Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 3 de 3
Filter
Add more filters










Language
Publication year range
1.
Clin. transl. oncol. (Print) ; 23(8): 1593-1600, ago. 2021. ilus
Article in English | IBECS | ID: ibc-222158

ABSTRACT

Purpose The administration of a dose boost to the tumor bed after breast-conserving surgery has proven to reduce local recurrence. Intra-operative electron radiotherapy (IOERT) offers an alternative method to deliver a boost with several advantages, such as direct visualization of the tumor bed, less inter- and intrafraction motion and a reduction in the number of medical appointments. The objective of our study is to assess chronic toxicity and long-term outcome for our patients after IOERT boost. Material and methods Forty-six patients treated at our institution between July 2013 and June 2020 with IOERT boost during Breast-Conserving Surgery and consecutive whole breast irradiation were prospectively analyzed. A 10–12 Gy boost was prescribed to 42 patients and 4 patients received a 20 Gy boost. An analysis for overall survival, local relapse and distant progression was performed. Acute and chronic toxicity was assessed by CTCAE 4.0. Results The median age was 64.5 years (40–90). The median follow-up was 62 months (4–86). We had no local recurrences but 2 patients (4.3%) presented a distant recurrence. Mean pathological tumor size was 16 mm (6–52). 84.8% (39) of the patients had invasive ductal carcinoma. 52.2% (24) presented histological grade II. 52.2% (24) were Luminal A like, 21.7% (10) Luminal B like, 13% (6) HER2 positive, 13% (6) triple negative. No Grade 3–4 chronic toxicity was observed. Grade 1–2 fibrosis was evidenced in 13% (6) of the patients, 4.3% (2) patients presented fat necrosis, 6.5% (3) presented seroma, 4.3% (2) had localized pain, 2.2% (1) presented localized hematoma and 2.2% (1) presented localized edema. Conclusions IOERT boost in breast cancer treatment during BCS is a safe option with low chronic toxicity. The recurrence rates are comparable to published data and emphasize that IOERT as boost is an effective treatment (AU)


Subject(s)
Humans , Female , Adult , Middle Aged , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Carcinoma, Ductal, Breast/radiotherapy , Carcinoma, Ductal, Breast/surgery , Breast Neoplasms/radiotherapy , Breast Neoplasms/surgery , Electrons/therapeutic use , Carcinoma, Ductal, Breast/mortality , Breast Neoplasms/mortality , Intraoperative Period , Mastectomy, Segmental , Prospective Studies , Radiation Injuries , Treatment Outcome
2.
Clin Transl Oncol ; 23(8): 1593-1600, 2021 Aug.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33534078

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: The administration of a dose boost to the tumor bed after breast-conserving surgery has proven to reduce local recurrence. Intra-operative electron radiotherapy (IOERT) offers an alternative method to deliver a boost with several advantages, such as direct visualization of the tumor bed, less inter- and intrafraction motion and a reduction in the number of medical appointments. The objective of our study is to assess chronic toxicity and long-term outcome for our patients after IOERT boost. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Forty-six patients treated at our institution between July 2013 and June 2020 with IOERT boost during Breast-Conserving Surgery and consecutive whole breast irradiation were prospectively analyzed. A 10-12 Gy boost was prescribed to 42 patients and 4 patients received a 20 Gy boost. An analysis for overall survival, local relapse and distant progression was performed. Acute and chronic toxicity was assessed by CTCAE 4.0. RESULTS: The median age was 64.5 years (40-90). The median follow-up was 62 months (4-86). We had no local recurrences but 2 patients (4.3%) presented a distant recurrence. Mean pathological tumor size was 16 mm (6-52). 84.8% (39) of the patients had invasive ductal carcinoma. 52.2% (24) presented histological grade II. 52.2% (24) were Luminal A like, 21.7% (10) Luminal B like, 13% (6) HER2 positive, 13% (6) triple negative. No Grade 3-4 chronic toxicity was observed. Grade 1-2 fibrosis was evidenced in 13% (6) of the patients, 4.3% (2) patients presented fat necrosis, 6.5% (3) presented seroma, 4.3% (2) had localized pain, 2.2% (1) presented localized hematoma and 2.2% (1) presented localized edema. CONCLUSIONS: IOERT boost in breast cancer treatment during BCS is a safe option with low chronic toxicity. The recurrence rates are comparable to published data and emphasize that IOERT as boost is an effective treatment.


Subject(s)
Breast Neoplasms/radiotherapy , Breast/radiation effects , Carcinoma, Ductal, Breast/radiotherapy , Electrons/therapeutic use , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Breast Neoplasms/mortality , Breast Neoplasms/surgery , Carcinoma, Ductal, Breast/mortality , Carcinoma, Ductal, Breast/secondary , Carcinoma, Ductal, Breast/surgery , Female , Fibrosis/pathology , Humans , Intraoperative Period , Mastectomy, Segmental , Middle Aged , Neoplasm Recurrence, Local/prevention & control , Postoperative Complications , Prospective Studies , Radiation Injuries/pathology , Radiotherapy Dosage , Treatment Outcome
3.
Clin Transl Oncol ; 22(7): 1187-1192, 2020 Jul.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31748962

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: Comorbidity assessment is essential in the triage of care for men with prostate cancer (PC). The aim of this study was to validate the Spanish version of the revised Charlson index (RCI) in PC. MATERIALS AND METHODS: 731 PC patients diagnosed from 1993 to 2008 were referred to our Radiation Oncology Department. The RCI classified patients into four categories RCI 0, RCI 1-2, RCI 3-4, and RCI 5 and higher. The Kaplan-Meier method and Cox proportional hazards modeling were used. We also analyzed the median age of patients who remained alive at the last control and those who died due to non-prostate cancer comorbidities. RESULTS: 636 patients were included median age: 70 years (44-85). The mean follow-up was 153.62 months, (6-288 months). Distribution of the D'Amico risk classification was 21%, 38.2%, and 40.8% for low, intermediate, and high risk, respectively. The RCI distribution categories were: 303 (46.7%) RCI 0, 102 (16%) RCI 1-2, 131 (20.6%) RCI 3-4, and 100 (15.7%) RCI 5 and higher. The probability of non-cause-specific mortality at 5 and 10 years was 2. 4% and 11.25% RCI 0, 3 and 14.1% RCI 1-2, 5.7% and 22.1% RCI 3-4, and 47% and 92% (RCI 5 and higher). The median age in the last control in patients alive or who had died by non-PC causes was 82.81 years (55.27-102). DISCUSSION: The RCI may be used to aid medical decision making in older Spanish men with PC, especially in those with a high RCI 5 and higher.


Subject(s)
Clinical Decision-Making , Comorbidity , Mortality , Prostatic Neoplasms , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Cause of Death , Humans , Kaplan-Meier Estimate , Life Expectancy , Male , Middle Aged , Prognosis , Proportional Hazards Models , Reproducibility of Results , Risk Factors , Spain
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...