RESUMO
PURPOSES: Several studies have shown that simultaneous integrated boost provides better dose homogeneity, improves the biologically effective dose-volume histogram and reduces treatment time compared to sequential boost in breast cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We conducted a systematic review of published trials evaluating simultaneous integrated boost in hypofractionated radiotherapy to analyze the results in terms of overall survival, local control, early and late side effects, and radiotherapy techniques used. RESULTS: Upon 9 articles, the prescribed dose to the whole breast varied from 40 to 46.8 Gy. The number of fractions varies from 15 to 20 fractions. The prescribed dose per fraction to the boost varied from 2.4 Gy per fraction to 3.4 Gy per fraction for a total boost dose from 48 to 52.8 Gy. CONCLUSIONS: Simultaneous integrated boost seems effective and safe when given hypofractionated whole-breast irradiation but needs to be validated in prospective trials.
RESUMO
PURPOSE: The dosimetric analysis of the incidental axillary dose delivered to axillary lymph node levels I-III by different techniques of whole breast irradiation and the analysis of prognostic factors of axillary recurrence of breast cancer. METHODS: We perform a retrospective analysis that includes 171 patients with localized breast carcinoma irradiated at Centre Paul Strauss. To be included in the study, patients had to have a histological confirmation of breast cancer diagnosis, surgical treatment without axillary lymph node dissection (ALND), whole breast irradiation without axillary irradiation by a specific field, and a treatment plan available. RESULTS: Three patients had lymph node recurrence. There was no significant correlation between the maximal or mean dose delivered at the three axillary levels and the risk of axillary lymph node recurrence. There was no significant correlation between the irradiation technique and the risk of axillary lymph node recurrence. Two patients, both in the HT group, had lymphoedema. There was significantly more lymphoedema in the HT group than in the ST and IMRT groups (p < 0.048). The mean dose in level II was significantly higher in the group of patients with lymphoedema (3.45 Gy (1.08; 9.62) vs. 23.4 Gy (23.1; 23.6)) (p < 0.02). CONCLUSION: The irradiation technique has an influence on the incidental dose delivered to the axillary area, but has no influence on the risk of axillary recurrence. The risk of lymphoedema could be related to the use of HT and the mean dose delivered at level II.