RadOncDoc21

7+ Year Member
Oct 24, 2010
1,193
665
Status
Attending Physician
Had a patient show me this article today, I had to convince her that she needed nodal radiation (5+ LN). She did have a point in that the title stated that she doesn't need it!

The article does say 4+ still needs nodal RT but its hidden in the text. Didn't the Meta-analysis show OS benefit in all N+ patients? I thought the problem with MA20 was that long-term data was the issue.


http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/848474?src=wnl_edit_tp10&uac=146618HN&impID=805708&faf=1
 
Last edited:
OP
RadOncDoc21

RadOncDoc21

7+ Year Member
Oct 24, 2010
1,193
665
Status
Attending Physician
Only in breast cancer can we have so much data about nothing! I cringe whenever I think about the next "big" trial for breast cancer.
 

hot sauce

7+ Year Member
Mar 10, 2010
303
11
Status
Attending Physician
If a patient asks specifically about survival I would say that the current studies did not show a statistically significant survival benefit to treating nodes compared to just tangents (although EORTC OS p = 0.06). However, other outcomes such as disease free survival, isolated locoregional disease free survival, and distant disease free survival were significantly different in MA.20; additionally, EORTC showed a disease specific survival benefit. These are important outcomes in my opinion and I think most women would want the benefit of being more likely to be alive without breast cancer in 10 years. Of course, you do have to balance with the (slightly) higher toxicity.
 
OP
RadOncDoc21

RadOncDoc21

7+ Year Member
Oct 24, 2010
1,193
665
Status
Attending Physician
Do we just not even bring up the EBCTCG meta-analysis anymore? Granted, the trials were old but we're talking about an extremely large data set and long-term outcomes.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Neuronix

RustBeltOnc

2+ Year Member
Dec 28, 2014
296
138
The Rust Belt
Status
Attending Physician
If a patient asks specifically about survival I would say that the current studies did not show a statistically significant survival benefit to treating nodes compared to just tangents (although EORTC OS p = 0.06). However, other outcomes such as disease free survival, isolated locoregional disease free survival, and distant disease free survival were significantly different in MA.20; additionally, EORTC showed a disease specific survival benefit. These are important outcomes in my opinion and I think most women would want the benefit of being more likely to be alive without breast cancer in 10 years. Of course, you do have to balance with the (slightly) higher toxicity.
We have this discussion in med onc all the time. Most pts under 70 without significant co morbids care about this; many of the older ones don't. I actually find it very satisfying when a patient makes an informed choice.