FEV1%, expressed as a percentage in comparison to the predicted value for each patient, before and at 2 years post-radiotherapy was not statistically different in patients who did or did not receive chemotherapy. No correlation was observed with TAM while a significant correlation was found with smoking habits for ≥G1 at 2-years post-radiotherapy (Table 5). In particular a ≥G1 toxicity based on FEV1% was observed

in 62% and 5% of smokers/non smokers, respectively (p < 0.001). Discussion Breast radiation therapy after conservative SAHA HDAC nmr surgery is now widely accepted as a Temsirolimus clinical trial standard of care for patients with early breast cancer. Moreover breast conserving therapy has become an accepted treatment option over radical mastectomy for stage I – II breast tumour. However, in some patients, such as the elderly and those living faraway from radiation facilities, adjuvant breast radiotherapy appears to be underutilized because of the substantial length of the standard radiation course. This usually consists of 50 Gy in 25 daily fractions of 2 Gy to the whole breast usually followed by the addition of a boost dose to the tumour bed of 10-16 Gy in 5 – 8 daily fractions, resulting selleckchem in an overall treatment time of 6 – 7 weeks. Delivering postoperative radiotherapy in a shorter time could effectively be much more convenient for these patients knocking down the “”logistical barriers”" to the adjuvant

breast radiotherapy. Several clinical randomized trials have shown that hypofractionated adjuvant radiotherapy in breast cancer offers similar rates of tumour control and normal tissue damage as the standard schedule [7–9]. In our Institute patients refusing a 42-49 day lasting treatment were offered an accelerated hypofractionated schedule requiring 19 days. Despite this “”aggressiveness”" the radiotherapy schedule investigated in this study (i.e 34 Gy in 3.4 Gy/fr plus boost dose Paclitaxel order of 8 Gy in single fraction) was well tolerated and compliant. It is worthwhile

to note that the early and late radiation toxicity appeared remarkably low and comparable to standard regime. In particular, acute skin toxicity of Grade 0, 1, and 2 was experienced by 49%, 41.0% and 10% of patients respectively; no patient experienced Grade 3 or more. This toxicity was much lower than expected from standard radiotherapy [26]. G1 late skin toxicity was observed in 11 out of 39 patients with no G2 or more. No correlation between chemotherapy and skin toxicity was found. However, due to the low number of patients receiving chemotherapy (12/39) and the different schedules of chemotherapy (CMF or FEC or EC followed by Docetaxel) used, further patients are needed to confirm this finding. No patient referred symptoms of radiation pneumonitis or other respiratory symptoms or problems clinically related to radiotherapy. No CT-lung toxicity was denoted by the radiologist on CT-scans acquired at 1 year post-radiotherapy.