Patients with pT1-2pN1 represent a heterogeneous group with a wide range of LRF/DM rates. In particular, patients with pT1 tumors and 1 + LN, and patients with micrometastases, had low event rates. These groups would derive small absolute reductions in LRF and DM with addition of PMRT, underscoring the importance of patient selection for PMRT in pT1-2pN1 breast cancer.
Background
The role of radiation therapy (RT) following breast-conserving surgery (BCS) in ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) remains controversial. Trials have not identified a low-risk cohort, based on clinicopathologic features, who do not benefit from RT. A biosignature (DCISionRT®) that evaluates recurrence risk has been developed and validated. We evaluated the impact of DCISionRT on clinicians’ recommendations for adjuvant RT.
Methods
The PREDICT study is a prospective, multi-institutional, observational registry in which patients underwent DCISionRT testing. The primary endpoint was to identify the percentage of patients where testing led to a change in RT recommendations.
Results
Overall, 539 women were included in this study. Pre DCISionRT testing, RT was recommended to 69% of patients; however, post-testing, a change in the RT recommendation was made for 42% of patients compared with the pre-testing recommendation; the percentage of women who were recommended RT decreased by 20%. For women initially recommended not to receive an RT pre-test, 35% had their recommendation changed to add RT following testing, while post-test, 46% of patients had their recommendation changed to omit RT after an initial recommendation for RT. When considered in conjunction with other clinicopathologic factors, the elevated DCISionRT score risk group (DS > 3) had the strongest association with an RT recommendation (odds ratio 43.4) compared with age, grade, size, margin status, and other factors.
Conclusions
DCISionRT provided information that significantly changed the recommendations to add or omit RT. Compared with traditional clinicopathologic features used to determine recommendations for or against RT, the factor most strongly associated with RT recommendations was the DCISionRT result, with other factors of importance being patient preference, tumor size, and grade.
Purpose: Cutaneous T-cell lymphoma (CTCL) is known to have an excellent response to radiotherapy, an important treatment modality for this disease. In patients with extremity and digit involvement, the irregular surface and depth variations create difficulty in delivering a homogenous dose using electrons. We sought to evaluate photon irradiation with rice packing as tissue equivalence and determine clinical tolerance and response.Materials and methods: Three consecutive CTCL patients with extensive lower extremity involvement including the digits were treated using external beam photon therapy with rice packing for tissue compensation. The entire foot was treated to 30–40 Gy in 2–3 Gy per fraction using 6 MV photons prescribed to the mid-plane of an indexed box filled with rice in which the foot was placed. Treatment tolerance and response were monitored with clinical evaluation.Results: All patients tolerated the treatment without treatment breaks. Toxicities included grade 3 erythema and desquamation with resolution within 4 weeks. No late toxicities were observed. All patients had a partial response by 4 weeks after therapy with two patients achieving a complete response. Patients reported improved functionality after treatment. No local recurrence has been observed.Conclusion: Tissue compensation with rice packing offers a convenient, inexpensive, and reproducible method for the treatment of CTCL with highly irregular surfaces.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.