Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Comparison of subjective, objective and patient-reported cosmetic outcomes between accelerated partial breast irradiation and whole breast radiotherapy: a prospective propensity score-matched pair analysis

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Breast Cancer Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

To compare the early cosmetic outcomes after whole breast radiotherapy (WBRT) and accelerated partial breast irradiation (APBI) by various cosmetic assessment methods.

Materials/methods

APBI was delivered using multiplane interstitial brachytherapy as per standard guidelines. Majority of women in WBRT cohort received hypo-fractionated external beam radiotherapy using bitangential portals and mega-voltage photons along with sequential boost to the tumor bed. Single cross-sectional assessment (18–36 months post-treatment completion) of the breast cosmesis was done by RO, SO and the patient using the modified Harvard scale and by photographic assessment using the BCCT.core software. The two cohorts were propensity score-matched using menopausal status, size of surgical cavity, size of tumor in greatest dimension, median number of lymph nodes dissected, treatment with adjuvant chemotherapy and treatment with hormonal therapy.

Results

A total of 64 APBI patients were matched with 99 WBRT patients of the entire cohort of 320. At a median follow-up of 25 months, cosmetic results were significantly better for APBI as compared to WBRT cohort by all methods of evaluation (excellent/good: RO:75% vs 38.4%, p = 0.0001; SO: 54.7% vs 37.4%, p = 0.009; patient: 87.5% vs 58.6%, p = 0.001 and BCCT: 73.4% vs 51.6%, p = 0.001). Individual parameters that were significantly better in APBI cohort included size and shape of breast as well as location and shape of NAC. Better results for individual BCCT parameters (pLBC, pBRE, pBAD) were also seen.

Conclusions

Overall cosmetic outcomes as well as individual subdomains are significantly better with APBI as compared to WBRT by all methods of assessment of cosmesis when matched for various factors.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Haviland JS, Owen JR, Dewar JA, Agrawal RK, Barrett J, Barrett-Lee PJ, et al. The UK Standardisation of Breast Radiotherapy (START) trials of radiotherapy hypofractionation for treatment of early breast cancer: 10-year follow-up results of two randomised controlled trials. Lancet Oncol. 2013;14(11):1086–94.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. NCCN Guidelines for Patients®|Breast Cancer - Stages I and II [Internet]. https://www.nccn.org/patients/guidelines/stage_i_ii_breast/files/assets/basic-html/page-1.html. Accessed 13 Oct 2018.

  3. Polgár C, Major T, Fodor J, Németh G, Orosz Z, Sulyok Z, et al. High-dose-rate brachytherapy alone versus whole breast radiotherapy with or without tumor bed boost after breast-conserving surgery: seven-year results of a comparative study. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2004;60(4):1173–81.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Coles CE, Griffin CL, Kirby AM, Titley J, Agrawal RK, Alhasso A, et al. Partial-breast radiotherapy after breast conservation surgery for patients with early breast cancer (UK IMPORT LOW trial): 5-year results from a multicentre, randomised, controlled, phase 3, non-inferiority trial. Lancet. 2017;390(10099):1048–60.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Polgár C, Ott OJ, Hildebrandt G, Kauer-Dorner D, Knauerhase H, Major T, et al. Late side-effects and cosmetic results of accelerated partial breast irradiation with interstitial brachytherapy versus whole-breast irradiation after breast-conserving surgery for low-risk invasive and in-situ carcinoma of the female breast: 5-year results of a randomised, controlled, phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol. 2017;18(2):259–68.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Corica T, Nowak AK, Saunders CM, Bulsara MK, Taylor M, Williams NR, et al. Cosmetic outcome as rated by patients, doctors, nurses and BCCT.core software assessed over 5 years in a subset of patients in the TARGIT-A Trial. Radiat Oncol. 2018;13(1):68.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Bhattacharya IS, Haviland JS, Kirby AM, Kirwan CC, Hopwood P, Yarnold JR, et al. Patient-reported outcomes over 5 years after whole- or partial-breast radiotherapy: longitudinal analysis of the IMPORT LOW (CRUK/06/003) phase III randomized controlled trial. J Clin Oncol. 2018;37(4):305–17.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Polgar C, Major T, Sulyok Z, Takacsi-Nagy Z, Fodor J. Long-term toxicity and cosmetic results of partial versus whole breast irradiation: 10-year results of a phase III APBI trial. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2014;90(1):S133–S134134.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Schäfer R, Strnad V, Polgár C, Uter W, Hildebrandt G, Ott OJ, et al. Quality-of-life results for accelerated partial breast irradiation with interstitial brachytherapy versus whole-breast irradiation in early breast cancer after breast-conserving surgery (GEC-ESTRO): 5-year results of a randomised, phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol. 2018;19(6):834–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Olivotto IA, Whelan TJ, Parpia S, Kim D-H, Berrang T, Truong PT, et al. Interim cosmetic and toxicity results from RAPID: a randomized trial of accelerated partial breast irradiation using three-dimensional conformal external beam radiation therapy. J Clin Oncol Off J Am Soc Clin Oncol. 2013;31(32):4038–45.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Vera R, Trombetta M, Mukhopadhyay ND, Packard M, Arthur D. Long-term cosmesis and toxicity following 3-dimensional conformal radiation therapy in the delivery of accelerated partial breast irradiation. Pract Radiat Oncol. 2014;4(3):147–52.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Munshi A, Kakkar S, Bhutani R, Jalali R, Budrukkar A, Dinshaw KA. Factors influencing cosmetic outcome in breast conservation. Clin Oncol. 2009;21(4):285–93.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Gurram L, Wadasadawala T, Joshi K, Phurailatpam R, Paul S, Sarin R. Multi-catheter interstitial brachytherapy for partial breast irradiation: an audit of implant quality based on dosimetric evaluation comparing intra-operative versus post-operative placement. J Contemp Brachyther. 2016;8(2):116–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Wadasadawala T, Sinha S, Verma S, Parmar V, Kannan S, Pathak R, et al. A prospective comparison of subjective and objective assessment of cosmetic outcomes following breast brachytherapy. J Contemp Brachyther. 2019;11(3):207–14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Aaronson NK, Bartelink H, van Dongen JA, van Dam FS. Evaluation of breast conserving therapy: clinical, methodological and psychosocial perspectives. Eur J Surg Oncol J Eur Soc Surg Oncol Br Assoc Surg Oncol. 1988;14(2):133–40.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Christie D, Sharpley C, Curtis T. Improving the accuracy of a photographic assessment system for breast cosmesis. Clin Oncol. 2005;17(1):27–31.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Cardoso MJ, Cardoso JS, Oliveira HP, Gouveia P. The breast cancer conservative treatment. Cosmetic results—BCCT.core—Software for objective assessment of esthetic outcome in breast cancer conservative treatment: a narrative review. Comput Methods Progr Biomed. 2016;126:154–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Austin PC. Optimal caliper widths for propensity-score matching when estimating differences in means and differences in proportions in observational studies. Pharm Stat. 2011;10(2):150–61.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Bodai BI, Tuso P. Breast cancer survivorship: a comprehensive review of long-term medical issues and lifestyle recommendations. Perm J. 2015;19(2):48–79.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Friedman N. The effects of irradiation on breast cancer and the breast. CA Cancer J Clin. 1988;38(6):368–71.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Dale RG, Jones B. The clinical radiobiology of brachytherapy. Br J Radiol. 1998;71(845):465–83.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Meattini I, Saieva C, Miccinesi G, Desideri I, Francolini G, Scotti V, et al. Accelerated partial breast irradiation using intensity modulated radiotherapy versus whole breast irradiation: Health-related quality of life final analysis from the Florence phase 3 trial. Eur J Cancer. 2017;76:17–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Sarin R. Partial-breast treatment for early breast cancer: emergence of a new paradigm. Nat Rev Clin Oncol. 2005;2(1):40–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Gabani P, Cyr AE, Zoberi JE, Ochoa LL, Matesa MA, Thomas MA, et al. Long-term outcomes of APBI via multicatheter interstitial HDR brachytherapy: results of a prospective single-institutional registry. Brachytherapy. 2018;17(1):171–80.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Fowble B, Fein DA, Hanlon AL, Eisenberg BL, Hoffman JP, Sigurdson ER, et al. The impact of tamoxifen on breast recurrence, cosmesis, complications, and survival in estrogen receptor-positive early-stage breast cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1996;35(4):669–77.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Volders JH, Negenborn VL, Haloua MH, Krekel NMA, Jóźwiak K, Meijer S, et al. Breast-specific factors determine cosmetic outcome and patient satisfaction after breast-conserving therapy: Results from the randomized COBALT study. J Surg Oncol. 2018;117(5):1001–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Nahabedian MY, Tsangaris TN. Breast reconstruction following subcutaneous mastectomy for cancer: a critical appraisal of the nipple-areola complex. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2006;117(4):1083–90.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Lagendijk M, Vos EL, Koning AHJ, Hunink MGM, Pignol JP, Corten EML, et al. TUmor-volume to breast-volume RAtio for improving COSmetic results in breast cancer patients (TURACOS); a randomized controlled trial. BMC Cancer [Internet]. 2017 [cited 2018 Oct 15];17. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5436425/

  29. Hepel JT, Arthur D, Shaitelman S, Polgár C, Todor D, Zoberi I, et al. American Brachytherapy Society consensus report for accelerated partial breast irradiation using interstitial multicatheter brachytherapy. Brachytherapy. 2017;16(5):919–28.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Cochrane RA, Valasiadou P, Wilson ARM, Al-Ghazal SK, Macmillan RD. Cosmesis and satisfaction after breast-conserving surgery correlates with the percentage of breast volume excised. Br J Surg. 2003;90(12):1505–9.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Jagsi R, Li Y, Morrow M, Janz N, Alderman A, Graff J, et al. Patient-reported quality of life and satisfaction with cosmetic outcomes after breast conservation and mastectomy with and without reconstruction: results of a survey of breast cancer survivors. Ann Surg. 2015;261(6):1198–206.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Kim MS, Sbalchiero JC, Reece GP, Miller MJ, Beahm EK, Markey MK. Assessment of breast aesthetics. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2008;121(4):186e–e194194.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank INESC Porto breast research group for providing us with BCCT.core v 3.1 software.

Funding

This research did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Radiation Oncology, Advanced Centre for Treatment, Research and Education in Cancer, Tata Memorial Centre, Homi Bhabha National Institute, Kharghar, Navi Mumbai, 410210, India

    Tabassum Wadasadawala & Rajiv Sarin

  2. Department of Radiation Oncology, Tata Memorial Centre, Homi Bhabha National Institute, Parel, Mumbai, India

    Shwetabh Sinha, Shalini Verma, Monidipa Mondal & Rima Pathak

  3. Department of Surgical Oncology, Advanced Centre for Treatment, Research and Education in Cancer, Tata Memorial Centre, Homi Bhabha National Institute, Kharghar, Navi Mumbai, India

    Vani Parmar & Urvashi Jain

  4. Clinical Research Secretariat, Tata Memorial Centre, Homi Bhabha National Institute, Parel, Mumbai, India

    Mithila Gaikar

  5. Department of Biostatistics, Advanced Centre for Treatment, Research and Education in Cancer, Tata Memorial Centre, Homi Bhabha National Institute, Kharghar, Navi Mumbai, India

    Sadhana Kannan

Authors
  1. Tabassum Wadasadawala
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Shwetabh Sinha
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Vani Parmar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Shalini Verma
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Mithila Gaikar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Sadhana Kannan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Monidipa Mondal
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Rima Pathak
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Urvashi Jain
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  10. Rajiv Sarin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Tabassum Wadasadawala.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

None of the authors have any potential conflict of interest to disclose.

Ethical approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki Declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Informed consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Wadasadawala, T., Sinha, S., Parmar, V. et al. Comparison of subjective, objective and patient-reported cosmetic outcomes between accelerated partial breast irradiation and whole breast radiotherapy: a prospective propensity score-matched pair analysis. Breast Cancer 27, 206–212 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12282-019-01009-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12282-019-01009-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation