RESUMO
AIMS: FAST-Forward and UK-FAST-trials have demonstrated the safety and efficacy of five-fraction breast adjuvant radiation therapy (RT) and have become the standard of care for selected early breast cancer patients. In response to the additional burden caused by the COVID-19 pandemic, we implemented "One-Week Breast RT," an innovative program delivering five-fraction whole breast RT in a complete 5-day workflow. The primary objective of this study was to demonstrate the feasibility and safety of our program. The secondary objective was to evaluate cosmetic results. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A total of 120 patients treated from February 2021 to March 2022, received whole breast RT without lymph node irradiation nor boost, with 26 Gy in five fractions over one week. Inverse planning with restricted optimization parameters offers systematic deep inspiration breath-hold aimed to provide treatment plans compliant with FAST-Forward recommendations. Toxicity and cosmetic evaluations were prospectively registered prior (pre-RT), at the end (end-RT), and 6 months after RT (6 months) based on Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events v. 4.03 and Harvard scale. RESULTS: With a median age of 70 years (interquartile range (IQR): 66-74) and a median follow-up of 6 months (IQR: 6.01-6.25), most patients (93.3%) completed their RT in one week from baseline to the end of the treatment consultation. The most common acute toxicities (at end-RT) were skin-related: radio-dermatitis (72%), induration (35%), hyperpigmentation (8%), and breast edema (16%). The rate of radio-dermatitis decreased from end-RT to 6 months (71.7% vs 5.4%, P< 0.001). No patient experienced grade ≥3 toxicity. At 6 months, cosmetic results were generally good or excellent (94.1%). CONCLUSION: This study confirms the feasibility and acute safety of the "One-Week Breast RT" in real life. Favorable toxicity profiles and good cosmetic outcomes are in line with FAST-Forward results. A prospective national cohort, aimed at decreasing treatment burden, maintaining safety, efficacy, and improving RT workflow efficiency with longer follow-up is ongoing.
RESUMO
Lung cancer treatment is a heavy workload for radiation oncologist and that field showed many evolutions over the last two decades. The issue about target volume was raised when treatment delivery became more precise with the development of three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy. Initially based upon surgical series, numerous retrospective and prospective studies aimed to evaluate the risk of elective nodal failure of involved-field radiotherapy compared to standard large field elective nodal irradiation. In every setting, locally advanced non-small cell lung cancer, localized non-small cell lung cancer, localized small cell lung cancer, exclusive chemoradiation or postoperative radiotherapy, most of the studies showed no significant difference between involved-field radiotherapy or elective nodal irradiation with elective nodal failure rate under 5% at 2 years, provided staging had been done with modern imaging and diagnostic techniques (positron emission tomography scan, endoscopy, etc.). Moreover, if reducing irradiated volumes are safe regarding recurrences, involved-field radiotherapy allowed dose escalation while reducing acute and late oesophageal, cardiac and pulmonary toxicities. Consequently, major clinical trials involving radiotherapy initiated in the last two decades and international clinical guidelines recommended omission of elective nodal irradiation in favour of in-field radiotherapy.
