Endocrine therapy for hormone receptor-positive metastatic breast cancer: American Society of Clinical Oncology Guideline

PURPOSE: To develop recommendations about endocrine therapy for women with hormone receptor (HR) -positive metastatic breast cancer (MBC). METHODS: The American Society of Clinical Oncology convened an Expert Panel to conduct a systematic review of evidence from 2008 through 2015 to create recommendations informed by that evidence. Outcomes of interest included sequencing of hormonal agents, hormonal agents compared with chemotherapy, targeted biologic therapy, and treatment of premenopausal women. This guideline puts forth recommendations for endocrine therapy as treatment for women with HR-positive MBC. RECOMMENDATIONS: Sequential hormone therapy is the preferential treatment for most women with HR-positive MBC. Except in cases of immediately life-threatening disease, hormone therapy, alone or in combination, should be used as initial treatment. Patients whose tumors express any level of hormone receptors should be offered hormone therapy. Treatment recommendations should be based on type of adjuvant treatment, disease-free interval, and organ function. Tumor markers should not be the sole criteria for determining tumor progression; use of additional biomarkers remains experimental. Assessment of menopausal status is critical; ovarian suppression or ablation should be included in premenopausal women. For postmenopausal women, aromatase inhibitors (AIs) are the preferred first-line endocrine therapy, with or without the cyclin-dependent kinase inhibitor palbociclib. As second-line therapy, fulvestrant should be administered at 500 mg with a loading schedule and may be administered with palbociclib. The mammalian target of rapamycin inhibitor everolimus may be administered with exemestane to postmenopausal women with MBC whose disease progresses while receiving nonsteroidal AIs. Among patients with HR-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive MBC, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-targeted therapy plus an AI can be effective for those who are not chemotherapy candidates

An Innovative Risk-Reducing Approach to Postmastectomy Radiation Delivery after Autologous Breast Reconstruction.

IntroductionPostmastectomy radiation therapy (PMRT) has known deleterious side effects in immediate autologous breast reconstruction. However, plastic surgeons are rarely involved in PMRT planning. Our institution has adopted a custom bolus approach for all patients receiving PMRT. This offers uniform distribution of standard radiation doses, thereby minimizing radiation-induced changes while maintaining oncologic safety. We present our 8-year experience with the custom bolus approach for PMRT delivery in immediate autologous breast reconstruction.MethodsAll immediate autologous breast reconstruction patients requiring PMRT after 2006 were treated with the custom bolus approach. Retrospective chart review was performed to compare the postirradiation complications, reconstruction outcomes, and oncologic outcomes of these patients with those of previous patients at our institution who underwent standard bolus, and to historical controls from peer-reviewed literature.ResultsOver the past 10 years, of the 29 patients who received PMRT, 10 were treated with custom bolus. Custom bolus resulted in fewer radiation-induced skin changes and less skin tethering/fibrosis than standard bolus (0% vs 10% and 20% vs 35%, respectively), and less volume loss and contour deformities compared with historical controls (10% vs 22.8% and 10% vs 30.7%, respectively).ConclusionsCustom bolus PMRT minimizes radiation delivery to the internal mammary vessels, anastomoses, and skin; uniformly doses the surgical incision; and provides the necessary radiation dose to prevent recurrence. Because custom bolus PMRT may reduce the deleterious effects of radiation on reconstructive outcomes while maintaining safe oncologic results, we encourage all plastic surgeons to collaborate with radiation oncologists to consider this technique

Dosimetric comparison of treatment planning systems in irradiation of breast with tangential fields

PURPOSE: The objectives of this study are: (1) to investigate the dosimetric differences of the different treatment planning systems (TPS) in breast irradiation with tangential fields, and (2) to study the effect of beam characteristics on dose distributions in tangential breast irradiation with 6 MV linear accelerators from different manufacturers. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Nine commercial and two university-based TPS are evaluated in this study. The computed tomographic scan of three representative patients, labeled as "small", "medium" and "large" based on their respective chest wall separations in the central axis plane (CAX) were used. For each patient, the tangential fields were set up in each TPS. The CAX distribution was optimized separately with lung correction, for each TPS based on the same set of optimization conditions. The isodose distributions in two other off-axis planes, one 6 cm cephalic and the other 6 cm caudal to the CAX plane were also computed. To investigate the effect of beam characteristics on dose distributions, a three-dimensional TPS was used to calculate the isodose distributions for three different linear accelerators, the Varian Clinac 6/100, the Siemens MD2 and the Philips SL/7 for the three patients. In addition, dose distributions obtained with 6 MV X-rays from two different accelerators, the Varian Clinac 6/100 and the Varian 2100C, were compared. RESULTS: For all TPS, the dose distributions in all three planes agreed qualitatively to within +/- 5% for the "small" and the "medium" patients. For the "large" patient, all TPS agreed to within +/- 4% on the CAX plane. The isodose distributions in the caudal plane differed by +/- 5% among all TPS. In the cephalic plane in which the patient separation is much larger than that in the CAX plane, six TPS correctly calculated the dose distribution showing a cold spot in the center of the breast contour. The other five TPS showed that the center of the breast received adequate dose. Isodose distributions for 6 MV X-rays from three different accelerators differed by about +/- 3% for the "small" patient and more than +/- 5% for the "large" patient. For two different 6 MV machines of the same manufacturer, the isodose distribution agreed to within +/- 2% for all three planes for the "large" patient. CONCLUSION: The differences observed among the various TPS in this study were within +/- 5% for both the "small" and the "medium" patients while doses at the hot spot exhibit a larger variation. The large discrepancy observed in the off-axis plane for the "large" patient is largely due to the inability of most TPS to incorporate the collimator angles in the dose calculation. Only six systems involved agreed to within +/- 5% for all three patients in all calculation planes. The difference in dose distributions obtained with three accelerators from different manufacturers is probably due to the difference in beam profiles. On the other hand, the 6 MV X-rays from two different models of linear accelerators from the same manufacturer have similar beam characteristics and the dose distributions are within +/- 2% of each other throughout the breast volume. In general, multi-institutional breast treatment data can be compared within a +/- 5% accuracy

Effect of bra use during radiation therapy for large-breasted women: Acute toxicity and treated heart and lung volumes.

PURPOSE: Large breast size presents special problems during radiation simulation, planning, and patient treatment, including increased skin toxicity, in women undergoing breast-conserving surgery and radiation therapy (BCT). We report our experience using a bra during radiation in large-breasted women and its effect on acute toxicity and heart and lung dosimetry. METHODS AND MATERIALS: From 2001 to 2006, 246 consecutive large-breasted women (bra size ≥38 or ≥D cup) were treated with BCT using either 3-dimensional conformal radiation therapy (3DCRT) or intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT). In 58 cases, at the physicians\u27 discretion, a custom-fit bra was used during simulation and treatment. Endpoints were acute radiation dermatitis and dosimetric comparison of heart and lung volumes in a subgroup of 12 left-sided breast cancer patients planned with and without a bra. RESULTS: The majority of acute skin toxicities were grade 2 and were experienced by 90% of patients in a bra compared with 70% of patients not in a bra (P = .003). On multivariate analysis significant predictors of grade 2 or 3 skin toxicity included the use of 3DCRT instead of IMRT (odds ratio, 3.9; 95% confidence interval, 1.8-8.5) and the use of a bra (odds ratio, 5.5; 95% confidence interval, 1.6-18.8). For left-sided patients, the use of a bra was associated with a volume of heart in the treatment fields decreased by 63.4% (P = .002), a volume of left lung decreased by 18.5% (P = .25), and chest wall separation decreased by a mean of 1 cm (P = .03). CONCLUSIONS: The use of a bra to augment breast shape and position in large-breasted women is an alternative to prone positioning and associated with reduced chest wall separation and reduced heart volume within the treatment field