International Journal of Radiation Oncology*Biology*Physics
Clinical InvestigationA Comparison of Outcomes and Prognostic Features for Radiation-Associated Angiosarcoma of the Breast and Other Radiation-Associated Sarcomas
Introduction
More than half of all patients with cancer will receive radiation therapy (RT) during the course of their disease.1 Although RT is effective at preventing recurrence, it is associated with significant morbidity in a subset of patients, including the development of radiation-associated sarcomas (RAS). RAS occurs in <1% of treated patients but accounts for up to 5% of all sarcomas.2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 As the number of cancer survivors grows, the number of patients developing RAS is expected to rise.11 This is particularly concerning given that multiple studies suggest worse outcomes for RAS compared with non–radiation-associated sarcomas.4, 5, 10, 12
Radiation oncologists are accustomed to having radiation-associated cancers listed on routine treatment consent forms, with RAS being a canonical example of this malignancy, and a deep analysis of the presentation, treatment, and outcomes provides an opportunity to understand the implications of this diagnosis. One area where conflicting data on RAS has been prominent is the influence of histologic subtype on RAS outcome.5, 6, 12 The current World Health Organization (WHO) classification scheme no longer recognizes several histotypes used in these prior studies, such as “malignant fibrous histiocytoma,” and new ancillary techniques have allowed more accurate tumor classification. Therefore, the application of contemporary classification and diagnostic tools can further refine the risks associated with specific subtypes of RAS.
Radiation-associated angiosarcoma of the breast occurring after treatment for breast carcinoma (RAAB) is a clinicopathologic subtype of RAS that constitutes approximately 40% of breast angiosarcomas.5, 13 Given the increasing numbers of breast cancer survivors treated with RT, the prevalence of RAAB is also expected to increase in the coming years.11
Although several reports have examined outcomes of RAS in small cohorts, there are limited data regarding prognostic features, particularly for histotypes other than radiation-associated angiosarcoma of the breast (other-RAS). Furthermore, with recent refinements in sarcoma classification and changing treatment approaches, the generalizability of some of these older data are limited. This study aimed to characterize histologic types of RAS based on the current WHO Classification of Tumours of Soft Tissue and Bone,14 apply uniform grading, evaluate clinical and histologic features, and correlate these data with patient outcomes. Because there are limited data on the genomic landscape of radiation-associated malignancies,15 next-generation sequencing (NGS) data on a subset of cases were analyzed to identify potentially actionable genomic abnormalities.
Section snippets
Identification of patient cohort
This study was conducted with approval from the Brigham and Women's Hospital Institutional Review Board (2016P000965). The pathology laboratory information system of the Brigham and Women's Hospital was searched for sarcomas diagnosed between 1994 and 2016 where the word radiation was used in the report. Pathology reports and medical records were reviewed to identify “true” RAS using criteria similar to those defined by Cahan et al: (1) histologic confirmation of a sarcoma, distinct from the
Patient and primary malignancy characteristics
Initial search identified 1346 potential RAS, among which review of pathology reports and medical records identified 200 RAS. More than 3 months of follow-up was available for 188 patients, of whom 176 had localized disease at diagnosis and served as the final cohort.
Of 176 patients with localized RAS, most were female (79%), including all with RAAB and 66% with other-RAS (P < .001). Median age at primary malignancy diagnosis was 51 years; patients with RAAB were slightly older at diagnosis
Discussion
This study provides a detailed analysis of clinical, histologic, and treatment characteristics and outcomes for a large cohort of patients with localized RAS, applying contemporary classification schemes and including patients treated with modern surgical techniques. The prognosis of RAS has generally been considered to be poor, but our data suggest that clinical outcomes might be better than previously recognized. In our cohort of 176 patients, 3-year OS was 74%, which is substantially better
References (31)
- et al.
Treatment and outcome of radiation-induced soft-tissue sarcomas at a specialist institution
Eur J Surg Oncol
(2009) - et al.
Loss of H3K27 trimethylation distinguishes malignant peripheral nerve sheath tumors from histologic mimics
Mod Pathol
(2016) - et al.
Angiosarcoma after breast-conserving therapy: Experience with hyperfractionated radiotherapy
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys
(2002) - et al.
Nine breast angiosarcomas after conservative treatment for breast carcinoma: A survey from French comprehensive Cancer Centers
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys
(1999) - et al.
Cancer treatment and survivorship statistics, 2016
CA Cancer J Clin
(2016) - et al.
Radiation-induced sarcoma: 25-year experience from the Norwegian Radium Hospital
Acta Oncol
(2008) - et al.
Radiation-induced soft-tissue sarcoma
Br J Surg
(1986) - et al.
Radiation-associated undifferentiated pleomorphic sarcoma is associated with worse clinical outcomes than sporadic lesions
Ann Surg Oncol
(2015) - et al.
Do radiation-associated soft tissue sarcomas have the same prognosis as sporadic soft tissue sarcomas?
J Clin Oncol
(2010) - et al.
Radiation-induced sarcoma: A 15-year experience in a single large tertiary referral center
Cancer Res Treat
(2016)
Postradiation soft tissue sarcomas. An analysis of 53 cases
Cancer
Post-radiation sarcomas. Clinical outcome of 52 Patients
J Surg Oncol
The clinical and functional outcome for patients with radiation-induced soft tissue sarcoma
Cancer
Trends in radiation therapy among cancer survivors in the United States, 2000-2030
Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev
Outcomes of a large single institutional series of radiation associated sarcomas
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys
Cited by (28)
Neoadjuvant Reirradiation for Radiation Therapy–Associated Angiosarcoma of the Breast
2024, International Journal of Radiation Oncology Biology PhysicsPostoperative Complications from Breast and Axillary Surgery
2023, Surgical Clinics of North AmericaCitation Excerpt :However, patients with certain heritable mutation syndromes who are at higher risk for radiation-induced tumors (eg, retinoblastoma) should be counseled regarding this risk of radiation and tailor the patient’s treatment plan accordingly.117 Radiation-associated angiosarcomas occur at a median 10 years after breast radiation, although cases have been reported as early as 14 months and as late as 54 years.118–120 Cases usually present as skin changes that can be confused for infection, moderate or severe radiation skin changes, or recurrence of the primary breast cancer and any suspicion should prompt biopsy to differentiate the diagnosis.
Response Evaluation Following Radiation Therapy With <sup>18</sup>F-FDG PET/CT: Common Variants of Radiation-Induced Changes and Potential Pitfalls
2022, Seminars in Nuclear MedicineCitation Excerpt :RAS carries a poor prognosis and has a median latency period of 11 years (range 2-60,6 years). Female breast carcinoma accounts for 41% of all RAS, with cutaneous angiosarcoma as the most frequent manifestation with a mean latency period of 8 years (range 3-25 year).54 Although, conformal RT delivery with IMRT has reduced toxicity in OARs, concerns regarding a risk of RTIM have been expressed.
Clinical Impact of Systemic Staging Studies in Secondary Breast Angiosarcoma
2022, Surgery in Practice and ScienceClinicopathological analysis and prognostic treatment study of angiosarcoma of the breast: a SEER population-based analysis
2023, World Journal of Surgical Oncology
Jeffrey K. Mito and Devarati Mitra made equal contributions to this study. Elizabeth H. Baldini and Leona A. Doyle are co-senior authors.
This study was partially supported by the Eleanor and Miles Shore Fellowship Program of Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts.
Conflict of interest: none.