Redefining radiotherapy for early-stage breast cancer with single dose ablative treatment: a study protocol.

BACKGROUND: A shift towards less burdening and more patient friendly treatments for breast cancer is currently ongoing. In low-risk patients with early-stage disease, accelerated partial breast irradiation (APBI) is an alternative for whole breast irradiation following breast-conserving surgery. MRI-guided single dose ablative APBI has the potential to offer a minimally burdening, non-invasive treatment that could replace current breast-conserving therapy. METHODS: The ABLATIVE study is a prospective, single arm, multicenter study evaluating preoperative, single dose, ablative radiation treatment in patients with early-stage breast cancer. Patients with core biopsy proven non-lobular invasive breast cancer, (estrogen receptor positive, Her2 negative, maximum tumor size 3.0 cm on diagnostic MRI) and a negative sentinel node biopsy are eligible. Radiotherapy (RT) planning will be performed using a contrast enhanced (CE) planning CT-scan, co-registered with a CE-MRI, both in supine RT position. A total of twenty-five consecutive patients will be treated with a single ablative RT dose of 20 Gy to the tumor and 15 Gy to the tumorbed. Follow-up MRIs are scheduled within 1 week, 2, 4 and 6 months after single-dose RT. Breast-conserving surgery is scheduled at six months following RT. Primary study endpoint is pathological complete response. Secondary study endpoints are the radiological response and toxicity. Furthermore, patients will fill out questionnaires on quality of life and functional status. Cosmetic outcome will be evaluated by the treating radiation oncologist, patient and 'Breast Cancer Conservation Treatment cosmetic results' software. Recurrence and survival rates will be assessed. The patients will be followed up to 10 years after diagnosis. If patients give additional informed consent, a biopsy and a part of the irradiated specimen will be stored at the local Biobank and used for future research on radiotherapy response associated genotyping. DISCUSSION: The ABLATIVE study evaluates MRI-guided single dose ablative RT in patients with early-stage breast cancer, aiming at a less burdening and non-invasive alternative for current breast-conserving treatment. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov registration number NCT02316561 . The trial was registrated prospectively on October 10th 2014.

Sentinel lymph node localization with contrast-enhanced ultrasound and an I-125 seed: an ideal prospective development study.

INTRODUCTION: Our aim was to evaluate the development of microbubble-enhanced sentinel lymph node (SLN) localization with placement of an I-125 seed in breast cancer patients as a potential alternative for SLN localization with nanocolloid. The study is conducted and reported following the IDEAL recommendations for evaluation of a new technique at Stage 2a (Prospective Development Study). METHODS: Fourteen consecutive patients with 15 lesions underwent microbubble-enhanced SLN localization with placement of an I-125 seed after the standard SLN localization (nanocolloid). We placed an I-125 seed within or near the SLN following its identification using intradermally injected microbubbles. The SLN was excised guided by nanocolloid and the SLN containing the I-125 seed was searched for. All technical modifications are described and standardized outcomes measured. RESULTS: Twelve (80%) microbubble procedures with I-125 seed placements were technically successful. In three cases no microbubble-enhancing lymph node could be detected. Intraoperatively, we found nine I-125 seeds within 0.5 cm of the nanocolloid confirmed SLN. One I-125 seed was found next to a non-SLN and two I-125 seeds were not near any lymph node. Overall, the procedure was successful in 60% (9 out of 15) of the cases. CONCLUSION: Given the low success rate, we conclude that microbubble-enhanced SLN is not a viable alternative to the standard SLN procedure. Modifications to this technique did not improve its performance. Planned study (NTR3690 http://www.trialregister.nl/trialreg/admin/rctview.asp?TC=3690) was stopped early due to this conclusion and results reported in order to provide a full and transparent record of the evolution of technique.

Efficacy of 'radioguided occult lesion localisation' (ROLL) versus 'wire-guided localisation' (WGL) in breast conserving surgery for non-palpable breast cancer: a randomised controlled multicentre trial.

For the management of non-palpable breast cancer, accurate pre-operative localisation is essential to achieve complete resection with optimal cosmetic results. Radioguided occult lesions localisation (ROLL) uses the radiotracer, injected intra-tumourally for sentinel lymph node identification to guide surgical excision of the primary tumour. In a multicentre randomised controlled trial, we determined if ROLL is superior to the standard of care (i.e. wire-guided localisation, WGL) for preoperative tumour localisation. Women (>18 years.) with histologically proven non-palpable breast cancer and eligible for breast conserving treatment with sentinel node procedure were randomised to ROLL or WGL. Patients allocated to ROLL received an intra-tumoural dose of 120 Mbq technetium-99 m nanocolloid. The tumour was surgically removed, guided by gamma probe detection. In the WGL group, ultrasound- or mammography-guided insertion of a hooked wire provided surgical guidance for excision of the primary tumour. Primary outcome measures were the proportion of complete tumour excisions (i.e. with negative margins), the proportion of patients requiring re-excision and the volume of tissue removed. Data were analysed according to intention-to-treat principle. This study is registered at ClinincalTrials.gov, number NCT00539474. In total, 314 patients with 316 invasive breast cancers were enrolled. Complete tumour removal with negative margins was achieved in 140/162 (86 %) patients in the ROLL group versus 134/152 (88 %) patients in the WGL group (P = 0.644). Re-excision was required in 19/162 (12 %) patients in the ROLL group versus 15/152 (10 %) (P = 0.587) in the WGL group. Specimen volumes in the ROLL arm were significantly larger than those in the WGL arm (71 vs. 64 cm(3), P = 0.017). No significant differences were seen in the duration and difficulty of the radiological and surgical procedures, the success rate of the sentinel node procedure, and cosmetic outcomes. In this first multicentre randomised controlled comparison of ROLL versus WGL in patients with histologically proven breast cancer, ROLL is comparable to WGL in terms of complete tumour excision and re-excision rates. ROLL, however, leads to excision of larger tissue volumes. Therefore, ROLL cannot replace WGL as the standard of care.

Sentinel lymph node biopsy of the internal mammary chain in breast cancer.

Routine removal of the internal mammary chain (IMC) sentinel node in breast cancer patients remains a subject of discussion. The aim of this study was to determine the impact of routinely performed IMC sentinel node biopsy on the systemic and locoregional treatments plan. All patients with biopsy proven breast cancer who underwent a sentinel node procedure between 2002 and 2011 were included in a prospective database. In cases of IMC drainage, successful exploration of the IMC (i.e., sentinel node removed) and surgical complications were registered. If the removed sentinel node contained malignant cells we determined if this altered the treatment plan when practising the current guidelines. In total, 119 of the 493 included patients showed IMC drainage on lymphoscintigraphy. Exploration of the IMC was performed in 107 (89 %) patients; in 86/107 (80 %) exploration was successful. In 14/107 patients (13 %) the IMC sentinel node was tumor positive. Macro and micro metastases were found in eight and six patients, respectively. In the group of patients who underwent surgical exploration of the IMC, systemic treatment was changed in none, radiotherapy treatment in 13/107 patients (11 %). Routine sentinel node biopsy of the IMC does not alter the systemic treatment. Radiotherapy treatment is altered in a small proportion of the patients; however, solid scientific evidence for this adjustment is lacking.

Predictive value of tumor load in breast cancer sentinel lymph nodes for second echelon lymph node metastases.

BACKGROUND: The need for routine axillary lymph node dissection (ALND) in patients with invasive breast cancer and low-volume sentinel node (SN) involvement is questionable. Accurate prediction of second echelon lymph node involvement could identify those patients most likely to benefit from ALND. METHODS: A consecutive series of 317 patients with invasive breast cancer and a tumor positive axillary SN followed by ALND was reviewed. Clinicopathologic features of the primary tumor and the SN were assessed as possible predictors of second echelon lymph node involvement. RESULTS: Second echelon metastases were found in 116/317 cases (36.6%). Frequency of second echelon lymph node involvement in patients with isolated tumor cells (ITC, N=23), micro- (N=101) and macrometastases (N=193) was 13%, 20% and 48%, respectively (p<0.001). Based on the area % of SN occupied by tumor no subgroup of patients could be selected with less than 20% second echelon lymph node involvement. However, none of the patients with SN ITC or micrometastases and a primary tumor size

Is there an indication for sentinel node biopsy in patients with ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast? A review.

Ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) of the breast is defined as a proliferation of malignant epithelial cells within breast ducts without evidence of invasion through the basement membrane. The detection rate of DCIS of the breast has dramatically increased since the mid-1980s as the result of the widespread use of screening mammography. DCIS currently represents about 15-25% of all breast cancers detected in population screening programmes. Although inherently a non-invasive disease, occult invasion with the potential of lymph node metastases may occur. Where performing an axillary lymph node dissection-or-not for DCIS used to be an important dilemma, the same now holds for the sentinel node biopsy. This article reviews the potential role of the sentinel node biopsy (SNB) in patients with DCIS. We conclude that based on the current literature, there is in general no role for a SNB in DCIS. A SNB should only be considered in patients with an excisional biopsy diagnosis of high risk DCIS (grade III with palpable mass or large tumour area by imaging) as well as in patients undergoing mastectomy after a core or excisional biopsy diagnosis of DCIS, although SNB may be contraindicated in many of the latter patients because of lesion size and/or multifocality. Even in these patients the value of a positive SN, containing mostly isolated tumour cells, is questionable.