DEGRO guideline for personalized radiotherapy of brain metastases and leptomeningeal carcinomatosis in patients with breast cancer.

PURPOSE: The aim of this review was to evaluate the existing evidence for radiotherapy for brain metastases in breast cancer patients and provide recommendations for the use of radiotherapy for brain metastases and leptomeningeal carcinomatosis. MATERIALS AND METHODS: For the current review, a PubMed search was conducted including articles from 01/1985 to 05/2023. The search was performed using the following terms: (brain metastases OR leptomeningeal carcinomatosis) AND (breast cancer OR breast) AND (radiotherapy OR ablative radiotherapy OR radiosurgery OR stereotactic OR radiation). CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS: Despite the fact that the biological subtype of breast cancer influences both the occurrence and relapse patterns of breast cancer brain metastases (BCBM), for most scenarios, no specific recommendations regarding radiotherapy can be made based on the existing evidence. For a limited number of BCBM (1-4), stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) or fractionated stereotactic radiotherapy (SRT) is generally recommended irrespective of molecular subtype and concurrent/planned systemic therapy. In patients with 5-10 oligo-brain metastases, these techniques can also be conditionally recommended. For multiple, especially symptomatic BCBM, whole-brain radiotherapy (WBRT), if possible with hippocampal sparing, is recommended. In cases of multiple asymptomatic BCBM (≥ 5), if SRS/SRT is not feasible or in disseminated brain metastases (> 10), postponing WBRT with early reassessment and reevaluation of local treatment options (8-12 weeks) may be discussed if a HER2/Neu-targeting systemic therapy with significant response rates in the central nervous system (CNS) is being used. In symptomatic leptomeningeal carcinomatosis, local radiotherapy (WBRT or local spinal irradiation) should be performed in addition to systemic therapy. In patients with disseminated leptomeningeal carcinomatosis in good clinical condition and with only limited or stable extra-CNS disease, craniospinal irradiation (CSI) may be considered. Data regarding the toxicity of combining systemic therapies with cranial and spinal radiotherapy are sparse. Therefore, no clear recommendations can be given, and each case should be discussed individually in an interdisciplinary setting.

Oligometastasis in breast cancer-current status and treatment options from a radiation oncology perspective.

Evidence from a few small randomized trials and retrospective cohorts mostly including various tumor entities indicates a prolongation of disease free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) from local ablative therapies in oligometastatic disease (OMD). However, it is still unclear which patients benefit most from this approach. We give an overview of the several aspects of stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) in extracranial OMD in breast cancer from a radiation oncology perspective. A PubMed search referring to this was conducted. An attempt was made to relate the therapeutic efficacy of SBRT to various prognostic factors. Data from approximately 500 breast cancer patients treated with SBRT for OMD in mostly in small cohort studies have been published, consistently indicating high local tumor control rates and favorable progression-free (PFS) and overall survival (OS). Predictors for a good prognosis after SBRT are favorable biological subtype (hormone receptor positive, HER2 negative), solitary metastasis, bone-only metastasis, and long metastasis-free interval. However, definitive proof that SBRT in OMD breast cancer prolongs DFS or OS is lacking, since, with the exception of one small randomized trial (n = 22 in the SBRT arm), none of the cohort studies had an adequate control group. Further studies are needed to prove the benefit of SBRT in OMD breast cancer and to define adequate selection criteria. Currently, the use of local ablative SBRT should always be discussed in a multidisciplinary tumor board.

Therapy of clinical stage IIA and IIB seminoma: a systematic review.

PURPOSE: The optimal treatment for clinical stage (CS) IIA/IIB seminomas is still controversial. We evaluated current treatment options. METHODS: A systematic review was performed. Only randomized clinical trials and comparative studies published from January 2010 until February 2021 were included. Search items included: seminoma, CS IIA, CS IIB and therapy. Outcome parameters were relapse rate (RR), relapse-free (RFS), overall and cancer-specific survival (OS, CSS). Additionally, acute and long-term side effects including secondary malignancies (SMs) were analyzed. RESULTS: Seven comparative studies (one prospective and six retrospective) were identified with a total of 5049 patients (CS IIA: 2840, CS IIB: 2209). The applied treatment modalities were radiotherapy (RT) (n = 3049; CS IIA: 1888, CSIIB: 1006, unknown: 155) and chemotherapy (CT) or no RT (n = 2000; CS IIA: 797, CS IIB: 1074, unknown: 129). In CS IIA, RRs ranged from 0% to 4.8% for RT and 0% for CT. Concerning CS IIB RRs of 9.5%-21.1% for RT and of 0%-14.2% for CT have been reported. 5-year OS ranged from 90 to 100%. Only two studies reported on treatment-related toxicities. CONCLUSIONS: RT and CT are the most commonly applied treatments in CS IIA/B seminoma. In CS IIA seminomas, RRs after RT and CT are similar. However, in CS IIB, CT seems to be more effective. Survival rates of CS IIA/B seminomas are excellent. Consequently, long-term toxicities and SMs are important survivorship issues. Alternative treatment approaches, e.g., retroperitoneal lymph node dissection (RPLND) or dose-reduced sequential CT/RT are currently under prospective investigation.

Post-neoadjuvant treatment with capecitabine and trastuzumab emtansine in breast cancer patients-sequentially, or better simultaneously?

PURPOSE: Following neoadjuvant chemotherapy for breast cancer, postoperative systemic therapy, also called post-neoadjuvant treatment, has been established in defined risk settings. We reviewed the evidence for sequencing of postoperative radiation and chemotherapy, with a focus on a capecitabine and trastuzumab emtansine (T-DM1)-based regimen. METHODS: A systematic literature search using the PubMed/MEDLINE/Web of Science database was performed. We included prospective and retrospective reports published since 2015 and provided clinical data on toxicity and effectiveness. RESULTS: Six studies were included, five of which investigated capecitabine-containing regimens. Of these, four were prospective investigations and one a retrospective matched comparative analysis. One randomized prospective trial was found for T­DM1 and radiotherapy. In the majority of these reports, radiation-associated toxicities were not specifically addressed. CONCLUSION: Regarding oncologic outcome, the influence of sequencing radiation therapy with maintenance capecitabine chemotherapy in the post-neoadjuvant setting is unclear. Synchronous administration of capecitabine is feasible, but reports on possible excess toxicities are partially conflicting. Dose reduction of capecitabine should be considered, especially if normofractionated radiotherapy is used. In terms of tolerance, hypofractionated schedules seem to be superior in terms of toxicity in concurrent settings. T­DM1 can safely be administered concurrently with radiotherapy.

Moderate hypofractionation remains the standard of care for whole-breast radiotherapy in breast cancer: Considerations regarding FAST and FAST-Forward.

Moderate hypofractionation is the standard of care for adjuvant whole-breast radiotherapy after breast-conserving surgery for breast cancer. Recently, 10-year results from the FAST and 5­year results from the FAST-Forward trial evaluating adjuvant whole-breast radiotherapy in 5 fractions over 5 weeks or 1 week have been published. This article summarizes recent data for moderate hypofractionation and results from the FAST and FAST-Forward trial on ultra-hypofractionation. While the FAST trial was not powered for comparison of local recurrence rates, FAST-Forward demonstrated non-inferiority for two ultra-hypofractionated regimens in terms of local control. In both trials, the higher-dose experimental arms resulted in elevated rates of late toxicity. For the lower dose experimental arms of 28.5 Gy over 5 weeks and 26 Gy over 1 week, moderate or marked late effects were similar in the majority of documented items compared to the respective standard arms, but significantly worse in some subdomains. The difference between the standard arm and the 26 Gy of the FAST-Forward trial concerning moderate or marked late effects increased with longer follow-up in disadvantage of the experimental arm for most items. For now, moderate hypofractionation with 40-42.5 Gy over 15-16 fractions remains the standard of care for the majority of patients with breast cancer who undergo whole-breast radiotherapy without regional nodal irradiation after breast-conserving surgery.

Management of Germ Cell Tumours of the Testes in Adult Patients: German Clinical Practice Guideline, PART II - Recommendations for the Treatment of Advanced, Recurrent, and Refractory Disease and Extragonadal and Sex Cord/Stromal Tumours and for the Management of Follow-Up, Toxicity, Quality of Life, Palliative Care, and Supportive Therapy.

OBJECTIVES: We developed the first German evidence- and consensus-based clinical guideline on diagnosis, treatment, and follow-up of germ cell tumours (GCT) of the testes in adult patients. We present the guideline content in 2 separate publications. The present second part summarizes therecommendations for the treatment of advanced disease stages and for the management of follow-up and late effects. MATERIALS AND METHODS: An interdisciplinary panel of 42 experts including 1 patient representative developed the guideline content. Clinical recommendations and statements were based on scientific evidence and expert consensus. For this purpose, evidence tables for several review questions, which were based on systematic literature searches (last search in March 2018), were provided. Thirty-one experts, who were entitled to vote, rated the final clinical recommendations and statements. RESULTS: Here we present the treatment recommendations separately for patients with metastatic seminoma and non-seminomatous GCT (stages IIA/B and IIC/III), for restaging and treatment of residual masses, and for relapsed and refractory disease stages. The recommendations also cover extragonadal and sex cord/stromal tumours, the management of follow-up and toxicity, quality-of-life aspects, palliative care, and supportive therapy. CONCLUSION: Physicians and other medical service providers who are involved in the diagnostics, treatment, and follow-up of GCT (all stages, outpatient and inpatient care as well as rehabilitation) are the users of the present guideline. The guideline also comprises quality indicators for measuring the implementation of the guideline recommendations in routine clinical care; these data will be presented in a future publication.

Management of Germ Cell Tumours of the Testis in Adult Patients. German Clinical Practice Guideline Part I: Epidemiology, Classification, Diagnosis, Prognosis, Fertility Preservation, and Treatment Recommendations for Localized Stages.

INTRODUCTION: This is the first German evidence- and consensus-based clinical guideline on diagnosis, treatment, and follow-up on germ cell tumours (GCTs) of the testis in adult patients. We present the guideline content in two publications. Part I covers the topic's background, methods, epidemiology, classification systems, diagnostics, prognosis, and treatment recommendations for the localized stages. METHODS: An interdisciplinary panel of 42 experts including 1 patient representative developed the guideline content. Clinical recommendations and statements were based on scientific evidence and expert consensus. For this purpose, evidence tables for several review questions, which were based on systematic literature searches (last search was in March 2018) were provided. Thirty-one experts entitled to vote, rated the final clinical recommendations and statements. RESULTS: We provide 161 clinical recommendations and statements. We present information on the quality of cancer care and epidemiology and give recommendations for staging and classification as well as for diagnostic procedures. The diagnostic recommendations encompass measures for assessing the primary tumour as well as procedures for the detection of metastases. One chapter addresses prognostic factors. In part I, we separately present the treatment recommendations for germ cell neoplasia in situ, and the organ-confined stages (clinical stage I) of both seminoma and nonseminoma. CONCLUSION: Although GCT is a rare tumour entity with excellent survival rates for the localized stages, its management requires an interdisciplinary approach, including several clinical experts. Quality of care is highly related to institutional expertise and can be reassured by established online-based second-opinion boards. There are very few studies on diagnostics with good level of evidence. Treatment of metastatic GCTs must be tailored to the risk according to the International Germ Cell Cancer Collaboration Group classification after careful diagnostic evaluation. An interdisciplinary approach as well as the referral of selected patients to centres with proven experience can help achieve favourable clinical outcomes.

Heart-sparing radiotherapy techniques in breast cancer patients: a recommendation of the breast cancer expert panel of the German society of radiation oncology (DEGRO).

PURPOSE: The aim of this review was to analyze the respective efficacy of various heart-sparing radiotherapy techniques. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Heart-sparing can be performed in three different ways in breast cancer radiotherapy: by seeking to keep the heart out of treated volumes (i.e. by prone position or specific breathing techniques such as deep inspiration breath-hold [DIBH] and/or gating), by solely irradiating a small volume around the lumpectomy cavity (partial breast irradiation, PBI), or by using modern radiation techniques like intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT), volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) or protons. This overview presents the available data on these three approaches. RESULTS: Studies on prone position are heterogeneous and most trials only refer to patients with large breasts; therefore, no definitive conclusion can be drawn for clinical routine. Nonetheless, there seems to be a trend toward better sparing of the left anterior descending artery in supine position even for these selected patients. The data on the use of DIBH for heart-sparing in breast cancer patients is consistent and the benefit compared to free-breathing is supported by several studies. In comparison with whole breast irradiation (WBI), PBI has an advantage in reducing the heart dose. Of note, DIBH and PBI with multicatheter brachytherapy are similar with regard to the dose reduction to heart structures. WBI by IMRT/VMAT techniques without DIBH is not an effective strategy for heart-sparing in breast cancer patients with "standard" anatomy. A combination of DIBH and IMRT may be used for internal mammary radiotherapy. CONCLUSION: Based on the available findings, the DEGRO breast cancer expert panel recommends the use of DIBH as the best heart-sparing technique. Nonetheless, depending on the treatment volume and localization, other techniques may be employed or combined with DIBH when appropriate.

Radiotherapy after skin-sparing mastectomy with immediate breast reconstruction in intermediate-risk breast cancer : Indication and technical considerations.

BACKGROUND: Skin-sparing (SSME) and nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSME) were developed to improve the cosmetic results for breast cancer (BC) patients, both allowing for immediate breast reconstruction. Recommendations for post-mastectomy radiotherapy (PMRT) are primarily derived from trials where patients were treated by standard mastectomies. Due to their more conservative character, SSME and especially NSME potentially leave more glandular tissue at risk for subclinical disease. METHODS: Rates and sites of locoregional failures following SSME and NSME plus/minus reconstruction were analyzed regarding tumor stage and biological risk factors. In particular, the role of PMRT in "intermediate"-risk and early stage high-risk breast cancer patients was revisited. Implications on targeting and dose delivery of PMRT were critically reviewed. RESULTS: The value of PMRT in stage III BC remains undisputed. For node-negative BC patients, the majority of reports classify clinical and biological features such as tumor size, close surgical margins, premenopausal status, multicentricity, lymphangiosis, triple-negativity, HER2-overexpression, and poor tumor grading as associated with higher rates of locoregional relapse, thus, building an "intermediate" risk group. Surveys revealed that the majority of radiation oncologists use risk-adaptive models also considering the number of coinciding factors for the estimation of recurrence probability following SSME and NSME. Constellations with a 10-year locoregional recurrence risk of >10% are usually triggering the indication for PMRT. There was no common belief that the amount of residual tissue, e.g., tissue thickness over flaps, serves as additional decision aid. Modern treatment planning can ensure optimal dose distribution for PMRT in almost all patients with SSME. There are no reliable data supporting a reduction of the treatment volume from the CTV chest wall, e.g., to the nipple-areola complex, to the dorsal aspect behind the implant volume, the pectoralis muscle, nor the regional interpectoral, axillary, or complete regional lymph nodes only. The omission of a skin bolus in intermediate-risk BC does not compromise oncological safety. CONCLUSIONS: For intermediate-risk as well as early stage high-risk BC patients, the DEGRO Breast Cancer Expert Panel recommends the use of PMRT following SSME and NSME when a 10-year locoregional recurrence risk is likely to be greater than 10%, as estimated by clinical and biological risk factors. Subvolume-only radiation is discouraged outside of trials. The impact of adequate systemic treatment and the value of radiotherapy on optimal locoregional tumor control, with the goal of less than 5% LRR at 10-years follow-up, has to be verified in prospective trials.

Heart toxicity from breast cancer radiotherapy : Current findings, assessment, and prevention.

BACKGROUND: Late cardiac toxicities caused by (particularly left-sided) breast radiotherapy (RT) are now recognized as rare but relevant sequelae, which has prompted research on risk structure identification and definition of threshold doses to heart subvolumes. The aim of the present review was to critically discuss the clinical evidence on late cardiac reactions based on dose-dependent outcome reports for mean heart doses as well as doses to cardiac substructures. METHODS: A literature review was performed to examine clinical evidence on radiation-induced heart toxicities. Mean heart doses and doses to cardiac substructures were focused upon based on dose-dependent outcome reports. Furthermore, an overview of radiation techniques for heart protection is given and non-radiotherapeutic aspects of cardiotoxicity in the multimodal setting of breast cancer treatment are discussed. RESULTS: Based on available findings, the DEGRO breast cancer expert panel recommends the following constraints: mean heart dose <2.5 Gy; DmeanLV (mean dose left ventricle) < 3 Gy; V5LV (volume of LV receiving ≥5 Gy) < 17%; V23LV (volume of LV receiving ≥23 Gy) < 5%; DmeanLAD (mean dose left descending artery) < 10 Gy; V30LAD (volume of LAD receiving ≥30 Gy) < 2%; V40LAD (volume of LAD receiving ≥40 Gy) < 1%. CONCLUSION: In addition to mean heart dose, breast cancer RT treatment planning should also include constraints for cardiac subvolumes such as LV and LAD. The given constraints serve as a clinicians' aid for ensuring adequate heart protection. The individual decision between sufficient protection of cardiac structures versus optimal target volume coverage remains in the physician's hand. The risk of breast cancer-specific mortality and a patient's cardiac risk factors must be individually weighed up against the risk of radiation-induced cardiotoxicity.

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy for breast cancer-background for the indication of locoregional treatment.

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) has been widely adopted into the multidisciplinary management of breast cancer. The prognostic impact of treatment response has been clearly demonstrated. However, the impact of treatment response on the indication for adjuvant radiotherapy is unclear. This review summarizes important implications of NACT and treatment response on the risk of recurrence and locoregional multidisciplinary management from the standpoint of radiation oncology.

Individualization of post-mastectomy radiotherapy and regional nodal irradiation based on treatment response after neoadjuvant chemotherapy for breast cancer : A systematic review.

PURPOSE: To review the evidence regarding post-mastectomy radiotherapy (PMRT) and regional nodal irradiation (RNI) after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) for breast cancer, with a special focus on individualization of adjuvant radiotherapy based on treatment response. METHODS: A systematic literature search using the PubMed/Medline database was performed. We included prospective and retrospective reports with a minimum of 10 patients that had been published since 1st January 2000, and provided clinical outcome data analyzed by treatment response and radiotherapy. RESULTS: Out of 763 articles identified via PubMed/Medline and hand search, 68 full text-articles were assessed for eligibility after screening of title and abstract. 13 studies were included in the systematic review, 9 for PMRT and 5 for RNI. All included studies were retrospective reports. CONCLUSIONS: There is a considerable lack of evidence regarding the role of adjuvant radiotherapy and its individualization based on treatment response after NACT. Results of prospective randomized trials such as NSABP B­51/RTOG 1304 and Alliance A11202 are eagerly awaited.

Seminoma Clinical Stage 1 - Patterns of Care in Germany.

INTRODUCTION: International guidelines are ambivalent regarding the recommendations for the management of clinical stage 1 (CS1) seminoma. PATIENTS AND METHODS: During 2008-2013, 1,050 patients with seminoma CS1 were prospectively registered with regard to assessing management modality (radiotherapy, carboplatin, surveillance). Associations with tumor size, rete testis invasion, age, year of diagnosis, type of institution, and geographic location were assessed. RESULTS: Of the total number of patients, 49.3% received carboplatin 1 course, 8.5% carboplatin 2 courses, 35.9% surveillance, and 6.3% radiotherapy. In 2013, surveillance increased significantly to 57.9%. Treatment decisions were significantly associated with rete testis invasion and tumor size. Carboplatin was applied significantly more in office clinics than elsewhere. There is some regional variation regarding treatment preferences. CONCLUSIONS: The rising acceptance of surveillance mirrors international trends. The associations with prognostic factors demonstrate care givers to be compliant with contemporary guidelines. The association with the type of institution suggests non-oncological factors to be also relevant in decision making.

DEGRO practical guidelines for radiotherapy of breast cancer V: Therapy for locally advanced and inflammatory breast cancer, as well as local therapy in cases with synchronous distant metastases.

AIM: The purpose of this work is to give practical guidelines for radiotherapy of locally advanced, inflammatory and metastatic breast cancer at first presentation. METHODS: A comprehensive survey of the literature using the search phrases "locally advanced breast cancer", "inflammatory breast cancer", "breast cancer and synchronous metastases", "de novo stage IV and breast cancer", and "metastatic breast cancer" and "at first presentation" restricted to "clinical trials", "randomized trials", "meta-analysis", "systematic review", and "guideline" was performed and supplemented by using references of the respective publications. Based on the German interdisciplinary S3 guidelines, updated in 2012, this publication addresses indications, sequence to other therapies, target volumes, dose, and fractionation of radiotherapy. RESULTS: International and national guidelines are in agreement that locally advanced, at least if regarded primarily unresectable and inflammatory breast cancer should receive neoadjuvant systemic therapy first, followed by surgery and radiotherapy. If surgery is not amenable after systemic therapy, radiotherapy is the treatment of choice followed by surgery, if possible. Surgery and radiotherapy should be administered independent of response to neoadjuvant systemic treatment. In patients with a de novo diagnosis of breast cancer with synchronous distant metastases, surgery and radiotherapy result in considerably better locoregional tumor control. An improvement in survival has not been consistently proven, but may exist in subgroups of patients. CONCLUSION: Radiotherapy is an important part in the treatment of locally advanced and inflammatory breast cancer that should be given to all patients regardless to the intensity and effect of neoadjuvant systemic treatment and the extent of surgery. Locoregional radiotherapy in patients with primarily distant metastatic disease should be prescribed on an individual basis.

DEGRO practical guidelines for radiotherapy of breast cancer IV: radiotherapy following mastectomy for invasive breast cancer.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Since the last recommendations from the Breast Cancer Expert Panel of the German Society for Radiation Oncology (DEGRO) in 2008, evidence for the effectiveness of postmastectomy radiotherapy (PMRT) has grown. This growth is based on updates of the national S3 and international guidelines, as well as on new data and meta-analyses. New aspects were considered when updating the DEGRO recommendations. METHODS: The authors performed a comprehensive survey of the literature. Data from recently published (meta-)analyses, randomized clinical trials and international cancer societies' guidelines yielding new aspects compared to 2008 were reviewed and discussed. New aspects were included in the current guidelines. Specific issues relating to particular PMRT constellations, such as the presence of risk factors (lymphovascular invasion, blood vessel invasion, positive lymph node ratio >20 %, resection margins <3 mm, G3 grading, young age/premenopausal status, extracapsular invasion, negative hormone receptor status, invasive lobular cancer, size >2 cm or a combination of ≥ 2 risk factors) and 1-3 positive lymph nodes are emphasized. RESULTS: The evidence for improved overall survival and local control following PMRT for T4 tumors, positive resection margins, >3 positive lymph nodes and in T3 N0 patients with risk factors such as lymphovascular invasion, G3 grading, close margins, and young age has increased. Recently identified risk factors such as invasive lobular subtype and negative hormone receptor status were included. For patients with 1-3 positive lymph nodes, the recommendation for PMRT has reached the 1a level of evidence. CONCLUSION: PMRT is mandatory in patients with T4 tumors and/or positive lymph nodes and/or positive resection margins. PMRT should be strongly considered in patients with T3 N0 tumors and risk factors, particularly when two or more risk factors are present.