Advertisement

Trends in Use of Hypofractionated Whole Breast Radiation in Breast Cancer: An Analysis of the National Cancer Database

Published:September 12, 2020DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrobp.2020.09.004

      Purpose

      Use of hypofractionated radiation (HR) as a component of breast-conserving treatment (BCT) in breast cancer is relatively low in the United States despite studies demonstrating its efficacy and guidelines supporting its use from the American Society for Radiation Oncology (ASTRO) in 2011 and 2018. Little is known regarding national trends in uptake and factors associated with uptake of HR in the US since the 2011 ASTRO guidelines.

      Methods and Materials

      We performed a retrospective review of the National Cancer Database (2012-2016) on patients undergoing BCT. Logistic regression modeling was used to identify relationships between patient, hospital, and tumor factors with the use of HR or traditional radiation (TR).

      Results

      A total of 259,342 cases of BCT were identified with 60% (n = 155,447) undergoing TR and 40% (n = 103,895) undergoing HR. There was an increase in use among patients meeting 2011 ASTRO criteria from 26.2% in 2012 to 67.0% in 2016. The odds of use of HR increased with year of diagnosis, patient age, higher median income, private insurance, treatment at an academic center, travel distance to treatment >20 miles, smaller tumors, lymph node–negative disease, and without use of chemotherapy (P values <.0001, Table 1).

      Conclusion

      Guidelines supporting the use of HR in BCT have been associated with a dramatic increase in use of HR in the US. However, there are substantial, identifiable disparities in the uptake of HR at patient and facility levels. By understanding which patient populations are at risk of not receiving the benefit of this therapy, we can improve our use of HR in the US, potentially leading to reduced health care costs and increased patient satisfaction.
      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment
      ASTRO Member Login
      ASTRO Members, full access to the journal is a member benefit. Use your society credentials to access all journal content and features.
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect

      References

        • Newman L.A.
        • Kuerer H.M.
        Advances in breast conservation therapy.
        J Clin Oncol. 2005; 23: 1685-1697
        • Van Tienhoven G.
        • Voogd A.C.
        • Peterse J.L.
        • et al.
        Prognosis after treatment for loco-regional recurrence after mastectomy or breast conserving therapy in two randomised trials (EORTC 10801 and DBCG- 82TM).
        Eur J Cancer. 1999; 35: 32-38
        • Fisher B.
        • Anderson S.
        • Bryant J.
        • et al.
        Twenty-year follow-up of a randomized trial comparing total mastectomy, lumpectomy, and lumpectomy plus irradiation for the treatment of invasive breast cancer.
        N Engl J Med. 2002; 347: 1233-1241
        • Veronesi U.
        • Cascinelli N.
        • Mariani L.
        • et al.
        Twenty-year follow-up of a randomized study comparing breast-conserving surgery with radical mastectomy for early breast cancer.
        N Engl J Med. 2002; 347: 1227-1232
        • Arriagada R.
        • Lê M.G.
        • Guinebretière J.M.
        • et al.
        Late local recurrences in a randomised trial comparing conservative treatment with total mastectomy in early breast cancer patients.
        Ann Oncol. 2003; 14: 1617-1622
        • Poggi M.M.
        • Danforth D.N.
        • Sciuto L.C.
        • et al.
        Eighteen-year results in the treatment of early breast carcinoma with mastectomy versus breast conservation therapy: The National Cancer Institute randomized trial.
        Cancer. 2003; 98: 697-702
        • Blichert-Toft M.
        • Nielsen M.
        • Düring M.
        • et al.
        Long-term results of breast conserving surgery vs. mastectomy for early stage invasive breast cancer: 20-Year follow-up of the Danish randomized DBCG-82TM protocol.
        Acta Oncol (Madr). 2008; 47: 672-681
        • Cao J.Q.
        • Olson R.A.
        • Tyldesley S.K.
        Comparison of recurrence and survival rates after breast-conserving therapy and mastectomy in young women with breast cancer.
        Curr Oncol. 2013; 20: e593-e601
        • Abe O.
        • Abe R.
        • Enomoto K.
        • et al.
        Effects of radiotherapy and of differences in the extent of surgery for early breast cancer on local recurrence and 15-year survival: An overview of the randomised trials.
        Lancet. 2005; 366: P2087-P2106
        • Shaitelman S.F.
        • Khan A.J.
        • Woodward W.A.
        • et al.
        Shortened radiation therapy schedules for early-stage breast cancer: A review of hypofractionated whole-breast irradiation and accelerated partial breast irradiation.
        Breast J. 2014; 20: 131-146
        • Whelan T.J.
        • Pignol J.P.
        • Levine M.N.
        • et al.
        Long-term results of hypofractionated radiation therapy for breast cancer.
        N Engl J Med. 2010; 362: 513-520
        • Deshmukh A.A.
        • Shirvani S.M.
        • Lal L.
        • et al.
        Cost-effectiveness analysis comparing conventional, hypofractionated, and intraoperative radiotherapy for early-stage breast cancer.
        J Natl Cancer Inst. 2017; 109
        • Bekelman J.E.
        • Sylwestrzak G.
        • Barron J.
        • et al.
        Uptake and costs of hypofractionated vs conventional whole breast irradiation after breast conserving surgery in the United States, 2008-2013.
        JAMA. 2014; 312: 2542-2550
        • Siegel R.L.
        • Miller K.D.
        • Jemal A.
        Cancer statistics, 2017.
        CA Cancer J Clin. 2017; 67: 7-30
        • Mariotto A.B.
        • Robin Yabroff K.
        • Shao Y.
        • et al.
        Projections of the cost of cancer care in the United States: 2010-2020.
        J Natl Cancer Inst. 2011; 103: 117-128
        • Swanick C.W.
        • Lei X.
        • Shaitelman S.F.
        • et al.
        Longitudinal analysis of patient-reported outcomes and cosmesis in a randomized trial of conventionally fractionated versus hypofractionated whole-breast irradiation.
        Cancer. 2016; 122: 2886-2894
        • Shaitelman S.F.
        • Schlembach P.J.
        • Arzu I.
        • et al.
        Acute and short-term toxic effects of conventionally fractionated vs hypofractionated whole-breast irradiation: A randomized clinical trial.
        JAMA Oncol. 2015; 1: 931-941
        • Schmeel L.C.
        • Koch D.
        • Schmeel F.C.
        • et al.
        Acute radiation-induced skin toxicity in hypofractionated vs. conventional whole-breast irradiation: An objective, randomized multicenter assessment using spectrophotometry.
        Radiother Oncol. 2020; 146: 172-179
        • Jagsi R.
        • Griffith K.A.
        • Boike T.P.
        • et al.
        Differences in the acute toxic effects of breast radiotherapy by fractionation schedule.
        JAMA Oncol. 2015; 1: 918-930
        • Smith B.D.
        • Bentzen S.M.
        • Correa C.R.
        • et al.
        Fractionation for whole breast irradiation: An American Society for Radiation Oncology (ASTRO) evidence-based guideline.
        Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2011; 81: 59-68
        • Smith B.D.
        • Bellon J.R.
        • Blitzblau R.
        • et al.
        Radiation therapy for the whole breast: Executive summary of an American Society for Radiation Oncology (ASTRO) evidence-based guideline.
        Pract Radiat Oncol. 2018; 8: 145-152
      1. American College of Surgeons, National Cancer Database. Available at: https://www.facs.org/quality-programs/cancer/ncdb. Accessed September 24, 2020.

        • Wang E.H.
        • Mougalian S.S.
        • Soulos P.R.
        • et al.
        Adoption of hypofractionated whole-breast irradiation for early-stage breast cancer: A National Cancer Data Base analysis.
        Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2014; 90: 993-1000
        • Wasserstein R.L.
        • Schirm A.L.
        • Lazar N.A.
        Moving to a world beyond “p  < 0.05.”.
        Am Stat. 2019; 73: 1-19
        • Ashworth A.
        • Kong W.
        • Whelan T.
        • et al.
        A population-based study of the fractionation of postlumpectomy breast radiation therapy.
        Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2013; 86: 51-57
        • Berrang T.S.
        • Truong P.T.
        • Tyldesley S.
        • et al.
        In regard to Ashworth et al.
        Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2013; 87: P632-P633
        • Ashworth A.
        • Kong W.
        • Whelan T.
        • et al.
        In reply to Berrang et al.
        Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2013; 87: 633
        • Shaitelman S.F.
        • Lin H.Y.
        • Smith B.D.
        • et al.
        Practical implications of the publication of consensus guidelines by the American Society for Radiation Oncology: Accelerated partial breast irradiation and the National Cancer Data Base.
        Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2016; 94: 338-348
        • Li P.
        • Stuart E.A.
        • Allison D.B.
        Multiple imputation: A flexible tool for handling missing data.
        JAMA. 2015; 314: 1966-1967

      Comments

      Commenting Guidelines

      To submit a comment for a journal article, please use the space above and note the following:

      • We will review submitted comments as soon as possible, striving for within two business days.
      • This forum is intended for constructive dialogue. Comments that are commercial or promotional in nature, pertain to specific medical cases, are not relevant to the article for which they have been submitted, or are otherwise inappropriate will not be posted.
      • We require that commenters identify themselves with names and affiliations.
      • Comments must be in compliance with our Terms & Conditions.
      • Comments are not peer-reviewed.