MétaCan
Menu
← Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W4322775166 · doi:10.1158/1538-7445.sabcs22-pd3-04

Abstract PD3-04: Locoregional Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy in Breast Cancer Patients Unsuitable for Surgical Resection

2023· article· en· W4322775166 sur OpenAlexaff
Daniel Moore-Palhares, Hanbo Chen, Benazir Mir Khan, Claire McCann, Sandi Bosnic, Ezra Hahn, Hany Soliman, Eileen Rakovitch, Justin Lee, Danny Vesprini

Notice bibliographique

RevueCancer Research · 2023
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
ThématiqueBreast Cancer Treatment Studies
Établissements canadiensHamilton Health SciencesHealth Sciences CentrePrincess Margaret Cancer CentreJuravinski HospitalVarian Medical Systems (Canada)Sunnybrook Health Science Centre
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésMedicineClinical endpointContext (archaeology)Breast cancerRadiation therapySurgeryRadiosurgeryCancerPrimary tumorStage (stratigraphy)Lymph nodeInternal medicineRandomized controlled trialMetastasis

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Abstract Purpose: Breast cancer (BC) patients (pts) who are not surgical candidates or decline surgical resection are usually managed with palliative systemic therapy alone or palliative radiotherapy if clinically appropriate. Stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) has shown excellent results for different primary malignancies, and we hypothesized it could improve outcomes in this context with acceptable toxicity. This study aims to assess the local control (LC) and toxicity rates of breast SBRT in pts unsuitable for surgical resection. Methods and Materials: We performed a retrospective analysis using an institutional registry of all BC pts unsuitable for resection who underwent breast and/or regional lymph node (LN) SBRT to a dose of 35-40 Gy in 5 fractions from 2014 to 2021. Patients were deemed unsuitable for resection if they were medically inoperable, declined surgery, had unresectable tumors, or where surgery was not appropriate, such as due to metastatic disease. The primary endpoint was LC (defined as no evidence of progression of the treated lesion as per RECIST 1.1 criteria) and toxicity grade ≥ 3 (as per CTCAE v5.0). Secondary endpoints included radiological response (RR) of the target tumor at the last follow-up, progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS). All endpoints were assessed per course of treatment, with death as a competing factor for LC. Results: This study included 61 treatment courses in 57 pts. The median age was 81 years (range 38-99), 74% being older than 70 years of age. Eighteen percent had stage I-II, 44% stage III, and 38% stage IV disease. Unresectable tumor (10%), patient refusal (18%), medically inoperability (34%), and metastatic disease (38%) were the main causes of not having surgery. The molecular subtypes were HER-2 in 3%, basal-like 23%, and luminal disease 74%. Previous systemic treatment consisted of endocrine therapy (ET) alone (49%), chemotherapy (CT) or target therapy (TT) alone (11%), both ET and CT/TT (18%), or none (21%). Seventy-two percent of tumors were progressing on ET (44%) or CT/TT (28%) at the time of SBRT. The median interval from cancer diagnosis to SBRT was 14.6 (range 0.5-180) months (mos). Fifty-four percent had breast SBRT, 15% LN SBRT, and 31% both. For LN treatment, axillary, internal mammary, and supraclavicular nodes were the target in 43%, 3%, and 2% of treatments, respectively. The median clinical and radiological follow-up was 16.8 (range 0.2-87) and 13.4 mos (range 1-81), respectively. The worst acute and late grade ≥ 3 toxicity was 16% and 4%, respectively, and all cases consisted of radiation dermatitis. No patient was unable to complete treatment due to acute toxicity. There was one case of grade 4 skin necrosis 6.3 mos after 35 Gy in 5 fractions to an axillary LN. The LC rate at 1 year was 100% and 2 years 88.6% (95% CI = 79-99%). The median time to local progression among those who progressed was 18.2 mos (95% CI = 12-not reached). At last FU, the RR of treated tumors was: complete response = 8%, partial response = 46%, stable disease = 38%, and progressive disease = 8%. The PFS and OS rates at 1 year was 69.8 % (95% CI = 58-82) and 74.6% (95% IC = 63-86), 2 years 39.1% (95% CI = 26—52) and 50.6% (95% IC = 36-65), 3 years 26.7 % (95% CI =14-39) and 38.7% (95% IC = 24-54), and 4 years 18.5 % (95% CI = 8-29) and 29.2% (95% CI = 14-44), respectively. The median PFS was 21.7 mos (95% CI = 17-28) and OS 31.1 mos (95% CI = 21- 38). Ongoing analysis intends to identify clinical and pathological predictors of LC, PFS, and OS. Conclusion: Our initial data suggest that breast SBRT safely provides excellent LC rates in non-operable BC pts. This approach may be a treatment option in pts who are not good surgical candidates, particularly in elderly pts with multiple comorbidities, which comprised 74% of our cohort. A clinical trial is underway to determine the optimal dose and side effect profile for primary breast SBRT with curative intent in pts not undergoing definitive surgery. Citation Format: Daniel Palhares, Hanbo Chen, Benazir Khan, Claire McCann, Sandi Bosnic, Ezra Hahn, Hany Soliman, Eileen Rakovitch, Justin Lee, Danny Vesprini. Locoregional Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy in Breast Cancer Patients Unsuitable for Surgical Resection [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2022 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2022 Dec 6-10; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2023;83(5 Suppl):Abstract nr PD3-04.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,001
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: Observationnel
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,001
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,004

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0010,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,001
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0010,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,049
Tête enseignante GPT0,399
Écart entre enseignants0,350 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeObservationnel
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations1
Publié2023
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueCancer Research→Même sujetBreast Cancer Treatment Studies→Travaux en français237 207→