Oncoplastic breast consortium recommendations for mastectomy and whole breast reconstruction in the setting of post-mastectomy radiation therapy

Aim: Demand for nipple-and skin-sparing mastectomy (NSM/SSM) with immediate breast reconstruction (BR) has increased at the same time as indications for post-mastectomy radiation therapy (PMRT) have broadened. The aim of the Oncoplastic Breast Consortium initiative was to address relevant questions arising with this clinically challenging scenario. Methods: A large global panel of oncologic, oncoplastic and reconstructive breast surgeons, patient advocates and radiation oncologists developed recommendations for clinical practice in an iterative process based on the principles of Delphi methodology. Results: The panel agreed that surgical technique for NSM/SSM should not be formally modified when PMRT is planned with preference for autologous over implant-based BR due to lower risk of long-term complications and support for immediate and delayed-immediate reconstructive approaches. Nevertheless, it was strongly believed that PMRT is not an absolute contraindication for implant-based or other types of BR, but no specific recom-mendations regarding implant positioning, use of mesh or timing were made due to absence of high-quality evidence. The panel endorsed use of patient-reported outcomes in clinical practice. It was acknowledged that the shape and size of reconstructed breasts can hinder radiotherapy planning and attention to details of PMRT techniques is important in determining aesthetic outcomes after immediate BR. Conclusions: The panel endorsed the need for prospective, ideally randomised phase III studies and for surgical and radiation oncology teams to work together for determination of optimal sequencing and techniques for PMRT for each patient in the context of BRPeer reviewe

On the sensitivity of PROMs during breast radiotherapy

Purpose: To investigate the sensitivity of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) to detect treatment-related side effects in patients with breast cancer undergoing external beam photon radiotherapy. Methods: As part of daily clinical care, an in-house developed PROM tool was used to assess side effects in patients during a) whole-breast irradiation (WBI) to 40 Gy, b) WBI with a sequential boost of 10 Gy, and c) partial-breast irradiation (PBI) to 40 Gy. Results: 414 patients participated in this prospective study between October 2020 and January 2022, with 128 patients (31 %) receiving WBI, 241 (58 %) receiving WBI followed by a sequential boost, and 50 patients (12 %) receiving PBI. Significant differences in the reported toxicities (itching, radiation skin reaction, skin darkening, and tenderness and swelling) were reported between the WBI cohorts with and without boost (p < 0.001, p < 0.001, p < 0.001, and p = 0.002, respectively). The comparison of PBI with WBI (no-boost) yielded significant differences for radiation skin reaction (p < 0.001). Conclusion: The results highlight the high sensitivity of PROMs to detect treatment-related side effects in patients with breast cancer. Thus, PROMs may be a valuable tool for quality control and may support evidence-based learning from real-world data originating from daily routine care

Recommendations from GEC ESTRO Breast Cancer Working Group (I): Target definition and target delineation for accelerated or boost Partial Breast Irradiation using multicatheter interstitial brachytherapy after breast conserving closed cavity surgery

OBJECTIVE The aim was to develop a delineation guideline for target definition for APBI or boost by consensus of the Breast Working Group of GEC-ESTRO. PROPOSED RECOMMENDATIONS Appropriate delineation of CTV (PTV) with low inter- and intra-observer variability in clinical practice is complex and needs various steps as: (1) Detailed knowledge of primary surgical procedure, of all details of pathology, as well as of preoperative imaging. (2) Definition of tumour localization before breast conserving surgery inside the breast and translation of this information in the postoperative CT imaging data set. (3) Calculation of the size of total safety margins. The size should be at least 2 cm. (4) Definition of the target. (5) Delineation of the target according to defined rules. CONCLUSION Providing guidelines based on the consensus of a group of experts should make it possible to achieve a reproducible and consistent definition of CTV (PTV) for Accelerated Partial Breast Irradiation (APBI) or boost irradiation after breast conserving closed cavity surgery, and helps to define it after selected cases of oncoplastic surgery

Accelerated partial breast irradiation with interstitial brachytherapy as second conservative treatment for ipsilateral breast tumour recurrence: multicentric study of the GEC-ESTRO Breast Cancer Working Group

PURPOSE To analyse the clinical outcome after salvage lumpectomy and multi-catheter brachytherapy (MCB) for ipsilateral breast tumour recurrence (IBTR). MATERIAL AND METHODS Between 09/00 and 09/10, 217 patients presenting an IBTR underwent lumpectomy and MCB (low, pulsed, or high-dose rate). Survival rates without second local recurrence (2nd LR), distant metastasis (DM), and overall survival (OS) were analysed as well as late effects and cosmetic results. Univariate and multivariate analyses (MVA) based on IBTR data were performed to find prognostic factors for 2nd LR, DM, and OS. RESULTS Median follow-up after the IBTR was 3.9 years [range: 1.1-10.3]. Five and 10-year actuarial 2nd LR rates were 5.6% [range: 1.5-9.5] and 7.2% [range: 2.1-12.1], respectively. Five and 10-year actuarial DM rates were 9.6% [range: 5.7-15.2] and 19.1% [range: 7.8-28.3], respectively. Five and 10-year actuarial OS rates were 88.7% [range: 83.1-94.8] and 76.4% [range: 66.9-87.3], respectively. In MVA, histological grade was prognostic factor for 2nd LR (p=0.008) and OS (p=0.02); while tumour size was prognostic factor for DM (p=0.03). G3-4 complication rate was 11%. Excellent/good cosmetic result was achieved in 85%. CONCLUSION This study suggests that in case of IBTR, lumpectomy plus MCB is feasible and effective in preventing 2nd LR with an OS rate at least equivalent to those achieved with salvage mastectomy

Accelerated partial breast irradiation using sole interstitial multicatheter brachytherapy compared with whole-breast irradiation with boost for early breast cancer: 10-year results of a GEC-ESTRO randomised, phase 3, non-inferiority trial.

BACKGROUND Several randomised, phase 3 trials have investigated the value of different techniques of accelerated partial breast irradiation (APBI) for patients with early breast cancer after breast-conserving surgery compared with whole-breast irradiation. In a phase 3 randomised trial, we evaluated whether APBI using multicatheter brachytherapy is non-inferior compared with whole-breast irradiation. Here, we present the 10-year follow-up results. METHODS We did a randomised, phase 3, non-inferiority trial at 16 hospitals and medical centres in Austria, Czech Republic, Germany, Hungary, Poland, Spain, and Switzerland. Patients aged 40 years or older with early invasive breast cancer or ductal carcinoma in situ treated with breast-conserving surgery were centrally randomly assigned (1:1) to receive either whole-breast irradiation or APBI using multicatheter brachytherapy. Whole-breast irradiation was delivered in 25 daily fractions of 50 Gy over 5 weeks, with a supplemental boost of 10 Gy to the tumour bed, and APBI was delivered as 30·1 Gy (seven fractions) and 32·0 Gy (eight fractions) of high-dose-rate brachytherapy in 5 days or as 50 Gy of pulsed-dose-rate brachytherapy over 5 treatment days. Neither patients nor investigators were masked to treatment allocation. The primary endpoint was ipsilateral local recurrence, analysed in the as-treated population; the non-inferiority margin for the recurrence rate difference (defined for 5-year results) was 3 percentage points. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT00402519; the trial is complete. FINDINGS Between April 20, 2004, and July 30, 2009, 1328 female patients were randomly assigned to whole breast irradiation (n=673) or APBI (n=655), of whom 551 in the whole-breast irradiation group and 633 in the APBI group were eligible for analysis. At a median follow-up of 10·36 years (IQR 9·12-11·28), the 10-year local recurrence rates were 1·58% (95% CI 0·37 to 2·8) in the whole-breast irradiation group and 3·51% (1·99 to 5·03) in the APBI group. The difference in 10-year rates between the groups was 1·93% (95% CI -0·018 to 3·87; p=0·074). Adverse events were mostly grade 1 and 2, in 234 (60%) of 393 participants in the whole-breast irradiation group and 314 (67%) of 470 participants in the APBI group, at 7·5-year or 10-year follow-up, or both. Patients in the APBI group had a significantly lower incidence of treatment-related grade 3 late side-effects than those in the whole-breast irradiation group (17 [4%] of 393 for whole-breast irradiation vs seven [1%] of 470 for APBI; p=0·021; at 7·5-year or 10-year follow-up, or both). At 10 years, the most common type of grade 3 adverse event in both treatment groups was fibrosis (six [2%] of 313 patients for whole-breast irradiation and three [1%] of 375 patients for APBI, p=0·56). No grade 4 adverse events or treatment-related deaths have been observed. INTERPRETATION Postoperative APBI using multicatheter brachytherapy after breast-conserving surgery in patients with early breast cancer is a valuable alternative to whole-breast irradiation in terms of treatment efficacy and is associated with fewer late side-effects. FUNDING German Cancer Aid, Germany

Late side-effects and cosmetic results of accelerated partial breast irradiation with interstitial brachytherapy versus whole-breast irradiation after breast-conserving surgery for low-risk invasive and in-situ carcinoma of the female breast: 5-year results of a randomised, controlled, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND We previously confirmed the non-inferiority of accelerated partial breast irradiation (APBI) with interstitial brachytherapy in terms of local control and overall survival compared with whole-breast irradiation for patients with early-stage breast cancer who underwent breast-conserving surgery in a phase 3 randomised trial. Here, we present the 5-year late side-effects and cosmetic results of the trial. METHODS We did this randomised, controlled, phase 3 trial at 16 centres in seven European countries. Women aged 40 years or older with stage 0-IIA breast cancer who underwent breast-conserving surgery with microscopically clear resection margins of at least 2 mm were randomly assigned 1:1, via an online interface, to receive either whole-breast irradiation of 50 Gy with a tumour-bed boost of 10 Gy or APBI with interstitial brachytherapy. Randomisation was stratified by study centre, menopausal status, and tumour type (invasive carcinoma vs ductal carcinoma in situ), with a block size of ten, according to an automated dynamic algorithm. Patients and investigators were not masked to treatment allocation. The primary endpoint of our initial analysis was ipsilateral local recurrence; here, we report the secondary endpoints of late side-effects and cosmesis. We analysed physician-scored late toxicities and patient-scored and physician-scored cosmetic results from the date of breast-conserving surgery to the date of onset of event. Analysis was done according to treatment received (as-treated population). This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00402519. FINDINGS Between April 20, 2004, and July 30, 2009, we randomly assigned 1328 women to receive either whole-breast irradiation (n=673) or APBI with interstitial brachytherapy (n=655); 1184 patients comprised the as-treated population (551 in the whole-breast irradiation group and 633 in the APBI group). At a median follow-up of 6·6 years (IQR 5·8-7·6), no patients had any grade 4 toxities, and three (<1%) of 484 patients in the APBI group and seven (2%) of 393 in the whole-breast irradiation group had grade 3 late skin toxicity (p=0·16). No patients in the APBI group and two (<1%) in the whole-breast irradiation group developed grade 3 late subcutaneous tissue toxicity (p=0·10). The cumulative incidence of any late side-effect of grade 2 or worse at 5 years was 27·0% (95% CI 23·0-30·9) in the whole-breast irradiation group versus 23·3% (19·9-26·8) in the APBI group (p=0·12). The cumulative incidence of grade 2-3 late skin toxicity at 5 years was 10·7% (95% CI 8·0-13·4) in the whole-breast irradiation group versus 6·9% (4·8-9·0) in the APBI group (difference -3·8%, 95% CI -7·2 to 0·4; p=0·020). The cumulative risk of grade 2-3 late subcutaneous tissue side-effects at 5 years was 9·7% (95% CI 7·1-12·3) in the whole-breast irradiation group versus 12·0% (9·4-14·7) in the APBI group (difference 2·4%; 95% CI -1·4 to 6·1; p=0·28). The cumulative incidence of grade 2-3 breast pain was 11·9% (95% CI 9·0-14·7) after whole-breast irradiation versus 8·4% (6·1-10·6) after APBI (difference -3·5%; 95% CI -7·1 to 0·1; p=0·074). At 5 years' follow-up, according to the patients' view, 413 (91%) of 454 patients had excellent to good cosmetic results in the whole-breast irradiation group versus 498 (92%) of 541 patients in the APBI group (p=0·62); when judged by the physicians, 408 (90%) of 454 patients and 503 (93%) of 542 patients, respectively, had excellent to good cosmetic results (p=0·12). No treatment-related deaths occurred, but six (15%) of 41 patients (three in each group) died from breast cancer, and 35 (85%) deaths (21 in the whole-breast irradiation group and 14 in the APBI group) were unrelated. INTERPRETATION 5-year toxicity profiles and cosmetic results were similar in patients treated with breast-conserving surgery followed by either APBI with interstitial brachytherapy or conventional whole-breast irradiation, with significantly fewer grade 2-3 late skin side-effects after APBI with interstitial brachytherapy. These findings provide further clinical evidence for the routine use of interstitial multicatheter brachytherapy-based APBI in the treatment of patients with low-risk breast cancer who opt for breast conservation. FUNDING German Cancer Aid

GEC-ESTRO multicenter phase 3-trial: Accelerated partial breast irradiation with interstitial multicatheter brachytherapy versus external beam whole breast irradiation: Early toxicity and patient compliance.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE To compare early side effects and patient compliance of accelerated partial breast irradiation (APBI) with multicatheter brachytherapy to external beam whole breast irradiation (WBI) in a low-risk group of patients with breast cancer. MATERIAL AND METHODS Between April 2004 and July 2009, 1328 patients with UICC stage 0-IIA breast cancer were randomized to receive WBI with 50Gy and a boost of 10Gy or APBI with either 32.0Gy/8 fractions, or 30.1Gy/7 fractions (HDR-brachytherapy), or 50Gy/0.60-0.80Gy per pulse (PDR-brachytherapy). This report focuses on early side-effects and patient compliance observed in 1186 analyzable patients. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00402519. RESULTS Patient compliance was excellent in both arms. Both WBI and APBI were well tolerated with moderate early side-effects. No grade 4 toxicity had been observed. Grade 3 side effects were exclusively seen for early skin toxicity (radiation dermatitis) with 7% vs. 0.2% (p<0.0001), and breast infection with 0% vs. 0.2% (p=n.s.) for patients treated with WBI and APBI. The incidence of grades 1-2 early side effects for WBI and APBI was 86% vs. 21% (p<0.0001) for skin toxicity, 2% vs. 20% (p<0.0001) for mild hematoma, and 2% vs. 5% (p=0.01) for mild breast infection rates, respectively. No differences had been found regarding grades 1-2 early breast pain (26% vs. 29%, p=0.23). CONCLUSIONS APBI with interstitial multicatheter brachytherapy was tolerated very well and dramatically reduced early skin toxicity in comparison to standard WBI

5-year results of accelerated partial breast irradiation using sole interstitial multicatheter brachytherapy versus whole-breast irradiation with boost after breast-conserving surgery for low-risk invasive and in-situ carcinoma of the female breast: a randomised, phase 3, non-inferiority trial.

BACKGROUND In a phase 3, randomised, non-inferiority trial, accelerated partial breast irradiation (APBI) for patients with stage 0, I, and IIA breast cancer who underwent breast-conserving treatment was compared with whole-breast irradiation. Here, we present 5-year follow-up results. METHODS We did a phase 3, randomised, non-inferiority trial at 16 hospitals and medical centres in seven European countries. 1184 patients with low-risk invasive and ductal carcinoma in situ treated with breast-conserving surgery were centrally randomised to either whole-breast irradiation or APBI using multicatheter brachytherapy. The primary endpoint was local recurrence. Analysis was done according to treatment received. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00402519. FINDINGS Between April 20, 2004, and July 30, 2009, 551 patients had whole-breast irradiation with tumour-bed boost and 633 patients received APBI using interstitial multicatheter brachytherapy. At 5-year follow-up, nine patients treated with APBI and five patients receiving whole-breast irradiation had a local recurrence; the cumulative incidence of local recurrence was 1·44% (95% CI 0·51-2·38) with APBI and 0·92% (0·12-1·73) with whole-breast irradiation (difference 0·52%, 95% CI -0·72 to 1·75; p=0·42). No grade 4 late side-effects were reported. The 5-year risk of grade 2-3 late side-effects to the skin was 3·2% with APBI versus 5·7% with whole-breast irradiation (p=0·08), and 5-year risk of grade 2-3 subcutaneous tissue late side-effects was 7·6% versus 6·3% (p=0·53). The risk of severe (grade 3) fibrosis at 5 years was 0·2% with whole-breast irradiation and 0% with APBI (p=0·46). INTERPRETATION The difference between treatments was below the relevance margin of 3 percentage points. Therefore, adjuvant APBI using multicatheter brachytherapy after breast-conserving surgery in patients with early breast cancer is not inferior to adjuvant whole-breast irradiation with respect to 5-year local control, disease-free survival, and overall survival. FUNDING German Cancer Aid