Concurrent Radiation and Modern Systemic Therapies for Breast Cancer: An Ever-Expanding Frontier.

Radiotherapy is a critical tool for reducing locoregional recurrence, extending survival, and palliating symptoms in patients with breast cancer. With an ever-expanding armamentarium of systemic agents available, and an increasing trend toward the use of hypofractionated radiation regimens, it can be difficult to determine the safety of concurrent therapy. In particular, new targeted agents in both the adjuvant and metastatic setting have limited prospective or long-term data demonstrating safety when delivered concurrently with radiotherapy. Other systemic agents, including chemotherapy and endocrine therapy, are also important components of the overall treatment strategy for localized and metastatic breast cancer, and are often delivered concurrently with radiation in certain clinical scenarios. This review explores the safety, efficacy, and pitfalls of delivering radiation in conjunction with systemic therapies for breast cancer.

The Acute Effects of Foam Rolling and Dynamic Stretching on Athletic Performance: A Critically Appraised Topic.

Clinical Scenario: Dynamic stretching and foam rolling are commonly used by athletes to reduce injury and enhance recovery, thereby improving athletic performance. In contrast to dynamic stretching, little research has been conducted on the acute effects of foam rolling as part of the preexercise warm-up routine. Previously, when researchers implemented foam rolling with static stretching as a warm-up, some found that foam rolling slightly improved flexibility and performance outcomes. More recent research has shown that dynamic stretching is favorable to static stretching when used as a warm-up strategy. Therefore, adding foam rolling to dynamic stretching is hypothesized to create more significant improvements in flexibility and performance compared with adding foam rolling to static stretching. Focused Clinical Question: In active individuals, does foam rolling in addition to dynamic stretching lead to enhanced performance compared with dynamic stretching alone? Summary of Key Findings: Four randomized controlled trials were included. Two studies concluded that the addition of foam rolling to dynamic stretching increased vertical jump height more than dynamic stretching alone, while 2 studies found no difference between these treatment groups. Two studies concluded that the addition of foam rolling increased agility performance compared with dynamic stretching alone, while one study found no difference between treatment groups and one study did not measure agility. All 4 studies reviewed concluded that foam rolling did not improve flexibility more than dynamic stretching alone. Clinical Bottom Line: Foam rolling in conjunction with dynamic stretching may further improve an athlete's agility and power output; however, little improvement has been observed with foam rolling in regard to athlete flexibility when compared with completing dynamic stretching programs alone. Strength of Recommendation: Inconsistent findings from 4 randomized controlled trials suggest there is Grade C evidence to support the inclusion of foam rolling in a dynamic warm-up.

Temporal Trends in Postmastectomy Radiation Therapy and Breast Reconstruction Associated With Changes in National Comprehensive Cancer Network Guidelines.

IMPORTANCE: Evolving data on the effectiveness of postmastectomy radiation therapy (PMRT) have led to changes in National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) recommendations, counseling clinicians to "strongly consider" PMRT for patients with breast cancer with tumors 5 cm or smaller and 1 to 3 positive nodes; however, anticipation of PMRT may lead to delay or omission of reconstruction, which can have cosmetic, quality-of-life, and complication implications for patients. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether revised guidelines have increased PMRT and affected receipt of breast reconstruction. We hypothesized that (1) PMRT rates would increase for women affected by the revised guidelines while remaining stable in other cohorts and (2) receipt of breast reconstruction would decrease in these women while increasing in other groups. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Retrospective, population-based cohort study of Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) data on women with stage I to III breast cancer undergoing mastectomy from 2000 through 2011. Our analytic sample (N = 62,442) was divided into cohorts on the basis of current NCCN radiotherapy recommendations: "radiotherapy recommended" (tumors > 5 cm or ≥ 4 positive lymph nodes), "strongly consider radiotherapy" (tumor ≤ 5 cm, 1-3 positive nodes), and "radiotherapy not recommended" (tumors ≤ 5 cm, no positive nodes). MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: We used Joinpoint regression analysis to evaluate temporal trends in receipt of PMRT and breast reconstruction. RESULTS: The 3 cohorts comprised 15,999 in the "radiotherapy recommended" group, 15,006 in the "strongly consider radiotherapy" group, and 31,837 in the "radiotherapy not recommended" group. [corrected]. Rates of PMRT were unchanged in the radiotherapy recommended (29.9%) and radiotherapy not recommended (7.4%) cohorts over the study period. Receipt of PMRT for the strongly consider radiotherapy cohort was unchanged at 26.9% until 2007. At that time, a significant change in the APC was observed (P = .01) with an increase in APC from 2.1% to 9.0% (P = .02) through the end of the study period, for a final rate of 40.5%. Breast reconstruction increased across all cohorts. Despite increasing receipt of PMRT, the strongly consider radiotherapy cohort maintained a consistent increase in reconstruction (annual percentage change, 7.4%) throughout the study period. This is similar to the increase in reconstruction observed for the radiotherapy recommended (10.7%) and radiotherapy not recommended (8.4%) cohorts. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Changes in NCCN guidelines have been associated with an increase in PMRT among patients with tumors 5 cm or smaller and 1 to 3 positive nodes without an associated decrease in receipt of reconstruction. This may represent increasing clinician comfort with irradiating a new breast reconstruction and may have cosmetic and quality-of-life implications for patients.