Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Randomized Controlled Trial
. 2015 Oct;1(7):931-41.
doi: 10.1001/jamaoncol.2015.2666.

Acute and Short-term Toxic Effects of Conventionally Fractionated vs Hypofractionated Whole-Breast Irradiation: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Affiliations
Randomized Controlled Trial

Acute and Short-term Toxic Effects of Conventionally Fractionated vs Hypofractionated Whole-Breast Irradiation: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Simona F Shaitelman et al. JAMA Oncol. 2015 Oct.

Abstract

Importance: The most appropriate dose fractionation for whole-breast irradiation (WBI) remains uncertain.

Objective: To assess acute and 6-month toxic effects and quality of life (QOL) with conventionally fractionated WBI (CF-WBI) vs hypofractionated WBI (HF-WBI).

Design, setting, and participants: Unblinded randomized trial of CF-WBI (n = 149; 50.00 Gy/25 fractions + boost [10.00-14.00 Gy/5-7 fractions]) vs HF-WBI (n = 138; 42.56 Gy/16 fractions + boost [10.00-12.50 Gy/4-5 fractions]) following breast-conserving surgery administered in community-based and academic cancer centers to 287 women 40 years or older with stage 0 to II breast cancer for whom WBI without addition of a third field was recommended; 76% of study participants (n = 217) were overweight or obese. Patients were enrolled from February 2011 through February 2014 and observed for a minimum of 6 months.

Interventions: Administration of CF-WBI or HF-WBI.

Main outcomes and measures: Physician-reported acute and 6-month toxic effects using National Cancer Institute Common Toxicity Criteria, and patient-reported QOL using the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy for Patients with Breast Cancer (FACT-B). All analyses were intention to treat, with outcomes compared using the χ2 test, Cochran-Armitage test, and ordinal logistic regression.

Results: Of 287 participants, 149 were randomized to CF-WBI and 138 to HF-WBI. Treatment arms were well matched for baseline characteristics, including FACT-B total score (HF-WBI, 120.1 vs CF-WBI, 118.8; P = .46) and individual QOL items such as somewhat or more lack of energy (HF-WBI, 38% vs CF-WBI, 39%; P = .86) and somewhat or more trouble meeting family needs (HF-WBI, 10% vs CF-WBI, 14%; P = .54). Maximum physician-reported acute dermatitis (36% vs 69%; P < .001), pruritus (54% vs 81%; P < .001), breast pain (55% vs 74%; P = .001), hyperpigmentation (9% vs 20%; P = .002), and fatigue (9% vs 17%; P = .02) during irradiation were lower in patients randomized to HF-WBI. The rate of overall grade 2 or higher acute toxic effects was less with HF-WBI than with CF-WBI (47% vs 78%; P < .001). Six months after irradiation, physicians reported less fatigue in patients randomized to HF-WBI (0% vs 6%; P = .01), and patients randomized to HF-WBI reported less lack of energy (23% vs 39%; P < .001) and less trouble meeting family needs (3% vs 9%; P = .01). Multivariable regression confirmed the superiority of HF-WBI in terms of patient-reported lack of energy (odds ratio [OR], 0.39; 95% CI, 0.24-0.63) and trouble meeting family needs (OR, 0.34; 95% CI, 0.16-0.75).

Conclusions and relevance: Treatment with HF-WBI appears to yield lower rates of acute toxic effects than CF-WBI as well as less fatigue and less trouble meeting family needs 6 months after completing radiation therapy. These findings should be communicated to patients as part of shared decision making.

Trial registration: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01266642.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Conflict of Interest Disclosures: SFS: Grant from Elekta; Consultation for MD Anderson Physicians’ Network; BDS: Grant from Varian Medical Systems. MCS: Consultation for MD Anderson Physicians’ Network; None of this funding was used to support the research contained herein. DB: Honorarium from Genomic Health Advisory Panel. GNH: served as a Scientific/Advisory Committee member for Antigen Express, Bayer Healthcare Pharmaceuticals, Galena Biopharma, Metastat, Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corp., Oncimmune, Pfizer, Inc., and Rockpointe and served as consultant to AstraZeneca Pharmaceuticals, Celgene, Genentech Inc., Peregrine Pharmaceuticals, Inc (none of the disclosure from GNH are relevant to the current manuscript).

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1. Consort diagram
Abbreviations: CF (conventional fractionation), HF (hypofractionation), WBI (whole breast irradiation)

Comment in

References

    1. Haviland JS, Owen JR, Dewar JA, et al. The UK Standardisation of Breast Radiotherapy (START) trials of radiotherapy hypofractionation for treatment of early breast cancer: 10-year follow-up results of two randomised controlled trials. Lancet Oncol. 2013;14(11):1086–94. - PubMed
    1. Whelan TJ, Pignol JP, Levine MN, et al. Long-term results of hypofractionated radiation therapy for breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 362(6):513–20. - PubMed
    1. Owen JR, Ashton A, Bliss JM, et al. Effect of radiotherapy fraction size on tumour control in patients with early-stage breast cancer after local tumour excision: long-term results of a randomised trial. Lancet Oncol. 2006;7(6):467–71. - PubMed
    1. Bekelman JE, 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 doi: 10.1001/jama.2014.16616. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Jagsi R, Falchook AD, Hendrix LH, et al. Adoption of hypofractionated radiation therapy for breast cancer after publication of randomized trials. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2014;90(5):1001–9. - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms

Associated data