Radiation therapy for the whole breast: Executive summary of an American Society for Radiation Oncology (ASTRO) evidence-based guideline.

INTRODUCTION: The purpose of this guideline is to offer recommendations on fractionation for whole breast irradiation (WBI) with or without a tumor bed boost and guidance on treatment planning and delivery. METHODS AND MATERIALS: The American Society for Radiation Oncology (ASTRO) convened a task force to address 5 key questions focused on dose-fractionation for WBI, indications and dose-fractionation for tumor bed boost, and treatment planning techniques for WBI and tumor bed boost. Guideline recommendations were based on a systematic literature review and created using a predefined consensus-building methodology supported by ASTRO-approved tools for grading evidence quality and recommendation strength. RESULTS: For women with invasive breast cancer receiving WBI with or without inclusion of the low axilla, the preferred dose-fractionation scheme is hypofractionated WBI to a dose of 4000 cGy in 15 fractions or 4250 cGy in 16 fractions. The guideline discusses factors that might or should affect fractionation decisions. Use of boost should be based on shared decision-making that considers patient, tumor, and treatment factors, and the task force delineates specific subgroups in which it recommends or suggests use or omission of boost, along with dose recommendations. When planning, the volume of breast tissue receiving >105% of the prescription dose should be minimized and the tumor bed contoured with a goal of coverage with at least 95% of the prescription dose. Dose to the heart, contralateral breast, lung, and other normal tissues should be minimized. CONCLUSIONS: WBI represents a significant portion of radiation oncology practice, and these recommendations are intended to offer the groundwork for defining evidence-based practice for this common and important modality. This guideline also seeks to promote appropriately individualized, shared decision-making regarding WBI between physicians and patients.

Cancer chronomics I. Origins of timed cancer treatment: early marker rhythm-guided individualized chronochemotherapy.

A 21-year old patient who presented in 1973 with a rare and highly malignant ovarian endodermal sinus tumor with spillage into the peritoneal cavity is alive and well today after receiving chronochemotherapy. During the first four courses of treatment, medications were given at different circadian stages. Complete blood counts and marker variables such as mood, vigor, nausea, and temperature were monitored around the clock and analyzed by cosinor to seek times of highest tolerance. Remaining treatment courses were administered at a time corresponding to the patient's best drug tolerance, rather than extrapolating the timing of optimal cyclophosphamide administration from also-implemented parallel laboratory studies on mice. Notwithstanding remaining hurdles in bringing chronochemotherapy to the clinic for routine care, merits of marker rhythm-guided chronotherapy documented in this and other case reports have led to the doubling of the two-year disease-free survival of patients with large perioral tumors in a clinical trial.

Chronomics: circadian and circaseptan timing of radiotherapy, drugs, calories, perhaps nutriceuticals and beyond.

We suggest a putative benefit from timing nutriceuticals (substances that are both nutrients and pharmaceuticals) such as antioxidants for preventive or curative health care, based on the proven merits of timing nutrients, drugs, and other treatments, as documented, i.a., in India. The necessity of timing melatonin, a major antioxidant, is noted. A protocol to extend the scope of chronoradiotherapy awaits testing. Imaging in time by mapping rhythms and broader time structures, chronomes, for earliest diagnoses, for example detection of vascular disease risk, is recommended. The study of rhythms and broader chronomes leads to a dynamic functional genomics, guided by imaging in time of free radicals and antioxidants, amongst many other variables.

Transdisciplinary unifying implications of circadian findings in the 1950s.

Afew puzzles relating to a small fraction of my endeavors in the 1950s are summarized herein, with answers to a few questions of the Editor-in-Chief, to suggest that the rules of variability in time complement the rules of genetics as a biological variability in space. I advocate to replace truisms such as a relative constancy or homeostasis, that have served bioscience very well for very long. They were never intended, however, to lower a curtain of ignorance over everyday physiology. In raising these curtains, we unveil a range of dynamics, resolvable in the data collection and as-one-goes analysis by computers built into smaller and smaller devices, for a continued self-surveillance of the normal and for an individualized detection of the abnormal. The current medical art based on spotchecks interpreted by reference to a time-unqualified normal range can become a science of time series with tests relating to the individual in inferential statistical terms. This is already doable for the case of blood pressure, but eventually should become possible for many other variables interpreted today only based on the quicksand of clinical trials on groups. These ignore individual differences and hence the individual's needs. Chronomics (mapping time structures) with the major aim of quantifying normalcy by dynamic reference values for detecting earliest risk elevation, also yields the dividend of allowing molecular biology to focus on the normal as well as on the grossly abnormal.

Breast cancer follow-up and management after primary treatment: American Society of Clinical Oncology clinical practice guideline update.

PURPOSE: To provide recommendations on the follow-up and management of patients with breast cancer who have completed primary therapy with curative intent. METHODS: To update the 2006 guideline of the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO), a systematic review of the literature published from March 2006 through March 2012 was completed using MEDLINE and the Cochrane Collaboration Library. An Update Committee reviewed the evidence to determine whether the recommendations were in need of updating. RESULTS: There were 14 new publications that met inclusion criteria: nine systematic reviews (three included meta-analyses) and five randomized controlled trials. After its review and analysis of the evidence, the Update Committee concluded that no revisions to the existing ASCO recommendations were warranted. RECOMMENDATIONS: Regular history, physical examination, and mammography are recommended for breast cancer follow-up. Physical examinations should be performed every 3 to 6 months for the first 3 years, every 6 to 12 months for years 4 and 5, and annually thereafter. For women who have undergone breast-conserving surgery, a post-treatment mammogram should be obtained 1 year after the initial mammogram and at least 6 months after completion of radiation therapy. Thereafter, unless otherwise indicated, a yearly mammographic evaluation should be performed. The use of complete blood counts, chemistry panels, bone scans, chest radiographs, liver ultrasounds, pelvic ultrasounds, computed tomography scans, [(18)F]fluorodeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography scans, magnetic resonance imaging, and/or tumor markers (carcinoembryonic antigen, CA 15-3, and CA 27.29) is not recommended for routine follow-up in an otherwise asymptomatic patient with no specific findings on clinical examination.

ACR appropriateness criteria on postmastectomy radiotherapy expert panel on radiation oncology-breast.

This summary focuses on the role of postoperative radiation therapy in patients treated with modified radical mastectomy for invasive breast cancer, particularly in patients receiving systemic therapy.

American College of Radiology appropriateness criteria on conservative surgery and radiation: stages I and II breast carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: During the past 2 decades, breast conservation therapy (BCT) has become firmly established as a standard therapeutic approach for eligible women with early-stage breast cancer. Breast radiation after conservative surgery is an integral component of BCT, resulting in comparable local control and equivalent survival to mastectomy. Successful breast conservation relies on understanding key elements for patient selection, evaluation, treatment contraindications, radiation therapy methods, and integration with systemic therapy. METHODS: The Appropriateness Criteria Committee of the American College of Radiology convened an expert panel to examine BCT for early-stage breast cancer. By using a modified Delphi technique to generate consensus, the expert panel responded to questionnaires on 9 clinical cases that address various key elements of breast conservation. A literature review on BCT led to the generation of an evidence table to support the consensus and overview. RESULTS: Consensus for appropriateness criteria for BCT was produced for various clinical scenarios commonly encountered in practice. These topics include radiation oncology management issues related to young patient age, sentinel node biopsy, elderly patients, other histology, positive margins, extensive intraductal component, node-positive breast cancer, genetic breast cancer, partial breast irradiation, and systemic therapy. Radiation methods for BCT are reviewed. CONCLUSION: The Breast Cancer Panel has generated a consensus of up-to-date guidelines for the appropriate use of radiation for BCT by using a modified Delphi process for the American College of Radiology Appropriateness Criteria.

American Society of Clinical Oncology 2006 update of the breast cancer follow-up and management guidelines in the adjuvant setting.

PURPOSE: To update the 1999 American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) guideline on breast cancer follow-up and management in the adjuvant setting. METHODS: An ASCO Expert Panel reviewed pertinent information from the literature through March 2006. More weight was given to studies that tested a hypothesis directly relating testing to one of the primary outcomes in a randomized design. RESULTS: The evidence supports regular history, physical examination, and mammography as the cornerstone of appropriate breast cancer follow-up. All patients should have a careful history and physical examination performed by a physician experienced in the surveillance of cancer patients and in breast examination. Examinations should be performed every 3 to 6 months for the first 3 years, every 6 to 12 months for years 4 and 5, and annually thereafter. For those who have undergone breast-conserving surgery, a post-treatment mammogram should be obtained 1 year after the initial mammogram and at least 6 months after completion of radiation therapy. Thereafter, unless otherwise indicated, a yearly mammographic evaluation should be performed. Patients at high risk for familial breast cancer syndromes should be referred for genetic counseling. The use of CBCs, chemistry panels, bone scans, chest radiographs, liver ultrasounds, computed tomography scans, [18F]fluorodeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography scanning, magnetic resonance imaging, or tumor markers (carcinoembryonic antigen, CA 15-3, and CA 27.29) is not recommended for routine breast cancer follow-up in an otherwise asymptomatic patient with no specific findings on clinical examination. CONCLUSION: Careful history taking, physical examination, and regular mammography are recommended for appropriate detection of breast cancer recurrence.