Cancer patients and
their families

What is radiation oncology? Here, patients and their families can find a comprehensive guide of radiotherapy treatments in Belgium.


Healthcare Professionals and radiation oncology

As a medical professional, you're familiar with the basics of radiotherapy. Visit the following pages for a more elaborate approach on the topic.


Healthcare Policy makers and radiation oncology

Radiation oncology is not like other medical specialties. This section deals with existing quality initiatives and cost-effectiveness.


Home > News


A Prospective Randomized Trial for Good-Risk Ductal Carcinoma In Situ Comparing Radiotherapy With Observation

Voor de Nederlandse versie, klik hier.

Pour la version française, cliquez ici.

McCormick B et al. RTOG 9804: A Prospective Randomized Trial for Good-Risk Ductal Carcinoma In Situ Comparing Radiotherapy With Observation. J Clin Oncol. Published online January 20, 2015 (link)

Purpose The Radiation Therapy Oncology Group 9804 study identified good-risk patients with ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS), a breast cancer diagnosis found frequently in mammographically detected cancers, to test the benefit of radiotherapy (RT) after breast-conserving surgery compared with observation.

Patients and Methods This prospective randomized trial (1998 to 2006) in women with mammographically detected low- or intermediate-grade DCIS, measuring less than 2.5 cm with margins ≥ 3 mm, compared RT with observation after surgery. The study was designed for 1,790 patients but was closed early because of lower than projected accrual. Six hundred thirty-six patients from the United States and Canada were entered; tamoxifen use (62%) was optional. Ipsilateral local failure (LF) was the primary end point; LF and contralateral failure were estimated using cumulative incidence, and overall and disease-free survival were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method.

Results Median follow-up time was 7.17 years (range, 0.01 to 11.33 years). Two LFs occurred in the RT arm, and 19 occurred in the observation arm. At 7 years, the LF rate was 0.9% (95% CI, 0.0% to 2.2%) in the RT arm versus 6.7% (95% CI, 3.2% to 9.6%) in the observation arm (hazard ratio, 0.11; 95% CI, 0.03 to 0.47; P < .001). Grade 1 to 2 acute toxicities occurred in 30% and 76% of patients in the observation and RT arms, respectively; grade 3 or 4 toxicities occurred in 4.0% and 4.2% of patients, respectively. Late RT toxicity was grade 1 in 30%, grade 2 in 4.6%, and grade 3 in 0.7% of patients.

Conclusion In this good-risk subset of patients with DCIS, with a median follow-up of 7 years, the LF rate was low with observation but was decreased significantly with the addition of RT. Longer follow-up is planned because the timeline for LF in this setting seems protracted.

23 February 2015

« Back