After IORT as a tumor bed boost with low-kilovoltage x-rays followed by whole-breast radiotherapy, low local recurrence and chronic toxicity rates were seen after 5-year follow-up.

No abstract

No abstract

BackgroundRadiation induced secondary cancers are a rare but severe late effect after breast conserving therapy. Intraoperative radiotherapy (IORT) is increasingly used during breast conserving surgery. The purpose of this analysis was to estimate secondary cancer risks after IORT compared to other modalities of breast radiotherapy (APBI - accelerated partial breast irradiation, EBRT - external beam radiotherapy).MethodsComputer-tomography scans of an anthropomorphic phantom were acquired with an INTRABEAM IORT applicator (diameter 4 cm) in the outer quadrant of the breast and transferred via DICOM to the treatment planning system. Ipsilateral breast, contralateral breast, ipsilateral lung, contralateral lung, spine and heart were contoured. An INTRABEAM source (50 kV) was defined with the tip of the drift tube at the center of the spherical applicator. A dose of 20 Gy at 0 mm depth from the applicator surface was prescribed for IORT and 34 Gy (5 days × 2 × 3.4 Gy) at 10 mm depth for APBI. For EBRT a total dose of 50 Gy in 2 Gy fractions was planned using two tangential fields with wedges. The mean and maximal doses, DVHs and volumes receiving more than 0.1 Gy and 4 Gy of organs at risk (OAR) were calculated and compared. The life time risk for secondary cancers was estimated according to NCRP report 116.ResultsIORT delivered the lowest maximal doses to contralateral breast (< 0.3 Gy), ipsilateral (1.8 Gy) and contralateral lung (< 0.3 Gy), heart (1 Gy) and spine (< 0.3 Gy). In comparison, maximal doses for APBI were 2-5 times higher. EBRT delivered a maximal dose of 10.4 Gy to the contralateral breast and 53 Gy to the ipsilateral lung. OAR volumes receiving more than 4 Gy were 0% for IORT, < 2% for APBI and up to 10% for EBRT (ipsilateral lung). The estimated risk for secondary cancer in the respective OAR is considerably lower after IORT and/or APBI as compared to EBRT.ConclusionsThe calculations for maximal doses and volumes of OAR suggest that the risk of secondary cancer induction after IORT is lower than compared to APBI and EBRT.

Patients with early breast cancer after BCS and IORT with or without EBRT present with comparable QoL like patients receiving EBRT without a boost. IORT patients show the lowest rate of breast symptoms.

Intraoperative radiotherapy (IORT) with low-energy x-rays is increasingly used in breast-conserving therapy (BCT). Previous non-randomized studies have observed mammographic changes in the tumor bed to be more pronounced after IORT. The purpose of this study was to reassess the postoperative changes in a randomized single-center subgroup of patients from a multicenter trial (TARGIT-A). In this subgroup (n = 48) 27 patients received BCT with IORT, 21 patients had BCT with standard whole-breast radiotherapy serving as controls. Overall 258 postoperative mammograms (median follow-up 4.3 years, range 3-8) were retrospectively evaluated by two radiologists in consensus focusing on changes in the tumor bed. Fat necroses showed to be significantly more frequent (56% versus 24%) and larger (8.7 versus 1.6 sq cm, median) after IORT than those in controls. Scar calcifications were also significantly more frequent after IORT (63% versus 19%). The high incidence of large fat necroses in our study confirms previous study findings. However, the overall higher incidence of calcifications in the tumor bed after IORT represents a new finding, requiring further attention.

Breast cancer is currently the most frequent indication for intraoperative radiotherapy with increasing numbers worldwide. Intraoperative radiotherapy can be used as a tumor bed boost followed by whole breast radiotherapy, or as a distinct form of accelerated partial breast irradiation in selected patients. This article summarizes the theoretical background including pattern of recurrence and distribution of tumor cell foci in the breast and discusses the rationale for intraoperative radiotherapy, especially using a miniature x-ray generator (Intrabeam(®)). The concepts of how to avoid geographic and temporal miss by giving radiotherapy during surgery to the open wound cavity are described. Experimental and clinical experience is presented based on in vitro experiments and more than 300 treated patients in a single department with mature follow-up.

The purpose of this study is to investigate reasons for omission of a planned intraoperative radiotherapy (IORT) during breast-conserving surgery (BCS). Between 2002 and 2009, in 297 women an IORT during BCS was planned. In 55 women this irradiation was finally not performed. We retrospectively analyzed pre-, peri-, and postoperative data of these 55 women. Main reasons for omission of an IORT were insufficient tumor-skin distance (n = 20, 35.1%), an oversized wound cavity (n = 14, 24.6%), and a combination of both (n = 8, 14%). Further reasons (n = 12, 21.1%) were temporal shortage, unplanned maintenance work of the Intrabeam(®) device, unsuitable anatomicosurgical conditions, and ineligible histologic findings. Apart from suitable anatomic conditions, a precise preoperative ultrasonography as well as a strict interdisciplinary preoperative management is important for successful application of IORT.