Simultaneous Integrated Boost in Once-weekly Hypofractionated Radiotherapy for Breast Cancer in the Elderly: Preliminary Evidence.

AIM: To evaluate once-weekly hypofractionated radiotherapy in elderly patients affected by early breast cancer, reporting acute and late toxicity profiles, and treatment feasibility. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Fifty patients were treated with a hypofractionated regimen: 28.5±2.5 Gy in five fractions at one fraction weekly. Simultaneous integrated boost (SIB) to the tumor bed in high-risk cases. INCLUSION CRITERIA: patients over 70 years old, pT1-2, N0-1a. Acute and late toxicities were assessed based on Radiation Therapy Oncology Group. RESULTS: The median follow-up was 20 months and the median patient age was 79 years. SIB was added for 22 patients (44%). Grade 3-4 acute cutaneous toxicities were not observed; grade 2 toxicity occurred only in four patients (8%). Late subcutaneous tissue toxicity consisted of grade 2 fibrosis in two patients (4%), grade 1 in five (10%) and grade 0 in 41(85%). CONCLUSION: Limiting fraction numbers with a safer profile may improve the management of breast cancer for the elderly.

Novel 10-fraction breast irradiation in prone and supine position: technical, dosimetric and clinical evaluation.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to evaluate retrospectively the planned dose distribution and acute toxicity of adjuvant hypofractionated whole breast radiotherapy (RT) delivered in the prone vs. supine position. METHODS: Twenty-four patients were enrolled; 12 underwent adjuvant RT with a supine setup and 12 with a prone setup. We included patients according to breast volume (≥500 mL), disease stage (≤pT2/pN1), and clinical/biological features. Patients received a regimen of 35 Gy in 10 fractions for 2.5 weeks, and a concomitant boost of 3/4 Gy in 1 fraction/week. Target coverage was assessed by volume, V90, V95, V100, V103 and V105. Heart, LADCA and ipsilateral lung doses were evaluated according to volume, maximum dose, mean dose, V14, V10 and V5. We evaluated acute skin toxicity during RT, at the end of treatment, and after 1 month according to RTOG scales. RESULTS: Radiobiological equivalence was warranted with satisfactory BED values: considering α/ß = 4 for breast cancer, the 10-fraction schedule equaled 74 or 77 Gy depending on the boost dose (3 Gy vs. 4 Gy, respectively). Toxicity was low and similar for supine and prone treatments. Dose sparing was significant in the ipsilateral lung in the prone position (median Dmax: 28.7 Gy vs. 38.4 Gy; median Dmean: 0.8 Gy vs. 6.3 Gy; median V14: 0.6% vs. 13.5%; median V5: 0 vs. 19.3%, p<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: This novel 10-fraction schedule is feasible and well tolerated; the prone position allows better saving of OARs, with a statistically significant value for the ipsilateral lung.

Concurrent vs sequential adjuvant chemotherapy and hormone therapy in breast cancer: a multicenter randomized phase III trial.

BACKGROUND: The most appropriate timing of chemotherapy and hormone therapy administration is a critical issue in early breast cancer patients. The purpose of our study was to compare the efficacy of concurrent vs sequential administration of adjuvant chemotherapy and tamoxifen. METHODS: Women with node-positive primary breast cancer were randomly assigned to receive tamoxifen (20 mg/d for 5 years) during (concurrent arm) or after (sequential arm) adjuvant chemotherapy. Chemotherapy consisted of alternating regimens of cyclophosphamide, epidoxorubicin, and 5-fluorouracil and cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and 5-fluorouracil every 21 days for a total of 12 cycles. The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS), and secondary endpoints were toxic effects and disease-free survival (DFS). No provision for interim analyses was made in the original study protocol. Survival curves were estimated by the Kaplan-Meier method. Multivariable Cox regression models, adjusted for age, menopausal status, tumor stage, and lymph node and hormone receptor status, were used to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). All statistical tests were two-sided. RESULTS: From 1985 to 1992, 431 patients were randomly assigned and studied according to the intention-to-treat principle. After a maximum of 15.4 years of follow-up (median 12.3 years), the estimated actuarial 10-year OS was equivalent for the two study arms (concurrent arm: 111 patients, 66%, 95% CI = 59% to 72%; sequential arm: 114 patients, 65%, 95% CI = 59% to 72%, P = .86). No differences in DFS and toxic effects were evident. Four interim analyses were performed, but no alpha error adjustment was necessary because of the largely negative results of this final analysis (sequential vs concurrent arm: HR of death = 1.06, 95% CI = 0.78 to 1.44, P = .76; HR of relapse = 1.16, 95% CI = 0.88 to 1.52, P = .36). CONCLUSIONS: No statistically significant differences in OS, DFS, and toxic effects between concurrent and sequential adjuvant chemo- and hormone therapies were observed. Our study does not support the superiority of one schedule of chemo- and hormone-therapy administration over the other. However, because of the limited statistical power of the study, these results must be considered with caution.