Patterns of Practice in Radiotherapy for Breast Cancer in Korea.
- Author:
Hae Jin PARK
1
;
Do Hoon OH
;
Kyung Hwan SHIN
;
Jin Ho KIM
;
Doo Ho CHOI
;
Won PARK
;
Chang Ok SUH
;
Yong Bae KIM
;
Seung Do AHN
;
Su Ssan KIM
Author Information
- Publication Type:Original Article
- Keywords: Breast neoplasms; Korea; Physicians' practice patterns; Radiotherapy; Surveys and questionnaires
- MeSH: Appointments and Schedules; Breast Neoplasms*; Breast*; Carcinoma, Intraductal, Noninfiltrating; Korea*; Lymph Nodes; Mastectomy, Segmental; Patient Selection; Practice Patterns, Physicians'; Radiation Oncology; Radiotherapy*; Radiotherapy, Adjuvant; Risk Factors; Surveys and Questionnaires; Thoracic Wall
- From:Journal of Breast Cancer 2018;21(3):244-250
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:English
- Abstract: Adjuvant radiotherapy (RT) is a well-established treatment for breast cancer. However, there is a large degree of variation and controversy in practice patterns. A nationwide survey on the patterns of practice in breast RT was designed by the Division for Breast Cancer of the Korean Radiation Oncology Group. All board-certified members of the Korean Society for Radiation Oncology were sent a questionnaire comprising 39 questions on six domains: hypofractionated whole breast RT, accelerated partial breast RT, postmastectomy RT (PMRT), regional nodal RT, RT for ductal carcinoma in situ, and RT toxicity. Sixty-four radiation oncologists from 54 of 86 (62.8%) hospitals responded. Twenty-three respondents (35.9%) used hypofractionated whole breast RT, and the most common schedule was 43.2 Gy in 16 fractions. Only three (4.7%) used accelerated partial breast RT. Five (7.8%) used hypofractionated PMRT, and 40 (62.5%) had never used boost RT after chest wall irradiation. Indications for regional nodal RT varied; ≥pN2 (n=7) versus ≥pN1 (n=17) versus ≥pN1 with pathologic risk factors (n=40). Selection criteria for internal mammary lymph node (IMN) irradiation also varied; only four (6.3%) always treated IMN when regional nodal RT was administered and 30 (46.9%) treated IMN only if IMN involvement was identified through imaging. Thirty-one (48.4%) considered omission of whole breast RT after breast-conserving surgery for ductal carcinoma in situ based on clinical and pathologic risk factors. Fifty-two (81.3%) used heart-sparing techniques. Overall, there were wide variations in the patterns of practice in breast RT in Korea. Standard guidelines are needed, especially for regional nodal RT and omission of RT for ductal carcinoma in situ.
