McCormick, Beryl L.

Abstract Background NRG Oncology NSABP B-39/RTOG 0413 compared whole-breast irradiation (WBI) to accelerated partial-breast irradiation (APBI). APBI was not equivalent to WBI in local tumor control. Secondary outcome was quality of life (QOL). Methods The QOL sub-study used validated self-report questionnaires, including the Breast Cancer Treatment Outcome Scale (BCTOS) and the 36-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36) vitality scale. Assessments occurred before random assignment, at treatment completion (chemotherapy or radiotherapy), 4 weeks later, at 6, 12, 24, and 36 months. Primary aims: cosmesis change equivalency (baseline to 3 years; a priori margin of equivalence 0.4 standard deviations) and fatigue change superiority (baseline to end of treatment [EOT]) for APBI vs WBI, by patient groups treated with or without chemotherapy when appropriate. Results From March 21, 2005 to May 25, 2009, 975 patients enrolled in this sub-study; 950 had follow-up data. APBI had 3-year cosmesis equivalent to WBI (95% CI = -0.0001 to -0.16; equivalence margin -0.22 to -0.22) in all patients. The APBI group without chemotherapy had less EOT fatigue (P = .011; mean score APBI 63 vs WBI 59); the APBI group receiving chemotherapy had worse EOT fatigue (P = .011; APBI 43 vs WBI 49). The APBI group reported less pain (BCTOS) at EOT (WBI 2.29 vs APBI 1.97) but worse pain at 3 years (WBI 1.62 vs APBI 1.71). APBI patients reported greater convenience of care than with WBI and reported less symptom severity at EOT and 4 weeks later. Conclusion Cosmetic outcomes were similar for the APBI and WBI groups, with small statistically significant differences in other outcomes that varied over time. Differences in fatigue and other symptoms appeared to resolve by ≥6 months. APBI may be preferred by some patients, for whom extended treatment is burdensome. ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00103181.

508 Background: PBI is an alternative to WBI, with potentially greater therapy (tx) compliance, and better integration with chemotherapy (CTX). NSABP B-39/RTOG 0413 clinical outcome results from 2018 did not show equivalence of PBI to WBI in local tumor control; PBI was statistically inferior, but with clinically small differences. PBI may be an acceptable alternative to WBI for some women. Understanding cosmesis and quality of life (QOL) treatment outcomes is important. Methods: B-39/0413 included a prospective QOL substudy with PRO evaluation of breast cancer treatment outcomes (cosmesis, function, pain) and fatigue using BCTOS and SF-36 vitality scales. Secondary QOL parameters included treatment related symptoms, perceived convenience of care, and the BPI pain scale. The study sample was stratified by CTX or not, as CTX is given before WBI but after PBI. PRO assessments occurred before randomization, the last day of adjuvant tx [CTX or radiation], 4 wks later, and 6, 12, 24, and 36 mo later. Primary aims included comparisons of change in fatigue from baseline to end of tx and equivalency of change in cosmesis from baseline to 36 mo for PBI v WBI. Separate analyses were done for CTX and non-CTX pts, controlling for axillary dissection. Each comparison used α=0.0125. Planned sample size was 964. Results: From 3-23-05 to 5-27-09, 975 pts were enrolled in the PRO study; 950 had follow-up data. 504 did not receive CTX and 446 received CTX. In non-CTX pts, PBI had less fatigue (p=0.011) and did not meet criteria for cosmesis equivalence (97.5% CI, -0.02 to 0.22; ∆=0.20). In CTX pts, PBI had worse fatigue (p=0.011) and equivalent cosmesis to WBI (97.5% CI, -0.09 to 0.21; ∆=0.24). In both groups, PBI pts reported less pain at end of tx. In non-CTX pts, PBI had more pain at 36 mo but in CTX pts, there was no difference. Convenience of care and treatment related symptom outcomes will be presented. Conclusions: In non-CTX pts, PBI is more convenient with less fatigue and slightly poorer cosmesis at 36 mo. Cosmesis was equivalent at 36 mo in CTX pts. Support: U10CA180868, -180822, UG1CA189867. Clinical trial information: NCT00103181.

Abstract Background: Ongoing phase III trials are comparing accelerated PBI around the lumpectomy site to standard whole breast irradiation in early stage breast cancer. Recent studies have questioned the late toxicity from PBI delivered with 3DCRT. We evaluated late toxicity on patients (pts) treated on RTOG 0319. Methods:52 pts with stage I-II breast cancer, ≥3 cm, negative margins, and < 3 nodes positive were treated with 3DCRT PBI and received 38.5 Gy in 10 BID fractions over 5 days. Median follow-up was 5.3 years (min-max: 1.7-6.4 years). Five pts were deceased at 5 years. NCI CTCAE v3.0 was used to grade adverse events (AEs). At 3 years, 50 pts were available for AE reporting or late toxicity assessment. Results: The treatment-related AEs were primarily grade 1 36.5%, 50% grade 2, and only 3 (5.8%) pts had grade 3 AEs. The grade 3 AEs in these pts were radiation dermatitis, skin fibrosis, telangectasia, and myositis. No baseline self-assessment of breast appearance is available. Patient self-assessment of breast appearance and satisfaction was available in 45 (87%) pts at 1 year and 36 (72%) at 3 years. At 1 year, 82% self reported excellent/good breast appearance and at 3 years, 64%. Pts who reported < excellent/good breast appearance had significantly more grade ≥2 skin AEs (telangectasia, skin atrophy, hyperpigmentation, erythema, skin fibrosis, radiation dermatitis, and breast or nipple/areolar deformity). At 3 years, 31 of 36 pts were satisfied with their treatment, but all 36 would choose 3DCRT PBI again over standard breast RT. Treatment factors were evaluated to establish correlation with patient reported breast appearance. Preliminary observations suggest surgical bed volume, PTV volume, number of beams used, and possible use of bolus are associated with patient reported outcomes (PRO). Surgical factors impacting PRO were not collected. Conclusions: The majority of pts were satisfied with their treatment results at 3 years and would all choose to have 3DCRT PBI again. With a median of 5.3 years, the rate of grade 3 AEs is low. Technical factors from this phase II trial were modified for the phase III NSABP B-39/RTOG 0413 trial, in which bolus is not allowed and both target volumes and required coverage were modified, increasing expectation of improved PRO. Supported by RTOG U10 CA21661, CCOP U10 CA37422 and ATC U24 CA 81647 NCI grants. Citation Information: Cancer Res 2010;70(24 Suppl):Abstract nr P3-15-07.