Incorporation of Biologic Response Variance Modeling Into the Clinic: Limiting Risk of Brachial Plexopathy and Other Late Effects of Breast Cancer Proton Beam Therapy.

PURPOSE: The relative biologic effectiveness (RBE) rises with increasing linear energy transfer toward the end of proton tracks. Presently, there is no consensus on how RBE heterogeneity should be accounted for in breast cancer proton therapy treatment planning. Our purpose was to determine the dosimetric consequences of incorporating a brachial plexus (BP) biologic dose constraint and to describe other clinical implications of biologic planning. METHODS AND MATERIALS: We instituted a biologic dose constraint for the BP in the context of MC1631, a randomized trial of conventional versus hypofractionated postmastectomy intensity modulated proton therapy (IMPT). IMPT plans of 13 patients treated before the implementation of the biologic dose constraint (cohort A) were compared with IMPT plans of 38 patients treated on MC1631 after its implementation (cohort B) using (1) a commercially available Eclipse treatment planning system (RBE = 1.1); (2) an in-house graphic processor unit-based Monte Carlo physical dose simulation (RBE = 1.1); and (3) an in-house Monte Carlo biologic dose (MCBD) simulation that assumes a linear relationship between RBE and dose-averaged linear energy transfer (product of RBE and physical dose = biologic dose). RESULTS: Before implementation of a BP biologic dose constraint, the Eclipse mean BP D0.01 cm3 was 107%, and the MCBD estimate was 128% (ie, 64 Gy [RBE = biologic dose] in 25 fractions for a 50-Gy [RBE = 1.1] prescription), compared with 100.0% and 116.0%, respectively, after the implementation of the constraint. Implementation of the BP biologic dose constraint did not significantly affect clinical target volume coverage. MCBD plans predicted greater internal mammary node coverage and higher heart dose than Eclipse plans. CONCLUSIONS: Institution of a BP biologic dose constraint may reduce brachial plexopathy risk without compromising target coverage. MCBD plan evaluation provides valuable information to physicians that may assist in making clinical judgments regarding relative priority of target coverage versus normal tissue sparing.

ATR Inhibition Is a Promising Radiosensitizing Strategy for Triple-Negative Breast Cancer.

Triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) is characterized by elevated locoregional recurrence risk despite aggressive local therapies. New tumor-specific radiosensitizers are needed. We hypothesized that the ATR inhibitor, VX-970 (now known as M6620), would preferentially radiosensitize TNBC. Noncancerous breast epithelial and TNBC cell lines were investigated in clonogenic survival, cell cycle, and DNA damage signaling and repair assays. In addition, patient-derived xenograft (PDX) models generated prospectively as part of a neoadjuvant chemotherapy study from either baseline tumor biopsies or surgical specimens with chemoresistant residual disease were assessed for sensitivity to fractionated radiotherapy, VX-970, or the combination. To explore potential response biomarkers, exome sequencing was assessed for germline and/or somatic alterations in homologous recombination (HR) genes and other alterations associated with ATR inhibitor sensitivity. VX-970 preferentially inhibited ATR-Chk1-CDC25a signaling, abrogated the radiotherapy-induced G2-M checkpoint, delayed resolution of DNA double-strand breaks, and reduced colony formation after radiotherapy in TNBC cells relative to normal-like breast epithelial cells. In vivo, VX-970 did not exhibit significant single-agent activity at the dose administered even in the context of genomic alterations predictive of ATR inhibitor responsiveness, but significantly sensitized TNBC PDXs to radiotherapy. Exome sequencing and functional testing demonstrated that combination therapy was effective in both HR-proficient and -deficient models. PDXs established from patients with chemoresistant TNBC were also highly radiosensitized. In conclusion, VX-970 is a tumor-specific radiosensitizer for TNBC. Patients with residual TNBC after neoadjuvant chemotherapy, a subset at particularly high risk of relapse, may be ideally suited for this treatment intensification strategy. Mol Cancer Ther; 17(11); 2462-72. ©2018 AACR.

Patient-reported outcomes of catheter-based accelerated partial breast brachytherapy and whole breast irradiation, a single institution experience.

PURPOSE: Accelerated partial breast irradiation (APBI) and whole breast irradiation (WBI) are treatment options for early-stage breast cancer. The purpose of this study was to compare patient-reported-outcomes (PRO) between patients receiving multi-channel intra-cavitary brachytherapy APBI or WBI. METHODS: Between 2012 and 2015, 131 patients with ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) or early stage invasive breast cancer were treated with adjuvant APBI (64) or WBI (67) and participated in a PRO questionnaire. The linear analog scale assessment (LASA), harvard breast cosmesis scale (HBCS), PRO-common terminology criteria for adverse events- PRO (PRO-CTCAE), and breast cancer treatment outcome scale (BCTOS) were used to assess quality of life (QoL), pain, fatigue, aesthetic and functional status, and breast cosmesis. Comparisons of PROs were performed using t-tests, Wilcoxon rank-sum, Chi square, Fisher exact test, and regression methods. RESULTS: Median follow-up from completion of radiotherapy and questionnaire completion was 13.3 months. There was no significant difference in QoL, pain, or fatigue severity, as assessed by the LASA, between treatment groups (p > 0.05). No factors were found to be predictive of overall QoL on regression analysis. BCTOS health-related QoL scores were similar between treatment groups (p = 0.52).The majority of APBI and WBI patients reported excellent/good breast cosmesis, 88.5% versus 93.7% (p = 0.37). Skin color change (p = 0.011) and breast elevation (p = 0.01) relative to baseline were more common in the group receiving WBI. CONCLUSIONS: APBI and WBI were both associated with favorable patient-reported outcomes in early follow-up. APBI resulted in a lesser degree of patient-reported skin color change and breast elevation relative to baseline.

Immediate tissue expander or implant-based breast reconstruction does not compromise the oncologic delivery of post-mastectomy radiotherapy (PMRT).

PURPOSE: Increasingly, women are choosing immediate breast reconstruction (IBR) following mastectomy. Reports have indicated IBR may compromise post-mastectomy radiotherapy (PMRT). We investigated the impact of IBR on timing of PMRT, target coverage, and doses to organs at risk in a modern radiotherapy practice using advanced planning techniques. METHODS: Between 2013 and 2015, PMRT was delivered to 116 patients (66 mastectomy alone, 50 IBR). PMRT was delivered with a median dose of 50 Gy in 25 fractions. Left-sided patients were treated in breath-hold under image guidance. Differences in dosimetric parameters and time to the initiation of PMRT were assessed between patients with and without reconstruction. RESULTS: Reconstructed patients were younger and had lower clinical stage disease. Reconstruction did not significantly increase the mean time to PMRT initiation (51 days reconstructed vs. 45 days non-reconstructed, p = 0.14) or the number of patients who initiated PMRT within 12 weeks of the last therapeutic intervention (48/50 [96.0] vs. 61/66 [92.4%], p = 0.41). There was no significant difference in the percentage of patients in whom the internal mammary lymph nodes (IMNs) were targeted (72 vs. 80%, p = 0.29) or in IMN target coverage (mean IMN V40.5 Gy 92.6 vs. 94.1%, p = 0.62). Reconstruction did not significantly affect the mean ipsilateral lung V20 (25.4 vs. 26.4%, p = 0.37) or the mean heart dose (2.2 vs. 2.1 Gy, p = 0.63). CONCLUSIONS: In a specialized breast multidisciplinary practice, immediate breast reconstruction did not significantly delay PMRT, compromise target coverage, or increase dose to organs at risk.

Delineation of Internal Mammary Nodal Target Volumes in Breast Cancer Radiation Therapy.

PURPOSE: The optimal clinical target volume for internal mammary (IM) node irradiation is uncertain in an era of increasingly conformal volume-based treatment planning for breast cancer. We mapped the location of gross internal mammary lymph node (IMN) metastases to identify areas at highest risk of harboring occult disease. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Patients with axial imaging of IMN disease were identified from a breast cancer registry. The IMN location was transferred onto the corresponding anatomic position on representative axial computed tomography images of a patient in the treatment position and compared with consensus group guidelines of IMN target delineation. RESULTS: The IMN location in 67 patients with 130 IMN metastases was mapped. The location was in the first 3 intercostal spaces in 102 of 130 nodal metastases (78%), whereas 18 of 130 IMNs (14%) were located caudal to the third intercostal space and 10 of 130 IMNs (8%) were located cranial to the first intercostal space. Of the 102 nodal metastases within the first 3 intercostal spaces, 54 (53%) were located within the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group consensus volume. Relative to the IM vessels, 19 nodal metastases (19%) were located medially with a mean distance of 2.2 mm (SD, 2.9 mm) whereas 29 (28%) were located laterally with a mean distance of 3.6 mm (SD, 2.5 mm). Ninety percent of lymph nodes within the first 3 intercostal spaces would have been encompassed within a 4-mm medial and lateral expansion on the IM vessels. CONCLUSIONS: In women with indications for elective IMN irradiation, a 4-mm medial and lateral expansion on the IM vessels may be appropriate. In women with known IMN involvement, cranial extension to the confluence of the IM vein with the brachiocephalic vein with or without caudal extension to the fourth or fifth interspace may be considered provided that normal tissue constraints are met.