Late effects and cosmetic results of conventional versus hypofractionated irradiation in breast-conserving therapy

被引:32
作者
Fehlauer, F [1 ]
Tribius, S [1 ]
Alberti, W [1 ]
Rades, D [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Hamburg, Med Clin Eppendorf, Dept Radiat Oncol, D-20246 Hamburg, Germany
关键词
breast cancer; radiotherapy; hypofractionation; late toxicity; LENT-SOMA; cosmesis;
D O I
10.1007/s00066-005-1404-9
中图分类号
R73 [肿瘤学];
学科分类号
100214 ;
摘要
Background and Purpose: Breast irradiation after lumpectomy is an integral component of breast-conserving therapy (BCT). As the prognosis is general good following BCT, Late morbidity and cosmesis are important. The present study compares two different radiation schedules with respect to these two endpoints. Patients and Methods: 129 breast cancer patients (pT1-2 pN0-1 cM0) were irradiated between 09/1992 and 08/1994 with either a 22-day fractionation schedule (2.5 Gy to 55 Gy, 4x/week, n = 65) or with a conventional fractionation schedule (28 days, 2.0 Gy to 55 Gy, 5x/week, n = 64), both without additional boost. The equivalent dose of 2-Gy fractions (EQD2) was 55 Gy and 62 Gy, respectively. Late toxicity, assessed according to the LENT-SOMA criteria, and cosmetic outcome, graded on a 5-point scale, were evaluated after a median of 86 months (range 72-94 months) in tumor-free breast cancer patients. Results: LENT-SOMA grade 2/3 toxicity (2.5 Gy vs. 2.0 Gy): breast pain (18% vs. 11%; p = 0.3), fibrosis (57% vs. 16%; p < 0.001), telangiectasia (22% vs. 3%; p = 0.002), atrophy (31% vs. 3%; p < 0.001). Medication to breast pain was taken by 8% versus 9% of patients. Cosmesis was very good/good/acceptable in 75% versus 93% (2.5 Gy vs. 2.0 Gy; p = 0.006). Conclusion: Late morbidity was significantly frequent and cosmesis was significantly worse after hypofractionated radiotherapy (2.5 Gy to 55 Gy). However, morbidity was not associated with major implications on daily life.
引用
收藏
页码:625 / 631
页数:7
相关论文
共 33 条
  • [1] Albrecht MR, 2002, STRAHLENTHER ONKOL, V178, P510, DOI 10.1007/s00066-002-1035-3
  • [2] [Anonymous], 1997, BASIC CLIN RADIOBIOL
  • [3] [Anonymous], 1995, INT J RADIAT ONCOL, V30, P1049
  • [4] DOSE FRACTIONATION, DOSE-RATE AND ISO-EFFECT RELATIONSHIPS FOR NORMAL TISSUE RESPONSES
    BARENDSEN, GW
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RADIATION ONCOLOGY BIOLOGY PHYSICS, 1982, 8 (11): : 1981 - 1997
  • [5] Bayerl A, 2001, STRAHLENTHER ONKOL, V177, P25, DOI 10.1007/PL00002354
  • [6] DOSE AND VOLUME EFFECTS ON FIBROSIS AFTER BREAST-CONSERVATION THERAPY
    BORGER, JH
    KEMPERMAN, H
    SMITT, HS
    HART, A
    VANDONGEN, J
    LEBESQUE, J
    BARTELINK, H
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RADIATION ONCOLOGY BIOLOGY PHYSICS, 1994, 30 (05): : 1073 - 1081
  • [7] Why recent studies relating normal tissue response to individual radiosensitivity might have failed and how new studies should be performed
    Dikomey, E
    Borgmann, K
    Peacock, J
    Jung, H
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RADIATION ONCOLOGY BIOLOGY PHYSICS, 2003, 56 (04): : 1194 - 1200
  • [8] Twenty-year follow-up of a randomized trial comparing total mastectomy, lumpectomy, and lumpectomy plus irradiation for the treatment of invasive breast cancer
    Fisher, B
    Anderson, S
    Bryant, J
    Margolese, RG
    Deutsch, M
    Fisher, ER
    Jeong, J
    Wolmark, N
    [J]. NEW ENGLAND JOURNAL OF MEDICINE, 2002, 347 (16) : 1233 - 1241
  • [9] HYPOFRACTIONATION - LESSONS FROM COMPLICATIONS
    FLETCHER, GH
    [J]. RADIOTHERAPY AND ONCOLOGY, 1991, 20 (01) : 10 - 15
  • [10] Fodor J, 2003, STRAHLENTHER ONKOL, V179, P197, DOI 10.1007/s00066-003-1010-7