Mapping the location of local and regional recurrences according to breast cancer surgery and radiation therapy: Results from EORTC 22922/10925.

The purpose of this study is to evaluate the influence of the extent of surgery and radiation therapy (RT) on the rates and sites of local (LR) and regional recurrences (RR) in the EORTC 22922/10925 trial. PATIENTS AND METHODS: All data were extracted from the trial's individual patients' case report forms (CRF) and analysed with a median follow-up of 15.7 years. Cumulative incidence curves were produced for LR and RR accounting for competing risks: an exploratory analysis of the effect of the extent of surgical and radiation treatments on LR rate was conducted using the Fine & Gray model accounting for competing risks and adjusted for baseline patient and disease characteristics. The significance level was set at 5%, 2-sided. Frequency tables were used to describe the spatial location of LR and RR. RESULTS: Out of 4004 patients included in the trial, 282 (7%) patients experienced LR and 165 (4.1%) RR, respectively. Cumulative incidence rate of LR at 15 years was lower after mastectomy (3.1%) compared to BCS + RT (7.3%) (F&G: HR (Hazard Ratio) = 0.421, 95%CI = 0.282-0.628, p-value < 0.0001). LR were similar up to 3 years for both mastectomy and BCS but continued to occur at a steady rate for BCS + RT, only. The spatial location of the recurrence was related to the locoregional therapy applied and the absolute gain of RT correlated to stage of disease and extent of surgery. CONCLUSIONS: The extent of locoregional therapies impacts significantly on LR and RR rates and spatial location.

Impact of therapeutic strategy on disease-free and overall survival of early-stage cervical cancer: Surgery alone versus preoperative radiation.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: There is no international consensus for management of early-stage cervical cancer (ESCC). This study aimed to retrospectively investigate disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) in patients with ESCC according to the therapeutic strategy used, surgery alone versus preoperative radiation following by surgery. METHODS: Data were retrospectively collected from 1998 to 2015 using the Gynecological Cancer Registry of the Côte d'Or. The inclusion criteria were FIGO 2018 ≤ IB2; squamous cell carcinoma, adenocarcinoma or adenosquamous type. Survival curves were compared using the log-rank test. RESULTS: One hundred twenty-six patients were included. Median survival was 90 months. There was no significant difference in DFS (HR = 0.91, 95%CI [0.32-2.53], p = 0.858) or in OS between surgery alone versus preoperative radiation following by surgery (HR = 0.97, 95%CI [0.31-2.99], p = 0.961). In the subgroup of patients with stage ≥IB1, there was no significant difference in DFS (HR = 3.26, p = 0.2) or in OS (HR = 3.87, p = 0.2). CONCLUSION: Our study did not identify any difference in survival according to the treatment strategy. Preoperative radiation following by surgery can be an alternative to surgery alone for ESCC.

The association of internal mammary and medial supraclavicular lymph node radiation technique with clinical outcomes: Results from the EORTC 22922/10925 randomised trial.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: The multicentre EORTC 22922/10925 trial (ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT00002851) was conducted between 1996 and 2004. The trial evaluated the effect of irradiation of the internal mammary and medial supraclavicular lymph node chains (IM-MS) vs no further radiation therapy (RT) on survival and cause of death in breast cancer stage I-III patients. At 15.7 years of median follow-up, a significant reduction of breast cancer specific mortality (BCSM) and any recurrence, not translating in improved overall survival (OS), and low absolute rates of side effects were found. The aim of the current analysis was to evaluate the association of RT techniques of IM-MS lymph node irradiation with long-term outcomes. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Three RT techniques were used for IM-MS: a standard technique using a fixed set-up combining photon/electron beams to the IM and tangential fields to the breast or chest wall vs a standard-modified technique with minor adaptation for beam settings vs a more individualised technique based on individual localisation of the IM. Techniques used were fixed per institution over the duration of the trial. We performed an exploratory and descriptive analysis of the outcomes after 15 years follow-up for the three RT techniques. RESULTS: Between July 1996 and January 2004, 46 radiation oncology departments from 13 countries accrued 4004 patients. Median follow-up was 15.7 years. The number of patients treated by each technique was 2440 (61%) by standard vs 635 (16%) by standard-modified vs 929 (23%) patients by individualised technique. The absolute improvements of oncological outcomes in terms of disease-free survival (DFS), OS and BCSM with IM-MS RT compared to no IM-MS RT were 6.8%, 4.9% and -5.8% for the individualised technique, vs 1.6%, 2.9% and -4.3% for modified standard and -1.4%, 1.1% and -3% for standard technique, respectively. The increase in 15-year rates of side effects due to IM-MS RT, both scored longitudinally and cross-sectionally, were similar among the techniques. CONCLUSION: Even though a straightforward comparison by technique is not possible because of variations in baseline characteristics between institutions, our findings suggest that the use of more individualised RT techniques is associated with higher rates of oncological improvements without increased risks for late side effects.

Side Effects 15 Years After Lymph Node Irradiation in Breast Cancer: Randomized EORTC Trial 22922/10925.

BACKGROUND: Uncertainty about the benefit-risk ratio of regional lymph node irradiation led to varying clinical protocols. We investigated long-term late side effects after internal mammary and medial supraclavicular (IM-MS) lymph node irradiation to improve shared decision making. METHODS: The multicenter European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer trial (ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT00002851) randomly assigned stage I-III breast cancer patients with involved axillary nodes and/or a medially located primary tumor. We analyzed late side effects both longitudinally at every follow-up and cross-sectionally at 5-year intervals. All statistical tests were 2-sided. RESULTS: Between 1996 and 2004, 46 departments from 13 countries accrued 4004 patients. Median follow-up was 15.7 years. Longitudinal follow-up data showed cumulative incidence rates at 15 years of 2.9% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 2.2% to 3.8%) vs 5.7% (95% CI = 4.7% to 6.9%) (P < .001) for lung fibrosis, 1.1% (95% CI = 0.7% to 1.7%) vs 1.9% (95% CI = 1.3% to 2.6%) (P = .07) for cardiac fibrosis, and 9.4% (95% CI = 8.0% to 10.8%) vs 11.1% (95% CI = 9.6% to 12.7%) (P = .04) for any cardiac disease when treated without or with IM-MS lymph node irradiation. There was no evidence for differences between left- and right-sided breast cancer (Wald χ2 test of treatment by breast side interaction, P = .33 and P = .35, for cardiac fibrosis and for any cardiac disease, respectively). The cumulative incidence probabilities of cross-sectionally reported side effects with a score of 2 or greater at 15 years were 0.1% (95% CI = 0.0% to 0.5%) vs 0.8% (95% CI = 0.4% to 1.4%) for pulmonary (P = .02), 1.8% (95% CI = 1.1% to 2.8%) vs 2.6% (95% CI = 1.8% to 3.7%) for cardiac (P = .15), and 0.0% (95% CI not evaluated) vs 0.1% (95% CI = 0.0% to 0.4%) for esophageal (P = .16), respectively. No difference was observed in the incidence of second malignancies, contralateral breast cancer, or cardiovascular deaths. CONCLUSIONS: The incidence of late pulmonary side effects was statistically significantly higher after IM-MS lymph node irradiation, as were some of the cardiac events, without a difference between left- and right-sided treatments. Absolute rates and differences were very low, without increased non-breast cancer-related mortality, even before introducing heart-sparing techniques.

Short Androgen Suppression and Radiation Dose Escalation in Prostate Cancer: 12-Year Results of EORTC Trial 22991 in Patients With Localized Intermediate-Risk Disease.

PURPOSE: The European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) trial 22991 (NCT00021450) showed that 6 months of concomitant and adjuvant androgen suppression (AS) improves event- (EFS, Phoenix) and clinical disease-free survival (DFS) of intermediate- and high-risk localized prostatic carcinoma, treated by external-beam radiotherapy (EBRT) at 70-78 Gy. We report the long-term results in intermediate-risk patients treated with 74 or 78 Gy EBRT, as per current guidelines. PATIENT AND METHODS: Of 819 patients randomly assigned between EBRT or EBRT plus AS started on day 1 of EBRT, 481 entered with intermediate risk (International Union Against Cancer TNM 1997 cT1b-c or T2a with prostate-specific antigen (PSA) ≥ 10 ng/mL or Gleason ≤ 7 and PSA ≤ 20 ng/mL, N0M0) and had EBRT planned at 74 (342 patients, 71.1%) or 78 Gy (139 patients, 28.9%). We report the trial primary end point EFS, DFS, distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS), and overall survival (OS) by intention-to-treat stratified by EBRT dose at two-sided α = 5%. RESULTS: At a median follow-up of 12.2 years, 92 of 245 patients and 132 of 236 had EFS events in the EBRT plus AS and EBRT arm, respectively, mostly PSA relapse (48.7%) or death (45.1%). EBRT plus AS improved EFS and DFS (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.53; CI, 0.41 to 0.70; P < .001 and HR = 0.67; CI, 0.49 to 0.90; P = .008). At 10 years, DMFS was 79.3% (CI, 73.4 to 84.0) with EBRT plus AS and 72.7% (CI, 66.2 to 78.2) with EBRT (HR = 0.74; CI, 0.53 to 1.02; P = .065). With 140 deaths (EBRT plus AS: 64; EBRT: 76), 10-year OS was 80.0% (CI, 74.1 to 84.7) with EBRT plus AS and 74.3% (CI, 67.8 to 79.7) with EBRT, but not statistically significantly different (HR = 0.74; CI, 0.53 to 1.04; P = .082). CONCLUSION: Six months of concomitant and adjuvant AS statistically significantly improves EFS and DFS in intermediate-risk prostatic carcinoma, treated by irradiation at 74 or 78 Gy. The effects on OS and DMFS did not reach statistical significance.

Internal mammary and medial supraclavicular lymph node chain irradiation in stage I-III breast cancer (EORTC 22922/10925): 15-year results of a randomised, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: 10-year results from several studies showed improved disease-free survival and distant metastasis-free survival, reduced breast cancer-related mortality, and variable effects on overall survival with the addition of partial or comprehensive regional lymph node irradiation after surgery in patients with breast cancer. We present the scheduled 15-year analysis of the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) 22922/10925 trial, which aims to investigate the impact on overall survival of elective internal mammary and medial supraclavicular (IM-MS) irradiation. METHODS: EORTC 22922/10925, a randomised, phase 3 trial done across 46 radiation oncology departments from 13 countries, included women up to 75 years of age with unilateral, histologically confirmed, stage I-III breast adenocarcinoma with involved axillary nodes or a central or medially located primary tumour. Surgery consisted of mastectomy or breast-conserving surgery and axillary staging. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) centrally using minimisation to receive IM-MS irradiation at 50 Gy in 25 fractions (IM-MS irradiation group) or no IM-MS irradiation (control group). Stratification was done for institution, menopausal status, site of the primary tumour within the breast, type of breast and axillary surgery, and pathological T and N stage. Patients and investigators were not masked to treatment allocation. The primary endpoint was overall survival analysed according to the intention-to-treat principle. Secondary endpoints were disease-free survival, distant metastasis-free survival, breast cancer mortality, any breast cancer recurrence, and cause of death. Follow-up is ongoing for 20 years after randomisation. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT00002851. FINDINGS: Between Aug 5, 1996, and Jan 13, 2004, we enrolled 4004 patients, of whom 2002 were randomly assigned to the IM-MS irradiation group and 2002 to the no IM-MS irradiation group. At a median follow-up of 15·7 years (IQR 14·0-17·6), 554 (27·7%) patients in the IM-MS irradiation group and 569 (28·4%) patients in the control group had died. Overall survival was 73·1% (95% CI 71·0-75·2) in the IM-MS irradiation group and 70·9% (68·6-72·9) in the control group (HR 0·95 [95% CI 0·84-1·06], p=0·36). Any breast cancer recurrence (24·5% [95% CI 22·5-26·6] vs 27·1% [25·1-29·2]; HR 0·87 [95% CI 0·77-0·98], p=0·024) and breast cancer mortality (16·0% [14·3-17·7] vs 19·8% [18·0-21·7]; 0·81 [0·70-0·94], p=0·0055) were lower in the IM-MS irradiation group than in the control group. No significant differences in the IM-MS irradiation group versus the control group were seen for disease-free survival (60·8% [95% CI 58·4-63·2] vs 59·9% [57·5-62·2]; HR 0·93 [95% CI 0·84-1·03], p=0·18), or distant metastasis-free survival (70·0% [67·7-72·2] vs 68·2% [65·9-70·3]; 0·93 [0·83-1·04], p=0·18). Causes of death between groups were similar. INTERPRETATION: The 15-year results show a significant reduction of breast cancer mortality and any breast cancer recurrence by IM-MS irradiation in stage I-III breast cancer. However, this is not converted to improved overall survival. FUNDING: US National Cancer Institute, Ligue Nationale contre le Cancer, and KWF Kankerbestrijding.

A comparison of two modalities of stereotactic body radiation therapy for peripheral early-stage non-small cell lung cancer: results of a prospective French study.

OBJECTIVES: This prospective, observational, non-randomized multicentric study was conducted to compare efficiency and toxicity using different modalities of stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) in early-stage peripheral non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). METHODS: From 9 April to 11 December, 106 patients were treated according to the local equipment availability for peripheral NSCLC with SBRT: 68 by linear accelerator equipped for SBRT and 38 by Cyberknife®. Multivariate analysis and propensity score analysis using Inverse Probability Treatment Weighting (IPTW) were undertaken in an effort to adjust for potential bias due to non-randomization. RESULTS: 2-year local control rates were 97.0% (95% CI: [90.6%; 99.4%]) with SBRT by Linac vs 100% (95% CI: ([100%; 100%]) with Cyberknife® (p = 0.2839). 2-year PFS and 2-year OS rates were 52.7% (95% CI [39.9%;64.0%]) versus 54.1% (95% CI [36.8; 68.6%]) (p = 0.8582) and 65.1% (95% CI: [51.9%; 75.5%] versus 83.9% (95% CI: [67.5%; 92.4%] (p = 0.0831) using Linac and Cyberknife® respectively. Multivariate regression analysis indicates no significant effect of SBRT treatment type on PFS or OS. Local relapse could not be modeled due to the small number of events (n = 2). Acute and late toxicity rates were not significantly different. After IPTW adjustment, results were unchanged. CONCLUSIONS: No difference in efficiency or toxicity was shown after SBRT of peripheral NSCLC treatment using Linac or Cyberknife®. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE: This is the first large prospective non-randomized study focusing on peripheral localized NSCLC comparing SBRT using an appropriately equipped linac with Cyberknife®. No significant difference in efficiency or toxicity was shown in this situation.

Exclusive image guided IMRT vs. radical prostatectomy followed by postoperative IMRT for localized prostate cancer: a matched-pair analysis based on risk-groups.

BACKGROUND: To investigate whether patients treated for a localized prostate cancer (PCa) require a radical prostatectomy followed by postoperative radiotherapy or exclusive radiotherapy, in the modern era of image guided IMRT. METHODS: 178 patients with PCa were referred for daily exclusive image guided IMRT (IG-IMRT) using an on-line 3D ultra-sound based system and 69 patients were referred for postoperative IMRT without image guidance after radical prostatectomy (RP + IMRT). Patients were matched in a 1:1 ratio according to their baseline risk group before any treatment. Late toxicity was scored using the CTV v3.0 scale. Biochemical failure was defined as a postoperative PSA ≤ 0.1 ng/mL followed by 1 consecutive rising PSA for the postoperative group of patients and by the Phoenix definition (nadir + 2 ng/mL) for the group of patients treated with exclusive radiotherapy. RESULTS: A total of 98 patients were matched (49:49). From the start of any treatment, the median follow-up was 56.6 months (CI 95% = [49.6-61.2], range [18.2-115.1]). No patient had late gastrointestinal grade ≥ 2 toxicity in the IG-IMRT group vs. 4% in the RP + IMRT group. Forty two percent of the patients in both groups had late grade ≥ 2 genitourinary toxicity. The 5-year FFF rates in the IG-IMRT group and in the RP + IMRT groups were 93.1% [80.0-97.8] and 76.5% [58.3-87.5], respectively (p = 0.031). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with a localized PCa treated with IG-IMRT had better oncological outcome than patients treated with RP + IMRT. Further improvements in postoperative IMRT using image guidance and dose escalation are urgently needed.

Clinical impact of margin reduction on late toxicity and short-term biochemical control for patients treated with daily on-line image guided IMRT for prostate cancer.

To evaluate the impact of PTV reduction when delivering image-guided IMRT (IG-IMRT) for patients with prostate cancer. Between 2001 and 2007, 165 men were treated with daily IG-IMRT using a 3D ultrasound-based system. Median dose prescribed to the prostate was 78 Gy [74 Gy-78 Gy]. Patients were stratified regarding the CTV to the PTV margin: group A (n=87)=5mm or group B (n=78)=10mm. Late toxicity was scored using the CTC v3.0 scale. Biochemical progression-free survival (bPFS) was calculated using the Phoenix definition. Grade 2 genitourinary toxicity was 7.0% for group A and 6.6% for group B (p=1.00). Grade 2 gastrointestinal toxicity was 1.2% and 2.6% (p=0.38). With a median follow-up of 38.3 months [5.25-87.3], bPFS at 3 years was 92.5% [82.4%-96.9%] in group A and 94.3% [85.5%-97.8%] in group B (p=0.84). IG-IMRT yielded very low rates of late toxicity. Margin had impact neither on short-term bPFS nor late toxicity.