AzTrials
AzTrials

Breast CancerHAI-5NCT04098926

Highly Accelerated Dose-Integrated Radiotherapy in 5 Fractions in Breast Cancer

A study testing Dose-integrated accelerated EBRT in pN0 breast cancer and Dose-integrated accelerated EBRT in pN+ breast cancer in people with Breast Cancer and Radiotherapy, run by University Hospital, Ghent at 1 site in Belgium.

Completed

Finished. The study has ended and is not enrolling. Results may be posted on the official record.

Official record
Search all trials

Trial summary

Adjuvant radiotherapy in breast cancer improves local control, also in the elderly. Hormonal therapy in hormone sensitive tumors improves results but can not substitute radiotherapy. Improved local control leads to less breast cancer related morbidity and mortality, also in an older population (Schonberg, JCO, 2011). Read more about this study

Who is it for?
Ages 70 years and older, women only
Conditions the study is for
Breast Cancer, Radiotherapy
What is being tested?
Dose-integrated accelerated EBRT in pN0 breast cancer and Dose-integrated accelerated EBRT in pN+ breast cancer
Type of treatment
Surgery or procedure
Could I receive a placebo?
No, everyone receives an active treatment
How many people
70 participants
Where
1 siteBelgium
Study dates
Jan 2015to 13 Jul 2018
Phase
Interventional
Are there results?
None posted in the registry

Key requirements

Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.

  • Ages 70 years and older
  • Women only
  • No healthy volunteers
  • Older adult

Who may be able to join

  • ≥ 70 years old
  • AND breast conserving surgery or mastectomy for breast carcinoma
  • AND multidisciplinary decision of adjuvant irradiation
  • AND absence of distant metastases
  • AND informed consent obtained, signed and dated before specific protocol procedures

Who cannot join

  • Bilateral breast irradiation
  • In case of mastectomy: positive resection margin, needing boost
  • Mental condition rendering the patient unable to understand the nature, scope and possible consequences of the study
  • Patient unlikely to comply with the protocol; i.e. uncooperative attitude, inability to return for follow-up visits, and unlikely to complete the study
  • History of previous radiation treatment to the same region

Trial locations and contacts

1 site in 1 country.

Belgium1 site
  • University Hospital - Radiotherapy Department

    Ghent, 9000

Other trials in Belgium

About this study

Official title: Evaluation of Dose Integrated Accelerated Irradiation in Older Women (≥ 70 Year) With Early and Loco-regionally Advanced Stages of Breast Cancer

Adjuvant radiotherapy in breast cancer improves local control, also in the elderly. Hormonal therapy in hormone sensitive tumors improves results but can not substitute radiotherapy. Improved local control leads to less breast cancer related morbidity and mortality, also in an older population (Schonberg, JCO, 2011).

Unfortunately, in older patients with lower life expectancy, adjuvant radiotherapy is often omitted. Following reasons are invoked:

Read more
  • frailty of the patient
  • fear for toxicity
  • impaired mobility, rendering transportation and positioning more difficult
  • dependency for transportation to and from the radiotherapy departement
  • negative cost effectiveness ratio, due to high cost (especially for complex techniques and long schedules) and lower benefit (lower life expectancy)

Hypofractionation is feasible without increased toxicity, and combines better local control with patient comfort and lower costs. Further lowering the number of fractions (from 15-21 to 5) will further improve patient comfort, but is challenging when different doses are needed in the same target volume. This problem is addressed using advanced techniques permitting dose-integration.

In the elder with cancer, several unrecognized geriatric problems, including depression and cognitive impairment, can be detected by CGA . Some problems do interact with cancer treatment. In this study screening and assessment is provided to support patients and to develop an inventory of radiotherapy obstacles.

Our study includes breast cancer patients, ≥70 years old, referred for adjuvant radiotherapy after surgical treatment. A schedule of 5 fractions is offered, encompassing different targets of treatment.

Read the detailed description

Adjuvant radiotherapy in breast cancer improves local control and overall survival, also in the elderly. Hormonal therapy in hormone sensitive tumors improves results but can not substitute radiotherapy (EBCTCG, Lancet, 2011). Improved local control, leads to less breast cancer related morbidity and mortality, also in an older population (Schonberg, JCO, 2011).

Unfortunately, in older patients with lower life expectancy, adjuvant radiotherapy is often perceived as too cumbersome. As a consequence, patients who could have benefit from breast conserving therapy are referred for mastectomy. Even when breast-conserving surgery is chosen, adjuvant radiotherapy is sometimes omitted in frail patients over 70 years fearing the burden of daily transportation to the radiation department. However, omitting radiotherapy results in a higher risk of loco-regional recurrence. It has been shown that older patients have a worse prognosis due to suboptimal treatment, especially in locally advanced breast cancer (Schonberg, JCO, 2011).

Following reasons are invoked by the patients or the care-givers:

  • frailty of the patient
  • fear for (mostly acute) toxicity
  • impaired mobility, rendering transportation and positioning more difficult
  • dependency on third parties (family, services) for transportation to and from the radiotherapy departement
  • negative cost effectiveness ratio, due to high cost (especially for complex techniques and long schedules) and lower benefit (lower life expectancy)

Hypofractionation and acceleration are proven to be feasible in recent trials (cf. Start Trial, Fast Trial).

Based on these data and in order to overcome above mentioned obstacles for radiotherapy in breast cancer, we start a study with accelerated radiotherapy in women above 70 years old.

As we are experienced in advanced techniques as IMRT, VMAT, simultaneous dose-integration and IGRT, we will use simultaneous dose integrated protocols to permit inclusion of early as well as locally advanced breast cancer.

Integration of doses within one global volume encompasses several advantages:

  • number of fractions can be maintained, regardless of the indication
  • imprevisible high doses due to overlap of adjacent fields in tangential techniques is avoided
  • high dose volume is more adequately limited to the actual region of high risk, as dose difference is smaller.

In order to evaluate the impact of accelerated radiotherapy on the well being of the patient and on the treatment cost, quality of life (QoL) will be measured and a cost-analysis will be performed.

Methodology of research At the radiotherapy intake consultation, patients with age ≥70 years are extensively informed on the advantages and the possible risks of accelerated irradiation. A written documentation of the study is provided to permit consultation of family and general practitioner before consent for participation. Until 1 week before the start of radiotherapy, patients can decide wether or not to participate in this study without impact on the starting day. Inclusion is performed after signing the informed consent.

The aim is to include 70 patients aged ≥ 70 years, who, after signing the informed consent, will be treated with the accelerated schemes over 10 days (5 sessions, every other day). Following doses are prescribed

  • Breast: 5x5,7Gy
  • R0 boost: 5x6.5Gy
  • R1 boost: 5x6.9Gy
  • Thoracic wall: 5x5.7Gy
  • Lymph nodes: 5x5.4Gy --> these doses are simultaneously integrated, and regions are prescribed according to our standard protocol .

Positioning of the patient depends on technical possibilities and patient rigidity:

  • for breast irradiation without lymph nodes, prone positioning is preferred if feasible, if not the patient is positioned in supine
  • for thoracic irradiation with or without lymph node irradiation, patient is always installed in supine position
  • for breast + lymph node irradiation, patients are installed in supine position.

End points of our study are acute and chronic toxicity, loco-regional control and QoL.

The study is divided in two different strata (first group without lymph node irradiation, second group with lymph node irradiation) for following reasons:

  1. these groups represent different outcomes with lymph node invasion having a negative impact on morbidity, loco-regional control and overall survival
  2. a higher frequency of acute moist desquamation might occur in the second group (lymph nodes included) as compared to the first group, due to a larger target volume.
  3. the brachial plexus is a special concern, as it lies close or even within the target volume. Therefore we will monitor closely the effects on the brachial plexus for the second group. Nevertheless, as the total dose is lower than with normo-fractionation, the risk for brachial neuropathy is maximally reduced.

Groups

  • 40 patients in group 1: irradiation of breast/thoracic wall with or without integrated boost without lymph node irradiation
  • 30 patients in group 2: irradiation of breast/thoracic wall with or without integrated boost and with lymph node region irradiation

An application for funding to perform geriatric assessment is introduced. In the elder with cancer, several unrecognized geriatric problems, including depression and cognitive impairment, can be detected bij CGA . Some of these problems even interact with cancer treatment. In this study screening and assessment is provided to develop an inventory of obstacles for undergoing radiotherapy.

When screening scores positive (G8 score ≤ 14/17) geriatric assessment will be performed to evaluate the problems and needs of the patient. Patients will be referred for appropriate treatment and support. As described by Schönberg, treatment in early stage breast cancer might even lead to improved morbidity and mortality when compared to a non-cancer population, due to the 'healthy user' effect, detecting otherwise unrevealed problems. In the scope of this study, this effect can not be evaluated.

Power analysis To estimate the number of patients needed, we applied the Wilson score confidence interval test for binomial proportion, which is a 2-sided exact method for power analysis, using "SAS Power and Sample Size".

Group 1:

To achieve a conditional probability of 87% with an alpha-error of 0,1, a number of 35 patients would be needed. To compensate for drop-outs, we include 40 patients in this study-arm.

Group 2 To achieve a conditional probability of >95% with an alpha-error of 0,1, a number of 25 patients would be needed. To compensate for drop-outs, we include 30 patients in this study-arm.

Being tested
Dose-integrated accelerated EBRT in pN0 breast cancer, Dose-integrated accelerated EBRT in pN+ breast cancer
Keywords
Older women, Accelerated radiotherapy, Dose-integrated radiotherapy
Medical subject headings
Breast Neoplasms

What participants receive

What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.

  • Dose-integrated accelerated EBRT in pN0 breast cancerRadiation

    WBI: 5 x 5.7Gy Thoracic wall: 5 x 5.7Gy R0 boost: 5 x 6.5Gy R1 boost: 5 x 6.9Gy

  • Dose-integrated accelerated EBRT in pN+ breast cancerRadiation

    WBI: 5 x 5.7Gy Thoracic wall: 5 x 5.7Gy R0 boost: 5 x 6.5Gy R1 boost: 5 x 6.9Gy Lymph node region: 5 x 5.4Gy

Study groups in NCT04098926
Study groupRoleWhat they receive
Accelerated dose-integrated radiotherapy - pN0ExperimentalLymph node negative breast cancer
Receives: Radiation: Dose-integrated accelerated EBRT in pN0 breast cancer
Accelerated dose-integrated radiotherapy - pN1ExperimentalLymph node positive breast cancer
Receives: Radiation: Dose-integrated accelerated EBRT in pN+ breast cancer

What is being measured

The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.

  1. Breast retraction (LENTSOMA)

    Breast Cancer Conservative treatment.core (BCCT.core) objective measurement

    Measured: 6 weeks post-radiotherapy

Secondary outcomes (16)
  1. Acute toxicity: number of patients with clinical relevant dermatitis (CTCAE v. 4.0)

    Assessment of grade of dermatitis

    Measured: 1-8 weeks

  2. Acute toxicity: number of patients with moist desquamation (CTCAE v. 4.0 (grade 3)

    Measured: 1-8 weeks

  3. Acute toxicity: number of patients with pain (CTCAE v. 4.0)

    Grade 1: mild; Grade 2: moderate, limiting activity of daily living (ADL); grade 3: severe, limiting ADL

    Measured: 1-8 weeks

  4. Acute toxicity: number of patients with pruritus (CTCAE v. 4.0)

    Grade 1: mild, localized topical intervention; Grade 2: intense, oral intervention, skin changes

    Measured: 1-8 weeks

  5. Acute toxicity: number of patients with fatigue (MFI-20)

    Questionnaire (20 questions)

    Measured: 1-8 weeks

  6. Chronic toxicity: measurement of patient satisfaction with breast esthetic outcome: BREAST-Q questionnaire

    BREAST-Q questionnaire: Patient reported outcome, evaluating satisfaction with esthetic outcome.

    Measured: Before radiotherapy and after 2 and 5 years

  7. Chronic toxicity: prevalence of fibrosis

    LENT Soma: fibrosis (score 0-3)

    Measured: 2 and 5 years

  8. Chronic toxicity: prevalence of pain

    LENT Soma: score 0-4

    Measured: 2 and 5 years

  9. Chronic toxicity: prevalence of telangiectasia

    LENT Soma: Score 0-3

    Measured: 2 and 5 years

  10. Chronic toxicity: prevalence of lymphedema

    LENT Soma: score 0-4

    Measured: 2 and 5 years

  11. Chronic toxicity: prevalence of fatigue (MFI-20)

    Questionnaire (20 questions)

    Measured: 2 and 5 years

  12. Chronic toxicity - prevalence of radiation induced brachial plexopathy (RIBP) (standardized screening questionnaire), confirmed by electromyogram (EMG)

    If a screening reveals unilateral pain, loss of function or muscular atrophy in the ipsilateral arm, an EMG will be performed to confirm/exclude RIBP

    Measured: 2 and 5 years

  13. Loco-regional tumor control

    Ipsilateral or regional breast recurrence

    Measured: 2 and 5 years

  14. Distant tumor control

    Distant metastases free survival

    Measured: 2 and 5 years

  15. Breast cancer specific survival

    Number of patients alive and without breast cancer recurrence at 2 and 5 years after adjuvant radiotherapy

    Measured: 2 and 5 years

  16. Overall survival

    Number of patients alive, 2 and 5 years after adjuvant radiotherapy

    Measured: 2 and 5 years

Timeline

From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.

  1. First posted23 Sep 2019
  2. Study startJan 2015
  3. Primary completionJul 2018
  4. Study completion13 Jul 2018

Resources

More details

For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.

Study design
Study type
Interventional
Phase
Phase N/A
Primary purpose
Treatment
Allocation
Non-randomised
Intervention model
Single group
Masking
None (open label)
Enrolment
70 participants (actual)
IDs, dates and publications
ClinicalTrials.gov ID
NCT04098926
Sponsor's protocol ID
EC/2014/1167
Acronym
HAI-5
Status last verified
Jun 2015
First submitted
2 Jun 2015
Last updated
23 Sep 2019
Results posted
No
Data monitoring committee
No

Questions about this trial

What is this clinical trial studying?

A study testing Dose-integrated accelerated EBRT in pN0 breast cancer and Dose-integrated accelerated EBRT in pN+ breast cancer in people with Breast Cancer and Radiotherapy, run by University Hospital, Ghent at 1 site in Belgium.

The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.

Who may be eligible to take part?

The sponsor lists 5 inclusion and 5 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.

Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?

The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 23 Sep 2019. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.

Where is the study taking place?

The record lists 1 site in Belgium. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.

What are the possible benefits and risks?

They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.

Are results available for this study?

The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.

How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?

The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.

What does the primary outcome measure?

Breast retraction (LENTSOMA) (time frame: 6 weeks post-radiotherapy). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.

Where can I read the original study information?
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?

No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.

How often is this information updated?

AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 23 Sep 2019.

Free account

Log in to keep searching

You’ve used your 3 free searches. AzTrials is free: log in or create a free account to keep searching clinical trials and save the ones you want to follow.

Create a free accountLog in