ABSTRACT
Importance: Postmastectomy radiation therapy (PMRT) improves local-regional disease control and patient survival. Hypofractionation (HF) regimens have comparable efficacy and complication rates with improved quality of life compared with conventional fractionation (CF) schedules. However, the use of HF after mastectomy in patients undergoing breast reconstruction has not been prospectively examined. Objective: To compare HF and CF PMRT outcomes after implant-based reconstruction. Design, Setting, and Participants: This randomized clinical trial assessed patients 18 years or older undergoing mastectomy and immediate expander or implant reconstruction for breast cancer (Tis, TX, or T1-3) and unilateral PMRT from March 8, 2018, to November 3, 2021 (median [range] follow-up, 40.4 [15.4-63.0] months), at 16 US cancer centers or hospitals. Analyses were conducted between September and December 2023. Interventions: Patients were randomized 1:1 to HF or CF PMRT. Chest wall doses were 4256 cGy for 16 fractions for HF and 5000 cGy for 25 fractions for CF. Chest wall toxic effects were defined as a grade 3 or higher adverse event. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was the change in physical well-being (PWB) domain of the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Breast (FACT-B) quality-of-life assessment tool at 6 months after starting PMRT, controlling for age. Secondary outcomes included toxic effects and cancer recurrence. Results: Of 400 women (201 in the CF arm and 199 in the HF arm; median [range] age, 47 [23-79] years), 330 patients had PWB scores at baseline and at 6 months. There was no difference in the change in PWB between the study arms (estimate, 0.13; 95% CI, -0.86 to 1.11; P = .80), but there was a significant interaction between age group and study arm (P = .03 for interaction). Patients younger than 45 years had higher 6-month absolute PWB scores if treated with HF rather than CF regimens (23.6 [95% CI, 22.7-24.6] vs 22.0 [95% CI, 20.7-23.3]; P = .047) and reported being less bothered by adverse effects (mean [SD], 3.0 [0.9] in the HF arm and 2.6 [1.2] in the CF arm; P = .02) or nausea (mean [SD], 3.8 [0.4] in the HF arm and 3.6 [0.8] in the CF arm; P = .04). In the as-treated cohort, there were 23 distant (11 in the HF arm and 12 in the CF arm) and 2 local-regional (1 in the HF arm and 1 in the CF arm) recurrences. Chest wall toxic effects occurred in 39 patients (20 in the HF arm and 19 in the CF arm) at a median (IQR) of 7.2 (1.8-12.9) months. Fractionation was not associated with chest wall toxic effects on multivariate analysis (HF arm: hazard ratio, 1.02; 95% CI, 0.52-2.00; P = .95). Fewer patients undergoing HF vs CF regimens had a treatment break (5 [2.7%] vs 15 [7.7%]; P = .03) or required unpaid time off from work (17 [8.5%] vs 34 [16.9%]; P = .02). Conclusions and Relevance: In this randomized clinical trial, the HF regimen did not significantly improve change in PWB compared with the CF regimen. These data add to the increasing experience with HF PMRT in patients with implant-based reconstruction. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03422003.
ABSTRACT
PURPOSE: The Bone Metastases Ensemble Trees for Survival Decision Support Platform (BMETS-DSP) provides patient-specific survival predictions and evidence-based recommendations to guide multidisciplinary management for symptomatic bone metastases. We assessed the clinical utility of the BMETS-DSP through a pilot prepost design in a simulated clinical environment. METHODS: Ten Radiation Oncology physicians reviewed 55 patient cases at two time points: without and then with the use of BMETS-DSP. Assessment included 12-month survival estimate, confidence in and likelihood of sharing estimates with patients, and recommendations for open surgery, systemic therapy, hospice referral, and radiotherapy (RT) regimen. Paired statistics compared pre- versus post-DSP outcomes. Reported statistical significance is P < .05. RESULTS: Pre- versus post-DSP, overestimation of true minus estimated survival time was significantly reduced (mean difference -2.1 [standard deviation 4.1] v -1 month [standard deviation 3.5]). Prediction accuracy was significantly improved at cut points of < 3 (72 v 79%), ≤ 6 (64 v 71%), and ≥ 12 months (70 v 81%). Median ratings of confidence in and likelihood of sharing prognosis significantly increased. Significantly greater concordance was seen in matching use of 1-fraction RT with the true survival < 3 months (70 v 76%) and < 10-fraction RT with the true survival < 12 months (55 v 62%) and appropriate use of open surgery (47% v 53%), without significant changes in selection of hospice referral or systemic therapy. CONCLUSION: This pilot study demonstrates that BMETS-DSP significantly improved physician survival estimation accuracy, prognostic confidence, likelihood of sharing prognosis, and use of prognosis-appropriate RT regimens in the care of symptomatic bone metastases, supporting future multi-institutional validation of the platform.
Subject(s)
Bone Neoplasms , Radiation Oncology , Humans , Pilot Projects , Bone Neoplasms/therapy , Bone Neoplasms/radiotherapy , PrognosisABSTRACT
PURPOSE: Adjacent tissues-in-beam (TIB) may receive substantial incidental doses within standard tangent fields during hypofractioned whole breast irradiation (HF-WBI). To characterize the impact of dose to TIB, we analyzed dosimetric parameters of TIB and associated acute toxicity. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Plans prescribed to 40.5â¯Gy/15 fractions from 4/2016-1/2018 were evaluated. Structures of interest were contoured: (1) TIB: all tissues encompassed by plan 30% isodose lines, (2) breast, (3) non-breast TIB (nTIB): TIB minus contoured breast. Volumes of TIB, breast, and nTIB receiving 100%-107% of prescription dose (V100-V107) were calculated. Twelve patient- and physician-reported acute toxicities were prospectively collected weekly. Correlations between volumetric and dosimetric parameters were assessed. Uni- and multivariable logistic regressions evaluated toxicity grade changes as a function of TIB, breast, and nTIB V100-V107 (in cm3). RESULTS: We evaluated 137 plans. Breast volume was positively correlated with nTIB and nTIB V100 (rhoâ¯=â¯0.52, rhoâ¯=â¯0.30, respectively, both pâ¯<â¯0.001). V107â¯>â¯2 cm3 were noted in 14% of breast and 21% of nTIB volumes. On multivariable analyses, increasing breast and nTIB V100 significantly raised odds of grade 2+ dermatitis and burning/twinging pain, respectively; increasing nTIB V105 elevated odds of hyperpigmentation and burning pain; and increasing nTIB V107 raised odds of burning pain. Threshold volumes for >6-fold odds of developing burning pain were TIB V105â¯>â¯100â¯cm3 and V107â¯>â¯5â¯cm3. CONCLUSIONS: For HF-WBI, doses to nTIB over the prescription predicted acute toxicities independent of breast doses. These data support inclusion of TIB as a region of interest in treatment planning and protocol design.