Cargando…

Efficacy and Tolerance of IMRT Boost Compared to IORT Boost in Early Breast Cancer: A German Monocenter Study

SIMPLE SUMMARY: The benefit of administering an extra dose to the tumor bed (boost) prior or simultaneously to adjuvant breast radiotherapy in terms of local recurrence rate has already been the subject of several studies and, thus, has already found justification in appropriate patient cases. In th...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Schumacher, Luisa, Tio, Joke, Eich, Hans Theodor, Reinartz, Gabriele
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9776951/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36551680
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/cancers14246196
_version_ 1784855985002643456
author Schumacher, Luisa
Tio, Joke
Eich, Hans Theodor
Reinartz, Gabriele
author_facet Schumacher, Luisa
Tio, Joke
Eich, Hans Theodor
Reinartz, Gabriele
author_sort Schumacher, Luisa
collection PubMed
description SIMPLE SUMMARY: The benefit of administering an extra dose to the tumor bed (boost) prior or simultaneously to adjuvant breast radiotherapy in terms of local recurrence rate has already been the subject of several studies and, thus, has already found justification in appropriate patient cases. In this study, we compared two boost techniques, an intraoperative radiotherapy (IORT) boost and an intensity-modulated radiotherapy boost (IMRT), analyzing two patient collectives to determine the equivalence of the two techniques or which of the two proves superior. According to our monocenter data on tumor control, survival rates, toxicities, and cosmetic results, no significant differences were revealed between the two boost techniques, and it cannot be generalized that one technique is more advantageous than the other. ABSTRACT: The aim of this retrospective study is to compare the two boost subgroups, IORT or IMRT, in terms of overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), cosmesis, and acute and late toxicity. It shall be shown whether and which of the boost techniques offers better results with respect to the facial points, since there are already many studies on applying boost to the tumor bed after/during breast conserving surgery, and there are few which compare the different techniques. For this comparison, two subgroups of 76 patients each (n = 152), treated between 2002 and 2015, were enrolled in the study. In one subgroup, the 9 Gy boost was intraoperatively administered after complete removal of the primary tumor, while the other subgroup received the boost of 8.4 Gy percutaneously and simultaneously integrated into the tumor bed after breast conserving surgery. Both subgroups have subsequently undergone whole breast irradiation (WBI) of 50.4/50 Gy in 1.8–2 Gy per fraction. OS and the incidence of late toxicity did not differ between the two subgroups and no risk factor was found regarding PFS. Acute toxicities initially occurred significantly less (p < 0.001) in the IORT subgroup; however, after WBI took place, this difference vanished. Therefore, boost application by means of IORT or IMRT can be considered equivalent.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9776951
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-97769512022-12-23 Efficacy and Tolerance of IMRT Boost Compared to IORT Boost in Early Breast Cancer: A German Monocenter Study Schumacher, Luisa Tio, Joke Eich, Hans Theodor Reinartz, Gabriele Cancers (Basel) Article SIMPLE SUMMARY: The benefit of administering an extra dose to the tumor bed (boost) prior or simultaneously to adjuvant breast radiotherapy in terms of local recurrence rate has already been the subject of several studies and, thus, has already found justification in appropriate patient cases. In this study, we compared two boost techniques, an intraoperative radiotherapy (IORT) boost and an intensity-modulated radiotherapy boost (IMRT), analyzing two patient collectives to determine the equivalence of the two techniques or which of the two proves superior. According to our monocenter data on tumor control, survival rates, toxicities, and cosmetic results, no significant differences were revealed between the two boost techniques, and it cannot be generalized that one technique is more advantageous than the other. ABSTRACT: The aim of this retrospective study is to compare the two boost subgroups, IORT or IMRT, in terms of overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), cosmesis, and acute and late toxicity. It shall be shown whether and which of the boost techniques offers better results with respect to the facial points, since there are already many studies on applying boost to the tumor bed after/during breast conserving surgery, and there are few which compare the different techniques. For this comparison, two subgroups of 76 patients each (n = 152), treated between 2002 and 2015, were enrolled in the study. In one subgroup, the 9 Gy boost was intraoperatively administered after complete removal of the primary tumor, while the other subgroup received the boost of 8.4 Gy percutaneously and simultaneously integrated into the tumor bed after breast conserving surgery. Both subgroups have subsequently undergone whole breast irradiation (WBI) of 50.4/50 Gy in 1.8–2 Gy per fraction. OS and the incidence of late toxicity did not differ between the two subgroups and no risk factor was found regarding PFS. Acute toxicities initially occurred significantly less (p < 0.001) in the IORT subgroup; however, after WBI took place, this difference vanished. Therefore, boost application by means of IORT or IMRT can be considered equivalent. MDPI 2022-12-15 /pmc/articles/PMC9776951/ /pubmed/36551680 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/cancers14246196 Text en © 2022 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Article
Schumacher, Luisa
Tio, Joke
Eich, Hans Theodor
Reinartz, Gabriele
Efficacy and Tolerance of IMRT Boost Compared to IORT Boost in Early Breast Cancer: A German Monocenter Study
title Efficacy and Tolerance of IMRT Boost Compared to IORT Boost in Early Breast Cancer: A German Monocenter Study
title_full Efficacy and Tolerance of IMRT Boost Compared to IORT Boost in Early Breast Cancer: A German Monocenter Study
title_fullStr Efficacy and Tolerance of IMRT Boost Compared to IORT Boost in Early Breast Cancer: A German Monocenter Study
title_full_unstemmed Efficacy and Tolerance of IMRT Boost Compared to IORT Boost in Early Breast Cancer: A German Monocenter Study
title_short Efficacy and Tolerance of IMRT Boost Compared to IORT Boost in Early Breast Cancer: A German Monocenter Study
title_sort efficacy and tolerance of imrt boost compared to iort boost in early breast cancer: a german monocenter study
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9776951/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36551680
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/cancers14246196
work_keys_str_mv AT schumacherluisa efficacyandtoleranceofimrtboostcomparedtoiortboostinearlybreastcanceragermanmonocenterstudy
AT tiojoke efficacyandtoleranceofimrtboostcomparedtoiortboostinearlybreastcanceragermanmonocenterstudy
AT eichhanstheodor efficacyandtoleranceofimrtboostcomparedtoiortboostinearlybreastcanceragermanmonocenterstudy
AT reinartzgabriele efficacyandtoleranceofimrtboostcomparedtoiortboostinearlybreastcanceragermanmonocenterstudy