Different meaning of the mean heart dose between 3D-CRT and IMRT for breast cancer radiotherapy

BackgroundPrevious studies in 2D and in 3D conformal radiotherapy concludes that the maximal heart distance and the mean heart dose (MHD) are considered predictive of late cardiac toxicities. As the use of inverse-planned intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) is increasing worldwide, we hypothesized that this 3D MHD might not be representative of heart exposure after IMRT for breast cancer (BC).MethodsPatients with left-sided BC and unfavorable cardiac anatomy received IMRT. Their treatment plan was compared to a virtual treatment plan for 3D conformal radiotherapy with similar target volume coverage (study A). Then, a second 3D conformal treatment plan was generated to achieve equivalent individual MHD obtained by IMRT. Then the heart and left anterior descending (LAD) coronary artery exposures were analyzed (study B). Last, the relationship between MHD and the heart volume or LAD coronary artery volume receiving at least 30Gy, 40Gy and 45Gy in function of each additional 1Gy to the MHD was assessed (study C).ResultsA significant decrease of heart and LAD coronary artery exposure to high dose was observed with the IMRT compared with the 3D conformal radiotherapy plans that both ensured adequate target coverage (study A). The results of study B and C showed that 3D MHD was not representative of similar heart substructure exposure with IMRT, especially in the case of high dose exposure.ConclusionsThe mean heart dose is not a representative dosimetric parameter to assess heart exposure following IMRT. Equivalent MHD values following IMRT and 3DRT BC treatment do not represent the same dose distribution leading to extreme caution when using this parameter for IMRT plan validation

Treatment time and circadian genotype interact to influence radiotherapy side-effects. A prospective European validation study using the REQUITE cohort

Breast cancer; Circadian rhythm; RadiotherapyCáncer de mama; Ritmo circadiano; RadioterapiaCàncer de mama; Ritme circadià; RadioteràpiaBackground Circadian rhythm impacts broad biological processes, including response to cancer treatment. Evidence conflicts on whether treatment time affects risk of radiotherapy side-effects, likely because of differing time analyses and target tissues. We previously showed interactive effects of time and genotypes of circadian genes on late toxicity after breast radiotherapy and aimed to validate those results in a multi-centre cohort. Methods Clinical and genotype data from 1690 REQUITE breast cancer patients were used with erythema (acute; n=340) and breast atrophy (two years post-radiotherapy; n=514) as primary endpoints. Local datetimes per fraction were converted into solar times as predictors. Genetic chronotype markers were included in logistic regressions to identify primary endpoint predictors. Findings Significant predictors for erythema included BMI, radiation dose and PER3 genotype (OR 1.27(95%CI 1.03-1.56); P < 0.03). Effect of treatment time effect on acute toxicity was inconclusive, with no interaction between time and genotype. For late toxicity (breast atrophy), predictors included BMI, radiation dose, surgery type, treatment time and SNPs in CLOCK (OR 0.62 (95%CI 0.4-0.9); P < 0.01), PER3 (OR 0.65 (95%CI 0.44-0.97); P < 0.04) and RASD1 (OR 0.56 (95%CI 0.35-0.89); P < 0.02). There was a statistically significant interaction between time and genotypes of circadian rhythm genes (CLOCK OR 1.13 (95%CI 1.03-1.23), P < 0.01; PER3 OR 1.1 (95%CI 1.01-1.2), P < 0.04; RASD1 OR 1.15 (95%CI 1.04-1.28), P < 0.008), with peak time for toxicity determined by genotype. Interpretation Late atrophy can be mitigated by selecting optimal treatment time according to circadian genotypes (e.g. treat PER3 rs2087947C/C genotypes in mornings; T/T in afternoons). We predict triple-homozygous patients (14%) reduce chance of atrophy from 70% to 33% by treating in mornings as opposed to mid-afternoon. Future clinical trials could stratify patients treated at optimal times compared to those scheduled normally.EU-FP7

Higher Toxicity with 42 Gy in 10 Fractions as a Total Dose for 3D-Conformal Accelerated Partial Breast Irradiation: Results from a Dose Escalation Phase II Trial

Objective: Recent recommendations regarding indications of accelerated partial breast irradiation (APBI) have been put forward for selected breast cancer (BC) patients. However, some treatment planning parameters, such as total dose, are not yet well defined. The Institut Gustave Roussy has initiated a dose escalation trial at the 40 Gy/10 fractions/5 days and at a further step of total dose (TD) of 42 Gy/10 fractions/5 days. Here, we report early results of the latest step compared with the 40 Gy dose level. Methods and materials: From October 2007 to March 2010, a total of 48 pT1N0 BC patients were enrolled within this clinical trial: 17 patients at a TD of 42 Gy/10f/5d and 31 at a TD of 40 Gy/10f/5d. Median follow-up was 19 months (min-max, 12–26). All the patients were treated by APBI using a technique with 2 minitangents and an “enface” electrons delivering 20% of the total dose. Toxicities were systematically assessed at 1; 2; 6 months and then every 6 months. Results: Patients’ recruitment of 42 Gy step was ended owing to persistent grade 3 toxicity 6 months after APBI completion (n = 1). Early toxicities were statistically higher after a total dose of 42 Gy regarding grade ≥2 dry (p = 0.01) and moist (p = 0.05) skin desquamation. Breast pain was also statistically higher in the 42 Gy step compared to 40 Gy step (p = 0.02). Other late toxicities (grade ≥2 fibrosis and telangectasia) were not statistically different between 42 Gy and 40 Gy. Conclusions: Early toxicities were more severe and higher rates of late toxicities were observed after 42 Gy/10 fractions/5 days when compared to 40 Gy/10 fractions/5 days. This data suggest that 40 Gy/10 fractions/5 days could potentially be the maximum tolerance for PBI although longer follow-up is warranted to better assess late toxicities

REQUITE: A prospective multicentre cohort study of patients undergoing radiotherapy for breast, lung or prostate cancer

Purpose: REQUITE aimed to establish a resource for multi-national validation of models and biomarkers that predict risk of late toxicity following radiotherapy. The purpose of this article is to provide summary descriptive data. Methods: An international, prospective cohort study recruited cancer patients in 26 hospitals in eight countries between April 2014 and March 2017. Target recruitment was 5300 patients. Eligible patients had breast, prostate or lung cancer and planned potentially curable radiotherapy. Radiotherapy was prescribed according to local regimens, but centres used standardised data collection forms. Pre-treatment blood samples were collected. Patients were followed for a minimum of 12 (lung) or 24 (breast/prostate) months and summary descriptive statistics were generated. Results: The study recruited 2069 breast (99% of target), 1808 prostate (86%) and 561 lung (51%) cancer patients. The centralised, accessible database includes: physician-(47,025 forms) and patient-(54,901) reported outcomes; 11,563 breast photos; 17,107 DICOMs and 12,684 DVHs. Imputed genotype data are available for 4223 patients with European ancestry (1948 breast, 1728 prostate, 547 lung). Radiation-induced lymphocyte apoptosis (RILA) assay data are available for 1319 patients. DNA (n = 4409) and PAXgene tubes (n = 3039) are stored in the centralised biobank. Example prevalences of 2-year (1-year for lung) grade >= 2 CTCAE toxicities are 13% atrophy (breast), 3% rectal bleeding (prostate) and 27% dyspnoea (lung). Conclusion: The comprehensive centralised database and linked biobank is a valuable resource for the radiotherapy community for validating predictive models and biomarkers. Patient summary: Up to half of cancer patients undergo radiation therapy and irradiation of surrounding healthy tissue is unavoidable. Damage to healthy tissue can affect short-and long-term quality-of-life. Not all patients are equally sensitive to radiation "damage" but it is not possible at the moment to identify those who are. REQUITE was established with the aim of trying to understand more about how we could predict radiation sensitivity. The purpose of this paper is to provide an overview and summary of the data and material available. In the REQUITE study 4400 breast, prostate and lung cancer patients filled out questionnaires and donated blood. A large amount of data was collected in the same way. With all these data and samples a database and biobank were created that showed it is possible to collect this kind of information in a standardised way across countries. In the future, our database and linked biobank will be a resource for research and validation of clinical predictors and models of radiation sensitivity. REQUITE will also enable a better understanding of how many people suffer with radiotherapy toxicity

Personalizing Breast Cancer Irradiation Using Biology: From Bench to the Accelerator

While adjuvant treatments of early breast cancers (BCs) had significantly improved patients’ overall survival, some of them will still develop locoregional relapses and/or severe late radio-induced toxicities. Here, we propose to review how to personalize locoregional treatment by identifying patients at high and low risk of locoregional relapse, patients at risk of late radio-induced side effects. We will, therefore, discuss how to enhance BC radiosensitivity. Finally, we will address how personalized radiotherapy could be implemented in prospective clinical trials

Management of the Axilla in the Era of Breast Cancer Heterogeneity

Systemic cancer therapies take into account breast cancer (BC) heterogeneity by targeting pathways specifically involved in some BC subtypes. On the other hand, BC intrinsic radiosensitivity is poorly understood and studied. Hence, radiotherapy personalization in BC is still “work in progress”. In this review, we will summarize the existing data on the management of axillary lymph nodes in BC, the impact of BC radiotherapy on axillary management, the indications for axillary radiotherapy, and biomarkers to predict patients’ outcome (tumor control and late toxicities) after axillary irradiation

One Size Fits All: Does the Dogma Stand in Radiation Oncology?

International audienceNearly 50% of cancer patients undergo radiotherapy. Late radiotherapy toxicity affects quality-of-life in long-term cancer survivors and risk of side-effects in a minority limits doses prescribed to the majority of patients. Development of a test predicting risk of toxicity could benefit many cancer patients. We aimed to meta-analyze individual level data from four genome-wide association studies from prostate cancer radiotherapy cohorts including 1564 men to identify genetic markers of toxicity. Prospectively assessed two-year toxicity endpoints (urinary frequency , decreased urine stream, rectal bleeding, overall toxicity) and single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) associations were tested using multivariable regression, adjusting for clinical and patient-related risk factors. A fixed-effects meta-analysis identified two SNPs: rs17599026 on 5q31.2 with urinary frequency (odds ratio [OR] 3.12, 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.08-4.69, p-value 4.16 × 10 −8) and rs7720298 on 5p15.2 with decreased urine stream (OR 2.71, 95% CI 1.90-3.86, p-value = 3.21 × 10 −8). These SNPs lie within genes that are expressed in tissues adversely affected by pelvic radiotherapy including bladder, kidney, rectum and small intestine. The results show that heterogeneous radiotherapy cohorts can be combined to identify new moderate-penetranc

New perspectives in radiation oncology: Young radiation oncologist point of view and challenges

AimTo assess the role of the young radiation oncologist in the context of important recent advancements in the field of radiation oncology, and to explore new perspectives and competencies of the young radiation oncologist.BackgroundRadiation oncology is a field that has rapidly advanced over the last century. It holds a rich tradition of clinical care and evidence-based practice, and more recently has advanced with revolutionary innovations in technology and computer science, as well as pharmacology and molecular biology.Materials and methodsSeveral young radiation oncologists from different countries evaluated the current status and future directions of radiation oncology.ResultsFor young radiation oncologists, it is important to reflect on the current practice and future directions of the specialty as it relates to the role of the radiation oncologist in the comprehensive management of cancer patients. Radiation oncologists are responsible for the radiation treatment provided to patients and its subsequent impact on patients’ quality of life. Young radiation oncologists must proactively master new clinical, biological and technical information, as well as lead radiation oncology teams consisting of physicists, dosimetrists, nurses and technicians.ConclusionsThe role of the young radiation oncologist in the field of oncology should be proactive in developing new competencies. Above all, it is important to remember that we are dealing with the family members and loved ones of many individuals during the most difficult part of their lives