Lymphedema Rates Following Axillary Lymph Node Dissection With and Without Immediate Lymphatic Reconstruction: A Prospective Trial.

BACKGROUND: Immediate lymphatic reconstruction (ILR) has been proposed to decrease lymphedema rates. The primary aim of our study was to determine whether ILR decreased the incidence of lymphedema in patients undergoing axillary lymph node dissection (ALND). METHODS: We conducted a two-site pragmatic study of ALND with or without ILR, employing surgeon-level cohort assignment, based on breast surgeons' preferred standard practice. Lymphedema was assessed by limb volume measurements, patient self-reporting, provider documentation, and International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision (ICD-10) codes. RESULTS: Overall, 230 patients with breast cancer were enrolled; on an intention-to-treat basis, 99 underwent ALND and 131 underwent ALND with ILR. Of the 131 patients preoperatively planned for ILR, 115 (87.8%) underwent ILR; 72 (62.6%) were performed by one breast surgical oncologist and 43 (37.4%) by fellowship-trained microvascular plastic surgeons. ILR was associated with an increased risk of lymphedema when defined as ≥10% limb volume change on univariable analysis, but not on multivariable analysis, after propensity score adjustment. We did not find a statistically significant difference in limb volume measurements between the two cohorts when including subclinical lymphedema (≥5% inter-limb volume change), nor did we see a difference in grade between the two cohorts on an intent-to-treat or treatment received basis. For all patients, considering ascertainment strategies of patient self-reporting, provider documentation, and ICD-10 codes, as a single binary outcome measure, there was no significant difference in lymphedema rates between those undergoing ILR or not. CONCLUSION: We found no significant difference in lymphedema rates between patients undergoing ALND with or without ILR.

Pre-diagnosis major life stressors and breast cancer outcomes.

PURPOSE: While the association between diagnosis of breast cancer and post-diagnosis psychological distress has been well documented, data regarding pre-diagnosis psychological distress in the breast cancer population are limited. Here, we assessed pre-diagnosis major life stressors and breast cancer outcomes, namely stage of disease and choice of surgery, in a single-center population. METHODS: Patients with newly diagnosed clinical stage 0-3 breast cancer seen at Mayo Clinic Florida between June 11, 2018, and October 7, 2019, were administered voluntary telephone surveys to assess major life stressors during the 24 months preceding their cancer diagnosis. Subsequent clinical outcomes of cancer stage at diagnosis and surgical treatment were obtained through retrospective chart review. Study subjects who had experienced major life stressors and those who had not were compared using Chi-square tests. RESULTS: Of 222 patients who were included, 51.3% reported experiencing a major life event before breast cancer diagnosis. 43.9% of these patients endorsed family-related stress. 21.1% had experienced multiple stressors. 1.8% described financial stress. Although more patients in the group with pre-diagnosis stress had carcinoma in situ (21.1% versus 13.0%, p = 0.11) and fewer had stage T1/T2 disease (64% versus 73.1%, p = 0.14) than in the group without stress, these differences were not statistically significant. More patients with pre-diagnosis stress chose mastectomy (34.2% versus 22.2%, p = 0.048). CONCLUSIONS: Psychological distress is prevalent prior to breast cancer diagnosis and may merit early intervention. While additional study in diverse populations is needed, current data suggest possible associations between pre-diagnosis psychological distress and surgical decision making, specifically mastectomy.

Parental leave policy information during residency interviews.

BACKGROUND: During interviews, medical students may feel uncomfortable asking questions that might be important to them, such as parental leave. Parental leave policies may be difficult for applicants to access without asking the program director or other interviewers. The goal of this study is to evaluate whether parental leave information is presented to prospective residents and whether medical students want this information. METHODS: Fifty-two program directors (PD's) at 3 sites of a single institution received a survey in 2019 to identify whether parental leave information is presented at residency interviews. Medical students received a separate survey in 2020 to identify their preferences. Fisher exact tests, Pearson χ2 tests and Cochran-Armitage tests were used where appropriate to assess for differences in responses. RESULTS: Of the 52 PD's, 27 responded (52%) and 19 (70%) indicated that information on parental leave was not provided to candidates. The most common reason cited was the belief that the information was not relevant (n = 7; 37%). Of the 373 medical students, 179 responded (48%). Most respondents (92%) wanted parental leave information formally presented, and many anticipated they would feel extremely or somewhat uncomfortable (68%) asking about parental leave. The majority (61%) felt that these policies would impact ranking of programs "somewhat" or "very much." CONCLUSIONS: Parental leave policies may not be readily available to interviewees despite strong interest and their impact on ranking of programs by prospective residents.

Long-term primary results of accelerated partial breast irradiation after breast-conserving surgery for early-stage breast cancer: a randomised, phase 3, equivalence trial.

BACKGROUND: Whole-breast irradiation after breast-conserving surgery for patients with early-stage breast cancer decreases ipsilateral breast-tumour recurrence (IBTR), yielding comparable results to mastectomy. It is unknown whether accelerated partial breast irradiation (APBI) to only the tumour-bearing quadrant, which shortens treatment duration, is equally effective. In our trial, we investigated whether APBI provides equivalent local tumour control after lumpectomy compared with whole-breast irradiation. METHODS: We did this randomised, phase 3, equivalence trial (NSABP B-39/RTOG 0413) in 154 clinical centres in the USA, Canada, Ireland, and Israel. Adult women (>18 years) with early-stage (0, I, or II; no evidence of distant metastases, but up to three axillary nodes could be positive) breast cancer (tumour size ≤3 cm; including all histologies and multifocal breast cancers), who had had lumpectomy with negative (ie, no detectable cancer cells) surgical margins, were randomly assigned (1:1) using a biased-coin-based minimisation algorithm to receive either whole-breast irradiation (whole-breast irradiation group) or APBI (APBI group). Whole-breast irradiation was delivered in 25 daily fractions of 50 Gy over 5 weeks, with or without a supplemental boost to the tumour bed, and APBI was delivered as 34 Gy of brachytherapy or 38·5 Gy of external bream radiation therapy in 10 fractions, over 5 treatment days within an 8-day period. Randomisation was stratified by disease stage, menopausal status, hormone-receptor status, and intention to receive chemotherapy. Patients, investigators, and statisticians could not be masked to treatment allocation. The primary outcome of invasive and non-invasive IBTR as a first recurrence was analysed in the intention-to-treat population, excluding those patients who were lost to follow-up, with an equivalency test on the basis of a 50% margin increase in the hazard ratio (90% CI for the observed HR between 0·667 and 1·5 for equivalence) and a Cox proportional hazard model. Survival was assessed by intention to treat, and sensitivity analyses were done in the per-protocol population. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT00103181. FINDINGS: Between March 21, 2005, and April 16, 2013, 4216 women were enrolled. 2109 were assigned to the whole-breast irradiation group and 2107 were assigned to the APBI group. 70 patients from the whole-breast irradiation group and 14 from the APBI group withdrew consent or were lost to follow-up at this stage, so 2039 and 2093 patients respectively were available for survival analysis. Further, three and four patients respectively were lost to clinical follow-up (ie, survival status was assessed by phone but no physical examination was done), leaving 2036 patients in the whole-breast irradiation group and 2089 in the APBI group evaluable for the primary outcome. At a median follow-up of 10·2 years (IQR 7·5-11·5), 90 (4%) of 2089 women eligible for the primary outcome in the APBI group and 71 (3%) of 2036 women in the whole-breast irradiation group had an IBTR (HR 1·22, 90% CI 0·94-1·58). The 10-year cumulative incidence of IBTR was 4·6% (95% CI 3·7-5·7) in the APBI group versus 3·9% (3·1-5·0) in the whole-breast irradiation group. 44 (2%) of 2039 patients in the whole-breast irradiation group and 49 (2%) of 2093 patients in the APBI group died from recurring breast cancer. There were no treatment-related deaths. Second cancers and treatment-related toxicities were similar between the two groups. 2020 patients in the whole-breast irradiation group and 2089 in APBI group had available data on adverse events. The highest toxicity grade reported was: grade 1 in 845 (40%), grade 2 in 921 (44%), and grade 3 in 201 (10%) patients in the APBI group, compared with grade 1 in 626 (31%), grade 2 in 1193 (59%), and grade 3 in 143 (7%) in the whole-breast irradiation group. INTERPRETATION: APBI did not meet the criteria for equivalence to whole-breast irradiation in controlling IBTR for breast-conserving therapy. Our trial had broad eligibility criteria, leading to a large, heterogeneous pool of patients and sufficient power to detect treatment equivalence, but was not designed to test equivalence in patient subgroups or outcomes from different APBI techniques. For patients with early-stage breast cancer, our findings support whole-breast irradiation following lumpectomy; however, with an absolute difference of less than 1% in the 10-year cumulative incidence of IBTR, APBI might be an acceptable alternative for some women. FUNDING: National Cancer Institute, US Department of Health and Human Services.

Carbon ion radiation therapy in breast cancer: a new frontier.

PURPOSE: Breast cancer is the most commonly diagnosed cancer in women, with many efforts aimed at reducing acute and late toxicity given the generally favorable clinical outcomes with the current standard of care. Carbon ion radiation therapy is an emerging technique that may reduce dose to adjacent organs at risk while allowing dose escalation to the target. Given the efficacy of the standard treatments for breast cancer, there have been few prospective studies to date investigating carbon ion radiation therapy in breast cancer. METHODS: PubMed/Medline, Ebsco, Cochrane, and Scopus were systematically reviewed using the search terms "carbon ion" and "breast" in November 2019. Out of the 76 articles screened, 26 articles were included. RESULTS: This comprehensive review describes the physical and biological properties of carbon ion radiation therapy, with an emphasis on how these properties can be applied in the setting of breast cancer. Studies investigating the role of carbon ion radiation therapy in early stage breast cancers are reviewed. Additionally, the use of carbon ion radiation therapy in locally advanced disease, recurrent disease, and radiation-induced angiosarcoma are discussed. CONCLUSION: Although the data is limited, the early clinical results are promising. Further clinical trials are needed, especially in the setting of locally advanced and recurrent disease, to fully define the potential role of carbon ion radiation therapy in the treatment of breast cancer.

Assessment of unintended shifts during frame-based stereotactic radiosurgery using cone beam computed tomography image guidance.

PURPOSE: To investigate the frequency, magnitude and possible causes of frame-shifts that may occur between treatment planning and treatment delivery when performing Gamma Knife radiosurgery with rigid frame-based immobilization. METHODS: Differences between computed tomography (CT) framed fiducial stereotactic coordinate reference and cone beam computed tomography stereotactic coordinates after image registration were recorded for 49 frame-based GK radiosurgery cases performed using the Gamma Knife Icon. Parameters recorded include rotational shifts, translational shifts, and the GK-computed Maximum Shot Displacement (MSD) between the two stereotactic coordinate spaces. Other patient-specific parameters were collected and linear regression analysis was performed to evaluate predictors of increased displacement. RESULTS: The median values of rotational shifts were: pitch 0.14°, yaw 0.17°, and roll 0.13°. The median absolute values of translational shifts were: left-right 0.39 mm, anteroposterior 0.14 mm, and superior-inferior 0. 22 mm. The median value of MSD was 0.71 mm. Twelve cases (24.5%) had a MSD of greater than 1.0 mm. Male gender was associated with increased MSD (p = 0.013) and translational shifts (root-mean-squared value, p = 0.017). Cases with large differences between right and left sided pin lengths were also associated with increased MSD (p = 0.011). CONCLUSIONS: The use of CBCT image guidance in frame-based GK radiosurgery allows unintended frame shifts to be identified and corrected. A significant fraction (24.5%) of patients had large enough shifts to result in a MSD of greater than 1.0 mm. Male gender and eccentrically placed frames were associated with increased MSD, and particular care should be taken in these cases.

Stereotactic Radiosurgery and Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors in the Management of Brain Metastases.

Brain metastases traditionally carried a poor prognosis with an overall survival of weeks to months in the absence of treatment. Radiation therapy modalities include whole brain radiation therapy (WBRT) and stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS). WBRT delivers a relatively low dose of radiation, has neurocognitive sequelae, and has not been investigated for its immunostimulatory effects. Furthermore, WBRT exposes the entire intracranial tumor immune microenvironment to radiation. SRS delivers a high dose of conformal radiation with image guidance to minimize dose to surrounding normal brain tissue, and appears to promote anti-tumor immunity. In parallel with many of these discoveries, immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have demonstrated a survival advantage in multiple malignancies commonly associated with brain metastases (e.g., melanoma). Combination SRS and ICI are theorized to be synergistic in anti-tumor immunity directed to brain metastases. The purpose of this review is to explore the synergy of SRS and ICIs, including pre-clinical data, existing clinical data, and ongoing prospective trials.

Anastrozole versus tamoxifen in postmenopausal women with ductal carcinoma in situ undergoing lumpectomy plus radiotherapy (NSABP B-35): a randomised, double-blind, phase 3 clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Ductal carcinoma in situ is currently managed with excision, radiotherapy, and adjuvant hormone therapy, usually tamoxifen. We postulated that an aromatase inhibitor would be safer and more effective. We therefore undertook this trial to compare anastrozole versus tamoxifen in postmenopausal women with ductal carcinoma in situ undergoing lumpectomy plus radiotherapy. METHODS: The double-blind, randomised, phase 3 National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project (NSABP) B-35 trial was done in 333 participating NSABP centres in the USA and Canada. Postmenopausal women with hormone-positive ductal carcinoma in situ treated by lumpectomy with clear resection margins and whole-breast irradiation were enrolled and randomly assigned (1:1) to receive either oral tamoxifen 20 mg per day (with matching placebo in place of anastrozole) or oral anastrozole 1 mg per day (with matching placebo in place of tamoxifen) for 5 years. Randomisation was stratified by age (<60 vs ≥60 years) and patients and investigators were masked to treatment allocation. The primary outcome was breast cancer-free interval, defined as time from randomisation to any breast cancer event (local, regional, or distant recurrence, or contralateral breast cancer, invasive disease, or ductal carcinoma in situ), analysed by intention to treat. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00053898, and is complete. FINDINGS: Between Jan 1, 2003, and June 15, 2006, 3104 eligible patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to the two treatment groups (1552 to tamoxifen and 1552 to anastrozole). As of Feb 28, 2015, follow-up information was available for 3083 patients for overall survival and 3077 for all other disease-free endpoints, with median follow-up of 9·0 years (IQR 8·2-10·0). In total, 212 breast cancer-free interval events occurred: 122 in the tamoxifen group and 90 in the anastrozole group (HR 0·73 [95% CI 0·56-0·96], p=0·0234). A significant time-by-treatment interaction (p=0·0410) became evident later in the study. There was also a significant interaction between treatment and age group (p=0·0379), showing that anastrozole is superior only in women younger than 60 years of age. Adverse events did not differ between the groups, except for thrombosis or embolism--a known side-effect of tamoxifen-for which there were 17 grade 4 or worse events in the tamoxifen group versus four in the anastrozole group. INTERPRETATION: Compared with tamoxifen, anastrozole treatment provided a significant improvement in breast cancer-free interval, mainly in women younger than 60 years of age. This finding means that women will benefit from having a choice of effective agents for ductal carcinoma in situ. FUNDING: US National Cancer Institute and AstraZeneca Pharmaceuticals LP.

Patient-reported outcomes with anastrozole versus tamoxifen for postmenopausal patients with ductal carcinoma in situ treated with lumpectomy plus radiotherapy (NSABP B-35): a randomised, double-blind, phase 3 clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: The NSABP B-35 trial compared 5 years of treatment with anastrozole versus tamoxifen for reducing subsequent occurrence of breast cancer in postmenopausal patients with ductal carcinoma in situ. This report assesses the effect of these drugs on quality of life and symptoms. METHODS: The study was done at 333 hospitals in North America. Postmenopausal women with hormone-positive ductal carcinoma in situ treated by lumpectomy with clear resection margins and whole breast irradiation were randomly assigned to receive either tamoxifen (20 mg/day) or anastrazole (1 mg/day) for 5 years, stratified by age (<60 years vs ≥60 years). Patients and investigators were masked to treatment allocation. Patients completed questionnaires at baseline and every 6 months thereafter for 6 years. The primary outcomes were SF-12 physical and mental health component scale scores, and vasomotor symptoms (as per the BCPT symptom scale). Secondary outcomes were vaginal symptoms and sexual functioning. Exploratory outcomes were musculoskeletal pain, bladder symptoms, gynaecological symptoms, cognitive symptoms, weight problems, vitality, and depression. We did the analyses by intention to treat, including patients who completed questionnaires at baseline and at least once during follow-up. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT00053898. FINDINGS: Between Jan 6, 2003, and June 15, 2006, 3104 patients were enrolled in the study, of whom 1193 were included in the quality-of-life substudy: 601 assigned to tamoxifen and 592 assigned to anastrozole. We detected no significant difference between treatment groups for: physical health scores (mean severity score 46·72 for tamoxifen vs 45·85 for anastrozole; p=0·20), mental health scores (52·38 vs 51·48; p=0·38), energy and fatigue (58·34 vs 57·54; p=0·86), or symptoms of depression (6·19 vs 6·39; p=0·46) over 5 years. Vasomotor symptoms (1·33 vs 1·17; p=0·011), difficulty with bladder control (0·96 vs 0·80; p=0·0002), and gynaecological symptoms (0·29 vs 0·18; p<0·0001) were significantly more severe in the tamoxifen group than in the anastrozole group. Musculoskeletal pain (1·50 vs 1·72; p=0·0006) and vaginal symptoms (0·76 vs 0·86; p=0·035) were significantly worse in the anastrozole group than in the tamoxifen group. Sexual functioning did not differ significantly between the two treatments (43·65 vs 45·29; p=0·56). Younger age was significantly associated with more severe vasomotor symptoms (mean severity score 1·45 for age <60 years vs 0·65 for age ≥60 years; p=0·0006), vaginal symptoms (0·98 vs 0·65; p<0·0001), weight problems (1·32 vs 1·02; p<0·0001), and gynaecological symptoms (0·26 vs 0·22; p=0·014). INTERPRETATION: Given the similar efficacy of tamoxifen and anastrozole for women older than age 60 years, decisions about treatment should be informed by the risk for serious adverse health effects and the symptoms associated with each drug. For women younger than 60 years old, treatment decisions might be driven by efficacy (favouring anastrozole); however, if the side-effects of anastrozole are intolerable, then switching to tamoxifen is a good alternative. FUNDING: US National Cancer Institute, AstraZeneca Pharmaceuticals.

The Influence of Breast Density on Preoperative MRI Findings and Outcome in Patients with a Known Diagnosis of Breast Cancer.

BACKGROUND: The role of breast density as an indication for preoperative breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for surgical planning in women with breast cancer is unknown. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed breast cancer patients diagnosed from 2007 to 2011 who underwent preoperative MRI. We obtained clinical and pathological data and grouped patients by mammographic breast density, with Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) density A and B considered low density, and C and D considered high density. We analyzed local recurrence rates by breast density. RESULTS: Among 683 patients, 66.6% had high breast density. We noted MRI abnormalities in the ipsilateral breast in 41.8% high-density and 30.7% low-density breasts, while contralateral abnormalities were noted in 24.9% high-density and 13.8% low-density breasts. Biopsy was recommended for MRI findings in a similar number of patients regardless of density cohort. While more abnormalities were found in high-density breasts, the rate of additional cancer found was not significantly different (ipsilateral: 32 vs. 23%; contralateral: 6.2 vs. 3.2%) for high-and low-density patients, respectively (both p > 0.15). With a median follow-up of 89 months, and similar rates of adjuvant systemic and radiation therapy, no difference in local recurrence rates existed when stratified according to density classification (p > 0.53). CONCLUSION: While more abnormalities were identified on MRI in dense breasts, there was no statistically significant difference in the number of cancers identified or in recurrence rates. These findings question the routine use of preoperative breast MRI in women with newly diagnosed breast cancer based solely on breast density.

Proposed prognostic scoring system evaluating risk factors for biochemical recurrence of prostate cancer after salvage radiation therapy.

OBJECTIVE: To update a previously proposed prognostic scoring system that predicts risk of biochemical recurrence (BCR) after salvage radiation therapy (SRT) for recurrent prostate cancer when using additional patients and a PSA value of 0.2 ng/mL and rising as the definition of BCR. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We included 577 patients who received SRT for a rising PSA after radical prostatectomy in this retrospective cohort study. Clinical, pathological, and SRT characteristics were evaluated for association with BCR using relative risks (RRs) from multivariable Cox regression models. RESULTS: With a median follow-up of 5.5 years after SRT, 354 patients (61%) experienced BCR. At 5 years after SRT, 40% of patients were free of BCR. Independent associations with BCR were identified for the PSA level before SRT (RR [doubling]: 1.25, P < 0.001), pathological tumour stage (RR [T3a vs T2] 1.21, P = 0.19; RR [T3b/T4 vs T2] 2.09, P < 0.001; overall P < 0.001), Gleason score (RR [7 vs <7] 1.63, P < 0.001; RR [8-10 vs <7] 2.28, P < 0.001; overall P < 0.001), and surgical margin status (RR [positive vs negative] 0.71, P = 0.003). We combined these four variables to create a prognostic scoring system that predicted BCR risk with a c-index of 0.66. Scores ranged from 0 to 7, and 5-year freedom from BCR for different levels of the score was as follows: Score = 0-1: 66%, Score = 2: 46%, Score = 3: 28%, Score = 4: 19%, and Score = 5-7: 15%. CONCLUSION: We developed a scoring system that provides an estimation of the risk of BCR after SRT. These findings will be useful for patients and physicians in decision making for radiation therapy in the salvage setting.

Prompt Pain Relief From Bone Metastases: The Virtual Simulation Program.

Purpose: Rapid pain relief for patients with bone metastases can be a challenge due to the lengthy and complex radiation therapy workflow. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the time (in days) between initial radiation oncology consultation and start of palliative radiation treatment after implementing an alternative virtual simulation palliative workflow. Methods and Materials: Patients meeting strict criteria were selected for virtual simulation, which included only those with painful bone metastases who were recommended palliative radiation therapy using standard anterior-posterior/posterior-anterior or opposed lateral fields. A recent (within 30 days) diagnostic computed tomography (CT) scan clearly visualizing the target volume was required for treatment planning. For comparison, a reference group of 40 consecutive patients with bone metastases who underwent in-person CT simulation before virtual simulation implementation was reviewed. Results: Forty-five patients were treated for painful bone metastases as part of the virtual simulation program from May 2021 to October 2022. Regarding travel distance, 23 patients lived locally (<50 miles from the treatment center) and 22 patients were distant (≥50 miles from the treatment center). Average time from consultation to treatment for all patients undergoing virtual simulation was 3.7 days, compared with 7.5 days for patients undergoing in-person CT simulation (3.8 days sooner, on average; P ≤ .001). Before full implementation of the virtual simulation program, 5 eligible patients participated in a virtual simulation pilot from April 2021 to May 2021, in which each patient was contoured and planned on both a pre-existing diagnostic CT scan and a standard CT simulation scan. For virtual simulation-based plans, the average V90, V95, and V99 were 99.99%, 99.87%, and 96.70%. No significant planning target volume (PTV) coverage difference was found on subsequent in-person CT simulation scans. Conclusions: The virtual simulation program decreased the time from consultation to start of treatment by more than 50% for patients recommended palliative radiation therapy for painful bone metastases. This benefit was most significant for outpatients traveling ≥50 miles for treatment. Virtual simulation-based planning can be considered for patients anxious to proceed with radiation therapy quickly or in underserved settings with limited transportation options to regional treatment centers.

Physician- and Patient-Reported Outcomes of the MC1635 Phase 3 Trial of Ultrahypofractionated Versus Moderately Hypofractionated Adjuvant Radiation Therapy After Breast-Conserving Surgery.

PURPOSE: Our aim was to report physician- and patient-reported outcomes of patients with localized breast cancer treated with moderate versus ultrahypofractionated whole breast irradiation (WBI) after breast-conserving surgery (BCS). METHODS AND MATERIALS: Between February 2018 and February 2020, patients with localized breast cancer (pT0-3 pN0-1 M0) were offered participation in a phase 3 randomized clinical trial assessing adjuvant moderate hypofractionation (MHF) to 40 Gy in 15 fractions versus ultrahypofractionation (UHF) to 25 Gy in 5 fractions after BCS, with an optional simultaneously integrated boost. Toxicities, cosmesis, and quality of life were assessed at baseline, end of treatment (EOT), and 3 months, 1 year, 2 years, and 3 years from irradiation using validated metric tools. RESULTS: One hundred seven patients were randomized to MHF (n = 54) or UHF (n = 53) adjuvant WBI. The median follow-up was 42.8 months. Grade 2 radiation dermatitis was experienced by 4 patients (7.4%) in the MHF arm and 2 patients (3.7%) in the UHF arm at EOT (P = .726). No grade 3 or higher toxicities were observed. Deterioration of cosmesis by physician assessment was observed in 2 (6.7%) patients treated in the UHF arm and 1 (1.9%) patient treated in the MHF arm at EOT (P = .534), whereas at 3 months, only 1 (1.8%) patient treated in the MHF arm demonstrated deterioration of cosmesis (P = .315). At EOT, 91% and 94% of patients reported excellent/good cosmesis among those treated with MHF and UHF regimens, respectively (P = .550). At 3 months, more patients within the MHF arm reported excellent/good cosmesis compared with those in the UHF arm (100% vs 91%; P = .030). However, the difference in patient-reported cosmesis disappeared at the 1-, 2-, and 3-year time points. CONCLUSIONS: UHF WBI showed similar treatment-related late toxicities and similar provider-scored cosmesis compared with MHF radiation in patients treated adjuvantly after BCS.

Is postexcision, preradiation mammogram necessary in patients after breast-conserving surgery with negative margins.

BACKGROUND: In women with breast cancer and calcifications, controversy exists over the need for postexcision/lumpectomy, preradiation mammogram (PEM) after breast-conserving surgery (BCS). Further, the need for excision of remaining or suspicious calcifications after PEM when surgical margins are negative is unclear. We sought to characterize the utility of PEM hypothesizing that its value in directing the need for additional surgery is minimized after achieving negative surgical margins. METHODS: We identified 524 women with breast cancer and calcifications treated with BCS with negative margins between 1996 and 2011. RESULTS: PEM was performed in 112 of 524 (21 %) women, with residual calcifications identified in 10 of 112 (9 %); of these, 2 of 112 (1.8 %) had residual disease. Local recurrence occurred in 4 of 112 (4 %) patients, none of whom had residual calcifications identified on PEM. The remaining 412 of 524 (79 %) women did not have PEM but had a postradiation mammogram 6 to 12 months after treatment identifying calcifications in 19 (5 %) women. Tissue diagnosis was benign in 14 women and was not pursued in the remaining 5. Local recurrence occurred in 13 (3 %) patients, none of whom had calcifications on the new post radiation baseline mammogram. CONCLUSIONS: Mammographically apparent calcifications representing residual disease occur infrequently after BCS with negative margins. The value of PEM may be to document the new radiographic baseline but should not be required to ensure adequate surgery. Radiation plays an integral role in sterilization of the remaining breast tissue after BCS.

Prognostic factors in Merkel cell carcinoma: analysis of 240 cases.

BACKGROUND: Knowledge regarding behavior of and prognostic factors for Merkel cell carcinoma (MCC) is limited. OBJECTIVE: We sought to further understand the characteristics, behavior, prognostic factors, and optimal treatment of MCC. METHODS: A multicenter, retrospective, consecutive study of patients with known primary MCC was completed. Overall survival and survival free of locoregional recurrence were calculated and statistical analysis of characteristics and outcomes was performed. RESULTS: Among the 240 patients, the mean age at diagnosis was 70.1 years, 168 (70.0%) were male, and the majority was Caucasian. The most common location was head and neck (111, 46.3%). Immunosuppressed patients had significantly worse survival, with an overall 3-year survival of 43.4% compared with 68.1% in immunocompetent patients. In our study, patients with stage II disease had improved overall survival versus those with stage I disease, in a statistically significant manner. Patients with stage III disease had significantly worse survival compared with stage I and with stage II. Primary tumor size did not predict nodal involvement. CONCLUSION: The data presented represent one of the largest series of primary MCC in the literature and confirm that MCC of all sizes has metastatic potential, supporting sentinel lymph node biopsy for all primary MCC. Because of the unpredictable natural history of MCC, we recommend individualization of care based on the details of each patient's tumor and clinical presentation.

Unknown primary Merkel cell carcinoma: 23 new cases and a review.

BACKGROUND: Knowledge is limited regarding unknown primary Merkel cell carcinoma (UPMCC). OBJECTIVE: We sought to document the characteristics and behavior of UPMCC, and determine the most appropriate treatment. METHODS: A multicenter, retrospective, consecutive study reviewing patients given a diagnosis of UPMCC between 1981 and 2008 was completed. In addition, a literature review of cases of UPMCC was performed. RESULTS: In all, 23 patients with UPMCC are described and 34 cases from previous reports are compiled. Among the 23 new cases of UPMCC, the average age at diagnosis was 66.0 years; the majority of patients were male (87%) and Caucasian (100% of those reported). One patient was immunosuppressed, and 39% had a history of other cancer. After the initial biopsy, 16 patients had further evaluation of the involved lymph node basin. Half of these had additional positive nodes (8 of 16). The majority of patients had lymph node basin involvement only (78%), whereas 22% had lymph node basin and distant metastasis. The most common lymph node basin involved was inguinal. The median size of the involved lymph node at diagnosis was 5.0 cm. At 2 years, the overall survival of stage IIIB UPMCC was significantly improved versus stage IIIB known primary Merkel cell carcinoma (MCC): 76.9% to 36.4%. LIMITATIONS: Limited number of cases and retrospective review are limitations. CONCLUSION: Our data demonstrate improved overall survival in patients with stage IIIB UPMCC versus those with stage IIIB known primary MCC. Because of the unpredictable natural history of UPMCC, we recommend individualization of care based on the details of each patient's clinical presentation.

Negative margin technique - a novel planning strategy to improve dose conformation in SBRT using dynamic conformal arc delivery.

The purpose of this study was to introduce a planning strategy for dynamic conformal arc therapy (DCAT), named negative margin technique (NMT), and evaluate its dosimetric gain in lung stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT). In DCAT, the field aperture is continuously conformed to the planning target volume (PTV) with an aperture margin (AM) to compensate for the penumbra effect with gantry rotation. It is a common belief the AM should be positive (or at least 'zero'). However, the radial penumbra width becomes significantly wider because of continuously overlapped beams in arc delivery. Therefore, we hypothesize if the 'negative margin' is applied in the radial direction, it would improve the PTV dose conformation while reducing normal tissue dose. For verification, trial plans were made using the NMT and compared with 'zero margin (ZM)' plans for five lung SBRT cases representing different situations depending on the location of the PTV and organs at risk. All plans met 95% PTV coverage with the prescription dose and spared the spinal cord below the tolerance. Two conventional conformation indices (the ratio of prescription isodose volume to the PTV (CI100) and the ratio of 50% prescription isodose volume to the PTV (CI50)) and a modified conformation index were investigated. The maximum dose at 2 cm from the PTV (Dmax-2cm) and the percent of lung volume receiving 20 Gy (V20) were also evaluated. Another planning simulation was performed with a total of ten randomly selected lung SBRT cases to mimic actual practice. In this simulation, optimization with ZM was first performed and further optimization using the NMT was processed for cases that could not meet a goal of CI100 = 1.2 with the ZM optimization. In all cases, both the CI100 and CI50 values were significantly reduced (overall, 9.4% ± 4.1% and 5.9%± 3.1% for CI100 and CI50, respectively). The modified conformation index values also showed similar improvement (overall, 10.1% ± 5.7% increase). Reduction of Dmax-2cm was also observed in all cases (4.5% ± 2.2%). V20 values decreased in all cases but one (5.7% ± 3.9%, excluding the increased case). In the random group simulation, it was possible to achieve the goal with just one NMT trial for five out of six cases that did not meet the goal in the ZM optimization. Interestingly, however, one case needed as many as six iterations to get the CI100 = 1.2 goal. The NMT turned out to be an effective planning strategy that could bring significant improvement of dose conformation. The NMT can be easily implemented in most clinics with no prerequisite.