The Investigators are investigating the potential role of MRI-guided Radiation Therapy for patients receiving breast radiotherapy in the prone position with a MRI-Linac radiotherapy system, the Precision Prone Irradiation (PPI) technique. Hypothesis: The investigators would like to hypothesize that breast radiation therapy using MRI-guided system including the MRI-Linac (Arm 2) is comparable to the current standard of treatment using conventional CT-based system (Arm 1), in terms of local control of the disease at 2 year time point.
Breast conserving surgery and adjuvant whole breast radiotherapy is a standard treatment option for most patients with early-stage invasive breast cancer. Recent technological advances in radiotherapy have enabled shorter treatment courses, smaller radiation fields, prone positioning, and fewer side effects associated with breast cancer treatment. To further improve target accuracy in breast radiation delivery, an emerging radiotherapy technology takes advantage of on-table MRI imaging and daily adaptive planning during the radiation delivery process. The objectives of the study are to compare side effects in patients treated under either of these treatment settings and to compare recurrence (if the cancer comes back) rates at a 2-year time point. Patients will have annual follow ups up to 10 years and recurrence rates will be measured at 5-year and at 10-year time points.
Study Type
INTERVENTIONAL
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
NONE
Enrollment
17
Patients randomized to ARM 1 will receive 3000 cGy in 5 fractions partial breast radiotherapy with CT-based breast radiation treatment (Arm 1) and patients randomized to ARM 2 will receive 3000 cGy in 5 fractions partial breast radiotherapy with MRI-based breast radiation treatment (Arm 2).
Weill Cornell Medicine
New York, New York, United States
Comparing local recurrence rates between patients receiving Standard CT radiation therapy (ARM1) and MRI-based radiation therapy (ARM 2)
Time frame: 24months
Comparing local recurrence rates between patients receiving Standard CT radiation therapy (ARM1) and MRI-based radiation therapy (ARM 2)
Time frame: 60 months
Comparing number of participants with local recurrence between patients treated on Standard CT radiation therapy (ARM1) and MRI-based radiation therapy (ARM 2)
Time frame: 120 months
Comparing clinical and planning target volumes (CTV and PTV volumes) for CT-based planning vs. MRI-based planning
Time frame: 60 months
Comparing patient reported cosmetic outcomes between patients treated on Standard CT radiation therapy (ARM1) and MRI-based radiation therapy (ARM 2)
Comparing patient reported cosmetic outcomes between patients treated on Standard CT radiation therapy (ARM1) and MRI-based radiation therapy (ARM 2) using the Breast Cancer Treatment Outcome Scale (BCTOS). BCTOS is a widely used questionnaire that is used to compare outcomes of treated and untreated breast by the patient. The questionnaire includes a cosmetic, functional and breast sensitivity questions. BCTOS Cosmesis scores range from 1 (excellent) to 4 (poor), and scores of 3 (fair) or more indicate adverse cosmetic outcomes.
Time frame: 60 months
Comparing the number of treatment related acute skin toxicities observed in patients who received either Standard CT radiation therapy (ARM1) and MRI-based radiation therapy (ARM 2)
Comparing the number of treatment related acute skin toxicities observed in patients who received either Standard CT radiation therapy (ARM1) and MRI-based radiation therapy (ARM 2) using the National Cancer Institute Common Toxicity Criteria for Adverse Events, version 5.0 (NCI CTCAEv5.0).
Time frame: 6 months
Comparing the number of treatment related acute skin toxicities observed in patients who received either Standard CT radiation therapy (ARM1) and MRI-based radiation therapy (ARM 2)
Comparing the number of treatment related acute skin toxicities observed in patients who received either Standard CT radiation therapy (ARM1) and MRI-based radiation therapy (ARM 2) using the National Cancer Institute Common Toxicity Criteria for Adverse Events, version 5.0 (NCI CTCAEv5.0).
Time frame: 12 months
Comparing the number of treatment related acute skin toxicities observed in patients who received either Standard CT radiation therapy (ARM1) and MRI-based radiation therapy (ARM 2)
Comparing the number of treatment related acute skin toxicities observed in patients who received either Standard CT radiation therapy (ARM1) and MRI-based radiation therapy (ARM 2) using the National Cancer Institute Common Toxicity Criteria for Adverse Events, version 5.0 (NCI CTCAEv5.0).
Time frame: 24 months
Comparing the number of treatment related late skin toxicities who received either Standard CT radiation therapy (ARM1) and MRI-based radiation therapy (ARM 2)
Comparing the number of treatment related late skin toxicities who received either Standard CT radiation therapy (ARM1) and MRI-based radiation therapy (ARM 2) using the National Cancer Institute Common Toxicity Criteria for Adverse Events, version 5.0 (NCI CTCAEv5.0).
Time frame: 6 months
Comparing the number of treatment related late skin toxicities who received either Standard CT radiation therapy (ARM1) and MRI-based radiation therapy (ARM 2)
Comparing the number of treatment related late skin toxicities who received either Standard CT radiation therapy (ARM1) and MRI-based radiation therapy (ARM 2) using the National Cancer Institute Common Toxicity Criteria for Adverse Events, version 5.0 (NCI CTCAEv5.0).
Time frame: 12 months
Comparing the number of treatment related late skin toxicities who received either Standard CT radiation therapy (ARM1) and MRI-based radiation therapy (ARM 2)
Comparing the number of treatment related late skin toxicities who received either Standard CT radiation therapy (ARM1) and MRI-based radiation therapy (ARM 2) using the National Cancer Institute Common Toxicity Criteria for Adverse Events, version 5.0 (NCI CTCAEv5.0).
Time frame: 24 months
This platform is for informational purposes only and does not constitute medical advice. Always consult a qualified healthcare professional.