Abstract 18P
Background
Compared to sequential conventional fractionation schedule, Simultaneous integrated Boost provides increased dose homogeneity, with less unintended excessive dose outside the boost area; in combination with a higher dose per fraction to the tumour bed, resulting in a shorter overall treatment time spanning over 5 1⁄2 weeks. We compared cosmesis using the Harvard cosmesis scale and dosimetry of SIB IMRT versus sequential electron boost in breast cancer patients.
Methods
Patients in our Institute who have undergone breast-conserving surgery and received adjuvant chemotherapy, who are referred for adjuvant radiotherapy. The study period spanned from 1st May 2016 to 31st March 2018.
Results
The baseline Harvard score for grading breast cosmesis in both the arms was excellent (84% in SIB and 81% in SEB) or good(16% in SIB and 19% in SEB). None of the patients in either arm had fair or poor cosmesis. Assessment of cosmesis at the end of radiation therapy showed a dip from excellent to good and fair in both the arms ( 34% versus 9% with excellent cosmesis, 53% versus 72% with good cosmesis and 13% versus 19% with poor cosmesis in SIB versus SEB arms) but the patients in the SEB arm had comparatively much lower cosmetic score. However, this difference was not statistically significant(p=0.045). Overall cosmesis at the end of 3 months was better in SIB arm compared to that of the SEB arm and was statistically significant (93% with excellent and good cosmesis in SIB vs 65% in SEB p<0.001). At 6 months of follow-up in SIB arm, there was an improvement of the cosmesis with a majority of the patients showing excellent(59%) and good (34%) cosmetic score.
Conclusions
In a selected cohort of patients who have undergone breast conservation surgery, a simultaneous integrated boost along with WBI is considered equivalent radiobiological to sequential electron boost after WBI. This study reports better cosmetic outcomes and favourable toxicity profile with SIB compared to SEB over short-term follow-up which is statistically significant.
Clinical trial identification
Editorial acknowledgement
Legal entity responsible for the study
The authors.
Funding
Has not received any funding.
Disclosure
All authors have declared no conflicts of interest.
Resources from the same session
325P - Clinical characteristics and outcomes of cancer patients with COVID-19 infection: A retrospective study in a single center in the Philippines
Presenter: Frances Victoria Que
Session: e-Poster Display Session
326P - Management of diffuse large B cell lymphomas in the COVID-19 era
Presenter: David Ng
Session: e-Poster Display Session
327P - COVID-19 in patients with oncohematologic diseases in Kazakhstan
Presenter: Zaure Dushimova
Session: e-Poster Display Session
328P - Impact of COVID-19 pandemic on 30 days colorectal cancer patients mortality undergoing emergency operation
Presenter: Ida Bagus Budhi
Session: e-Poster Display Session
329P - Radiotherapy palliative and COVID-19: Experience of radiotherapy oncology department of Cancer Center Tlemcen, Algeria
Presenter: Asma Mous
Session: e-Poster Display Session
330P - COVID and cancer: Choosing between hammer and anvil
Presenter: Ullas Batra
Session: e-Poster Display Session
331P - The clock stopped with COVID-19 but continued ticking for cancer patients
Presenter: Sasi Shanmugam Senga
Session: e-Poster Display Session
336P - Efficacy of methylcobalamin administered intravenously for chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy (CIPN): A prospective crossover study
Presenter: Jun Chen
Session: e-Poster Display Session
337P - A prospective study about the quality of life and chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy
Presenter: Wala Ben Kridis
Session: e-Poster Display Session
338P - Vitamin E in the treatment of chemotherapy and radiation-induced mucositis: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
Presenter: Michelle Joane Alcantara
Session: e-Poster Display Session