scholarly journals Comparison of IORT (Radical and Boost Dose) and EBRT in Terms of Disease-Free Survival and Overall Survival according to Demographic, Pathologic, and Biological Factors in Patients with Breast Cancer

2021 ◽  
Vol 2021 ◽  
pp. 1-9
Author(s):  
Solmaz Hashemi ◽  
Seyedmohammadreza Javadi ◽  
Mohammad Esmaeil Akbari ◽  
Hamidreza Mirzaei ◽  
Seied Rabi Mahdavi
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Overall Survival ◽  
Intraoperative Radiotherapy ◽  
Disease Free Survival ◽  
Breast Conserving Surgery ◽  
External Beam Radiation ◽  
Consensus Protocol ◽  
Beam Radiation ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Boost Dose

Background. The standard treatment for breast cancer is breast-conserving surgery (BCS) with radiotherapy. If external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) can be safely replaced with intraoperative radiotherapy (IORT), it will help patients to save their breast and to have equivocal or better results in DFS and overall survival (OS). Methods. A total of 2022 patients with breast cancer treated during 6 years were enrolled in the current study. A total of 657, 376, and 989 patients received EBRT, radical, and boost dose by IORT, respectively, according to the IRIORT consensus protocol. The primary endpoint was recurrence and death. The secondary endpoint was the role of variables in recurrence and death. Results. With a mean follow-up of 34.5 and 40.18 months for the IORT and EBRT groups, respectively, there was a significant difference in DFS between electron boost and X-ray boost groups ( P = 0.037 ) and the electron radical group compared with EBRT ( P = 0.025 ), but there was no significant difference between other boost and radical groups in DFS and OS. Conclusions. IORT can be a preferred treatment modality because of its noninferior outcomes, and in some special conditions, it has superior outcomes compared to EBRT, particularly in delivering radical dose with IORT.

scholarly journals THE MODERN ASPECTS OF THE BREAST CONSERVING SURGERY AFTER NEOADJUVANT CHEMOTHERAPY IN PATIENTS WITH BREAST CANCER CT1-3N0-3M0

2020 ◽  
Vol 66 (4) ◽  
pp. 376-380
Author(s):  
Nadezhda Volchenko ◽  
A. Bosieva ◽  
A. Zikiryakhodzhayev ◽  
M. Ermoshchenkova
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Overall Survival ◽  
Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy ◽  
Breast Conserving Surgery ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
Medical Documentation ◽  
Oncological Safety ◽  
Lobular Cancer ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Disease Free

Introduction. While the “no tumor on ink” approach is generally accepted for breast-conserving surgery (BCS) in patient with breast cancer, it remains unclear whether it is oncologically safe for BCS after neoadjuvant chemotherapy therapy (NACT). The aim of the study is to investigate the optimal width of the resection edges in BCS after NALT and the influence on disease-free and overall survival in patients with breast cancer. Materials and methods. Retrospectively, the medical documentation of 76 patients with breast cancer, who were performed BCS after NACT, was studied. The distribution by stage of breast cancer was as follows: I St. -5 patients, II St. - 55, III St. - 16 (excluded IIIB St.). Invasive cancer of non-specific type was diagnosed in 81.6% of cases, in 6.5% - lobular cancer, in 1.3% - combined breast cancer. Radical breast resections in the classic version were performed in 28 cases, and oncoplastic resections in various modifications were performed in 48 Cases. Results. We present the retrospective data of 76 patients with breast cancer who underwent OSA after NALT in the Department of breast and skin cancer OF the Moscow Institute of medical research. P. A. Herzen. The results of our study demonstrated the oncological safety of OSO with respect to new sizes of tumor nodes after NALT followed by remote radiotherapy. The method of “absence of tumor cells” at the edges of resection demonstrated a high percentage of 1, 3, 5-year relapse - free and overall survival, the frequency of relapse was 2.6%. There was no statistically significant difference in 1, 3, 5-year relapse-free and overall survival when the width of the resection edges was more or less than 1 mm. Conclusion. The results of numerous studies have demonstrated that the breast- conserving surgery is the safe method of surgical treatment from an oncological point of view and is an alternative for radical mastectomies for patients with the breast cancer after neoadjuvant chemotherapy.

Targeted intraoperative radiotherapy tumor bed boost during breast conserving surgery after neoadjuvant chemotherapy in hormone receptor positive HER2 negative breast cancer.

2017 ◽  
Vol 35 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e12090-e12090 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hans-Christian Kolberg ◽  
Gyoergy Loevey ◽  
Leyla Akpolat-Basci ◽  
Miltiades Stephanou ◽  
Peter A. Fasching ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Overall Survival ◽  
Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy ◽  
Hormone Receptor ◽  
Intraoperative Radiotherapy ◽  
Breast Conserving Surgery ◽  
Tumor Bed ◽  
Hormone Receptor Positive ◽  
Whole Breast Radiotherapy ◽  
Tumor Bed Boost

e12090 Background: Targeted intraoperative radiotherapy (TARGIT – IORT) as a tumor bed boost during breast conserving surgery is an established option for women with early breast cancer. In a previous study our group could show a beneficial effect of TARGIT-IORT on overall survival after neoadjuvant chemotherapy compared to an external boost in an unselected cohort. In this study we present an analysis of the hormone receptor positive HER2 negative subgroup. Methods: In this non-randomized cohort study involving 46 hormone receptor positive HER2 negative patients after NACT we compared outcomes of 21 patients who received a tumour bed boost with IORT (TARGIT-IORT) during lumpectomy versus 25 patients treated in the previous 13 months with external (EBRT) boost. All patients received whole breast radiotherapy. Disease free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) were compared. Results: There were no statistical differences between the two groups regarding tumor size, grading, nodal status and pCR rates. Median follow up was 49 months. Whereas DFS was not significantly different between the groups the 5-year Kaplan-Meier estimate of OS was significantly better by 21% with IORT: TARGIT-IORT 0 events 100%, EBRT 5 events 79%, log rank p = 0.028. Conclusions: Although our results have to be interpreted with caution due to a possible selection bias and the small numbers, we could show that the improved OS as previously demonstrated in our dataset for TARGIT-IORT during lumpectomy after neoadjuvant chemotherapy as a tumor bed boost compared to an external beam radiotherapy boost is driven by the hormone receptor positive HER2 negative subgroup. These data give further support to the inclusion of such patients in the TARGIT-B (Boost) randomised trial that is testing whether IORT boost is superior to EBRT boost and to the analysis of subgroups based on tumor biology in this trial.

scholarly journals 15-year Follow-up of Comparing Mastoscopic and Conventional Axillary Dissection in Breast Cancer: A Multicentres, Randomized Controlled Trial

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chengyu Luo ◽  
Guang Cao ◽  
wenbin Guo ◽  
Jie Yang ◽  
Qiuru Sun ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Overall Survival ◽  
Survival Rates ◽  
Disease Free Survival ◽  
Axillary Lymph ◽  
Term Survival ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Disease Free

Abstract Backgroud: Longer follow-up was necessary to testify the exact value of mastoscopic axillary lymph node dissection (MALND).Methods：From January 1, 2003 to December 31, 2005,1027 patients with operable breast cancer were randomly assigned to two groups: MALND and CALND. 996 eligible patients were enrolled. The end points are disease free survival and overall survival.Results：The final cohort of 996 patients was followed for an average of 184 months. The distribution of all events was fairly similar between two groups of patients. The incidence of local in-breast events did not differ in a significant manner between two cohorts. Similarly, the rate of distant metastases was not significantly different with 30.0% in MLND and 32.6% in CALND. And no significant difference was observed in other primary tumor between two groups (p=0.46). Patients who remain alive with no event comprise a total of 37.2% in MALND and 35.4% in CALND. Other primary cancers and deaths from other causes were distributed equally between two groups. The 15-year disease-free survival rates were41.1 percent for the MALND group and 39.6 percent for the CALND group (p=0.79). MALND was found to be not inferior for overall survival (P =0.54). The 15-year overall survival rates were 49.5 percentafter MALND and 51.2 percentafter CALND (p=0.86). Probability of overall survival was not significantly different between two groups.Conclusions：MALND does not increase unfavorable events, and also does not affect the long-term survival of patients. Therefore, MALND should be one of the preferred approaches for breast cancer surgery.

scholarly journals Survival Outcomes of Screening with Breast MRI in Women at Elevated Risk of Breast Cancer

2020 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 29-35
Author(s):  
Min Sun Bae ◽  
Janice S Sung ◽  
Blanca Bernard-Davila ◽  
Elizabeth J Sutton ◽  
Christopher E Comstock ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Overall Survival ◽  
Cancer Detection ◽  
Disease Free Survival ◽  
Breast Mri ◽  
Elevated Risk ◽  
Survival Outcomes ◽  
Interval Cancers ◽  
Increased Risk ◽  
Significant Difference

Abstract Objective To determine survival outcomes in women with breast cancer detected at combined screening with breast MRI and mammography versus screening mammography alone. Methods This is an institutional review board-approved retrospective study, and the need for informed consent was waived. A total of 3002 women with an increased risk of breast cancer were screened between 2001 and 2004. Of the 3002 women, 1534 (51.1%) had 2780 combined screenings (MRI and mammography) and 1468 (48.9%) had 4811 mammography-only screenings. The Χ2 test and the Kaplan-Meier method were used to compare cancer detection rates and survival rates. Results The overall cancer detection rate was significantly higher in the MRI plus mammography group compared with the mammography-only group (1.4% [40 of 2780] vs 0.5% [23 of 4811]; P < 0.001). No interval cancers occurred in the MRI plus mammography group, whereas 9 interval cancers were found in the mammography-only group. During a median follow-up of 10.9 years (range: 0.7 to 15.2), a total of 11 recurrences and 5 deaths occurred. Of the 11 recurrences, 6 were in the MRI plus mammography group and 5 were in the mammography-only group. All five deaths occurred in the mammography-only group. Disease-free survival showed no statistically significant difference between the two groups (P = 0.32). However, overall survival was significantly improved in the MRI plus mammography group (P = 0.002). Conclusion Combined screening with MRI and mammography in women at elevated risk of breast cancer improves cancer detection and overall survival.

Targeted Intraoperative Radiotherapy for Breast Cancer in Patients in Whom External Beam Radiation Is Not Possible

2011 ◽  
Vol 80 (1) ◽  
pp. 31-38 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mohammed R.S. Keshtgar ◽  
Jayant S. Vaidya ◽  
Jeffrey S. Tobias ◽  
Frederik Wenz ◽  
David Joseph ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Intraoperative Radiotherapy ◽  
External Beam Radiation ◽  
External Beam ◽  
Beam Radiation

The analyses of disease free survival and overall survival in premenopausal and postmenopausal axillary node negative breast cancer patients

2006 ◽  
Vol 24 (18_suppl) ◽  
pp. 10757-10757
Author(s):  
N. D. Bajic ◽  
D. D. Scepanovic
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Overall Survival ◽  
Prognostic Factors ◽  
Disease Free Survival ◽  
Axillary Node ◽  
Breast Cancer Patients ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Node Negative ◽  
Node Negative Breast Cancer ◽  
Significant Difference

10757 Background: The aim of this study was to analyse in which order known traditional prognostic factors predict disease free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) in breast cancer patients (pts) who are patohystologicaly axillary node negative. Methods: From 1998 till 2004, 258 patients were treated of axillary node negative breast cancer. We analysed 3 and 5 years (yrs) DFS and 3 and 5 yrs OS for all patients as well as for premenopausal (96 pts, 37%) and postmenopausal (162 pts, 63%). The mean follow-up time for DFS was 60 months (mo) (min 30, max 136 mo) and for OS was 66 mo (min 36, max 140 mo). As prognostic factors for DFS and OS, age, tumour size, HG as well as adjuvant treatment (locoregional and systemic) were analysed accordingly. Fifty two patients (20%) were HG1 while 190 pts (74%), were HG2 & 3; 30 pts (11%) had tumour up to 1cm and 157 pts (61%) had tumours up to 3cm and 71 pts (28%) above 3cm. Radical mastectomy was performed in 92 pts (36%) while conservative surgery were performed in 166 pts (64%). Systemic therapy was applied in 224 pts (87% of which 57% were treated with hormonotherapy). Results: 3 yrs DFS for 258 treated pts were 87% - there was no statistically significant difference among pre- and postmenopausal pts; 5 yrs DFS were 73% with no statistically significant difference among pre- and postmenopausal group of pts (p > 0.05). 3 yrs overall survival were 94% and 5 yrs 80% with no statistically significant difference among pre- and postmenopausal pts (p > 0.05). There were statistically different DFS and OS among those pts treated with adjuvant radiotherapy as well as for those with adjuvant systemic therapy in both group of pts (p < 0.001). Also as independent prognostic factor for DFS and OS were HG (Cox regression model). Conclusions: Although, HG and adjuvant therapy are the most important prognostic factors for DFS and OS in premenopausal and postmenopausal patients, we found that there is no statistically significant difference between the groups respectively. However, life-expectancy for premenopausal patients is longer. Therefore further adjuvant therapy research is needed to achieve better DFS and OS in this group of pts. No significant financial relationships to disclose.

Interstitial high dose rate (HDR) brachtherapy + IMRT vs. HDR monotherapy for early stage prostate cancer

2006 ◽  
Vol 24 (18_suppl) ◽  
pp. 14606-14606 ◽  
Author(s):  
T. Neumann ◽  
R. Mark ◽  
P. J. Anderson ◽  
M. Nair
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Dose Rate ◽  
Gleason Score ◽  
Disease Free Survival ◽  
High Dose Rate ◽  
External Beam Radiation ◽  
High Dose ◽  
Beam Radiation ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Grade 3

14606 Background: Transrectal Ultrasound (TRUS) guided interstitial implant for prostate cancer using High Dose Rate (HDR) + External Beam Radiation Therapy (EBRT) or IMRT has been reported with favorable results. The role of supplemental EBRT or IMRT in brachytherapy is undefined. We compare our results of HDR + IMRT vs. HDR monotherapy. Methods: Between 1997 and 2006, 276 patients with T1 and T2 localized prostate underwent TRUS interstitial implant. After discussion of treatment options, 109 patients elected HDR Implant + IMRT and 167 patients underwent HDR alone. No patient received Hormonal Blockade. Median Gleason Score was 7 (range: 4 to 10). Median PSA was 9.8 (0.60 to 39.8). In patients who received IMRT + HDR, 4500 cGy in 25 fractions was given via IMRT and 1650 cGy in 3 fractions via HDR. Our protocol for HDR alone, has called for two HDR Implants. The treatment volume received 2,250 cGy in 3 fractions prescribed to the 100% Isodose line, given over 24 hours. A 2nd implant was performed 4 weeks later, delivering a further 2,250 cGy in 3 fractions, bringing the final dose to the prostate to 4,500 cGy in 6 fractions. Results: There was no significant difference between the treatment groups with respect to T-Stage, Gleason Score, and PSA. With a median follow-up of 66 months (range: 6 months to 120 months), the overall PSA disease free survival (DFS) was 89.5% (247/276). In patients undergoing IMRT + HDR, PSA DFS was 89.0% (97/109) vs. 89.8% (150/167) for patients undergoing HDR alone (p = 0.6). The 5 year actuarial survival was 86% for the group receiving IMRT + HDR vs. 89% with HDR (log rank = 0.5). Urinary stress incontinence has occurred in 2.5% (7/276). RTOG late bladder toxicities were: 0% Grade 4, 0% Grade 3, and 3.3% (9/276) Grade 2. RTOG late rectal toxicities were: 0.4% (1/276) Grade 4, 0% Grade 3, 3.6% (10/276) Grade 2, and 4.7% (13/276) Grade 1. RTOG late rectal toxicity was higher in patients undergoing HDR + IMRT with 14.7% (16/109) of patients experiencing Grade 2 and 1 symptoms, vs. 3.0% (5/167) receiving HDR alone (p ≤ 0.01). Conclusions: We have observed no difference in PSA DFS in patients undergoing HDR vs. HDR + IMRT. Complications were similar, though RTOG Grade 1 and 2 late toxicity was higher in patients receiving HDR + IMRT. By omitting IMRT, rectal complications may be reduced. No significant financial relationships to disclose.

Adjuvant chemotherapy in operable breast cancer: cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and fluorouracil versus chlorambucil, methotrexate, and fluorouracil--11-year results of Swiss Group for Clinical Cancer Research trial SAKK 27/82.

1997 ◽  
Vol 15 (7) ◽  
pp. 2502-2509 ◽  
Author(s):  
H J Senn ◽  
R Maibach ◽  
M Castiglione ◽  
W F Jungi ◽  
F Cavalli ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Overall Survival ◽  
Prospective Trial ◽  
Disease Free Survival ◽  
Toxicity Profile ◽  
Unilateral Breast Cancer ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Disease Free

PURPOSE To compare two adjuvant combination chemotherapies, cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and fluorouracil (CMF) and chlorambucil, methotrexate, and fluorouracil (LMF), for patients who had undergone potentially curative surgery for unilateral breast cancer, in terms of relapse, survival, and toxicity. PATIENTS AND METHODS Selection criteria was as follows: stage pT1-3a, N+ or N-, M0, less than 72 years of age. Eligible patients were randomized to receive either CMF (cyclophosphamide 100 mg/m2 orally on days 1 to 14, methotrexate 40 mg/m2 intravenously (I.V.) on days 1 and 8, fluorouracil 600 mg/m2 I.V. on days 1 and 8) or LMF (Leukeran [Wellcome A.G., Bern, Switzerland] 5 mg/m2 orally on days 1 to 14 with the some I.V. cytostatic drugs). Follow-up examinations were performed every 3 months during the first 3 years after mastectomy, and every 6 months thereafter. RESULTS A total of 246 patients were randomized, of whom 232 who were fully eligible and contribute to the analyses presented here. No statistically significant difference in favor of adjuvant CMF over LMF emerges after a median follow-up duration of 11.2 years, for either overall survival (P = .15) or disease-free survival (P = .14). A consistent trend suggestive of a possible relative benefit associated with CMF should be pointed out. However, CMF presents a significantly worse toxicity profile as concerns hematologic parameters as well as alopecia, nausea, and vomiting. CONCLUSION This prospective trial has not identified a statistically significant difference in disease-free survival or overall survival between the two adjuvant regimens LMF and CMF. Although a trend in favor of CMF has been observed in premenopausal patients, this has to be weighted against its definitely more pronounced toxicity profile.

scholarly journals Lumbar spine metastasis in a breast cancer survivor after twelve years of disease-free survival

2020 ◽  
Vol 7 (7) ◽  
pp. 2396
Author(s):  
Okwuoma Okwunodulu ◽  
Moses O. Inojie ◽  
Francis C. Campbell ◽  
Chika A. Ndubuisi ◽  
Samuel C. Ohaegbulam
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Disease Free Survival ◽  
External Beam Radiation ◽  
Spine Metastasis ◽  
Beam Radiation ◽  
Insidious Onset ◽  
Anticancer Treatment ◽  
Local Tumour ◽  
Spine Mri

Spine metastasis is a common occurrence in breast cancer. The median time of spine metastasis from the diagnosis of breast cancer is approximately 3 years. In this case report, a 55 years old woman presented with insidious onset and progressively worsening severe low back pain. Spine MRI revealed L4-S1 heterogeneous marrow signal changes with L5 vertebral body collapse. She had undergone surgery, radiation, and chemotherapy for breast cancer 12 years prior. Although she had not received any anticancer treatment for 12 years, but she has been on regular follow up with the oncology team with no clinical evidence of local tumour recurrence. She had laminectomy and biopsy and the histological diagnosis was metastatic adenocarcinoma from breast cancer. She had palliative external beam radiation therapy and systemic chemotherapy with improvement in Karnofsky performance. We present a case of dormant micro metastasis re-activated 12 years after perceived cure for breast cancer.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document