Timothy J Whelan1, Jim A Julian2, Tanya S Berrang3, Do-Hoon Kim2, Isabelle Germain4, Alan M Nichol5, Mohamed Akra6, Sophie Lavertu7, Francois Germain8, Anthony Fyles9, Theresa Trotter10, Francisco E Perera11, Susan Balkwill12, Susan Chafe13, Thomas McGowan14, Thierry Muanza15, Wayne A Beckham16, Boon H Chua17, Chu Shu Gu2, Mark N Levine2, Ivo A Olivotto10. 1. Department of Oncology, McMaster University and Juravinski Cancer Centre, Hamilton, ON, Canada. Electronic address: twhelan@hhsc.ca. 2. Department of Oncology, McMaster University and Juravinski Cancer Centre, Hamilton, ON, Canada. 3. Radiation Therapy Program, BC Cancer - Victoria, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada. 4. Department of Radiation Oncology, CHU de Québec - Université Laval, Québec, QC, Canada. 5. Division of Radiation Oncology, University of British Columbia and BC Cancer - Vancouver, BC, Canada. 6. Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, MB, Canada. 7. Department of Radiation Oncology, Centre Hospitalier de l'Université de Montréal, Montreal, QC, Canada. 8. Department of Radiation Oncology, CHU de Québec - Université Laval, Québec, QC, Canada; Division of Radiation Oncology, University of British Columbia and BC Cancer - Kelowna, BC, Canada. 9. Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Toronto and Radiation Medicine Program, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, Toronto, ON, Canada. 10. University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada. 11. Department of Oncology, Western University and London Regional Cancer Program, London, ON, Canada. 12. BC Cancer - Surrey, BC, Canada. 13. Department of Oncology, Division of Radiation Oncology, University of Alberta and Cross Cancer Institute, Edmonton, AB, Canada. 14. Trillium Health Partners Credit Valley Hospital, Mississauga, ON, Canada. 15. Department of Oncology, McGill University and Jewish General Hospital Segal Cancer Centre, Montreal, QC, Canada. 16. Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Victoria and BC Cancer - Victoria, BC, Canada. 17. University of New South Wales and Prince of Wales Hospital, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Abstract
BACKGROUND:Whole breast irradiation delivered once per day over 3-5 weeks after breast conserving surgery reduces local recurrence with good cosmetic results. Accelerated partial breast irradiation (APBI) delivered over 1 week to the tumour bed was developed to provide a more convenient treatment. In this trial, we investigated if external beam APBI was non-inferior to whole breast irradiation. METHODS: We did this multicentre, randomised, non-inferiority trial in 33 cancer centres in Canada, Australia and New Zealand. Women aged 40 years or older with ductal carcinoma in situ or node-negative breast cancer treated by breast conserving surgery were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive either external beam APBI (38·5 Gy in ten fractions delivered twice per day over 5-8 days) or whole breast irradiation (42·5 Gy in 16 fractions once per day over 21 days, or 50 Gy in 25 fractions once per day over 35 days). Patients and clinicans were not masked to treatment assignment. The primary outcome was ipsilateral breast tumour recurrence (IBTR), analysed by intention to treat. The trial was designed on the basis of an expected 5 year IBTR rate of 1·5% in the whole breast irradiation group with 85% power to exclude a 1·5% increase in the APBI group; non-inferiority was shown if the upper limit of the two-sided 90% CI for the IBTR hazard ratio (HR) was less than 2·02. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT00282035. FINDINGS:Between Feb 7, 2006, and July 15, 2011, we enrolled 2135 women. 1070 were randomly assigned to receive APBI and 1065 were assigned to receive whole breast irradiation. Six patients in the APBI group withdrew before treatment, four more did not receive radiotherapy, and 16 patients received whole breast irradiation. In the whole breast irradiation group, 16 patients withdrew, and two more did not receive radiotherapy. In the APBI group, a further 14 patients were lost to follow-up and nine patients withdrew during the follow-up period. In the whole breast irradiation group, 20 patients were lost to follow-up and 35 withdrew during follow-up. Median follow-up was 8·6 years (IQR 7·3-9·9). The 8-year cumulative rates of IBTR were 3·0% (95% CI 1·9-4·0) in the APBI group and 2·8% (1·8-3·9) in the whole breast irradiation group. The HR for APBI versus whole breast radiation was 1·27 (90% CI 0·84-1·91). Acute radiation toxicity (grade ≥2, within 3 months of radiotherapy start) occurred less frequently in patients treated with APBI (300 [28%] of 1070 patients) than whole breast irradiation (484 [45%] of 1065 patients, p<0·0001). Late radiation toxicity (grade ≥2, later than 3 months) was more common in patients treated with APBI (346 [32%] of 1070 patients) than whole breast irradiation (142 [13%] of 1065 patients; p<0·0001). Adverse cosmesis (defined as fair or poor) was more common in patients treated with APBI than in those treated by whole breast irradiation at 3 years (absolute difference, 11·3%, 95% CI 7·5-15·0), 5 years (16·5%, 12·5-20·4), and 7 years (17·7%, 12·9-22·3). INTERPRETATION: External beam APBI was non-inferior to whole breast irradiation in preventing IBTR. Although less acute toxicity was observed, the regimen used was associated with an increase in moderate late toxicity and adverse cosmesis, which might be related to the twice per day treatment. Other approaches, such as treatment once per day, might not adversely affect cosmesis and should be studied. FUNDING: Canadian Institutes for Health Research and Canadian Breast Cancer Research Alliance.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: Whole breast irradiation delivered once per day over 3-5 weeks after breast conserving surgery reduces local recurrence with good cosmetic results. Accelerated partial breast irradiation (APBI) delivered over 1 week to the tumour bed was developed to provide a more convenient treatment. In this trial, we investigated if external beam APBI was non-inferior to whole breast irradiation. METHODS: We did this multicentre, randomised, non-inferiority trial in 33 cancer centres in Canada, Australia and New Zealand. Women aged 40 years or older with ductal carcinoma in situ or node-negative breast cancer treated by breast conserving surgery were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive either external beam APBI (38·5 Gy in ten fractions delivered twice per day over 5-8 days) or whole breast irradiation (42·5 Gy in 16 fractions once per day over 21 days, or 50 Gy in 25 fractions once per day over 35 days). Patients and clinicans were not masked to treatment assignment. The primary outcome was ipsilateral breast tumour recurrence (IBTR), analysed by intention to treat. The trial was designed on the basis of an expected 5 year IBTR rate of 1·5% in the whole breast irradiation group with 85% power to exclude a 1·5% increase in the APBI group; non-inferiority was shown if the upper limit of the two-sided 90% CI for the IBTR hazard ratio (HR) was less than 2·02. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT00282035. FINDINGS: Between Feb 7, 2006, and July 15, 2011, we enrolled 2135 women. 1070 were randomly assigned to receive APBI and 1065 were assigned to receive whole breast irradiation. Six patients in the APBI group withdrew before treatment, four more did not receive radiotherapy, and 16 patients received whole breast irradiation. In the whole breast irradiation group, 16 patients withdrew, and two more did not receive radiotherapy. In the APBI group, a further 14 patients were lost to follow-up and nine patients withdrew during the follow-up period. In the whole breast irradiation group, 20 patients were lost to follow-up and 35 withdrew during follow-up. Median follow-up was 8·6 years (IQR 7·3-9·9). The 8-year cumulative rates of IBTR were 3·0% (95% CI 1·9-4·0) in the APBI group and 2·8% (1·8-3·9) in the whole breast irradiation group. The HR for APBI versus whole breast radiation was 1·27 (90% CI 0·84-1·91). Acute radiation toxicity (grade ≥2, within 3 months of radiotherapy start) occurred less frequently in patients treated with APBI (300 [28%] of 1070 patients) than whole breast irradiation (484 [45%] of 1065 patients, p<0·0001). Late radiation toxicity (grade ≥2, later than 3 months) was more common in patients treated with APBI (346 [32%] of 1070 patients) than whole breast irradiation (142 [13%] of 1065 patients; p<0·0001). Adverse cosmesis (defined as fair or poor) was more common in patients treated with APBI than in those treated by whole breast irradiation at 3 years (absolute difference, 11·3%, 95% CI 7·5-15·0), 5 years (16·5%, 12·5-20·4), and 7 years (17·7%, 12·9-22·3). INTERPRETATION: External beam APBI was non-inferior to whole breast irradiation in preventing IBTR. Although less acute toxicity was observed, the regimen used was associated with an increase in moderate late toxicity and adverse cosmesis, which might be related to the twice per day treatment. Other approaches, such as treatment once per day, might not adversely affect cosmesis and should be studied. FUNDING: Canadian Institutes for Health Research and Canadian Breast Cancer Research Alliance.
Authors: Max O Meneveau; Gina R Petroni; Nikole E Varhegyi; John C Hulse; Anneke T Schroen; David R Brenin; Einsley M Janowski; Adam C Berger; Melissa A Lazar; Nicole L Simone; Timothy N Showalter; Shayna L Showalter Journal: Brachytherapy Date: 2020-06-20 Impact factor: 2.362
Authors: Ishita Chen; Astrid M Botty Van den Bruele; Erin F Gillespie; Boris A Mueller; Amy J Xu; John Cuaron; Atif J Khan; Beryl McCormick; Oren Cahlon; Simon N Powell; Hiram Cody; Lior Z Braunstein Journal: Breast Cancer Res Treat Date: 2021-03-26 Impact factor: 4.872
Authors: Matthew N Mills; Nicholas W Russo; Matthew Fahey; Ronica H Nanda; Sunny Raiker; Jessica Jastrzebski; Lisa L Stout; Jason P Wilson; Taghrid A Altoos; Kathleen G Allen; Peter W Blumencranz; Roberto Diaz Journal: Oncologist Date: 2021-10-04
Authors: Tobias Forster; Clara Victoria Katharina Köhler; Jürgen Debus; Juliane Hörner-Rieber Journal: Breast Care (Basel) Date: 2020-02-21 Impact factor: 2.860