Dataset Information

Radiotherapy refusal in breast cancer with breast-conserving surgery.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Although radiotherapy after breast-conserving surgery has been the standard treatment for breast cancer, some people still refuse to undergo radiotherapy. The aim of this study is to identify risk factors for refusal of radiotherapy after breast-conserving surgery.

Methods

To investigate the trend of refusing radiotherapy after breast-conserving surgery in patients with breast cancer using the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database. The patients were divided into radiotherapy group and radiotherapy refusal group. Survival results were compared using a multivariate Cox risk model adjusted for clinicopathological variables. Multivariate logistic regression was used to analyze the influencing factors of patients refusing radiotherapy after breast-conserving surgery and a nomogram model was established.

Results

The study included 87,100 women who underwent breast-conserving surgery for breast cancer between 2010 and 2015. There were 84,948 patients (97.5%) in the radiotherapy group and 2152 patients (2.5%) in the radiotherapy refusal group. The proportion of patients who refused radiotherapy after breast-conserving surgery increased from 2.1% in 2010 to 3.1% in 2015. The Kaplan-Meier survival curve showed that radiotherapy can improve overall survival (p < 0.001) and breast cancer specific survival (p < 0.001) in the patients with breast-conserving surgery. The results of multivariate logistic regression showed that age, income, marital status, race, grade, stage, subtype and chemotherapy were independent factors associated with the refusal of radiotherapy.

Conclusions

Postoperative radiotherapy can improve the benefits of breast-conserving surgery. Patients with old age, low income, divorce, white race, advanced stage, and no chemotherapy were more likely to refuse radiotherapy.

SUBMITTER: Liu J

PROVIDER: S-EPMC10403910 | biostudies-literature | 2023 Aug

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Radiotherapy refusal in breast cancer with breast-conserving surgery.

Liu Jiameng J Zhu Zhanlin Z Hua Zhipeng Z Lin Weijie W Weng Yiyin Y Lin Juli J Mao Hehui H Lin Lifen L Chen Xuming X Guo Jujiang J

Radiation oncology (London, England) 20230805 1

<h4>Background</h4>Although radiotherapy after breast-conserving surgery has been the standard treatment for breast cancer, some people still refuse to undergo radiotherapy. The aim of this study is to identify risk factors for refusal of radiotherapy after breast-conserving surgery.<h4>Methods</h4>To investigate the trend of refusing radiotherapy after breast-conserving surgery in patients with breast cancer using the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database. The patients were divid ...[more]

PMID: 37543579

Similar Datasets

Project description:PurposeThis study aimed to evaluate the robustness with respect to the positional variations of five planning strategies in free-breathing breast hypofractionated radiotherapy (HFRT) for patients after breast-conserving surgery.MethodsTwenty patients who received breast HFRT with 42.72 Gy in 16 fractions were retrospectively analyzed. Five treatment planning strategies were utilized for each patient, including 1) intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) planning (IMRTpure); 2) IMRT planning with skin flash tool extending and filling the fluence outside the skin by 2 cm (IMRTflash); 3) IMRT planning with planning target volume (PTV) extended outside the skin by 2 cm in the computed tomography dataset (IMRTePTV); 4) hybrid planning, i.e., 2 Gy/fraction three-dimensional conformal radiation therapy combined with 0.67 Gy/fraction IMRT (IMRThybrid); and 5) hybrid planning with skin flash (IMRThybrid-flash). All plans were normalized to 95% PTV receiving 100% of the prescription dose. Six additional plans were created with different isocenter shifts for each plan, which were 1 mm, 2 mm, 3 mm, 5 mm, 7 mm, and 10 mm distally in the X (left-right) and Y (anterior-posterior) directions, namely, (X,Y), to assess their robustness, and the corresponding doses were recalculated. Variation of dosimetric parameters with increasing isocenter shift was evaluated.ResultsAll plans were clinically acceptable. In terms of robustness to isocenter shifts, the five planning strategies followed the pattern IMRTePTV, IMRThybrid-flash, IMRTflash, IMRThybrid, and IMRTpure in descending order. V 95% of IMRTePTV maintained at 99.6% ± 0.3% with a (5,5) shift, which further reduced to 98.2% ± 2.0% with a (10,10) shift. IMRThybrid-flash yielded the robustness second to IMRTePTV with less risk from dose hotspots, and the corresponding V 95% maintained >95% up until (5,5).ConclusionConsidering the dosimetric distribution and robustness in breast radiotherapy, IMRTePTV performed best at maintaining high target coverage with increasing isocenter shift, while IMRThybrid-flash would be adequate with positional uncertainty<5 mm.

Project description:PurposeSurgical clips are used as a target for postoperative breast radiotherapy, and displacement of surgical clips would result in inaccurate delivery of radiation. We investigated the displacement range of surgical clips in the breast during postoperative radiotherapy following breast-conserving surgery.MethodsA total of 178 patients who received breast-conserving surgery and postoperative radiation of 59.4 Gy in 33 fractions to the involved breast for 6.5 weeks were included. Surgical clips were used to mark the lumpectomy cavity during breast-conserving surgery. Patients undertook planning computed tomography (CT) scan for whole breast irradiation. Five weeks after beginning radiation, when the irradiation dose was 45 Gy, planning CT scan was performed again for a boost radiotherapy plan in all patients. The surgical clips were defined in both CT images and compared in lateromedial (X), anteroposterior (Y), superoinferior (Z), and three-dimensional directions.ResultsThe 90th percentile of displacement of surgical clips was 5.31 mm (range, 0.0-22.2 mm) in the lateromedial direction, 7.1 mm (range, 0.0-14.2 mm) in the anteroposterior direction, and 6.0 mm (range, 0.0-10.0 mm) in the superoinferior direction. The 90th percentile of three-dimensional displacement distance was 9.8 mm (range, 0.0-28.2 mm). On the multivariate analysis, seroma ≥15 mL was the only independent factor associated with the displacement of surgical clips. In patients with seroma ≥15 mL, the 90th percentile of displacement of surgical clips was 15.1 mm in the lateromedial direction, 12.7 mm in the anteroposterior direction, 10.0 mm in the superoinferior direction, and 21.8 mm in the three-dimensional distance.ConclusionA target volume expansion of 10 mm from surgical clips may be sufficient to compensate for the displacement of clips during postoperative radiotherapy after breast-conserving surgery. For patients who had a seroma, a replanning CT scan for a boost radiation should be considered to ensure exact postoperative radiotherapy in breast cancer.

Project description:AbstractIt has been reported that some male breast cancer patients may refuse the recommended surgery, but the incidence rate in the United States is not clear. The purpose of this study was to identify the incidence, trends, risk factors, and eventual survival outcomes associated with the rejection of such cancer-directed surgery.We collected data on 5860 patients with male breast cancer (MBC) from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database, including 50 patients refusing surgery as recommended. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis and Cox proportional hazard regression were used to identify the effects of refusing surgery on cancer-specific survival (CSS) and overall survival (OS). The association between acceptance or rejection of surgery and mortality were estimated by nested Cox proportional hazards regression models with adjustment for age, race, clinical characteristics, and radiation.Of the 5860 patients identified, 50 (0.9%) refused surgery. Old age (≥65: hazard ratio [HR]: 3.056, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.738-5.374, P < .0001), higher AJCC stage (III: HR: 3.283, 95% CI: 2.134-5.050, P < .0001, IV: HR: 14.237, 95% CI: 8.367-24.226, P < .0001), progesterone receptor status (negative: HR: 1.633, 95% CI: 1.007-2.648, P = .047) were considered risk factors. Compared with the surgery group, the refusal group was associated with a poorer prognosis in both OS and CSS (χ2 = 94.81, P < .001, χ2 = 140.4, P < .001). Moreover, significant differences were also observed in OS and CSS among 1:3 matched groups (P = .0002, P < .001).Compared with the patients undergoing surgery, the patients who refused the cancer-directed surgery had poor prognosis in the total survival period, particularly in stage II and III. The survival benefit for undergoing surgery remained even after adjustment, which indicates the importance of surgical treatment before an advanced stage for male breast cancer patients.

Dataset Information

Radiotherapy refusal in breast cancer with breast-conserving surgery.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Radiotherapy refusal in breast cancer with breast-conserving surgery.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets