Effects on Lung Tissue After Breast Cancer Radiation: Comparing Photon and Proton Therapies.

Purpose: In breast cancer, improved treatment approaches that reduce injury to lung tissue and early diagnosis and intervention for lung toxicity are increasingly important in survivorship. The aims of this study are to (1) compare lung tissue radiographic changes in women treated with conventional photon radiation therapy and those treated with proton therapy (PT), (2) assess the volume of lung irradiated to 5 Gy (V5) and 20 Gy (V20) by treatment modality, and (3) quantify the effects of V5, V20, time, and smoking history on the severity of tissue radiographic changes. Patients and Methods: A prospective observational study of female breast cancer patients was conducted to monitor postradiation subclinical lung tissue radiographic changes. Repeated follow-up x-ray computed tomography scans were acquired through 2 years after treatment. In-house software was used to quantify an internally normalized measure of pulmonary tissue density change over time from the computed tomography scans, emphasizing the 6- and 12-month time points. Results: Compared with photon therapy, PT was associated with significantly lower lung V5 and V20. Lung V20 (but not V5) correlated significantly with increased subclinical lung tissue radiographic changes 6 months after treatment, and neither correlated with lung effects at 12 months. Significant lung tissue density changes were present in photon therapy patients at 6 and 12 months but not in PT patients. Significant lung tissue density change persisted at 12 months in ever-smokers but not in never-smokers. Conclusion: Patients treated with PT had significantly lower radiation exposure to the lungs and less statistically significant tissue density change, suggesting decreased injury and/or improved recovery compared to photon therapy. These findings motivate additional studies in larger, randomized, and more diverse cohorts to further investigate the contributions of treatment modality and smoking regarding the short- and long-term radiographic effects of radiation on lung tissue.

Incidence of Rib Fracture following Treatment with Proton Therapy for Breast Cancer.

Purpose: To determine the rib fracture rate in a cohort of patients with breast cancer treated with proton therapy. Patient and Methods: From a prospective database, we identified 225 patients treated with proton therapy between 2012 and 2020 (223 women; 2 men). Clinical and dosimetric data were extracted, the cumulative incidence method assessed rib fracture rate, and Fine-Gray tests assessed prognostic significance of select variables. In-field rib fracture was defined as a fracture that occurred in a rib located within the 10% isodose line. Out-of-field rib fracture was defined as a fracture occurring in a rib location outside of the 10% isodose line. Results: Of the patients, 74% had left-sided breast cancer; 5%, bilateral; and 21%, right-sided. Dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry scans showed normality in 20%, osteopenia in 34%, and osteoporosis in 6% (test not performed in 40%). Additionally, 57% received an aromatase inhibitor. Target volumes were breast ± internal mammary nodes (IMNs) (16%), breast and comprehensive regional lymphatics (32%), chest wall ± IMNs (1%), and chest wall/comprehensive regional lymphatics (51%). Passive-scattered proton therapy was used for 41% of patients, 58% underwent pencil-beam scanning (PBS), and 1% underwent a combination (passive scattering/PBS), with 85% of patients receiving a boost. Median follow-up was 3.1 years, with 97% having >12-month follow-up. The 3-year cumulative in-field rib fracture incidence was 3.7%. Eight patients developed in-field rib fractures (1 symptomatic, 7 imaging identified) for a 0.4% symptomatic rib fracture rate. Median time from radiation completion to rib fracture identification was 1.8 years (fractures were identified within 2.2 years for 7 of 8 patients). No variables were associated with rib fracture on univariate analysis. Three fractures developed outside the radiation field (0.9% cumulative incidence of out-of-field rib fracture). Conclusion: In this series of patients with breast cancer treated with proton therapy, the 3-year rib fracture rates remain low (in-field 3.7%; symptomatic 0.4%). As in photon therapy, the asymptomatic rate may be underestimated owing to a lack of routine surveillance imaging. However, patients experiencing symptomatic rib fractures after proton therapy for breast cancer are rare.

Proton Therapy for Bilateral Breast Cancer Maximizes Normal-Tissue Sparing.

Purpose: Treatment for bilateral breast cancer with radiation therapy is technically challenging. We evaluated the clinical and dosimetric outcomes of a small series of patients with synchronous bilateral breast cancer, including a photon dosimetric comparison, to identify optimal treatment planning approaches. Materials and Methods: We reviewed a registry of patients (simultaneously) diagnosed with synchronous bilateral breast cancers who underwent postoperative definitive adjuvant proton therapy at our institution between 2012 and 2021. All patients were treated with double-scattered proton or pencil-beam scanning therapies. For comparison, intensity-modulated radiation therapy photon plans optimized for organ sparing and coverage were generated after treatment. Results: Six patients were included. The median patient age was 66 years; all were female with no history of breast cancer or radiation therapy. Two (33%) patients received breast/chest wall-only treatments, 1 (17%) required breast plus level I axillary treatment to one side and breast plus regional nodal irradiation (RNI) to the other, and 3 (50%) received bilateral breast/chest plus RNI; dosimetric results are reported for each group's median. Analysis showed clinical target coverage was comparable between proton and photon techniques (V95% of 96.4% with proton, 97.8% with photon). However, protons could deliver superior organ sparing at clinically relevant dose metrics for virtually all structures: a 6.7 Gy absolute reduction in the mean heart dose (7.5 Gy with photons to 0.7 Gy with protons), a 47% to 57% relative reduction in D0.1cm3 to coronary arteries, a 54% relative reduction in lung V20 Gy, and an absolute 7.6 Gy reduction to the brachial plexus. There was also greater esophagus and spinal cord sparing. The overall survival rate was 100% at 1.5 years of median follow-up (0.5-4.9), and all patients were free of disease. For toxicity, all patients had some form of acute side effects: 66% experienced grade 2 breast/chest pain or soreness; 100% had grade 2 radiation dermatitis or skin induration; 33% had grade 2 fatigue; and 17% had grade 2 esophagitis (per the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events [CTCAE] version 5.0; US National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Maryland). Subacute toxicity (within 6 months) was observed for 17% of patients with delayed onset of grade 3 dermatitis in the setting of preexisting lupus, 17% with a delayed surgical wound complication, and 17% with grade 2 soft tissue fibrosis. No grade 4 or 5 events were observed. Conclusions: Substantial dose reductions to multiple organs at risk while maintaining target coverage make proton the preferred modality for bilateral breast cancer treatment when available.