Journal info
|
||
Select Journal
Journals
Bratislava Medical Journal Endocrine Regulations General Physiology and Biophysics Neoplasma 2024 Ahead of print 2023 2022 2021 2020 2019 2018 2017 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 Acta Virologica Studia Psychologica Cardiology Letters Psychológia a patopsych. dieťaťa Kovove Materialy-Metallic Materials Slovenská hudbaWebshop Cart
Your Cart is currently empty.
Info: Your browser does not accept cookies. To put products into your cart and purchase them you need to enable cookies.
Neoplasma Vol.53, p.507-510, 2006 |
||
Title: Radiation treatment for ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS): is a boost to the tumor bed necessary? | ||
Author: R. YERUSHALMI, A. SULKES, M. MISHAELI, A. NEUMANN, M. DINERMAN, J. SULKES, S. RIZEL, N.YAROM, H.GUTMAN, E. FENIG | ||
Abstract: The aim of the presented study was to evaluate the long-term outcome of breast-conserving surgery and radiation for the treatment of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) and the role of the radiation boost to the tumor bed. The files of 75 women with DCIS treated by breast-conserving surgery followed by definitive radiation from 1988 to 1997 were reviewed for demographic data, prognostic variables, radiation dose, radiation boost, recurrence, and outcome. Total radiation dose was 5000
cGy delivered in 25 fractions. Twenty patients (26.7%) received an additional boost to the tumor bed of 1000 cGy in 5 fractions. Median follow-up time was 81.5 months (range, 22–145). Pearson correlation coefficient and its significance was calculated between the variables. Log rank test was used to analyze differences in local recurrence rates between patients who did or did not receive a boost, and a Cox regression model was fitted to the data to predict recurrence. Ten patients (13%) had local recurrence; one patient showed lymphatic spread. Histopathologic examination revealed DCIS in 6 cases (60%) and invasive duct carcinoma in 4 (40%)(one minimally invasive). The recurrence group included 3 of the 20 patients who received a radiation boost (15%) and 7 of the 55 who did not (12.7%) (p=0.7). Correlation analysis of patient characteristics, prognostic factors, and treatment was significant only between mastitis as the presenting symptom (n=4) and longer time to
recurrence (p=0.02). The recurrence rate in the present study was similar to other series of conservative treatment for DCIS of the breast. No additional value was found for the radiation boost. Larger controlled randomized studies are needed to confirm these findings. |
||
Keywords: boost, DCIS, ductal carcinoma in situ, radiation treatment | ||
Year: 2006, Volume: 53, Issue: | Page From: 507, Page To: 510 | |
|
download file |
|