Trial supports targeted radiotherapy for early breast cancer but protocol still requires 3 weeks of daily therapy

Commentary on: Coles CE, Griffin CL, Kirby AM, et al. IMPORT Trialists. Partial-breast radiotherapy after breast conservation surgery for patients with early breast cancer (UK IMPORT LOW trial): 5-year results from a multicentre, randomised, controlled, phase 3, non-inferiority trial. Lancet 2017;390:1048–60. Context The evidence-based local treatment for early breast cancer is breast-conserving surgery and radiotherapy, requiring 3–6 weeks of daily whole breast external beam radiation therapy, which is inconvenient for patients and expensive. The suggestion that targeted radiation to the tumour bed with modern techniques may be adequate was proposed in 1995.1 This was heralded as a new standard2 with the publication of the TARGIT-A trial3 4 of single-dose targeted intraoperative radiotherapy (TARGIT-IORT), later confirmed by other European studies using brachytherapy5 that requires 5 days of inpatient stay or EBRT.6 Methods In this study,7 in 30 UK centres, from 2007 to 2010, women aged ≥50 years, who had undergone breast-conserving surgery for unifocal invasive ductal carcinoma ≤3 cm in size with a 2 mm non-cancerous excision margin, were randomly assigned (1:1:1) to receive daily over 3 weeks one of three regimens: (1) 40 Gy whole breast irradiation (WBI); (2) 36 Gy WBI with 40 Gy partial breast irradiation (PBI); or (3) 40 Gy PBI targeted to the tumour bed. The primary endpoint was ipsilateral local relapse with a non-inferiority margin of 2.5% at 5 years. For quality of life, 72 different patient-reported outcome measures (PROM) were analysed and radiotherapy toxicity was assessed by photographs and clinicians. Neither patients, clinicians nor data analysts were masked to treatment allocation. Findings Five-year estimated incidence of local relapse was 1.1% (95% CI 0.5 to 2.3) with WBI (n=674) and 0.5% (0.2–1.4) with PBI (n=669); non-inferiority was confirmed. Unlike in prior trials,3–6 radiotherapy toxicity was not reduced. Of the 72 PROMs assessed, only two (breast appearance and texture) were reported to have better cumulative scores with PBI. The incidence of only one PROM (‘breast appearance changed’) was reduced at 5 years (from 27% to 15%). Commentary IMPORT-LOW provides further mature randomised evidence supporting PBI. However, PBI with IMPORT-LOW protocol offers little advantage to patients or the healthcare system. The 2 mm clear margins this protocol requires render many patients ineligible; acceptable margins are currently much smaller, for example, >0 mm in USA.8 The authors emphasise the benefit in two quality of life domains, although 72 were tested, with 5-year benefit seen in only one. Clearly, IMPORT-LOW patients had considerably better prognosis cancers than in other trials that have proven non-inferiority of targeted radiation to whole breast radiation. Compared with TARGIT-A, for example, only 3% versus 16% were node positive, and 9% versus 15% were grade 3. Therefore, the low recurrence rate is not surprising. Who benefits from the IMPORT-LOW protocol? For patients and healthcare systems, the 3-week daily regimen has adverse physical, social, financial9 and environmental impacts10 and offers no advantage over conventional radiation. PBI using IMPORT-LOW is also resource consuming (and therefore expensive), and keeps radiotherapy departments very busy. Conversely, TARGIT-IORT delivered during the operation enables over 80% of patients to avoid visiting the radiotherapy centre at all. The relevance here is that although published twice in The Lancet, with an independent editorial concluding that it should be offered as an alternative to conventional EBRT, TARGIT-IORT is not even mentioned in the IMPORT-LOW paper. We find this surprising since the number of patients with a median follow-up of 5–6 years is similar (~1200 vs 1300), and both proved non-inferiority. Implications for practice Targeted radiation methods range from the 3-week daily course required for IMPORT-LOW with 16 hospital visits, to the single-dose TARGIT-IORT given during lumpectomy. Several other approaches are also available,5 6 and as all are effective, patients are entitled to choose what is right for them, based on convenience, personal cost, quality of life and side effects. Acknowledgments We thank Professor Michael Baum, Professor Michael Douek, Mr Nathan Coombs, Professor Max Bulsara, Dr Julian Singer, Dr David Morgan, Dr Shiroma D’Silva and Ms Marcelle Bernstein for valuable discussion about this manuscript

Rethinking neoadjuvant chemotherapy for breast cancer

Breast cancer is the most common cancer in women worldwide. In 2014, 55 000 women in the UK were given the diagnosis of breast cancer, and 11 000 died.1 Early breast cancer is traditionally treated with surgery, plus radiotherapy and adjuvant systemic therapy as required. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy for breast cancer is a new strategy that was introduced towards the end of the 20th century with the aim of reducing tumour size. It has four main rationales. Firstly, it should render an otherwise inoperable tumour operable or, secondly, allow more conservative surgery. Thirdly, starting systemic treatment preoperatively was hoped to lead to improved overall survival in patients with locally advanced cancers, who are at high risk of having distant disease. Finally, unlike adjuvant chemotherapy given in the absence of any measurable disease, neoadjuvant chemotherapy gives us the opportunity to observe the tumour shrink both palpably and on imaging, enabling a rapid assessment of clinical response. This could help test responses in vivo to new drug regimens, which could then be used as adjuvant therapies, in so called window of opportunity studies. A survey of multidisciplinary teams in Australia, Germany, Italy, the UK, and the US found that 7-27% of new breast cancers are treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy (Saunders C, Cody H, Kolberg HC, et al, personal communication, 2017). With 1.7 million women receiving diagnoses annually, this translates into 120 000-460 000 women receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy worldwide.1 Although data indicate that the first rationale remains valid, the others have not led to the desired outcomes. More conservative surgery after neoadjuvant chemotherapy can result in a higher rate of local recurrence, and, despite the earlier initiation of systemic treatment, no improvement in survival has been seen.234 Furthermore, neoadjuvant chemotherapy may not help test novel chemotherapies—although primary tumour response is a good indicator of prognosis for a particular treatment, it is counterintuitively a poor surrogate marker for the overall survival benefit when evaluating novel chemotherapy regimens. Finally, for 40-80% of patients, even the best neoadjuvant chemotherapy regimens extend the period the cancer remains in the breast and can make surgery more difficult, as the tumour is less easily palpable and the axillary lymph nodes are less distinct. We question the wisdom of the current widespread use of neoadjuvant chemotherapy

An international randomised controlled trial to compare targeted intra-operative radiotherapy (TARGIT) with conventional post-operative radiotherapy after conservative breast surgery for women with early stage breast cancer (The TARGIT-A trial)

BACKGROUND: Based on our laboratory work and clinical trials we hypothesised that radiotherapy after lumpectomy for breast cancer could be restricted to the tumour bed. In collaboration with the industry we developed a new radiotherapy device and a new surgical operation for delivering single-dose radiation to the tumour bed - the tissues at highest risk of local recurrence. We named it TARGeted Intraoperative radioTherapy (TARGIT). From 1998 we confirmed its feasibility and safety in pilot studies. OBJECTIVE: To compare TARGIT within a risk-adapted approach with whole breast external beam radiotherapy over several weeks (EBRT). DESIGN AND SETTING: The TARGIT-A trial was a pragmatic, prospective, international, multicenter, non-inferiority, non-blinded, randomised (1:1 ratio), clinical trial from 33 centres in 11 countries. Originally, randomisation occurred before initial lumpectomy (prepathology) and if allocated TARGIT, the patient received it during the lumpectomy. Subsequently, the postpathology stratum was added, in which randomisation occurred after initial lumpectomy, allowing potentially easier logistics and a more stringent case selection, but needed a reoperation to reopen the wound to give TARGIT as delayed procedure. Risk-adapted approach meant that in the experimental arm, if pre-specified unsuspected adverse factors were found postoperatively after receiving TARGIT, then EBRT was recommended. Pragmatically, this reflected how TARGIT would be practiced in the real world. PARTICIPANTS: Women who were >=45 years of age with unifocal invasive ductal carcinoma preferably <= 3.5cm in size; 3451 patients were recruited between March 2000 and June 2012. OUTCOMES: Primary: absolute difference in local recurrence, with a non-inferiority margin of 2.5%. Secondary: included toxicity, breast cancer specific and non-breast-cancer mortality. RESULTS: Values below are 5-year Kaplan-Meier rates for TARGIT vs. EBRT. There was no statistically significant difference in local recurrence between TARGIT and EBRT. TARGIT was non-inferior to EBRT overall (3·3%(2·1–5·1) vs. 1·3%(0·7–2·5),p=0.04,Pnoninferiority =0.00000012) and in the prepathology stratum(n=2298) when TARGIT was given concurrently with lumpectomy(2·1%(1·1–4·2) vs. 1·1%(0·5–2·5),p=0.31,Pnoninferiority =0.0000000013). With delayed TARGIT postpathology,(n=1153) the between-group difference was larger than 2·5% and non-inferiority was not established for this stratum((5·4%(3·0–9·7) vs. 1·7%(0·6–4·9),p=0.069,Pnoninferiority= 0.06640). The local-recurrence-free survival when TARGIT was given with lumpectomy was 93.9%(95%CI 90.9 – 95.9) vs. EBRT: 92.5%(95%CI 89.7 – 94.6),p=0.35. In a planned subgroup analysis, progesterone (PgR) receptor status was found to be the only predictor of outcome - hormone responsive patients (PgRpositive) had similar 5-year local recurrence with TARGIT during lumpectomy 1.4%(0.5-3.9) vs. EBRT 1.2%(0.5-2.9),p=0.77. Grade 3 or 4 radiotherapy toxicity was significantly reduced with TARGIT. Overall, breast cancer mortality was much the same between groups (2·6%[1·5–4·3] vs. 1·9%[1·1–3·2];p=0·56) but there were significantly fewer non-breast-cancer deaths with TARGIT (1·4% [0·8–2·5] vs 3·5%[2·3–5·2];p=0·0086), attributable to fewer deaths from cardiovascular causes and other cancers, leading to a trend in reduced overall mortality in the TARGIT arm 37 deaths, 3·9%(2·7–5·8) vs. 51 deaths, 5·3%(3·9–7·3),p=0.099). Health economic analyses suggest that TARGIT was statistically significantly less costly than EBRT, produced similar QALYs, had a positive incremental Net Monetary Benefit that was borderline statistically significant from zero, and had a probability of over 90% of being cost-effective. There appears to be little uncertainty in the point estimates, based on deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses. If TARGIT were given instead of EBRT in suitable patients, it might potentially reduce costs to the health care providers by £8 million to £9.1 million each year. This does not include environmental, patient and societal costs. LIMITATIONS: The number of local recurrences is small however, the number of events for local-recurrence-free survival is not small (59 vs. 61); Occurrence of only a few events implies that the treatments are effective and any difference is unlikely to be large. The follow up not all 3451 patients is 5 years, although the number required to answer the main trial question (n=585) have more than 5 years follow up. FUTURE WORK: We shall repeat the analyses with longer follow up. Although this may not change the primary result, the larger number of events may confirm the effect on mortality and allow more detailed subgroup analyses. The TARGIT-B trial is testing whether TARGIT-Boost is superior to EBRT boost. CONCLUSION: For patients with breast cancer (women who are 45 years of age and older with hormone sensitive invasive ductal carcinoma that is up to 3.5cm in size), TARGIT concurrent with lumpectomy within a risk-adapted approach is as effective, safer and less expensive alternative to postoperative EBRT. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN34086741, ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00983684

On the stability of high-speed milling with spindle speed variation

Spindle speed variation is a well-known technique to suppress regenerative machine tool vibrations, but it is usually considered to be effective only for low spindle speeds. In this paper, the effect of spindle speed variation is analyzed in the high-speed domain for spindle speeds corresponding to the first flip (period doubling) and to the first Hopf lobes. The optimal amplitudes and frequencies of the speed modulations are computed using the semidiscre- tization method. It is shown that period doubling chatter can effectively be suppressed by spindle speed variation, although, the technique is not effective for the quasiperiodic chatter above the Hopf lobe. The results are verified by cutting tests. Some special cases are also discussed where the practical behavior of the system differs from the predicted one in some ways. For these cases, it is pointed out that the concept of stability is understood on the scale of the principal period of the system—that is, the speed modulation period for variable spindle speed machining and the tooth passing period for constant spindle speed machining

Quantifying habitual levels of physical activity according to impact in older people: accelerometry protocol for the VIBE study

Physical activity (PA) may need to produce high impacts to be osteogenic. The aim of this study was to identify threshold(s) for defining high impact PA for future analyses in the VIBE (Vertical Impact and Bone in the Elderly) study, based on home recordings with triaxial accelerometers. Recordings were obtained from 19 Master Athlete Cohort (MAC; mean 67.6 years) and 15 Hertfordshire Cohort Study (HCS; mean 77.7 years) participants. Data cleaning protocols were developed to exclude artifacts. Accelerations expressed in g units were categorized into three bands selected from the distribution of positive Y-axis peak accelerations. Data were available for 6.6 and 4.4 days from MAC and HCS participants respectively, with approximately 14 hr recording daily. Three-fold more 0.5–1.0g impacts were observed in MAC versus HCS, 20-fold more 1.0–1.5g impacts, and 140-fold more impacts ≥ 1.5g. Our analysis protocol successfully distinguishes PA levels in active and sedentary older individuals

G-CSF Prevents the Progression of Structural Disintegration of White Matter Tracts in Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis: A Pilot Trial

Background: The hematopoietic protein Granulocyte-colony stimulating factor (G-CSF) has neuroprotective and regenerative properties. The G-CSF receptor is expressed by motoneurons, and G-CSF protects cultured motoneuronal cells from apoptosis. It therefore appears as an attractive and feasible drug candidate for the treatment of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS). The current pilot study was performed to determine whether treatment with G-CSF in ALS patients is feasible.Methods: Ten patients with definite ALS were entered into a double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized trial. Patients received either 10 mu g/kg BW G-CSF or placebo subcutaneously for the first 10 days and from day 20 to 25 of the study. Clinical outcome was assessed by changes in the ALS functional rating scale (ALSFRS), a comprehensive neuropsychological test battery, and by examining hand activities of daily living over the course of the study (100 days). The total number of adverse events (AE) and treatment-related AEs, discontinuation due to treatment-related AEs, laboratory parameters including leukocyte, erythrocyte, and platelet count, as well as vital signs were examined as safety endpoints. Furthermore, we explored potential effects of G-CSF on structural cerebral abnormalities on the basis of voxel-wise statistics of Diffusion Tensor Imaging (DTI), brain volumetry, and voxel-based morphometry.Results: Treatment was well-tolerated. No significant differences were found between groups in clinical tests and brain volumetry from baseline to day 100. However, DTI analysis revealed significant reductions of fractional anisotropy (FA) encompassing diffuse areas of the brain when patients were compared to controls. On longitudinal analysis, the placebo group showed significant greater and more widespread decline in FA than the ALS patients treated with G-CSF.Conclusions: Subcutaneous G-CSF treatment in ALS patients appears as feasible approach. Although exploratory analysis of clinical data showed no significant effect, DTI measurements suggest that the widespread and progressive microstructural neural damage in ALS can be modulated by G-CSF treatment. These findings may carry significant implications for further clinical trials on ALS using growth factors

Plasma membrane H⁺ -ATPase regulation is required for auxin gradient formation preceding phototropic growth.

Phototropism is a growth response allowing plants to align their photosynthetic organs toward incoming light and thereby to optimize photosynthetic activity. Formation of a lateral gradient of the phytohormone auxin is a key step to trigger asymmetric growth of the shoot leading to phototropic reorientation. To identify important regulators of auxin gradient formation, we developed an auxin flux model that enabled us to test in silico the impact of different morphological and biophysical parameters on gradient formation, including the contribution of the extracellular space (cell wall) or apoplast. Our model indicates that cell size, cell distributions, and apoplast thickness are all important factors affecting gradient formation. Among all tested variables, regulation of apoplastic pH was the most important to enable the formation of a lateral auxin gradient. To test this prediction, we interfered with the activity of plasma membrane H⁺ -ATPases that are required to control apoplastic pH. Our results show that H⁺ -ATPases are indeed important for the establishment of a lateral auxin gradient and phototropism. Moreover, we show that during phototropism, H⁺ -ATPase activity is regulated by the phototropin photoreceptors, providing a mechanism by which light influences apoplastic pH

Targeted Intraoperative Radiotherapy Tumour Bed Boost during Breast-Conserving Surgery after Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy

Kolberg and colleagues have recently published a series of papers [1,2,3] that, for the first time, give some idea of the outcomes of targeted intraoperative radiotherapy (TARGIT IORT) as a tumour bed boost during lumpectomy after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT). The last of these series is published in the current issue of BREAST CARE. We would like to discuss these from two perspectives - NACT and TARGIT IORT