Ultrahypofractionation in postoperative radiotherapy for breast cancer: A single-institution retrospective cohort series.

BACKGROUND: The 'FAST-forward', study published in April 2020, demonstrated the effectiveness of an extremely hypofractionated radiotherapy schedule, delivering the total radiation dose in five sessions over the course of 1 week. We share our department's experience regarding patients treated with this regimen in real-world clinical settings, detailing outcomes related to short-term toxicity and efficacy. METHODS: A descriptive observational study was conducted on 160 patients diagnosed with breast cancer. Between July 2020 and December 2021, patients underwent conservative surgery followed by a regimen of 26 Gy administered in five daily fractions. RESULTS: The median age was 64 years (range: 43-83), with 82 patients (51.3%) treated for left-sided breast cancer, 77 patients (48.1%) for right-sided breast cancer, and 1 instance (0.6%) of bilateral breast cancer. Of these, 66 patients had pT1c (41.3%), 70.6% were infiltrative ductal carcinomas, and 11.3% were ductal carcinoma in situ. Most tumours exhibited intermediate grade (41.9%), were hormone receptor positive (81.3%), had low Ki-67 (Ki-67 < 20%; 51.9%) and were Her 2 negative (85%). The majority of surgical margins were negative (99.4%). Among the patients, 72.5% received hormonotherapy, and 23.8% received chemotherapy. Additionally, 26 patients (16.3%) received an additional tumour boost following whole breast irradiation (WHBI) of 10 Gy administered in five sessions of 2 Gy over a week. The median planning target volume (PTV) was 899 cm3 (range: 110-2509 cm3). Early toxicity was primarily grade I radiodermatitis, affecting 117 patients (73.1%). During a median follow-up of 15 months (range: 3.9-28.77), only one patient experienced a local relapse, which required mastectomy. CONCLUSIONS: The implementation of this highly hypofractionated regimen in early-stage breast cancer appears feasible and demonstrates minimal early toxicity. However, a more extended follow-up duration would be required to evaluate long-term toxicity and efficacy accurately.

Importance of dose in palliative treatment for incurable head and neck cancer with radiotherapy.

PURPOSE: To identify predictors of palliation for head and neck cancer treated with the "Hypo Trial" hypofractionated radiation therapy regimen in a clinical setting. DESIGN/METHOD: We retrospectively assessed 106 consecutive patients with incurable cancer, treated between January 2008 and December 2018. Regimen used was 30-36Gy in 5-6 biweekly fractions of 6Gy. RESULTS: The prescription dose was 30Gy in 57 (53.8%) patients and 36Gy in 49 (46.2%) patients. 89.6% patients completed the prescribed treatment. With a median follow-up of 6.92 months, 79.2% of the patients experienced clinical palliation. Palliation was correlated with the radiation therapy dose (P = 0.05). Median overall and progression-free survival (OS, PFS) were 7 and 4.63 months, respectively. Achieving palliation was associated to OS (P = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: This short palliative hypofractionated scheme resulted in a high rate of palliation, with excellent compliance and acceptable toxicity. Our results show that radiation dose is a predictive factor for palliation.

PITASOR epidemiological study: prevalence, incidence and treatment of anaemia in radiation therapy oncology departments in Spain.

INTRODUCTION: Anemia is the most common haematological complication in cancer patients. OBJECTIVE: Analysis of the incidence, prevalence and treatment of anemia in oncologic patients treated in Radiation Oncology Departments in Spain (ROD) and monitoring of the existing recommendations for the treatment of anemia. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Observational, prospective, multicenter study which involved 19 Spanish ROD. The study was approved by the CEIC Central Defense Hospital. 477 patients with solid tumors, subsidiary of RT with radical intent referred to such centers within a period of one month (5/5/09 to 5/6/09) and gave their consent to participate in the study. We gathered the main characteristics of patients and their oncologic disease. All patients underwent a determination of Hb levels before RT, upon reaching 25-35 Gy and at the end treatment. In patients with anemia we assessed the existence of related symptoms and its treatment. RESULTS: Basal situation: The prevalence of anemia was 34.8% (166 patients). Mean Hb in patients with anemia was 11.17 ± 1.07 g/dl. Anemia-related symptoms were present in 34% of the patients. Anemia predisposing factors were: stage of the disease, previously received chemotherapy, and hormonal therapy. 39% (66 patients) received anemia treatment, with a mean Hb of 10.43 ± 1.04 g/dl. During RT: The prevalence of anemia was 38.9% (182 patients) with a mean Hb of 11.24 ± 1.21 g/dl. Predisposing factors for anemia during RT treatment were: age, male sex, chemotherapy prior to RT, basal anemia and chemotherapy during RT. 36.3% (66 patients) had anemia-related symptoms. 34.6% (63 patients) with a mean Hb of 10.5 ± 1.37 g/dl received treatment for anemia. The prevalence of anemia at the end of the RT was 38.1% (177 patients) with a mean Hb of 11.19 ± 1.18 g/dl. The predisposing factors for the appearance of anemia at the end of RT were: male sex, anemia at basal situation and during treatment and chemotherapy during RT. 34% (61 patients) had anemia-related symptoms and 73 patients (41.2%) with a mean Hb of 10.5 ± 1.22 g/dl received treatment for anemia. The presence of anemia-related symptoms was significantly correlated with the beginning of treatment for anemia. The incidence of anemia (new cases) during radiotherapy was 17.5%. CONCLUSION: The prevalence of anemia in basal situation, during RT and at the end of RT is 34.8%, 38.9% and 38.1%. During RT the incidence of anemia is 17.5%. 39.8%-41.2% of patients with anemia and 64.2%-68% of patients with anemia-related symptoms received treatment. Treatment of anemia starts with Hb<11 g/dl and the goal is to achieve Hb 12 g/dl. In our Radiotherapy Oncology Departments, the treatment of anemia complies with the current recommendations and guidelines in use.

Outcome of small invasive breast cancer with no axillary lymph node involvement.

The prognosis and need or not for adjuvant therapy in patients with small breast tumors (≤1cm N0) is the subject of controversy as regards the clinical benefit obtained, toxicity, and the economical costs generated. A retrospective analysis was made of 238 patients with early-stage breast cancer (pT1≤1 cm N0M0) diagnosed between January 1993 and May 2008. As regards the systemic adjuvant treatments provided, (a) 122 (51%) received no treatment, (b) 102 (43%) received hormone therapy, (c) 9 (4%) chemotherapy, and (d) 5 (2%) received both hormone therapy and chemotherapy. An analysis was made of disease-free survival (DFS) and breast cancer-specific survival in our series of patients, and of their correlation to clinicopathological factors (age, tumor size, histological grade, estrogen receptor (ER) expression, HER-2 overexpression, and systemic adjuvant therapy). The median follow-up of this cohort was 63months (range 5-145). Some type of relapse was recorded in 4.2% of the patients (six patients presented local recurrence in all cases subjected to rescue treatment with surgery and/or radiotherapy, three patients developed distant metastases, and one patient presented a resected local recurrence followed by systemic relapse). The 5year DFS was 96%, and the 5year breast cancer-specific survival was 99.6%. A univariate analysis was made of the clinicopathological variables and their association to DFS. None of the variables was seen to be significantly correlated to shorter DSF except for an association between HER-2 overexpression and poor outcome borderline significance (p=0.07). The prognosis of our pT1≤1cm N0M0 tumors was excellent, although the absence of systemic adjuvant therapy in one-half of the patients.

Targeted therapy of metastatic breast cancer.

Breast cancer is a heterogeneous disease characterised by a dysregulation of multiple pathways related to cell differentiation, cell cycle control, apoptosis, angiogenesis and development of metastasis. Acting against these pathways provides therapeutic targets for new targeted biologic therapies, which, in the future, might constitute a key for fighting cancer. The development of molecular technology in recent years has allowed a further comprehension of these mutations and dysregulated pathways leading to oncogenesis. New targeted biologic therapies will block essential functions of cancer cells and tumour stroma. A growing number of therapy options, alone or in combination with background treatments (chemotherapy, hormone therapy, radiotherapy), will allow oncologists a better adaptation of treatment to patients and disease characteristics. Examples of approved targeted agents in breast cancer include agents targeting the human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2), such as trastuzumab, lapatinib and the anti-VEGF bevacizumab. In addition, there are other therapy classes under evaluation, including novel antiEGFR or antiHER2 therapies; agents fighting other tyrosine kinases, including the Src and the insulinlike growth factor receptor; agents interfering critically relevant pathways, such as PI3K/AKT/mTOR inhibitors; and agents promoting apoptosis, such as PARP inhibitors (for particular breast cancer subtypes, such as basal-like, or breast cancer with BRCA mutations) and others. The better selectivity against malignant cells of these therapies, when compared to conventional chemotherapy, gives, a priori, at least two advantages to biologic treatments: fewer side effects and a more individualised treatment of cancer depending on the tumour's molecular characteristics. The ability to identify patients' subgroups and response predicting factors will be crucial in obtaining the greatest benefit with minimal toxicity levels. Unsolved questions remain, such as appropriate patient selection based on the expression of the therapeutic target in the tumour, the study of the efficacy of the drug in not so extensively pretreated populations and with a greater chance of response, the use of new pharmacodynamic models to help to define new response predicting factors for a specific new biologic therapy, the combined and rational use of different biologic therapies having different molecular targets and fighting the same target through a complementary mechanism of action that might improve clinical efficacy.