Oops, you're using an old version of your browser so some of the features on this page may not be displaying properly.

MINIMAL Requirements: Google Chrome 24+Mozilla Firefox 20+Internet Explorer 11Opera 15–18Apple Safari 7SeaMonkey 2.15-2.23

Poster viewing and lunch

169P - Hypofractionated Radiotherapy versus Conventional Radiotherapy in Postmastectomy Breast Cancer Patients: A single institution non-randomized study, prospective study

Date

12 May 2023

Session

Poster viewing and lunch

Presenters

Richmarie Grace Uy

Citation

Annals of Oncology (2023) 8 (1suppl_4): 101221-101221. 10.1016/esmoop/esmoop101221

Authors

R.G. Uy1, J. Fernandez-Ramos1, M.V. Barcelona1, C.C. Lo1, A.A. Granda1, C.A. Ngelangel2

Author affiliations

  • 1 Jose R. Reyes Memorial Medical Center, Manila/PH
  • 2 AHMC - Asian Hospital and Medical Center, Muntinlupa/PH

Resources

Login to get immediate access to this content.

If you do not have an ESMO account, please create one for free.

Abstract 169P

Background

Hypofractionation—delivering higher dosages per fraction in a shorter time—is common now. Hypofractionated radiotherapy for whole breast irradiation is preferred over CF-PMRT according to multiple randomized trials showing equivalent efficacy and safety. Post-mastectomy breast cancer hypofractionation is understudied. HF-PMRT with regional nodal irradiation has equal efficacy and toxicity to traditional fractionation (CF-PMRT).

Methods

87 of 92 histopathologically confirmed locally advanced breast cancer patients who underwent modified radical mastectomy and appropriate surgical axillary staging, WHO performance status 0-2, were eligible for this prospective, non-randomized trial from 2014–2015 and 2019–2021. HF-PMRT was 43.2 Gy in 16 fractions (2.7 Gy/fraction) or CF-PMRT was 50-50.4 Gy in 1.8-2.0 Gy/fraction to the chest wall and regional nodes with scar boost for high-risk patients. Locoregional recurrence-free survival. Overall survival, distant metastases control, disease-free survival, acute and late toxicity were secondary objectives.

Results

Stage II and menopausal cases dominated HF-PMRT. Same age, co-morbidities, symptoms, and performance. HF-PMRT had 23.5 months of median follow-up and CF-PMRT 23. (10-39). HF-PMRT had 68% interruption days versus 8 for CF-PMRT (p<0.003). HF-PMRT had 86.3% two-year survival, CF-PMRT 100%, p = 0.126. The longer-follow-up 2014-2015 cohort showed three HF-PMRT deaths (13.6%) and no CF-PMRT deaths (1 patient died of brain metastasis after 26.9 months, another died of unknown cause after 47.5 months, and 1 died due to cardiopulmonary arrest after 17.9 months follow-up). HF-PMRT showed 68.18% disease-free survival, CF-PMRT 73.33%. No locoregional recurrence was reported. HF-PMRT showed 86.96% grade 1 acute cutaneous toxicity, CF-PMRT 53.6%. Six (8.70%) HF-PMRT and 14 (34.15%) CF-PMRT patients exhibited Grade 2 skin toxicity. Five (12.20%) CF-PMRT patients exhibited Grade 3 acute cutaneous toxicity, compared to none in HF-PMRT, p = 0.001.

Conclusions

This interim analysis suggests HF-PMRT is a promising therapeutic option. This observational study follows all patients for five years.

Legal entity responsible for the study

The authors.

Funding

Has not received any funding.

Disclosure

All authors have declared no conflicts of interest.

This site uses cookies. Some of these cookies are essential, while others help us improve your experience by providing insights into how the site is being used.

For more detailed information on the cookies we use, please check our Privacy Policy.

Customise settings
  • Necessary cookies enable core functionality. The website cannot function properly without these cookies, and you can only disable them by changing your browser preferences.