OPAR: A Randomized Trial of Partial Breast Irradiation in Five Fractions Once Daily for Early Breast Cancer

D Do-Hoon Kim (Division of Radiation Oncology, Department of Oncology, McMaster University and Juravinski Cancer Centre at Hamilton Health Sciences, Hamilton, ON, Canada) V Valérie Théberge (CHU de Québec-Université Laval, Quebec City, QC, Canada) S Sameer Parpia I Iwa Kong (BC Cancer Vancouver, Vancouver, BC, Canada) S Sawyna Provencher (Department of Radiation Oncology, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Sherbrooke (CHUS), Sherbrooke, QC, Canada) M Michael Yassa (Department of Radiation Oncology, Maisonneuve-Rosemont Hospital, Montreal, QC, Canada) F Francisco Perera (Department of Radiation Oncology, Western University and London Regional Cancer Program, London, ON, Canada) S Sophie Lavertu (Department of Radiation Oncology, Universite de Laval and Hôtel-Dieu de Lévis, Lévis, QC, Canada) P Pierre Rousseau (Department of Radiation Oncology, Universite de Montreal, Montreal, QC, Canada) J Justin Lee (Department for Biochemistry of Plant Interactions, Leibniz Institute of Plant Biochemistry) I Irene Karam (Sunnybrook Health Sciencies, Toronto, ON, Canada) K Kenneth Schneider (Department of Radiation Oncology, Windsor Regional Cancer Centre, Windsor, ON, Canada) M Mark N. Levine (Department of Oncology, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada) T Timothy J. Whelan (McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada) C Christiaan Stevens R Ramana Rachakonda T Tarek Hijal (McGill University Health Centre, Montreal, QC, Canada)

Abstract

PURPOSE Previous studies suggest that external-beam partial breast irradiation (PBI) delivered twice a day can lead to increased adverse cosmesis (AC). The objective of our trial was to determine whether two regimens for PBI given once daily over 1 week resulted in acceptable AC to inform a phase III trial. METHODS Patients age ≥50 years with invasive breast cancer or ductal carcinoma in situ, ≤3 cm in size treated by lumpectomy with negative axillary nodes were randomly assigned to external-beam PBI of 30 Gy or 27.5 Gy, each given in five fractions once daily. The primary outcome was AC (fair or poor) by photographic assessment at 2 years. Secondary outcomes included AC assessed by nurse at 2 years, by patient self-assessment at 3 years, and late toxicity. On the basis of a 17% risk of AC with whole-breast irradiation, the upper bound of a two-sided 90% CI, 23% was set as the tolerance margin (OPAR, ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02637024 ). RESULTS In total, 142 patients were randomly assigned to 30 Gy and 139 to 27.5 Gy. The median follow-up was 5 years. The mean age was 65 years, and the mean tumor size was 1.2 cm. Both schedules met acceptability criteria by photographic assessment (AC, 12.1% [90% CI, 8.2 to 17.6] for 30 Gy and 15.2% [90% CI, 10.8 to 21.1] for 27.5 Gy) and by nurse assessment. AC by patient self-assessment exceeded the 90% CI for the 30 Gy regimen. At 5 years, 16 (11.3%, 90% CI, 7.6 to 16.4) patients treated with 30 Gy and eight (5.8%, 90% CI, 3.3 to 9.9) patients treated with 27.5 Gy were observed to have grade 2 or more late toxicity. CONCLUSION According to the study design, 30 Gy and 27.5 Gy resulted in acceptable cosmetic outcomes. In light of recent studies, a lower dose was chosen for the phase III trial.

Article Details

Volume / Issue Vol. 43, Issue 5
Published February 10, 2025
Pages 505-512
ISSN 0732-183X
Publisher Lippincott Williams & Wilkins

Journal Info

Journal of Clinical Oncology

Lippincott Williams & Wilkins

ISSN: 0732-183X Health Sciences

Authors (17)

D

Do-Hoon Kim

Division of Radiation Oncology, Department of Oncology, McMaster University and Juravinski Cancer Centre at Hamilton Health Sciences, Hamilton, ON, Canada

V

Valérie Théberge

CHU de Québec-Université Laval, Quebec City, QC, Canada

S

Sameer Parpia

I

Iwa Kong

BC Cancer Vancouver, Vancouver, BC, Canada

S

Sawyna Provencher

Department of Radiation Oncology, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Sherbrooke (CHUS), Sherbrooke, QC, Canada

M

Michael Yassa

Department of Radiation Oncology, Maisonneuve-Rosemont Hospital, Montreal, QC, Canada

F

Francisco Perera

Department of Radiation Oncology, Western University and London Regional Cancer Program, London, ON, Canada

S

Sophie Lavertu

Department of Radiation Oncology, Universite de Laval and Hôtel-Dieu de Lévis, Lévis, QC, Canada

P

Pierre Rousseau

Department of Radiation Oncology, Universite de Montreal, Montreal, QC, Canada

J

Justin Lee

Department for Biochemistry of Plant Interactions, Leibniz Institute of Plant Biochemistry

I

Irene Karam

Sunnybrook Health Sciencies, Toronto, ON, Canada

K

Kenneth Schneider

Department of Radiation Oncology, Windsor Regional Cancer Centre, Windsor, ON, Canada

M

Mark N. Levine

Department of Oncology, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada

T

Timothy J. Whelan

McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada

C

Christiaan Stevens

R

Ramana Rachakonda

T

Tarek Hijal

McGill University Health Centre, Montreal, QC, Canada