NCBI Bookshelf. A service of the National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health.
StatPearls [Internet]. Treasure Island (FL): StatPearls Publishing; 2024 Jan-.
Jill Remick ; Neha P. Amin .
Last Update: January 2, 2023 .
Postmastectomy radiation therapy (PMRT) is recommended for patients with more advanced breast cancer or certain high-risk pathologic features. In select patients, post-mastectomy radiation therapy has been shown to improve local control and overall survival. PMRT is directed at the chest wall and often includes the regional lymph nodes that drain the breast. This activity reviews the principles of post-mastectomy radiation therapy and the role of the interprofessional team in caring for patients undergoing it.
Identify the mechanism of postmastectomy radiation therapy. Identify appropriate candidates for postmastectomy radiation therapy. Evaluate the potential adverse effects of postmastectomy radiation therapy.Communicate a well-coordinated interprofessional team approach to provide effective care and appropriate monitoring to patients undergoing postmastectomy radiation therapy.
A modified radical mastectomy is the primary treatment for women with locally advanced breast cancer. Additionally, some women with early-stage breast cancer may elect to undergo a mastectomy for cosmetic reasons, to avoid radiation potentially, or due to a genetic mutation that portends a higher risk for subsequent breast cancer. A mastectomy involves the removal of the whole breast. It is often paired with some axillary lymph node sampling (either sentinel lymph node biopsy or axillary node dissection of levels 1 and 2). Post-mastectomy radiation therapy (PMRT) is recommended for patients with more advanced disease or with certain high-risk pathologic features. PMRT has been shown to improve local control and overall survival in select patients. PMRT is directed at the chest wall and often includes the regional lymph nodes that drain the breast. This topic focuses on the key aspects of PMRT.
Locally advanced breast cancer encompasses a heterogeneous group of patients, including those with advanced primary tumor size, extensive or widespread nodal disease, and inflammatory breast cancer. In 2013, 30 to 40% of patients diagnosed with breast cancer had regional lymph node involvement, and 10% of patients had a primary tumor 5 centimeters or greater in size. Unlike most other malignancies, the prognosis for patients with locally advanced disease is favorable, with 5-year breast cancer-specific survival ranging from 78% to 90%.[1]
Indications for PMRT
Several large randomized trials have demonstrated a clinical benefit with the addition of postmastectomy radiation therapy in patients with high-risk diseases.[2] A large meta-analysis performed by the Early Breast Cancer Trialists’ Collaborative Group (EBCTCG) pooled individual patient data from 22 randomized trials comparing mastectomy, with or without adjuvant radiation therapy, and found that among patients with 4 or more positive notes, PMRT reduced locoregional recurrence by 19% which translated into a 9% reduction in breast cancer mortality [3]. The 2 largest studies included in this meta-analysis, the Danish collaborative group trials, randomized pre-and post-menopausal women with high-risk breast cancer, defined as any positive axillary lymph nodes, tumor size greater than 5 cm, or skin invasion, to undergo adjuvant chemotherapy with or without postmastectomy radiation therapy.[2] These trials both showed an improvement in disease-free and overall survival with the addition of postmastectomy radiation therapy by approximately 10%, irrespective of tumor size or the number of lymph nodes involved. Therefore, the National Cancer Center Network (NCCN) recommends postmastectomy radiation therapy for patients with greater than or equal to 4 positive nodes.
Current controversies in PMRT
Less than 4 positive lymph nodes
Despite earlier trials showing a consistent survival advantage for all node-positive patients, the validity of these findings among patients with less than 4 positive lymph nodes is often debated. The main criticisms of these trials were the use of less effective systemic therapies (ie, taxanes, dose-dense chemotherapy scheduling, HER2 targeted agents, and prolonged use of hormonal therapy were not consistently used) and inadequate axillary lymph node dissections. Furthermore, several other studies suggest the rate of locoregional recurrence among patients with 1 to 3 positive nodes is low [4][5]. An earlier study by Katz et al included over a thousand patients treated with mastectomy without adjuvant radiation and reported a locoregional failure rate of only 10% for a woman with 1 to 3 positive nodes. However, in the presence of other pathologic features, such as large tumor size, invasion of the skin/nipple, and close/positive margins, the risk of LRR was higher [5]. A more recent analysis of more than 600 patients with 1 to 3 positive nodes enrolled on a randomized chemotherapy trial reported a 6.5% versus 2.5% rate of locoregional first recurrence after total mastectomy for those treated with or without postmastectomy radiation therapy, respectively [6]. A more modern series from the Cleveland Clinic reported a less than 10% locoregional failure rate among patients with 1 to 3 positive lymph nodes treated with mastectomy and chemotherapy without radiation [7].
Given the conflicting data, the NCCN recommends postmastectomy radiation therapy should be “strongly considered” in patients with 1 to 3 positive lymph nodes while also taking into account other clinical characteristics (ie, age, comorbidities, life expectancy), pathologic risk factors (ie tumor size, the ratio of positive lymph nodes, tumor grade, LVSI), and biologic tumor makeup (ie, hormonal receptor status and targetable mutations). These recommendations align with recently updated postmastectomy radiation therapy guidelines by a joint panel of the American Societies of Clinical, Radiation, and Surgical Oncology [8]. An ongoing, randomized trial in Europe (P88 MRC/EORTC BIG 2-04 SUPREMO) is evaluating the role of postmastectomy radiation therapy in intermediate-risk patients, including those with 1 to 3 positive nodes, by randomizing patients to receive postmastectomy radiation therapy or not.
A similar controversy exists among node-negative patients with large primary tumor size (greater than 5 cm) [9]. Isolated locoregional failure was as low as 7% among patients with T3N0 disease treated with mastectomy alone or with adjuvant systemic therapy in 5 NSABP chemotherapy trials [9]. Furthermore, a recent SEER analysis of 568 patients who received postmastectomy radiation therapy for T3N0 breast cancer showed no improvement in overall survival compared to a case-matched control analysis [10]. However, the risk of locoregional recurrence is higher in the presence of high-risk pathologic features, including LVSI, high tumor grade, close/positive margins, and premenopausal status, which again implies a subset of patients who may benefit from postmastectomy radiation therapy [11].
Complete nodal response after neoadjuvant chemotherapy
Current recommendations for postmastectomy radiation therapy are based on the clinical stage before initiation of any therapy. However, an excellent/complete pathologic response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in either the nodes or the breast is associated with a significantly decreased risk of locoregional recurrence [12]. As a result, many argue these patients are effectively down-staged to a lower risk category and thus may no longer derive a significant benefit from postmastectomy radiation therapy [13]. This is the subject of an ongoing randomized controlled trial, NSABP B-51 (NCT01872975), in which patients with initial biopsy-proven positive lymph nodes (N1) that have a complete pathologic response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy are randomized to comprehensive regional nodal RT or chest wall radiation only. However, both NCCN and professional societies currently state there is not enough evidence to support the omission of postmastectomy radiation therapy in these patients [8].
Internal mammary node coverage
If internal mammary nodes (IMNs) are involved (ie, pathologically enlarged on CT and metabolically active on PET), they should be included in the radiation field. Elective IMN coverage is somewhat controversial. In the earlier postmastectomy radiation therapy trials, the radiation portal encompassed all draining lymphatics of the breast, including the axillary, supraclavicular, and internal mammary nodal (IMN) chain [2]. However, several studies have demonstrated an extremely low incidence of IMN nodal positivity and clinical IMN recurrence [14]. Furthermore, the inclusion of the IMN chain within the radiation field comes at the expense of increased doses to the heart and lungs, resulting in a potentially greater risk of long-term toxicity.
Several large trials have evaluated the volume of elective nodal irradiation (ENI) volume to include in patients with centrally/medially located tumors, positive lymph nodes, or node-negative patients with high-risk disease after mastectomy [15]. Studies from France and Denmark specifically addressed the benefit of internal mammary node irradiation (IMNI) by comparing outcomes of patients treated with a whole breast, chest wall radiation, supraclavicular, and axillary apex with or without IMNI [23][16]. While the French study was randomized, the Dutch study allocated IMNI only to patients with right-sided disease and omitted IMNI in left-sided disease to save the dose to the heart. The Dutch study reported a small but significant 2.5% improvement in breast cancer-specific survival for right-sided breast cancer patients allocated to IMNI [17]. In contrast, the French randomized trial failed to show a survival benefit [18]. Another large randomized trial, EORTC 22922, evaluated comprehensive nodal irradiation (including IMN) compared to standard breast radiation alone in patients with high-risk node-negative, central/medially located tumors, or positive lymph nodes. This study demonstrated a 3% improvement in disease-free survival and a 2% reduction in breast cancer mortality; however, only about one-fourth of these patients had undergone mastectomy [15].
In summary, comprehensive lymph node coverage has yielded mixed results but may offer a small improvement in disease-free and possibly even breast cancer-specific survival. Given the insufficient evidence, a multidisciplinary expert panel on post-mastectomy management suggests that if comprehensive nodal radiation is recommended, the radiation treatment field should include the IMN, supraclavicular, and apical axillary regions, as well as the chest wall [8].
Postmastectomy radiation therapy after implant/tissue expander
Postmastectomy radiation therapy after breast reconstruction has been associated with increased rates of capsular contracture, reconstructive failures, revision surgeries, and overall worse cosmetic outcomes [19]. The timing of the breast reconstruction (ie, immediate versus delayed) and type of breast reconstruction (ie, autologous versus implant-based) are important considerations that require an informative discussion with the patient and multi-disciplinary team before surgery.
Most often, implant reconstruction occurs in 2 phases, with the placement of a tissue expander followed by a permanent implant. Several studies evaluating the optimal sequence of 2-phase reconstruction with radiotherapy have demonstrated higher rates of reconstructive failures ranging from 32% to 40% when radiation was delivered to the tissue expander compared to radiation directed at the permanent implant [20]. Interestingly, a prospective study from the Mastectomy Reconstruction Outcomes Consortium (MROC) found no difference in major complication rates between tissue-expander versus implant-directed radiotherapy and reported an overall failure rate of 10% [21]. Therefore, patients who elect to undergo immediate expander/implant reconstruction should be carefully evaluated to determine the potential need for postmastectomy radiation therapy and should be thoroughly counseled regarding the risks in the setting of breast reconstruction.
Simulation and Treatment Volumes
Patients are simulated in the supine position with their arms raised above their heads. Immobilization devices, such as a wingboard with a vacuum bag, can support the arms and neck and replicate the same position during daily treatments. The head is turned up and away from the treated breast to remove the chin from the beam divergence. The mastectomy scar is often delineated with a radio-opaque marker to make sure the entire scar is included in the radiation plan. The medial, lateral (mid-axillary line), superior (caudal edge of the clavicle), and inferior (1 to 2 cm below the inframammary line) field borders can also be delineated with a radio-opaque marker to guide initial beam placement. For patients with left-sided breast cancer, deep-inspiratory breath hold, a technique in which patients are instructed to hold their breath for 20 to 30 seconds at peak inspiration, can often increase the distance between the heart and chest wall, thus lowering the cardiac dose. If this technique is considered, testing a patient’s ability to perform this exercise should be done during simulation. Several contouring atlases are available for chest wall and nodal delineation, including the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) [22] and RADCOMP (NCT02603341), among others [16]. For lymph node volume delineation, contouring guidelines differ slightly regarding anatomical reference points and vessel-based approaches.
General volume delineation guidelines for the chest wall
The chest wall clinical target volume (CTV) should be contoured to the muscle-rib interface to include the pectoralis muscles and the entire scar plus margin. The cranial border extends to the caudal border of the clavicular head, which is clinically determined based on markers placed at the time of simulation and using the contralateral breast as a guide. The lateral border typically extends to the mid-axillary line and the medial border to the sternal-rib junction to avoid crossing the midline.
If image guidance is used during treatments, the chest wall planning target volume (PTV) is created by expanding the CTV by 0.5 cm. Otherwise, the CTV to PTV expansion ranges from 0.5 to 1 cm. To ensure chest wall dose, the PTV can extend into the ribs about 2 mm.
General volume delineation guidelines for lymph nodes
Axillary levels 1 through 3 are demarcated relative to the pectoralis minor muscle, axillary vessels in which level 1 lies lateral and inferior, level 2 lies posterior, and level 3 lies superior-medial.
The supraclavicular (SCV) lymph nodes lie superior to level 3 and commence just caudal to the cricoid cartilage. SVC nodes extend inferiorly to the caudal edge of the clavicular head, laterally to the lateral edge of the sternocleidomastoid or junction of the 1 rib with the clavicle, and medially, it excludes the thyroid and trachea.
If treating the internal mammary nodes with IMRT, the first 3 intercostal spaces should be contoured.
When using image guidance, PTV for the lymph nodes is generated by expanding the CTV by 0.5 cm.Radiation Planning Technique
Patient anatomy, target volume, dose constraints, and physician preference are used to determine the optimal radiation technique. Below is a description of various radiation techniques.
3D conformation radiation therapy (3DCRT)
The most commonly used treatment technique for PMRT is a forward-planned technique using photons called 3D conformation radiation therapy (3DCRT). The dosimetrist and radiation oncologist often use 3 to 5 beams to treat the chest wall and regional lymphatics. To create a customized plan for each patient, the dosimetrist and radiation oncologist work together to determine the best beam angle, field size, blocks, beam energy, and weighting. The radiation field setup for a typical plan is discussed below:
The chest wall is treated with 2 opposing tangential fields. The superior field edge of the tangential fields is often just below the clavicular head, and the inferior field edge of the supraclavicular field (discussed below). The tangents should be placed at an angle to avoid the contralateral breast and minimize the dose to the heart and lungs, ideally with less than 1 cm (or no heart) in the field and less than 2 cm of the lung in the field.
The supraclavicular and Level 3 lymph node volumes are treated with a single oblique anterior supraclavicular field, often angled 10 to 15 degrees away from the midline, to avoid overlapping the spinal cord and esophagus. The multileaf collimator blocks the acromioclavicular joint and part of the humeral head. The beam's energy can be adjusted so that the 45 Gray (Gy) line reaches the posterior edge of the lymph node volumes. An optional posterior axillary “boost” field may be added to increase deep axillary coverage or to reduce hot spots from a single anterior field.
A direct matched electron or photon field can cover the internal mammary chain. Alternatively, the tangents can be partially widened superiorly to cover the top 3 intercostal spaces encompassing the internal mammary nodes.
An even, non-divergent match line between the tangential chest wall beams and the anterior supraclavicular beam is generated by using a half-beam block (one isocenter technique) or by angling the couch (couch-kick) to create a horizontal match line between the tangential and supraclavicular field edges (2 isocenter technique).
Intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT)
Intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) is generally considered when heart or lung dose-volume constraints with 3DCRT planning are unmet. IMRT is an inverse planning technique using photons. This means that after the target and normal structures are contoured, the dosimetrist enters the goals of coverage and limits to normal structures, and the radiation treatment planning system runs to optimize the plan. IMRT typically involves a greater number of beams compared to 3DCRT. Volumetric modulated therapy (VMAT) is the IMRT technique that employs continuous arcs during treatment. While VMAT can be very conformal, it does result in the expansive spread of low dose to a larger volume of normal structures compared to a 3DCRT plan due to the exit dose of the photon beam arc.
Intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT)
Protons are heavy ions that deposit the maximum dose at a specific distance in tissue (Bragg Peak), after which no dose is deposited into the tissue. In other words, there is no exit dose when using proton therapy, resulting in possibly less dose to normal tissues and, therefore, has the potential to reduce long-term side effects. This contrasts photon beams with an entry and exit dose [23]. Clinical experience with proton therapy for postmastectomy radiation therapy primarily involves patients with left-sided lesions or those that require regional nodal irradiation (RNI) [24]. Reported mean heart dose, mean heart V5, and mean lung V20 from select studies are less than or equal to 1 Gy, 3% to 7%, and 13% to 28% [24][25]. Proton treatment planning involving the chest wall and lymphatics commonly employs 2 enface proton beams to cover the targets. The treatment planning system then optimizes the plan and accounts for uncertainties pertaining to dose calibration using Hounsfield units (HU) and proton end range. Comparison of conventional photon versus proton radiation in comprehensive breast irradiation is an area of ongoing research. A nationwide randomized trial, RADCOMP (NCT02603341), is actively accruing patients with locally advanced breast cancer who require RNI after either mastectomy or breast conservation surgery to receive either photon or proton therapy. The primary endpoint of this study is a reduction in major cardiovascular events at 10 years. Other assessment endpoints include long-term disease control, survival, and quality of life.
Radiation Dosing and Fractionation
Conventional dosing for PMRT is 50-50.4 Gy in 1.8-2.0 Gy per fraction (25-28 total fractions) to the chest wall and 45-50 Gy in 1.8-2.0 Gy per fraction (25 total fractions) to the regional lymph nodes. Hypofractionation, which involves giving a larger daily dose over a shorter period (fewer total fractions), is an active area of research in the post-mastectomy setting to reduce treatment costs and increase patient convenience. The Alliance Group is currently evaluating the effect of hypofractionated PMRT in breast reconstruction, with the primary endpoint being the 2-year reconstructive complication rate (NCT03414970). In this study, patients with stage IIA-IIIA breast cancer who have undergone mastectomy and breast reconstruction are randomized to receive either standard daily radiation therapy for 5 to 6 weeks or daily radiotherapy given over a shortened course of 3 to 4 weeks. Further dose hypofractionation for postmastectomy radiation therapy is being explored in the United Kingdom (FAST-Forward). This phase III, multicenter, randomized controlled trial (FAST-Forward) is evaluating 2 different 5-fraction PMRT dosing regimens (27 Gy or 26 Gy in 5 fractions) compared to standard control (40.05 Gy in 15 fractions).
Since photons require tissue interaction to build up the dose, the dose at the skin surface is lower than the dose at the target. A chest wall bolus may be used to increase the skin dose for patients who have an increased risk of chest wall recurrence (ie, large tumors, positive/close margins, inflammatory breast cancer). In general, a 0.5 cm tissue equivalent bolus can be used every other day to increase the skin to 85% of the prescription dose, or in cases of inflammatory breast cancer, a daily bolus can be used to ensure the skin dose reaches 95% of the prescribed dose. Alternatively, a single sheet of brass bolus (2-sheet thickness for inflammatory/T4 tumors) can be used daily and is equivalent to 0.5 cm tissue equivalent bolus every other day. A mastectomy scar boost to 10 to 16 Gy in 5 to 8 fractions is considered in the presence of close (less than 2 mm) or positive margins, and for inflammatory breast cancer, however, a boost is generally avoided in patients planned for reconstruction if they don’t have other risk factors for recurrence.
Plan Evaluation
Radiation oncologists work with dosimetrists to customize the plan to the patient’s anatomy and targets using the abovementioned options. The radiation oncologist then evaluates the plan to assess the adequacy of target coverage while minimizing the dose to the lung, heart, and other nearby tissues using the dose-value recommendations.
Radiation Toxicity
In general, postmastectomy radiation therapy is very well tolerated, and patients can continue their normal routine. It does not lead to decreased immunity or feelings of illness, and patients are not radioactive; therefore, they are safe to be around other people. Adverse effects or toxicity associated with postmastectomy radiation therapy is discussed in terms of acute and chronic.
Acute Toxicity
Acute toxicity is generally defined as occurring during and within 3 months of radiation treatment. The most common adverse effects include fatigue, temporary sore throat, and radiation dermatitis. Radiation dermatitis gradually develops as more radiation treatments are delivered. It can include skin erythema, hyperpigmentation, rash, and dryness followed by moist desquamation. Skin toxicity may peak in intensity 1 to 2 weeks after the end of treatment. Patients are advised to keep their skin moisturized during radiation to help with the daily healing of healthy skin tissue. Other topical agents like aloe, hydrocortisone, or silver sulfadiazine can help with burning, itching, and desquamation of the skin. If a patient develops large confluent areas of moist desquamation, hydrogel or hydrocolloid dressings can be applied. The skin should be monitored regularly for signs and symptoms of infection. A skin bolus is typically removed during brisk erythema or moist desquamation. Generally, the skin is well healed 2 to 4 weeks after treatment, although some patients have residual long-term skin hyperpigmentation and subcutaneous fibrosis throughout the treatment field.
Chronic Toxicity
Common chronic or long-term toxicity associated with postmastectomy radiation therapy includes hyperpigmentation and fibrosis of the chest wall, affecting cosmetic outcomes after reconstruction (breast implant). Other potential long-term toxicities include minor risks of radiation pneumonitis (higher when treating comprehensive lymph nodes), rib fracture, arm lymphedema, radiation-induced heart disease (RIHD) (particularly for left-sided treatments), hypothyroidism (if treating supraclavicular region), and an extremely low risk of secondary malignancy. The management of arm lymphedema and the risk of RIHD is discussed in more detail below. Chronic arm lymphedema is a very challenging complication of postmastectomy radiation therapy, and thus, prevention and early intervention are key. Early signs of lymphedema include swelling, limb heaviness, aching, tightness, and fatigue. The risk of lymphedema after axillary RT ranges from 11% to 15% at 1 to 5 years post-treatment and is significantly higher in the setting of prior axillary dissection [26]. Lymphedema education, compression sleeves, compression pumps, regular exercise, and personal preventive measures have been shown to reduce the incidence of breast cancer-related lymphedema [27].
The most worrisome late side effect of postmastectomy radiation therapy is the increased risk of cardiac disease. Data to support dose-volume constraints for normal tissues are limited. The ongoing national randomized trial, RADCOMP, recommends general dose-volume constraints. An early landmark trial by Darby et al demonstrated a linear correlation between dose to the heart and rate of major coronary events. In this analysis, for every 1 Gy increase in mean dose to the heart, the relative rate of major coronary events increased by 7.4% and was observed as early as 5 years and continued up to 20 years after treatment [28]. However, this risk is thought to be less with more modern radiation techniques. A more recent analysis of individual patient data published between 2010 and 2015 reported average whole lung and heart doses of 5.7 Gy and 4.4 Gy, respectively [29]. Among patients treated before the year 2000, the risk of cardiac mortality was increased (RR 1.3), corresponding to a 4% increased incidence of cardiac mortality per Gy mean heart dose.
Proton beam therapy may reduce the dose to the heart and lungs, particularly when treating comprehensive lymph nodes. There have been several dosimetric comparison studies between 3D conformal, IMRT, and proton beam therapy and comparisons of passive scatter and pencil beam technology [30]. These studies have shown a reduction in dose to the heart and lung with proton therapy, particularly when IMNs are treated; however, the clinical impact of this dose reduction is unknown. An ongoing randomized trial, RADCOMP (NCT02603341), evaluates these dose effects by randomizing patients who require comprehensive nodal irradiation to receive either proton or photon therapy, with the primary endpoint being a reduction in late cardiac mortality. Deep inspiratory breath hold is another technique to reduce the radiation dose to the heart by creating lung airspace between the chest wall and mediastinum.
Key facts to keep in mind about this topic are as follows:
Postmastectomy radiation therapy (PMRT) is associated with a decrease in locoregional recurrence and an improvement in overall survival among patients with high-risk pathologic features, including positive lymph nodes, positive margins, and inflammatory breast cancer.
There is controversy over the benefit of PMRT in patients with T3N0 breast cancer, however, the risk of recurrence is increased in the presence of other high-risk pathologic features such lymphovascular invasion, high tumor grade, close or positive margins, and premenopausal status.
Target volume should include the chest wall and comprehensive lymph node areas, which include the axillary, supraclavicular, and internal mammary lymph nodes. If all lymph nodes are negative and the patient has a positive margin, then the chest wall alone can be the target. Studies evaluating the role of comprehensive lymph node coverage have demonstrated a small improvement in disease-free survival and overall survival; however, this comes at the cost of increased dose to the heart.
3D conformal radiation therapy (3D CRT) and intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) are 2 of the most common treatment techniques used for postmastectomy radiotherapy. Several different consensus guidelines for target volume delineation exist.
Long-term side effects of PMRT include an increased risk of heart disease and secondary malignancy. Deep-inspiratory breath hold is used to reduce the radiation dose to the heart. Proton beam therapy can potentially reduce the dose to the heart and normal tissue and is currently an active area of research.
There is good evidence that post-mastectomy radiation lowers the risk of locoregional recurrence of breast cancer. However, this therapy is not devoid of side effects. Patients undergoing radiation therapy must be managed by an interprofessional team that includes an oncologist, an oncology nurse, a physical therapist, and an internist. These patients need follow-up to ensure that they are not developing a recurrence of cancer or side effects from the therapy. Besides history and physical exam, a mammogram and routine blood tests are required every 6 to 12 months. In addition, women over 60 also need an assessment of their bone density. To reduce the risk of fractures, the patient should be encouraged to discontinue smoking and enroll in a physical therapy program. A cardiology referral is necessary to screen for heart disease. The pharmacist should emphasize the importance of integrative therapies like yoga, meditation, massage, and music to lower stress. A dietary consult should be obtained to ensure the patient eats a healthy diet rich in calcium.[31][32]
There have been many studies conducted on the benefits of post-mastectomy radiation, and the overall impression is that there is a reduction in relapse rates and overall mortality in patients who receive extensive irradiation. So far, the studies have not shown a significant difference in recurrence following radiation in patients with 1 or 2-3 positive lymph nodes. Unfortunately, most studies have not been long-term, with only a few following patients at 10 years.[33][6]
Park JH, Anderson WF, Gail MH. Improvements in US Breast Cancer Survival and Proportion Explained by Tumor Size and Estrogen-Receptor Status. J Clin Oncol. 2015 Sep 10; 33 (26):2870-6. [PMC free article : PMC4554748 ] [PubMed : 26195709 ]
Overgaard M, Hansen PS, Overgaard J, Rose C, Andersson M, Bach F, Kjaer M, Gadeberg CC, Mouridsen HT, Jensen MB, Zedeler K. Postoperative radiotherapy in high-risk premenopausal women with breast cancer who receive adjuvant chemotherapy. Danish Breast Cancer Cooperative Group 82b Trial. N Engl J Med. 1997 Oct 02; 337 (14):949-55. [PubMed : 9395428 ]
EBCTCG (Early Breast Cancer Trialists' Collaborative Group). McGale P, Taylor C, Correa C, Cutter D, Duane F, Ewertz M, Gray R, Mannu G, Peto R, Whelan T, Wang Y, Wang Z, Darby S. Effect of radiotherapy after mastectomy and axillary surgery on 10-year recurrence and 20-year breast cancer mortality: meta-analysis of individual patient data for 8135 women in 22 randomised trials. Lancet. 2014 Jun 21; 383 (9935):2127-35. [PMC free article : PMC5015598 ] [PubMed : 24656685 ]
Recht A, Gray R, Davidson NE, Fowble BL, Solin LJ, Cummings FJ, Falkson G, Falkson HC, Taylor SG, Tormey DC. Locoregional failure 10 years after mastectomy and adjuvant chemotherapy with or without tamoxifen without irradiation: experience of the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group. J Clin Oncol. 1999 Jun; 17 (6):1689-700. [PubMed : 10561205 ]
Katz A, Strom EA, Buchholz TA, Theriault R, Singletary SE, McNeese MD. The influence of pathologic tumor characteristics on locoregional recurrence rates following mastectomy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2001 Jul 01; 50 (3):735-42. [PubMed : 11395242 ]
Zeidan YH, Habib JG, Ameye L, Paesmans M, de Azambuja E, Gelber RD, Campbell I, Nordenskjöld B, Gutiérez J, Anderson M, Lluch A, Gnant M, Goldhirsch A, Di Leo A, Joseph DJ, Crown J, Piccart-Gebhart M, Francis PA. Postmastectomy Radiation Therapy in Women with T1-T2 Tumors and 1 to 3 Positive Lymph Nodes: Analysis of the Breast International Group 02-98 Trial. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2018 Jun 01; 101 (2):316-324. [PubMed : 29534902 ]
Tendulkar RD, Rehman S, Shukla ME, Reddy CA, Moore H, Budd GT, Dietz J, Crowe JP, Macklis R. Impact of postmastectomy radiation on locoregional recurrence in breast cancer patients with 1-3 positive lymph nodes treated with modern systemic therapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2012 Aug 01; 83 (5):e577-81. [PubMed : 22560546 ]
Recht A, Comen EA, Fine RE, Fleming GF, Hardenbergh PH, Ho AY, Hudis CA, Hwang ES, Kirshner JJ, Morrow M, Salerno KE, Sledge GW, Solin LJ, Spears PA, Whelan TJ, Somerfield MR, Edge SB. Postmastectomy Radiotherapy: An American Society of Clinical Oncology, American Society for Radiation Oncology, and Society of Surgical Oncology Focused Guideline Update. Pract Radiat Oncol. 2016 Nov-Dec; 6 (6):e219-e234. [PubMed : 27659727 ]
Taghian AG, Jeong JH, Mamounas EP, Parda DS, Deutsch M, Costantino JP, Wolmark N. Low locoregional recurrence rate among node-negative breast cancer patients with tumors 5 cm or larger treated by mastectomy, with or without adjuvant systemic therapy and without radiotherapy: results from five national surgical adjuvant breast and bowel project randomized clinical trials. J Clin Oncol. 2006 Aug 20; 24 (24):3927-32. [PubMed : 16921044 ]
Yu JB, Wilson LD, Dasgupta T, Castrucci WA, Weidhaas JB. Postmastectomy radiation therapy for lymph node-negative, locally advanced breast cancer after modified radical mastectomy: analysis of the NCI Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database. Cancer. 2008 Jul 01; 113 (1):38-47. [PubMed : 18442108 ]
Floyd SR, Buchholz TA, Haffty BG, Goldberg S, Niemierko A, Raad RA, Oswald MJ, Sullivan T, Strom EA, Powell SN, Katz A, Taghian AG. Low local recurrence rate without postmastectomy radiation in node-negative breast cancer patients with tumors 5 cm and larger. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2006 Oct 01; 66 (2):358-64. [PubMed : 16887288 ]
Mamounas EP, Anderson SJ, Dignam JJ, Bear HD, Julian TB, Geyer CE, Taghian A, Wickerham DL, Wolmark N. Predictors of locoregional recurrence after neoadjuvant chemotherapy: results from combined analysis of National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project B-18 and B-27. J Clin Oncol. 2012 Nov 10; 30 (32):3960-6. [PMC free article : PMC3488269 ] [PubMed : 23032615 ]
White J, Mamounas E. Locoregional radiotherapy in patients with breast cancer responding to neoadjuvant chemotherapy: a paradigm for treatment individualization. J Clin Oncol. 2014 Feb 20; 32 (6):494-5. [PMC free article : PMC5612477 ] [PubMed : 24378411 ]
Heuts EM, van der Ent FW, von Meyenfeldt MF, Voogd AC. Internal mammary lymph drainage and sentinel node biopsy in breast cancer - A study on 1008 patients. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2009 Mar; 35 (3):252-7. [PubMed : 18684584 ]
Poortmans PM, Collette S, Kirkove C, Van Limbergen E, Budach V, Struikmans H, Collette L, Fourquet A, Maingon P, Valli M, De Winter K, Marnitz S, Barillot I, Scandolaro L, Vonk E, Rodenhuis C, Marsiglia H, Weidner N, van Tienhoven G, Glanzmann C, Kuten A, Arriagada R, Bartelink H, Van den Bogaert W., EORTC Radiation Oncology and Breast Cancer Groups. Internal Mammary and Medial Supraclavicular Irradiation in Breast Cancer. N Engl J Med. 2015 Jul 23; 373 (4):317-27. [PubMed : 26200978 ]
Verhoeven K, Weltens C, Remouchamps V, Mahjoubi K, Veldeman L, Lengelé B, Hortobagyi E, Kirkove C. Vessel based delineation guidelines for the elective lymph node regions in breast cancer radiation therapy - PROCAB guidelines. Radiother Oncol. 2016 Jan; 118 (1):209-10. [PubMed : 26743831 ]
Thorsen LB, Offersen BV, Danø H, Berg M, Jensen I, Pedersen AN, Zimmermann SJ, Brodersen HJ, Overgaard M, Overgaard J. DBCG-IMN: A Population-Based Cohort Study on the Effect of Internal Mammary Node Irradiation in Early Node-Positive Breast Cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2016 Feb 01; 34 (4):314-20. [PubMed : 26598752 ]
Hennequin C, Bossard N, Servagi-Vernat S, Maingon P, Dubois JB, Datchary J, Carrie C, Roullet B, Suchaud JP, Teissier E, Lucardi A, Gerard JP, Belot A, Iwaz J, Ecochard R, Romestaing P. Ten-year survival results of a randomized trial of irradiation of internal mammary nodes after mastectomy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2013 Aug 01; 86 (5):860-6. [PubMed : 23664327 ]
Christante D, Pommier SJ, Diggs BS, Samuelson BT, Truong A, Marquez C, Hansen J, Naik AM, Vetto JT, Pommier RF. Using complications associated with postmastectomy radiation and immediate breast reconstruction to improve surgical decision making. Arch Surg. 2010 Sep; 145 (9):873-8. [PubMed : 20855758 ]
Nava MB, Pennati AE, Lozza L, Spano A, Zambetti M, Catanuto G. Outcome of different timings of radiotherapy in implant-based breast reconstructions. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2011 Aug; 128 (2):353-359. [PubMed : 21788827 ]
Santosa KB, Chen X, Qi J, Ballard TNS, Kim HM, Hamill JB, Bensenhaver JM, Pusic AL, Wilkins EG. Postmastectomy Radiation Therapy and Two-Stage Implant-Based Breast Reconstruction: Is There a Better Time to Irradiate? Plast Reconstr Surg. 2016 Oct; 138 (4):761-769. [PMC free article : PMC5117482 ] [PubMed : 27673513 ]
Gentile MS, Usman AA, Neuschler EI, Sathiaseelan V, Hayes JP, Small W. Contouring Guidelines for the Axillary Lymph Nodes for the Delivery of Radiation Therapy in Breast Cancer: Evaluation of the RTOG Breast Cancer Atlas. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2015 Oct 01; 93 (2):257-65. [PubMed : 26383674 ]
Patyal B. Dosimetry aspects of proton therapy. Technol Cancer Res Treat. 2007 Aug; 6 (4 Suppl):17-23. [PubMed : 17668947 ]
Verma V, Shah C, Mehta MP. Clinical Outcomes and Toxicity of Proton Radiotherapy for Breast Cancer. Clin Breast Cancer. 2016 Jun; 16 (3):145-54. [PubMed : 26995159 ]
MacDonald SM, Patel SA, Hickey S, Specht M, Isakoff SJ, Gadd M, Smith BL, Yeap BY, Adams J, Delaney TF, Kooy H, Lu HM, Taghian AG. Proton therapy for breast cancer after mastectomy: early outcomes of a prospective clinical trial. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2013 Jul 01; 86 (3):484-90. [PubMed : 23523326 ]
Donker M, van Tienhoven G, Straver ME, Meijnen P, van de Velde CJ, Mansel RE, Cataliotti L, Westenberg AH, Klinkenbijl JH, Orzalesi L, Bouma WH, van der Mijle HC, Nieuwenhuijzen GA, Veltkamp SC, Slaets L, Duez NJ, de Graaf PW, van Dalen T, Marinelli A, Rijna H, Snoj M, Bundred NJ, Merkus JW, Belkacemi Y, Petignat P, Schinagl DA, Coens C, Messina CG, Bogaerts J, Rutgers EJ. Radiotherapy or surgery of the axilla after a positive sentinel node in breast cancer (EORTC 10981-22023 AMAROS): a randomised, multicentre, open-label, phase 3 non-inferiority trial. Lancet Oncol. 2014 Nov; 15 (12):1303-10. [PMC free article : PMC4291166 ] [PubMed : 25439688 ]
Park JH, Lee WH, Chung HS. Incidence and risk factors of breast cancer lymphoedema. J Clin Nurs. 2008 Jun; 17 (11):1450-9. [PubMed : 18482142 ]
Darby SC, Ewertz M, McGale P, Bennet AM, Blom-Goldman U, Brønnum D, Correa C, Cutter D, Gagliardi G, Gigante B, Jensen MB, Nisbet A, Peto R, Rahimi K, Taylor C, Hall P. Risk of ischemic heart disease in women after radiotherapy for breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2013 Mar 14; 368 (11):987-98. [PubMed : 23484825 ]
Taylor C, Correa C, Duane FK, Aznar MC, Anderson SJ, Bergh J, Dodwell D, Ewertz M, Gray R, Jagsi R, Pierce L, Pritchard KI, Swain S, Wang Z, Wang Y, Whelan T, Peto R, McGale P., Early Breast Cancer Trialists’ Collaborative Group. Estimating the Risks of Breast Cancer Radiotherapy: Evidence From Modern Radiation Doses to the Lungs and Heart and From Previous Randomized Trials. J Clin Oncol. 2017 May 20; 35 (15):1641-1649. [PMC free article : PMC5548226 ] [PubMed : 28319436 ]
Ares C, Khan S, Macartain AM, Heuberger J, Goitein G, Gruber G, Lutters G, Hug EB, Bodis S, Lomax AJ. Postoperative proton radiotherapy for localized and locoregional breast cancer: potential for clinically relevant improvements? Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2010 Mar 01; 76 (3):685-97. [PubMed : 19615828 ]
Arciero C, Thompson P, Meisel JL, Taylor CE, Torres MA, Wood WC. Multidisciplinary Approaches to Chest Wall Recurrences of Breast Cancer. Oncology (Williston Park). 2018 Aug 15; 32 (8):392-6, 417. [PubMed : 30153317 ]
Grossmith S, Nguyen A, Hu J, Plichta JK, Nakhlis F, Cutone L, Dominici L, Golshan M, Duggan M, Carter K, Rhei E, Barbie T, Calvillo K, Nimbkar S, Bellon J, Wong J, Punglia R, Barry W, King TA. Multidisciplinary Management of the Axilla in Patients with cT1-T2 N0 Breast Cancer Undergoing Primary Mastectomy: Results from a Prospective Single-Institution Series. Ann Surg Oncol. 2018 Nov; 25 (12):3527-3534. [PubMed : 29868979 ]
Abdel-Rahman O. Impact of postmastectomy radiotherapy on the outcomes of breast cancer patients with T1-2 N1 disease : An individual patient data analysis of three clinical trials. Strahlenther Onkol. 2019 Apr; 195 (4):297-305. [PubMed : 30069737 ]
Disclosure: Jill Remick declares no relevant financial relationships with ineligible companies.
Disclosure: Neha Amin declares no relevant financial relationships with ineligible companies.
