| Literature DB >> 27795716 |
Anna Kulik1, Jarosław Łyczek1, Maria Kawczyn Ska2, Ewelina Gruszczyn Ska2.
Abstract
PURPOSE: The estimation of cosmetic effect in 93 patients with early breast cancer treated with breast conserving surgery (BCS) followed by combined radiotherapy, including HDR brachytherapy (HDR-BT) boost.Entities:
Keywords: BCS; HDR; breast cancer; cosmetic effect
Year: 2009 PMID: 27795716 PMCID: PMC5075992
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Contemp Brachytherapy ISSN: 2081-2841
Histopathology
| N | % | |
|---|---|---|
| Carcinoma ductale invasivum | 57 | 59 |
| Carcinoma lobulare ¡nvasivum | 12 | 12 |
| Others | 29 | 29 |
| Node negative | 74 | 76 |
| Node positive | 24 | 24 |
Radiotherapy description
| Factor | Treated patients | Analyzed patients |
|---|---|---|
| Number of patients | 98 | 93 |
| EBRT (conventional) | 74 (75.5%) | 71 (76%) |
| EBRT (hyperfractionation) | 24 (24.5%) | 22 (24%) |
| BT (manual optimalization) | 77 (78.6%) | 74 (79.5%) |
| BT (automatic optimalization) | 21 (21.4%) | 19 (20.5%) |
| Maximal number of applicators | 17 | 17 |
| Median number of applicators | 9 | 9 |
| Minimal number of applicators | 3 | 3 |
| Maximal reference volume (ml) | 56 | 56 |
| Median reference volume (ml) | 32.3 | 30 |
| Minimal reference volume (ml) | 10 | 10 |
EBRT – external beam radiation therapy, BT – brachytherapy
Estimation of cosmetic effect – criteria, modified EORTC score, used in Brachytherapy Department, Cancer Centre – Institute, Warsaw
| Excellent and very good cosmetic effect (9-10 points) | No differences between both breasts |
| Good cosmetic effect (7-8 points) | Small grade breast asymmetry, depigmentation in applicators insertion places, little retraction of scar |
| Sufficient cosmetic effect (5-6 points) | Substantial breast asymmetry, scar deformation, intensive teleangiectasis in applicators insertion places |
| Bad cosmetic effect (< 4 points) | Large breast asymmetry – deformation of treated breast, skin necrosis |
Estimation of cosmetic effect – done by physicians
| Cosmetic effect | Number of patients | % |
|---|---|---|
| 10 points | 6 | 6.5 |
| 9 points | 32 | 34.4 |
| 8 points | 33 | 35.5 |
| 7 points | 8 | 8.6 |
| 6 points | 9 | 9.7 |
| 5 points | 2 | 2.2 |
| 4 points | 3 | 3.2 |
| Excellent and very good cosmetic effect (9-10 points) | 38 | 40.9 |
| Good cosmetic effect (7-8 points) | 41 | 44.1 |
| Sufficient cosmetic effect (5-6 points) | 11 | 11.8 |
| Bad cosmetic effect (≤ 4 points) | 3 | 3.2 |
Estimation of cosmetic effect – correlation with chemotherapy in combined treatment
| Chemotherapy | 10 points score | Total | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1-6 pts. | 7-10 pts. | ||
| (-) | 8 (12%) | 57 (88%) | 65 |
| (+) | 6 (21%) | 22 (79%) | 28 |
| Total | 14 | 79 | 93 |
Estimation of cosmetic effect – done by patients
| Cosmetic effect | Number of patients | % |
|---|---|---|
| 10 points | 32 | 34.4 |
| 9 points | 18 | 19.3 |
| 8 points | 21 | 22.6 |
| 7 points | 5 | 5.4 |
| 6 points | 10 | 10.8 |
| 5 points | 7 | 7.5 |
| Excellent and very good cosmetic effect (9-10 points) | 50 | 53.8 |
| Good cosmetic effect (7-8 points) | 26 | 28 |
| Sufficient cosmetic effect (5-6 points) | 17 | 18.2 |
Fig. 1Correlation between cosmetic effect and age
Fig. 2Correlation between cosmetic effect and tumor size – mammographic
Estimation of cosmetic effect – tumor location
| Location | 10 points score | Total | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1-6 pts. | 7-10 pts. | ||
| Central location | 1 (25%) | 3 (75%) | 4 |
| Internal quadrants location | 4 (21%) | 15 (79%) | 19 |
| External quadrants location | 9 (13%) | 61 (87%) | 70 |
| Total | 14 (15%) | 79 (85%) | 93 |
Estimation of cosmetic effect – type of skin cutting
| Type of skin cutting | 10 points score | Total | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1-6 pts. | 7-10 pts. | ||
| Arched | 7 (10%) 50% | 67 (90%) 85% | 74 |
| Radial | 7 (37%) 50% | 12 (63%) 15% | 19 |
| Total | 14 | 79 | 93 |
Estimation of cosmetic effect – method of breast conserving surgery
| Method | 10 points score | Total | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1-6 pts. | 7-10 pts. | ||
| Quadrantectomy | 4 (80%) 29% | 1 (20%) 1% | 5 |
| Tumorectomy | 10 (11%) 71% | 78 (89%) 99% | 88 |
| Total | 14 | 79 | 93 |
Fig. 3Correlation between cosmetic effect and number of interstitial applicators
Fig. 4Correlation between cosmetic effect and reference volume (ml)
Estimation of cosmetic effect – correlation with optimization method
| Optimization method | 10 points score | Total | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1-6 pts. | 7-10 pts. | ||
| Automatic | 9 (43%) | 12 (57%) | 21 |
| Manual | 5 (7%) | 67 (93%) | 72 |
| Total | 14 | 79 | 93 |