Background: DCIS remains a cautionary criterion for APBI by the ASTRO APBI consensus statement. We performed a matched analysis to compare the efficacy of WBI and APBI for patients with DCIS. Methods: Women with DCIS treated with APBI or WBI were reviewed. APBI (n=102) patients with ≥2 y follow-up were matched 1:3 to WBI (n=546) patients with ≥5 y follow-up by age, tumor size, nuclear grade, ER status, margin status, and laterality. Ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence (IBTR), distant metastasis (DM), contralateral breast cancer (CLBC) and cause-specific survival (CSS) were compared by cumulative incidence (Gray’s) and competing risks regression (Fine and Gray’s), and overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) by Kaplan-Meier (log-rank test). Results: Median follow-up was 4.6 y (2.0-14.7) for APBI and 9.0 y (5.4-27.0) for WBI. Median (range) or percentages are shown (Table). Patients did not differ by match criteria. There were 17 LR, 1 DM, 19 CLBC, 2 CSS, 22 OS, and 19 DFS events during follow-up. The patient groups had similar rates of cancer-related events including ipsilateral and contralateral breast recurrences at both five and eight years. Treatment type, age, tumor size, nuclear grade, ER status, and hormone therapy (HT) were not prognostic of LR or CLBC on uni- and multi-variate analyses. Conclusions: APBI provides equivalent and exemplary outcomes compared to WBI following breast-conserving surgery for DCIS. These findings support previous reports on the efficacy of APBI in the treatment of noninvasive breast carcinoma. Prospective randomized comparison of APBI to WBI for DCIS is needed.