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.

NCCN Guidelines® Insights: Breast Cancer, Version 4.2023.

The NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology (NCCN Guidelines) for Breast Cancer address all aspects of management for breast cancer. The treatment landscape of metastatic breast cancer is evolving constantly. The therapeutic strategy takes into consideration tumor biology, biomarkers, and other clinical factors. Due to the growing number of treatment options, if one option fails, there is usually another line of therapy available, providing meaningful improvements in survival. This NCCN Guidelines Insights report focuses on recent updates specific to systemic therapy recommendations for patients with stage IV (M1) disease.

Breast Cancer, Version 3.2022, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology.

The therapeutic options for patients with noninvasive or invasive breast cancer are complex and varied. These NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines for Breast Cancer include recommendations for clinical management of patients with carcinoma in situ, invasive breast cancer, Paget disease, phyllodes tumor, inflammatory breast cancer, and management of breast cancer during pregnancy. The content featured in this issue focuses on the recommendations for overall management of ductal carcinoma in situ and the workup and locoregional management of early stage invasive breast cancer. For the full version of the NCCN Guidelines for Breast Cancer, visit NCCN.org.

Partial Breast Reirradiation for Patients With Ipsilateral Breast Tumor Recurrence After Initial Treatment With Breast Conservation for Early Stage Breast Cancer.

PURPOSE: Accelerated partial breast irradiation (APBI), including intraoperative radiation therapy (IORT), is an evidence-based treatment option in patients undergoing breast conserving surgery (BCS) for early-stage breast cancer. However, literature regarding reirradiation for patients with ipsilateral breast tumor recurrences (IBTR) is limited. This prospective study assessed the feasibility and efficacy of using APBI in patients who had prior whole breast irradiation. METHODS AND MATERIALS: This was a single institution, prospective study of patients who were previously treated with BCS and adjuvant whole breast radiation. At the time of enrollment, all had unifocal IBTR, histologically confirmed invasive ductal carcinoma with negative margins after repeat BCS. Patients received either IORT in a single fraction at time of BCS or MammoSite brachytherapy twice daily over 5 days. Follow-up data and patient surveys were collected at 1, 3, 6, 9, and 12 months, then annually for at least a 5-year period. RESULTS: From 2008 to 2014, 13 patients were enrolled. Median time to recurrence after initial course of radiation was 12.5 years. Median follow-up after retreatment was 7.8 years. One patient in the IORT group had a subsequent tumor bed recurrence, yielding a local control of 92%. One patient had distant recurrence. At baseline, 680 reported excellent-good cosmesis compared with 42% at 5 years. All patients indicated total satisfaction with overall treatment experience. CONCLUSIONS: APBI using IORT was well tolerated with excellent local control and may be a reasonable alternative to mastectomy for IBTR. Further study is needed to determine the most suitable candidates for this approach.

NCCN Guidelines® Insights: Breast Cancer, Version 4.2021.

The NCCN Guidelines for Breast Cancer include up-to-date guidelines for clinical management of patients with carcinoma in situ, invasive breast cancer, Paget disease, phyllodes tumor, inflammatory breast cancer, male breast cancer, and breast cancer during pregnancy. These guidelines are developed by a multidisciplinary panel of representatives from NCCN Member Institutions with breast cancer-focused expertise in the fields of medical oncology, surgical oncology, radiation oncology, pathology, reconstructive surgery, and patient advocacy. These NCCN Guidelines Insights focus on the most recent updates to recommendations for adjuvant systemic therapy in patients with nonmetastatic, early-stage, hormone receptor-positive, HER2-negative breast cancer.

Comparison of Radiation With or Without Concurrent Trastuzumab for HER2-Positive Ductal Carcinoma In Situ Resected by Lumpectomy: A Phase III Clinical Trial.

PURPOSE: Preclinical studies report that trastuzumab (T) can boost radiotherapy (RT) effectiveness. The primary aim of the B-43 trial was to assess the efficacy of RT alone vs concurrent RT plus T in preventing recurrence of ipsilateral breast cancer (IBTR) in women with ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Eligibility: Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status 0 or 1, DCIS resected by lumpectomy, known estrogen receptor (ER) and/or progesterone receptor (PgR), and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) status by centralized testing. Whole-breast RT was given concurrently with T. Stratification was by menopausal status, adjuvant endocrine therapy plan, and nuclear grade. Definitive intent-to-treat primary analysis was to be conducted when either 163 IBTR events occurred or all accrued patients were on study ≥ 5 years. RESULTS: There were 2,014 participants who were randomly assigned. Median follow-up time as of December 31, 2019, was 79.2 months. At primary definitive analysis, 114 IBTR events occurred: RT arm, 63 and RT plus T arm, 51 (hazard ratio [HR], 0.81; 95% CI, 0.56 to 1.17; P value = .26). There were 34 who were invasive: RT arm, 18 and RT plus T arm, 20 (HR, 1.11; 95% CI, 0.59 to 2.10; P value = .71). Seventy-six were DCIS: RT arm, 45 and RT plus T arm, 31 (HR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.43 to 1.08; P value = .11). Annual IBTR event rates were: RT arm, 0.99%/y and RT plus T arm, 0.79%/y. The study did not reach the 163 protocol-specified events, so the definitive analysis was triggered by all patients having been on study for ≥ 5 years. CONCLUSION: Addition of T to RT did not achieve the objective of 36% reduction in IBTR rate but did achieve a modest but statistically nonsignificant reduction of 19%. Nonetheless, this trial had negative results. Further exploration of RT plus T is needed in HER2-positive DCIS before its routine delivery in patients with DCIS resected by lumpectomy.

Recommendations for prioritization, treatment, and triage of breast cancer patients during the COVID-19 pandemic. the COVID-19 pandemic breast cancer consortium.

The COVID-19 pandemic presents clinicians a unique set of challenges in managing breast cancer (BC) patients. As hospital resources and staff become more limited during the COVID-19 pandemic, it becomes critically important to define which BC patients require more urgent care and which patients can wait for treatment until the pandemic is over. In this Special Communication, we use expert opinion of representatives from multiple cancer care organizations to categorize BC patients into priority levels (A, B, C) for urgency of care across all specialties. Additionally, we provide treatment recommendations for each of these patient scenarios. Priority A patients have conditions that are immediately life threatening or symptomatic requiring urgent treatment. Priority B patients have conditions that do not require immediate treatment but should start treatment before the pandemic is over. Priority C patients have conditions that can be safely deferred until the pandemic is over. The implementation of these recommendations for patient triage, which are based on the highest level available evidence, must be adapted to current availability of hospital resources and severity of the COVID-19 pandemic in each region of the country. Additionally, the risk of disease progression and worse outcomes for patients need to be weighed against the risk of patient and staff exposure to SARS CoV-2 (virus associated with the COVID-19 pandemic). Physicians should use these recommendations to prioritize care for their BC patients and adapt treatment recommendations to the local context at their hospital.

Breast Cancer, Version 3.2020, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology.

Several new systemic therapy options have become available for patients with metastatic breast cancer, which have led to improvements in survival. In addition to patient and clinical factors, the treatment selection primarily depends on the tumor biology (hormone-receptor status and HER2-status). The NCCN Guidelines specific to the workup and treatment of patients with recurrent/stage IV breast cancer are discussed in this article.

Patterns of Failure Observed in the 2-Step Institution Credentialing Process for NRG Oncology/Radiation Therapy Oncology Group 1005 (NCT01349322) and Lessons Learned.

PURPOSE: To investigate patterns of failure in institutional credentialing submissions to NRG/RTOG 1005 with the aim of improving the quality and consistency for future breast cancer protocols. METHODS AND MATERIALS: NRG/RTOG 1005 allowed the submission of 3-dimensional conformal radiation therapy (3DCRT), intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT), and simultaneous integrated boost (SIB) breast plans. Credentialing required institutions to pass a 2-step quality assurance (QA) process: (1) benchmark, requiring institutions to create a plan with no unacceptable deviations and ≤1 acceptable variation among the dose volume (DV) criteria, and (2) rapid review, requiring each institution's first protocol submission to have no unacceptable deviations among the DV criteria or contours. Overall rates, number of resubmissions, and reasons for resubmission were analyzed for each QA step. RESULTS: In total, 352 institutions participated in benchmark QA and 280 patients enrolled had rapid review QA. Benchmark initial failure rates were similar for 3DCRT (18%), IMRT (17%), and SIB (18%) plans. For 3DCRT and IMRT benchmark plans, ipsilateral lung most frequently failed the DV criteria, and SIB DV failures were seen most frequently for the heart. Rapid review contour initial failures (35%) were due to target rather than organs at risk. For 29% of the rapid review initial failures, the planning target volume boost eval volume was deemed an unacceptable deviation. CONCLUSIONS: The review of the benchmark and rapid review QA submissions indicates that acceptable variations or unacceptable deviations for the ipsilateral lung and heart dose constraints were the most commonly observed cause of benchmark QA failure, and unacceptable deviations in target contouring, rather than normal structure contouring, were the most common cause of rapid review QA failure. These findings suggest that a rigorous QA process is necessary for high quality and homogeneity in radiation therapy in multi-institutional trials of breast cancer to ensure that the benefits of radiation therapy far outweigh the risks.

NCCN Guidelines Insights: Breast Cancer, Version 3.2018.

These NCCN Guidelines Insights highlight the updated recommendations for use of multigene assays to guide decisions on adjuvant systemic chemotherapy therapy for women with hormone receptor-positive, HER2-negative early-stage invasive breast cancer. This report summarizes these updates and discusses the rationale behind them.

Breast Cancer, Version 4.2017, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology.

Ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) of the breast represents a heterogeneous group of neoplastic lesions in the breast ducts. The goal for management of DCIS is to prevent the development of invasive breast cancer. This manuscript focuses on the NCCN Guidelines Panel recommendations for the workup, primary treatment, risk reduction strategies, and surveillance specific to DCIS.

NCCN Guidelines Insights: Breast Cancer, Version 1.2017.

These NCCN Guidelines Insights highlight the important updates/changes to the surgical axillary staging, radiation therapy, and systemic therapy recommendations for hormone receptor-positive disease in the 1.2017 version of the NCCN Guidelines for Breast Cancer. This report summarizes these updates and discusses the rationale behind them. Updates on new drug approvals, not available at press time, can be found in the most recent version of these guidelines at NCCN.org.

Neglecting to screen women between 40 and 49 years old with mammography: what is the impact on treatment morbidity and potential risk reduction?

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study is to determine whether there were significant differences with respect to treatment recommendations, stage at diagnosis, and identification of high-risk lesions for women 40-49 years old undergoing screening mammography (screened) compared to women with a symptom needing a diagnostic evaluation (nonscreened). MATERIALS AND METHODS: We reviewed the pathology results of all imaging-guided biopsies performed at the three breast center locations of University Hospitals Case Medical Center from January 1, 2008, to December 31, 2011. In patients diagnosed with a high-risk lesion or breast cancer, the reason for presentation, pathology, tumor size, stage, receptor characteristics, and treatment were recorded. The chi-square test was used for statistical analysis. RESULTS: Of 230 primary breast cancers, 149 were in the screened group and 81 were considered nonscreened. Nonscreened patients were more likely to undergo chemotherapy (p = 0.042). Eighty-one percent of the high-risk lesions were diagnosed in the screened patients. Screened patients with cancer were significantly more likely to receive a diagnosis at earlier stages (p = 0.001), to have negative axillary lymph nodes (p = 0.005), and to have smaller tumors (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: In addition to the benefits of receiving a diagnosis at earlier stages, with smaller tumors and node negativity, patients with breast cancer undergoing screening mammography aged 40-49 years are less likely to require chemotherapy and its associated morbidities. The majority of high-risk lesions were diagnosed in the screened group, which may lead to the benefit of chemoprevention, lowering their risk of subsequent breast cancer, or screening with MRI, which may diagnose future mammographically occult malignancies.

Postmastectomy radiation therapy.

Many women undergo mastectomy as treatment of their breast cancer either because of personal preference or because of tumor-related factors making mastectomy the preferred surgical option. The use of postmastectomy radiation therapy has been shown to decrease the risk of local recurrence and in some cases improve overall survival. Decisions regarding the need for postmastectomy radiation therapy can be complex and rely on careful review of many factors. Lymph node status, tumor size, tumor grade, receptor status, presence or absence of lymphovascular space invasion, Her-2/neu status, margin width, and patient age all need to be considered when making recommendations for or against postmastectomy radiation therapy. In this article, we provide a review of the relevant literature pertaining to postmastectomy radiation therapy in order to help guide this decision-making process.

Neglecting to screen women between the ages of 40 and 49 years with mammography: what is the impact on breast cancer diagnosis?

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to compare breast cancer stage at diagnosis in two groups of women between 40 and 49 years old: women undergoing screening mammography and women with a symptom needing diagnostic workup. This comparison is indicative of the impact of forgoing screening in this age group, as recommended by the United States Preventive Services Task Force. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective chart review was used to collect the results of imaging-guided core needle biopsies performed in women between the ages of 40 and 49 years from January 1, 2008, to December 31, 2009. In patients diagnosed with breast cancer or a high-risk lesion, the reason for presentation, pathology, tumor size, stage, and receptor characteristics were recorded. The chi-square test was used for statistical analysis. RESULTS: Of 108 primary breast cancers, 71 were detected in the screened group and 37 in the unscreened group. The screened group was significantly more likely to be diagnosed with ductal carcinoma in situ than the unscreened group (22 vs 1, chi-square = 11.6, p = 0.001). Furthermore, screened patients with invasive carcinoma were significantly more likely to be diagnosed at earlier stages (chi-square = 5.02, p = 0.025). The size of invasive breast cancer in the screened group was significantly smaller as well (chi-square = 9.3, p = 0.002). Of the high-risk lesions, atypical ductal hyperplasia (n = 29) and lobular carcinoma in situ (n = 8) were most frequently seen. CONCLUSION: Breast cancer patients undergoing screening mammography were diagnosed at earlier stages with smaller tumors. Screening also allows detection of high-risk lesions, which may prompt chemoprevention and lower subsequent breast cancer risk. We continue to support screening mammography in women between the ages of 40 and 49 years.