The Italian Association for Radiotherapy and Clinical Oncology (AIRO) position statements for postoperative breast cancer radiation therapy volume, dose, and fractionation.

Recent advances in non-metastatic breast cancer radiation therapy significantly reshaped our views on modern dose and fractionation schedules. Especially the advent of hypofractionation and partial breast irradiation defined a new concept of treatment optimization, that should strongly include both patient and tumour characteristics in the physician's decision-making process. Unfortunately, hypofractionation for breast cancer radiation therapy needed long time to enter the routine practice during the last decades despite the level-1 evidence published over time. Hereby we present the Italian Association for Radiotherapy and Clinical Oncology (AIRO) Breast Cancer Group position statements for postoperative breast cancer radiation therapy volume, dose, and fractionation to harmonically boost routine clinical practice implementation following evidence-based data.

AIRO Breast Cancer Group Best Clinical Practice 2022 Update.

INTRODUCTION: Breast cancer is the most common tumor in women and represents the leading cause of cancer death. Radiation therapy plays a key-role in the treatment of all breast cancer stages. Therefore, the adoption of evidence-based treatments is warranted, to ensure equity of access and standardization of care in clinical practice. METHOD: This national document on the highest evidence-based available data was developed and endorsed by the Italian Association of Radiation and Clinical Oncology (AIRO) Breast Cancer Group.We analyzed literature data regarding breast radiation therapy, using the SIGN (Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network) methodology (www.sign.ac.uk). Updated findings from the literature were examined, including the highest levels of evidence (meta-analyses, randomized trials, and international guidelines) with a significant impact on clinical practice. The document deals with the role of radiation therapy in the treatment of primary breast cancer, local relapse, and metastatic disease, with focus on diagnosis, staging, local and systemic therapies, and follow up. Information is given on indications, techniques, total doses, and fractionations. RESULTS: An extensive literature review from 2013 to 2021 was performed. The work was organized according to a general index of different topics and most chapters included individual questions and, when possible, synoptic and summary tables. Indications for radiation therapy in breast cancer were examined and integrated with other oncological treatments. A total of 50 questions were analyzed and answered.Four large areas of interest were investigated: (1) general strategy (multidisciplinary approach, contraindications, preliminary assessments, staging and management of patients with electronic devices); (2) systemic therapy (primary, adjuvant, in metastatic setting); (3) clinical aspects (invasive, non-invasive and micro-invasive carcinoma; particular situations such as young and elderly patients, breast cancer in males and cancer during pregnancy; follow up with possible acute and late toxicities; loco-regional relapse and metastatic disease); (4) technical aspects (radiation after conservative surgery or mastectomy, indications for boost, lymph node radiotherapy and partial breast irradiation).Appendixes about tumor bed boost and breast and lymph nodes contouring were implemented, including a dedicated web application. The scientific work was reviewed and validated by an expert group of breast cancer key-opinion leaders. CONCLUSIONS: Optimal breast cancer management requires a multidisciplinary approach sharing therapeutic strategies with the other involved specialists and the patient, within a coordinated and dedicated clinical path. In recent years, the high-level quality radiation therapy has shown a significant impact on local control and survival of breast cancer patients. Therefore, it is necessary to offer and guarantee accurate treatments according to the best standards of evidence-based medicine.

Patterns of Care for Breast Radiotherapy in Italy: Breast IRRadiATA (Italian Repository of Radiotherapy dATA) Feasibility Study.

Aim. Breast IRRADIATA (Italian Repository of RADIotherapy dATA) is a collaborative nationwide project supported by the Italian Society of Radiotherapy and Clinical Oncology (AIRO) and the Italian League Against Cancer (LILT). It focuses on breast cancer (BC) patients treated with radiotherapy (RT) and was developed to create a national registry and define the patterns of care in Italy. A dedicated tool for data collection was created and pilot tested. The results of this feasibility study are reported here. Methods. To validate the applicability of a user-friendly data collection tool, a feasibility study involving 17 Italian Radiation Oncology Centers was conducted from July to October 2021, generating a data repository of 335 BC patients treated between January and March 2020, with a minimum follow-up time of 6 months. A snapshot of the clinical presentation, treatment modalities and radiotherapy toxicity in these patients was obtained. A Data Entry Survey and a Satisfaction Questionnaire were also sent to all participants. Results. All institutions completed the pilot study. Regarding the Data Entry survey, all questions achieved 100% of responses and no participant reported spending more than 10 min time for either the first data entry or for the updating of follow-up. Results from the Satisfaction Questionnaire revealed that the project was described as excellent by 14 centers (82.3%) and good by 3 (17.7%). Conclusion. Current knowledge for the treatment of high-prevalence diseases, such as BC, has evolved toward patient-centered medicine, evidence-based care and real-world evidence (RWE), which means evidence obtained from real-world data (RWD). To this aim, Breast IRRADIATA was developed as a simple tool to probe the current pattern of RT care in Italy. The pilot feasibility of IRRADIATA encourages a larger application of this tool nationwide and opens the way to the assessment of the pattern of care radiotherapy directed to other cancers.

The dosimetric impact of axillary nodes contouring variability in breast cancer radiotherapy: An AIRO multi-institutional study.

AIM: To quantify the dosimetric impact of contouring variability of axillary lymph nodes (L2, L3, L4) in breast cancer (BC) locoregional radiotherapy (RT). MATERIALS AND METHODS: 18 RT centres were asked to plan a locoregional treatment on their own planning target volume (single centre, SC-PTV) which was created by applying their institutional margins to the clinical target volume of the axillary nodes of three BC patients (P1, P2, P3) previously delineated (SC-CTV). The gold standard CTVs (GS-CTVs) of P1, P2 and P3 were developed by BC experts' consensus and validated with STAPLE algorithm. For each participating centre, the GS-PTV of each patient was created by applying the same margins as those used for the SC-CTV to SC-PTV expansion and replaced the SC-PTV in the treatment plan. Datasets were imported into MIM v6.1.7 [MIM Software Inc.], where dose-volume histograms (DVHs) were extracted and differences were analysed. RESULTS: 17/18 centres used intensity-modulated RT (IMRT). The CTV to PTV margins ranged from 0 to 10 mm (median 5 mm). No correlation was observed between GS-CTV coverage by 95% isodose and GS-PTV margins width. Doses delivered to 98% (D98) and 95% (D95) of GS-CTVs were significantly lower than those delivered to the SC-CTVs. No significant difference between SC-CTV and GS-CTV was observed in maximum dose (D2), always under 110%. Mean dose ≥99% of the SC-CTVs and GS-CTVs was satisfied in 84% and 50%, respectively. In less than one half of plans, GS-CTV V95% was above 90%. Breaking down the GS-CTV into the three nodal levels (L2, L3 and L4), L4 had the lowest probability to be covered by the 95% isodose. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, GS-CTV resulted worse coverage, especially for L4. IMRT was largely used and CTV-to-PTV margins did not compensate for contouring issues. The results highlighted the need for delineation training and standardization.

FDG-PET/CT in the Radiotherapy Treatment Planning of Locally Advanced Anal Cancer: A Monoinstitutional Experience.

AIMS: Radiotherapy with concurrent 5-fluorouracil/mitomycin-C based chemotherapy has been established as definitive standard therapy approach for anal cancer. Intensity Modulated Radiotherapy (IMRT) leads to a precise treatment of the tumor, allowing dose escalation on Gross Tumor Volume (GTV), with a surrounding healthy tissues sparing. Our study assessed the impact of 18-Fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography (18FDG-PET/CT) on the radiotherapy contouring process and its contribution to lymphatic spread detection, resulting to a personalization of Clinical Target Volume (CTV) and dose prescription. METHODS: Thirty-seven patients, with histologically proven squamous cell carcinoma of the anal canal (SCCAC) were analyzed. All patients were evaluated with history and physical examination, trans-anal endoscopic ultrasound, pelvis magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), computed tomography (CT) scans of the chest, abdomen and pelvis and planning 18FDG-PET/CT. The GTV and CTV were drawn on CT, MRI and 18FDG-PET/CT fused images. RESULTS: Thirty-four (91%) out of 37 patients presented lymph nodes involvement, in one or more areas, detected on 18FDG-PET/CT and/or MRI. The 18FDG-PET/CT showed positive lymph nodes not detected on MRI imaging (PET+, MRI-) in 14/37 patients (38%). In 14 cases, 18FDG-PET/CT allowed to a dose escalation in the involved nodes. The 18FDG-PET/CT fused images led to change the stage in 5/37(14%) cases: four cases from N0 to N1 (inguinal lymph nodes) and in one case from M0 to M1 (common iliac lymph nodes). CONCLUSIONS: The 18FDG-PET/CT has a potentially relevant impact in staging and target volume delineation/definition in patients affected by anal cancer. In our experience, clinical stage variation occurred in 14% of cases. More investigations are needed to define the role of 18FDG-PET/CT in the target volume delineation of anal cancer.

Geometric contour variation in clinical target volume of axillary lymph nodes in breast cancer radiotherapy: an AIRO multi-institutional study.

OBJECTIVES: To determine interobserver variability in axillary nodal contouring in breast cancer (BC) radiotherapy (RT) by comparing the clinical target volume of participating single centres (SC-CTV) with a gold-standard CTV (GS-CTV). METHODS: The GS-CTV of three patients (P1, P2, P3) with increasing complexity was created in DICOM format from the median contour of axillary CTVs drawn by BC experts, validated using the simultaneous truth and performance-level estimation and peer-reviewed. GS-CTVs were compared with the correspondent SC-CTVs drawn by radiation oncologists, using validated metrics and a total score (TS) integrating all of them. RESULTS: Eighteen RT centres participated in the study. Comparative analyses revealed that, on average, the SC-CTVs were smaller than GS-CTV for P1 and P2 (by -29.25% and -27.83%, respectively) and larger for P3 (by +12.53%). The mean Jaccard index was greater for P1 and P2 compared to P3, but the overlap extent value was around 0.50 or less. Regarding nodal levels, L4 showed the highest concordance with the GS. In the intra-patient comparison, L2 and L3 achieved lower TS than L4. Nodal levels showed discrepancy with GS, which was not statistically significant for P1, and negligible for P2, while P3 had the worst agreement. DICE similarity coefficient did not exceed the minimum threshold for agreement of 0.70 in all the measurements. CONCLUSIONS: Substantial differences were observed between SC- and GS-CTV, especially for P3 with altered arm setup. L2 and L3 were the most critical levels. The study highlighted these key points to address. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE: The present study compares, by means of validated geometric indexes, manual segmentations of axillary lymph nodes in breast cancer from different observers and different institutions made on radiotherapy planning CT images. Assessing such variability is of paramount importance, as geometric uncertainties might lead to incorrect dosimetry and compromise oncological outcome.

Lymph nodal radiotherapy in breast cancer: what are the unresolved issues?

Introduction: Sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) is the gold standard in invasive breast cancer. Axillary dissection (ALND) is controversial in some presentations.Areas covered: Key questions were formulated and explored focused on four different scenarios in adjuvant axillary radiation management in early and locally advanced breast cancer. Answers to these questions were searched in MEDLINE, PubMed from June 1946 to August 2020. Clinical trials, retrospective studies, international guidelines, meta-analysis, and reviews were explored.Expert opinion: Analysis according to biological disease characteristics is necessary to establish the impact of ALND avoidance in unexpectedly positive SLNB (pN1) in cN0 patients. A low-risk probability of axillary recurrence was observed if axillary radiotherapy (ART) or ALND were offered without impact on outcomes. Adjuvant RNI in pT1-3 pN1 treated with mastectomy or BCS should be proposed in unfavorable disease and risk factors. In ycN0 after NACT, SLNB can be offered in selected cases or ALND should be performed. After SLNB post-NACT (ypN1), ALND and adjuvant radiotherapy are mandatory.

Variability in axillary lymph node delineation for breast cancer radiotherapy in presence of guidelines on a multi-institutional platform.

AIM: To quantify the variability between radiation oncologists (ROs) when outlining axillary nodes in breast cancer. MATERIAL AND METHODS: For each participating center, three ROs with different levels of expertise, i.e., junior (J), senior (S) and expert (E), contoured axillary nodal levels (L1, L2, L3 and L4) on the CT images of three different patients (P) of an increasing degree of anatomical complexity (from P1 to P2 to P3), according to contouring guidelines. Consensus contours were generated using the simultaneous truth and performance level estimation (STAPLE) method. RESULTS: Fifteen centers and 42 ROs participated. Overall, the median Dice similarity coefficient was 0.66. Statistically significant differences were observed according to the level of expertise (better agreement for J and E, worse for S); the axillary level (better agreement for L1 and L4, worse for L3); the patient (better agreement for P1, worse for P3). Statistically significant differences in contouring were found in 18% of the inter-center comparison. Less than a half of the centers could claim to have a good agreement between the internal ROs. CONCLUSIONS: The overall intra-institute and inter-institute agreement was moderate. Central lymph-node levels were the most critical and variability increased as the complexity of the patient's anatomy increased. These findings might have an effect on the interpretation of results from multicenter and even mono-institute studies.

Supraclavicular and infraclavicular lymph node delineation in breast cancer patients: a proposal deriving from a comparative study.

AIMS AND BACKGROUND: Current advances in radiotherapy for breast cancer require knowledge of the anatomy of irradiated areas to minimize geographic miss and spare organs at risk. This study aimed at defining a contouring approach for supraclavicular (SC) and infraclavicular (IC) nodes after mastectomy or conservative surgery in patients with breast cancer. METHODS AND STUDY DESIGN: In 15 patients, SC and IC nodes were contoured on computed tomography slices according to Madu et al and Dijkema et al. After analyzing relapse sites, as reported by Reed et al, our approach was defined. The 3 methods were compared in all patients, quantifying differences in contours by percentage overlap (PO). RESULTS: In our approach, SC node delineation is similar to Madu et al in the ventral and medial landmarks, but includes the lateral SC nodes described by Dijkema et al. The lateral landmarks are the scalenus anterior and medius muscle lateral border and the clavicle. Dorsal boundaries are the scalenus anterior and medius muscle ventral and lateral surfaces and the subclavian artery ventral border. In IC node delineation, major differences emerged in cranial and dorsal limits which, in our approach, are the pectoralis minor muscle upper edge and the subclavian axillary artery ventral side. Our mean and median volumes and POs were between the other 2 methods. CONCLUSIONS: This study contributes to standardizing draining node contouring, so as to reduce variability and minimize geographic miss.