Interplay of Oncoplastic Reconstruction and Adjuvant Radiation Therapy in Breast Cancer.

Purpose: Oncoplastic breast surgery (OBS) combines breast cancer tumor removal with the cosmetic benefits of plastic surgery at the time of breast-conserving surgery. Potential advantages of OBS include wider surgical margins around the tumor bed, while the natural shape and appearance of the breast are maintained more than standard lumpectomy procedures. However, limited information is available regarding the potential effect on adjuvant radiation treatment planning. Materials and Methods: Women with localized breast cancer undergoing lumpectomy with immediate OBS and adjuvant radiation therapy between 2014 and 2019 were reviewed. OBS was performed using volume displacement techniques and patients received whole-breast irradiation with 3-dimensional conformal radiation therapy. Results: Volume of additional ipsilateral breast tissue removed during OBS ranged from 21 to 2086 cm3 (median, 304 cm3), 29% of patients had >500 cm3 of tissue removed. Surgical margins were positive in 12.5% and were not affected by volume of breast tissue removed (445 vs 439 cm3). Patients with surgical clips more often received a lumpectomy bed boost (75.9% vs 50.0%), boost volumes were on average 157 cm3 with clips versus 205 cm3 without clips. Mean V105 was comparable in patients with >500 cm3 tissue removed and irradiated breast volume >1000 cm3, while higher absolute volumes were found in patients with >26 cm posterior separation (58.0 cm3 vs 102.7 cm3; P = .07). No meaningful difference was observed in Dmax or radiation coverage (95% of the volume receiving 95% of the prescription dose) for patients with >26 cm posterior separation, >500 cm3 of breast tissue removed, or irradiated breast volume >1000 cm3. Conclusions: Radiation dosimetry plans for patients undergoing oncoplastic surgery were acceptable and no significant radiation or surgical advantage was gained in patients with more tissue removed. Our study stresses the importance of clear communication between surgeons and radiation oncologists about sufficient marking of the lumpectomy cavity, using practices that minimize the need for re-excisions and minimize lumpectomy cavity disruption during rearrangement.

Oncoplastic Reconstruction in the Setting of Prior Cosmetic Augmentation.

BACKGROUND: This study explores the surgical management and reconstruction options for augmented breasts in the context of breast conservation therapy (BCT) for breast cancer. We hypothesized that there would be no difference in the rates of complications, revisions, or patient satisfaction in patients who maintained their breast augmentation versus those that had their implants removed in the context of BCT. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective review of 142 patients who underwent BCT at a single center from March 2016 to March 2022. The study included patients who had a preexistent cosmetic augmentation at the time of breast cancer diagnosis and BCT. Patient demographics, clinical and treatment characteristics, breast implant details, reconstructive technique, complications, and revisions were recorded. Patient-reported outcomes were assessed using the BREAST-Q Breast-Conserving Therapy module. RESULTS: Ninety-three (65.5%) patients chose to maintain their implants, while 49 (34.5%) elected to have them removed during BCT. Patients with submuscular implants were more likely to maintain their implants. Oncoplastic mastopexy was associated with higher complication rates, particularly in patients opting for implant downsizing. However, multivariate logistic regression did not identify implant management strategy as an independent predictor for complications or revisions. Surgical site infection was the only predictor of implant explantation. Patient-reported outcomes did not differ significantly between the different implant management cohorts. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates that maintaining breast implants during BCT does not increase the risk of complications or revisions. Overall, BCT in augmented women was found to be a safe approach, with high patient satisfaction.

Single-fraction radiation retreatment for bone metastases: role of a rapid access clinic.

OBJECTIVES: This study investigates retreatment rates in single-fraction radiation therapy (SFRT) for painful bone metastasis in patients with limited life expectancy. We compared retreatment-free survival (RFS) in patients from a rapid access bone metastases clinic (RABC) and non-RABC patients, identifying factors associated with retreatment. METHODS: In this observational study, we analysed RABC patients who received SFRT between April 2018 and November 2019, using non-RABC SFRT patients as a comparison group. Patients with prior or perioperative radiation therapy (RT) were excluded. The primary endpoint was same-site and any-site retreatment with RT or surgery. Patient characteristics were compared using χ2 and Student's t-tests, with RFS estimates based on a multistate model considering death as a competing risk using Aalen-Johansen estimates. RESULTS: We identified 151 patients (79 RABC, 72 non-RABC) with 225 treatments (102 RABC, 123 non-RABC) meeting eligibility criteria. Of the 22 (10.8%) same-site retreatments, 5 (22.7%) received surgery, 14 (63.6%) received RT and 3 (13.6%) received both RT and surgery. We found no significant differences in any-site RFS (p=0.97) or same-site RFS (p=0.11). CONCLUSIONS: RFS is high and similar comparable in the RABC and non-RABC cohorts. Retreatment rates are low, even in patients with low Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group scores.

Premastectomy Radiotherapy and Immediate Breast Reconstruction: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Premastectomy radiotherapy (PreMRT) is a new treatment sequence to avoid the adverse effects of radiotherapy on the final breast reconstruction while achieving the benefits of immediate breast reconstruction (IMBR). Objective: To evaluate outcomes among patients who received PreMRT and regional nodal irradiation (RNI) followed by mastectomy and IMBR. Design, Setting, and Participants: This was a phase 2 single-center randomized clinical trial conducted between August 3, 2018, and August 2, 2022, evaluating the feasibility and safety of PreMRT and RNI (including internal mammary lymph nodes). Patients with cT0-T3, N0-N3b breast cancer and a recommendation for radiotherapy were eligible. Intervention: This trial evaluated outcomes after PreMRT followed by mastectomy and IMBR. Patients were randomized to receive either hypofractionated (40.05 Gy/15 fractions) or conventionally fractionated (50 Gy/25 fractions) RNI. Main Outcome and Measures: The primary outcome was reconstructive failure, defined as complete autologous flap loss. Demographic, treatment, and outcomes data were collected, and associations between multiple variables and outcomes were evaluated. Analysis was performed on an intent-to-treat basis. Results: Fifty patients were enrolled. Among 49 evaluable patients, the median age was 48 years (range, 31-72 years), and 46 patients (94%) received neoadjuvant systemic therapy. Twenty-five patients received 50 Gy in 25 fractions to the breast and 45 Gy in 25 fractions to regional nodes, and 24 patients received 40.05 Gy in 15 fractions to the breast and 37.5 Gy in 15 fractions to regional nodes, including internal mammary lymph nodes. Forty-eight patients underwent mastectomy with IMBR, at a median of 23 days (IQR, 20-28.5 days) after radiotherapy. Forty-one patients had microvascular autologous flap reconstruction, 5 underwent latissimus dorsi pedicled flap reconstruction, and 2 had tissue expander placement. There were no complete autologous flap losses, and 1 patient underwent tissue expander explantation. Eight of 48 patients (17%) had mastectomy skin flap necrosis of the treated breast, of whom 1 underwent reoperation. During follow-up (median, 29.7 months [range, 10.1-65.2 months]), there were no locoregional recurrences or distant metastasis. Conclusions and Relevance: This randomized clinical trial found PreMRT and RNI followed by mastectomy and microvascular autologous flap IMBR to be feasible and safe. Based on these results, a larger randomized clinical trial of hypofractionated vs conventionally fractionated PreMRT has been started (NCT05774678). Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02912312.