantitative measurements of nipple position asymmetries and breast contour retraction were carried out. The scoring and measurement results were analysed using a multivariate model to assess the relative importance of the various factors involved. In this material radiation dose to the breast was the most significant parameter correlated with cosmetic outcome (p = 0.0001). Radiation doses higher than 75 Gy in 37 fractions led to very poor results in more than 30% of patients. For the quantitative measurements of radiation fibrosis, a dose-response curve could be demonstrated over a dose range of 40 to 86 Gy in fraction sizes of 2 Gy. Above 50 Gy, increases in dose of 1 Gy correlated with an average displacement of nipple and breast contour of 1 mm, in upward direction and of 0.75 mm to the median. An increased amount of fibrosis was observed when part of the treatment was given in larger fraction sizes (4-6 Gy). Plotting the data against dose equivalent TE values, an alpha/beta value of 2.5 Gy could be estimated for the development of late fibrosis. Other treatment factors whose influence on cosmetic outcome could be identified and quantified were the differences in surgical techniques for the removal of the primary tumor (tumorectomy vs. segmentectomy, p = 0.05) and for the axillary clearance ("en bloc" dissection vs. separate incisions, p = 0.018). Also technical aspects of the radiotherapy on the regional lymph nodes, sometimes leading to matchline fibrosis, proved to be important (p = 0.0075). Finally, a number of tumor-related factors were assessed in order to take their relative importance into account, if necessary, when studying therapy factors. While tumor stage had only a limited impact in the range of tumors included in this study, the localisation of the tumor significantly influenced cosmetic outcome with worse results for inferior and medial localisations. While quantitative measurements were not correlated with all the factors identified for poor cosmesis, their great value is to quantify the radiation-induced fibrosis as well as the effects of different surgical techniques on nipple retraction.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1989        PMID: 2616812     DOI: 10.1016/0167-8140(89)90037-6

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Radiother Oncol        ISSN: 0167-8140            Impact factor:   6.280


  21 in total

Review 1.  New trends in breast cancer management: is the era of immediate breast reconstruction changing?

Authors:  Bohdan Pomahac; Abram Recht; James W May; Charles A Hergrueter; Sumner A Slavin
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2006-08       Impact factor: 12.969

2.  Why should diagnostic benign breast biopsies weight less than twenty grams?

Authors:  S J Parker; M Wheaton; M G Wallis; S A Harries
Journal:  Ann R Coll Surg Engl       Date:  2001-03       Impact factor: 1.891

Review 3.  Recent developments in breast-conserving surgery for breast cancer patients.

Authors:  F Fitzal; O Riedl; R Jakesz
Journal:  Langenbecks Arch Surg       Date:  2008-09-10       Impact factor: 3.445

4.  Immediate breast volume replacement using a free dermal fat graft after breast cancer surgery: multi-institutional joint research of short-term outcomes in 262 Japanese patients.

Authors:  Yuko Kijima; Chihaya Koriyama; Teruhiko Fujii; Kouichi Hirokaga; Kiyoshi Ishigure; Tomoyo Kaneko; Shuji Kayano; Sachio Miyamoto; Yasuaki Sagara; Takashi Sakurai; Teruhisa Sakurai; Keiichi Sotome; Hiroaki Ueo; Kazuyuki Wakita; Masahiro Watatani
Journal:  Gland Surg       Date:  2015-04

5.  Cosmetic outcome 1-5 years after breast conservative surgery, irradiation and systemic therapy.

Authors:  Gyöngyi Kelemen; Zoltán Varga; György Lázár; László Thurzó; Zsuzsanna Kahán
Journal:  Pathol Oncol Res       Date:  2011-10-08       Impact factor: 3.201

6.  Reconstruction of the breast conservation deformity.

Authors:  Sumner A Slavin; Terri Halperin
Journal:  Semin Plast Surg       Date:  2004-05       Impact factor: 2.314

7.  Conservative surgery, external radiotherapy, and HDR brachytherapy in a single fraction of 7 Gy in early breast cancer: long-term toxicity and esthetic assessment.

Authors:  Aurora Rodríguez Pérez; Maria Concepción López Carrizosa; Pilar Maria Samper Ots; José Fermín Pérez-Regadera Gómez; José Zapatero Ortuño; Juan de Dios Sáez Garrido; Manuel Joaquín Martín de Miguel
Journal:  Clin Transl Oncol       Date:  2012-09-14       Impact factor: 3.405

8.  Factors affecting cosmetic outcome in breast-conserving cancer treatment--objective quantitative assessment.

Authors:  R D Pezner; M P Patterson; J A Lipsett; T Odom-Maryon; N L Vora; J Y Wong; K H Luk
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res Treat       Date:  1992-01       Impact factor: 4.872

Review 9.  Local failure and margin status in early-stage breast carcinoma treated with conservation surgery and radiation therapy.

Authors:  M S Anscher; P Jones; L R Prosnitz; W Blackstock; M Hebert; R Reddick; A Tucker; R Dodge; G Leight; J D Iglehart
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  1993-07       Impact factor: 12.969

Review 10.  Hypofractionated Radiotherapy as Adjuvant Treatment in Early Breast Cancer. A Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

Authors:  Wilfried Budach; Edwin Bölke; Christiane Matuschek
Journal:  Breast Care (Basel)       Date:  2015-08-19       Impact factor: 2.860

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.