Defining a dose-response relationship with radiotherapy for prostate cancer: is more really better?

PURPOSE: Data were reviewed addressing the association between radiation therapy (RT) dose and treatment outcome for localized prostate cancer to help clarify the existence of a potential dose-response relationship. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Articles were identified through the MEDLINE database, CancerLit database, and reference lists of relevant articles. Studies were categorized into four groups based upon the endpoint analyzed, including biochemical control (BC), local control (LC), pathologic control (PC), and cause-specific survival (CSS). The impact of increasing RT dose with each endpoint was recorded. RESULTS: Twenty-two trials involving a total of 11,297 patients were identified. Of the 11 trials addressing the association of RT dose with LC, 9 showed statistically significant improvements. Of the 12 trials that reported BC with RT dose, all showed statistically significant improvements. Two out of 4 studies analyzing PC with increasing dose showed a positive correlation. Finally, 3 out of 9 studies addressing RT dose with CSS showed statistically significant improvements. Despite inconclusive results, patients with poor risk features (e.g., prostate-specific antigen [PSA] > or = 10, Gleason score [GS] > or = 7, or tumor stage > or = T2b) were most likely to benefit from increasing dose with respect to each endpoint. However, the optimal RT dose and the magnitude of benefit of dose escalation could not be identified. CONCLUSIONS: Although RT dose appears to correlate with various measures of treatment outcome, objective, high-quality data addressing this critical issue are still lacking. At the present time, the absolute improvement in outcome due to dose escalation, the subset of patients benefitting most, and the optimal dose remain to be defined.

The use of high-dose-rate brachytherapy alone after lumpectomy in patients with early-stage breast cancer treated with breast-conserving therapy.

PURPOSE: We present the preliminary results of our in-house protocol using outpatient high-dose-rate (HDR) brachytherapy as the sole radiation modality following lumpectomy in patients with early-stage breast cancer. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Thirty-seven patients with 38 Stage I-II breast cancers received radiation to the lumpectomy cavity alone using an HDR interstitial implant with (192)Ir. A minimum dose of 32 Gy was delivered on an outpatient basis in 8 fractions of 4 Gy to the lumpectomy cavity plus a 1- to 2-cm margin over consecutive 4 days. RESULTS: Median follow-up is 31 months. There has been one ipsilateral breast recurrence for a crude failure rate of 2.6% and no regional or distant failures. Wound healing was not impaired in patients undergoing an open-cavity implant. Three minor breast infections occurred, and all resolved with oral antibiotics. The cosmetic outcome was good to excellent in all patients. CONCLUSION: In selected patients with early-stage breast cancer, treatment of the lumpectomy cavity alone with outpatient HDR brachytherapy is both technically feasible and well tolerated. Early results are encouraging, however, longer follow-up is necessary before equivalence to standard whole-breast irradiation can be established and to determine the most optimal radiation therapy technique to be employed.

Accelerated treatment of breast cancer.

PURPOSE: Radiation therapy (RT) restricted to the tumor bed, by means of an interstitial implant, and lasting 4 to 5 days after lumpectomy was prospectively evaluated in early-stage breast cancer patients treated with breast-conserving therapy (BCT). The goals of the study were to determine whether treatment time can be reduced and whether elective treatment of the entire breast is necessary. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Between January 1993 and January 2000, 174 cases of early-stage breast cancer were managed with lumpectomy followed by RT restricted to the tumor bed using an interstitial implant. Each brachytherapy patient was matched with one external-beam RT (ERT) patient derived from a reference group of 1,388 patients treated with standard BCT. Patients were matched for age, tumor size, histology, margins of excision, absence of an extensive intraductal component, nodal status, estrogen receptor status, and tamoxifen use. Median follow-up for both the ERT and brachytherapy groups was 36 months. RESULTS: No statistically significant differences were noted in the 5-year actuarial rates of ipsilateral breast treatment failure or locoregional failure between ERT and brachytherapy patients (1% v 0%, P =.31 and 2% v 1%, P =.63, respectively). In addition, there were no statistically significant differences noted in rates of distant metastasis (6% v 3%, P =.24), disease-free survival (87% v 91%, P =.55), overall survival (90% v 93%, P =.66), or cause-specific survival (97% v 99%, P =.28). CONCLUSION: Accelerated treatment of breast cancer using an interstitial implant to deliver radiation to the tumor bed alone over 4 to 5 days seems to produce 5-year results equivalent to those achieved with conventional ERT. Extended follow-up will be required to determine the long-term efficacy of this treatment approach.

Relationship between excision volume, margin status, and tumor size with the development of local recurrence in patients with ductal carcinoma-in-situ treated with breast-conserving therapy.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: We reviewed our institution's experience treating patients with ductal carcinoma-in-situ (DCIS) with breast-conserving therapy (BCT) to help define the interrelationship between excision volume, margin status, and tumor size with local recurrence. METHODS: From January 1980 to December 1993, 146 patients received BCT for DCIS. All patients underwent excisional biopsy and 95 cases (64%) underwent re-excision. Each patient received whole breast radiation to a median dose of 45 Gy. An additional 139 cases (94%) received a supplemental boost to the tumor bed (median total dose 60.4 Gy). The median follow-up is 7.2 years. RESULTS: Seventeen patients developed an ipsilateral breast failure for a 5- and 10-year actuarial rate of 10.2 and 12.4%, respectively. On multivariate analysis, patient age, margin status, the number of slides containing DCIS, the number of DCIS/cancerization of lobules (COL) foci near (< 5 mm) the margin, and a smaller volume of excision (< 60 cm(3)) were all independently associated with outcome. Although the local recurrence rate generally decreased as margin distance increased, these differences did not achieve statistical significance unless the volume of excision was taken into consideration. CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that the success of BCT is directly related to the degree of surgical removal of DCIS and that margin status alone may be suboptimal in defining excision adequacy.

Impact of boost technique on outcome in early-stage breast cancer patients treated with breast-conserving therapy.

We reviewed our institution's experience treating early-stage breast cancer patients with breast-conserving therapy (BCT) to determine the impact of boost technique on outcome. A total of 552 patients with stage I and II breast cancer were managed with BCT. All patients were treated with a partial mastectomy and radiation therapy (RT). RT consisted of 45 Gy to 50 Gy external beam irradiation to the whole breast followed by a boost to the tumor bed using either electrons (232 patients), photons (15 patients), or an interstitial implant (316 patients). Local control and cosmetic outcome was compared among three patient groups based on the type of boost used. Forty-one patients had a recurrence of cancer in the treated breast for 5-, 10-, and 13-year actuarial local recurrence rates of 2.8%, 7.5%, and 11.2%, respectively. There were no significant differences in the local recurrence rates or cosmetic outcome using electrons, photons, or an interstitial implant. On multivariate analysis, only young age and margin status were associated with local recurrence. Stage I and II breast cancer patients undergoing BCT can be effectively managed with electron, photon, or interstitial implant boost techniques. Long-term local control and cosmetic outcome are excellent regardless of which boost technique is used.