乳腺癌保乳术后放疗瘤床二维电子线与三维调强补量的疗效比较

目的 比较乳腺癌保乳手术后瘤床电子线二维补量和X射线三维调强补量方法对肿瘤局部控制率及患者生存的影响。方法 回顾性分析485例于北京肿瘤医院接受乳腺癌保乳手术的患者,术后全乳腺照射46~50 Gy/23~25次后,一组患者采用电子线技术,另一组采用X射线调强技术进行瘤床补量放疗,补量剂量均为10~16 Gy/5~8次。结果 全组患者的中位随访时间为96.04个月。X射线调强瘤床补量组的5年和10年无局部复发生存率（LRFS）均为98.4%,明显优于电子线补量组5年的94.2%和10年的93.2%（χ²=4.190,P<0.05）。但两组的总生存率（OS）间无明显差异,X射线组5年和10年的OS率分别为96.7%和95.8 %,电子线组的分别为94.9%和89.4%（P>0.05）。在多因素分析中,年龄≤40岁、腋窝淋巴结有转移及Her-2高表达是LRFS的独立预后因素,而放疗瘤床补量方式不是LRFS和OS的预后因素（P>0.05）。结论 乳腺癌保乳手术后,X射线调强放疗较电子线二维放疗在瘤床补量治疗上有更好的肿瘤局部控制率,但对患者生存无明显影响。     

乳腺癌保留乳房术后瘤床同步X射线和电子线整合补量调强放疗剂量研究

目的 比较乳腺癌保留乳房术后瘤床同步X射线和电子线整合补量调强放疗剂量学特点,探讨不同补量方式对全乳、心脏和同侧肺脏受照剂量的影响.方法 选择10例患者,将银夹所标记的范围外扩10 mm定义为肉眼靶区（GTV）,全乳腺定义为临床靶区（CTV）,根据ADAC Pinnacle^3 6.2和Pinnacle^3 7.0分别制定X射线和电子线瘤床整合补量放疗计划,比较两种计划的剂量学参数.结果 X射线和电子线瘤床补量计划的剂量均匀性和适形性差异均无统计学意义;受照射剂量≥20 Gy的患侧肺脏容积V20（1ung）及受照射剂量≥GTV处方剂量的患侧肺脏容积V处方剂量（lung）-GTV差异无统计学意义,但电子线瘤床补量计划中受照射剂量≥CTV处方剂量的患侧肺脏容积V处方剂量（1ung）-CTV明显高于X射线瘤床补量,差异有统计学意义（P=0.014）;受照剂量≥30 Gy的心脏容积V30（heart）和受照剂量≥CTV处方剂量的心脏容积V处方剂量（heart）-CTV差异均无统计学意义.结论 X射线和电子线瘤床补量计划中的多数剂量学参数差异无统计学意义,但电子线瘤床补量计划中受照射剂量≥CTV处方剂量的患侧肺脏容积明显高于X射线瘤床补量.     

手术中放疗技术在早期乳腺癌治疗中的研究进展

乳房保留手术加术后放疗是早期乳腺癌重要的局部治疗手段。术后放疗通常采用全乳房照射50~55 Gy后,用电子线针对瘤床加量10~16 Gy。这种照射方式的总治疗时间较长,一般需要6~7周时间,瘤床加量时靶区的定义往往不够精确。研究发现,保留乳房术后,有85%的局部复发发生在手术部位^[1],因此,越来越多的学者质疑全乳放疗的必要性,部分乳腺照射的技术应运而生。术中放疗(intra-operative radiation therapy, IORT)是指在手术过程中直接给予瘤床一定剂量的单次照射^[2]。该技术的优点是可在肉眼直视下确定瘤床,较术后放疗提高了靶区的精确性,能够更好地保护正常组织,并缩短放疗的疗程等。     

剂量率和单次分割剂量对外照射联合~(192)Ir播植治疗乳癌的临床效果的影响:289例分析

早期乳癌以首选放射治疗取代乳房切除术已日趋增多。根治性放疗的目的是以获得与乳房切除术相同的肿瘤局部控制和生存率,同时又保留乳房形态。其治疗效果(局部控制,迟发并发症和美容效果)取决于外照射的治疗方案和常用于瘤床缩野加量的组织间插植的剂量率。作者对1980～1990年间接受放疗的289例T_1和T_2病变的乳癌进行了回顾性分析。病例均于肿块切除术后行乳房及区域淋巴结的外照射和瘤床的缩野加量照射。按ICRU29号推荐的处方剂量,外照射为45Gy的~(60)钴γ线或6     

早期乳腺癌保乳术后低分割瘤床同步加量放疗方法的前瞻性临床研究

目的 研究早期乳腺癌保乳术后低分割模式的同步加量调强放疗的近期疗效不良反应及美容效果。方法 前瞻性纳入76例分期为TisT_1~2N₀M₀早期乳腺癌保乳术后行低分割同步加量调强适形放疗（IMRT）/容积旋转调强放疗（VMAT）的患者,放疗剂量分割方式为患侧全乳2.65 Gy/次,42.4 Gy/16次,共22 d,瘤床区给予同步加量3.1 Gy/次,49.6 Gy/16次,共22 d。乳房美容效果评估依据哈弗系统,不良反应评估采用常见不良反应事件评价标准（CTCAE）3.0标准。logistic回归分析检验发生2级及以上放射性皮肤反应的相关因素。结果 中位随访29（16~40）个月,随访率为100%。1、2、3年的生存率均为100％,无患者出现复发或转移。1、2级急性皮肤反应发生率分别为52/76（68.4%）和6/76（7.9%）。放疗后晚期1、2级皮肤及皮下组织晚期反应发生率为10/76（13.1%）和2/76（2.6%）。美容优良率为61/74（82.4%）。瘤床的平均剂量与2级及以上放射性皮肤反应相关。结论 早期乳腺癌保乳术后大分割全乳同步瘤床加量调强放疗的近期疗效、美容效果及急性/晚期不良反应均可接受,需要更长时间的随访来进一步证实其安全性。     

对食管癌放疗并用化疗的一次性效果的探讨

作者对22例食管癌放疗并用化疗的一次性效果作了分析。单纯外照射者15例,其中10例照射剂量为60Gy以上,外照射十腔内照射7例。一般外照射剂量为10MV X线,2.0～2.5Gy/次,4次/周。并用腔内照射者给予50～55Gy照射后再追加10～20Gy腔内照射。化疗应用Cisplatin(CDDP),Methotrexate(MTX)及Replomycin(PEP),于放疗前、40Gy前后及放疗后分别给药。只服药1次者13例,2次者8例,3次者1例。治疗结束时     

早期乳腺癌保乳术后瘤床同步加量调强放疗的临床观察

目的 探讨早期乳腺癌保乳术后瘤床同步加量调强放射治疗（SIB-IMRT）技术的疗效、不良反应及美容效果。方法 2009年8月-2013年10月山东省肿瘤医院收治的分期为T_1-2N_0-1M₀的乳腺癌保乳术后患者146例,其中60例行序贯瘤床加量调强放疗（常规组）,剂量分割方案：全乳1.8~2.0 Gy/次,共45~50 Gy/25次,后续瘤床加量10~16 Gy/5~8次,总疗程42~45 d;86例行SIB-IMRT短疗程调强放疗（SIB组）,剂量分割方案：全乳1.8 Gy×28次,瘤床同步加量2.15 Gy×28次,总疗程38 d。采用Kaplan-Meier法计算生存率和局部复发率,χ²检验比较两组资料可比性、不良反应及美容效果。结果 常规组与SIB组1、2、3级急性皮肤反应发生率分别为63.3%与75.8%、20.0%与16.2%、16.7%与8.0%（P>0.05）;0、1、2级皮肤及皮下组织晚期反应发生率分别为84.6%与85.8%、12.2%与10.6%、3.2%与3.6%（P>0.05）;0、1、2、3级中性粒细胞减少发生率分别为22.6%与33.7%、34.6%与40.7%、26.7%与20.9%、15.0%与4.7%（P>0.05）。常规组与SIB组放射性肺炎分别为2例（3.3%）与3例（3.5%）（P>0.05）;美容优良率分别为89.7%与89.2%（P>0.05）。随访24~74个月（中位数38个月）,随访率95.2%;两组1、3、5年生存率均为100%。常规组2例出现复发或转移（3.5%）,SIB组3例出现复发或转移（3.7%）。结论 保乳术后瘤床同步加量放疗与瘤床序贯放疗疗效相似,美容效果相当且未加重早晚期不良反应,并有缩短疗程的优势。     

早期乳腺癌保乳术后加速部分乳腺放射治疗新进展

目前保乳手术＋放射治疗这一保乳治疗模式已成为欧美国家早期乳腺癌的标准治疗模式,且在我国大中城市已成为一种趋势。保乳术后放疗分为全乳腺放疗和部分乳腺放疗,而部分乳腺放疗与传统的全乳腺放疗比较,有降低乳腺癌局部复发率、保持乳房良好外观、提高患者生存质量等优点。因而得到了迅速地应用及发展。本研究就早期乳腺癌保乳术后的部分乳腺放射治疗技术及研究新进展进行综述。     

腮腺癌术后高危复发区放疗的不同治疗计划剂量学比较

目的 探讨腮腺癌术后高危复发区用何种照射方法可以更有效的使靶区剂量均匀及更好的保护危及器官.方法 对8例腮腺癌术后患者设计治疗计划,处方剂量为95%计划靶区(PTV)60 Gy/30次.对常规放疗、二维适形放疗(2D-CRT)、三维适形放疗(3D-CRT)和调强放疗(IMRT)等放射治疗技术的腮腺癌术后靶区进行放疗计划设计,分析比较各种治疗计划靶区适形度和在保护危及器官等方面的优劣.结果 在2D-CRT时,以计算点深度取3.5 cm,电子线能量采取12 MeV及X射线/电子射线(X/E)剂量比为1∶2时靶区的适形度和均匀度较好,危及器官的受量较低.与2D-CRT比较,常规放疗照射野能够较好地包括CT断层图像上勾画的靶区.与2D-CRT及3D-CRT相比,IMRT计划有最好的靶区适形度及均匀度,同时对危及器官有较好的保护作用.结论 X射线与电子线混合线束照射时,剂量计算点深度取3.5 cm左右、电子线能量采取12 MeV及X/E剂量比为1∶2时,靶区的适形度和均匀度较好,对正常组织的保护较好,但具体患者最好用计划系统来选择以上指标.常规放疗按解剖标志确定的照射野能够较好地包括三维靶区.IMRT计划的靶区适形度及均匀度最好,并且危及器官受量较低,在腮腺癌术后放射治疗中IMRT技术是值得推广并普及的放射治疗技术.     

宫颈癌调强放疗同步补量与常规照射剂量分布比较

目的 评价调强放疗同步补量(IMRT SIB)代替常规照射(全盆外照射加腔内放疗)治疗局部进展期宫颈癌(LACC)的可行性。方法 根据子宫的不同位置选择5例LACC患者,分别制订常规放疗和IMRT SIB计划,比较2种放疗方式靶区的剂量分布。结果 子宫前位、水平位、后位以及偏位时IMRT SIB可以为靶区提供优于常规照射均匀、足量的剂量分布,降低危险器官(直肠、膀胱和小肠)受照体积和剂量;IMRT SIB能够得到较常规放疗更高的A、B点和宫底剂量。但如果小肠邻近或环绕子宫时靶区则欠量。结论 剂量学研究证明LACC IMRT SIB在不同子宫位置(过度前倾前曲位除外)时肿瘤靶区的剂量分布优于常规放疗。     

Combined External Beam and Intraluminal Radiotherapy for Irresectable Klatskin Tumors

BACKGROUND: In most cases of proximal cholangiocarcinoma, curative surgery is not possible. Radiotherapy can be used for palliative treatment. We report our experience with combined external beam and intraluminal radiotherapy of advanced Klatskin's tumors. PATIENTS AND METHODS: 30 patients were treated for extrahepatic proximal bile duct cancer. Our schedule consisted of external beam radiotherapy (median dose 30 Gy) and a high-dose-rate brachytherapy boost (median dose 40 Gy) delivered in four of five fractions, which could be applied completely in twelve of our patients. 15 patients in the brachytherapy and nine patients in the non-brachytherapy group received additional low-dose chemotherapy with 5-fluorouracil. RESULTS: The brachytherapy boost dose improved the effect of external beam radiotherapy by increasing survival from a median of 3.9 months in the non-brachytherapy group to 9.1 months in the brachytherapy group. The effect was obvious in patients receiving a brachytherapy dose above 30 Gy, and in those without jaundice at the beginning of radiotherapy (p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The poor prognosis in patients with advanced Klatskin's tumors may be improved by combination therapy, with the role of brachytherapy and chemotherapy still to be defined. Our results suggest that patients without jaundice should be offered brachytherapy, and that a full dose of more than 30 Gy should be applied.     

Electron and High-Dose-Rate Brachytherapy Boost in the Conservative Treatment of Stage I–II Breast Cancer

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: To evaluate the effect of electron and high-dose-rate brachytherapy (HDR BT) boost on local tumor control (LTC), side effects and cosmesis after breast-conserving surgery (BCS) in a prospective randomized study. PATIENTS AND METHODS: 207 women with stage I-II breast cancer who underwent BCS were treated by 50 Gy irradiation to the whole breast and then randomly assigned to receive either a boost to the tumor bed (n = 104) or no further radiotherapy (n = 103). Boost treatments consisted of either 16 Gy electron irradiation (n = 52) or 12-14,25 Gy HDR BT (n = 52). Breast cancer-related events, side effects, and cosmetic results were assessed. RESULTS: At a median follow-up of 5.3 years, the crude rate of local recurrences was 6.7% (7/104) with and 15.5% (16/103) without boost. The 5-year probability of LTC, relapse-free survival (RFS), and cancer-specific survival (CSS) was 92.7% vs. 84.9% (p = 0.049), 76.6% vs. 66.2% (p = 0.044), and 90.4% vs. 82.1% (p = 0.053), respectively. There was no significant difference in LTC between patients treated with electron or HDR BT boost (94.2% vs. 91.4%; p = 0.74). On multivariate analysis, patient age < 40 years (RR: 4.53), positive margin status (RR: 4.17), and high mitotic activity index (RR: 3.60) were found to be significant risk factors for local recurrence. The incidence of grade 2-3 side effects was higher in the boost arm (17.3% vs. 7.8%; p = 0.03). However, the rate of excellent/good cosmetic results was similar for the two arms (85.6% vs 91.3%; p = 0.14). Cosmesis was rated as excellent/good in 88.5% of patients treated with HDR BT and 82.7% of patients with electron boost (p = 0.29). CONCLUSIONS: Boost dose significantly improves LTC and RFS in patients treated with BCS and radiotherapy. In spite of the higher incidence of late side effects in the boost arm, boost dose is strongly recommended for patients at high risk for local recurrence. Positive or close margin status, high mitotic activity index, and young patient age should be viewed as absolute indications for tumor bed boost. LTC and cosmesis are excellent and similar to patients boosted with either HDR BT or electrons.     

Lokale Tumorkontrolle und kosmetisches Ergebnis nach brusterhaltender Operation und Strahlentherapie bis 56 Gy Gesamtdosis ohne Boost beim Mammakarzinom

PURPOSE: To evaluate overall survival, local tumor control and cosmetic outcome after breast-conserving surgery followed by radiotherapy without boost irradiation. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In a retrospective study 270 breast cancer patients were treated with breast conserving surgery combined with a homogenous radiation of the tumor bearing breast up to a total dose of 56 Gy without local boost irradiation. Mean follow-up was 48 months. Local tumor control, side effects, cosmetic results and contentment with treatment were assessed using physical examinations and interviews based on a standardized questionnaire. RESULTS: Cause-specific survival at 5 years after treatment was 88.3%, actuarial disease-free survival at 5 years was 76.1%. Within 23 to 78 months after treatment 12 patients suffered from ipsilateral breast recurrence. The actuarial freedom from local recurrence (single tumor manifestation) was 96.8% at 5 years after treatment, 89% at 10 years. The occurrence of local failures was not significantly correlated to tumor size, margins, grading, nodal status, age or lymphangiosis. 15.6% of the patients developed distant metastases. In all patients treatment was performed without interruption. Side effects were predominantly of mild degree, no severe side effects were detected. 73% of physicians and 81% of patients scored their cosmetic outcome as excellent or good. 93% of patients would again decide in favor of this procedure. Whereas use of adjuvant chemotherapy as well as subcutaneous reconstruction of breast tissue did not significantly affect breast cosmesis, analysis demonstrated impaired cosmetic results related to a larger breast size. CONCLUSION: The data of this study show that tumor control achieved by breast conserving surgery in combination with a radiation technique up to a total dose of 56 Gy which omits boost irradiation is within the range of literature data. Side effects of the therapy were tolerable. The treatment displayed a good compatibility with tolerable side effects and good cosmetic results.     

Interstitial High-Dose-Rate Brachytherapy in the Treatment of Base of Tongue Carcinoma

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE:. To date none of the studies examined the feasibility and efficacy of interstitial high-dose-rate (HDR) brachytherapy in the treatment of carcinoma of the tongue base. Therefore the aim of this study was to contribute to this issue. PATIENTS AND METHODS:. Between 1992 and 2000 37 patients (mean age 55 years) with T1-4 and N0-3 carcinoma of the base of tongue were presented. Neck dissection was carried out in twelve cases (32%). 30 patients with advanced stage received brachytherapy boost after 50-66.5 Gy (mean, 60 Gy) locoregional external beam irradiation (EBI) and 7 patients with early stage (T1-2, N0) were managed locally with wide tumor excision and sole brachytherapy. 4 of them underwent neck dissection and the others were subjected to 50 Gy regional EBI. The mean dose of boost and sole brachytherapy was 18 Gy and 28 Gy, respectively. RESULTS:. The median follow-up time for surviving patients was 51 months. The 7 sole brachytherapy patients are living with no evidence of disease. For patients treated with EBI and brachytherapy boost, the 5-year actuarial rate of local, locoregional recurrence-free and overall survival was 60%, 52% and 46%, respectively. For all patients in univariate analysis larger tumor size (T4 vs. T1-3) was significant negative predictor of local (RR: 7.23) and locoregional control (RR: 3.87), but nodal involvement was not. Delayed soft tissue ulceration and osteoradionecrosis occurred in 4 (13%) EBI and brachytherapy treated patients. None of the sole brachytherapy patients experienced severe late radiation toxicity. CONCLUSION:. EBI combined with interstitial HDR brachytherapy boost result in acceptable local tumor control with low incidence of late side effects in patients with advanced disease. Fractionated sole HDR brachytherapy following tumor excision is a feasible treatment option for patients with early stage cancer and gives excellent local results.     

5-Year Results of Pulsed Dose Rate Brachytherapy Applied as a Boost after Breast-Conserving Therapy in Patients at High Risk for Local Recurrence from Breast Cancer

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to evaluate effect, toxicity, and cosmesis of a prospectively applied pulsed dose rate (PDR) brachytherapy boost schedule in patients with stage I/II/IIIa invasive breast cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 113 patients were treated after breast-conserving surgery (BCS) and external beam radiotherapy (median 50 Gy, range 46-52). The boost dose was graded in accordance to the pathologic tumor characteristics: 20-25 Gy: incomplete resection (n = 34), vascular invasion (n = 27), close margin resection (n = 41); 15 Gy: T2G3 stage (n = 11). PDR brachytherapy (37 GBq, (192)Ir source) was carried out after geometric volume optimization with 1 Gy/pulse/h. The implantation and dose specification were performed similar to the rules of the Paris system. RESULTS: The overall local failure rate after a median follow-up of 61 months was 4.4% (5/113). The actuarial 5- and 8-year local recurrence-free survival rates were 95% and 93%, respectively. Cosmesis was rated by 90% of the patients as excellent or good. 14/113 patients experienced grade III (all caused by planar telangiectasia) and none of the patients grade IV late toxicity of the skin (RTOG/EORTC). A boost dose of 25 Gy resulted in a significantly higher rate of late toxicity (Fisher's exact test, p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: PDR brachytherapy is safe, effective, and provides good cosmesis. A CLDR breast boost can be replaced by PDR brachytherapy without significant loss of therapeutic ratio.     

Outcomes in 24 selected patients with stage IVB cervical cancer and excellent performance status treated with radiotherapy and chemotherapy

Purpose We sought to review outcomes in patients with stage IVB carcinoma of the cervix treated with irradiation in combination with chemotherapy. Materials and methods We report outcomes of 24 consecutive patients with good performance status treated from 1998 to 2005. Most of these patients underwent concurrent irradiation with platinum-based chemotherapy. Some patients received subsequent systemic chemotherapy. Results All patients underwent external beam radiotherapy; 7 patients (29%) had additional high-dose-rate and 12 (50%) low-dose-rate brachytherapy. Two patients (8%) received an IMRT boost instead of brachytherapy. The mean dose to point A was variable (73.9 ± 19.2 Gy). Twenty patients (83%) received radio-sensitizing platinum-based chemotherapy, and the remaining had radiotherapy alone. Seven patients (29%) had further combination chemotherapy. Therapy was well tolerated. The overall survival was 44% at 36 months and 22% at 5 years. Conclusion Patients with stage IVB cervical cancer have mostly been treated with palliative intent. With the advent of concurrent chemoradiation, we have treated many of these cases with aggressive combination therapy. In this series, the use of radiotherapy and multiagent chemotherapy in patients with stage IVB cervical carcinoma and good performance status was well tolerated and resulted in higher survival rates than previously reported. This study was presented at the 37th annual meeting of the Society of Gynecologic Oncologists, Palm Springs, CA, March 2006     

Combined modality treatment with high-dose-rate brachytherapy boost for locally advanced prostate cancer

PURPOSE: This is a retrospective review of our experience using high-dose-rate (HDR) brachytherapy boost for prostate cancer. METHODS AND MATERIALS: During the study period, we recommended external beam radiotherapy (45 Gy) and HDR boost (18 Gy in three fractions) combined with hormonal therapy (HT) for 2 months before and during radiotherapy to patients with at least one of the following risk features: pretreatment prostate-specific antigen>10, Gleason score (GS)>or=7, and clinical T3 disease. Additional HT for 2 years after radiotherapy was recommended for patients with GS>7. To patients whose risk of positive nodes exceeded 15%, we recommended whole pelvic radiotherapy. We administered HDR via single implant, and all fractions were given within 24h. RESULTS: This report is based on our initial 64 patients treated with HDR boost. The median follow-up was 50 months (range 25-68 months). The 4-year estimates of overall and disease-free survival were 98% and 92%, respectively. One patient experienced late grade 4 gastrointestinal toxicity. CONCLUSIONS: HDR brachytherapy is an effective means of delivering conformal prostate radiotherapy, and may be used with whole pelvic radiotherapy and HT.     

Cesium-137 needle brachytherapy boosts after external beam irradiation for locally advanced carcinoma of the tongue and floor of the mouth

PURPOSE: A retrospective study was undertaken to compare local tumor control and complications of external beam radiation therapy with and without interstitial 137Cs needle brachytherapy boost doses. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Two hundred one consecutive patients with locally advanced (T3-T4) cancer of the tongue and floor of the mouth treated with definitive radiotherapy by external beam irradiation with (n = 78) or without (n = 123) low-dose-rate interstitial brachytherapy from 1974 to 1999 were analyzed retrospectively. External beam irradiation was administered with conventional fractionation in 105 patients and administered with accelerated hyperfractionation in 96 patients. RESULTS: The 8-year actuarial local control rates showed a trend toward improved results in the combined-treatment group as a whole and also when it was stratified into patients with base of tongue sites and those with oral tongue and floor of mouth sites. Cox regression analysis for local control showed that the only significant variable was overall treatment time. The use of brachytherapy boost doses was not a significant variable. The 8-year actuarial probability of Radiation Therapy Oncology Group and European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Grades 3-5 late effects was 25% and 35% for patients with and without brachytherapy, respectively (p = not significant), although the crude incidence of mandibular radiation osteonecrosis was 10% and 1.6%, respectively (p =0.001). CONCLUSIONS: This study showed a trend toward improved local control rates for brachytherapy after external beam radiotherapy. The incidence of mandibular osteonecrosis was increased.     

Breast Boost – Why, How, When ...?

BACKGROUND: Breast conservation management including tumorectomy or quadrantectomy and external beam radiotherapy with a dose of 45 to 50 Gy in the treatment of small breast carcinomas is generally accepted. The use of a radiation boost--in particular for specific subgroups--has not been clarified. With regard to the boost technique there is some controversy between groups emphasizing the value of electron boost treatment and groups pointing out the value of interstitial boost treatment. This controversy has become even more complicated as there is an increasing number of institutions reporting the use of HDR interstitial brachytherapy for boost treatment. The most critical issue with regard to interstitial HDR brachytherapy is the assumed serious long-term morbidity after a high single radiation dose as used in HDR-treatments. METHODS AND RESULTS: This article gives a perspective and recommendations on some aspects of this issue (indication, timing, target volume, dose and dose rate). CONCLUSION: More information about the indication for a boost is to be expected from the EORTC trial 22881/10882. Careful selection of treatment procedures for specific subgroups of patients and refinement in surgical procedures and radiotherapy techniques may be useful in improving the clinical and cosmetic results in breast conservation therapy. Prospective trials comparing on the one hand different boost techniques and on the other hand particular morphologic criteria in treatments with boost and without boost are needed to give more detailed recommendations for boost indications and for boost techniques.