As the use of hypofractionated breast radiation therapy (RT) increases, so will the need for long-term data on post-RT mammographic changes. The purpose of the present study was to longitudinally compare the incidence of common mammographic sequelae seen after breast conserving surgery and RT in patients treated with accelerated partial breast irradiation (APBI), hypofractionated whole breast irradiation (HWBI), and conventionally fractionated whole breast irradiation (WBI).
Patients treated with either APBI or HWBI after breast conserving therapy and with ≥3 mammograms of the treated breast were identified. They were matched 1:1 by age ±5 years to patients treated with WBI. The mammograms were evaluated for common post-RT breast findings by a mammographer who was unaware of the treatment. The outcomes were analyzed using a cumulative logistic regression model; P<.05 indicated statistically significance.
Of 89 patients treated with RT from 2006 to 2011, 29 had received APBI, 30 had received HWBI, and 30 had received WBI. Their median age was 60 years (range 33-83). A total of 605 mammograms were evaluated, with a median follow-up of 48 months. The treatment technique did not affect the severity of architectural distortion when the groups were evaluated longitudinally. The likelihood of finding skin thickening decreased with increasing follow-up duration (odds ratio 0.6; P<.001) adjusted for fractionation schemes. No differences were seen with respect to changes in skin thickening, fluid collections, or calcifications among the treatment groups, after adjustment for the follow-up time. The clinical characteristics, including age, race, T stage, and chemotherapy use, were not linked to the likelihood of finding several mammographic phenomena over time.
Although specific post-treatment imaging findings evolved over time, RT fractionation did not alter the relative incidence or severity of architectural distortion, skin thickening, fluid collections, or calcifications. These findings will be useful to both radiologists and radiation oncologists when counseling patients regarding follow-up studies after RT.
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 02 April 2016.
All research outputs
#11,178,270
of 34,410,315 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Radiation Oncology, Biology, Physics
#5,974
of 15,466 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#137,764
of 452,058 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Radiation Oncology, Biology, Physics
#60
of 134 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,410,315 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 67th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 15,466 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 61% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 452,058 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 134 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 55% of its contemporaries.
