Premastectomy Radiotherapy and Immediate Breast Reconstruction: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Premastectomy radiotherapy (PreMRT) is a new treatment sequence to avoid the adverse effects of radiotherapy on the final breast reconstruction while achieving the benefits of immediate breast reconstruction (IMBR). Objective: To evaluate outcomes among patients who received PreMRT and regional nodal irradiation (RNI) followed by mastectomy and IMBR. Design, Setting, and Participants: This was a phase 2 single-center randomized clinical trial conducted between August 3, 2018, and August 2, 2022, evaluating the feasibility and safety of PreMRT and RNI (including internal mammary lymph nodes). Patients with cT0-T3, N0-N3b breast cancer and a recommendation for radiotherapy were eligible. Intervention: This trial evaluated outcomes after PreMRT followed by mastectomy and IMBR. Patients were randomized to receive either hypofractionated (40.05 Gy/15 fractions) or conventionally fractionated (50 Gy/25 fractions) RNI. Main Outcome and Measures: The primary outcome was reconstructive failure, defined as complete autologous flap loss. Demographic, treatment, and outcomes data were collected, and associations between multiple variables and outcomes were evaluated. Analysis was performed on an intent-to-treat basis. Results: Fifty patients were enrolled. Among 49 evaluable patients, the median age was 48 years (range, 31-72 years), and 46 patients (94%) received neoadjuvant systemic therapy. Twenty-five patients received 50 Gy in 25 fractions to the breast and 45 Gy in 25 fractions to regional nodes, and 24 patients received 40.05 Gy in 15 fractions to the breast and 37.5 Gy in 15 fractions to regional nodes, including internal mammary lymph nodes. Forty-eight patients underwent mastectomy with IMBR, at a median of 23 days (IQR, 20-28.5 days) after radiotherapy. Forty-one patients had microvascular autologous flap reconstruction, 5 underwent latissimus dorsi pedicled flap reconstruction, and 2 had tissue expander placement. There were no complete autologous flap losses, and 1 patient underwent tissue expander explantation. Eight of 48 patients (17%) had mastectomy skin flap necrosis of the treated breast, of whom 1 underwent reoperation. During follow-up (median, 29.7 months [range, 10.1-65.2 months]), there were no locoregional recurrences or distant metastasis. Conclusions and Relevance: This randomized clinical trial found PreMRT and RNI followed by mastectomy and microvascular autologous flap IMBR to be feasible and safe. Based on these results, a larger randomized clinical trial of hypofractionated vs conventionally fractionated PreMRT has been started (NCT05774678). Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02912312.

Interplay of Oncoplastic Reconstruction and Adjuvant Radiation Therapy in Breast Cancer.

Purpose: Oncoplastic breast surgery (OBS) combines breast cancer tumor removal with the cosmetic benefits of plastic surgery at the time of breast-conserving surgery. Potential advantages of OBS include wider surgical margins around the tumor bed, while the natural shape and appearance of the breast are maintained more than standard lumpectomy procedures. However, limited information is available regarding the potential effect on adjuvant radiation treatment planning. Materials and Methods: Women with localized breast cancer undergoing lumpectomy with immediate OBS and adjuvant radiation therapy between 2014 and 2019 were reviewed. OBS was performed using volume displacement techniques and patients received whole-breast irradiation with 3-dimensional conformal radiation therapy. Results: Volume of additional ipsilateral breast tissue removed during OBS ranged from 21 to 2086 cm3 (median, 304 cm3), 29% of patients had >500 cm3 of tissue removed. Surgical margins were positive in 12.5% and were not affected by volume of breast tissue removed (445 vs 439 cm3). Patients with surgical clips more often received a lumpectomy bed boost (75.9% vs 50.0%), boost volumes were on average 157 cm3 with clips versus 205 cm3 without clips. Mean V105 was comparable in patients with >500 cm3 tissue removed and irradiated breast volume >1000 cm3, while higher absolute volumes were found in patients with >26 cm posterior separation (58.0 cm3 vs 102.7 cm3; P = .07). No meaningful difference was observed in Dmax or radiation coverage (95% of the volume receiving 95% of the prescription dose) for patients with >26 cm posterior separation, >500 cm3 of breast tissue removed, or irradiated breast volume >1000 cm3. Conclusions: Radiation dosimetry plans for patients undergoing oncoplastic surgery were acceptable and no significant radiation or surgical advantage was gained in patients with more tissue removed. Our study stresses the importance of clear communication between surgeons and radiation oncologists about sufficient marking of the lumpectomy cavity, using practices that minimize the need for re-excisions and minimize lumpectomy cavity disruption during rearrangement.

Oncoplastic Reconstruction in the Setting of Prior Cosmetic Augmentation.

BACKGROUND: This study explores the surgical management and reconstruction options for augmented breasts in the context of breast conservation therapy (BCT) for breast cancer. We hypothesized that there would be no difference in the rates of complications, revisions, or patient satisfaction in patients who maintained their breast augmentation versus those that had their implants removed in the context of BCT. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective review of 142 patients who underwent BCT at a single center from March 2016 to March 2022. The study included patients who had a preexistent cosmetic augmentation at the time of breast cancer diagnosis and BCT. Patient demographics, clinical and treatment characteristics, breast implant details, reconstructive technique, complications, and revisions were recorded. Patient-reported outcomes were assessed using the BREAST-Q Breast-Conserving Therapy module. RESULTS: Ninety-three (65.5%) patients chose to maintain their implants, while 49 (34.5%) elected to have them removed during BCT. Patients with submuscular implants were more likely to maintain their implants. Oncoplastic mastopexy was associated with higher complication rates, particularly in patients opting for implant downsizing. However, multivariate logistic regression did not identify implant management strategy as an independent predictor for complications or revisions. Surgical site infection was the only predictor of implant explantation. Patient-reported outcomes did not differ significantly between the different implant management cohorts. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates that maintaining breast implants during BCT does not increase the risk of complications or revisions. Overall, BCT in augmented women was found to be a safe approach, with high patient satisfaction.

Subpectoral Implant Placement Is Not Protective against Postmastectomy Radiotherapy-Related Complications Compared to Prepectoral Placement.

BACKGROUND: Postmastectomy radiotherapy (PMRT) is associated with altered cosmetic outcomes and higher complication rates in implant-based breast reconstruction (IBR). Conventional wisdom suggests that muscle coverage is somewhat protective against PMRT-related complications. In this study, the authors compared surgical outcomes in patients who underwent two-stage prepectoral versus subpectoral IBR in the setting of PMRT. METHODS: The authors performed a retrospective cohort study of patients who underwent mastectomy and PMRT with two-stage IBR from 2016 to 2019. The primary outcome was breast-related complications, including device infection; the secondary outcome was device explantation. RESULTS: The authors identified 179 reconstructions (101 prepectoral and 78 subpectoral) in 172 patients with a mean follow-up time of 39.7 ± 14.4 months. There were no differences between the prepectoral and subpectoral reconstructions in rates of breast-related complications (26.7% and 21.8%, respectively; P = 0.274), device infection (18.8% and 15.4%, respectively; P = 0.307), skin flap necrosis (5.0% and 1.3%, respectively; P = 0.232), or device explantation (20.8% and 14.1%, respectively; P = 0.117). In adjusted models, compared with prepectoral device placement, subpectoral device placement was not associated with a lower risk of breast-related complications [hazard ratio (HR), 0.75; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.41 to 1.36], device infection (HR, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.35 to 1.49), or device explantation (HR, 0.58; 95% CI, 0.28 to 1.19). CONCLUSIONS: Device placement plane was not predictive of complication rates in IBR in the setting of PMRT. Two-stage prepectoral IBR provides safe long-term outcomes with acceptable postoperative complication rates comparable to those with subpectoral IBR, even in the setting of PMRT. CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic, III.

Long-Term Outcomes and Predictors of Response in Breast Cancer Patients with Advanced Nodal Involvement.

BACKGROUND: Advanced nodal disease is associated with poor prognosis. However, modern neoadjuvant systemic therapy (NST) regimens have resulted in higher pathologic complete response (pCR) rates, which are associated with improved survival. We sought to assess contemporary outcomes in patients with advanced nodal involvement and response to NST. STUDY DESIGN: We conducted a single-institution, retrospective study of 521 patients with cN2-3 primary nonmetastatic breast cancer treated with NST followed by surgery and radiation from 2012 to 2018. Descriptive statistics, multivariate Cox regression, and Kaplan-Meier analyses were performed. RESULTS: The mean age was 50.5 years, and median follow-up was 61 (4.7 to 197) months. The majority of patients had hormone receptor-positive (HR+)/HER2-negative tumors (HER2-; n = 242, 47.8%). Most were cT2 (n = 243; 46.6%) or cT3 (n = 139; 26.7%) and 73.3% (n = 382) had cN3 disease. Rate of axillary pCR was 34.2%, and breast and axillary pCR was 19.4% (n = 101). Event-free survival (EFS) at 5 years was 75.1% (95% CI, 0.71 to 0.79). Rate of locoregional recurrence was 6.7%; distant metastatic rate was 29.4%. Axillary pCR with or without breast pCR was significantly associated with longer EFS (p = 0.001). Achieving breast/axillary pCR was an independent predictor of improved EFS (hazard ratio 0.22, p < 0.0001). Having triple-negative disease was associated with worse EFS (hazard ratio 1.74, p = 0.008). CONCLUSIONS: In a high-risk cohort of patients with cN2-3 disease, trimodality therapy was effective in achieving durable EFS. Approximately one-third of patients achieved axillary pCR, which was associated with improved survival. Further studies are needed to accurately determine axillary response in cN2-3 breast cancer after NST in order to develop de-escalation strategies to reduce morbidity associated with axillary surgery.

Patient Interest in Exploring Nonsurgical Treatment Approaches for Early-Stage Breast Cancer: A Qualitative Study.

PURPOSE: Advances in radiation therapy have enabled the ability to deliver ablative treatments, but there has been limited application of these treatments to early-stage breast cancers with a goal of omitting surgery. The purpose of this study was to explore patient interest in pursuing nonsurgical treatment approaches for their early-stage breast cancer. METHODS AND MATERIALS: We conducted a qualitative study involving interviews with 21 patients with early-stage breast cancer who were eligible for participation in a phase 2 clinical trial offering omission of definitive surgery. Interviews were transcribed and an inductive, thematic analysis was performed by 3 independent reviewers to generate themes and subthemes. RESULTS: Data analysis revealed the following factors that affected patient willingness and desire to explore nonsurgical treatment options: (1) perceptions and feelings about their cancer; (2) current quality of life and the level of support available in their daily life; (3) external conversations focusing on family members' and friends' experiences with cancer and/or cancer treatments; (4) personal health care experiences, including their current breast cancer diagnosis; (5) perceptions and feelings about their physicians; (6) conversations with their physicians about their treatment options; and (7) self-identified desire to direct care decisions. Specifically, patients verbalized fearing surgery and surgical recovery; wanting to preserve their breast(s); the prior negative surgical experiences of friends, family, and themselves; a desire to receive treatment per the latest research; wanting to match the level of treatment with the severity of their cancer; and other comorbidities as reasons for wanting to explore omitting surgery. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings demonstrate an unmet need directed by patient interest to explore nonsurgical options for early-stage, biologically favorable breast cancer. These results may shape conversations around shared decision-making and clinical trial design, and result in more personalized treatment options for women with early-stage breast cancer.

Automated contouring and statistical process control for plan quality in a breast clinical trial.

Background and purpose: Automatic review of breast plan quality for clinical trials is time-consuming and has some unique challenges due to the lack of target contours for some planning techniques. We propose using an auto-contouring model and statistical process control to independently assess planning consistency in retrospective data from a breast radiotherapy clinical trial. Materials and methods: A deep learning auto-contouring model was created and tested quantitatively and qualitatively on 104 post-lumpectomy patients' computed tomography images (nnUNet; train/test: 80/20). The auto-contouring model was then applied to 127 patients enrolled in a clinical trial. Statistical process control was used to assess the consistency of the mean dose to auto-contours between plans and treatment modalities by setting control limits within three standard deviations of the data's mean. Two physicians reviewed plans outside the limits for possible planning inconsistencies. Results: Mean Dice similarity coefficients comparing manual and auto-contours was above 0.7 for breast clinical target volume, supraclavicular and internal mammary nodes. Two radiation oncologists scored 95% of contours as clinically acceptable. The mean dose in the clinical trial plans was more variable for lymph node auto-contours than for breast, with a narrower distribution for volumetric modulated arc therapy than for 3D conformal treatment, requiring distinct control limits. Five plans (5%) were flagged and reviewed by physicians: one required editing, two had clinically acceptable variations in planning, and two had poor auto-contouring. Conclusions: An automated contouring model in a statistical process control framework was appropriate for assessing planning consistency in a breast radiotherapy clinical trial.

Patient-Reported Outcomes of Omission of Breast Surgery Following Neoadjuvant Systemic Therapy: A Nonrandomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Patients should have an active role in decisions about pursuing or forgoing specific therapies in treatment de-escalation trials. Objective: To evaluate longitudinal patient-reported outcomes (PROs) encompassing decisional comfort and health-related quality of life (HRQOL) among patients who elected to enroll in a clinical trial evaluating radiotherapy alone, without breast surgery, for invasive breast cancers with exceptional response to neoadjuvant systemic therapy (NST). Design, Setting, and Participants: Prospective, single-group, phase 2 clinical trial at 7 US medical centers. Women aged 40 years or older with invasive cT1-2 N0-1 M0 triple-negative or human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (ERBB2)-positive breast cancer with no pathologic evidence of residual disease following standard NST enrolled from March 6, 2017, to November 9, 2021. Validated PRO measures were administered at baseline and 6, 12, and 36 months post-radiotherapy. Data were analyzed from January to February 2023. Interventions: PRO measures included the Decision Regret Scale (DRS), Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Lymphedema (FACT-B+4), and Breast Cancer Treatment Outcomes Scale (BCTOS). Main Outcomes and Measures: Changes in PRO measure scores and subscores over time. Results: Among 31 patients, the median (IQR) age was 61 (56-66) years, 26 (84%) were White, and 26 (84%) were non-Hispanic. A total of 15 (48%) had triple-negative disease and 16 (52%) had ERBB2-positive disease. Decisional comfort was high at baseline (median [IQR] DRS score 10 [0-25] on a 0-100 scale, with higher scores indicating higher decisional regret) and significantly increased over time (median [IQR] DRS score at 36 months, 0 [0-20]; P < .001). HRQOL was relatively high at baseline (median [IQR] FACT-B composite score 121 [111-134] on a 0-148 scale, with higher scores indicating higher HRQOL) and significantly increased over time (median [IQR] FACT-B score at 36 months, 128 [116-137]; P = .04). Perceived differences between the affected breast and contralateral breast were minimal at baseline (median [IQR] BCTOS score 1.05 [1.00-1.23] on a 1-4 scale, with higher scores indicating greater differences) and increased significantly over time (median [IQR] BCTOS score at 36 months, 1.36 [1.18-1.64]; P < .001). At 36 months postradiotherapy, the cosmetic subscore was 0.45 points higher than baseline (95% CI, 0.16-0.74; P = .001), whereas function, pain, and edema subscores were not significantly different than baseline. Conclusions and Relevance: In this nonrandomized phase 2 clinical trial, analysis of PROs demonstrated an overall positive experience for trial participants, with longitudinal improvements in decisional comfort and overall HRQOL over time and minimal lasting adverse effects of therapy. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02945579.

Prospective, early longitudinal assessment of lymphedema-related quality of life among patients with locally advanced breast cancer: The foundation for building a patient-centered screening program.

BACKGROUND: We examined how breast cancer-related lymphedema (BCRL) affects health-related quality of life (HRQOL), productivity, and compliance with therapeutic interventions to guide structuring BCRL screening programs. METHODS: We prospectively followed consecutive breast cancer patients who underwent axillary lymph node dissection (ALND) with arm volume screening and measures assessing patient-reported health-related quality of life (HRQOL) and perceptions of BCRL care. Comparisons by BCRL status were made with Mann-Whitney U, Chi-square, Fisher's exact, or t tests. Trends over time from ALND were assessed with linear mixed-effects models. RESULTS: With a median follow-up of 8 months in 247 patients, 46% self-reported ever having BCRL, a proportion that increased over time. About 73% reported fear of BCRL, which was stable over time. Further in time from ALND, patients were more likely to report that BCRL screening reduced fear. Patient-reported BCRL was associated with higher soft tissue sensation intensity, biobehavioral, and resource concerns, absenteeism, and work/activity impairment. Objectively measured BCRL had fewer associations with outcomes. Most patients reported performing prevention exercises, but compliance decreased over time; patient-reported BCRL was not associated with exercise frequency. Fear of BCRL was positively associated with performing prevention exercises and using compressive garments. CONCLUSIONS: Both incidence and fear of BCRL were high after ALND for breast cancer. Fear was associated with improved therapeutic compliance, but compliance decreased over time. Patient-reported BCRL was more strongly associated with worse HRQOL and productivity than was objective BCRL. Screening programs must support patients' psychological needs and aim to sustain long-term compliance with recommended interventions.

Surgical and Patient-Reported Outcomes of 694 Two-Stage Prepectoral versus Subpectoral Breast Reconstructions.

BACKGROUND: Opinion regarding the optimal plane for prosthetic device placement in breast reconstruction patients has evolved. The purpose of this study was to assess the differences in complication rates and patient satisfaction between patients who underwent prepectoral and subpectoral implant-based breast reconstruction (IBR). METHODS: The authors conducted a retrospective cohort study of patients who underwent two-stage IBR at their institution from 2018 to 2019. Surgical and patient-reported outcomes were compared between patients who received a prepectoral versus a subpectoral tissue expander. RESULTS: A total of 694 reconstructions in 481 patients were identified (83% prepectoral, 17% subpectoral). The mean body mass index was higher in the prepectoral group (27 versus 25 kg/m 2 , P = 0.001), whereas postoperative radiotherapy was more common in the subpectoral group (26% versus 14%, P = 0.001). The overall complication rate was very similar, with 29.3% in the prepectoral and 28.9% in the subpectoral group ( P = 0.887). Rates of individual complications were also similar between the two groups. A multiple-frailty model showed that device location was not associated with overall complications, infection, major complications, or device explantation. Mean scores for Satisfaction with the Breast, Psychosocial Well-Being, and Sexual Well-Being were similar between the two groups. Median time to permanent implant exchange was significantly longer in the subpectoral group (200 versus 150 days, P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Prepectoral breast reconstruction results in similar surgical outcomes and patient satisfaction compared with subpectoral IBR. CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic, III.

Prediction of breast cancer-related lymphedema by dermal backflow detected with near-infrared fluorescence lymphatic imaging.

PURPOSE: Mild breast cancer-related lymphedema (BCRL) is clinically diagnosed as a 5%-10% increase in arm volume, typically measured no earlier than 3-6 months after locoregional treatment. Early BCRL treatment is associated with better outcomes, yet amid increasing evidence that lymphedema exists in a latent form, treatment is typically delayed until arm swelling is obvious. In this study, we investigated whether near-infrared fluorescence lymphatic imaging (NIRF-LI) surveillance could characterize early onset of peripheral lymphatic dysfunction as a predictor of BCRL. METHODS: In a prospective, longitudinal cohort/observational study (NCT02949726), subjects with locally advanced breast cancer who received axillary lymph node dissection and regional nodal radiotherapy (RT) were followed serially, between 2016 and 2021, before surgery, 4-8 weeks after surgery, and 6, 12, and 18 months after RT. Arm volume was measured by perometry, and lymphatic (dys) function was assessed by NIRF-LI. RESULTS: By 18 months after RT, 30 of 42 study subjects (71%) developed mild-moderate BCRL (i.e., ≥ 5% arm swelling relative to baseline), all manifested by "dermal backflow" of lymph into lymphatic capillaries or interstitial spaces. Dermal backflow had an 83% positive predictive value and 86% negative predictive value for BCRL, with a sensitivity of 97%, specificity of 50%, accuracy of 83%, positive likelihood ratio of 1.93, negative likelihood ratio of 0.07, and odds ratio of 29.00. Dermal backflow appeared on average 8.3 months, but up to 23 months, before the onset of mild BCRL. CONCLUSION: BCRL can be predicted by dermal backflow, which often appears months before arm swelling, enabling early treatment before the onset of edema and irreversible tissue changes.

Contemporary Outcomes After Multimodality Therapy in Patients With Breast Cancer Presenting With Ipsilateral Supraclavicular Node Involvement.

PURPOSE: Patients with breast cancer and ipsilateral supraclavicular (SCV) node involvement at the time of diagnosis (TNM cN3c) have historically had poor outcomes. Radiation therapy (RT) has an important role because SCV nodes are not routinely surgically dissected. However, optimal locoregional management, contemporary outcomes, and prognostic factors are not well defined. METHODS AND MATERIALS: We reviewed the data of patients with cN3c breast cancer treated at our institution between 2014 and 2019 with curative intent, including neoadjuvant chemotherapy, surgery, and adjuvant RT. All patients received comprehensive regional RT, including to the SCV nodes. Institutional guidelines recommend a 10-Gy or 16-Gy boost to resolved and unresolved N3 nodes, respectively. Overall survival (OS), recurrence-free survival (RFS), locoregional recurrence-free survival (LRRFS), and supraclavicular recurrence-free survival (SCRFS) were analyzed. RESULTS: Data from 173 consecutive patients were analyzed with a median follow-up time of 2.8 years. The median age was 54 years, 76 patients (44%) were estrogen receptor positive/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 negative, 100 patients (58%) had T3/4 disease, and 10 patients (6%) underwent a neck dissection. In addition, 156 patients (90%) received a cumulative SCV dose of ≥60 Gy. The 5-year OS, SCRFS, LRRFS, and RFS rates were 73%, 95%, 86%, and 50%, respectively. The 5-year OS rate for a cumulative SCV dose of ≥60 Gy versus <60 Gy was 75% versus 39% (P = .04). In the multivariable analysis, a cumulative SCV dose of ≥60 Gy, extranodal extension, receptor status, and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status were associated with OS. The 5-year SCRFS rates with and without neck dissection were 100% versus 95% (P = .57). Among patients with a postchemotherapy SCV node size of ≥1 cm without neck dissection, the 5-year SCRFS rate was 83%. CONCLUSIONS: In one of the largest series of patients with cN3c breast cancer, multimodality therapy using adjuvant RT with a SCV boost resulted in a 5-year LRRFS rate of 86%. There is a limited role for neck dissection as the 5-year SCRFS rate was 95% overall and 83% for residual SCV disease ≥1 cm after chemotherapy with RT alone. A cumulative SCV dose of ≥60 Gy was associated with improved OS, but not SCRFS, LRRFS, or RFS. A SCV boost should be considered in these patients as treatment was well-tolerated. Despite advances in systemic therapy, nearly half of patients developed distant metastases, highlighting the need for close observation after treatment.

The mammographic appearance of the BioMonitor implantable loop recorder.

The imaging appearance of implantable loop recorders (ILR's) have been described in literature (Steinberger and Margolies, 2017; Mayo and Leung, 2017; Tsau and Berger, 2004)1-3; however, the mammographic appearance of the BioMonitor ILR produced by BIOTRONIK has not been described. It is important for radiologists interpreting breast imaging to become familiar with the appearance of different implantable cardiac devices on mammograms in order to create accurate reports and adjust imaging protocols to improve imaging quality and lessen patient discomfort as needed.

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.

Current Therapeutic Approaches to DCIS.

Treatment for ductal carcinoma in-situ (DCIS) has historically been extrapolated from studies of invasive breast cancer. Accepted local therapy approaches range from small local excisions, with or without radiation, to bilateral mastectomies. Systemic treatment with endocrine therapy is often recommended for hormone positive patients. With improvements in imaging, pathologic review, and treatment techniques in the modern era, combined with new information regarding tumor biology, the management of DCIS is rapidly evolving. A multidisciplinary approach to treatment is now more important than ever, with a shift towards de-escalating therapy to reduce treatment related toxicity. This review focuses on nuances of clinical management of DCIS in the modern era, highlighting key differences between DCIS as compared to invasive breast cancer. The American Cancer Society (ACS) currently recommends beginning screening with annual mammograms for women age 45, with the option to start at age 40. As treatment of DCIS has not been shown to impact survival, the USPSTF has more conservative screening recommendations of biennial mammograms from age 50-74. Unlike invasive breast cancer, DCIS is almost exclusively diagnosed by mammographic detection, and lymph node evaluation is not recommended. Pathologic review of biopsy specimens should follow the guidelines of the College of American Pathologists. Surgical management options include breast conservation, mastectomy, or possibly nipple sparing mastectomy, with upfront sentinel lymph node evaluation in the case of mastectomy. Radiation therapy is generally recommended as a component of breast conserving therapy for patients with DCIS, though in some low risk patients, there is trial data to suggest that adjuvant radiation may be omitted. Techniques for minimizing radiation toxicity should always be emphasized. Endocrine therapy is offered to women with hormone positive DCIS who have undergone lumpectomy for risk reduction, and has the benefit of decreasing incidence of events in both the ipsilateral and contralateral breast. More recent studies have explored use of targeted treatments such as trastuzumab in DCIS for HER2 overexpression. Future directions include tailoring therapy based on patient characteristics and tumor biology. With so many different options for treatment, it is also critical to engage in a discussion with the patient to arrive at a treatment decision that balances patient preferences for disease control versus treatment toxicity, financial toxicity, cosmesis, and quality of life.

Reducing Breast Cancer-Related Lymphedema (BCRL) Through Prospective Surveillance Monitoring Using Bioimpedance Spectroscopy (BIS) and Patient Directed Self-Interventions.

BACKGROUND: Breast cancer-related lymphedema (BCRL) is a chronic progressive disease that results from breast cancer treatment and nodal surgery. NCCN guidelines support baseline measurements with prospective assessment for early diagnosis and treatment. We sought to determine if baseline measurement with bioimpedance spectroscopy (BIS) and serial postoperative evaluations provide early detection amenable to conservative interventions that reduce BCRL. METHODS: Breast cancer patients with unilateral disease high-risk for BCRL from a single institution were evaluated from November 2014 to December 2017. High risk was defined as axillary lymph node dissection with radiation and/or taxane chemotherapy. Patients received preoperative baseline BIS measurements followed by postoperative measurements with at least two follow-ups. Patients with BIS results that were 2 standard deviations above baseline (10 + points) started home conservative interventions for 4-6 weeks. Postintervention measurements were taken to assess improvement. RESULT: A total of 146 patients high-risk for BCRL were included. Forty-nine patients (34%) developed early BCRL and started self-directed treatment. Forty patients (82%) had elevated BIS measurements return to normal baseline range. Nine (6%) patients had persistent BCRL requiring referral for advanced therapy. Patients with persistent BCRL had significant nodal burden on surgical pathology; eight (89%) had N2/N3 disease. Six (76%) with BCRL refractory to conservative measures died of their breast cancer. CONCLUSION: Our results demonstrated that early conservative intervention for breast cancer patients high risk for BCRL who were prospectively monitored by utilizing BIS significantly lowers rates of BCRL. These findings support early prospective screening and intervention for BCRL. Early detection with patient-directed interventions improves patient outcomes and decreases the risk of persistent BCRL.

The Use of Surgery and Radiotherapy as Treatment of Regional Nodes in Breast Cancer Patients.

Ipsilateral regional nodal status is an important independent prognostic factor for patients with breast cancer. Several decisions regarding local therapy are necessary for patients found to have pathologically involved lymph node(s). This article reviews the role of completion dissection and/or radiation therapy in patients found to have positive sentinel lymph node(s), taking into consideration use of mastectomy vs lumpectomy, tumor characteristics, tumor biology, plans for systemic therapy, and patient preferences. Published literature and current guidelines are reviewed, with emphasis on controversial topics such as regional nodal and postmastectomy radiation therapy for patients with one to three positive nodes. Choice of field design in patients undergoing radiation therapy will also be highlighted. Unique clinical situations such as locoregional treatment in patients receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy and the emerging role of tumor biology and molecular assays in local therapy decision making will also be discussed.