Hypofractionated Radiation Therapy: A Cross-sectional Survey Study of US Radiation Oncologists.

OBJECTIVES: For many malignancies, hypofractionated radiotherapy (HFRT) is an accepted standard associated with decreased treatment time and costs. United States provider beliefs regarding HFRT likely impact its adoption but are poorly studied. We surveyed US-based radiation oncologists (ROs) to gauge HFRT utilization rates for prostate (PC), breast (BC), and rectal cancer (RC) and to characterize the beliefs governing these decisions. METHODS: From July to October 2021, an anonymized, online survey was electronically distributed to ROs actively practicing in the United States. Demographic and practice characteristic information was collected. Questions assessing rates of offering HFRT for PC, BC, and RC and perceived limitations towards using HFRT were administered. RESULTS: A total of 203 eligible respondents (72% male, 72% White, 53% nonacademic practice, 69% with 11+ years in practice) were identified. Approximately 50% offered stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) for early/favorable intermediate risk PC. Although >90% of ROs offered whole-breast HFRT for early-stage BC, only 33% offered accelerated partial-breast irradiation (APBI). Overall, 41% of ROs offered short-course neoadjuvant RT for RC. The primary reported barriers to HFRT utilization were lack of data, inexperience, and referring provider concerns. CONCLUSIONS: HFRT is safe, effective, and beneficial, yet underutilized-particularly prostate SBRT, APBI, and short-course RT for RC. Skills retraining and education of ROs and referring providers may increase utilization rates.

Navigating Breast Cancer Oligometastasis and Oligoprogression: Current Landscape and Future Directions.

PURPOSE: We examine the potential for curative approaches among metastatic breast cancer (MBC) patients by exploring the recent literature on local ablative therapies like surgery and stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) in patients with oligometastatic (OM) breast cancer. We also cover therapies for MBC patients with oligoprogressive (OP) disease. KEY FINDINGS: Surgery and SBRT have been studied for OM and OP breast cancer, mainly in retrospective or non-randomized trials. While many studies demonstrated favorable results, a cooperative study and single-institution trial found no support for surgery/SBRT in OM and OP cases, respectively. CONCLUSION: While there is interest in applying local therapies to OM and OP breast cancer, the current randomized data does not back the routine use of surgery or SBRT, particularly when considering the potential for treatment-related toxicities. Future research should refine patient selection through advanced imaging and possibly explore these therapies specifically in patients with hormone receptor-positive or HER2-positive disease.

Partial breast irradiation for patients with early-stage invasive breast cancer or ductal carcinoma in situ: an ASTRO clinical practice guideline

This guideline provides evidence-based recommendations on appropriate indications and techniques for partial breast irradiation (PBI) for patients with early-stage invasive breast cancer and ductal carcinoma in situ. ASTRO convened a task force to address 4 key questions focused on the appropriate indications and techniques for PBI as an alternative to whole breast irradiation (WBI) to result in similar rates of ipsilateral breast recurrence (IBR) and toxicity outcomes. Also addressed were aspects related to the technical delivery of PBI, including dose-fractionation regimens, target volumes, and treatment parameters for different PBI techniques. The guideline is based on a systematic review provided by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. Recommendations were created using a predefined consensus-building methodology and system for grading evidence quality and recommendation strength. PBI delivered using 3-dimensional conformal radiation therapy, intensity modulated radiation therapy, multicatheter brachytherapy, and single-entry brachytherapy results in similar IBR as WBI with long-term follow-up. Some patient characteristics and tumor features were underrepresented in the randomized controlled trials, making it difficult to fully define IBR risks for patients with these features. Appropriate dose-fractionation regimens, target volume delineation, and treatment planning parameters for delivery of PBI are outlined. Intraoperative radiation therapy alone is associated with a higher IBR rate compared with WBI. A daily or every-other-day external beam PBI regimen is preferred over twice-daily regimens due to late toxicity concerns.

Partial Breast Irradiation for Patients With Early-Stage Invasive Breast Cancer or Ductal Carcinoma In Situ: An ASTRO Clinical Practice Guideline.

PURPOSE: This guideline provides evidence-based recommendations on appropriate indications and techniques for partial breast irradiation (PBI) for patients with early-stage invasive breast cancer and ductal carcinoma in situ. METHODS: ASTRO convened a task force to address 4 key questions focused on the appropriate indications and techniques for PBI as an alternative to whole breast irradiation (WBI) to result in similar rates of ipsilateral breast recurrence (IBR) and toxicity outcomes. Also addressed were aspects related to the technical delivery of PBI, including dose-fractionation regimens, target volumes, and treatment parameters for different PBI techniques. The guideline is based on a systematic review provided by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. Recommendations were created using a predefined consensus-building methodology and system for grading evidence quality and recommendation strength. RESULTS: PBI delivered using 3-dimensional conformal radiation therapy, intensity modulated radiation therapy, multicatheter brachytherapy, and single-entry brachytherapy results in similar IBR as WBI with long-term follow-up. Some patient characteristics and tumor features were underrepresented in the randomized controlled trials, making it difficult to fully define IBR risks for patients with these features. Appropriate dose-fractionation regimens, target volume delineation, and treatment planning parameters for delivery of PBI are outlined. Intraoperative radiation therapy alone is associated with a higher IBR rate compared with WBI. A daily or every-other-day external beam PBI regimen is preferred over twice-daily regimens due to late toxicity concerns. CONCLUSIONS: Based on published data, the ASTRO task force has proposed recommendations to inform best clinical practices on the use of PBI.

Racial Disparities in Breast Cancer: from Detection to Treatment.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Update on current racial disparities in the detection and treatment of breast cancer. RECENT FINDINGS: Breast cancer remains the leading cause of cancer death among Black and Hispanic women. Mammography rates among Black and Hispanic women have surpassed those among White women, with studies now advocating for earlier initiation of breast cancer screening in Black women. Black, Hispanic, Asian, and American Indian and Alaskan Native women continue to experience delays in diagnosis and time to treatment. Further, racial discrepancies in receipt of guideline-concordant care, access to genetic testing and surgical reconstruction persist. Disparities in the initiation, completion, toxicity, and efficacy of chemotherapy, endocrine therapy, and targeted drug therapy remain for racially marginalized women. Efforts to evaluate the impact of race and ethnicity across the breast cancer spectrum are increasing, but knowledge gaps remain and further research is necessary to reduce the disparity gap.

Patient-driven decisions and perceptions of the 'safest possible choice': insights from patient-provider conversations about how some breast cancer patients choose contralateral prophylactic mastectomy.

OBJECTIVE: Observe patient-clinician communication to gain insight about the reasons underlying the choice of patients with unilateral breast cancer to undergo contralateral prophylactic mastectomy (CPM), despite lack of survival benefit, risk of harms, and cautions expressed by surgical guidelines and clinicians. METHODS & MEASURES: WORDS is a prospective study that explored patient-clinician communication and patient decision making. Participants recorded clinical visits through a downloadable mobile application. We analyzed 44 recordings from 22 patients: 9 who chose CPM, 8 who considered CPM but decided against it, and 5 who never considered CPM. We used abductive analysis combined with constructivist grounded theory methods. RESULTS: Decisions to undergo CPM are patient-driven and motivated by perceptions that CPM is the most aggressive, and therefore safest, treatment option available. These decisions are shaped not primarily by the content of conversations with clinicians, but by the history of cancer in patients' families, their own first-hand experiences with cancers among loved ones, fear for their children, and anxiety about cancer recurrence. CONCLUSION: The perception that CPM is the safest, most aggressive option strongly influences patients, despite scientific evidence to the contrary. Future efforts to address high CPM rates should focus on patient-driven decision making and cancer-related fears.

Moving the Needle Forward in Genomically-Guided Precision Radiation Treatment.

Radiation treatment (RT) is a mainstay treatment for many types of cancer. Recommendations for RT and the radiation plan are individualized to each patient, taking into consideration the patient's tumor pathology, staging, anatomy, and other clinical characteristics. Information on germline mutations and somatic tumor mutations is at present rarely used to guide specific clinical decisions in RT. Many genes, such as ATM, and BRCA1/2, have been identified in the laboratory to confer radiation sensitivity. However, our understanding of the clinical significance of mutations in these genes remains limited and, as individual mutations in such genes can be rare, their impact on tumor response and toxicity remains unclear. Current guidelines, including those from the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN), provide limited guidance on how genetic results should be integrated into RT recommendations. With an increasing understanding of the molecular underpinning of radiation response, genomically-guided RT can inform decisions surrounding RT dose, volume, concurrent therapies, and even omission to further improve oncologic outcomes and reduce risks of toxicities. Here, we review existing evidence from laboratory, pre-clinical, and clinical studies with regard to how genetic alterations may affect radiosensitivity. We also summarize recent data from clinical trials and explore potential future directions to utilize genetic data to support clinical decision-making in developing a pathway toward personalized RT.

Treatment Patterns and Outcomes for Patients with Ampullary Carcinoma Who Do Not Undergo Surgery.

Surgical resection is the standard of care for ampullary adenocarcinoma (AC). Many patients are ineligible due to comorbidities/advanced disease. Evidence for the optimal non-operative management of localized AC is lacking. We hypothesize that patients treated with chemotherapy (CT) and definitive radiation (DRT) will have superior survival (OS) compared to those treated with CT alone. We performed a retrospective review of the National Cancer Database from 2004 to 2017 to identify patients with non-metastatic AC and no surgical intervention. Patients were categorized as having received no treatment, palliative radiotherapy (PRT) alone, CT alone, CT + PRT, DRT alone, or CT + DRT. We utilized Kaplan-Meier analysis to determine OS and the log-rank test to compare survival curves. Among 2176 patients, treatment groups were: No treatment (71.2%), PRT alone (1.9%), CT alone (13.1%), CT + PRT (1.6%), DRT alone (2.4%), and CT + DRT (9.7%). One-year OS varied by treatment group, ranging from 35.1% (PRT alone) to 59.4% (CT + DRT). The one-year OS in a matched cohort was not significantly different between CT alone and CT + DRT (HR 0.87, 95% CI 0.69-1.10, p = 0.87). Most patients with non-metastatic AC not treated with surgery do not receive any treatment. There is no difference in one-year OS between those undergoing CT alone and CT + DRT.

Not Too Little, Not Too Much: Optimizing More Versus Less Locoregional Treatment for Older Patients With Breast Cancer.

Although undertreatment of older women with aggressive breast cancers has been a concern for years, there is increasing recognition that some older women are overtreated, receiving therapies unlikely to improve survival or reduce morbidity. De-escalation of surgery may include breast-conserving surgery over mastectomy for appropriate candidates and omitting or reducing extent of axillary surgery. Appropriate patients to de-escalate surgery are those with early-stage breast cancer, favorable tumor characteristics, are clinically node-negative, and who may have other major health issues. De-escalation of radiation includes reducing treatment course length through hypofractionation and ultrahypofractionation regimens, reducing treatment volumes through partial breast irradiation, omission of radiation for select patients, and reducing radiation dose to normal tissues. Shared decision making, which aims to facilitate patients making decisions concordant with their values, can guide health care providers and patients through complicated decisions optimizing breast cancer care.

Advances in Radiotherapy for Breast Cancer.

Breast cancer is the most prevalent cancer in women, and the second leading cause of cancer death in women in the United States. Radiation therapy is an important component in the multimodal management of breast cancer, including early stage and locally advanced breast cancers, as well as metastatic cases. Breast cancer radiation therapy has seen significant advancements over the past 20 years. This article discusses the latest advances in the radiotherapeutic management of breast cancer, especially focusing on the technological advances in radiation treatment planning and techniques that have exploited the understanding of radiation biology.

Implementation of a Breast Intraoperative Oncoplastic Form to Aid Management of Oncoplastic Surgery.

INTRODUCTION: Oncoplastic breast conservation surgery (BCS) uses concurrent reduction and/or mastopexy with lumpectomy to improve aesthetic outcomes. However, tissue rearrangement can shift the original tumor location site in relation to external breast landmarks, resulting in difficulties during re-excision for a positive margin and accurate radiation targeting. We developed the Breast Intraoperative Oncoplastic (BIO) form to help depict the location of the tumor and breast reduction specimen. This study seeks to assess physician perspectives of the implementation outcomes. METHODS: From February 2021 to April 2021, the BIO form was used in 11 oncoplastic BCS cases at a single institution. With institutional review board approval, surgical oncologists (SOs), plastic surgeons (PSs), and radiation oncologists (ROs) were administered a 12-question validated survey on Acceptability of Intervention Measure (AIM), Intervention Appropriateness Measure (IAM), and Feasibility of Intervention Measure (FIM), using a 5-point Likert scale during initial implementation and at 6-month reassessment. RESULTS: Twelve physicians completed the survey initially (4 SOs, 4 PSs, and 4 ROs). The mean scores for Acceptability of Intervention Measure, Intervention Appropriateness Measure, and Feasibility of Intervention Measure were high (4.44, 4.56, and 4.56, respectively). Twelve completed the second survey (5 SOs, 3 PSs, and 4 ROs). The mean scores were marginally lower (4.06, 4.21, and 4.25). There were no significant differences when stratified by number of years in practice or specialty. Free text comments showed that 75% of physicians found the form helpful in oncoplastic BCS. CONCLUSIONS: The data indicate high feasibility, acceptability, and appropriateness of the BIO form. Results of this study suggest multidisciplinary benefits of implementing the BIO form in oncoplastic BCS.

The Axillary Lateral Vessel Thoracic Junction Is Not an Organ at Risk for Breast Cancer-Related Lymphedema.

PURPOSE: Breast cancer-related lymphedema (BCRL) is a treatment complication that significantly reduces patient quality of life. Regional nodal irradiation (RNI) may increase the risk of BCRL. Recently, a region of the axilla known as the axillary-lateral thoracic vessel juncture (ALTJ) was identified as a potential organ at risk (OAR). Here, we set out to validate whether radiation dose to the ALTJ is associated with BCRL. METHODS AND MATERIALS: We identified patients with stage II-III breast cancer treated with adjuvant RNI from 2013 to 2018, excluding those with BCRL preradiation. We defined BCRL as difference in arm circumference between the ipsilateral and contralateral limb >2.5 cm at any 1 encounter or ≥2 cm on ≥2 visits. All patients suspected of having BCRL at routine follow-up visits were referred to physical therapy for confirmation. The ALTJ was retrospectively contoured and dose metrics were collected. Cox proportional hazards regression models were used to test the association between clinical and dosimetric parameters with the development of BCRL. RESULTS: The study population included 378 patients with a median age of 53 years, median body mass index of 28.4 kg/m2, and median of 18 axillary nodes removed; 71% underwent mastectomy. Median follow-up was 70 months (interquartile range, 55-89.7 months). BCRL developed in 101 patients at a median of 18.9 months (interquartile range, 9.9-32.4 months), with a corresponding 5-year cumulative incidence BCRL of 25.8%. On multivariate analysis, none of the ALTJ metrics were associated with BCRL risk. Only increasing age, increasing body mass index, and increasing number of nodes were associated with a higher risk of developing BCRL. The 6-year locoregional recurrence rate was 3.2%, the axillary recurrence rate was 1.7%, and the isolated axillary recurrence rate was 0%. CONCLUSIONS: The ALTJ is not validated as a critical OAR for reducing BCRL risk. Until such an OAR is discovered, the axillary PTV should not be modified or dose reduced in efforts to reduce BCRL.

Quality and Safety Considerations in Intensity Modulated Radiation Therapy: An ASTRO Safety White Paper Update.

PURPOSE: This updated report on intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) is part of a series of consensus-based white papers previously published by the American Society for Radiation Oncology (ASTRO) addressing patient safety. Since the first white papers were published, IMRT went from widespread use to now being the main delivery technique for many treatment sites. IMRT enables higher radiation doses to be delivered to more precise targets while minimizing the dose to uninvolved normal tissue. Due to the associated complexity, IMRT requires additional planning and safety checks before treatment begins and, therefore, quality and safety considerations for this technique remain important areas of focus. METHODS AND MATERIALS: ASTRO convened an interdisciplinary task force to assess the original IMRT white paper and update content where appropriate. Recommendations were created using a consensus-building methodology, and task force members indicated their level of agreement based on a 5-point Likert scale, from "strongly agree" to "strongly disagree." A prespecified threshold of ≥75% of raters who select "strongly agree" or "agree" indicated consensus. CONCLUSIONS: This IMRT white paper primarily focuses on quality and safety processes in planning and delivery. Building on the prior version, this consensus paper incorporates revised and new guidance documents and technology updates. IMRT requires an interdisciplinary team-based approach, staffed by appropriately trained individuals as well as significant personnel resources, specialized technology, and implementation time. A comprehensive quality assurance program must be developed, using established guidance, to ensure IMRT is performed in a safe and effective manner. Patient safety in the delivery of IMRT is everyone's responsibility, and professional organizations, regulators, vendors, and end-users must work together to ensure the highest levels of safety.

Consensus Quality Measures and Dose Constraints for Breast Cancer From the Veterans Affairs Radiation Oncology Quality Surveillance Program and American Society for Radiation Oncology Expert Panel.

PURPOSE: Using evidence-based radiation therapy to direct care for patients with breast cancer is critical to standardize practice, improve safety, and optimize outcomes. To address this need, the Veterans Affairs (VA) National Radiation Oncology Program (NROP) established the VA Radiation Oncology Quality Surveillance Program to develop clinical quality measures (QMs). The VA NROP contracted with the American Society for Radiation Oncology to commission 5 Blue Ribbon Panels for breast, lung, prostate, rectal, and head and neck cancers. METHODS AND MATERIALS: The Breast Cancer Blue Ribbon Panel experts worked collaboratively with the NROP to develop consensus QMs for use throughout the VA system, establishing a set of QMs for patients in several areas, including consultation and work-up; simulation, treatment planning, and treatment; and follow-up care. As part of this initiative, consensus dose-volume histogram (DVH) constraints were outlined. RESULTS: In total, 36 QMs were established. Herein, we review the process used to develop QMs and final consensus QMs pertaining to all aspects of radiation patient care, as well as DVH constraints. CONCLUSIONS: The QMs and expert consensus DVH constraints are intended for ongoing quality surveillance within the VA system and centers providing community care for Veterans. They are also available for use by greater non-VA community measures of quality care for patients with breast cancer receiving radiation.

Stereotactic Radiosurgery for Women Older than 65 with Breast Cancer Brain Metastases.

BACKGROUND: Breast cancer is the second most common cause of brain metastases (BM). Despite increasing incidence of BM in older women, there are limited data on the optimal management of BM in this age group. In this study, we assessed the survival outcomes and treatment patterns of older breast cancer patients ≥65 years old with BM compared to younger patients at our institution. METHODS: An IRB-approved single-institutional retrospective review of biopsy-proven breast cancer patients with BM treated with 1- to 5-fraction stereotactic radiation therapy (SRS) from 2015 to 2020 was performed. Primary endpoint was intracranial progression-free survival (PFS) defined as the time interval between the end of SRS to the date of the first CNS progression. Secondary endpoints were overall survival (OS) from the end of SRS and radiation treatment patterns. Kaplan-Meier estimates and Cox proportional hazard regression method were used for survival analyses. RESULTS: A total of 112 metastatic breast cancer patients with BMs were included of which 24 were ≥65 years old and 88 were <65 years old. Median age at RT was 72 years (range 65-84) compared to 52 years (31-64) in younger patients. There were significantly higher number of older women with ER/PR positive disease (75% vs. 49%, p = 0.036), while younger patients were more frequently triple negative (32% vs. 12%, p = 0.074) and HER2 positive (42% vs. 29%, p = 0.3). Treatment-related adverse events were similar in both groups. Overall, 14.3% patients had any grade radiation necrosis (RN) (older vs. young: 8.3% vs. 16%, p = 0.5) while 5.4% had grade 3 or higher RN (0% vs. 6.8%, p = 0.7). Median OS after RT was poorer in older patients compared to younger patients (9.5 months vs. 14.5 months, p = 0.037), while intracranial PFS from RT was similar between the two groups (9.7 months vs. 7.1 months, p = 0.580). On univariate analysis, significant predictors of OS were age ≥65 years old (hazard risk, HR = 1.70, p = 0.048), KPS ≤ 80 (HR = 2.24, p < 0.001), HER2 positive disease (HR = 0.46, p < 0.001), isolated CNS metastatic disease (HR = 0.29, p < 0.001), number of brain metastases treated with RT (HR = 1.06, p = 0.028), and fractionated SRS (HR = 0.53, p = 0.013). On multivariable analysis, KPS ≤ 80, HER2 negativity and higher number of brain metastases predicted for poorer survival, while age was not a significant factor for OS after adjusting for other variables. Patients who received systemic therapy after SRS had a significantly improved OS on univariate and multivariable analysis (HR = 0.32, p < 0.001). Number of brain metastases treated was the only factor predictive of worse PFS (HR = 1.06, p = 0.041), which implies a 6% additive risk of progression for every additional metastasis treated. CONCLUSIONS: Although older women had poorer OS than younger women, OS was similar after adjusting for KPS, extracranial progression, and systemic therapy; and there was no difference in rates of intracranial PFS, neurological deaths, and LMD in the different age groups. This study suggests that age alone may not play an independent role in treatment-selection and that outcomes for breast cancer patients with BMs and personalized decision-making including other clinical factors should be considered. Future studies are warranted to assess neurocognitive outcomes and other radiation treatment toxicities in older patients.