A phase II trial proposal of total neoadjuvant treatment with primary chemotherapy, stereotactic body radiation therapy, and intraoperative radiation therapy in borderline resectable pancreatic adenocarcinoma.

BACKGROUND: The current management guidelines recommend that patients with borderline resectable pancreatic adenocarcinoma (BRPC) should initially receive neoadjuvant chemotherapy. The addition of advanced radiation therapy modalities, including stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) and intraoperative radiation therapy (IORT), could result in a more effective neoadjuvant strategy, with higher rates of margin-free resections and improved survival outcomes. METHODS/DESIGN: In this single-center, single-arm, intention-to-treat, phase II trial newly diagnosed BRPC will receive a "total neoadjuvant" therapy with FOLFIRINOX (5-fluorouracil, irinotecan and oxaliplatin) and hypofractionated SBRT (5 fractions, total dose of 30 Gy with simultaneous integrated boost of 50 Gy on tumor-vessel interface). Following surgical exploration or resection, IORT will be also delivered (10 Gy). The primary endpoint is 3-year survival. Secondary endpoints include completion of neoadjuvant treatment, resection rate, acute and late toxicities, and progression-free survival. In the subset of patients undergoing resection, per-protocol analysis of disease-free and disease-specific survival will be performed. The estimated sample size is 100 patients over a 36-month period. The trial is currently recruiting. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT04090463 at clinicaltrials.gov.

Long-term outcome after intraoperative radiotherapy as a boost in breast cancer.

PURPOSE: To investigate long-term oncological outcome and incidence of chronic side effects in patients with breast cancer and intraoperative radiotherapy given as an upfront boost (IORT boost). METHODS: Retrospective analysis of 400 patients with an IORT boost with low-energy X­rays (20 Gy), subsequent whole-breast irradiation (46-50 Gy), and annual oncological follow-up. Side effects were prospectively evaluated (LENT-SOMA scales) over a period of up to 15 years. Side effects scored ≥grade 2 at least three times during follow-up were judged to be chronic. RESULTS: The median age was 63 years (30-85) and the median follow-up was 78 months (2-180) after IORT boost. In 15 patients a local recurrence occurred, resulting in a local recurrence rate at 5, 10, and 15 years of 2.0%, 6.6%, and 10.1%, respectively. The overall survival rates at 5, 10, and 15 years were 92.1%, 81.8%, and 80.7%, respectively. The most common high-grade side effects were fibrosis (21%) and pain (8.6%). The majority of side effects occurred within the first 3 years. The actuarial rates of chronic fibrosis were 19.1% and 21.1% at 5 and ≥8 years, of chronic pain 8.6% at ≥4 years, of chronic edema of the breast 2.4% at ≥2 years, of chronic lymphedema 0.0% at 5 and 10 years, and of chronic hyperpigmentation 0.5% at ≥2 years. Side effects were similar or less than expected from an external beam boost. CONCLUSION: IORT boost appears to be a highly efficient and safe method for upfront delivery of the tumor bed boost in high-risk breast cancer patients.

Patient preferences regarding intraoperative versus external beam radiotherapy for early breast cancer and the impact of socio-demographic factors.

PURPOSE: Patient comfort and preference have steadily gained attention in radio-oncologic treatment of breast cancer. Therefore, the purpose of this investigation was to further explore patient preferences in choosing between intraoperative radiotherapy (IORT) and external beam radiotherapy (EBRT). METHODS: We prospectively analysed data of 101 women, who were candidates for breast-conserving surgery with adjuvant radiotherapy. A two-part video was shown to patients: an educational section about EBRT/IORT, followed by a preference elicitation section focusing on additional accepted risk (AAR) of recurrence after either treatment. Furthermore, participants completed a questionnaire to identify factors that influence patient preference of radiation modality. RESULTS: The data demonstrate that 42.5% of patients would accept additional risk of recurrence for IORT versus 9% AAR for EBRT, while 48.5% of patients would not accept any additional risk, yet would choose IORT over EBRT if risks of recurrence were equivalent. When combining patient preferences and the results from the questionnaire, no single socio-economic/-demographic factor was found to significantly correlate with AAR of IORT. CONCLUSION: Our study confirms the existence of subgroups of breast cancer patients who would accept an additional risk of recurrence associated with choice of radiation modality to receive a single dose of IORT as adjuvant radiotherapy for breast cancer instead of EBRT over several weeks; yet our data fail to identify a single factor significantly associated with these patient preferences and, therefore, helpful for individualised decision-making processes.

Comparing preoperative imaging modalities in patient selection for breast intraoperative radiotherapy.

BACKGROUND: This study evaluated the relative accuracy of mammography, ultrasound, and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in predicting the tumor size of early stage breast tumors in preoperative selection of patients for intraoperative radiotherapy (IORT). METHODS: We identified 156 patients with clinical T1/T2, N0 breast cancer who underwent IORT. Clinical, pathologic, and radiation data were collected. The preoperative tumor size obtained by imaging was compared with tumor pathological size. RESULTS: The median patient age was 66. The mean tumor size at excision was 1.05 cm (0.1-3.0 cm). Out of the 156 patients, 98 had a reported, nonzero tumor size by mammography, 131 by ultrasound, and 76 by MRI. The mean difference between imaging and the tumor size was +0.062 ± 0.54 cm for mammography, -0.11 ± 0.43 cm for ultrasound, and +0.33 ± 0.55 cm for MRI, with positive values indicating an overestimate of the tumor size. MRI produced more overestimates of tumor size of at least 0.5 cm than mammography or ultrasound in a paired analysis of patients who received both modalities. CONCLUSIONS: Accuracy of imaging modalities in determining tumor size can influence patients' eligibility for IORT. Mammography and ultrasound showed acceptable accuracy in predicting size. MRI overestimated tumor size and may inappropriately exclude patients from IORT. We would discourage ruling out candidates for IORT on the basis of large size by MRI alone.

Is current clinical practice modified about intraoperative breast irradiation?

After the results obtained in the two randomized clinical trial, the ELIOT trial and the TARGIT-A trial, a heated debate is going on concerning the question of applying intraoperative radiotherapy (IORT) instead of postoperative whole breast irradiation (WBI) after breast conservative treatment. Currently, many centers are applying the IORT following the strict selection criteria dictated by the working groups American Society for Radiation Oncology (ASTRO) and Groupe Européen de Curiethérapie-European Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology (GEC-ESTRO) and monitoring the oncological outcome together with radiation toxicity on breast tissue. The clinical experience of the Geneva University Hospital regarding the use of the Intrabeam system is evaluated and compared with current evidences.

Intraoperative radiotherapy: An alternative to whole-breast external beam radiotherapy in the management of highly selective breast cancer: A SEER database analysis.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to verify if intraoperative radiotherapy (IORT) can achieve the same survival outcome as whole-breast external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) in early breast cancer after breast-conserving surgery (BCS), and to explore the suitable candidates that can safely receive IORT after BCS. METHODS: Eligible post-BCS patients who received IORT or EBRT were included in the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) database from 2010 to 2018. Risk factors that affected 5-year overall survival (OS) or breast cancer specific survival (BCSS) were identified by Cox proportional hazards regression analysis. Clinical characteristics, OS, and BCSS were comparatively analyzed between the two treatment modalities. RESULTS: The survival analysis after propensity score matching confirmed that patients who received IORT (n = 2200) had a better 5-year OS than those who received EBRT (n = 2200) (p = 0.015). However, the two groups did not differ significantly in 5-year BCSS (p = 0.381). This feature persisted even after multivariate analyses that took into account numerous clinical characteristics. Although there was no significant difference in BCSS between different subgroups of patients treated with IORT or EBRT, patients over 55 years of age, with T1, N0, non-triple negative breast cancers, hormone receptor-positive, and histologic grade II showed a better OS after receiving IORT. CONCLUSION: In low-risk, early-stage breast cancer, IORT was not inferior to EBRT considering 5-year BCSS and OS. Considering the equivalent clinical outcome but less radiotoxicity, IORT might be a reasonable alternative to EBRT in highly selective patients undergoing BCS.

Comparison of intraoperative radiotherapy as a boost vs. simultaneously integrated boosts after breast-conserving therapy for breast cancer.

Background: Currently, there are no data from randomized trials on the use of intraoperative radiotherapy (IORT) as a tumor bed boost in women at high risk of local recurrence. The aim of this retrospective analysis was to compare the toxicity and oncological outcome of IORT or simultaneous integrated boost (SIB) with conventional external beam radiotherapy (WBI) after breast conserving surgery (BCS). Methods: Between 2009 and 2019, patients were treated with a single dose of 20 Gy IORT with 50 kV photons, followed by WBI 50 Gy in 25 or 40.05 in 15 fractions or WBI 50 Gy with SIB up to 58.80-61.60 Gy in 25-28 fractions. Toxicity was compared after propensity score matching. Overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Results: A 1:1 propensity-score matching resulted in an IORT + WBI and SIB + WBI cohort of 60 patients, respectively. The median follow-up for IORT + WBI was 43.5 vs. 32 months in the SIB + WBI cohort. Most women had a pT1c tumor: IORT group 33 (55%) vs. 31 (51.7%) SIB group (p = 0.972). The luminal-B immunophenotype was most frequently diagnosed in the IORT group 43 (71.6%) vs. 35 (58.3%) in the SIB group (p = 0.283). The most reported acute adverse event in both groups was radiodermatitis. In the IORT cohort, radiodermatitis was grade 1: 23 (38.3%), grade 2: 26 (43.3%), and grade 3: 6 (10%) vs. SIB cohort grade 1: 3 (5.1%), grade 2: 21 (35%), and grade 3: 7 (11.6%) without a meaningful difference (p = 0.309). Fatigue occurred more frequently in the IORT group (grade 1: 21.7% vs. 6.7%; p = 0.041). In addition, intramammary lymphedema grade 1 occurred significantly more often in the IORT group (11.7% vs. 1.7%; p = 0.026). Both groups showed comparable late toxicity. The 3- and 5-year local control (LC) rates were each 98% in the SIB group vs. 98% and 93% in the IORT group (LS: log rank p = 0.717). Conclusion: Tumor bed boost using IORT and SIB techniques after BCS shows excellent local control and comparable late toxicity, while IORT application exhibits a moderate increase in acute toxicity. These data should be validated by the expected publication of the prospective randomized TARGIT-B study.

Application of intraoperative radiotherapy for malignant glioma.

Malignant glioma is characterized by rapid tumor cell proliferation and high recurrence risk. In terms of its treatment, the therapeutic effects of maximum resection and postoperative radiotherapy with adjuvant chemotherapy as well as many other new therapeutic techniques such as antiangiogenic therapy and immunotherapy remain poor. Glioma recurrence, especially local recurrence, is an important reason of glioma treatment failure. Intraoperative radiotherapy (IORT) enables exclusion of radiation-sensitive normal tissue from the radiation field in operation and then the application of a single high-dose precision irradiation to the residual tumor or tumor bed. IORT has great application potential in the control of local recurrence of malignant tumors. This paper thus aims to review the current status and prospects of IORT's application in malignant glioma treatment.

Resection of supratentorial brain metastases with intraoperative radiotherapy. Is it safe? Analysis and experiences of a single center cohort.

Introduction: Intraoperative Radiotherapy (ioRT) is an emerging treatment option in oncologic surgery for various diseases including intraaxial brain lesions to improve surgical outcome and accelerate the adjuvant oncologic therapy. Despite its use in glioma surgery, the application and data regarding ioRT in the treatment of brain metastases (BMs) is sparse. Here were report the largest series of supratentorial BMs treated with resection and ioRT according to functional outcome and adverse events. Methods: We performed a retrospective chart review analysis of patients undergoing surgery for BMs following an interdisciplinary tumor board decision in every case with ioRT at our institution. Patient properties, functional status (Karnofsky Performance Score/KPS) before and after surgery as well as oncologic (disease, recursive partitioning analysis, lesion size) and operative parameters were analyzed until hospital discharge. Adverse events (AE) were recorded until 30 days after surgery and rated according to the Clavien Dindo Grading (CDG) scale. Results: 70 patients (40 female) with various oncologic diseases were identified and analyzed. Six underwent prior RT. Mean age was 66 ± 11 years. Preoperative median KPS was 80% with a mean BM volume of 3.2 ± 1.2 cm3. Nine patients (13%) experienced in total 14 AEs, including 2 cases (3%) of postoperative death (CDG5) and 2 with new postoperative epilepsy necessitating additional pharmacotreatment (CDG2). Five patients suffered from new neurologic deficit (CDG1) not needing further surgical or medical treatment. After surgery, the neurological status in 7 patients (10%) deteriorated while it improved in 21 cases (30%). Patients experiencing AEs had longer hospitalization and poorer postoperative KPS mdn. 90 vs. 80%. There was no statistically significant deterioration of the functional status during the immediate postoperative course in the whole patient cohort. Conclusion: Surgery for supratentorial BMs with ioRT seems safe and feasible. Further studies on the benefit regarding oncologic outcome need to be performed.

Outcomes Of Intraoperative Radiotherapy (Iort) For Spinal Tumours.

BACKGROUND: The spinal column is a major site of neoplastic proliferation where decisions regarding surgical or radiotherapeutic intervention are based upon spinal instability neoplastic score (SINS). A novel technique named 'Intraoperative radiotherapy (IORT) was proposed where surgery and radiotherapy were performed in the same session. During our literature search, we found no published systematic review or meta-analysis regarding the outcomes of IORT for spinal tumors. This review aims to provide the knowledge regarding the outcomes of IORT for spinal tumors to assist surgeons and radiologists. METHODS: PubMed, Google Scholar, Cochrane library for trials reporting the outcomes of IORTin spinal tumors. The search terms were "outcomes", "Intraoperative radiotherapy", "IORT", "spine neoplasia" and "spine metastasis" in different combinations. Standardized mean difference (SMD) in VAS for pain relief while proportionality for neurological improvement, local progression, and toxicities were plotted on forest plots, respectively. RESULTS: Eight studies comprising 610 patients were included with two conference proceedings. SMD for VAS was -1.715 while proportionality for neurological improvement, local progression, and toxicities were 0.9 (90%), 0.03 (3%), and 0.121 (12.1%), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Pain relief was evident by a decrease in VAS scores in the majority of patients. The majority showed neurological improvement and regained motor and sensory functions while an overwhelming population showed local tumor control with lesser patients developing tumor progression and radiation-induced toxicities. Short follow-ups and the absence of randomized trials advocates the need for further clinical researches to confirm the outcomes of IORT in spinal tumors.

Long-Term Results of the TARGIT-A Trial: More Questions than Answers.

Background: During the last decade, partial breast irradiation (PBI) has gained traction as a relevant treatment option for patients with early-stage low-risk breast cancer after breast-conserving surgery. The TARGIT-A prospective randomized trial compared a "risk-adapted" intraoperative radiotherapy (IORT) approach with 50-kv X-rays (INTRABEAM®) as the PBI followed by optional whole-breast irradiation (WBI) and conventional adjuvant WBI in terms of observed 5-year in-breast recurrence rates. Recently, long-term data were published. Since the first publication of the TARGIT-A trial, a broad debate has been emerged regarding several uncertainties and limitations associated with data analysis and interpretation. Our main objective was to summarize the data, with an emphasis on the updated report and the resulting implications. Summary: From our point of view, the previously unresolved questions still remain and more have been added, especially with regard to the study design, a change in the primary outcome measure, the significant number of patients lost to follow-up, and the lack of a subgroup analysis according to risk factors and treatment specifications. Key Message: Taking into account the abovementioned limitations of the recently published long-term results of the TARGIT-A trial, the German Society of Radiation Oncology (DEGRO) Breast Cancer Expert Panel adheres to its recently published recommendations on PBI: "the 50-kV system (INTRABEAM) cannot be recommended for routine adjuvant PBI treatment after breast-conserving surgery."

Targeted Intraoperative Radiotherapy (TARGIT-IORT) for Early-Stage Invasive Breast Cancer: A Single Institution Experience.

Purpose/Objective: We present our single-institution experience in the management of invasive breast cancer with targeted intraoperative radiotherapy (TARGIT-IORT), focusing on patient suitability for IORT determined by the American Society for Radiation Oncology (ASTRO) Accelerated Partial Breast Irradiation (APBI) consensus guidelines. Materials/Methods: We identified 237 patients treated for biopsy-proven early-stage invasive breast cancer using low energy x-ray TARGIT-IORT at the time of lumpectomy between September 2013 and April 2020 who were prospectively enrolled in an institutional review board (IRB) approved database. We retrospectively reviewed preoperative and postoperative clinicopathologic factors to determine each patient's ASTRO APBI suitability (suitable, cautionary or unsuitable) according to the 2017 consensus guidelines (CG). Change in suitability group was determined based on final pathology. Kaplan-Meier methods were used to estimate the survival probability and recurrence probability across time. Results: 237 patients were included in this analysis, based on preoperative clinicopathologic characteristics, 191 (80.6%) patients were suitable, 46 (19.4%) were cautionary and none were deemed unsuitable. Suitability classification changed in 95 (40%) patients based on final pathology from lumpectomy. Increasing preoperative lesion size or a body mass index (BMI) ≥ 30 kg/m2 were significant predictors for suitability group change. Forty-one (17.3%) patients received additional adjuvant whole breast radiotherapy after TARGIT-IORT. At a median follow up of 38.2 months (range 0.4 - 74.5), five (2.1%) patients had ipsilateral breast tumor recurrences (IBTR), including two (0.8%) true local recurrences defined as a recurrence in the same quadrant as the initial lumpectomy bed with the same histology as the initial tumor. IBTR occurred in 1/103 (0.09%) patient in the post-op suitable group, 4/98 (4.08%) patients in the post-op cautionary group, and no patients in the post-op unsuitable group. At 3-years, the overall survival rate was 98.4% and the local recurrence free survival rate was 97.1%. Conclusion: There is a low rate of IBTR after TARGIT-IORT when used in appropriately selected patients. Change in suitability classification pre to postoperatively is common, highlighting a need for further investigation to optimize preoperative patient risk stratification in this setting. Patients who become cautionary or unsuitable based on final pathology should be considered for additional adjuvant therapy.

Prognosis comparison between intraoperative radiotherapy and whole-breast external beam radiotherapy for T1-2 stage breast cancer without lymph node metastasis treated with breast-conserving surgery: A case-control study after propensity score matching.

Background: External beam radiotherapy (EBRT), an adjuvant to breast-conserving surgery (BCS), requires a long treatment period, is costly, and is associated with numerous complications. Large sample studies with long follow-up periods are lacking regarding whether intraoperative radiotherapy (IORT), an emerging radiotherapy modality, can replace EBRT for patients with T1-2 early stage breast cancer without lymph node metastasis treated with BCS. Methods: We identified 270,842 patients with T1-2N0M0 breast cancer from 2000 to 2018 in the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database. A total of 10,992 patients were matched by propensity score matching (PSM). According to the radiotherapy method, the patients were divided into the IORT and EBRT groups. Overall survival (OS) and breast cancer-specific survival (BCSS) rates were analyzed and compared between the IORT and EBRT groups by Kaplan-Meier analysis. Bilateral P < 0.05 was considered to indicate significance. Results: After PSM, the survival analysis showed no significant differences in OS or BCSS rates between the IORT and EBRT groups. In the subgroup analysis, the IORT population diagnosed from 2010 to 2013 (HRs = 0.675, 95% CI 0.467-0.976, P = 0.037) or with T2 stage (HRs = 0.449, 95% CI 0.261-0.772, P = 0.004) had better OS rates, but in the overall population, the OS and BCSS rates were better in patients with T1 stage than in patients with T2 stage (P < 0.0001), and the proportion of chemotherapy was significantly higher in T2 stage than in T1 stage. Patients who had EBRT with unknown estrogen receptor had better OS rates (HRs = 3.392, 95% CI 1.368-8.407, P = 0.008). In addition, the IORT group had better BCSS rates for married (HRs = 0.403, 95% CI 0.184-0.881, P = 0.023), grade III (HRs = 0.405, 95% CI 0.173-0.952, P = 0.038), and chemotherapy-receiving (HRs = 0.327, 95% CI 0.116-0.917, P = 0.034) patients with breast cancer compared to the EBRT group. Conclusion: Intraoperative radiotherapy results of non-inferior OS and BCSS rates, compared to those of EBRT, in patients with early stage breast cancer without lymph node metastasis treated with BCS, and IORT may provide substantial benefits to patients as an effective alternative to standard treatment. This finding provides new insights into radiotherapy strategies for early stage breast cancer.

Can elderly patients with low-risk breast cancer benefit from radiotherapy?

There are few trials published on treatment in elderly women with low-risk breast cancer. Although the clinical behavior is like younger patients, there is a tendency to undertreat them, which may lead to an increase in the risk of local relapses and decrease their survival. The local recurrences omitting adjuvant treatment (tamoxifen or radiotherapy) after breast conserving surgery (BCS) even in low-risk patients is high, reaching up 20%, which is unacceptable. Although tamoxifen and radiotherapy seem to have a similar effect in reducing local recurrence with equal overall survival, the combination of both achieves the maximum benefit with local relapses of less than 2%. In recent years two studies have been published and were designed specifically for elderly patients. The CALGB 9343 and the PRIME II trials recommend omitting radiotherapy in patients with low-risk tumors treated with BCS and tamoxifen based on a similar survival, but with an increase in local relapses when radiotherapy is omitted, 10% at 10 years vs. 2%. There is no basis to ensure that a treatment with tamoxifen has less toxicity in this group of patients who are usually poly-treated, and it seems that treatment compliance is much lower than expected. The decrease in the number of sessions in external radiotherapy with hypofractionation and accelerate partial breast irradiation, especially intraoperative radiotherapy (IORT) with a single session, makes this recommendation very controversial. Elderly patients may benefit from radiation therapy after BCS.

Results of intraoperative radiotherapy given as a boost after breast conserving-surgery.

BACKGROUND: Whole breast irradiation after breast-conserving surgery (BCS) with an external beam boost of 10-16 Gy is currently the standard treatment in breast cancer. Various modalities have been used for tumor bed boost irradiation. This study aimed to evaluate the local recurrence rate, overall survival rate (OSR), toxicity and cosmetic outcome of intraoperative radiotherapy (IORT) as a boost followed by whole breast irradiation in patients who received BCS. METHODS: This is a retrospective study. Between December 2009 and March 2017, 81 patients who underwent BCS with IORT as a boost were enrolled in this study. For IORT, a single dose of 20 Gy was delivered using a 30-50 kV photon beam, intraoperatively. All patients received whole breast radiation therapy (WBRT) of 42.5-50 Gy over 4-5 weeks. The primary endpoint was a 3-year local recurrence rate. Secondary endpoints included the OSR, toxicity and cosmetic outcome at 6 months after radiation treatment. RESULTS: At a median follow-up of 43 months, ipsilateral local recurrence was observed in one of the 81 patients (1.2%) which occurred in the same quadrant of the breast index. The 3-year OSR was 89.8%. Treatment was well-tolerated with no grade 3-4 acute and late toxicity, and 87% of patients were recorded as excellent-good cosmesis. CONCLUSIONS: The use of BCS with IORT as a boost resulted in a low local recurrence rate and excellent cosmetic outcome in early breast cancer. Thus, IORT as a boost could be considered as an alternative to an external beam boost. Prospective studies are needed to confirm this data.

Intraoperative radiotherapy versus whole-breast external beam radiotherapy, and other factors associated with the prognosis of early breast cancer treated with breast-conserving surgery and radiotherapy: a retrospective study from SEER database.

BACKGROUND: This study was aimed to investigate the prognostic factors of early breast cancer treated with breast-conserving surgery (BCS) and radiotherapy. Besides, we focused our attention exclusively on the comparison of the impact on prognosis between intraoperative radiotherapy (IORT) and whole-breast external beam radiotherapy (EBRT). METHODS: An observational cohort study was performed on patients with Tis-2 N0-1 M0 breast cancer from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database who treated with BCS and radiotherapy. Cox regression analysis, Kaplan-Meier analysis, and propensity score matching (PSM) were used to estimate risk factors for overall survival (OS) and breast cancer-specific survival (BCSS). RESULTS: Of the 98,614 early breast cancer patients treated with BCS and radiotherapy, 97,164 (98.5%) patients underwent EBRT and 1,450 (1.5%) underwent IORT. Multivariable Cox regression analysis showed that early breast cancer patients with age ≥65, poor marital status, lack of medical insurance, histological grade III/IV (SEER 4 grades), high T stage, high N stage, and TNBC were associated with a decreased OS/BCSS, whereas ER-positive and PR-positive were associated with an improved OS/BCSS. No significant difference was observed in survival between IORT and EBRT groups (P=0.213 for OS, P=0.180 for BCSS), or between intraoperative beam radiation and intraoperative radioactive implants groups (P=0.319 for OS, P=0.972 for BCSS). CONCLUSIONS: Our study can help clinicians identify patients with poor prognosis after breast-conserving therapy. IORT may be an alternative to EBRT for early breast cancer patients who are unable to complete the long-term postoperative radiation treatment. Beam radiation and radioactive implants are both ideal alternatives for patients who choose IORT.

Intraoperative radiotherapy (IORT) versus whole-breast external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) in early stage breast cancer: results from SEER database.

PURPOSE: Intraoperative radiotherapy (IORT) has emerged as an alternative to whole-breast external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) for early breast cancer. This study aimed to investigate the risk factors for survival after IORT or whole-breast EBRT in breast cancer patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Breast cancer patients undergoing IORT or whole-breast EBRT were included from the surveillance, epidemiology, and end results database. Risk factors for overall survival (OS) and cancer-specific survival (CSS) were identified by Cox proportional hazards regression analysis. RESULTS: The IORT and EBRT groups did not differ significantly in OS and CSS. T2 stage (tumor size > 2 cm) was associated with poorer OS (aHR 3.49, 95% CI 1.05-11.62, P = 0.042), whereas ER-positive tumors were associated with better OS (aHR 0.26, 95% CI 0.09-0.76, P = 0.014). CONCLUSION: IORT was not inferior than EBRT considering the OS and CSS in the short-term follow-up of early breast cancer. It may be a reasonable alternative to EBRT for early breast cancer in select patients with favorable tumor size and receptor status, given the need for long-term monitoring of local control and radiation toxicity.

Long-term changes in blood counts after intraoperative radiotherapy for breast cancer-single center experience and review of the literature.

BACKGROUND: Intraoperative radiotherapy (IORT) for breast cancer is used as an upfront boost or as accelerated partial breast irradiation (APBI). To date, no description of blood count changes after IORT are available. Our analysis shows blood count changes in breast cancer patients up to 5 years after IORT ± whole breast radiotherapy (WBRT). METHODS: IORT was given as APBI in 58 patients (IORT/APBI-group) and as a boost in 198 patients (IORT/WBRT-group). A median dose of 20 Gy was given intraoperatively with low energy X-rays [INTRABEAM (TM) System] and additionally 46 Gy/2 Gy per fraction to the whole breast, if WBRT was added. Blood counts were collected preoperatively, after 90 days and through year 1-5 of follow-up. Dunnett's tests were used to calculate changes in blood counts over time. Additionally, platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio (PLR), neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) and derived neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (dNLR) were calculated for each time point. RESULTS: Significantly decreases in the IORT/WBRT-group were seen for erythrocytes, hemoglobin, platelets and leucocytes and an increase for lymphocytes for the total follow-up period. In the IORT/APBI-group significantly decreases were seen for erythrocytes and hemoglobin for the total follow-up period. Regarding changes during follow-up compared to the preoperative value, much more significant changes were seen in the IORT/WBRT-group compared to IORT/APBI-group without any relevant impact of chemotherapy. Regarding PLR-, NLR- and dNLR-values the rate of patients over the range improved over time in both groups. CONCLUSIONS: IORT/APBI seems to have a smaller effect on blood counts compared to IORT/WBRT. Furthermore, PLR-, NLR- and dNLR-values improved over time, suggesting a positive effect on outcome after IORT in general.

Update on intraoperative radiotherapy: new challenges and issues.

Intraoperative radiotherapy (IORT) for breast cancer has challenged the standard external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) and has been shown to be non-inferior for treating early breast cancer in the past decade. Several technologies have been tested for IORT and various randomised controlled trials are still ongoing. Different methods of application of IORT have also been evaluated, from early breast cancer to tumour bed boost radiotherapy amongst high risk women. TARGIT-A and ELIOT trials have reported a low incidence of local recurrence and good survival in both arms. Moreover, mortality has been found to be lower amongst women who underwent partial breast radiotherapy compared to those treated with EBRT in a recent meta-analysis. Despite this, IORT has not been introduced in the current clinical practice as yet, and many clinicians do not mention this treatment option to patients awaiting breast cancer surgery. The scientific community does not unanimously support the effectiveness of IORT and still raises concerns about introducing IORT as a standard treatment option for breast cancer. Current evidence demonstrates that IORT is ready for roll-out; it is time to let well-selected and informed patients be offered this treatment option in the current clinical practice.

Patient selection for partial breast irradiation by intraoperative radiation therapy: can magnetic resonance imaging be useful?-perspective from radiation oncology point of view.

The guidelines of the European and American Societies of Radiation Oncology (GEC-ESTRO and ASTRO) defined the selection criteria to offer partial breast irradiation (PBI) after lumpectomy in patients with low risk breast cancer regardless pre-operative staging. A recent publication by Tallet et al. explored the impact of preoperative magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) on patient eligibility for PBI. From their study, an ipsilateral BC was detected in 4% of patients, excluding these patients from intraoperative radiotherapy (IORT). The authors suggested that preoperative MRI should be used routinely for patient's candidate to IORT, because of the rate of ipsilateral breast cancer detected. In view of Tallet's article, we analyzed some aspects of this issue in order to envisage some possible perspective on how to better identify those patients who could benefit from PBI, especially using IORT. From historical studies, the risk of breast cancer recurrence outside index quadrant without irradiation is in the range of 1.5-3.5%. MRI sensitivity for detection of invasive cancer is reported up to 100%, and it is particularly useful in dense breast. Other imaging technique did not achieve the same sensibility and specificity as conventional MRI. Of note, none of randomized trials published and ongoing on PBI included preoperative MRI as part of staging. To perform a preoperative MRI in PBI setting is an interesting issue, but the available data suggest that this issue should be preferably studied in the setting of prospective clinical trials to clarify the role of MRI and the clinical meaning of the discovered additional foci.