Journal of Contemporary Brachytherapy

Full text

1/2026 vol. 18
Original paper

No increased risk for accelerated partial breast irradiation with multicatheter brachytherapy in early-stage invasive lobular carcinoma

  1. Department of Radiation Oncology, Evangelisches Klinikum Gelsenkirchen, Gelsenkirchen, Germany
  2. Department of Senology, Evangelisches Klinikum Gelsenkirchen, Gelsenkirchen, Germany
J Contemp Brachytherapy 2026; 18, 1: 19–22
Data publikacji online: 2026/02/12
Article file
No increased risk.pdf

Purpose

Accelerated partial breast irradiation (APBI) has emerged as a standard adjuvant radiotherapy approach following breast-conserving surgery (BCS) for selected patients with early-stage breast cancer [1-5]. Key advantages of this modality include a shorter overall treatment time and a reduced dose to surrounding organs at risk [6]. The non-inferiority of APBI using multicatheter brachytherapy compared with whole breast irradiation (WBI) in terms of local control was demonstrated in an innovative multicenter phase 3 randomized trial [7], providing robust evidence for its adoption in appropriate populations. However, the application of APBI in patients with invasive lobular carcinoma (ILC) remains a subject of debate [8]. The inherent biological characteristics of ILC, especially its propensity for multicentricity and multifocality, raise concerns regarding the adequacy of local control with limited-field irradiation techniques [9-11]. Some studies have shown higher local recurrence rates in patients with ILC treated with APBI compared with those with invasive ductal carcinoma (IDC) [12, 13]. These concerns stem from the risk of undertreating undetected disease outside the APBI target volume. To mitigate this risk, pre-operative magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) has emerged as a valuable tool to identify and exclude high-risk ILC patients [14, 15]. Despite these concerns, patients with ILC were included in major randomized APBI trials. Notably, long-term follow-up data, including 10-year results from the GEC-ESTRO trial [16], did not demonstrate a statistically significant difference in local recurrence rates between ILC and IDC patients. This suggests that with careful patient selection, appropriate staging, and modern treatment planning, the risk of local recurrence in ILC patients can be minimized. Our institution has adopted APBI as a treatment option for low-risk breast cancer patients in 2016, adhering to eligibility criteria from major randomized trials. Critically, ILC histology was not considered an exclusion criterion. In this study, we presented our institutional experience with APBI in patients diagnosed with ILC treated since 2016. The outcomes of eligible patients with a minimum follow-up of 24 months were retrospectively analyzed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of APBI in this histological sub-type.

Material and methods

Patient and treatment features

Institutional database were reviewed to identify all patients treated between February 2016 and March 2023 with pure or mixed ILC histology, who underwent BCS followed by adjuvant APBI delivered via multicatheter HDR brachytherapy. Patients were treated according to the GEC-ESTRO recommendations for interstitial multicatheter breast brachytherapy [17-19]. Catheter implantation was performed post-operatively after BCS using the closed cavity technique after sufficient wound healing. To reduce the risk of undetected multicentricity, our institutional policy includes pre-operative breast MRI as part of the standard staging workup for all patients considered for BCS. This facilitates a comprehensive assessment of disease extent and accurate target volume delineation. Computed tomography (CT) simulation scan was performed prior to implantation to visualize tumor bed using surgical clips placed during BCS. A second CT scan was performed after catheter implantation for delineation of clinical target volume (CTV) and organs at risk. CTV was defined as the excisional cavity, with a safety margin according to the GEC-ESTRO recommendations [19]. On the day of implantation, a single prophylactic dose of antibiotics was administered. 3D dose optimization was performed using Oncentra Brachy® (Elekta AB, Stockholm, Sweden). The prescribed dose was 32 Gy in 8 fractions (twice daily), covering at least 90% of the CTV (D90). Alternatively, a schedule of 30.1 Gy in 7 fractions (twice daily) was accepted. Volume receiving 150% of the prescribed dose (V150) was limited to below 25% of the CTV. All patients were treated with an iridium-192 (192Ir) HDR afterloading system (MicroSelectron® or Flexitron®, Elekta AB, Stockholm, Sweden).

Statistical analysis

Descriptive statistics were used to summarize clinical features. Analyses were performed using R Statistical software (v. 4.5.0; R Core Team 2025). Primary endpoints were ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence (IBTR), defined as the re-appearance of in situ or invasive carcinoma in the same breast (skin or parenchyma) after initial breast-conserving surgery and radiation, and overall survival (OS), defined as the percentage of patients remaining alive after start of treatment, estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Secondary endpoints included long-term clinical complaints and cosmetic outcomes.

Follow-up

Follow-up time was defined as the interval from the last day of APBI to any recurrence event, death, or last clinical examination.

Results

A total of 47 patients with ILC were treated with APBI following BCS during the study period. The patient and tumor characteristics are detailed in Table 1. The median patient age was 65 years (range, 49-80 years), and twenty patients (42.6%) were diagnosed via a mammography screening program. The median Charlson comorbidity index was 4 (range, 3-11). All patients (100%) were estrogen receptor (ER)-positive, and 34 (72.3%) were progesterone receptor (PR)-positive; HER2 was negative in all cases. The median Ki-67 proliferation index was 8% (range, 1-20%). All patients had unifocal tumors, and a sentinel node biopsy with no axillary lymph-node metastases (pN0). Although the protocol targeted low-risk criteria, focal LVSI was present in 3 patients (6.4%). Pre-operative breast MRI was performed in 37 patients (78.7%). The treatment characteristics are summarized in Table 1. Forty-four patients (93.6%) received 32 Gy in 8 fractions, while 3 patients (6.4%) received 30.1 Gy in 7 fractions. The median number of catheters implanted was 12. Adjuvant anti-hormonal therapy was administered to 42 patients (89.4%); one patient rejected therapy, one had contraindications, and one patient’s data was incomplete. Two patients (4.3%) discontinued therapy after approximately one year due to side effects. The follow-up outcomes are presented in Table 2. At a median follow-up of 47 months (range, 24-106 months), no ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence was observed. One patient died from non-breast cancer-related causes (head and neck cancer diagnosed two years post-APBI), resulting in a 4-year OS of 97%. Moreover, no regional relapses or distant metastases were noted. Regarding late toxicity (Table 3), 9 patients (19.1%) reported cosmetic side effects: two noted hyperpigmentation of the areola/nipple, 6 patients had skin hypopigmentation in the implant area, and one observed breast asymmetry related to BCS. Clinical grade 1 fibrosis in the surgical field was seen in 9 patients (19.1%), while no grade 2 or higher toxicities were observed. Asymptomatic low-grade fatty tissue necrosis in the treated area was detected in 7 cases (14.9%) via follow-up mammography.

Table 1

Patient and tumor characteristics and treatment parameters

Patient characteristicsValue
Age (years), median (range)65 (49-80)
ECOG performance status, n (%)
026 (55.3)
121 (44.7)
Mammography screening program, n (%)20 (42.6)
Pre-operative MRI, n (%)37 (78.7)
Follow-up (months), median (range)47 (24-106)
Neoadjuvant antihormonal therapy, n (%)5 (10.6)
Tumor characteristics
Tumor site, n (%)
Left26 (55.3)
Right21 (44.7)
T stage, n (%)
T01 (2.1)
T1a4 (8.5)
T1b18 (38.3)
T1c23 (48.9)
T21 (2.1)
Tumor diameter (cm), median (IQR)1.1 (0.7)
Tumor diameter (cm), range0-2.5
Tumor grading, n (%)
G14 (8.5)
G243 (91.5)
ER-positive, n (%)47 pts. (100%)
PR-positive, n (%)34 pts. (72.3%)
LVSI-positive, n (%)3 pts. (6.4%)
Ki-67 (%), median (IQR)8 (9)
Ki-67 (%), range1-20
Minimal resection margin (cm), median (IQR)1.1 (0.6)
Minimal resection margin (cm), range0.1-2-6
Treatment parametersMedian (IQR)
Numbers of catheters used12 (1.5)
CTV volume (cm3)49.6 (45.5)
CTV V150 (%)21 (7)
Skin dose (Gy)2.2 (0.4)
Thorax wall dose (Gy)2.6 (0.8)
DNR0.23 (0.09)

[i] IQR – interquartile range, DNR – dose non-uniformity ratio

Table 2

Oncological outcomes

Outcomesn (%)
Ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence0 (0)
Overall deaths1 (2.1)
Breast cancer-related deaths0 (0)
Overall survival at 4 years97%
Table 3

Late toxicities

Variablen (%)
Fatty tissue necrosis grade 1 in follow-up mammography7 (14.9)
Fibrosis grade 19 (19.1)
Breast pain grade 13 (6.4)
Skin hypo- or hyper-pigmentation grade 18 (17)

[i] No toxicities of ≥ grade 2 were observed.

Discussion

Due to the increased prevalence of multifocality and positive resection margins associated with ILC, this histological sub-type was historically considered a significant risk factor for local recurrence following APBI [8]. However, recent studies show the opposite, suggesting that ILC is not a significant predictor of IBTR following APBI [20-22]. For example, Braunstein et al. recently reported a 48-month cumulative incidence of local recurrence rate of 3% in patients with ILC treated with external beam APBI [23].

The current study presents the oncological outcomes of ILC patients treated at our institution with multicatheter interstitial brachytherapy. We observed excellent local control rates in this cohort of appropriately staged and selected patients. Our results compare favorably with previous reports, e.g., Mills et al. [13], who reported a 10-year actuarial IBTR rate of 14%. Several factors may explain this divergence. The Mills et al. study included higher-risk patients (grade 3, HER2+), and utilized intracavitary balloon brachytherapy for a significant portion of cases. In contrast, our study exclusively used multicatheter interstitial brachytherapy, which offers superior dose conformality and target coverage, and we excluded HER2+ and grade 3 tumor cases. Additionally, only one patient in our cohort had a resection margin of < 2 mm (due to proximity to the pectoral fascia). A strength of our study is the high utilization of pre-operative MRI (78.7%), which aids in excluding multifocal disease. Furthermore, long-term results of the GEC-ESTRO APBI trial indicated that histology does not impact local recurrence rates, further validating APBI for ILC [16]. We acknowledge several limitations, including the retrospective design and relatively small sample size (n = 47). Moreover, while a median follow-up of 47 months provides valuable mid-term data, it is insufficient to draw definitive conclusions in terms of late recurrences, which are more common in ILC patients.

Conclusions

This study provides further evidence that APBI delivered via multicatheter interstitial brachytherapy is a safe and effective treatment option for patients with early-stage ILC who meet established selection criteria.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Disclosures

Approval of the Bioethics Committee was not required.

Notes

[3]Conflicts of interest The authors report no conflict of interest.

References

1 

Meattini I, Marrazzo L, Saieva C et al. Accelerated partial-breast irradiation compared with whole-breast irradiation for early breast cancer: long-term results of the randomized phase III APBI-IMRT-Florence trial. J Clin Oncol 2020; 38: 4175-4183.

2 

Vicini FA, Cecchini RS, White JR et al. Long-term primary results of accelerated partial breast irradiation after breast-conserving surgery for early-stage breast cancer: a randomised, phase 3, equivalence trial. Lancet 2019; 394: 2155-2164.

3 

Whelan TJ, Julian JA, Berrang TS et al. External beam accelerated partial breast irradiation versus whole breast irradiation after breast conserving surgery in women with ductal carcinoma in situ and node-negative breast cancer (RAPID): a randomised controlled trial. Lancet 2019; 394: 2165-2172.

4 

Strnad V, Krug D, Sedlmayer F et al. DEGRO practical guideline for partial-breast irradiation. Strahlenther Onkol 2020; 196: 749-763.

5 

Sharma D, Budrukkar A, Kumar R et al. Indian Brachytherapy Society consensus recommendations for brachytherapy in breast cancer. J Contemp Brachytherapy 2024; 16: 257-267.

6 

Witt JS, Gao RW, Sudmeier LJ et al. Low cardiac and left anterior descending coronary artery dose achieved with left-sided multicatheter interstitial-accelerated partial breast irradiation. Brachytherapy 2019; 18: 50-56.

7 

Strnad V, Ott OJ, Hildebrandt G et al. 5-year results of accelerated partial breast irradiation using sole interstitial multicatheter brachytherapy versus whole-breast irradiation with boost after breast-conserving surgery for low-risk invasive and in-situ carcinoma of the female breast: a randomised, phase 3, non-inferiority trial. Lancet 2016; 387: 229-238.

8 

Shaitelman SF, Anderson BM, Arthur DW et al. Partial breast irradiation for patients with early-stage invasive breast cancer or ductal carcinoma in situ: An ASTRO Clinical Practice Guideline. Pract Radiat Oncol 2024; 14: 112-132.

9 

Mubarak F, Kowkabany G, Popp R et al. Early stage breast cancer: does histologic subtype (ductal vs. lobular) impact 5 year overall survival? Cancers (Basel) 2024; 16: 1509.

10 

Oesterreich S, Nasrazadani A, Zou J et al. Clinicopathological features and outcomes comparing patients with invasive ductal and lobular breast cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst 2022; 114: 1511-1522.

11 

Pramod N, Nigam A, Basree M et al. Comprehensive review of molecular mechanisms and clinical features of invasive lobular cancer. Oncologist 2021; 26: e943-e953.

12 

Leonardi MC, Maisonneuve P, Mastropasqua MG et al. Comparison of treatment outcome between invasive lobular and ductal carcinomas in patients receiving partial breast irradiation with intraoperative electrons. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2017; 99: 173-181.

13 

Mills MN, Russo NW, Fahey M et al. Increased risk for ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence in invasive lobular carcinoma after accelerated partial breast irradiation brachytherapy. Oncologist 2021; 26: e1931-e1938.

14 

Daniaux M, Gruber L, De Zordo T et al. Preoperative staging by multimodal imaging in newly diagnosed breast cancer: Diagnostic performance of contrast-enhanced spectral mammography compared to conventional mammography, ultrasound, and MRI. Eur J Radiol 2023; 163: 110838.

15 

Lobbes MBI, Neeter LMFH, Raat F et al. The performance of contrast-enhanced mammography and breast MRI in local preoperative staging of invasive lobular breast cancer. Eur J Radiol 2023; 164: 110881.

16 

Strnad V, Polgár C, Ott OJ et al. Accelerated partial breast irradiation using sole interstitial multicatheter brachytherapy compared with whole-breast irradiation with boost for early breast cancer: 10-year results of a GEC-ESTRO randomised, phase 3, non-inferiority trial. Lancet Oncol 2023; 24: 262-272.

17 

Polgár C, Van Limbergen E, Pötter R et al. Patient selection for accelerated partial-breast irradiation (APBI) after breast-conserving surgery: recommendations of the Groupe Européen de Curiethérapie-European Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology (GEC-ESTRO) breast cancer working group based on clinical evidence (2009). Radiother Oncol 2010; 94: 264-273.

18 

Strnad V, Major T, Polgar C et al. ESTRO-ACROP guideline: Interstitial multi-catheter breast brachytherapy as Accelerated Partial Breast Irradiation alone or as boost-GEC-ESTRO Breast Cancer Working Group practical recommendations. Radiother Oncol 2018; 128: 411-420.

19 

Strnad V, Hannoun-Levi JM, Guinot JL et al. Working Group Breast Cancer of GEC-ESTRO. Recommendations from GEC ESTRO Breast Cancer Working Group (I): Target definition and target delineation for accelerated or boost Partial Breast Irradiation using multicatheter interstitial brachytherapy after breast conserving closed cavity surgery. Radiother Oncol 2015; 115: 342-348.

20 

Ott OJ, Hildebrandt G, Pötter R et al. Accelerated partial breast irradiation with interstitial implants: risk factors associated with increased local recurrence. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2011; 80: 1458-1463.

21 

Shah C, Wilkinson JB, Shaitelman S et al. Clinical outcomes using accelerated partial breast irradiation in patients with invasive lobular carcinoma. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2011; 81: e547-e551.

22 

Shaikh AY, LaCombe MA, Du H et al. Accelerated partial breast irradiation using once-daily fractionation: analysis of 312 cases with four years median follow-up. Radiat Oncol 2012; 7: 17.

23 

Braunstein LZ, Boe L, Mueller B et al. Accelerated partial breast irradiation for early-stage invasive lobular carcinoma. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2025; 121: 894-899.

24 

Polgár C, Gutierrez Miguelez C, Ivanov O et al. Patient selection for APBI: Updated recommendations of the GEC-ESTRO Breast Cancer Working Group based on clinical evidence (2024). Radiother Oncol 2025; 206 (Suppl 1): S170.

Copyright: © 2026 Termedia Sp. z o. o. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0) License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/), allowing third parties to copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format and to remix, transform, and build upon the material, provided the original work is properly cited and states its license.
Share
without publication fees