Kyubo Kim, Jinhong Jung, Haeyoung Kim, Wonguen Jung, Kyung Hwan Shin, Ji Hyun Chang, Su Ssan Kim, Won Park, Jee Suk Chang, Yong Bae Kim, Sung Ja Ahn, Ik Jae Lee, Jong Hoon Lee, Hae Jin Park, Jihye Cha, Juree Kim, Jin Hwa Choi, Taeryool Koo, Jeanny Kwon, Jin Hee Kim, Mi Young Kim, Shin-Hyung Park, Yeon-Joo Kim
Cancer Res Treat. 2022;54(2):497-504. Published online August 25, 2021
Purpose
To evaluate the role of postmastectomy radiation therapy (PMRT) in patients with node-negative breast cancer of 5cm or larger tumors undergoing mastectomy
Materials and Methods
Medical records of 274 patients from 18 institutions treated with mastectomy between January 2000 and December 2016 were retrospectively reviewed. Among these, 202 patients underwent PMRT, while 72 did not. Two hundred and forty-one patients (88.0%) received systemic chemotherapy, and 172 (62.8%) received hormonal therapy. Patients receiving PMRT were younger, more likely to have progesterone receptor-positive tumors, and received adjuvant chemotherapy more frequently compared with those without PMRT (p <0.001, 0.018, and <0.001, respectively). Other characteristics were not significantly different between the two groups.
Results
With a median follow-up of 95 months (range, 1-249), there were 9 locoregional recurrences, and 20 distant metastases. The 8-year locoregional recurrence-free survival rates were 98.0% with PMRT and 91.3% without PMRT (p=0.133), and the 8-year disease-free survival (DFS) rates were 91.8% with PMRT and 73.9% without PMRT (p=0.008). On multivariate analysis incorporating age, histologic grade, lymphovascular invasion, hormonal therapy, chemotherapy, and PMRT, the absence of lymphovascular invasion and the receipt of PMRT were associated with improved DFS (p=0.025 and 0.009, respectively).
Conclusion
Locoregional recurrence rate was very low in node-negative breast cancer of 5cm or larger tumors treated with mastectomy regardless of the receipt of PMRT. However, PMRT was significantly associated with improved DFS. Further investigation is needed to confirm these findings.
Citations
Citations to this article as recorded by
Outcomes with and without postmastectomy radiotherapy for pT3N0‐1M0 breast cancer: An institutional experience Xinxin Rao, Xuanyi Wang, Kairui Jin, Yilan Yang, Xu Zhao, Zhe Pan, Weiluo Lv, Zhen Zhang, Li Zhang, Xiaoli Yu, Xiaomao Guo Cancer Medicine.2024;[Epub] CrossRef
The effect of radiotherapy on patients with pathological stage IIB breast cancer after breast-conserving surgery or mastectomy: A cohort study Yi-Ying Pan, Tzu-Yu Lai, Cheng-Ying Shiau, Ling-Ming Tseng, I-Chun Lai, Yu-Ming Liu, Pin-I Huang Journal of the Chinese Medical Association.2024; 87(2): 202. CrossRef
Post-mastectomy radiation therapy after breast reconstruction: from historic dogmas to practical expert agreements based on a large literature review of surgical and radiation therapy considerations Yazid Belkacemi, Meena S. Moran, Burcu Celet Ozden, Yazan Masannat, Fady Geara, Mohamed Albashir, Nhu Hanh To, Kamel Debbi, Mahmoud El Tamer Critical Reviews in Oncology/Hematology.2024; 200: 104421. CrossRef
Impact of the 21-gene recurrence score testing on chemotherapy selection and clinical outcomes in T3N0 luminal breast cancer Ke Liu, Jia-Yi Li, Guan-Qiao Li, Zhen-Yu He, San-Gang Wu Expert Review of Anticancer Therapy.2024; 24(12): 1283. CrossRef
Post-Mastectomy Radiation Therapy: Applications and Advancements Jessica L. Thompson, Steven G. Allen, Cecilia Pesavento, Corey W. Speers, Jacqueline S. Jeruss Current Breast Cancer Reports.2022; 14(3): 75. CrossRef
Yeon Joo Kim, Yeon-Joo Kim, Yong Bae Kim, Ik Jae Lee, Jeanny Kwon, Kyubo Kim, Jihye Cha, Myungsoo Kim, In Young Jo, Jung Hoon Kim, Jaehyeon Park, Jin Hee Kim, Juree Kim, Kyung Hwan Shin, Su Ssan Kim
Cancer Res Treat. 2022;54(2):478-487. Published online July 12, 2021
Purpose This study aimed to investigate the impact of postoperative radiotherapy (PORT) in de novo metastatic breast cancer (dnMBC) patients undergoing planned primary tumor resection (PTR) and to identify the subgroup of patients who would most benefit from PORT.
Materials and Methods This study enrolled 426 patients with dnMBC administered PTR alone or with PORT. The primary and secondary outcomes were overall and progression-free survival (OS and PFS), respectively.
Results The median follow-up time was 53.7 months (range, 3.1 to 194.4). The 5-year OS and PFS rates were 73.2% and 32.0%, respectively. For OS, clinical T3/4 category, triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC), postoperative chemotherapy alone were significantly poor prognostic factors, and administration of PORT failed to show its significance. Regarding PFS, PORT was a favorable prognostic factor (hazard ratio, 0.64; 95% confidence interval, 0.50 to 0.82; p < 0.001), in addition to T1/2 category, ≤ 5 metastases, and non-TNBC. According to the multivariate analyses of OS in the PORT group, we divided the patients into three groups (group 1, T1/2 and non-TNBC [n=193]; group 2, T3/4 and non-TNBC [n=171]; and group 3, TNBC [n=49]), and evaluated the effect of PORT. Although PORT had no significance for OS in all subgroups, it was a significant factor for good prognosis regarding PFS in groups 1 and 2, not in group 3.
Conclusion PORT was associated with a significantly better PFS in patients with dnMBC who underwent PTR. Patients with clinical T1/2 category and non-TNBC benefited most from PORT, while those with TNBC showed little benefit.
Citations
Citations to this article as recorded by
Survival Impact of Postoperative Primary Area Radiotherapy on De Novo Metastatic Breast Cancer: A Retrospective Study Pingchuan Li, Lineng Wei, Yinan Ji, Huawei Yang Technology in Cancer Research & Treatment.2025;[Epub] CrossRef
Letter to the editor for the article“Tumor margin irregularity degree is an important preoperative predictor of adverse pathology for clinical T1/2 renal cell carcinoma and the construction of predictive model” Yaping Miao, Lexin Wang, Ping Chen, Jiaan Lu, Guanhu Yang, Hao Chi World Journal of Urology.2024;[Epub] CrossRef
The prognostic differences and the effect of postmastectomy radiotherapy between post‐chemotherapy ypT1‐2ypN1 and de novo pT1‐2N1 breast cancer Tian Yang, Xiaorong Zhong, Jun Wang, Zhongzheng Xiang, Yuanyuan Zeng, Siting Yu, Zelei Dai, Ningyue Xu, Ting Luo, Lei Liu Cancer Medicine.2023; 12(7): 8112. CrossRef
Impact of high dose radiotherapy for breast tumor in locoregionally uncontrolled stage IV breast cancer: a need for a risk-stratified approach Nalee Kim, Haeyoung Kim, Won Park, Won Kyung Cho, Tae Gyu Kim, Young-Hyuck Im, Jin Seok Ahn, Yeon Hee Park, Ji-Yeon Kim Radiation Oncology.2023;[Epub] CrossRef
Machine learning predicts the prognosis of breast cancer patients with initial bone metastases Chaofan Li, Mengjie Liu, Jia Li, Weiwei Wang, Cong Feng, Yifan Cai, Fei Wu, Xixi Zhao, Chong Du, Yinbin Zhang, Yusheng Wang, Shuqun Zhang, Jingkun Qu Frontiers in Public Health.2022;[Epub] CrossRef
Factors Influencing Prognosis in Patients with De Novo Stage IV Breast Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Meilin Zhang, Zining Jin, Yingying Xu, Bo Chen, Jian Song, Muyao Li, Feng Jin, Ang Zheng SSRN Electronic Journal .2022;[Epub] CrossRef
Mee Sun Yoon, Seung Jae Huh, Hak Jae Kim, Young Seok Kim, Yong Bae Kim, Joo-Young Kim, Jong-Hoon Lee, Hun Jung Kim, Jihye Cha, Jin Hee Kim, Juree Kim, Won Sup Yoon, Jin Hwa Choi, Mison Chun, Youngmin Choi, Kang Kyoo Lee, Myungsoo Kim, Jae-Uk Jeong, Sei Kyung Chang, Won Park
Cancer Res Treat. 2016;48(3):1074-1083. Published online October 29, 2015
Purpose We evaluated the role of adjuvant therapy in stage IIIA endometrioid adenocarcinoma patients who underwent surgery followed by radiotherapy (RT) alone or chemoradiotherapy (CTRT) according to risk group. Materials and Methods A multicenter retrospective study was conducted including patients with surgical stage IIIA endometrial cancertreated by radical surgery and adjuvant RT or CTRT. Disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) were analyzed.
Results Ninety-three patients with stage IIIA disease were identified. Nineteen patients (20.4%) experienced recurrence, mostly distant metastasis (17.2%). Combined CTRT did not affect DFS (74.1% vs. 82.4%, p=0.130) or OS (96.3% vs. 91.9%, p=0.262) in stage IIIA disease compared with RT alone. Patients with age ≥ 60 years, grade G2/3, and lymphovascular space involvement had a significantly worse DFS and those variables were defined as risk factors. The high-risk group showed a significant reduction in 5-year DFS (≥ 2 risk factors) (49.0% vs. 88.0%, p < 0.001) compared with the low-risk group (< 2). Multivariate analysis confirmed that more than one risk factor was the only predictor of worse DFS (hazard ratio, 5.45; 95% confidence interval, 2.12 to 13.98; p < 0.001). Of patients with no risk factors, a subset treated with RT alone showed an excellent 5-year DFS and OS (93.8% and 100%, respectively). Conclusion We identified a low-risk subset of stage IIIA endometrioid adenocarcinoma patients who might be reasonable candidates for adjuvant RT alone. Further randomized studies are needed to determine which subset might benefit from combined CTRT.
Citations
Citations to this article as recorded by
Practice patterns and survival in FIGO 2009 stage 3B endometrial cancer Jessica Jou, Lindsey Charo, Marianne Hom-Tedla, Katherine Coakley, Pratibha Binder, Cheryl Saenz, Ramez N. Eskander, Michael McHale, Steven Plaxe Gynecologic Oncology.2021; 163(2): 299. CrossRef
Treatment strategies for endometrial cancer: current practice and perspective Yeh C. Lee, Stephanie Lheureux, Amit M. Oza Current Opinion in Obstetrics & Gynecology.2017; 29(1): 47. CrossRef