4.7 Review

Radiation-Induced Sarcoma of the Breast: A Systematic Review

Journal

ONCOLOGIST
Volume 17, Issue 3, Pages 405-418

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1634/theoncologist.2011-0282

Keywords

Radiation-induced; Radiotherapy; Breast cancer; Second primary malignancy; Sarcoma; Angiosarcoma

Categories

Funding

  1. Supergen
  2. Threshold
  3. Biovex
  4. Bristol Myers Squibb
  5. Progen
  6. Ziopharm
  7. Varian Medical Systems
  8. Sysmex Corp
  9. Department of Surgery of the University of Arizona

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Introduction. Radiation-induced sarcoma (RIS) is a rare, aggressive malignancy. Breast cancer survivors treated with radiotherapy constitute a large fraction of RIS patients. To evaluate evidenced-based practices for RIS treatment, we performed a systematic review of the published English-language literature. Methods. We performed a systematic keyword search of PubMed for original research articles pertaining to RIS of the breast. We classified and evaluated the articles based on hierarchal levels of scientific evidence. Results. We identified 124 original articles available for analysis, which included 1,831 patients. No randomized controlled trials involving RIS patients were found. We present the best available evidence for the etiology, comparative biology to primary sarcoma, prognostic factors, and treatment options for RIS of the breast. Conclusion. Although the evidence to guide clinical practice is limited to single institutional cohort studies, registry studies, case-control studies, and case reports, we applied the available evidence to address clinically relevant questions related to best practice in patient management. Surgery with widely negative margins remains the primary treatment of RIS. Unfortunately, the role of adjuvant and neoadjuvant chemotherapy remains uncertain. This systematic review highlights the need for additional well-designed studies to inform the management of RIS. The Oncologist 2012; 17: 405-418

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available