[Local treatment of ipsilateral breast cancer recurrences: comparison of alternative therapeutic options]. / Az azonos oldali emlorecidívák lokális kezelése: alternatív terápiás lehetoségek összehasonlító elemzése.

We compared the clinical outcomes of second breast conserving therapy (2ndBCT) versus salvage mastectomy (sMT) for the treatment of ipsilateral breast tumour recurrences (IBTR). 195 patients who presented with an IBTR after previous breast conserving treatment were salvaged either with re-excision and perioperative interstitial brachytherapy (n=39) or sMT (n=156). A total dose of 5×4.4Gy was delivered to the tumour bed, on 3 consecutive days. The median follow-up time was 59 and 56 months. During follow-up 4 (10.2%) and 28 (17.9%) second local recurrences occurred after 2ndBCT and sMT, respectively. There were no significant differences between treatments in 5-year oncological outcomes (local and regional recurrence-free survival, disease- and metastasis-free survival, cancer-specific and overall survival). After 2ndBCT, the rate of good to excellent cosmesis was 70%. 2ndBCT is a safe and feasible option for the management of IBTR, resulting similar 5-year oncological outcomes and better cosmetic results compared to sMT.

Impact of Imaging-Guided Localization on Performance of Tailored Axillary Surgery in Patients with Clinically Node-Positive Breast Cancer: Prospective Cohort Study Within TAXIS (OPBC-03, SAKK 23/16, IBCSG 57-18, ABCSG-53, GBG 101).

BACKGROUND: Tailored axillary surgery (TAS) is a novel surgical concept for clinical node-positive breast cancer. It consists of the removal of the sentinel lymph nodes (LNs), as well as palpably suspicious nodes. The TAS technique can be utilized in both the upfront and neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) setting. This study assessed whether/how imaging-guided localization (IGL) influenced TAS. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This was a prospective observational cohort study preplanned in the randomized phase-III OPBC-03/TAXIS trial. IGL was performed at the surgeon's discretion for targeted removal of LNs during TAS. Immediate back-up axillary lymph node dissection (ALND) followed TAS according to TAXIS randomization. RESULTS: Five-hundred patients were included from 44 breast centers in six countries, 151 (30.2%) of whom underwent NACT. IGL was performed in 84.4% of all patients, with significant variation by country (77.6-100%, p < 0.001). No difference in the median number of removed (5 vs. 4, p = 0.3) and positive (2 vs. 2, p = 0.6) LNs by use of IGL was noted. The number of LNs removed during TAS with IGL remained stable over time (p = 0.8), but decreased significantly without IGL, from six (IQR 4-6) in 2019 to four (IQR 3-4) in 2022 (p = 0.015). An ALND was performed in 249 patients, removing another 12 (IQR 9-17) LNs, in which a median number of 1 (IQR 0-4) was positive. There was no significant difference in residual nodal disease after TAS with or without IGL (68.0% vs. 57.6%, p = 0.2). CONCLUSIONS: IGL did not significantly change either the performance of TAS or the volume of residual nodal tumor burden. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03513614.

Association of Axillary Dissection With Systemic Therapy in Patients With Clinically Node-Positive Breast Cancer.

Importance: The role of axillary lymph node dissection (ALND) to determine nodal burden to inform systemic therapy recommendations in patients with clinically node (cN)-positive breast cancer (BC) is currently unknown. Objective: To address the association of ALND with systemic therapy in cN-positive BC in the upfront surgery setting and after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT). Design, Setting, and Participants: This was a prospective, observational, cohort study conducted from August 2018 to June 2022. This was a preplanned study within the phase 3 randomized clinical OPBC-03/TAXIS trial. Included were patients with confirmed cN-positive BC from 44 private, public, and academic breast centers in 6 European countries. After NACT, residual nodal disease was mandatory, and a minimum follow-up of 2 months was required. Exposures: All patients underwent tailored axillary surgery (TAS) followed by ALND or axillary radiotherapy (ART) according to TAXIS randomization. TAS removed suspicious palpable and sentinel nodes, whereas imaging-guidance was optional. Systemic therapy recommendations were at the discretion of the local investigators. Results: A total of 500 patients (median [IQR] age, 57 [48-69] years; 487 female [97.4%]) were included in the study. In the upfront surgery setting, 296 of 335 patients (88.4%) had hormone receptor (HR)-positive and Erb-B2 receptor tyrosine kinase 2 (ERBB2; formerly HER2 or HER2/neu)-negative disease: 145 (49.0%) underwent ART, and 151 (51.0%) underwent ALND. The median (IQR) number of removed positive lymph nodes without ALND was 3 (1-4) nodes compared with 4 (2-9) nodes with ALND. There was no association of ALND with the proportion of patients undergoing adjuvant chemotherapy (81 of 145 [55.9%] vs 91 of 151 [60.3%]; adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.72; 95% CI, 0.19-2.67) and type of systemic therapy. Of 151 patients with NACT, 74 (51.0%) underwent ART, and 77 (49.0%) underwent ALND. The ratio of removed to positive nodes was a median (IQR) of 4 (3-7) nodes to 2 (1-3) nodes and 15 (12-19) nodes to 2 (1-5) nodes in the ART and ALND groups, respectively. There was no observed association of ALND with the proportion of patients undergoing postneoadjuvant systemic therapy (57 of 74 [77.0%] vs 55 of 77 [71.4%]; aOR, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.43-1.70), type of postneoadjuvant chemotherapy (eg, capecitabine: 10 of 74 [13.5%] vs 10 of 77 [13.0%]; trastuzumab emtansine-DM1: 9 of 74 [12.2%] vs 11 of 77 [14.3%]), or endocrine therapy (eg, aromatase inhibitors: 41 of 74 [55.4%] vs 36 of 77 [46.8%]; tamoxifen: 8 of 74 [10.8%] vs 6 of 77 [7.8%]). Conclusion: Results of this cohort study suggest that patients without ALND were significantly understaged. However, ALND did not inform systemic therapy recommendations.

Trends in use of neoadjuvant systemic therapy in patients with clinically node-positive breast cancer in Europe: prospective TAXIS study (OPBC-03, SAKK 23/16, IBCSG 57-18, ABCSG-53, GBG 101).

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to evaluate clinical practice heterogeneity in use of neoadjuvant systemic therapy (NST) for patients with clinically node-positive breast cancer in Europe. METHODS: The study was preplanned in the international multicenter phase-III OPBC-03/TAXIS trial (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03513614) to include the first 500 randomized patients with confirmed nodal disease at the time of surgery. The TAXIS study's pragmatic design allowed both the neoadjuvant and adjuvant setting according to the preferences of the local investigators who were encouraged to register eligible patients consecutively. RESULTS: A total of 500 patients were included at 44 breast centers in six European countries from August 2018 to June 2022, 165 (33%) of whom underwent NST. Median age was 57 years (interquartile range [IQR], 48-69). Most patients were postmenopausal (68.4%) with grade 2 and 3 hormonal receptor-positive and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative breast cancer with a median tumor size of 28 mm (IQR 20-40). The use of NST varied significantly across the countries (p < 0.001). Austria (55.2%) and Switzerland (35.8%) had the highest percentage of patients undergoing NST and Hungary (18.2%) the lowest. The administration of NST increased significantly over the years (OR 1.42; p < 0.001) and more than doubled from 20 to 46.7% between 2018 and 2022. CONCLUSION: Substantial heterogeneity in the use of NST with HR+/HER2-breast cancer exists in Europe. While stringent guidelines are available for its use in triple-negative and HER2+ breast cancer, there is a need for the development of and adherence to well-defined recommendations for HR+/HER2-breast cancer.

CyberKnife versus multicatheter interstitial brachytherapy for accelerated partial breast irradiation: a dosimetrical assessment with focus on organs at risk.

Background: The purpose of the study was to dosimetrically compare multicatheter interstitial brachytherapy (MIBT) and stereotactic radiotherapy with CyberKnife (CK) for accelerated partial breast irradiation with special focus on dose to organs at risk (OARs). Materials and methods: Treatment plans of thirty-one patients treated with MIBT were selected and additional CK plans were created on the same CT images. The OARs included ipsilateral non-target and contralateral breast, ipsilateral and contralateral lung, skin, ribs, and heart for left sided cases. The fractionation was identical (4 × 6.25 Gy). Dose-volume parameters were calculated for both techniques and compared. Results: The D90 of the PTV for MIBT and CK were similar (102.4% vs. 103.6%, p = 0.0654), but in COIN the MIBT achieved lower value (0.75 vs. 0.91, p < 0.001). Regarding the V100 parameter of non-target breast CK performed slightly better than MIBT (V100: 1.1% vs. 1.6%), but for V90, V50 and V25 MIBT resulted in less dose. Every examined parameter of ipsilateral lung, skin, ribs and contralateral lung was significantly smaller for MIBT than for CK. Protection of the heart was slightly better with MIBT, but only the difference of D2cm3 was statistically significant (17.3% vs. 20.4%, p = 0.0311). There were no significant differences among the dose-volume parameters of the contralateral breast. Conclusion: The target volume can be properly irradiated by both techniques with high conformity and similar dose to the OARs. MIBT provides more advantageous plans than CK, except for dose conformity and the dosimetry of the heart and contralateral breast. More studies are needed to analyze whether these dosimetrical findings have clinical significance.

Multicatheter interstitial brachytherapy versus stereotactic radiotherapy with CyberKnife for accelerated partial breast irradiation: a comparative treatment planning study with respect to dosimetry of organs at risk.

BACKGROUND: The aim of the study was to dosimetrically compare multicatheter interstitial brachytherapy (MIBT) and stereotactic radiotherapy with CyberKnife (CK) for accelerated partial breast irradiation (APBI) especially concerning the dose of organs at risk (OAR-s). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Treatment plans of thirty-two MIBT and CK patients were compared. The OAR-s included ipsilateral non-target and contralateral breast, ipsilateral and contralateral lung, skin, ribs, and heart for left-sided cases. The fractionation was identical (4 x 6.25 Gy) in both treatment groups. The relative volumes (e.g. V100, V90) receiving a given relative dose (100%, 90%), and the relative doses (e.g. D0.1cm3, D1cm3) delivered to the most exposed small volumes (0.1 cm3, 1 cm3) were calculated from dose-volume histograms. All dose values were related to the prescribed dose (25 Gy). RESULTS: Regarding non-target breast CK performed slightly better than MIBT (V100: 0.7% vs. 1.6%, V50: 10.5% vs. 12.9%). The mean dose of the ipsilateral lung was the same for both techniques (4.9%), but doses irradiated to volume of 1 cm3 were lower with MIBT (36.1% vs. 45.4%). Protection of skin and rib was better with MIBT. There were no significant differences between the dose-volume parameters of the heart, but with MIBT, slightly larger volumes were irradiated by 5% dose (V5: 29.9% vs. 21.2%). Contralateral breast and lung received a somewhat higher dose with MIBT (D1cm3: 2.6% vs. 1.8% and 3.6% vs. 2.5%). CONCLUSIONS: The target volume can be properly irradiated by both techniques with similar dose distributions and high dose conformity. Regarding the dose to the non-target breast, heart, and contralateral organs the CK was superior, but the nearby organs (skin, ribs, ipsilateral lung) received less dose with MIBT. The observed dosimetric differences were small but significant in a few parameters at the examined patient number. More studies are needed to explore whether these dosimetric findings have clinical significance.

Salvage Mastectomy Versus Second Conservative Treatment for Second Ipsilateral Breast Tumor Event: A Propensity Score-Matched Cohort Analysis of the GEC-ESTRO Breast Cancer Working Group Database.

PURPOSE: Second conservative treatment has emerged as an option for patients with a second ipsilateral breast tumor event after conserving surgery and breast irradiation. We aimed to address the lack of evidence regarding second breast event treatment by comparing oncologic outcomes after conservative treatment or mastectomy. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Oncologic outcomes were analyzed using a propensity score-matched cohort analysis study on patients who received a diagnosis of a second breast event between January 1995 and June 2017. Patient data were collected from 15 hospitals/cancer centers in 7 European countries. Patients were offered mastectomy or lumpectomy plus brachytherapy. Propensity scores were calculated with logistic regression and multiple imputations. Matching (1:1) was achieved using the nearest neighbor method, including 10 clinical/pathologic data related to the second breast event. The primary endpoint was 5-year overall survival from the salvage surgery date. Secondary endpoints were 5-year cumulative incidence of third breast event, regional relapse and distant metastasis, and disease-free and specific survival. Complications and 5-year incidence of mastectomy were investigated in the conservative treatment cohort. RESULTS: Among the 1327 analyzed patients (mastectomy, 945; conservative treatment, 382), 754 were matched by propensity score (mastectomy, 377; conservative treatment, 377). The median follow-up was 75.4 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 65.4-83.3) and 73.8 months (95% CI, 67.5-80.8) for mastectomy and conservative treatment, respectively (P = .9). In the matched analyses, no differences in 5-year overall survival and cumulative incidence of third breast event were noted between mastectomy and conservative treatment (88% [95% CI, 83.0-90.8] vs 87% [95% CI, 82.1-90.2], P = .6 and 2.3% [95% CI, 0.7-3.9] vs 2.8% [95% CI, 0.8-4.7], P = .4, respectively). Similarly, no differences were observed for all secondary endpoints. Five-year cumulative incidence of mastectomy was 3.1% (95% CI, 1.0-5.1). CONCLUSIONS: To our knowledge, this is the largest matched analysis of mastectomy and conservative treatment combining lumpectomy with brachytherapy for second breast events. Compared with mastectomy, conservative treatment does not appear to be associated with any differences in terms of oncologic outcome. Consequently, conservative treatment could be considered a viable option for salvage treatment.

Is stereotactic CyberKnife radiotherapy or multicatheter HDR brachytherapy the better option dosimetrically for accelerated partial breast irradiation?

OBJECTIVE: To compare dosimetrically the stereotactic CyberKnife (CK) therapy and multicatheter high-dose-rate (HDR) brachytherapy (BT) for accelerated partial breast irradiation (APBI). METHODS: Treatment plans of 25 patients treated with CK were selected, and additional plans using multicatheter HDR BT were created on the same CT images. The prescribed dose was 6.25/25 Gy in both plans to the target volume (PTV). The dose-volume parameters were calculated for both techniques and compared. RESULTS: The D90 total dose of the PTV was significantly lower with CK than with HDR BT, D90 was 25.7 Gy, and 27.0 Gy (p < 0.001). However, CK plans were more conformal than BT, COIN was 0.87, and 0.81 (p = 0.0030). The V50 of the non-target breast was higher with CK than with BT: 10.5% and 3.3% (p = 0.0010), while there was no difference in the dose of the contralateral breast and contralateral lung. Dose to skin, ipsilateral lung, and ribs were higher with CK than with BT: D1 was 20.6 Gy vs. 11.5 Gy (p = 0.0018) to skin, 11.4 Gy vs. 9.6 Gy (p = 0.0272) to ipsilateral lung and 18.5 Gy vs. 12.3 Gy (p = 0.0013) to ribs, while D0.1 to heart was lower, 3.0 Gy vs. 3.2 Gy (p = 0.0476), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Multicatheter HDR BT yields more advantageous plans than stereotactic CyberKnife treatment in accelerated partial breast irradiation, except in terms of dose conformality and the dose to the heart. There was no difference in the dose of the contralateral breast and lung.

Very accelerated partial breast irradiation Phase I-II multicenter trial (VAPBI): Feasibility and early results.

PURPOSE: This is a multicenter Phase I-II trial endorsed by the GEC-ESTRO Breast Working Group, to analyze if very accelerated partial breast irradiation (VAPBI) with multicatheter interstitial brachytherapy is feasible and safe compared with the standard APBI treatment in 4-5 days for early stage breast carcinomas. METHODS AND MATERIALS: We have included 81 patients with pT1-2 pN0 invasive carcinomas after breast-conserving surgery. Between August 2017 and July 2019, 33 women received high-dose-rate brachytherapy, four fractions of 6.25 Gy in 2-3 days, and 48 patients received three fractions of 7.45 Gy in 2 days. Thirty-six patients were implanted perioperatively and 45 postoperatively. Mean age was 68 (51-90). Free surgical margins were of 2 mm or greater. RESULTS: Acute effects were 11% dermatitis, 18.5% hematoma, 3.7% infection, and 14.8% pain. At a median followup of 20 months (range 8-35), no relapse has occurred. Pigmentation changes in the entrance and exit of tubes were visible in 16%, but 1 year later, few cases remained. Patients developed G1-2 induration or fibrosis in 18.5% and 2.5%, respectively. No patient developed telangiectasia. The cosmetic outcome was good/excellent in 97.5% and fair in 2.5%. CONCLUSIONS: VAPBI with multicatheter interstitial brachytherapy using four fractions of 6.25 Gy or three fractions of 7.45 Gy in two or 3 days is feasible. No excess has been observed in acute effects. At a mean followup of 20 months, late side effects seem to be similar to standard fractionation. VAPBI in two to 3 days is beneficial for the patients and reduces the workload of the brachytherapy units.

Biological dose summation of external beam radiotherapy for the whole breast and image-guided high-dose-rate interstitial brachytherapy boost in early-stage breast cancer.

PURPOSE: To develop an alternative method for summing biologically effective doses of external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) with interstitial high-dose-rate (HDR) brachytherapy (BT) boost in breast cancer. The total doses using EBRT boost were compared with BT boost using our method. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Twenty-four EBRT plus interstitial HDR-BT plans were selected, and additional plans using EBRT boost were created. The prescribed dose was 2.67/40.05 Gy to whole breast and 4.75/14.25 Gy BT or 2.67/10.7 Gy EBRT to planning target volume (PTV) boost. EBRT and BT computed tomography (CT) were registered twice, including fitting the target volumes and using the lung, and the most exposed volume of critical organs in BT were identified on EBRT CT images. The minimal dose of these from EBRT was summed with their BT dose, and these EQD2 doses were compared using BT vs. EBRT boost. This method was compared with uniform dose conception (UDC). RESULTS: D90 of PTV boost was significantly higher with BT than with EBRT boost: 67.1 Gy vs. 56.7 Gy, p = 0.0001. There was no significant difference in the dose of non-target and contralateral breast using BT and EBRT boost. D1 to skin, lung, and D0.1 to heart were 58.6 Gy vs. 66.7 Gy (p = 0.0025), 32.6 Gy vs. 50.6 Gy (p = 0.0002), and 52.2 Gy vs. 58.1 Gy (p = 0.0009), respectively, while D0.1 to ribs was 44.3 Gy vs. 37.7 Gy (p = 0.0062). UDC overestimated D1 (lung) by 54% (p = 0.0001) and D1 (ribs) by 28% (p = 0.0003). CONCLUSIONS: Based on our biological dose summation method, the total dose of PTV in the breast is higher using BT boost than with EBRT. BT boost yields lower skin, lung, and heart doses, but higher dose to ribs. UDC overestimates lung and ribs doses.

Does inverse planning improve plan quality in interstitial high-dose-rate breast brachytherapy?

PURPOSE: To investigate the effect of input parameters for an inverse optimization algorithm, and dosimetrically evaluate and compare clinical treatment plans made by inverse and forward planning in high-dose-rate interstitial breast implants. MATERIAL AND METHODS: By using a representative breast implant, input parameters responsible for target coverage and dose homogeneity were changed step-by-step, and their optimal values were determined. Then, effects of parameters on dosimetry of normal tissue and organs at risk were investigated. The role of dwell time modulation restriction was also studied. With optimal input parameters, treatment plans of forty-two patients were re-calculated using an inverse optimization algorithm (HIPO). Then, a pair-wise comparison between forward and inverse plans was performed using dose-volume parameters. RESULTS: To find a compromise between target coverage and dose homogeneity, we recommend using weight factors in the range of 70-90 for minimum dose, and in the range of 10-30 for maximum dose. Maximum dose value of 120% with a weight factor of 5 is recommended for normal tissue. Dose constraints for organs at risk did not play an important role, and the dwell time gradient restriction had only minor effect on target dosimetry. In clinical treatment plans, at identical target coverage, the inverse planning significantly increased the dose conformality (COIN, 0.75 vs. 0.69, p < 0.0001) and improved the homogeneity (DNR, 0.35 vs. 0.39, p = 0.0027), as compared to forward planning. All dosimetric parameters for non-target breast, ipsilateral lung, ribs, and heart were significantly better with inverse planning. The most exposed small volumes for skin were less in HIPO plans, but without statistical significance. Volume irradiated by 5% was 173.5 cm3 in forward and 167.7 cm3 in inverse plans (p = 0.0247). CONCLUSIONS: By using appropriate input parameters, inverse planning can provide dosimetrically superior dose distributions over forward planning in interstitial breast implants.

Implementation of Stereotactic Accelerated Partial Breast Irradiation Using Cyber-Knife - Technical Considerations and Early Experiences of a Phase II Clinical Study.

To report the implementation, dosimetric results of and early experiences with stereotactic accelerated partial breast irradiation (SAPBI) following breast conserving surgery (BCS) for postmenopausal low-risk St I-II invasive breast cancer (IBC) patients. Between November 2018 and August 2019, 27 patients were registered in our phase II prospective study. SAPBI was performed with Cyber-Knife (CK) M6 machine, in 4 daily fractions of 6.25 Gy to a total dose of 25 Gy. Respiratory movements were followed with implanted gold markers and Synchrony system. Corrections for patient displacement and respiratory movement during treatment were performed with the robotic arm. Early side effects, cosmetic results, and dosimetric parameters were assessed. The average volume of the surgical cavity, clinical target volume (CTV), and planning target volume (PTV_EVAL) were 8.1 cm3 (range: 1.75-27.3 cm3), 55.3 cm3 (range: 26.2-103.5 cm3), and 75.7 cm3 (range: 40-135.4 cm3), respectively. The mean value of the PTV_eval/whole breast volume ratio was 0.09 (range: 0.04-0.19). No grade 2 or worst acute side-effect was detected. Grade 1 (G1) erythema occurred in 6 (22.2%) patients, while G1 oedema was reported by 3 (11.1%) cases. G1 pain was observed in 1 (3.4%) patient. Cosmetic result were excellent in 17 (62.9%) and good in 10 (37.1%) patients. SAPBI with CK is a suitable and practicable technique for the delivery of APBI after BCS for low-risk, St. I-II. IBC. Our early findings are encouraging, CK-SAPBI performed with four daily fractions is convenient and perfectly tolerated by the patients.

Evaluation of the central pedicled, modified Wise-pattern technique as a standard level II oncoplastic breast-conserving surgery: A retrospective clinicopathological study of 190 breast cancer patients.

Involving 207 breast cancer patients a retrospective study was performed to facilitate the acceptance of the central pedicled, modified Wise-pattern therapeutic mammoplasty technique as a standard volume-displacement level II oncoplastic breast-conserving surgery (OBCS). The overall local recurrence rate was 5.8% with an average follow-up of 43.9 months. The median time to the initiation of the adjuvant treatment was 4.9 weeks. Due to positive surgical margins, 13 (6.84%) completional surgeries were performed. In total, 45 complications (12.9%) were recorded. The median values of the esthetic outcomes represented improved cosmetic results. The modified Wise-pattern technique could be a standard, safe and repeatable level II volume-displacement OBCS.

Second breast-conserving surgery and interstitial brachytherapy vs. salvage mastectomy for the treatment of local recurrences: 5-year results.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to report the clinical outcomes of a second breast-conserving therapy (2nd BCT) with perioperative interstitial brachytherapy (iBT) vs. those of salvage mastectomy (sMT) in the treatment of ipsilateral breast tumor recurrences (IBTRs). METHODS AND MATERIALS: Between 1999 and 2015, 195 patients with IBTR after a previous breast-conserving treatment were salvaged either with reexcision and perioperative high-dose-rate iBT (n = 39), or with sMT (n = 156). In the 2nd BCT group, a total dose of 22 Gy in five fractions of 4.4 Gy was delivered to the tumor bed with intraoperatively implanted catheters for 3 consecutive days. RESULTS: The median followup time was 59 months (1-189) in the 2nd BCT, and 56 months (3-189) in the sMT group. The mean size of IBTR was 16 mm (2-70) vs. 24 mm (2-90), respectively (p = 0.0005), but there were no other significant differences in patient- or IBTR-related parameters between the two groups. During the followup period, 4 of 39 (10.2%) and 28 of 156 (17.9%) second local recurrences (2nd LR) occurred in the 2nd BCT and the sMT group, respectively. The 5-year actuarial rate of 2nd LR was 6% vs. 18% (p = 0.22), the 5-year probability of disease-free, cancer-specific and overall survival was 69% vs. 65% (p = 0.13), 85% vs. 78% (p = 0.32), and 81% vs. 66% (p = 0.15), respectively. In the 2nd BCT group, the rate of good to excellent cosmesis was 70%. CONCLUSIONS: 2nd BCT with perioperative high-dose-rate iBT is a safe and feasible option for the management of IBTR, resulting in similar 5-year oncological outcomes and better cosmetic results compared with sMT.

Comparison of clinicopathologic, cosmetic and quality of life outcomes in 700 oncoplastic and conventional breast-conserving surgery cases: A single-centre retrospective study.

INTRODUCTION: Limited data is available from studies that directly compare oncoplastic breast surgery and conventional breast-conserving surgery (CBCS) procedures. The aim of this study was to compare three volume displacement oncoplastic breast-conserving surgery (OBCS) techniques to CBCS procedures, providing more evidence and facilitating the standardization of OBCS techniques. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A retrospective single-centre comparative study was performed between January 2010 and January 2017 involving 758 breast cancer patients. The endpoints for comparison were oncological safety, frequency of complications, initiation time of adjuvant therapy, aesthetic outcome, quality of life and operation time. To compare data, statistical analyses were performed. RESULTS: The mean follow-up time was 51 months for the OBCS group and 52 months for the CBCS group. The excised weight of the specimens was significantly larger in the OBCS group than in the CBCS group (90 g vs. 63 g). The overall complication rate (5.7% vs. 6.6%), the initiation time of adjuvant therapy (4.2 weeks vs. 4.1 weeks) and the local recurrence rate (2.0% vs. 3.7%) did not differ significantly. Scores for the aesthetic outcome were significantly higher in the OBCS group; however, required longer operation time. CONCLUSION: The investigated OBCS procedures allowed the removal of large volumes of breast tissue with improved cosmetic outcomes without delay in adjuvant therapies, maintaining the oncological safety. However, OBCS required longer operation time. Furthermore, the extended radicality of the OBCS could reduce the rate of re-excision and completion mastectomy, although it may result in the overtreatment of some breast cancer patients.

[Second breast conserving surgery and interstitial radiotherapy for the treatment of breast tumor local recurrences. Five-year results]. / Második emlomegtartó mutét és szövetközi sugárkezelés az emlodaganat lokális kiújulásának kezelésére. Ötéves eredmények.

INTRODUCTION AND AIM: To report the clinical outcomes of second breast-conserving therapy with perioperative interstitial radiotherapy for the treatment of ipsilateral breast tumor recurrences. METHOD: Between 1999 and 2015, 33 patients, presenting with an ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence after previous breast conserving therapy, were salvaged by re-excision and perioperative high-dose-rate interstitial brachytherapy. A median of 8 (range: 4-24) catheters were implanted into the tumor bed intraoperatively. A total dose of 22 Gy in 5 fractions of 4.4 Gy was delivered to the tumor bed with a margin of 1-2 cm, on 3 consecutive days. The adjuvant systemic treatments consisted of hormonal therapy for 24 patients (73%) and chemotherapy for 6 patients (18%). The survival results were estimated by the Kaplan-Meier method. Late side effects and cosmetic results were also registered. RESULTS: The median follow-up time following the second breast conserving therapy was 61 months (range: 26-189 months). During the follow-up, 4 patients (12.1%) developed second local recurrence. The five-year actuarial rates of the second local, regional and distant recurrence were 6.3%, 6.1%, and 14.9%, respectively. The five-year probabilities of disease-free, cancer-specific and overall survival were 76.2%, 92.4%, and 89.2%, respectively. Four (12%), 19 (58%), 4 (12%) and 6 (18%) patients had excellent, good, fair and poor cosmetic results, respectively. Grade 2 and 3 fibrosis developed in 9 (27%) and 1 (3%) patients. Asymptomatic fat necrosis was detected in 7 (21%) women. CONCLUSION: Second breast conserving therapy with perioperative high-dose-rate interstitial brachytherapy is a safe and feasible option for the management of ipsilateral breast tumor recurrences. Interstitial brachytherapy may decrease the risk of second local relapse with acceptable cosmetic results and low rate of late side effects. Hence, in selected cases it can provide a feasible alternative to salvage mastectomy. Orv Hetil. 2018; 159(11): 430-438.