4.6 Article

The clinical outcome of postoperative radiotherapy using hybrid planning technique in left breast cancer after breast-conserving surgery

期刊

CANCER MEDICINE
卷 12, 期 5, 页码 5364-5371

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/cam4.5358

关键词

breast cancer; prognosis; radiotherapy; survival

类别

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study observed the preliminary clinical outcome and acute toxicity of hybrid intensity modulated radiotherapy and volumetric modulated arc therapy in postoperative radiotherapy for left-sided breast cancer. The results showed that this technique is safe and feasible, with less acute toxicity.
Background The purpose of this study is to observe the preliminary clinical outcome and acute toxicity of hybrid intensity modulated radiotherapy and volumetric modulated arc therapy planning technique with simultaneous integrated boost (SIB). Methods From November 2015 to December 2018, 149 female patients with left-side breast cancer who underwent adjuvant radiotherapy with hybrid IMRT and VMAT planning technique with SIB were reviewed retrospectively. The primary endpoint was acute toxicities and the secondary endpoints were local recurrence-free survival (LRFS), distant metastasis-freesurvival (DMFS), disease-free survival (DFS), and overall survival (OS). Results The median age was 52 years old and median follow-up was 43.4 months. Eighty-six percent of patients had acute grade 0 to grade1 dermatitis and 14% had grade 2 dermatitis. No acute radiation pneumonitis, esophagitis, or cardiovascular events were recorded during follow-up. The 3-year LRFS, DMFS, DFS, and OS rates were 95.1%, 95.1%, 90.3%, and 97.9%, respectively. The subgroup analysis revealed that patients with lymphovascular invasion had more local recurrence rate and worse DFS rate. Patients with advanced N stage had the trend of worse DMFS. Conclusion In conclusion, the hybrid IMRT and VMAT technique is feasible, safe and has less acute radiation related toxicities in SIB postoperative radiotherapy for left-sided breast cancer.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据