Loco-regional adjuvant radiation therapy in breast cancer patients with positive axillary lymph-nodes at diagnosis (CN2) undergoing preoperative chemotherapy and with complete pathological lymph-nodes response. Development of GRADE (Grades of recommendation, assessment, Development and Evaluation) recommendation by the Italian Association of radiation therapy and Clinical Oncology (AIRO). (February 2021) - Marino, Lorenza
Abstract: Objective: To perform a meta-analysis to determine the effect of loco-regional radiation therapy (RT) compared to no loco-regional RT for operated patients in clinical stage cN2 breast cancer at diagnosis and ypN0 after preoperative chemotherapy (PST). Material and Methods: Eligible studies were identified through a systematic search of the medical literature performed independently by two researchers using a validated search strategy. An electronic search of Medline via PubMed and Embase (Breast cancer AND preoperative chemotherapy AND radiation therapy) was conducted with no language or publication status restrictions. The effect of loco-regional RT on overall (OS), disease free (DFS), loco-regional recurrence-free (LRRFS) survival and local recurrence was evaluated. An electronic search of Medline via PubMed and Embase (Toxicity AND radiation therapy breast cancer AND preoperative therapy; toxicity AND breast surgery AND preoperative chemotherapy) was conducted for outcomes of harm: major acute and late skin toxicity, lymphedema and cardiac events. Results: Of 333 studies identified, 4 retrospective studies reporting on a total of 1107 patients were included in the meta-analysis. Six and 3 reported data of acute and late skin toxicity, while 2 studies provided information on cardiac events. Pooled results showed no difference in terms of hazard ratio for loco-regional RT versus no loco-regional RT [hazard ratio (HR) = 0.82, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.63–1.68]. Loco-regional RT was associated with an OS benefit in the subgroup analysis: IIIB-C (loco-regional RT 79.3% vs no loco-regional RT 71.2%, p = 0.027 ) and T3-T4 (loco-regional RT 82.6% vs no loco-regional RT 76.6%, p = 0.025 ). No difference was shown in terms of 5-year DFS (loco-regional RT 91.2% vs no loco-regional RT 83%, p = 0.441 ) and LRRFS (loco-regional RT 98.1% vs no loco-regional RT 92.3%, p = 0.148 ). There was no significant difference between the groups in terms of acute and late skin toxicities, lymphedema and cardiac events. Conclusions: Because of the limitations due to the small number of studies and heterogeneity in the analysis, the present study does not allow to draw any definitive conclusion, highlighting the need for well-controlled trials to determine the effect of loco-regional RT in patients with cN2 having a pathological complete response in the axillary nodes after preoperative chemotherapy. Highlights: The prognostic impact of pCR after primary systemic therapy on DFS and OS has been shown in meta-analyses of randomized phase III trials. The association of treatment response with loco-regional recurrence has been studied only in retrospective reports. RNI should be strongly considered in patients with clinically involved lymph nodes regardless of the response to primary systemic therapy, especially in the presence of further risk factors. In patients with cN2 at diagnosis and ypN0 at surgery after PST, loco-regional RT should be evaluated for each patient in the multidisciplinary team.