onc brain

About · curated by Nick Boehling, MD · @nb2276
Practice-changing

SUPREMO

ForPost-mastectomy pT1-2N1, pT3N0, or pT2N0 grade 3/LVI+ breast cancer

Overall survival

81.4% vs 81.9%

HR 1.04, 95% CI 0.82-1.30, P=0.80; primary endpoint not met

TL;DR10yr OS 81.4% vs 81.9% (HR 1.04, 0.82-1.30, p=0.80): PMRT omission safe in intermediate-risk pN0-pN1 post-mastectomy.

Why it mattersRadiation oncology

The RT read is the local-control trade: 1.1% vs 2.5% chest-wall recurrence, 29 events total, bought with 40-50 Gy to the chest wall in a population where OS was flat at 10 years. Nodal volumes were not routinely treated (SCF 97/808), so this speaks to chest wall alone, not to regional nodal irradiation.

Monday clinic

In a pT2N1 or pT3N0 mastectomy patient who has completed modern adjuvant systemic therapy, this supports discussing PMRT omission with an absolute chest-wall recurrence trade under 2 points; it does not address regional nodal irradiation or pN2-N3 disease.

Also covered Jul 9

9 details

International phase 3 randomized trial (BIG 2-04 MRC/EORTC SUPREMO), 125 UK sites plus 27 European and 21 international sites. N=1607 ITT (808 CWI, 799 no CWI), randomized August 2006 to April 2013, database lock June 2024. Median follow-up 9.6 years.

"Intermediate-risk" post-mastectomy disease: pT1N1, pT2N1, pT3N0, or pT2N0 with grade 3 and/or LVI. All had mastectomy, an axillary procedure, and systemic therapy. Baseline systemic exposure: 85% chemotherapy, 79% endocrine, 19% trastuzumab.

Chest wall 40 to 50 Gy in the irradiation arm. Nodal volumes were not part of the randomized question: supraclavicular fossa treated in only 97/808 irradiated patients, internal mammary chain in 12/808. Twelve patients in the no-irradiation arm received SCF treatment.

Primary: overall survival at 10 years. Secondary: chest-wall recurrence, regional recurrence, disease-free survival, distant metastasis-free survival, cause of death, radiation-related adverse events.

The historic case for postmastectomy RT in node-positive disease rests on the EBCTCG overview, where the locoregional-control gain translated into a mortality benefit. SUPREMO tests that inheritance in the 1-3 node and high-risk node-negative band under contemporary systemic therapy and finds the recurrence signal preserved (HR 0.45) but the survival signal absent (HR 1.04).

post-mastectomy pT1-2N1, pT3N0, and pT2N0 grade 3 or LVI-positive disease treated with modern adjuvant systemic therapy and chest-wall-only irradiation
Does not represent pN2-N3 disease, patients requiring regional nodal irradiation, or those who did not receive systemic therapy.

The chest-wall recurrence benefit rests on 29 events total with a CI upper bound of 0.99, so the point estimate is unstable. Accrual ran 2006-2013, predating routine dual HER2 blockade, extended adjuvant CDK4/6 inhibition, and current genomic risk stratification, all of which lower the baseline recurrence rate this trial was powered against.

A flat OS with a halved chest-wall recurrence is the signature of a locoregional intervention operating below the threshold where local control converts into survival. At 1.1% vs 2.5%, the absolute chest-wall event rate in both arms is low enough that no plausible salvage-to-mortality pathway could move a 10-year OS curve. The result reframes PMRT in this band as a local-control decision to be weighed against RT morbidity, not as a survival decision.

EndpointCWINo CWIHR (95% CI)
Overall survival (1°)81.4%81.9%1.04 (0.82-1.30), p=0.80
Disease-free survival76.2%75.5%0.97 (0.79-1.18)
Distant MFS78.2%79.2%1.06 (0.86-1.31)
Chest-wall recurrence9 (1.1%)20 (2.5%)0.45 (0.20-0.99)
CONSORT flow
Randomized 1607
Chest-wall irradiation
allocated 808
10yr OS 81.4%
No chest-wall irradiation
allocated 799
10yr OS 81.9%

Adequately powered phase 3, prespecified OS primary, 9.6yr median follow-up, modern systemic backbone. Supports omitting PMRT in a population where guidelines still often recommend it.

  • Does regional nodal irradiation carry the same null in pN1 disease
  • Which biomarker or genomic subgroup still benefits from chest-wall RT
  • Late cardiac and second-malignancy burden of the irradiated arm
📚 Sources · 📄 1 paper
📄 PAPER Kunkler; Russell; Anderson et al. · The New England journal of medicine (2025-11)
Ten-Year Survival after Postmastectomy Chest-Wall Irradiation in Breast Cancer.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The role of postmastectomy chest-wall irradiation in patients with breast cancer classified as pN1 (with involvement of one to three axillary nodes) or pN0 (pathologically node negative) with additional risk factors is uncertain.<br/><br/>METHODS: In this international, phase 3, randomized trial, we evaluated the omission of chest-wall irradiation in women with "intermediate-risk" breast cancer - defined as cancer that was stage pT1N1, pT2N1, or pT3N0 or stage pT2N0 with a histologic grade of 3, lymphovascular invasion, or both (tumor size: T1, &#x2264;2 cm; T2, >2 cm to 5 cm; or T3, >5 cm) - that was treated with mastectomy, an axillary procedure, and systemic therapy. Patients were assigned to undergo chest-wall irradiation (40 to 50 Gy; the irradiation group) or not to undergo chest-wall irradiation (the no-irradiation group). The primary end point was overall survival, with 10 years of follow-up. Chest-wall recurrence, regional recurrence, disease-free survival, distant metastasis-free survival, causes of death, and radiation-related adverse events were also assessed.<br/><br/>RESULTS: The intention-to-treat population included 808 patients in the irradiation group and 799 in the no-irradiation group. The median follow up was 9.6 years. Overall survival was 81.4% with chest-wall irradiation and 81.9% with no chest-wall irradiation according to 10-year Kaplan-Meier estimates (hazard ratio for death, 1.04; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.82 to 1.30; P&#x2009;=&#x2009;0.80). A total of 29 patients had a chest-wall recurrence - 9 (1.1%) in the irradiation group and 20 (2.5%) in the no-irradiation group (between-group difference, <2 percentage points; hazard ratio, 0.45; 95% CI, 0.20 to 0.99). Disease-free survival was 76.2% in the irradiation group and 75.5% in the no-irradiation group (hazard ratio for recurrence or death, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.79 to 1.18), and distant metastasis-free survival was 78.2% and 79.2%, respectively (hazard ratio for distant metastasis or death, 1.06; 95% CI, 0.86 to 1.31).<br/><br/>CONCLUSIONS: In this trial, chest-wall irradiation did not result in higher overall survival than no chest-wall irradiation among patients with intermediate-risk, early breast cancer treated with mastectomy and contemporary adjuvant systemic therapy. (Funded by the Medical Research Council and others; SUPREMO ISRCTN Clinical Study Registry number, 61145589.).
📝 https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7618363/

The longer read

The central claim in postmastectomy radiotherapy has always been inherited rather than directly tested in this population: the EBCTCG overview established that preventing locoregional recurrence in node-positive disease converts into a breast-cancer mortality reduction, and guidelines extended that logic downward into the one-to-three node band and into node-negative disease carrying grade 3 or lymphovascular invasion. SUPREMO is the trial that asks whether the conversion still happens when the systemic backbone is modern. It does not.

The two headline numbers should be read together rather than in sequence. Chest-wall irradiation did what radiotherapy is supposed to do: chest-wall recurrence fell from 2.5% to 1.1%, hazard ratio 0.45. Overall survival did not move at all, 81.4% versus 81.9%, hazard ratio 1.04 with a confidence interval from 0.82 to 1.30 that comfortably excludes any survival gain of the size guidelines have historically assumed. The mechanism is arithmetic rather than biological. With 29 chest-wall recurrences across 1607 patients, the pool of events available to be converted into deaths is too small for even complete conversion to register on a ten-year survival curve. Radiotherapy did not fail here; the population was chosen such that success could not matter to survival.

That reasoning is what should move a reader's confidence, and it should move it toward accepting the null rather than treating it as a power problem. A trial that observed no local-control effect would leave open the possibility of underdosing or poor technique. A trial that observed the expected local-control effect and no survival effect has isolated the question cleanly. The 9.6-year median follow-up is long enough that late breast-cancer deaths, which dominate here at 65.8% of all deaths, have had time to accumulate.

Two boundaries limit how far this travels. The randomized question was the chest wall, not the regional nodes: supraclavicular fossa treatment occurred in 97 of 808 irradiated patients and internal mammary chain in 12, so this is not evidence about regional nodal irradiation, which carries its own trial base and its own toxicity profile. And the trial's own vintage cuts in a direction that reinforces its conclusion rather than undermining it. Accrual closed in 2013, before dual HER2 blockade, extended adjuvant endocrine intensification, and current genomic stratification became routine. Each of those lowers baseline recurrence risk further, which shrinks the absolute local-control benefit radiotherapy has available to deliver in a patient treated today. If SUPREMO overestimates anything, it overestimates the case for treating.

The residual uncertainty sits in the chest-wall recurrence estimate itself, whose upper confidence bound touches 0.99. A reader should not carry the 0.45 point estimate around as a stable quantity. What survives is the shape of the result: a real but small local-control gain, no survival gain, in a population where the competing risk is distant disease. That converts postmastectomy radiotherapy in this band from a survival decision into a morbidity-versus-local-control conversation, which is a different conversation to have with a patient.