Less aggressive treatment for low-risk breast cancer ‘just as effective'
More than 37,000 women have radiotherapy for breast cancer in the UK every year.
The treatment uses radiation to kill cancer cells and is usually given after surgery to reduce the risk of the disease coming back.
However, side-effects can include changes in breast size and shape, swelling in the arms or breast, and pain.
The Import Low trial, led by The Institute of Cancer Research, London, and the University of Cambridge, found limiting radiation to the tumour area, rather than treating the whole breast, was just as effective.
The study included 2,018 women across 30 radiotherapy centres in the UK, who were monitored for 10 years after treatment.
It compared three radiotherapy approaches; whole-breast, partial-breast and a reduced-dose.
After a decade, cancer recurrence rates in the group given partial radiotherapy was 3%, the same proportion as those who had been treated with a more aggressive approach.
Patients who had targeted radiotherapy were also less likely to experience long-term changes in breast appearance.
Some 15% reported noticeable changes at five years compared with 27% in the whole-breast radiotherapy group.
Dr Anna Kirby, consultant clinical oncologist at The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, and reader in breast cancer radiotherapy at The Institute of Cancer Research, London, said: 'The long-term results of this study confirm that a less aggressive approach, limiting radiotherapy to the tumour rather than the whole breast, is just as effective as traditional whole-breast radiotherapy.
'Patients receiving partial-breast radiotherapy experience fewer side-effects while maintaining excellent cancer control.'
Charlotte Coles, a professor of breast cancer clinical oncology at the University of Cambridge, honorary clinical oncology consultant at Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, and chief investigator of the Import Low study, said the trial has 'transformed' how early breast cancer is treated.
Following the study, which is published in the Lancet Oncology, partial-breast radiotherapy has been integrated into NHS treatment guidelines.
It is hoped that more than 9,000 women in the UK could benefit from more targeted treatment.
'By targeting the area around the tumour, rather than the whole breast, we have demonstrated that patients can achieve the same outstanding long-term outcomes with fewer complications,' Prof Coles said.
'This approach is now widely adopted across the NHS, sparing thousands of women from unnecessary radiation exposure.
'The results of this study have not only shaped UK clinical practice but also informed international guidelines, ensuring that women worldwide benefit from this personalised, evidence-based treatment.'
Hilary Stobart, now 70, was diagnosed with ER-positive breast cancer in December 2008, with a 2cm tumour in her left breast.
Ms Stobart, who was 54 at the time, was offered the chance to take part in the trial after surgery and was treated with partial radiotherapy.
'I had three weeks of radiotherapy, but suffered no side-effects, other than some soreness in my breast and nipple in the first few weeks,' she said.
'Ten years on, I am doing fine. I have no side-effects and no recurrence of disease.
'For me personally, I am very thankful to have received the lowest dose of radiotherapy.
'Whilst I may have had some niggling worries in the early days, having seen the results of the trial, I feel positive and optimistic now. I know that I was lucky enough back then to have had the best treatment, a treatment that other women will be routinely offered now.'
Dr Fay Cafferty, lead statistician at The Institute of Cancer Research, London, added that the findings are 'crucial in reinforcing the long-term safety and effectiveness of partial-breast radiotherapy'.
'Long-term data is vital to ensure we know there's no greater risk of breast cancer returning after this targeted radiotherapy treatment,' she said.
'This latest analysis confirms that partial breast radiotherapy remains a safe and effective treatment option, supporting its continued adoption as the standard of care in the UK and globally.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The National
19 minutes ago
- The National
Scottish hospital car park savings revealed for patients
The SNP said the savings meant keeping money 'in the pockets of NHS staff as well as patients and families at some of the most difficult times in their lives'. The figure was revealed in an answer to a written question tabled in Holyrood by Emma Harper on what savings had been made since the policy was scrapped during the SNP's first term in power. READ MORE: Pro-Palestine protesters drive van through fence of arms firm factory in Edinburgh Health Secretary Neil Gray said: 'The estimated saving for patients, visitors and staff who used NHS car parks that previously charged for car parking is over £90m.' Most Scottish hospitals have not charged for parking since 2008 however the Scottish Government was forced to buy out the private finance initiative (PFI) car parks at the Glasgow Royal Infirmary and Ninewells Hospital in Dundee in 2021 for £26.3m and £9m, respectively. (Image: Web) At that time, it was reported that talks with the PFI operator of the car park at the Royal Infirmary of Edinburgh were 'progressing' and NHS Lothian says that charges are currently suspended. While car parking fees can be a cash cow for the NHS, with trusts in England ploughing the money back into the health service, the SNP have long complained that visitors and staff were being charged to fund private companies leasing out car parks. READ MORE: UK set up secret Afghan migration scheme after massive data leak and media gagged SNP MSP Clare Haughey said: 'This is exactly the kind of action people expect from a government that puts public services first. 'By scrapping these unfair and unnecessary car parking charges, the SNP have saved people across Scotland more than £90m, money that stays in the pockets of NHS staff as well as patients and families at some of the most difficult times in their lives. 'While Westminster governments have allowed these charges to continue in parts of England, the SNP have delivered meaningful change that puts fairness and wellbeing first.'
Telegraph
21 minutes ago
- Telegraph
A two-hour drive to A&E and no GP: Life in Britain's healthcare deserts
'If my home was in a city instead of the countryside, I might not be living with a disability now,' says Phil Woodford, from rural north Lancashire. The former NHS hospital manager had a stroke on a Sunday morning when he was 45. But in his area, there was no weekend service providing thrombectomy, an emergency procedure to remove a clot blocking blood supply to the brain. Without the treatment, the stroke caused lasting damage. He spent four months in hospital and now lives with a disability, including pain and limited movement down his left side. 'If I had had the stroke on the same day, with the same symptoms, but I'd been in Liverpool – around an hour's drive away – I would have got the treatment I needed,' adds Phil, now 54, who had to take early retirement. 'Life could have, and should have, been so different.' Phil is far from the only Briton living in a rural area to find they have drawn the short straw accessing NHS healthcare. 'Healthcare deserts' are a growing issue in parts of the UK. Studies show it is harder to see a GP or dentist in rural areas, while there are fewer care and nursing home beds and poorer end-of-life care. Delivering healthcare is more difficult rurally, where there are thinly spread facilities, poor transport links and fewer health professionals living locally. Yet rural residents may be more likely to have chronic illness and disabilities, as the population is, on average, nearly six years older than urban areas, and ageing twice as fast as the UK average, as older people move to the countryside and younger people move to the city. The average age in north Norfolk of 53.8 years is England's highest. The Government hopes its new NHS 10-Year Plan will help tackle the issue. Under the plan, new 'Neighbourhood Health Service' hubs will enable patients to see doctors, nurses, social care workers, pharmacists, health visitors, palliative care staff, paramedics and dental therapists under one roof. 'This Government is giving patients easier, quicker and more convenient care, wherever they live,' Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer said in his launch speech. Health Secretary Wes Streeting said it would ensure patients access 'care closer to home' – but can that really work in rural areas? Struggle to see a GP Four of the five areas where people struggle most to get face-to-face GP appointments are rural or semi-rural, according to Office for National Statistics (ONS) data. They include the integrated care board (ICB) areas of Frimley (in Surrey), Devon, Kent and Medway, and Suffolk and North East Essex, where around a third of patients have difficulty getting GP appointments, compared with around one out of 10 in the best area, Derby and Derbyshire. While demand is high in rural areas with older populations, there are often fewer doctors per patient, in part because GPs face higher running costs to provide services in remote places. 'The countryside is not just the Cotswolds; there are a lot of areas where rural deprivation is a real issue, and the funding formula for GPs doesn't currently reflect deprivation,' says Beccy Baird, a senior fellow in health policy at the King's Fund think tank. Streeting has promised to review this formula as part of the 10-year NHS plan – but Baird points out a number of reviews under previous administrations have been ignored. Lack of urgent care centres A lack of healthcare services in rural areas also adds to the demand to see GPs. 'There is no urgent treatment centre anywhere near us, so we get patients presenting at the front desk with minor injuries and other issues which should be treated in hospital,' explains one West Country GP. Getting to the nearest A&E 15 miles away is a two-hour journey each way on public transport. 'Often patients refuse to travel for treatment, and many can't afford to,' the GP adds. Her practice used to have extra funding to treat patients with minor injuries, but this was recently cut. 'We still get patients expecting us to be able to treat them, but we no longer have the time or resources to help them – and it would go against guidelines for us to do so,' she adds. 'Patients struggle to understand this and get very frustrated. They can be rude to staff and make official complaints.' Ambulance waiting times in the countryside can also be far longer, with average response times in the most life-threatening cases almost a third longer in the South West (at nine minutes, 14 seconds), compared with London (six minutes, 54 seconds). The GP had to wait two hours for an ambulance to arrive in the case of one young woman with sepsis. 'She was close to having a cardiac arrest. We used all of resources in our emergency kit – it was terrifying for everyone involved,' she recalls. The woman survived but was traumatised by the experience. No NHS dentists for miles The South West is England's poorest-served area for dentists, with only around a third of adults in Devon, Somerset and Cornwall having an NHS dentist, compared with the national average of 53 per cent. But with local incomes below the national average, many people cannot afford private dental care. Cornwall has the highest levels of total dental deserts, with a shocking 27 per cent of the population having no dentist at all (the national average is 11 per cent). In Devon, Somerset, Norfolk and Waveney, and Leicester, Leicestershire and Rutland around one in seven people have no dentist. The inbox of Caroline Voaden, the Liberal Democrat MP for Totnes, in south Devon, is inundated with messages about the 'persistent and difficult issue' of the lack of dentists. 'I have been contacted by constituents who cannot afford private care but there is no alternative – one lady took out four of her own teeth,' she says. None of the 20 registered practices in her area are taking on new NHS patients. In the most shocking cases, her constituents have been unable to have open heart surgery or start cancer treatment because they haven't been able to get a vital pre-treatment dental assessment. This is necessary because poor dental health increases the risk of life-threatening infections. When no dentists are available, treatment is needlessly delayed. The Airbnb effect Nadia Allen, 56, and her husband, Brendan, 72, have been unsuccessfully trying to register with an NHS dentist since they moved five years ago from Leicestershire to Brixham, a coastal town in Voaden's constituency. 'I've given up hope of finding one,' explains Nadia, a retired personal assistant. 'Sometimes you hear a rumour that a dentist in another town might be taking on new patients, but by the time I call there is never any space.' Instead, the couple together pay around £480 per year privately for dental hygienist appointments. Brendan was quoted up to £15,000 by a private clinic to repair three damaged teeth, so has opted to live with the problem and chew only on one side. 'We are lucky we can afford the hygienist, but I worry about all the children and pregnant women in this area who are not able to access the NHS care they need,' Nadia adds. The new NHS plans include a proposal for dental therapists and nurses to do checks, treatment and referrals in the community, with only more serious cases 'directed to dentists' – but it fails to address what happens when there are no dentists. Voaden believes the only solution is to renegotiate the NHS dental contract, which fails to attract dentists to operate in rural areas where running costs are high. And last week the Government announced it would be reviewing the contract. But she fears this is worsened by the high cost of living in some rural areas. 'Property prices are exorbitant here because prices have been inflated by second homes and Airbnbs,' she adds. Baird agrees the problems go deeper. 'We need to make it possible for the health and care workforce to live where they work,' she adds. Public transport problems Half of people who missed at least one NHS hospital appointment in the last two years blamed travel problems, according to health tech company DrDoctor. The Government has previously pledged to give local authorities more influence over how (largely privatised) bus services are run. But funding remains based on factors including population, which disadvantages rural areas. A lack of public transport around Hebden Bridge, West Yorkshire, proved a nightmare for Gabriella Lake Walker, 40, whose daughter Thea had a rare neurodegenerative condition. The family had moved from London to the countryside for a better quality of life around a year before Thea was born in 2016. But after she was diagnosed at nearly one year old, the family discovered there was no help with physiotherapy or home support available through their local authority. Instead, they faced two-hour round trips in the car to every hospital appointment and to weekly therapy sessions at a children's hospice. Thea suffered severe vomiting and pain whenever she was in a car seat, causing her to scream continually. Although she could have travelled more comfortably in her supportive wheelchair on a bus or train, there was no public transport. She died just before turning three. 'You have no choice but to rely on your local system, but when the support is just not there in rural areas, it is the most vulnerable children, like Thea, who suffer the most,' Gabriella says. Move to centralised care NHS figures show patients living in some rural areas have some of the shortest waits for hospital treatment, but these figures may hide the fact many patients are transferred to other areas because nothing is available locally. Cornwall's closest major hospital, for example, is in neighbouring Devon. The concept of the local 'cottage hospital' was phased out in the 1990s – although the new plans for community health hubs may provide some of the same services. These days, specialist treatments for conditions such as stroke and cancer have been centralised in a few specialist hospitals in urban areas. Research shows patients do better when treated at centres of expertise rather than in local hospitals. But centralisation only works when systems are in place to transfer patients in time. For patients like Phil, who wasn't transferred, it can have devastating effects. Around 15 per cent of stroke patients like him can benefit from a thrombectomy to remove a blood clot. But while around 10 per cent of stroke patients in London receive one, only 1 per cent of those in the mainly rural east of England do. The procedure is currently only performed 24 hours a day in major cities such as London, Birmingham, Southampton and Liverpool, with no round-the-clock service in the whole of the North East or Yorkshire region, according to the Stroke Association charity, which describes it as a 'postcode lottery'. Could technology help? Streeting is convinced technology is key to saving the NHS. And it's true that digital healthcare is already helping some patients who live in remote areas. Sue Waterfield, 60, needs regular blood tests to check her high cholesterol levels – but it takes her up to four days to travel to and from the GP from her home on the remote island of Lundy, 12 miles off the North Devon coast. Residents have to catch a two-hour boat crossing to the mainland, stay overnight and wait two or three days for the return crossing. Now Sue uses an at-home cholesterol checking service – run by digital pharmacy Pharmacy2U – which involves photographing a finger-prick test with a smartphone app to get her results. Three quarters of patients who used such kits found it more convenient than visiting the GP, according to a study of nearly 4,000 patients by the pharmacy. 'All this new technology is fantastic for anyone living in remote places,' says Sue, who manages the island shop. 'Before, it was such a big expense and I had to take days off work just to go for a check-up. Now I get the results on my phone.' But poor broadband and mobile phone signals can make remote healthcare consultations difficult in some rural areas. Fewer than half (45 per cent) of rural homes in England have access to the fastest broadband networks, compared with 83 per cent of urban homes, Ofcom data shows. What does the Government say? Baird says the Government must review its contracts with NHS doctors and dentists to make it more financially viable for them to work in rural areas. In the past, GPs have been offered a 'golden handshake' to work in under-served areas. Under the new plan, the Government promises: 'New contracts will be introduced which encourage and allow practices to cover a wider geographical area.' But exact details of how this will work are unclear. So will the move to community care solve the problem of health deserts? Caroline Abrahams, the charity director at Age UK, is circumspect. 'We aspire to an NHS that proactively supports older people to stay as well as is possible for as long as possible, and if delivered well, the Neighbourhood Health Service really could help achieve it,' she says. The feeling among experts seems to be that the 10-Year Plan is a step in the right direction – but only 'if delivered well'. It remains to be seen whether the promised changes will become reality.
Scottish Sun
44 minutes ago
- Scottish Sun
Warning over ‘contaminated' tomatoes sold across UK after surge in deadly infection that left 100 ill & 14 hospitalised
Read on for precautions to avoid getting seriously ill HEALTH HAZARD Warning over 'contaminated' tomatoes sold across UK after surge in deadly infection that left 100 ill & 14 hospitalised FOOD safety chiefs have issued an urgent warning over a popular salad staple. Certain tomatoes have been linked to a deadly infection that's already left a dozen people in hospital. Advertisement 2 Two nasty strains of the diarrhoea-inducing bug have been behind the surge in cases this year Health officials have sounded the alarm after a deadly salmonella outbreak was linked to tomatoes — with more than 100 people falling ill and at least 14 rushed to hospital. The alert comes after the worrying outbreak sparked fears over contaminated produce, prompting health bosses to advise shoppers to check their tomatoes carefully and follow hygiene advice. Two nasty strains of the diarrhoea-inducing bug have been behind the surge in cases this year, with experts pointing the finger at contaminated tomatoes as the likely culprit. Worryingly, the infections aren't limited to one region — cases have been reported across the UK, prompting a nationwide health warning from safety chiefs. Advertisement Tests revealed that every case in the outbreak was caused by two rare strains of the bug — Salmonella Blockley and Salmonella Strathcona — with health chiefs warning the latter can cause particularly severe illness. S. Blockley is usually found in East Asia and the US, and has only been recorded a handful of times across Europe, making the spike in UK cases even more alarming. It comes as new figures from the UK Health Security Agency (UKHSA) show salmonella infections have soared in the first three months of 2025 — up significantly compared to the same period in 2023 and 2024. What is Salmonella? Salmonella is typically linked to meat, eggs and poultry — but experts now warn contaminated tomatoes are behind a wave of stomach-churning illness sweeping the UK. Advertisement The nasty bug, which infects the gut of farm animals, can cause vomiting, diarrhoea and fever — and while most people recover within days, in some cases it can prove deadly. According to 2024 data from the UK Health Security Agency (UKHSA), 81 cases of the rare S. Blockley strain were confirmed by lab tests — all linked to tomatoes. Three dead and two hospitalised after food poisoning outbreak linked to desserts in NHS hospitals At least 14 people were hospitalised. The fruit was also blamed for a separate outbreak of Salmonella Strathcona, affecting another 24 people. Advertisement Officials say it's still unclear where the tomatoes came from — whether they were UK-grown or imported. Experts say the soft, porous texture of tomatoes makes them more vulnerable to salmonella — especially as they're often eaten raw, meaning bugs aren't killed off by cooking. Symptoms of Salmonella Blockley to look out for SYMPTOMS of Salmonella Blockley, a specific type of Salmonella infection, are similar to general Salmonella infection. Common symptoms include: Diarrhoea - This is often the most prominent symptom. - This is often the most prominent symptom. Stomach cramps or abdominal pain -This can range from mild discomfort to severe pain. -This can range from mild discomfort to severe pain. Fever - A temperature elevation is a common symptom. - A temperature elevation is a common symptom. Nausea and vomiting - Some individuals experience nausea and may also vomit. - Some individuals experience nausea and may also vomit. Chills -This can be associated with fever. -This can be associated with fever. Headache - Some individuals may experience headaches. - Some individuals may experience headaches. Blood in the stool - In some cases, blood can be present in the stool. Salmonella symptoms typically last for four to seven days, and most people recover without needing specific treatment. You should see a doctor for salmonella symptoms if your symptoms are severe, prolonged, or you are at increased risk of complications. This includes infants, young children, older adults, pregnant individuals, and those with weakened immune systems. Symptoms Symptoms usually appear 12 to 72 hours after infection, and those most at risk include the elderly, young children and anyone with a weakened immune system. Health officials are urging Brits to be on high alert for the symptoms of salmonella infection, which can last anywhere from four to seven days. Advertisement The most common signs include diarrhoea — which may be watery and occasionally contain blood or mucus — stomach cramps, fever, nausea, vomiting, headaches, and chills. These symptoms can vary in intensity, but even mild cases can leave people feeling drained. In more serious instances, the illness can lead to severe dehydration, particularly in infants, older adults, or those with weakened immune systems. Some sufferers may go on to develop reactive arthritis, a painful condition that causes swelling and stiffness in the joints, or even enteric fever — a rare but dangerous form of the illness that brings on high fever, exhaustion and severe sickness requiring urgent antibiotic treatment. Advertisement While most people recover without medical intervention, doctors advise seeking help if symptoms are severe or don't improve after a few days, if there's blood in the stool, or if signs of dehydration — such as dizziness or reduced urination — are present. Anyone preparing fresh produce like tomatoes is reminded to wash them thoroughly, store them properly, and follow general food hygiene guidance to reduce the risk of infection. Treatment There is no specific treatment for most cases of salmonella infection, as it usually clears up on its own within a week. The primary focus is on staying hydrated, especially if diarrhoea and vomiting are severe, to prevent dehydration. Advertisement Drinking plenty of fluids such as water, oral rehydration solutions, or clear broths is essential. In some cases, doctors may recommend over-the-counter medications to relieve symptoms like fever and cramps, but antibiotics are generally not prescribed unless the infection is severe, spreads beyond the intestines, or affects high-risk groups such as infants, the elderly, or those with weakened immune systems. If complications like enteric fever or reactive arthritis develop, more intensive medical treatment, including antibiotics or specialist care, may be required. Anyone experiencing serious symptoms or prolonged illness should seek medical advice promptly to ensure proper care and avoid complications. Advertisement Prevention Preventing salmonella largely comes down to good hygiene and safe food practices. Experts say there are several simple steps that can dramatically reduce your risk of infection. Always thoroughly cook meat, poultry, and seafood to the correct internal temperature, and avoid cross-contamination by using separate chopping boards and utensils for raw and cooked foods. Handwashing is crucial — especially after using the toilet, changing nappies, handling raw produce or meat, and before preparing or eating food. Advertisement When travelling, stick to bottled or properly treated water, particularly in countries where sanitation may be poor. Avoid ice cubes or uncooked foods that may have been rinsed in contaminated water. While there's no vaccine for general salmonella, typhoid fever — a severe form of salmonella — can be prevented through vaccination, which is recommended for travellers heading to high-risk areas. Taking these precautions can help you avoid getting seriously ill — and stop the spread of infection to others. Advertisement 2 Health officials have sounded the alarm after a salmonella outbreak was linked to tomatoes Credit: Getty
