No abstract

No abstract

Purpose Our purpose was to describe the risk of radiation-induced brachial plexopathy (RIBP) in patients with breast cancer who received comprehensive adjuvant radiation therapy (RT). Methods and Materials Records for 498 patients who received comprehensive adjuvant RT (treatment of any residual breast tissue, the underlying chest wall, and regional nodes) between 2004 and 2012 were retrospectively reviewed. All patients were treated with conventional 3 to 5 field technique (CRT) until 2008, after which intensity modulated RT (IMRT) was introduced. RIBP events were determined by reviewing follow-up documentation from oncologic care providers. Patients with RIBP were matched (1:2) with a control group of patients who received CRT and a group of patients who received IMRT. Dosimetric analyses were performed in these patients to determine whether there were differences in ipsilateral brachial plexus dose distribution between RIBP and control groups. Results Median study follow-up was 88 months for the overall cohort and 92 months for the IMRT cohort. RIBP occurred in 4 CRT patients (1.6%) and 1 IMRT patient (0.4%) ( P = .20). All patients with RIBP in the CRT cohort received a posterior axillary boost. Maximum dose to the brachial plexus in RIBP, CRT control, and IMRT control patients had median values of 56.0 Gy (range, 49.7-65.1), 54.8 Gy (47.4-60.5), and 54.8 Gy (54.2-57.3), respectively. Conclusions RIBP remains a rare complication of comprehensive adjuvant breast radiation and no clear dosimetric predictors for RIBP were identified in this study. The IMRT technique does not appear to adversely affect the development of this late toxicity.

HighlightsRe-irradiation using proton therapy for recurrent breast cancer has excellent local control.Re-irradiation using proton beam radiation therapy increases risk of skin toxicity.There is minimal increase in the late toxicity due to re-irradiation using proton beam therapy.

The role of induction chemotherapy in nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC) remains controversial. The primary aim of this study was to use the National Cancer Database to evaluate the patterns of care of induction chemotherapy in NPC and its impact on overall survival (OS). Patients with NPC from 2004 to 2014 were obtained from the NCDB. Patients were considered to have received induction chemotherapy if it was started ≥43 days before the start of RT and concurrent CRT if chemotherapy started within 21 days after the start of RT. Propensity score matching was used to control for selection bias. Cox proportional hazards model was used to determine significant predictors of OS. Logistic regression model was used to determine predictors of the use of induction chemotherapy. Significance was defined as a P value <.05. A total of 4857 patients were identified: 4041 patients (87.2%) received concurrent CRT and 816 patients (16.8%) received induction chemotherapy. The use of induction therapy remained stable between 2004 and 2014. Younger patients and those with higher T‐ and N‐stage had a higher likelihood of being treated with induction chemotherapy. The 5‐year OS in patients treated with induction chemotherapy and CRT was 66.3% vs 69.1%, respectively (P = .25). There was no difference in OS when these two groups were analyzed after propensity score matching. No differences in OS existed between these treatment groups in patients with T3‐T4N1 or TanyN2‐3 disease (P = .76). Propensity score matching also did not reveal any difference in OS in patients with T3‐T4N1 or TanyN2‐3 disease. The use of induction chemotherapy has remained stable in the last decade. In this study of patients with NPC, induction chemotherapy was not associated with improved OS compared to CRT alone.