Prognostic Factors for Local Control in Breast Cancer After Long-term Follow-up in the EORTC Boost vs No Boost Trial: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

IMPORTANCE: Prognostic factors of ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence (IBTR) may change over time following breast-conserving therapy. OBJECTIVE: The EORTC "boost no boost" trial showed that young age and high-grade invasive carcinoma were the most important risk factors for IBTR. This study reanalyses pathological prognostic factors related to IBTR using long-term follow-up. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Participants included 5569 early-stage breast cancer patients, treated with breast-conserving surgery (BCS) and whole-breast irradiation (WBI), who were randomized between no boost and a 16-Gy boost in the EORTC phase III "boost no boost" trial (1989-1996). A total of 1616 patients with a microscopically complete resection (according to local pathologists), included in the central pathology review, have been analyzed in this study. Median follow-up was 18.2 years. INTERVENTIONS: No further treatment or 16-Gy boost, after BCS and 50-Gy WBI. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Time to ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence (IBTR) as first event. RESULTS: The 20-year cumulative incidence of IBTR in 1616 patients (160 events observed) was 15% (95% CI, 12%-17%). Young age (P < .001) and presence of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) (HR, 2.15; 95% CI, 1.36-3.38; P = .001) were associated with an increased risk of IBTR in multivariable analysis. The cumulative incidence of IBTR at 20 years was 34% (95% CI, 25%-41%), 14% (95% CI, 10%-18%), and 11% (95% CI, 8%-15%), in patients 40 years or younger, 41 to 50 years and 50 years or older, respectively (P < .001). This incidence was 18% (95% CI, 14%-22%) and 9% (95% CI, 6%-12%) for tumors with and without DCIS (P < .001). High-grade tumors relapsed more frequently early during follow-up but the relative effect of age and presence of DCIS seemed stable over time. The boost reduced the 20-year IBTR incidence from 31% (95% CI, 22%-39%) to 15% (95% CI, 8%-21%) (HR, 0.37; 95% CI, 0.22-0.62; P < .001) in high-risk patients (≤50 years with DCIS present). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: The association of high-grade invasive tumor with IBTR diminished during follow-up, while the effect of DCIS adjacent to invasive tumor seemed to remain stable. Therefore, patients with high-grade invasive tumors should be monitored closely, especially in the first 5 years, while additional DCIS is an indication for longer follow-up, emphasizing the importance of long-term trial follow-up to estimate absolute effects accurately. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT02295033.

Recent advances in regional treatment of breast carcinoma.

Regional treatment is driven by surgery and radiotherapy in early breast cancer patients as sole or combined modalities. Lymph node dissection, performed in patients with positive sentinel lymph nodes accurately identifies malignant spread in the nodal areas and ensures high levels of control in the axilla. At the turn of the century, its real impact on survival indices was nevertheless questioned, also in terms of therapeutic index, by cooperative groups and meta-analyses. As regards radiotherapy, both the indication and extension of regional irradiation remained for a long time open questions, since these issues were never addressed by randomized trials. Recent results of controlled trials investigating the exact impact of nodal surgery or irradiation on survival indices provide useful tools to optimize the regional treatment in patients with early breast cancer. Caution on interpreting some of the key messages from these controlled studies is nevertheless mandatory due to methodological limitations and caveats identified in several of these major trials enrolling patients with positive sentinel nodes.

Whole-breast irradiation with or without a boost for patients treated with breast-conserving surgery for early breast cancer: 20-year follow-up of a randomised phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Since the introduction of breast-conserving treatment, various radiation doses after lumpectomy have been used. In a phase 3 randomised controlled trial, we investigated the effect of a radiation boost of 16 Gy on overall survival, local control, and fibrosis for patients with stage I and II breast cancer who underwent breast-conserving treatment compared with patients who received no boost. Here, we present the 20-year follow-up results. METHODS: Patients with microscopically complete excision for invasive disease followed by whole-breast irradiation of 50 Gy in 5 weeks were centrally randomised (1:1) with a minimisation algorithm to receive 16 Gy boost or no boost, with minimisation for age, menopausal status, presence of extensive ductal carcinoma in situ, clinical tumour size, nodal status, and institution. Neither patients nor investigators were masked to treatment allocation. The primary endpoint was overall survival in the intention-to-treat population. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02295033. FINDINGS: Between May 24, 1989, and June 25, 1996, 2657 patients were randomly assigned to receive no radiation boost and 2661 patients randomly assigned to receive a radiation boost. Median follow-up was 17.2 years (IQR 13.0-19.0). 20-year overall survival was 59.7% (99% CI 56.3-63.0) in the boost group versus 61.1% (57.6-64.3) in the no boost group, hazard ratio (HR) 1.05 (99% CI 0.92-1.19, p=0.323). Ipsilateral breast tumour recurrence was the first treatment failure for 354 patients (13%) in the no boost group versus 237 patients (9%) in the boost group, HR 0.65 (99% CI 0.52-0.81, p<0.0001). The 20-year cumulative incidence of ipsilatelal breast tumour recurrence was 16.4% (99% CI 14.1-18.8) in the no boost group versus 12.0% (9.8-14.4) in the boost group. Mastectomies as first salvage treatment for ipsilateral breast tumour recurrence occurred in 279 (79%) of 354 patients in the no boost group versus 178 (75%) of 237 in the boost group. The cumulative incidence of severe fibrosis at 20 years was 1.8% (99% CI 1.1-2.5) in the no boost group versus 5.2% (99% CI 3.9-6.4) in the boost group (p<0.0001). INTERPRETATION: A radiation boost after whole-breast irradiation has no effect on long-term overall survival, but can improve local control, with the largest absolute benefit in young patients, although it increases the risk of moderate to severe fibrosis. The extra radiation dose can be avoided in most patients older than age 60 years. FUNDING: Fonds Cancer, Belgium.

[Intraoperative radiation therapy in conservative treatment of breast cancer: Quo Vadis?]. / Radiothérapie intra-opératoire dans le traitement du cancer du sein: Quo Vadis?

Intraoperative radiotherapy of breast carcinomas consists of a single irradiation session delivered to the surgical bed, immediately after the tumor resection. This modality, denoted in the literature as IORT, represents a novel therapeutic approach, the application of which is rigorously codified according to the risk factors identified at the time of diagnosis. As definitive treatment, IORT is applied to patients in post-menopausal status, presenting a small tumor with favorable pathological features. In patients with less favorable presentation (intermediary risk), IORT can be associated to hypofractionated external radiotherapy delivered to the whole mammary gland, on the basis of recommendations proposed by specialty international bodies, in Europe and USA.

Altered-fractionated radiotherapy in locally advanced head and neck cancer.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: To revisit the biologic rationale, the clinical methodology, the outcome and perspectives of altered fractionation in head and neck oncology. RECENT FINDINGS: Various prospective trials and meta-analyses clearly underline the major benefit patients with locally advanced disease draw from hyperfractionation and the need for an adequate selection of time-dose factors to optimize therapeutic index for accelerated regimens. In addition, the advent of high-precision techniques such as intensity-modulated radiation therapy is bound to favor the development of more intensive regimens of irradiation in the management of locally advanced head and neck squamous cell carcinomas. SUMMARY: Altered fractionation, both as stand-alone strategy or as part of approaches combining radiation to systemic treatments, is offering a lot of opportunities to the radiation oncologist. Its role is likely to gain ground in all high-risk patients not amenable to systemic treatments, or for whom the high toxicity of chemotherapy is not justified, in case, for instance, of intermediate-risk disease.

Larynx preservation: what is the standard treatment?

Locally advanced laryngeal and hypo-pharyngeal cancers have a rather poor prognosis. Up until the early 1990s, standard treatment was total laryngectomy, with dramatic functional and social outcome. The introduction of cisplatin based chemotherapy made concurrent chemo-radiotherapy (CCRT) the standard treatment for selected patients, fit for an organ preservation strategy. Over two decades of improvement in nonsurgical management of locally advanced laryngeal cancer is reviewed, including the most recent improvements with the introduction of taxanes and anti-EGFR targeted therapy.

Hyperfractionated or accelerated radiotherapy for head and neck cancer.

BACKGROUND: Several trials have studied the role of altered fractionation radiotherapy in head and neck squamous cell carcinoma, but the effect of such treatment on survival is not clear. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this individual patient data (IPD) meta-analysis was to assess whether this type of radiotherapy could improve survival. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Ear, Nose and Throat Disorders Group Trials Register; CENTRAL (2010, Issue 3); PubMed; EMBASE; CINAHL; Web of Science; BIOSIS Previews; Cambridge Scientific Abstracts; ISRCTN and additional sources for published and unpublished trials. The date of the most recent search was 8 August 2010. SELECTION CRITERIA: We identified randomised trials comparing conventional radiotherapy with hyperfractionated or accelerated radiotherapy, or both, in patients with non-metastatic head and neck squamous cell carcinomas and grouped trials into three pre-specified treatment categories: hyperfractionated, accelerated and accelerated with total dose reduction. Trials were eligible if they began recruitment after 1969 and ended before 1998. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We obtained updated individual patient data. Overall survival was the main outcome measure. The secondary outcome measures were local or regional control rates (or both), distant control rates and cause-specific mortality. MAIN RESULTS: We included 15 trials with 6515 patients. The median follow up was six years. Tumour sites were mostly oropharynx and larynx; 5221 (74%) patients had stage III-IV disease (UICC 2002). There was a significant survival benefit with altered fractionation radiotherapy, corresponding to an absolute benefit of 3.4% at five years (hazard ratio (HR) 0.92, 95% CI 0.86 to 0.97; P = 0.003). The benefit was significantly higher with hyperfractionated radiotherapy (8% at five years) than with accelerated radiotherapy (2% with accelerated fractionation without total dose reduction and 1.7% with total dose reduction at five years, P = 0.02). There was a benefit in locoregional control in favour of altered fractionation versus conventional radiotherapy (6.4% at five years; P < 0.0001), which was particularly efficient in reducing local failure, whereas the benefit on nodal control was less pronounced. The benefit was significantly higher in the youngest patients (under 50 year old) (HR 0.78, 95% CI 0.65 to 0.94), 0.95 (95% CI 0.83 to 1.09) for 51 to 60 year olds, 0.92 (95% CI 0.81 to 1.06) for 61 to 70 year olds, and 1.08 (95% CI 0.89 to 1.30) for those over 70 years old; test for trends P = 0.007). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Altered fractionation radiotherapy improves survival in patients with head and neck squamous cell carcinoma. Comparison of the different types of altered radiotherapy suggests that hyperfractionation provides the greatest benefit. An update of this IPD meta-analysis (MARCH 2), which will increase the power of this analysis and allow for other comparisons, is currently in progress.

Impact of pathological characteristics on local relapse after breast-conserving therapy: a subgroup analysis of the EORTC boost versus no boost trial.

PURPOSE: To investigate the long-term impact of pathologic characteristics and an extra boost dose of 16 Gy on local relapse, for stage I and II invasive breast cancer patients treated with breast conserving therapy (BCT). PATIENTS AND METHODS: In the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer boost versus no boost trial, after whole breast irradiation, patients with microscopically complete excision of invasive tumor, were randomly assigned to receive or not an extra boost dose of 16 Gy. For a subset of 1,616 patients central pathology review was performed. RESULTS: The 10-year cumulative risk of local breast cancer relapse as a first event was not significantly influenced if the margin was scored negative, close or positive for invasive tumor or ductal carcinoma in situ according to central pathology review (log-rank P = .45 and P = .57, respectively). In multivariate analysis, high-grade invasive ductal carcinoma was associated with an increased risk of local relapse (P = .026; hazard ratio [HR], 1.67), as was age younger than 50 years (P < .0001; HR, 2.38). The boost dose of 16 Gy significantly reduced the local relapse rate (P = .0006; HR, 0.47). For patients younger than 50 years old and in patients with high grade invasive ductal carcinoma, the boost dose reduced the local relapse from 19.4% to 11.4% (P = .0046; HR, 0.51) and from 18.9% to 8.6% (P = .01; HR, 0.42), respectively. CONCLUSION: Young age and high-grade invasive ductal cancer were the most important risk factors for local relapse, while margin status had no significant influence. A boost dose of 16 Gy significantly reduced the negative effects of both young age and high-grade invasive cancer.

The influence of the use of CT-planning on the irradiated boost volume in breast conserving treatment.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to investigate the effect of CT-based delineation and planning on the irradiated boost volume. For this specific purpose we used the data as derived from 2 prospective phase III randomised trials. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Data from 1331 patients (

Impact of the boost dose of 10 Gy versus 26 Gy in patients with early stage breast cancer after a microscopically incomplete lumpectomy: 10-year results of the randomised EORTC boost trial.

PURPOSE: To assess the impact of the boost dose in patients with involved surgical margins. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In the EORTC "boost versus no boost" trial, 251 patients with a microscopically incomplete tumour excision were randomised to receive either a low boost dose of 10 Gy (126 patients) or a high boost dose of 26 Gy (125 patients). Overall survival and the cumulative incidence of local recurrence as first event were compared by Logrank and Gray test, respectively (2-sided alpha=0.05), with a median follow-up of 11.3 years. The planned sample size was 660 patients, but only 251 were recruited. RESULTS: The median age at randomisation was 54 years. Thirty-seven patient initially relapsed locally. At 10 years, the cumulative incidence of local recurrence was 17.5% (95% CI: 10.4-24.6%) versus 10.8% (95% CI: 5.2-16.4%) for the low and high boost dose groups, respectively (HR=0.83, 95% CI: 0.43-1.57, Gray p>0.1). Overall, 64 patients have died (25.5%), 47 of them of breast cancer, without a difference in duration of survival between the two groups (HR=0.97, 95% CI=0.59-1.5, p>0.1). Severe fibrosis was palpated in the breast in 1% versus 5% and in the boost area in 3% versus 13% in the low and high boost dose groups, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: There was no statistically significant difference in local control or survival between the high boost dose of 26 Gy and the low boost dose of 10 Gy in patients with microscopically incomplete excision of early breast cancer. Fibrosis, however, was noted significantly more frequently in cases treated with the high boost dose.

Predictors of the risk of fibrosis at 10 years after breast conserving therapy for early breast cancer: a study based on the EORTC Trial 22881-10882 'boost versus no boost'.

The EORTC 22881-10882 trial in 5178 conservatively treated early breast cancer patients showed that a 16 Gy boost dose significantly improved local control, but increased the risk of breast fibrosis. To investigate predictors for the long-term risk of fibrosis, Cox regression models of the time to moderate or severe fibrosis were developed on a random set of 1797 patients with and 1827 patients without a boost, and validated in the remaining set. The median follow-up was 10.7 years. The risk of fibrosis significantly increased (P<0.01) with increasing maximum whole breast irradiation (WBI) dose and with concomitant chemotherapy, but was independent of age. In the boost arm, the risk further increased (P<0.01) if patients had post-operative breast oedema or haematoma, but it decreased (P<0.01) if WBI was given with >6 MV photons. The c-index was around 0.62. Nomograms with these factors are proposed to forecast the long-term risk of moderate or severe fibrosis.

Impact of a higher radiation dose on local control and survival in breast-conserving therapy of early breast cancer: 10-year results of the randomized boost versus no boost EORTC 22881-10882 trial.

PURPOSE: To investigate the long-term impact of a boost radiation dose of 16 Gy on local control, fibrosis, and overall survival for patients with stage I and II breast cancer who underwent breast-conserving therapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 5,318 patients with microscopically complete excision followed by whole-breast irradiation of 50 Gy were randomly assigned to receive either a boost dose of 16 Gy (2,661 patients) or no boost dose (2,657 patients), with a median follow-up of 10.8 years. RESULTS: The median age was 55 years. Local recurrence was reported as the first treatment failure in 278 patients with no boost versus 165 patients with boost; at 10 years, the cumulative incidence of local recurrence was 10.2% versus 6.2% for the no boost and the boost group, respectively (P < .0001). The hazard ratio of local recurrence was 0.59 (0.46 to 0.76) in favor of the boost, with no statistically significant interaction per age group. The absolute risk reduction at 10 years per age group was the largest in patients

Radiation therapy and the geriatric oncology patient.

Delivering radiotherapy to the geriatric cancer patient raises several questions: Are there objective reasons to consider the elderly population as potentially more vulnerable to radiation therapy than younger people? In practice, how are geriatric patients treated when radiotherapy is indicated? Recent data from French tumor registries on rectal cancers are reviewed to illustrate the evolution of the practices during a 20-year period up to 2000. Is there a changing landscape in radiotherapy research protocols in the elderly? Thirty-one European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (Brussels, Belgium) radiotherapy protocols are analyzed regarding compliance to the 1996 recommendation of having no upper age limit when other eligibility factors are fulfilled. To conclude, specific recommendations for optimal radiotherapeutic management of geriatric patients are made for some common cancers in the elderly.

Effect of age and radiation dose on local control after breast conserving treatment: EORTC trial 22881-10882.

PURPOSE: To determine whether the effect of an additional "boost" radiation after breast conservative therapy (BCT) on local control depends on age and evaluate the impact of a treatment policy with a threshold for age. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We used data from EORTC 22881-10882 trial, with median follow-up of 77.4 months. Patients receiving BCT and 50Gy whole breast irradiation were randomized to no boost and 16Gy boost (N=5318). RESULTS: In univariate analysis, a boost reduced local failure by a factor of 2 (P<0.0001). Multivariate analysis showed local control increased with age (P=0.0003). There was no evidence that the relative effect of a boost on local control depends on age (P=0.97) However in younger patients the 5-year local failure was higher, therefore the absolute reduction was greater. If the threshold-age for boost treatment were set at 40 years, 8.4% of the study population would receive a boost, resulting in a 5-year local failure of 6.1% in the study population. Changing the threshold-age to 60 years, 67% of the study population would receive a boost and the 5-year local failure would be reduced to 4.4%. CONCLUSIONS: In younger patients a boost dose resulted in a greater absolute reduction of local failure. The relative risk reduction was however similar for all ages. Applying a treatment policy with a threshold-age of 60 would result in 0.6% increase in local failure in the total study population, while sparing the boost to 1/3 of the patients.

Hyperfractionated or accelerated radiotherapy in head and neck cancer: a meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Several trials have studied the role of unconventional fractionated radiotherapy in head and neck squamous cell carcinoma, but the effect of such treatment on survival is not clear. The aim of this meta-analysis was to assess whether this type of radiotherapy could improve survival. METHODS: Randomised trials comparing conventional radiotherapy with hyperfractionated or accelerated radiotherapy, or both, in patients with non-metastatic HNSCC were identified and updated individual patient data were obtained. Overall survival was the main endpoint. Trials were grouped in three pre-specified categories: hyperfractionated, accelerated, and accelerated with total dose reduction. FINDINGS: 15 trials with 6515 patients were included. The median follow-up was 6 years. Tumours sites were mostly oropharynx and larynx; 5221 (74%) patients had stage III-IV disease (International Union Against Cancer, 1987). There was a significant survival benefit with altered fractionated radiotherapy, corresponding to an absolute benefit of 3.4% at 5 years (hazard ratio 0.92, 95% CI 0.86-0.97; p=0.003). The benefit was significantly higher with hyperfractionated radiotherapy (8% at 5 years) than with accelerated radiotherapy (2% with accelerated fractionation without total dose reduction and 1.7% with total dose reduction at 5 years, p=0.02). There was a benefit on locoregional control in favour of altered fractionation versus conventional radiotherapy (6.4% at 5 years; p<0.0001), which was particularly efficient in reducing local failure, whereas the benefit on nodal control was less pronounced. The benefit was significantly higher in the youngest patients (hazard ratio 0.78 [0.65-0.94] for under 50 year olds, 0.95 [0.83-1.09] for 51-60 year olds, 0.92 [0.81-1.06] for 61-70 year olds, and 1.08 [0.89-1.30] for over 70 year olds; test for trends p=0.007). INTERPRETATION: Altered fractionated radiotherapy improves survival in patients with head and neck squamous cell carcinoma. Comparison of the different types of altered radiotherapy suggests that hyperfractionation has the greatest benefit.

Antiemetic therapy in cancer: an update.

Although nausea and vomiting are widely recognised as two of the most distressing symptoms of cytotoxic therapy, there is still concern over the adequate control of these symptoms in the cancer population. Recently updated Antiemetic Consensus Guidelines recommend the prophylactic treatment of all patients at moderate-to-high risk of experiencing nausea and vomiting following chemotherapy and radiotherapy. It is important that these guidelines are fully adhered to; however, when considering which antiemetic regimen is most appropriate in an individual patient, it is also important to consider individual patient-related factors. In addition, certain patient groups, such as the young or the elderly, may be in need of specific consideration due to age-related factors that may influence treatment decisions.