Advertisement

Patient preferences regarding intraoperative versus external beam radiotherapy for early breast cancer and the impact of socio-demographic factors

  • Saskia SpaichEmail author
  • Sophie Krickeberg
  • Svetlana Hetjens
  • Frederik Wenz
  • Axel Gerhardt
  • Marc Sütterlin
Gynecologic Oncology
  • 26 Downloads

Abstract

Purpose

Patient comfort and preference have steadily gained attention in radio-oncologic treatment of breast cancer. Therefore, the purpose of this investigation was to further explore patient preferences in choosing between intraoperative radiotherapy (IORT) and external beam radiotherapy (EBRT).

Methods

We prospectively analysed data of 101 women, who were candidates for breast-conserving surgery with adjuvant radiotherapy. A two-part video was shown to patients: an educational section about EBRT/IORT, followed by a preference elicitation section focusing on additional accepted risk (AAR) of recurrence after either treatment. Furthermore, participants completed a questionnaire to identify factors that influence patient preference of radiation modality.

Results

The data demonstrate that 42.5% of patients would accept additional risk of recurrence for IORT versus 9% AAR for EBRT, while 48.5% of patients would not accept any additional risk, yet would choose IORT over EBRT if risks of recurrence were equivalent. When combining patient preferences and the results from the questionnaire, no single socio-economic/-demographic factor was found to significantly correlate with AAR of IORT.

Conclusion

Our study confirms the existence of subgroups of breast cancer patients who would accept an additional risk of recurrence associated with choice of radiation modality to receive a single dose of IORT as adjuvant radiotherapy for breast cancer instead of EBRT over several weeks; yet our data fail to identify a single factor significantly associated with these patient preferences and, therefore, helpful for individualised decision-making processes.

Keywords

Intraoperative radiotherapy (IORT) Breast cancer Breast-conserving surgery Patient preference External beam whole breast radiotherapy (EBRT) Shared decision-making 

List of Abbreviations

AAR

Additional accepted risk

BCS

Breast-conserving surgery

EBRT

External beam whole breast radiotherapy

IORT

Intraoperative radiotherapy

Notes

Authors contributions

SS: project development, data management, data analysis, provision of study patients, manuscript writing, final approval of manuscript. SK: data collection, data analysis, provision of study patients, final approval of manuscript. SH: data analysis, final approval of manuscript. FW: project development, administrative support, provision of study patients, final approval of manuscript. AG: project development, data analysis, administrative support, provision of study patients, final approval of manuscript. MS: project development, data analysis, administrative support, provision of study patients, final approval of manuscript, supervision.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

Carl Zeiss Meditec supports radiobiological research in the Department of Radiation Oncology (Frederik Wenz). Marc Sütterlin reports reception of lecture fees in regard to IORT. The remaining authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Informed consent

All patients provided informed consent.

Ethical approval

The ethical approval for this study was obtained through Ethics Committee II, Heidelberg University, Medical Faculty Mannheim (2013-591N-MA).

References

  1. 1.
    Tuschy B, Berlit S, Romero S, Sperk E, Wenz F, Kehl S, Sutterlin M (2013) Clinical aspects of intraoperative radiotherapy in early breast cancer: short-term complications after IORT in women treated with low energy X-rays. Radiat oncol 8:95.  https://doi.org/10.1186/1748-717X-8-95 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Ruano-Ravina A, Cantero-Munoz P, Eraso Urien A (2011) Efficacy and safety of intraoperative radiotherapy in breast cancer: a systematic review. Cancer Lett 313(1):15–25.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.canlet.2011.08.020 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Alvarado MD, Mohan AJ, Esserman LJ, Park CC, Harrison BL, Howe RJ, Thorsen C, Ozanne EM (2013) Cost-effectiveness analysis of intraoperative radiation therapy for early-stage breast cancer. Ann Surg Oncol 20(9):2873–2880.  https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-013-2997-3 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Hill-Kayser CE, Vachani C, Hampshire MK, Di Lullo GA, Metz JM (2012) Cosmetic outcomes and complications reported by patients having undergone breast-conserving treatment. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 83(3):839–844.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrobp.2011.08.013 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Blank E, Kraus-Tiefenbacher U, Welzel G, Keller A, Bohrer M, Sutterlin M, Wenz F (2010) Single-center long-term follow-up after intraoperative radiotherapy as a boost during breast-conserving surgery using low-kilovoltage X-rays. Ann Surg Oncol 17(Suppl 3):352–358.  https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-010-1265-z CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Vaidya JS, Joseph DJ, Tobias JS, Bulsara M, Wenz F, Saunders C, Alvarado M, Flyger HL, Massarut S, Eiermann W, Keshtgar M, Dewar J, Kraus-Tiefenbacher U, Sutterlin M, Esserman L, Holtveg HM, Roncadin M, Pigorsch S, Metaxas M, Falzon M, Matthews A, Corica T, Williams NR, Baum M (2010) Targeted intraoperative radiotherapy versus whole breast radiotherapy for breast cancer (TARGIT-A trial): an international, prospective, randomised, non-inferiority phase 3 trial. Lancet 376(9735):91–102.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(10)60837-9 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Wenz F, Welzel G, Blank E, Hermann B, Steil V, Sutterlin M, Kraus-Tiefenbacher U (2010) Intraoperative radiotherapy as a boost during breast-conserving surgery using low-kilovoltage X-rays: the first 5 years of experience with a novel approach. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 77(5):1309–1314.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrobp.2009.06.085 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Eldredge-Hindy HB, Rosenberg AL, Simone NL (2014) Intraoperative radiotherapy for breast cancer: the lasting effects of a fleeting treatment. Int J Breast Cancer 2014:214325.  https://doi.org/10.1155/2014/214325 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Sedlmayer F, Reitsamer R, Fussl C, Ziegler I, Zehentmayr F, Deutschmann H, Kopp P, Fastner G (2014) Boost IORT in breast cancer: body of evidence. Int J Breast Cancer 2014:472516.  https://doi.org/10.1155/2014/472516 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Alvarado MD, Conolly J, Park C, Sakata T, Mohan AJ, Harrison BL, Hayes M, Esserman LJ, Ozanne EM (2014) Patient preferences regarding intraoperative versus external beam radiotherapy following breast-conserving surgery. Breast Cancer Res Treat 143(1):135–140.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10549-013-2782-9 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Stiggelbout AM, de Haes JC (2001) Patient preference for cancer therapy: an overview of measurement approaches. J Clin Oncol 19(1):220–230.  https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2001.19.1.220 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Palda VA, Llewellyn-Thomas HA, Mackenzie RG, Pritchard KI, Naylor CD (1997) Breast cancer patients’ attitudes about rationing postlumpectomy radiation therapy: applicability of trade-off methods to policy-making. J Clin Oncol 15(10):3192–3200.  https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.1997.15.10.3192 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Brown SM, Culver JO, Osann KE, MacDonald DJ, Sand S, Thornton AA, Grant M, Bowen DJ, Metcalfe KA, Burke HB, Robson ME, Friedman S, Weitzel JN (2011) Health literacy, numeracy, and interpretation of graphical breast cancer risk estimates. Patient Educ Couns 83(1):92–98.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pec.2010.04.027 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Fagerlin A, Zikmund-Fisher BJ, Ubel PA (2011) Helping patients decide: ten steps to better risk communication. J Natl Cancer Inst 103(19):1436–1443.  https://doi.org/10.1093/jnci/djr318 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Sperk E, Welzel G, Keller A, Kraus-Tiefenbacher U, Gerhardt A, Sutterlin M, Wenz F (2012) Late radiation toxicity after intraoperative radiotherapy (IORT) for breast cancer: results from the randomized phase III trial TARGIT A. Breast Cancer Res Treat 135(1):253–260.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10549-012-2168-4 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Merrick HW 3rd, Battle JA, Padgett BJ, Dobelbower RR Jr (1997) IORT for early breast cancer: a report on long-term results. Front Radiat Ther Oncol 31:126–130CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Mussari S, Sabino Della Sala W, Busana L, Vanoni V, Eccher C, Zani B, Menegotti L, Tomio L (2006) Full-dose intraoperative radiotherapy with electrons in breast cancer. First report on late toxicity and cosmetic results from a single-institution experience. Strahlenther Onkol 182(10):589–595.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00066-006-1559-z CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Fastner G, Sedlmayer F, Merz F, Deutschmann H, Reitsamer R, Menzel C, Stierle C, Farmini A, Fischer T, Ciabattoni A, Mirri A, Hager E, Reinartz G, Lemanski C, Orecchia R, Valentini V (2013) IORT with electrons as boost strategy during breast conserving therapy in limited stage breast cancer: long term results of an ISIORT pooled analysis. Radiother Oncol 108(2):279–286.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.radonc.2013.05.031 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Spaich S, Tuschy B, Sperk E, Wenz F, Sütterlin M (2017) Initial experience of intraoperative radiotherapy as tumour bed boost after neoadjuvant chemotherapy in breast cancer patients. Transl Cancer Res 6(2):416–423CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Herzlinger R (2007) A bold new consumer-driven health care system. The laws and their legislators. Manag Care 16(8):34–36PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Herzlinger RE, Falit BP (2009) Consumer-driven health care. Jama 301(20):2093–2094.  https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2009.699 (author reply 2094) CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Hamelinck VC, Bastiaannet E, Pieterse AH, Jannink I, van de Velde CJ, Liefers GJ, Stiggelbout AM (2014) Patients’ preferences for surgical and adjuvant systemic treatment in early breast cancer: a systematic review. Cancer Treat Rev 40(8):1005–1018.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ctrv.2014.06.007 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Simes RJ, Coates AS (2001) Patient preferences for adjuvant chemotherapy of early breast cancer: how much benefit is needed? J Nat Cancer Inst Monogr 30:146–152CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Lindley C, Vasa S, Sawyer WT, Winer EP (1998) Quality of life and preferences for treatment following systemic adjuvant therapy for early-stage breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 16(4):1380–1387.  https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.1998.16.4.1380 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Athas WF, Adams-Cameron M, Hunt WC, Amir-Fazli A, Key CR (2000) Travel distance to radiation therapy and receipt of radiotherapy following breast-conserving surgery. J Natl Cancer Inst 92(3):269–271CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Boscoe FP, Johnson CJ, Henry KA, Goldberg DW, Shahabi K, Elkin EB, Ballas LK, Cockburn M (2011) Geographic proximity to treatment for early stage breast cancer and likelihood of mastectomy. Breast 20(4):324–328.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.breast.2011.02.020 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Goyal S, Chandwani S, Haffty BG, Demissie K (2015) Effect of travel distance and time to radiotherapy on likelihood of receiving mastectomy. Ann Surg Oncol 22(4):1095–1101.  https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-014-4093-8 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Schroen AT, Brenin DR, Kelly MD, Knaus WA, Slingluff CL Jr (2005) Impact of patient distance to radiation therapy on mastectomy use in early-stage breast cancer patients. J Clin Oncol 23(28):7074–7080.  https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2005.06.032 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Obstetrics and GynaecologyUniversity Medical Centre Mannheim, Heidelberg UniversityMannheimGermany
  2. 2.Department of Gynaecology and ObstetricsMannheimGermany
  3. 3.Department of Medical Statistics and BiomathematicsUniversity Medical Centre Mannheim, Heidelberg UniversityMannheimGermany
  4. 4.Department of Radiation OncologyUniversity Medical Centre Mannheim, Heidelberg UniversityMannheimGermany

Personalised recommendations