Clinical Oncology
Volume 19, Issue 8 , Pages 596-603, October 2007

Cosmesis, Late Sequelae and Local Control after Breast-Conserving Therapy: Influence of Type of Tumour Bed Boost and Adjuvant Chemotherapy

  • A.N. Budrukkar

      Affiliations

    • Department of Radiation Oncology, Tata Memorial Hospital, Parel, Mumbai, India
  • ,
  • R. Sarin

      Affiliations

    • Department of Radiation Oncology, Tata Memorial Hospital, Parel, Mumbai, India
  • ,
  • S.K. Shrivastava

      Affiliations

    • Department of Radiation Oncology, Tata Memorial Hospital, Parel, Mumbai, India
  • ,
  • D.D. Deshpande

      Affiliations

    • Department of Medical Physics, Tata Memorial Hospital, Parel, Mumbai, India
  • ,
  • K.A. Dinshaw

      Affiliations

    • Department of Radiation Oncology, Tata Memorial Hospital, Parel, Mumbai, India
    • Corresponding Author InformationAuthor for correspondence: K. A. Dinshaw, Department of Radiation Oncology, Tata Memorial Centre, Dr. E Borges Marg, Parel, Mumbai 400012, India. Tel: +912224139318/146750; Fax: +912224168440/146937.

Received 12 November 2006; received in revised form 16 May 2007; accepted 16 June 2007.

Abstract 

Aims

To study the influence of various factors affecting cosmetic outcome and late sequelae in a large cohort of women treated with breast-conserving therapy.

Materials and methods

Between 1980 and 2000, 1022 pathological stage I/II breast cancer patients underwent breast-conserving therapy. On the basis of the type of tumour bed boost they received after whole breast radiotherapy, these women were assigned to three groups: (A) low dose rate (LDR) brachytherapy of 15–20Gy (n=383); (B) high dose rate (HDR) brachytherapy of 10Gy (optimised) in a single fraction (n=153); (C) electron beam 15Gy/six fractions (n=460). Systemic adjuvant therapy was given to 757 women, of whom 570 received adjuvant chemotherapy.

Results

Cosmesis at the last follow-up was good or excellent in 77% of women. Post-radiation worsening of cosmesis was observed in 11.5% of women and was similar in the three boost groups. Moderate to severe late breast sequelae were observed in 22% of women in group B, which was significantly higher than the 12% in group A (P=0.002) and 9% in group C (P=0.0001). The actuarial 5-year local control rate was 91% and was 90, 92 and 93% in groups A, B and C, respectively. Tumour size (P=0.049) and adjuvant chemotherapy (P=0.04) were the significant factors affecting cosmetic outcome on univariate analysis. On multivariate analysis, adjuvant chemotherapy was the only factor leading to worsening in the cosmetic outcome, with P=0.03 (hazard ratio 1.65 [95% confidence interval 1.05–2.59]).

Conclusion

The type of tumour bed boost did not have a significant effect on the worsening of cosmetic outcome. However, there were significantly more late breast sequelae in women treated with single fraction HDR implants. Chemotherapy had an adverse effect on the cosmetic outcome, but the late breast sequelae and local control rates were comparable.

Key words: Boost, brachytherapy, breast conservation, chemotherapy, cosmesis, radiation sequelae

To access this article, please choose from the options below

Login to an existing account or Register a new account.

  • Purchase this article for 31.50 USD (You must login/register to purchase this article)

    Online access for 24 hours. The PDF version can be downloaded as your permanent record.

  • Subscribe to this title

    Get unlimited online access to this article and all other articles in this title 24/7 for one year.

  • Claim access now

    For current subscribers with Society Membership or Account Number.

  • Visit SciVerse ScienceDirect to see if you have access via your institution.
 

PII: S0936-6555(07)00678-4

doi:10.1016/j.clon.2007.06.008

Clinical Oncology
Volume 19, Issue 8 , Pages 596-603, October 2007