PURPOSE Radiation dermatitis (RD) is common in patients undergoing breast radiotherapy. Mepitel film (MF) can reduce RD, but the results from two randomized controlled trials are conflicting. We aimed to conduct a confirmatory randomized controlled trial in patients at risk of RD. METHODS Patients were randomly assigned to receive MF or standard care (2:1 ratio). Patients with large breasts after lumpectomy (bra size ≥ 36 inches or cup size ≥ C) or after mastectomy were eligible. Stratification factors included surgery type, dose fractionation, and administration of boost/bolus. The primary end point was grade (G) 2 or 3 RD using the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events v5.0. Secondary end points included patient- and clinician-reported outcomes. RESULTS Between January 2020 and May 2022, 376 patients were included in the modified intention-to-treat analysis. The incidence of G2 or 3 RD was significantly lower in MF patients compared with standard care (n = 39/251, 15.5%; 95% CI, 11.3 to 20.6% v n = 57/125, 45.6%; 95% CI, 36.7 to 54.8% respectively, odds ratio (OR): 0.20, P < .0001). Benefits of MF remained significant in patients who developed G 3 RD (n = 7, 2.8%; 95% CI, 1.1 to 5.7% v n = 17, 13.6%; 95% CI, 8.1 to 20.9%, OR: 0.19) and moist desquamation (n = 20, 8.0%; 95% CI, 4.9 to 12.0% v n = 24, 19.2%; 95% CI, 12.7 to 27.1%, OR: 0.36). When evaluating the combined patient and health care provider score using Radiation-Induced Skin Reaction Assessment Scale, the MF arm had significantly lower scores ( P < .0001). Individual items on the Radiation-Induced Skin Reaction Assessment Scale also favored the MF for both patient- and clinician-reported outcomes. Blistering/peeling, erythema, pigmentation, and edema were significantly reduced in the MF arm. Three patients removed the film prematurely because of rash (n = 2) and excessive pruritus (n = 1). CONCLUSION MF significantly reduces RD in patients undergoing breast radiotherapy.

Pelvic radiotherapy is an essential component of cancer therapy for patients with cervical and other gynecological malignancies. The ovaries are particularly radiosensitive, and even low radiotherapy doses may result in impaired or complete loss of ovarian function, causing hormonal disturbances and infertility. Recent advances in both surgery and radiotherapy have facilitated the ability of some patients to maintain ovarian function through ovarian transposition and careful radiotherapy planning. Multidisciplinary discussions should be undertaken to consider which candidates are appropriate for transposition. Generally, patients under age 35 should be considered due to ovarian reserve, likelihood of oophoropexy success, and radioresistance of ovaries. Those patients with small squamous cell tumors, minimal extra-uterine extension, and no lymphovascular invasion or lymph node involvement are ideal candidates to minimize risk of ovarian metastasis. Patients should be assessed and counseled about the risks of ovarian metastasis and the likelihood of successful ovarian preservation before undergoing oophoropexy and starting treatment. Oophoropexy should be bilateral if possible, and ovaries should be placed superior and lateral to the radiotherapy field. Studies limiting the mean ovarian dose to less than 2–3 Gray have demonstrated excellent preservation of ovarian function. Intensity modulated radiotherapy and volumetric modulated arc therapy techniques have the potential to further minimize the dose to the ovary with excellent outcomes. The addition of brachytherapy to the treatment regimen will probably cause minimal risk to transposed ovaries. Oophoropexy before radiotherapy may preserve the hormonal function of ovaries for a duration, and fertility might be possible through surrogate pregnancy. Successful ovarian transposition has the potential to improve the overall health and wellbeing, reproductive options, and potentially quality of life in patients with cervical and other gynecological cancers.

No abstract