The NeST (Neoadjuvant systemic therapy in breast cancer) study: National Practice Questionnaire of United Kingdom multi-disciplinary decision making.

BACKGROUND: Neoadjuvant systemic therapy (NST) is increasingly used in the treatment of breast cancer, yet it is clear that there is significant geographical variation in its use in the UK. This study aimed to examine stated practice across UK breast units, in terms of indications for use, radiological monitoring, pathological reporting of treatment response, and post-treatment surgical management. METHODS: Multidisciplinary teams (MDTs) from all UK breast units were invited to participate in the NeST study. A detailed questionnaire assessing current stated practice was distributed to all participating units in December 2017 and data collated securely usingREDCap. Descriptive statistics were calculated for each questionnaire item. RESULTS: Thirty-nine MDTs from a diverse range of hospitals responded. All MDTs routinely offered neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) to a median of 10% (range 5-60%) of patients. Neoadjuvant endocrine therapy (NET) was offered to a median of 4% (range 0-25%) of patients by 66% of MDTs. The principal indication given for use of neoadjuvant therapy was for surgical downstaging. There was no consensus on methods of radiological monitoring of response, and a wide variety of pathological reporting systems were used to assess tumour response. Twenty-five percent of centres reported resecting the original tumour footprint, irrespective of clinical/radiological response. Radiologically negative axillae at diagnosis routinely had post-NACT or post-NET sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) in 73.0 and 84% of centres respectively, whereas 16% performed SLNB pre-NACT. Positive axillae at diagnosis would receive axillary node clearance at 60% of centres, regardless of response to NACT. DISCUSSION: There is wide variation in the stated use of neoadjuvant systemic therapy across the UK, with general low usage of NET. Surgical downstaging remains the most common indication of the use of NAC, although not all centres leverage the benefits of NAC for de-escalating surgery to the breast and/or axilla. There is a need for agreed multidisciplinary guidance for optimising selection and management of patients for NST. These findings will be corroborated in phase II of the NeST study which is a national collaborative prospective audit of NST utilisation and clinical outcomes.

Radiotherapy Trial Set-up in the UK: Identifying Inefficiencies and Potential Solutions.

AIMS: Radiotherapy clinical trials are integral to the development of new treatments to improve the outcomes of patients with cancer. A collaborative study by the National Cancer Research Institute Clinical and Translational Radiotherapy Research Working Group and the National Institute for Health Research was carried out to understand better if and why inefficiencies occur in the set-up of radiotherapy trials in the UK. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Two online surveys collected information on the time taken for UK radiotherapy trials to reach key milestones during set-up and the research support currently being provided to radiotherapy centres to enable efficient clinical trial set-up. Semi-structured interviews with project managers and chief investigators identified better ways of working to improve trial set-up in the future. RESULTS: The timelines for the set-up of 39 UK radiotherapy trials were captured in an online survey showing that the median time from grant approval to trial opening was 600 days (range 169-1172). There were 38 responses from radiotherapy centres to a survey asking about the current support provided for radiotherapy research. Most of these centres have more than one type of staff member dedicated to supporting radiotherapy research. The most frequent barrier to radiotherapy trial set-up identified was lack of physicists' time and lack of time for clinical oncologists to carry out research activities. Four main themes around trial set-up were identified from semi-structured interviews: the importance of communication and building relationships, the previous experience of the chief investigator and clinical trials units, a lack of resources and having the time and personnel required to produce trial documentation and to process trial approval requests. CONCLUSIONS: This unique, collaborative project has provided up to date information about the current landscape of trial set-up and research support in the UK and identified several avenues on which to focus future efforts in order to support the excellent radiotherapy trial work carried out across the UK.

The NeST (neoadjuvant systemic therapy in breast cancer) study - Protocol for a prospective multi-centre cohort study to assess the current utilization and short-term outcomes of neoadjuvant systemic therapies in breast cancer.

INTRODUCTION: Neoadjuvant systemic therapy (NST) has several potential advantages in the treatment of breast cancer. However, there is currently considerable variation in NST use across the UK. The NeST study is a national, prospective, multicentre cohort study that will investigate current patterns of care with respect to NST in the UK. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Phase 1 - a national practice questionnaire (NPQ) to survey current practice.Phase 2 - a multi-centre prospective cohort study of breast cancer patients, undergoing NST.Women undergoing NST as their MDT recommended primary breast cancer treatment between December 2017 and May 2018 will be included. The breast surgery and oncological professional associations and the trainee research collaborative networks will encourage participation by all breast cancer centres.Patient demographics, radiological, oncological, surgical and pathological data will be collected, including complications and the need for further intervention/treatment. Data will be collated to establish current practice in the UK, regarding NST usage and variability of access and provision of these therapies. Prospective data on 600 patients from ~50 centres are anticipated.Trial registration: ISRCTN11160072. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Research ethics approval is not required for this study, as per the online Health Research Authority decision tool. The information obtained will provide valuable insights to help patients make informed decisions about their treatment. These data should establish current practice in the UK concerning NST, inform future service delivery as well as identifying further research questions.This protocol will be disseminated through the Mammary Fold Academic Research Collaborative (MFAC), the Reconstructive Surgery Trials Network and the Association of Breast Surgery. Participating units will have access to their own data and collective results will be presented at relevant conferences and published in appropriate peer-reviewed journals, as well as being made accessible to relevant patient groups.

A Dosimetric Comparison of Breast Radiotherapy Techniques to Treat Locoregional Lymph Nodes Including the Internal Mammary Chain.

AIMS: Radiotherapy target volumes in early breast cancer treatment increasingly include the internal mammary chain (IMC). In order to maximise survival benefits of IMC radiotherapy, doses to the heart and lung should be minimised. This dosimetry study compared the ability of three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy, arc therapy and proton beam therapy (PBT) techniques with and without breath-hold to achieve target volume constraints while minimising dose to organs at risk (OARs). MATERIALS AND METHODS: In 14 patients' datasets, seven IMC radiotherapy techniques were compared: wide tangent (WT) three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy, volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) and PBT, each in voluntary deep inspiratory breath-hold (vDIBH) and free breathing (FB), and tomotherapy in FB only. Target volume coverage and OAR doses were measured for each technique. These were compared using a one-way ANOVA with all pairwise comparisons tested using Bonferroni's multiple comparisons test, with adjusted P-values ≤ 0.05 indicating statistical significance. RESULTS: One hundred per cent of WT(vDIBH), 43% of WT(FB), 100% of VMAT(vDIBH), 86% of VMAT(FB), 100% of tomotherapy FB and 100% of PBT plans in vDIBH and FB passed all mandatory constraints. However, coverage of the IMC with 90% of the prescribed dose was significantly better than all other techniques using VMAT(vDIBH), PBT(vDIBH) and PBT(FB) (mean IMC coverage ± 1 standard deviation = 96.0% ± 4.3, 99.8% ± 0.3 and 99.0% ± 0.2, respectively). The mean heart dose was significantly reduced in vDIBH compared with FB for both the WT (P < 0.0001) and VMAT (P < 0.0001) techniques. There was no advantage in target volume coverage or OAR doses for PBT(vDIBH) compared with PBT(FB). CONCLUSIONS: Simple WT radiotherapy delivered in vDIBH achieves satisfactory coverage of the IMC while meeting heart and lung dose constraints. However, where higher isodose coverage is required, VMAT(vDIBH) is the optimal photon technique. The lowest OAR doses are achieved by PBT, in which the use of vDIBH does not improve dose statistics.

Can Interrogation of Tumour Characteristics Lead us to Safely Omit Adjuvant Radiotherapy in Patients with Early Breast Cancer?

Adjuvant radiotherapy after breast-conserving surgery has been an important component of the standard of care for early breast cancer. Improvements in breast cancer care have resulted in a substantial reduction in local relapse rates over recent decades. Although the proportional benefits of adjuvant radiotherapy are similar for different prognostic risk groups of patients, the absolute benefits depend on the risk of relapse and therefore vary considerably between prognostic groups. Radiotherapy is not without risk and for some patients at very low risk of relapse the risks of radiotherapy may outweigh the benefit, leading to potential overtreatment. Randomised controlled trial (RCT) evidence shows that omission of radiotherapy in low risk early breast cancer does not reduce overall survival or increase breast cancer mortality and local recurrences are salvageable. Despite this there has not been a change in practice regarding omission of radiotherapy. The reasons for this may include challenges in patient selection. Recent advances in immunohistochemistry and genomic profiling may improve risk stratification and the development of biomarkers to directed therapies. Several RCTs have quantified the benefit of radiotherapy in reducing local relapse. Where a treatment benefit is known but is considered to be so small not to be clinically relevant then alternatives to RCTs may be considered to answer the question of need. This is because we can assess risk against a fixed 'absolute' boundary rather than needing a randomised comparator. The prospective cohort study is an alternative to the RCT design to answer the question of need for radiotherapy. The feasibility of recruitment into biomarker-directed de-escalation studies will become apparent as more studies open. The challenge is to determine if we are able to accurately risk stratify patients and avoid unnecessary toxicity, thereby tailoring the need for adjuvant breast radiotherapy on an individual patient basis.

Preoperative breast radiation therapy: Indications and perspectives.

Preoperative breast radiation therapy (RT) is not a new concept, but older studies failed to change practice. More recently, there has been interest in revisiting preoperative RT using modern techniques. This current perspective discusses the indications, summarises the published literature and then highlights current clinical trials, with particular attention to combining with novel drugs and optimising associated translational research.

Treatment of the axilla in patients with primary breast cancer and low burden axillary disease: Limitations of the evidence from randomised controlled trials.

Invasive breast cancer is the second most common cancer worldwide. It is known to metastasise to the regional axillary lymph nodes but there has been debate over what is the best way to stage and treat the axilla in patients presenting with primary breast cancer. Multiple trials over the last two decades have led to a change in practice from routine axillary lymph node dissection to sentinel lymph node biopsy in patients who are clinically lymph node negative preoperatively. This has resulted in new questions regarding subsequent treatment of some patients. This review will critically appraise the evidence on axillary treatment in patients with low burden axillary disease and highlight limitations of relevant randomised controlled trials.

The Cambridge Breast Intensity-modulated Radiotherapy Trial: Comparison of Clinician- versus Patient-reported Outcomes.

AIMS: Breast radiotherapy-associated toxicity is often reported using clinical and photographic assessments. The addition of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) is becoming more common. This study investigated the concordance between clinician- and patient-reported outcomes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The Cambridge Breast Intensity-modulated Radiotherapy (IMRT) trial prospectively collected data on clinician assessment and PROMs at 2 and 5 years after breast radiotherapy. Clinician assessment included physical examination and photographic assessment. PROMs included European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) BR23 questionnaire and four breast radiotherapy-specific questions. The correlation between patient and clinician scores were analysed on an independent patient basis using percentage agreement, Cohen's kappa coefficient (k) and Bowker's test of symmetry. The analysis was repeated after stratifying patients based on age, baseline Hospital Anxiety and Depression Score (HADS) and baseline body image score. RESULTS: At 2 and 5 years, a weak level of concordance was seen between the clinician-based assessment and PROMS for all the five toxicity end points (k = 0.05-0.21), with individual patient-based agreement of 32.9-78.3% and a highly discordant Bowker's test of symmetry (P < 0.001). The most frequently reported moderate-severe toxicity by patients was change in breast appearance (14% at both 2 and 5 years), whereas it was breast induration (36% and 25% at 2 and 5 years, respectively) by the clinicians. The lack of concordance was not affected by patient's age, baseline HADS and baseline body image score. CONCLUSIONS: This study found that moderate-severe toxicity reported by patients is low and the overall concordance between clinicians and patients is low. This could be due to methodological limitations or alternatively reflects the subjective nature of PROMs. Incorporation of a patient's perception on treatment-related toxicity will have important implications for treatment decisions and follow-up care.

The effect of image guidance on dose distributions in breast boost radiotherapy.

AIMS: To determine the effect of image-guided radiotherapy on the dose distributions in breast boost treatments. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Computed tomography images from a cohort of 60 patients treated within the IMPORT HIGH trial (CRUK/06/003) were used to create sequential and concomitant boost treatment plans (30 cases each). Two treatment plans were created for each case using tumour bed planning target volume (PTV) margins of 5 mm (achieved with image-guided radiotherapy) and 8 mm (required for bony anatomy verification). Dose data were collected for breast, lung and heart; differences with margin size were tested for statistical significance. RESULTS: A median decrease of 29 cm(3) (range 11-193 cm(3)) of breast tissue receiving 95% of the prescribed dose was observed where image-guided radiotherapy margins were used. Decreases in doses to lungs, contralateral breast and heart were modest, but statistically significant (P < 0.01). Plan quality was compromised with the 8 mm PTV margin in one in eight sequential boost plans and one third of concomitant boost plans. Tumour bed PTV coverage was <95% (>91%) of the prescribed dose in 12 cases; in addition, the required partial breast median dose was exceeded in nine concomitant boost cases by 0.5-3.7 Gy. CONCLUSIONS: The use of image guidance and, hence, a reduced tumour bed PTV margin, in breast boost radiotherapy resulted in a modest reduction in radiation dose to breast, lung and heart tissues. Reduced margins enabled by image guidance were necessary to discriminate between dose levels to multiple PTVs in the concomitant breast boost plans investigated.