Health-related quality of life of breast cancer patients after accelerated partial breast irradiation using intraoperative or external beam radiotherapy technique.

PURPOSE: To compare health-related quality of life (HRQL) in elderly breast cancer patients between two types of Accelerated Partial Breast Irradiation: intraoperative radiotherapy (IORT) and external beam APBI (EB-APBI). METHODS: Between 2011 and 2016 women ≥60 years undergoing breast conserving therapy for early stage breast cancer were included in a prospective multi-centre cohort study. Patients were treated with electron IORT (1 × 23.3 Gy) or photon EB-APBI (10 × 3.85 Gy daily). HRQL was measured by the EORTC-QLQ C30 and BR23 questionnaires before surgery and at several time points until 1 year. RESULTS: HRQoL data was available of 204 IORT and 158 EB-APBI patients. In longitudinal analyses emotional functioning and future perspective were significantly, but not clinically relevantly, worse in IORT-treated patients, and improved significantly during follow-up in both groups. All other aspects of HRQL slightly worsened after treatment and recovered within 3 months with an improvement until 1 year. Cross-sectional analysis showed that postoperatively fatigue and role functioning were significantly worse in IORT patients compared to EB-APBI patients who were not yet irradiated, but the difference was not clinically relevant. At other timepoints there were no significant differences. Multivariable analysis at 1 year identified comorbidity and systemic therapy as risk factors for a worse global health score (GHS). CONCLUSIONS: EB-APBI and IORT were well tolerated. Despite a temporary deterioration after treatment, all HRQL scales recovered within 3 months resulting in no clinically relevant differences until 1 year between groups nor compared to baseline levels.

Acute toxicity of intraoperative radiotherapy and external beam-accelerated partial breast irradiation in elderly breast cancer patients.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: We investigated the acute toxicity of accelerated partial breast irradiation using external beam (EB-APBI) or intraoperative radiotherapy (IORT) techniques in elderly breast cancer patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Women ≥ 60 years with unifocal breast tumors of ≤ 30 mm were eligible for this prospective multi-center cohort study. IORT was applied with electrons following lumpectomy (23.3 Gy). EB-APBI was delivered using 3D-CRT or IMRT in 10 daily fractions of 3.85 Gy within 6 weeks after surgery. Acute toxicity was scored using the CTCAE v3.0 at 3 months after treatment. Patient-reported symptoms were analyzed using visual analogue scales (VAS) for pain and fatigue (scale 0-10), and single items from the EORTC QLQ-C30 and Breast Cancer questionnaires. RESULTS: In total, 267 (IORT) and 206 (EB-APBI) patients were available for toxicity analysis. More patients experienced ≥ grade 2 CTCAE acute toxicity in the IORT group (10.4% IORT and 4.9% EB-APBI; p = 0.03); grade 3 toxicity was low (3.3% IORT and 1.5% EB-APBI; ns); and no grade 4 toxicity occurred. EB-APBI patients experienced less fatigue direct postoperatively (EORTC p < 0.00, VAS p < 0.00). After 3 months only pain, according to the VAS scale, was significantly worse in the EB-APBI group (p < 0.00). CONCLUSION: Acute toxicity after IORT and EB-APBI treatment is acceptable.

Re-irradiation and hyperthermia for recurrent breast cancer in the orbital region: a case report.

Based on the good results of re-irradiation plus hyperthermia in breast cancer recurrences on the chest wall, it was decided to offer similar treatment to a patient with recurrent metastatic breast cancer in the orbital region. A female patient was diagnosed in 1997 with breast cancer stage T4N0M0. She was treated with six neo-adjuvant chemotherapy courses and mastectomy, followed by hormonal treatment. In December 1998, she was diagnosed with metastatic disease in the medial upper quadrant of the left orbit. This was excised, followed by 40 Gy radiotherapy. Nine months later, the tumour had recurred in the left orbit at the margin of the radiotherapy field. This again was treated with surgery, followed by 30 Gy radiotherapy. Two months thereafter, the eyelid tumour progressed and hormonal therapy was changed, without an effect on the eyelid tumour. Screening gave no evidence of tumour activity elsewhere. The patient preferred treatment with re-irradiation plus hyperthermia to a surgical approach. Eight fractions of 4 Gy were given in 4 weeks, combined with once weekly hyperthermia. One week after treatment, the tumour had regressed completely. The patient died 22 months following treatment. Until last follow-up, a few weeks before death, the patient mentioned a dry left eye for which she used eyedrops, an unchanged vision and no further difficulties. On examination, there was epilation of the eyelids, a slight conjunctival oedema, no subcutaneous fibrosis and no evidence of tumour regrowth. For this patient, a surgical approach would have resulted in loss of the left eye. Toxicity of re-irradiation plus hyperthermia might lead to either a loss of vision or a delayed loss of her left eye due to treatment-induced toxicity. The chosen local treatment resulted in a very good palliative effect, which lasted for the patient's remaining lifetime of 22 months.

Point-counterpoint: what is the optimal trial design to test hyperthermia for carcinoma of the cervix? Point: addition of hyperthermia or cisplatin to radiotherapy for patients with cervical cancer; two promising combinations--no definite conclusions.

Randomized trials have shown that results of radiotherapy in patients with cervical cancer can be improved by combining the treatment with either cisplatin based chemotherapy, or hyperthermia. The studies on both the combination of radiotherapy with chemotherapy, and the combination on radiotherapy with hyperthermia, leave several important questions unanswered. At present, no definite conclusions can be drawn with regard to which combination results in the best therapeutic ratio. Therefore, on both ethical and scientific grounds, the next logical step would be to compare the two types of combined treatment to each other, and each combination with a treatment including all three modalities, in a randomized fashion.