Cargando…

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)...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Chen, Qitong, Qu, Limeng, He, Yeqing, Xu, Jiachi, Deng, Yueqiong, Zhou, Qin, Yi, Wenjun
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Frontiers Media S.A. 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9381880/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35991652
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fmed.2022.919406
Descripción
Sumario: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.