4.6 Review

Partial breast irradiation versus whole breast radiotherapy for early breast cancer

Journal

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD007077.pub4

Keywords

Breast [radiation effects]; Breast Neoplasms [pathology] [*radiotherapy] [surgery]; Combined Modality Therapy [methods]; Disease-Free Survival; Mastectomy, Segmental; Neoplasm Recurrence, Local [prevention & control]; Organ Sparing Treatments [*methods]; Radiation Dose Hypofractionation; Radiotherapy [adverse effects] [methods]; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Female; Humans

Funding

  1. Princess Alexandra Cancer Collaborative Group, Australia
  2. National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Cochrane Incentive Award 2020 [NIHR 133261]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The study suggests that partial breast irradiation (PBI)/accelerated partial breast irradiation (APBI) may result in slightly reduced local recurrence-free survival, but similar overall survival compared to whole breast radiotherapy (WBRT), with little to no difference in other oncological outcomes. However, PBI/APBI may lead to worse cosmetic outcomes.
Background Breast-conserving therapy for women with breast cancer consists of local excision of the tumour (achieving clear margins) followed by radiotherapy (RT). Most true recurrences occur in the same quadrant as the original tumour. Whole breast radiotherapy (WBRT) may not protect against the development of a new primary cancer developing in other quadrants of the breast. In this Cochrane Review, we investigated the delivery of radiation to a limited volume of the breast around the tumour bed (partial breast irradiation (PBI)) sometimes with a shortened treatment duration (accelerated partial breast irradiation (APBI)). Objectives To determine whether PBIJAPBI is equivalent to or better than conventional or hypofractionated VVBRT after breast-conserving therapy for early-stage breast cancer. Search methods On 27 August 2020, we searched the Cochrane Breast Cancer Group Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL and three trial databases. We searched for grey literature: OpenGrey (September 2020), reference lists of articles, conference proceedings and published abstracts, and applied no language restrictions. Selection criteria Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) without confounding, that evaluated conservative surgery plus PBI/APBI versus conservative surgery plus WBRT. Published and unpublished trials were eligible. Data collection and analysis Two review authors (BH and ML) performed data extraction, used Cochrane's risk of bias tool and resolved any disagreements through discussion, and assessed the certainty of the evidence for main outcomes using GRADE. Main outcomeswere local recurrence-free survival, cosmesis, overall survival, toxicity (subcutaneous fibrosis), cause-specific survival, distant metastasis-free survival and subsequent mastectomy. We entered data into Review Manager 5 for analysis. Main results We included nine RCTs that enrolled 15,187 women who had invasive breast cancer or ductal carcinoma in-situ (6.3%) with T1-2N0-1M0 Grade I or Il unifocal tumours (less than 2 cm or 3 cm or less) treated with breast-conserving therapy with negative margins. This is the second update of the review and includes two new studies and 4432 more participants. Local recurrence-free survival is probably slightly reduced (by 3/1000, 95% CI 6 fewer to 0 fewer) with the use of PBI/APBI compared to WBRT (hazard ratio (HR) 1.21, 950/o confidence interval (CI) 1.03 to 1.42; 8 studies, 13,168 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Cosmesis (physician/nurse-reported) is probably worse (by 63/1000, 95% CI 35 more to 92 more) with the use of PBI/APBI (odds ratio (OR) 1.57, 95% CI 1.31 to 1.87; 6 studies, 3652 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Overall survival is similar (0/1000 fewer, 9 5 0/s CI 6 fewer to 6 more) with PBI/APBI and WBRT (HR 0.99, 95% C I 0.8 8 to 1.12; 8 studies, 13,175 participants; high-certainty evidence). Late radiation toxicity (subcutaneous fibrosis) is probably increased (by 14/1000 more, 95% Cl 102 more to 188 more) with PBI/APBI (OR 5.07, 95% CI 3.81 to 6.74; 2 studies, 3011 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). The use of PBI/APBI probably makes little difference (1/1000 less, 95% CI 6 fewer to 3 more) to cause-specific survival (HR 1.06, 95% CI 0.83 to 1.36; 7 studies, 9865 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). We found the use of PBI/APBI compared with VVBRT probably makes little or no difference (1/1000 fewer (95% CI 4 fewer to 6 more)) to distant metastasis-free survival (HR 0.95, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.13; 7 studies, 11,033 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). We found the use of PBI/APBI in comparison with WBRT makes little or no difference (2/1000 fewer, 95% Cl 20 fewer to 20 more) to mastectomy rates (OR 0.98, 95% CI 0.78 to 1.23; 3 studies, 3740 participants, high-certainty evidence). Authors' conclusions It appeared that local recurrence-free survival is probably worse with PBI/APBI; however, the difference was small and nearly all women remain free of local recurrence. Overall survival is similar with PBIJAPBI and VVBRT, and we found little to no difference in other oncological outcomes. Some late effects (subcutaneous fibrosis) may be worse with PBI/APBI and its use is probably associated with worse cosmetic outcomes. The limitations of the data currently available mean that we cannot make definitive conclusions about the efficacy and safety or ways to deliver PBI/APBI. We await completion of ongoing trials.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available