Practical radiation oncology · 2017
Effect of reduction mammoplasty on acute radiation side effects and use of lumpectomy cavity boosts.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Lin Jolinta Y, Bluebond-Langner Rachel, Choi Enid, Cheston Sally, Nichols Elizabeth M, Cohen Randi J, Bentzen Soren M, Drogula Cynthia, Kesmodel Susan, Bellavance Emily, Rosenblatt Paula, Tkaczuk Katherine, Slezak Sheri, Feigenberg Steven J
Аннотация
PURPOSE: Reduction mammoplasty (RM) during breast-conserving surgery is popular among women with large-volume breasts because it reduces redundant breast folds and may decrease skin-related morbidity from radiation therapy. However, RM may obscure the lumpectomy cavity (LC) and pose challenges to administering an LC boost, potentially affecting local control. We investigated the impact of RM on acute side effects and use of LC boosts.
METHODS AND MATERIALS: The records of 645 consecutive women treated with whole-breast irradiation at an urban university and 2 community practices between January 2012 and December 2014 were reviewed on an institutional review board-approved study. The primary endpoint was grade ≥3 radiation dermatitis; the secondary endpoint was use of LC boost. Student 2-sample t tests, Pearson χ2 tests, Fisher exact tests, and univariate and multivariable logistic regression analyses were performed.
RESULTS: Forty-three (7%) RMs were performed in 650 treated breasts. No significant differences in grade 3 toxicities were identified among RM and non-RM patients. LC boost was delivered to 474 breasts. Fewer (16/43) RM patients received LC boosts compared with non-RM patients (458/607), P = .0001. RM patients were more likely to have neoadjuvant chemotherapy, stage III or multifocal disease, higher body mass index, larger planning treatment volumes, and conventional fractionation (P < .05).
CONCLUSIONS: RM was associated with decreased use of LC boost without significant differences in acute toxicities. Further investigation to delineate LCs in patients undergoing RM or identify alternative strategies for delivering LC dose is needed.
METHODS AND MATERIALS: The records of 645 consecutive women treated with whole-breast irradiation at an urban university and 2 community practices between January 2012 and December 2014 were reviewed on an institutional review board-approved study. The primary endpoint was grade ≥3 radiation dermatitis; the secondary endpoint was use of LC boost. Student 2-sample t tests, Pearson χ2 tests, Fisher exact tests, and univariate and multivariable logistic regression analyses were performed.
RESULTS: Forty-three (7%) RMs were performed in 650 treated breasts. No significant differences in grade 3 toxicities were identified among RM and non-RM patients. LC boost was delivered to 474 breasts. Fewer (16/43) RM patients received LC boosts compared with non-RM patients (458/607), P = .0001. RM patients were more likely to have neoadjuvant chemotherapy, stage III or multifocal disease, higher body mass index, larger planning treatment volumes, and conventional fractionation (P < .05).
CONCLUSIONS: RM was associated with decreased use of LC boost without significant differences in acute toxicities. Further investigation to delineate LCs in patients undergoing RM or identify alternative strategies for delivering LC dose is needed.