A Comparison Between Sequential Conventional and Hypofractionated Boost Following Whole-Breast Radiotherapy: A Propensity Score-Matched Analysis.

BACKGROUND

The majority of local relapses after breast conservation therapy occur in the proximity of the primary lesion. Studies have shown that boost radiotherapy (RT) following conventional whole-breast radiotherapy (WBRT) of 50 Gy in five weeks improves outcomes. Boost RT also increases the risk of moderate skin reactions and fibrosis. The ideal boost RT dose and timing (sequential versus simultaneous) after hypofractionated radiotherapy schedules remain unclear. This retrospective propensity score-matched analysis assessed the outcome of sequential hypofractionated boost compared to conventional fractionated boost.

METHODS

The study was approved by the Institutional Review Board of the Regional Cancer Centre, Thiruvananthapuram, India. Patients with stage I-III breast cancer who have received adjuvant radiotherapy with a sequential boost of either hypofractionated RT (8 Gy in three fractions) or conventional fractionated RT (10 Gy in five fractions) after conservative breast surgery were identified from the radiotherapy planning records and included in this study. A 1:1 case matching was performed using a propensity score incorporating four known prognostic factors, namely, clinical and pathological composite stage, tumor grade, tumor biology (based on estrogen and/or progesterone and HER2 neu expression), and boost technique, which may have an impact on acute toxicity to make the two boost groups more homogenous.

RESULTS

After propensity score matching (PSM), there were a total of 166 patients, with 83 patients each in both conventional and hypofractionated boost RT groups. The median follow-up period was 30.7 months. At two years, locoregional recurrence-free survival (LRFS) was 98.8% in both groups. Disease-free survival (DFS) at two years for the hypofractionated group and conventional group was 91.5% and 96.3% (hazard ratio (HR): 2.5, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.664-9.4, p = 0.161), respectively, with no statistically significant difference. Patients with grade 3 tumors who received hypofractionated boost had a statistically significant increased risk of recurrence (DFS: 88.9% versus 100%, HR: 60.559, 95% CI: 0.138-26613.2, p = 0.011). The overall survival (OS) at two years was 100% in both groups. There was no difference in acute skin toxicity between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

The present interim analysis shows similar locoregional recurrence-free survival, overall survival, and disease-free survival and acute skin toxicity for hypofractionated boost RT of 8 Gy in three fractions compared to the conventional boost of 10 Gy in five fractions. Hypofractionated boost is a feasible alternative option following hypofractionated whole-breast radiotherapy for women with breast conservation treatment. However, longer follow-up is required before forming definite conclusions.