Physician- and Patient-Reported Outcomes of the MC1635 Phase 3 Trial of Ultrahypofractionated Versus Moderately Hypofractionated Adjuvant Radiation Therapy After Breast-Conserving Surgery

Our aim was to report physician- and patient-reported outcomes of patients with localized breast cancer treated with moderate versus ultrahypofractionated whole breast irradiation (WBI) after breast-conserving surgery (BCS). Between February 2018 and February 2020, patients with localized breast can...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics biology, physics, 2024-03, Vol.118 (4), p.1049-1059
Hauptverfasser: Laughlin, Brady S., Corbin, Kimberly S., Toesca, Diego Augusto Santos, Thorpe, Cameron S., Golafshar, Michael A., Pockaj, Barbara, Cronin, Patricia, McGee, Lisa A., Halyard, Michele Y., Mutter, Robert W., Keole, Sameer R., Park, Sean S., Shumway, Dean A., Vern-Gross, Tamara Z., Vallow, Laura, Wong, William W., DeWees, Todd A., Vargas, Carlos E.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Our aim was to report physician- and patient-reported outcomes of patients with localized breast cancer treated with moderate versus ultrahypofractionated whole breast irradiation (WBI) after breast-conserving surgery (BCS). Between February 2018 and February 2020, patients with localized breast cancer (pT0-3 pN0-1 M0) were offered participation in a phase 3 randomized clinical trial assessing adjuvant moderate hypofractionation (MHF) to 40 Gy in 15 fractions versus ultrahypofractionation (UHF) to 25 Gy in 5 fractions after BCS, with an optional simultaneously integrated boost. Toxicities, cosmesis, and quality of life were assessed at baseline, end of treatment (EOT), and 3 months, 1 year, 2 years, and 3 years from irradiation using validated metric tools. One hundred seven patients were randomized to MHF (n = 54) or UHF (n = 53) adjuvant WBI. The median follow-up was 42.8 months. Grade 2 radiation dermatitis was experienced by 4 patients (7.4%) in the MHF arm and 2 patients (3.7%) in the UHF arm at EOT (P = .726). No grade 3 or higher toxicities were observed. Deterioration of cosmesis by physician assessment was observed in 2 (6.7%) patients treated in the UHF arm and 1 (1.9%) patient treated in the MHF arm at EOT (P = .534), whereas at 3 months, only 1 (1.8%) patient treated in the MHF arm demonstrated deterioration of cosmesis (P = .315). At EOT, 91% and 94% of patients reported excellent/good cosmesis among those treated with MHF and UHF regimens, respectively (P = .550). At 3 months, more patients within the MHF arm reported excellent/good cosmesis compared with those in the UHF arm (100% vs 91%; P = .030). However, the difference in patient-reported cosmesis disappeared at the 1-, 2-, and 3-year time points. UHF WBI showed similar treatment-related late toxicities and similar provider-scored cosmesis compared with MHF radiation in patients treated adjuvantly after BCS.
ISSN:0360-3016
1879-355X
DOI:10.1016/j.ijrobp.2023.10.018