Immediate post-mastectomy breast reconstruction followed by radiotherapy: risk factors for complications

The objective is to prospectively determine the factors responsible for reconstruction failure and capsular contracture in mastectomized breast cancer patients who underwent immediate two-stage breast reconstruction with a tissue expander and implant, followed by radiotherapy. This is a multicenter, prospective, non-randomized study. Between February 1998 and September 2006, we prospectively examined 141 consecutive patients, each of which received an implant after mastectomy, followed by chest wall radiotherapy at 46–50 Gy in 23–25 fractions. Radiotherapy was delivered during immediate post-mastectomy reconstruction. Patients were evaluated by both a radiation oncologist and a surgeon 24–36 months after treatment. The median follow-up duration was 37 months. According to Baker’s classification, capsular contracture was grade 0, 1, or 2 in 67.5% of cases; it was grade 3 or 4 in 32.5% of cases. In total, 32 breast reconstruction failures required surgery. In univariate analysis, the following factors were associated with Baker grade 3 and 4 capsular contraction: adjuvant hormone therapy (P = 0.02), the surgeon (P = 0.04), and smoking (P = 0.05). Only one factor was significant in multivariate analysis: the surgeon (P = 0.009). Three factors were associated with immediate post-mastectomy breast reconstruction failure in multiple logistic regression analysis: T3 or T4 tumors (P = 0.0005), smoking (P = 0.001), and pN+ axillary status (P = 0.004). Patients with none, 1, 2, or all 3 factors have a probability of failure equal to 7, 15.7, 48.3, and 100%, respectively (P = 3.6 × 10^?6). The model accurately predicts 80% of failures. Mastectomy, immediate reconstruction (expander followed by implant), and radiotherapy should be considered when conservative surgery is contraindicated. Three factors may be used to select patients likely to benefit from this technique with a low failure rate.     

我国乳腺癌改良根治术后放疗现状的调查分析

目的为了全面了解我国目前乳腺癌根治术或改良根治术后放疗（简称术后放疗）的现状，特开展此项研究。方法对全国所有开展放疗的单位分别于2003年1～3月邮寄调查表，对乳腺癌术后放疗的适应证和放疗技术等进行两轮问卷调查。结果乳腺癌术后放疗适应证中包含T1～T2期病变及位于内象限或中央区、T1～亿期淋巴结转移1～3个、T3期或淋巴结转移≥4个的单位比例分别为11．9％、63．8％、87．6％和97．1％，其中仅以T3期或淋巴结转移≥4个为术后放疗主要适应证的单位只占7．1％。在放疗靶区中，常规照射锁骨上下区的单位最多，占96．2％，其余依次为内乳区85．2％、胸壁79．0％和腋窝74．8％。胸壁照射以^60Co或高能X线切线野照射最多见（45．2％），单纯电子线照射占28．3％，^60Co或高能X线与电子线混合照射占25．3％；34．3％的单位在照射中胸壁加垫填充物；胸壁的中位照射剂量是50Gy（30～60Gy）。腋窝照射以^60Co或高能X线为主（86．6％），与电子线混合照射占12．7％；有65．6％的单位采用腋后野补量照射技术；腋窝中位照射剂量是50Gy（40～64Gy）。锁骨上下区也以^60Co或高能X线照射为主（61．4％），与电子线混合照射占33．7％；锁骨上下区中位照射剂量是50Gy（40～60Gy）。内乳区单纯^60Co或高能X线照射占49．7％，与电子线混合照射占33．0％，单纯电子线照射占15．6％；内乳区中位照射剂量也是50Gy（40—60Gy）。结论目前我国对肿瘤≥5cm或淋巴结转移≥4个的乳腺癌进行术后放疗的看法比较一致，但对T1～T2期淋巴结转移1～3个的患者是否需要术后放疗的看法尚存分歧，有待进一步的前瞻性临床研究来证实。     

Myocardial perfusion imaging in breast cancer patients treated with or without post-mastectomy radiotherapy.

PURPOSE: To assess the occurrence and location of myocardial perfusion defects in left-sided mastectomized breast cancer patients, treated with or without postoperative radiotherapy according to the guidelines from the Danish Breast Cancer Cooperative Group (DBCG). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Seventeen left-sided breast cancer patients, with a median age of 59 years (range, 47-75 years), randomized to post-mastectomy irradiation plus systemic treatment, or systemic treatment alone, were examined after a median follow-up of 7.9 years (range, 6.0-12.2 years). The chest wall and the ipsilateral internal mammary nodes had been treated through two anterior-shaped electron fields, and the electron energy was chosen according to chest wall thickness, measured individually by ultrasound. The median absorbed dose was 50 Gy in 25 fractions, with 5 fractions/week. Information on clinical history was obtained and symptoms of ischemic heart disease (IHD), as well as major risk factors, were recorded. All patients had a physical examination, blood chemistry, electrocardiogram (ECG), chest X-ray and myocardial perfusion imaging by sestamibi-single photon emission computerized tomography (SPECT). SPECT-scanning was performed as a rest/dipyridamole 2-day protocol. The evaluation of regional myocardial perfusion was based on scintigrams using a 20-segment model. RESULTS: There was no significant difference between the scintigraphic findings in the two groups. Four of ten irradiated patients and four of seven non-irradiated patients showed scintigraphic defects. An anterior defect was found in one non-irradiated patient. CONCLUSIONS: This study does not indicate that the described radiotherapy technique induces detectable coronary artery disease. However, the small number of patients does not allow strong conclusions to be drawn.     

乳腺癌乳房切除术后大分割与常规分割放疗的Meta分析

目的 比较乳腺癌乳房切除术后大分割放疗与常规放疗之间的疗效差异。方法 计算机检索PubMed、EMbase、Cochrane图书馆、万方、维普、CNKI及中国生物医学等数据库,搜集有关乳腺癌乳房切除术后大分割放疗与常规放疗比较的临床对照研究资料,汇总数据采用RevMan5.3及Stata14.0软件进行分析。两组间差异采用优势比(OR)及95%可信区间(95%CI)描述。结果 根据纳入和排除标准,最终纳入19个包括2652例患者的临床对照资料。Meta分析结果显示,大分割组与常规分割组两组间无瘤生存率(OR=1.10,95%CI=0.78~1.56,P=0.59),总生存率(OR=1.18,95%CI=0.92~1.53,P=0.19)、局部区域复发率(OR=1.01,95%CI=0.68~1.51,P=0.96)、远处转移率(OR=1.14,95%CI=0.82~1.59,P=0.43)、皮肤不良反应(OR=1.01,95%CI=0.80~1.26,P=0.96)、心脏不良反应(OR=1.17,95%CI=0.71~1.93,P=0.53)及肺不良反应(OR=0.78,95%CI=0.44~1.37,P=0.38)均相近。结论 乳腺癌乳房切除术后大分割放疗与常规放疗疗效相近,均是安全有效的放疗分割模式,但还需大型随机临床试验进一步证实,并长期随访患者的晚期并发症。     

心理干预对乳腺癌术后乳房重建患者心身症状的影响

目的探讨乳腺癌患者乳房重建手术前后的心身症状及干预治疗的效果。方法采用焦虑自评量表（self-rating anxiety scale，SAS）和抑郁自评量表（self-rating depression scale，SDS）对天津医科大学附属肿瘤医院乳腺一科2001年5月至2007年2月96例乳腺癌术后患者在乳房重建手术前后心身症状进行评价，同时在重建手术前后对患者进行心理干预治疗，评价治疗效果。结果心理干预治疗降低了乳房重建术前焦虑、抑郁、自卑、躯体症状及外形不满意的发生率（P〈0．05），而对性吸引力下降无改善（P〉0．05）。乳房重建术后心身症状发生率在干预治疗后低于心理干预治疗前（P〈0．05）。心理干预治疗显著降低腹直肌皮瓣重建术后心身症状发生率（P〈0．05），而对背阔肌皮瓣重建后可降低焦虑、抑郁及躯体症状发生率（P〈0．05），同时降低假体重建术后焦虑抑郁发生率（P〈0．05），而对其它症状无改善（P〉0．05）。结论心理干预治疗降低了乳房重建手术前后乳腺癌患者心身症状的发生率，对提高乳腺癌患者的生活质量有积极作用。     

Hypofractionation in post-mastectomy breast cancer patients: seven-year follow-up

To compare three fractionation schedules in post-mastectomy patients treated with radiotherapy as regard acute and early late effects as well as local recurrence rates. One hundred and seven breast cancer patients treated with modified radical mastectomy and adjuvant radiotherapy?±?adjuvant systemic treatments between November 2001 and July 2004 were enrolled in this study. Patients were categorized into three groups. Group A (41 patients) received conventional fractionation 50?Gy over 25 fractions. Group B (36 patients) received other fractionation regimen 45?Gy over 17 fractions. Group C (30 patients) received 40?Gy over 15 fractions. The median follow-up period was 23?months. There has been no statistical significant difference in local control (P?=?0.88), pain (P?=?0.98), telangectasis (P?=?0.23), fibrosis (P?=?0.13), arm oedema (P?=?0.96) or pigmentation (P?=?0.80) between the three groups. GII-III Erythema was significantly higher in the two hypofractionation arms compared to the control arm (P?=?0.001). Although acute skin reactions were higher in the hypofractionated arms, there was no significant difference in the local recurrence rates or late radiation effects. A national randomized multicentre study is recommended to explore this further.     

左侧乳腺癌根治术后两种常用放疗计划剂量学比较

目的 评估左侧乳腺癌根治术后两种常用调强放疗方法的靶区及其周围正常组织受照剂量的差异,为术后放疗临床选择提供理论依据.方法 选取2014-01-01-2014-04-28江西省肿瘤医院15例左侧乳腺癌根治术后患者,经CT扫描后将图像传至Pinnacle3治疗计划系统中进行靶区勾画.每位患者分别设计两种不同角度的7野(Ⅰ)和6野(Ⅱ)共面适形调强放疗(intensity modulated radiation therapy,IMRT)计划.两种设野方法的机架角度分别为Ⅰ:300°,330°,0°,30°,60°,90°,140°;Ⅱ:300°,315°,350°,115°,130°,140°.在满足PTV达到95％处方剂量的前提下,采用剂量体积直方图评价两种调强方法的靶区和周围正常组织照射剂量和靶区适形指数(conformity index,CI)及剂量均匀性指数(homogeneity index,HI).结果 计划Ⅰ和Ⅱ组的PTVmean分别为(51.39±3.43)和(52.46±0.31) Gy,z＝-0.713,P=0.476;HI分别为1.08±0.01和1.07±0.01,z＝-1.742,P=0.081;CI分别为0.73±0.05和0.65±0.02,z=-2.936,P=0.003.Ⅱ组心脏V5接受的受照体积为60.43±11.04,明显小于Ⅰ组的76.84±14.49,z=-2.402,P＝0.016;Ⅱ组心脏V10为25.15±8.56,明显小于Ⅰ组的36.38±20.00,z＝-2.046,P＝0.041;Ⅱ组心脏V40为1.24±1.15,明显小于Ⅰ组的2.59±1.32,z=-2.491,P=0.013.Ⅱ组左肺受照平均剂量Dmean为13.85±0.81,较计划Ⅰ组的13.04±0.79略高,z=-2.936,P=0.003;Ⅱ组左肺接受低剂量照射体积V5为58.03±10.51,明显小于Ⅰ组的71.43±16.09,z＝-2.936,P＝0.003.Ⅱ组右肺接受的照射平均剂量Dmean为1.47±0.86,低于Ⅰ组的5.23±0.83,z＝-2.936,P=0.003.Ⅱ组右侧乳腺接受的照射平均剂量Dmean为2.04±0.54,明显低于Ⅰ组的5.27±0.78,z=2.937,P=0.003;V5为11.45±4.34,明显小于Ⅰ组的46.69±6.25,z＝-2.937,P=0.003.Ⅱ组甲状腺最大剂量为42.35±4.15,高于Ⅰ组的38.77±5.26,差异有统计学意义,z=-2.937,P＜0.05.结论 两种调强方法的靶区照射剂量分布基本相当,但是在对心脏、健侧乳腺及右肺等危机器官的保护上方法Ⅱ明显优于Ⅰ.6野切线射野方式对于降低正常组织器官的照射量具有重要意义,值得在临床推广应用.     

Risk factors for complications among breast cancer patients treated with post-mastectomy radiotherapy and immediate tissue-expander/permanent implant reconstruction: a retrospective cohort study

Background

The use of post-mastectomy radiotherapy (PMRT) following immediate breast reconstruction has increased recently, and its safety is becoming a major concern. We aimed to evaluate the complication rates of PMRT to immediate tissue-expander/permanent implant (TE/PI)-based reconstructions for breast cancer and its association with radiotherapy timing (irradiation to TE or PI).

Methods

We retrospectively reviewed the cases of breast cancer patients who underwent mastectomy, immediate TE/PI reconstruction, and PMRT between January 2003 and December 2014. The rates of complications including reconstruction failure, re-operation, and infection were estimated by Kaplan–Meier analysis. The risk factors including radiotherapy timing were analyzed by log-rank test and multivariate Cox proportional hazard model.

Results

A total of 81 patients were included. Median follow-up was 32 months (range 2–120 months). Radiotherapy consisted of 50 Gy to the reconstructed breast and supraclavicular region in most cases. Total reconstruction failure, re-operation, and infection rates were 12.3, 13.6, and 11.1%, and 5-year cumulative reconstruction failure, re-operation, and infection rates were 16.7, 16.6, and 12.2%, respectively. No significant differences were observed in complication rates with respect to radiotherapy timing. In multivariate analysis, age 55 years and older was a significant risk factor for complications (P < 0.05).

Conclusion

There were no significant differences in rates of reconstruction failure, re-operation, or infection with regard to radiotherapy timing. PMRT to reconstructed breasts of older patients aged 55 years or over can be expected to result in more complications than in younger patients.

     

放疗对乳腺癌全乳切除术后腋窝淋巴结1~3个转移患者的意义

乳腺癌是危害女性健康的主要恶性肿瘤之一。随着乳腺癌综合治疗的深入研究和广泛应用,放疗在治疗中的作用越来越不容忽视。国际上对于腋窝1～3个转移淋巴结患者术后是否需要放疗一直尚未达成共识,影响这类患者预后的高危因素有哪些仍是各国学者讨论的热点。本文就放疗对乳腺癌全乳切除术后腋窝淋巴结1～3个转移患者的意义作一综述。     

自体组织乳房再造手术方式的变迁

乳房再造是乳腺癌治疗的一部分。多项研究表明：乳腺癌术后实施乳房再造不会对肿瘤演变过程产生不良影响；乳房再造患者的局部肿瘤复发率或生存率均与对照组无明显差异，并且不妨碍肿瘤复发的早期发现。同时，大量的心理研究结果提示：乳房再造对患者心理恢复确实有正面影响，能使患者在情绪稳定、社会功能、精神健康状况等方面都有明显改善。     

保乳术后放疗对乳腺癌局部淋巴结转移患者预后的影响

  目的  探讨术后放疗(post-mastectomy radiation therapy, PMRT)对局部淋巴结阳性行保乳手术的乳腺癌患者预后的影响, 针对不同的pN分期以及淋巴结转移率(lymph node ratio, LNR)提出更具针对性的术后放疗方案。  方法  回顾性分析天津医科大学肿瘤医院1998年2月至2007年3月152例行保乳手术并有局部淋巴结转移的原发浸润性乳腺癌患者的临床病理资料, 比较LNR和pN分期对患者预后的指导意义, 并在LNR基础上, 根据PMRT与否比较无病生存期(disease-free survival, DFS)和总生存期(overall survival, OS)。  结果  152例患者被分为pN1(114例)、pN2(23例)、pN3(15例), 其中LNR < 0.21为114例, 位于0.21~0.65为26例, >0.65为12例。单因素分析显示淋巴结切检总数、pN、LNR、雌激素受体(estrogen receptor, ER)状态、孕激素受体(progesterone receptor, PR)状态、放疗与否均与DFS、OS具有相关性(P < 0.05), 诊断年龄和化疗方案仅与OS具有相关性(P < 0.05)。多因素分析显示, LNR、PMRT依然是DFS、OS的独立预测指标(P < 0.05), 而pN差异无统计学意义(P>0.05);分组分析时仅在LNR < 0.21术后放疗对预后的影响差异有统计学意义。  结论  LNR作为一个独立预测指标, 可用于评价行保留乳房手术治疗发生淋巴结转移的乳腺癌患者的预后。针对不同的LNR分级, 需要进一步细化PMRT的适应症。      

Why and how post-mastectomy edema should be quantified in patients with breast cancer

In the present study, we advocate quantifying post-mastectomy edema in patients with breast cancer in millilitres and not in centimetre, contrarily to the usual routine practice. The water displacement and perimetric quantification methods exhibited both excellent reproducibility with an intraclass correlation coefficient > 0.99 and an accuracy coefficient     

Urban and non-urban disparities in the use of post-mastectomy radiation for breast cancer

Post-mastectomy radiation therapy (PMRT) is indicated for local-regionally advanced breast cancer (LABC). We hypothesized that candidates for PMRT from non-urban areas would receive lower rates of RT than urban patients and would have poorer overall survival (OS) and disease-specific survival (DSS). We used the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database to identify patients diagnosed with LABC and treated with mastectomy in Sacramento and its surrounding 13 counties between 2000 and 2006. All patients were eligible to receive RT according to established guidelines, with tumors >5 cm size, ≥ 4 metastatic lymph nodes, or both. According to a United States Department of Agriculture scale, we designated counties as urban or non-urban and used multivariate logistic regression and Cox proportional hazards models to predict the use of RT, overall survival (OS), and disease-specific survival (DSS). Density of radiation oncologists in non-urban and urban counties was determined using the American Medical Association database in relation to census-derived populations of the respective counties. Entry criteria were met by 1,507 patients. Most (56.5%) were from urban counties; only 61% received RT. There was no radiation oncologist listed for 8/10 non-urban counties and 2/4 urban counties. Each radiation oncologist served 88,804 people in non-urban counties and 68,624 residents in urban counties. On multivariate analysis, non-urban patients (OR 0.56, CI 0.44-0.72) and increasing age were the only factors predicting a decreased likelihood of receiving RT (OR 0.97, CI 0.96-0.98). Patients not receiving PMRT experienced poorer OS (HR 1.77, CI 1.39-2.25; P < 0.001) and DSS (HR 1.62, CI 1.23-2.15; P = 0.001); however, non-urban status did not predict OS or DSS. Non-urban residents with LABC are less likely to receive indicated PMRT. This discrepancy may be due to limited RT access in non-urban areas. The lack of poorer OS and DSS due to this disparity requires further study.