ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Oncoplastic surgery is an expanding approach for managing breast conservation because it offers improved cosmetic outcomes while maintaining oncological safety. OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to assess the oncological and surgical outcomes of patients who underwent oncoplastic procedures at a single institution. METHODS: The study population includes all consecutive breast cancer patients who underwent lumpectomy followed by immediate oncoplastic breast reconstruction with contralateral breast adjustment between 2010 and 2021. Following IRB approval, patient demographics, tumor characteristics, surgical details, complications, and follow-up were evaluated for this group. Quality of life (QOL) and patient-reported outcome measures were assessed through questionnaires. RESULTS: Following multidisciplinary tumor board discussion, 77 patients (82 breasts) underwent oncoplastic surgery. Of these, 92.2% underwent breast MRI prior to surgery with mean mass enhancement of 2.35â cm (range, 0-8.5 cm) and non-mass enhancement of 5.77 cm (range, 0-14â cm), and 44% presented with multifocal disease. The final positive surgical margin rate was 2.4%, and all conserved breasts received adjuvant radiation therapy. The 5-year local recurrence rate for invasive tumors was 4.1%. QOL scores were generally high, with most patients reporting good to excellent cosmetic outcomes and high personal satisfaction with breast appearance and softness. Physicians reported breast symmetry in 89.5%. CONCLUSIONS: The findings suggest that oncoplastic surgery with contralateral breast adjustment is safe, effective, and an excellent option for breast cancer patients wishing for breast conservation even for large or multifocal masses, with favorable oncologic and cosmetic outcomes. The QOL analysis indicates high patient satisfaction. These results support the use of oncoplastic surgery in the management of breast cancer.
ABSTRACT
Introduction: Stereotactic MR-guided on-table adaptive radiotherapy (SMART) allows the precise delivery of high-dose radiation to tumors in great proximity to radiation-sensitive organs. The aim of this study is to evaluate the toxicity and clinical outcome in locally advanced or recurrent pancreatic tumors, with or without prior irradiation, treated with SMART. Methods: Patients were treated for pancreatic cancer (PC) using SMART technology to a prescribed dose of 50 Gy (BED10, 100 Gy) in five fractions, with daily on-table adaptation of treatment plan. Endpoints were acute and late toxicities, local control, local disease-free period, and overall survival. Results: A total of 54 PC patients were treated between August 2019 and September 2022, with a median follow-up of 8.9 months from SMART. The median age was 70.4 (45.2-86.9) years. A total of 40 patients had upfront inoperable PC (55% were locally advanced and 45% metastatic), and 14 had local recurrence following prior pancreatectomy (six patients also had prior adjuvant RT). Of the patients, 87% received at least one chemotherapy regimen (Oxaliplatin based, 72.2%), and 25.9% received ≥2 regimens. Except from lower CA 19-9 serum level at the time of diagnosis and 6 weeks prior to SMART in previously operated patients, there were no significant differences in baseline parameters between prior pancreatectomy and the inoperable group. On-table adaptive replanning was performed for 100% of the fractions. No patient reported grade ≥2 acute GI toxicity. All previously irradiated patients reported only low-grade toxicities during RT. A total of 48 patients (88.9%) were available for evaluation. Complete local control was achieved in 21.7% (10 patients) for a median of 9 months (2.8-28.8); three had later local progression. Eight patients had regional or marginal recurrence. Six- and 12-month OS were 75.0% and 52.1%, respectively. Apart from mild diarrhea 1-3 months after SMART and general fatigue, there were no significant differences in toxicity and outcomes between post-pancreatectomy and inoperable groups. Conclusion: SMART allows safe delivery of an ablative dose of radiotherapy, with minimal treatment-related toxicity, even in previously resected or irradiated patients. In this real-world cohort, local control with complete response was achieved by 20% of the patients. Further studies are needed to evaluate long-term outcome and late toxicity.
ABSTRACT
Background: We present our experience with MR-guided stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) for 200 consecutive patients with prostate cancer with minimum 3-month follow-up. Methods: Treatment planning included fusion of the 0.35-Tesla planning MRI with multiparametric MRI and PET-PSMA for Group Grade (GG) 2 or higher and contour review with an expert MRI radiologist. No fiducials or rectal spacers were used. Prescription dose was 36.25 Gy in 5 fractions over 2 weeks to the entire prostate with 3-mm margins. Daily plan was adapted if tumor and organs at risk (OAR) doses differed significantly from the original plan. The prostate was monitored during treatment that was automatically interrupted if the target moved out of the PTV range. Results: Mean age was 72 years. Clinical stage was T1c, 85.5%; T2, 13%; and T3, 1.5%. In addition, 20% were GG1, 50% were GG2, 14.5% were GG3, 13% were GG4, and one patient was GG5. PSA ranged from 1 to 77 (median, 6.2). Median prostate volume was 57cc, and 888/1000 (88%) fractions required plan adaptation. The most common acute GU toxicity was Grade I, 31%; dysuria and acute gastrointestinal toxicity were rare. Three patients required temporary catheterization. Prostate size of over 100cc was associated with acute fatigue, urinary hesitance, and catheter insertion. Prostate Specific Antigen (PSA) decreased in 99% of patients, and one patient had regional recurrence. Conclusion: MR-guided prostate SBRT shows low acute toxicity and excellent short-term outcomes. Real-time MRI ensures accurate positioning and SBRT delivery.