The Feasibility of Breast-Conserving Surgery for Multiple Ipsilateral Breast Cancer: An Initial Report from ACOSOG Z11102 (Alliance) Trial

Pushing the envelope in breast conserving surgery - is multiple-wire localization (3 or more wires) associated with increased risk of compromised margins and long-term recurrence?

INTRODUCTION

In the last two decades there has been a paradigm shift with breast conserving surgery (BCS) being applied to larger and more extensive breast malignancies. The aim of this study is to examine the success of BCS being performed in patients with extensive breast malignancies requiring at least 3 wires for localization, and to assess possible risk factors for failure.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We performed a retrospective single center review of 232 patients who underwent BCS between 2010 and 2020 requiring at least 3 wires for localization, thus comprising the multi-wire group (MWG). The cohort included a control group of 232 single-wire BCS patients (SWG) chronologically matched with the MWG. Patients with either invasive malignancy or ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) were included in the study. Clinical, radiological, and pathological data was collected. Proportions of positive surgical margins, re-lumpectomies and conversion to mastectomy were calculated. Survival analysis for locoregional and distant recurrence was performed.

RESULTS

Women in the MWG were younger (mean age 57 vs. 63.1, P < 0.001), had larger tumor size (mean size 5.1 cm vs. 1.3 cm, p < 0.001), a higher prevalence of calcifications on mammograms (72 % vs. 17 %, P < 0.001), a higher proportion of positive lymph nodes (75 % vs. 45 %, P = 0.019), and an elevated incidence of a ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) component (72 % vs. 38 %, P < 0.001). Positive surgical margins were higher in the MWG (13 % vs 7 %, P = 0.03), which lead to higher proportions of re-lumpectomies or conversion to mastectomies (7 % vs 4 %, P = 0.17). On multivariate analysis of the entire cohort, patients with positive margins were more likely to have a DCIS component (77 % vs 53 %, P = 0.001), an infiltrating lobular carcinoma (ILC) component (15 % vs 9 %, P = 0.013), and positive ER hormonal status (94 % vs 85 %, p = 0.05). The number of wires was not an independent predictor of positive margins. On long-term analysis, the locoregional disease-free survival was similar between the SWG and MWG (P = 0.1). However, the MWG showed higher rates of distant metastasis (12 % vs 4 %, P = 0.006).

CONCLUSIONS

BCS requiring 3 or more wires is associated with a slightly higher proportion of positive margins. The increased risk of positive margins appears to be related to the type of tumor (DCIS component, ILC component and ER status) rather than to the number of wires. The number of wires does not significantly impact locoregional disease-free survival.

The Canadian Breast Cancer Symposium 2023 Meeting Report

On 15-16 June 2023, healthcare professionals and breast cancer patients and advocates from across Canada met in Toronto, Ontario, for the 2023 Canadian Breast Cancer Symposium (CBSC.). The CBSC. is a national, multidisciplinary event that occurs every 2 years with the goal of developing a personalized approach to the management of breast cancer in Canada. Experts provided state-of-the-art information to help optimally manage breast cancer patients, including etiology, prevention, diagnosis, experimental biology, and therapy of breast cancer and premalignant breast disease. The symposium also had the objectives of increasing communication and collaboration among breast cancer healthcare providers nationwide and providing a comprehensive and real-life review of the many facets of breast cancer. The sessions covered the patient voice, the top breast cancer papers from different disciplines in 2022, artificial intelligence in breast cancer, systemic therapy updates, the management of central nervous system metastases, multidisciplinary management of ductal carcinoma in situ, special populations, optimization-based individual prognostic factors, toxicity management of novel therapeutics, survivorship, and updates in surgical oncology. The key takeaways of these sessions have been summarized in this conference report.

Oncoplastic breast surgery in Europe

Oncoplastic breast surgery (OPS) has become an integral part of breast cancer surgery for both breast conservation and mastectomies. In recent years, the emphasis on early detection and the advances in systemic and locoregional therapy has improved prognosis leading to an increased focus on survivorship and quality of life issues including patients' short and long-term aesthetic appearance as a key part of the surgical management. There is a significant variation across Europe in the type of specialist performing breast cancer surgery and the provision of OPS as such. In the traditional model, breast cancer care was provided by gynecologists in some countries, general surgeons, surgical oncologists, and breast surgeons in others. However recently, surgeons throughout Europe have extended their skill-base to include level 1 and 2 OPS and implant- and pedicle-flap based breast reconstruction. For breast surgeons to become proficient in these techniques, a standardized level of training and expertise is needed. The European Society of Mastology (EUSOMA) set standards for a specialist health professional in the field of breast cancer, the European Union of Medical Specialists (UEMS) examinations and the global curriculum that was developed by the American Society of Surgical Oncology (SSO) and the European Society of Surgical Oncology (ESSO) aims to improve standards of OPS practice across Europe. The new generation of breast surgeons, therefore, should be equipped with the necessary skill set to provide high quality OPS while keeping abreast of novel technologies and techniques aiming to provide patients with excellent long-term quality of life.

Impact of Radiotherapy Volumes on Late-Term Cosmetic Outcomes and Quality of Life in Patients With Unifocal and Multifocal/Multicentric Breast Cancer After Breast-Conserving Surgery

Objective

Breast-conserving surgery (BCS) followed by radiotherapy (RT) is the standard treatment for early-stage breast cancer. The use of an additional RT dose (boost) to the tumour bed improves local control but may worsen quality of life (QOL) and cosmetic results. Multifocal/multicentric tumours (MMTs) pose a challenge as they require larger boost volumes. This study investigated the impact of RT volumes on late-term cosmetic outcomes and QOL in patients with unifocal and MMTs who underwent adjuvant RT after BCS.

Materials and Methods

Retrospective data of 367 patients who underwent BCS between 2012 and 2014 were reviewed. A cohort of 121 patients with at least six months of completed RT were prospectively included in the study. Cosmetic results were evaluated using a modified scoring system, and QOL was assessed using The European Cancer Treatment and Organization Committee tools.

Results

The results showed that the inclusion of regional lymphatics in the RT treatment field significantly affected QOL, particularly in terms of role functioning and social functioning. Higher boost volume ratios were associated with increased pain-related symptoms. However, the presence of MMTs did not significantly affect cosmetic outcomes compared to unifocal tumours.

Conclusion

The size of the boost and inclusion of regional lymphatics in RT significantly impact QOL in patients undergoing BCS. Tumour foci number does not affect cosmetic outcomes. These findings emphasize the need for careful consideration of RT volumes to minimize long-term adverse effects on QOL. Future prospective studies should evaluate early side effects and baseline QOL scores to provide a comprehensive assessment.

Local Recurrence After Breast-Conserving Therapy in Patients With Multiple Ipsilateral Breast Cancer: Results From ACOSOG Z11102 (Alliance)

PURPOSE

Breast-conserving therapy (BCT) is the preferred treatment for unifocal breast cancer (BC). The oncologic safety of BCT for multiple ipsilateral breast cancer (MIBC) has not been demonstrated in a prospective study. ACOSOG Z11102 (Alliance) is a phase II, single-arm, prospective trial designed to evaluate oncologic outcomes in patients undergoing BCT for MIBC.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Women age 40 years and older with two to three foci of biopsy-proven cN0-1 BC were eligible. Patients underwent lumpectomies with negative margins followed by whole breast radiation with boost to all lumpectomy beds. The primary end point was cumulative incidence of local recurrence (LR) at 5 years with an a priori rate of clinical acceptability of <8%.

RESULTS

Among 270 women enrolled between November 2012 and August 2016, there were 204 eligible patients who underwent protocol-directed BCT. The median age was 61 years (range, 40-87 years). At a median follow-up of 66.4 months (range, 1.3-90.6 months), six patients developed LR for an estimated 5-year cumulative incidence of LR of 3.1% (95% CI, 1.3 to 6.4). Patient age, number of sites of preoperative biopsy-proven BC, estrogen receptor status and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 status, and pathologic T and N categories were not associated with LR risk. Exploratory analysis showed that the 5-year LR rate in patients without preoperative magnetic resonance imaging (MRI; n = 15) was 22.6% compared with 1.7% in patients with a preoperative MRI (n = 189; P = .002).

CONCLUSION

The Z11102 clinical trial demonstrates that breast-conserving surgery with adjuvant radiation that includes lumpectomy site boosts yields an acceptably low 5-year LR rate for MIBC. This evidence supports BCT as a reasonable surgical option for women with two to three ipsilateral foci, particularly among patients with disease evaluated with preoperative breast MRI.

Current practice and provision of oncoplastic breast-conserving surgery in the UK: results of the ANTHEM national practice questionnaire

PURPOSE

Oncoplastic breast-conserving surgery (OPBCS) may be a better option than mastectomy ± immediate breast reconstruction (IBR) for women with breast cancer but studies directly comparing the techniques are lacking. We surveyed UK breast units to determine the current practice of OPBCS to inform the design of a future comparative study.

METHODS

An electronic survey was developed to explore the current practice of OPBCS. This included the local availability of volume displacement and/or replacement techniques; number of cases performed; contraindications and approach to contralateral symmetrisation. Summary data for each survey item were calculated and overall provision of care examined.

RESULTS

58 UK centres completed the survey, including 43 (74%) stand-alone breast and 15 (26%) combined breast/plastics units. Over 40% of units (n = 24) treated more than 500 cancers/year. Most units offered volume displacement techniques (TMs) (97%). Over two-thirds (n = 39. 67%) of units offered local perforator flaps (LPF). Approximately a half of units (10/19) not performing LPF were planning to introduce them in the next 12-24 months. A third (n = 19, 33%) of units routinely performed simultaneous contralateral symmetrisation mostly with two-surgeon operating. There were limited oncological restrictions to OPBCS with no contraindications for multifocal cancers in most centres; 65% of units (36/55) offered OPBCS for multicentric disease. Extensive DCIS was a contraindication in a minority of units.

CONCLUSIONS

OPBCS is widely available in the UK but contraindications and approaches to contralateral symmetrisation were variable. Work is now needed to prospectively evaluate the outcomes of OPBCS vs mastectomy ± IBR to support informed decision-making.

Impact of multifocal or multicentric disease on local recurrence and survival in breast cancer patients with or without BRCA1/2 variants

PURPOSE

Multifocal or multicentric (MFMC) breast cancer is mainly focused on breast cancer patients with unknown BRCA status, the incidence and clinical relevance of MFMC disease in BRCA1/2 carriers is less explored to date. Our study was to investigate the incidence of MFMC disease in BRCA1/2 carriers and whether MFMC disease influences local recurrence and clinical outcomes.

METHODS

In this retrospective study, 479 breast cancer patients with BRCA1/2 variants and 1437 age-matched noncarriers were enrolled and patients received either breast-conserving therapy (BCT) or mastectomy with or without radiotherapy.

RESULTS

The rates of MFMC disease in BRCA1 and BRCA2 carriers, and noncarriers were 33.0% (61 of 185), 37.4% (110 of 294), and 31.2% (449 of 1437), respectively. MFMC disease in BRCA2 carriers was significantly higher than that in noncarriers (P = 0.039). After a median follow-up of 8.1 years, among patients treated with BCT, BRCA2 carriers with MFMC disease experienced a significantly higher rate of ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence (IBTR) than those with unifocal disease (16.7% vs 4.1%, P = 0.044). Moreover, BRCA2 carriers with MFMC disease had a significantly worse RFS (unadjusted hazard ratio [HR], 3.65 [95% CI 1.40-9.52]; P = 0.008), DRFS (unadjusted HR, 3.07 [95% CI 1.07-8.80]; P = 0.037), and OS (unadjusted HR, 4.96 [95% CI 1.18-20.02]; P = 0.029) than those with unifocal disease when treated with BCT.

CONCLUSION

MFMC breast cancer is more common in BRCA2 carriers, and BRCA2 carriers with MFMC disease treated with BCT exhibit a higher rate of IBTR and may have a poor survival.

Five decades of progress in surgical oncology: Breast

Surgery remains the single most effective treatment for breast cancer but coincident with a deeper understanding of tumor biology and advances in multidisciplinary care (encompassing breast imaging, systemic adjuvant therapy, radiotherapy, and genomics) continues to de-escalate, supported by strong level I data. We have moved from mastectomy to breast conservation, and from routine axillary dissection to sentinel lymph node biopsy to selective omission of axillary node staging altogether. We have further de-escalated through consensus over margin width in breast conservation, through improvements in neoadjuvant therapy, and by demonstrating no benefit for upfront surgery in patients with stage IV disease. For patients with ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence, reconservation surgery and reirradiation are promising. Cell cycle and immune checkpoint inhibitors, when added to conventional systemic therapy, have now moved beyond stage IV disease to phase III trials in the adjuvant and neoadjuvant settings, promising even further de-escalation of surgery. Finally, with genomic profiling we are moving away from the primacy of axillary node status for prognostication and into a new era allowing prediction of response to therapy.

De-Escalating the Management of In Situ and Invasive Breast Cancer

Simple Summary

De-escalation of breast cancer treatment reduces morbidity and toxicity for patients. De-escalation is safe if cancer outcomes, such as recurrence and survival, remain unaffected compared to more radical regimens. This review provides an overview on treatment de-escalation for ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS), local treatment of breast cancer, and surgery after neoadjuvant systemic therapy. Improvements in understanding the natural history and biology of breast cancer, imaging modalities, and adjuvant treatments have facilitated de-escalation of treatment over time.

Abstract

It is necessary to identify appropriate areas of de-escalation in breast cancer treatment to minimize morbidity and maximize patients’ quality of life. Less radical treatment modalities, or even no treatment, have been reconsidered if they offer the same oncologic outcomes as standard therapies. Identifying which patients benefit from de-escalation requires particular care, as standard therapies will continue to offer adequate cancer outcomes. We provide an overview of the literature on the de-escalation of treatment of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS), local treatment of breast cancer, and surgery after neoadjuvant systemic therapy. De-escalation of breast cancer treatment is a key area of investigation that will continue to remain a priority. Improvements in understanding the natural history and biology of breast cancer, imaging modalities, and adjuvant treatments will expand this even further. Future efforts will continue to challenge us to consider the true role of various treatment modalities.

Breast cancer: an up-to-date review and future perspectives

Breast cancer is the most common cancer worldwide. The occurrence of breast cancer is associated with many risk factors, including genetic and hereditary predisposition. Breast cancers are highly heterogeneous. Treatment strategies for breast cancer vary by molecular features, including activation of human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2), hormonal receptors (estrogen receptor [ER] and progesterone receptor [PR]), gene mutations (e.g., mutations of breast cancer 1/2 [BRCA1/2] and phosphatidylinositol-4,5-bisphosphate 3-kinase catalytic subunit alpha [PIK3CA]) and markers of the immune microenvironment (e.g., tumor-infiltrating lymphocyte [TIL] and programmed death-ligand 1 [PD-L1]). Early-stage breast cancer is considered curable, for which local-regional therapies (surgery and radiotherapy) are the cornerstone, with systemic therapy given before or after surgery when necessary. Preoperative or neoadjuvant therapy, including targeted drugs or immune checkpoint inhibitors, has become the standard of care for most early-stage HER2-positive and triple-negative breast cancer, followed by risk-adapted post-surgical strategies. For ER-positive early breast cancer, endocrine therapy for 5-10 years is essential. Advanced breast cancer with distant metastases is currently considered incurable. Systemic therapies in this setting include endocrine therapy with targeted agents, such as CDK4/6 inhibitors and phosphoinositide 3-kinase (PI3K) inhibitors for hormone receptor-positive disease, anti-HER2 targeted therapy for HER2-positive disease, poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitors for BRCA1/2 mutation carriers and immunotherapy currently for part of triple-negative disease. Innovation technologies of precision medicine may guide individualized treatment escalation or de-escalation in the future. In this review, we summarized the latest scientific information and discussed the future perspectives on breast cancer.

Breast Magnetic Resonance Imaging for Patients With Newly Diagnosed Breast Cancer: A Review

Despite the high sensitivity and widespread use of preoperative magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), the American Cancer Society and the National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines do not recommend the routine use of preoperative MRI owing to the conflicting results and lack of clear benefit to the surgical outcome (reoperation and mastectomy) and long-term clinical outcomes (local recurrence and metachronous contralateral breast cancer). Preoperative MRI detects additional cancers that are occult at mammography and ultrasound but increases the rate of mastectomy. Concerns about overdiagnosis and overtreatment of preoperative MRI might be mitigated by adjusting the confounding factors when conducting studies, using the state-of-the-art image-guided biopsy technique, applying the radiologists’ cumulative experiences in interpreting MRI findings, and performing multiple lumpectomies in patients with multicentric cancer. Among the various imaging methods, dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI has the highest accuracy in predicting pathologic complete response after neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Prospective trials aimed at applying the MRI information to the de-escalation of surgical or radiation treatments are underway. In this review, current studies on the clinical outcomes of preoperative breast MRI are updated, and circumstances in which MRI may be useful for surgical planning are discussed.

Addressing the problem of overtreatment in breast cancer

INTRODUCTION

As breast cancer treatment options have multiplied and biologic diversity within breast cancer has been recognized, the use of the same treatment strategies for patients with early-stage and favorable disease, and for those with biologically aggressive disease, has been questioned. In addition, as patient-reported outcome measures have called attention to the morbidity of many common treatments, and as the cost of breast cancer care has continued to increase, reduction in the overtreatment of breast cancer has assumed increasing importance.

AREAS COVERED

Here we review selected aspects of surgery, radiation oncology, and medical oncology for which scientific evidence supports de-escalation for invasive carcinoma and ductal carcinoma in situ, and assess strategies to address overtreatment.

EXPERT OPINION

The problems of breast cancer overtreatment we face today are based on improved understanding of the biology of breast cancer and abandonment of the 'one-size-fits-all' approach. As breast cancer care becomes increasingly complex, and as our knowledge base continues to increase exponentially, these problems will only be magnified in the future. To continue progress, the move must be made from advocating the maximum-tolerated treatment to advocating the minimum-effective one.

Bracketing with Multiple Radioactive Seeds to Achieve Negative Margins in Breast Conservation Surgery: Multiple Seeds in Breast Surgery

INTRODUCTION

Breast conservation surgery (BCS) is the treatment of choice for unifocal, early-stage breast cancer. The ability to offer BCS to a wider subset of patients, including those with multifocal/multicentric cancer as well as extensive ductal carcinoma in situ, has emerged over time, especially in those undergoing joint oncoplastic reconstruction and those treated with neoadjuvant therapy. However, localization techniques using multiple radioactive seeds for bracketing in this patient subset have not been validated.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A single-institution retrospective review was conducted of all patients with breast cancer who underwent BCS, guided by multiple bracketed iodine I 125 radioactive seeds between January 2014 and April 2017.

RESULTS

Bracketing of breast cancer using 2 or more radioactive seeds was performed in 157 breasts in 156 patients. Negative margins were achieved in 124 of 157 (79%) breasts, including 33 cases (21%) that underwent targeted margin reexcision at the time of surgery after intraoperative, multidisciplinary margin assessment. Thirty-three cases (21%) resulted in close or positive margins, of which 11 (7%) and 10 (6.4%) underwent completion mastectomy or repeat lumpectomy, respectively. Twelve patients (7.6%) did not undergo reexcision. En bloc resection was successful in 134 of 157 (85.4%) lumpectomies. Eighty-nine percent of the procedures were coupled with oncoplastic reconstruction.

CONCLUSION

Bracketing techniques using multiple radioactive seeds expands the indications for breast conservation therapy in patients who would have traditionally required mastectomy. Intraoperative margin assessment improves surgical and pathologic success. Larger defects created by multifocal resection are optimally managed in concert with oncoplastic reconstruction to minimize asymmetries and aesthetic defects.

Breast cancer-The catalyst of contemporary trials design

Surgical trials in breast cancer have catalyzed contemporary trial design for solid organ cancers and are a prime example of surgeons taking the lead in clinical trial design. Surgeons have lead trials that have improved patient outcomes and quality of life without sacrificing oncologic safety. We have evolved from radical mastectomy to breast conservation and sentinel node biopsy. Contemporary trial design in breast cancer now focus on personalizing care based on tumor genomics.

The Feasibility of Radiation Therapy after Breast-Conserving Surgery for Multiple Ipsilateral Breast Cancer: An Initial Report from ACOSOG Z11102 (Alliance) Trial

Purpose:

Historically, multiple ipsilateral breast cancer (MIBC) has been a contraindication to breast-conserving therapy. We report the feasibility of radiation therapy (RT) after breast-conserving therapy in MIBC from the Alliance Z11102 trial.

Methods and Materials:

Delineation of targets and organs at risk was performed according to the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group contouring consensus definitions. RT was delivered to the whole breast to 45 to 50 Gy in standard daily fractions of 1.8 to 2.0 Gy. A boost of 10 to 16 Gy in 2.0-Gy daily fractions to each tumor bed was mandatory.

Results:

A total of 236 eligible patients were enrolled in the study between July 23, 2012 and August 19, 2016. Of those, 195 (83%) completed RT. No patient underwent mastectomy for failure to meet the RT dose constraints. Higher absolute boost volume was associated with increased incidence of grade 2 or higher dermatitis (odds ratio, 1.21; 95% confidence interval, 1.041.41; P = .014). Higher relative boost volume as a percentage of the overall breast volume was not associated with increased dermatitis. Neither absolute nor relative boost volume appeared to significantly influence overall cosmesis.

Conclusions:

Breast conservation followed by whole breast RT plus boost to each tumor bed was feasible in the majority of patients with MIBC. Increasing radiation boost volume was associated with increased incidence of acute dermatitis, but was not associated with worse overall cosmesis.

De-escalation of Endocrine Therapy in Early Hormone Receptor-positive Breast Cancer: When Is Local Treatment Enough?

OBJECTIVE

To identify subgroups of hormone receptor-positive (HR+) breast cancer patients that might not benefit from adding endocrine therapy (ET) to their local treatment.

BACKGROUND

De-escalation in breast cancer treatment has included surgery, radiation, and chemotherapy and has often focused on older patient populations. Systemic ET has yet to be de-escalated, though it carries serious side-effects, decreasing quality of life over 5 to 10 years. We hypothesize the 21-gene recurrence score (RS) could identify subgroups of younger patients whose long-term survival is unaffected by adjuvant ET.

METHODS

The National Cancer Database was used to identify women aged ≥50, with HR+, HER2-negative tumors, ≤3 cm in size, N0 status, and a RS≤25, who underwent breast-conserving surgery in 2010 to 2016. Kaplan-Meier and Cox proportional hazards models were used to identify association between treatment and overall survival (OS).

RESULTS

Of the 45,217 patients identified, 80.6% were 50 to 69 years old. 42,632 (94.3%) patients received ET and 2585 (5.7%) did not. The 5-year OS was 96.4% for patients receiving ET and 93.1% for those who did not (P < 0.001). After adjusting for all covariates, patients aged 50 to 69 with RS < 11 showed no statistically significant improvement in OS when adding ET to surgery, with or without radiation (P = 0.40). With RS 11 to 25, there was a significant improvement of OS with ET plus radiation (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Local treatment only, with de-escalation of long-term ET, for patients aged 50 to 69 with RS < 11, seems not to impact OS and should have an anticipated quality of life improvement. Prospective studies investigating this approach are warranted.

Extreme Oncoplasty: Breast Conservation in Patients with Large, Multifocal, and Multicentric Breast Cancer

INTRODUCTION

Extreme Oncoplastic Breast Conservation Surgery (EOBCS) is offered in selected patients with multifocal or multicentric breast cancer (MFMC). Recent evidence has suggested that EOBCS may be a valuable resource for patients with MFMC who may avoid the risk associated with mastectomy in favour of the benefits of breast conservation without risking their oncological outcomes. Our study examined the practice of EOBCS in two regional breast units in Glasgow, United Kingdom.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A prospectively collected database of 50 patients treated with EOBC in two breast units in Glasgow between 2007 and 2018 were evaluated, and clinical outcomes were observed.

RESULTS

Fifty patients (median age 55) underwent EOBCS, of which 43 (86%) had invasive disease. Median tumour size was 55mm (50-90) and multifocal disease was identified in 22 (44%) patients. Nine patients (18%) were found to have positive margins and underwent a second procedure, with 6 (12%) proceeding to mastectomy. Five-year disease free survival rate was 91.5%, while cancer-specific survival was 95.7%.

CONCLUSION

EOBCS is oncologically safe in short-term follow-up. Large scale studies are required to confirm these preliminary results, in order to offer EOBCS as a valid option to patients with advanced or multifocal breast cancer.

Breast cancer

Breast cancer is still the most common cancer worldwide. But the way breast cancer is viewed has changed drastically since its molecular hallmarks were extensively characterised, now including immunohistochemical markers (eg, ER, PR, HER2 [ERBB2], and proliferation marker protein Ki-67 [MKI67]), genomic markers (eg, BRCA1, BRCA2, and PIK3CA), and immunomarkers (eg, tumour-infiltrating lymphocytes and PD-L1). New biomarker combinations are the basis for increasingly complex diagnostic algorithms. Neoadjuvant combination therapy, often including targeted agents, is a standard of care (especially in HER2-positive and triple-negative breast cancer), and the basis for de-escalation of surgery in the breast and axilla and for risk-adapted post-neoadjuvant strategies. Radiotherapy remains an important cornerstone of breast cancer therapy, but de-escalation schemes have become the standard of care. ER-positive tumours are treated with 5-10 years of endocrine therapy and chemotherapy, based on an individual risk assessment. For metastatic breast cancer, standard therapy options include targeted approaches such as CDK4 and CDK6 inhibitors, PI3K inhibitors, PARP inhibitors, and anti-PD-L1 immunotherapy, depending on tumour type and molecular profile. This range of treatment options reflects the complexity of breast cancer therapy today.

Women Could Avoid Axillary Lymph Node Dissection by Choosing Breast-Conserving Therapy Instead of Mastectomy

BACKGROUND

The ACOSOG Z0011 trial showed that completion axillary lymph node dissection (cALND) can be safely omitted for some patients with T1-2 clinically node-negative breast cancer with one to two involved sentinel lymph nodes (SLNs) treated with breast-conserving therapy (BCT). There is little evidence for the safety of omitting cALND for mastectomy-treated patients. Consequently, cALND is often recommended for sentinel node-positive patients treated with mastectomy. The aim of this study is to determine the proportion of patients who could avoid cALND by choosing BCT instead of mastectomy at a tertiary cancer center.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

All T1-2 clinically node-negative breast cancer patients treated with BCT or mastectomy between 2012 and 2017 with metastases in the SLN(s) were selected from a prospectively maintained database. Clinical factors and outcomes were evaluated between the two groups. Differences were compared using Wilcoxon rank-sum test, chi-square test or Fisher's exact test as appropriate. Significance was set at the 0.05 level for all analyses.

RESULTS

A total of 306 patients were included, 199 (65.0%) of whom were treated with BCT and 107 (35.0%) with mastectomy. Patients treated with mastectomy were more often treated with cALND compared with those treated with BCT (71.0% versus 26.6%, p < 0.0001). Overall, 52 of the mastectomy patients (68.4%) could have avoided cALND if they had chosen BCT.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients treated with mastectomy are more likely to receive cALND than those treated with BCT. Axillary management should be addressed during discussion of primary tumor therapy, and cALND may be avoided when patients choose BCT instead of mastectomy.

A Survey of Breast Pathologists' Practice in Staging Multiple Foci of Invasive Carcinoma

BACKGROUND

The American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) staging system is the reference standard for describing the extent of neoplastic disease on the basis of the size of primary tumor (T), and the presence of regional lymph node (N) involvement and distant metastasis (M). Multiple foci of invasive breast carcinoma may pose staging challenges to the reporting pathologist. We set out to evaluate the practice of local breast pathologists with regard to staging of multiple foci of invasive carcinoma.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Breast pathologists were surveyed at a Community of Interest in Breast Pathology meeting. The live voting survey contained 6 case-based scenarios of multiple foci of invasive mammary carcinoma of the same or different histologic type and with unilateral or bilateral involvement. A supporting illustration was provided for each case.

RESULTS

There was poor interobserver agreement with no consensus reached among the respondents in any of the cases. Staging choices varied from staging tumors together irrespective of histology or procedure type to staging tumors of the same histologic type together, or staging each tumor focus separately. Confusion was particularly evident when tumor foci with different histologic types were present.

CONCLUSION

Inconsistencies exist in the reporting of AJCC pathologic TNM stage for multiple foci of invasive carcinoma. The results serve as a reminder that education and strict adherence to the AJCC guidelines is essential for establishing standard practice in order to provide accurate cancer staging and ensure optimal clinical management.

Cosmetic Outcomes Following Breast-Conservation Surgery and Radiation for Multiple Ipsilateral Breast Cancer: Data from the Alliance Z11102 Study

BACKGROUND

Diagnoses of multiple ipsilateral breast cancer (MIBC) are increasing. Historically, the primary treatment for MIBC has been mastectomy due to concerns about in-breast recurrence risk and poor cosmetic outcome. The Alliance Z11102 study prospectively assessed cosmetic outcomes in women with MIBC treated with breast-conserving therapy (BCT).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Z11102 was a multicenter trial enrolling women with two or three separate sites of biopsy-proven malignancy separated by ≥ 2 cm within the same breast. Cosmetic outcome was a planned secondary endpoint. Data were collected with a four-point cosmesis survey (1 = excellent, 4 = poor) and the BREAST-Q (scored 0-100). All patients undergoing successful breast-conserving therapy were treated with whole-breast radiation. Associations were assessed with Chi square or Fisher's exact tests as appropriate.

RESULTS

Cosmetic outcome data for 216 eligible women who completed therapy are included in this analysis. Of the 136 patients who completed the survey 2 years postoperatively, 70.6% (N = 96) felt the result was good or excellent, while 3.7% (N = 5) felt the result was poor. We found no significant differences in patient-reported cosmetic outcomes when stratifying by patient age, number of lesions (two or three), number of incisions, number of lumpectomies, or size of largest area of disease. Mean satisfaction score on the BREAST-Q was 77.2 at 6 months following whole-breast radiation and 73.7 at 3 years following surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

BCT performed for MIBC results in good or excellent cosmesis for the majority of women. From a cosmetic perspective, BCT is a valid surgical approach to women with MIBC.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01556243.

Oncoplastic Breast-Conserving Surgery: Can We Reduce Rates of Mastectomy and Chemotherapy Use in Patients with Traditional Indications for Mastectomy?

INTRODUCTION

Traditional indications for mastectomy include multiple ipsilateral lesions and/or disease spanning ≥ 5 cm. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy increases breast conservation but does not improve survival. We hypothesized that oncoplastic breast-conserving surgery (OPS) may allow for breast conservation while providing full staging and tumor profiling information to guide systemic therapy decisions, thereby permitting more judicious chemotherapy use.

METHODS

This was an observational cohort of patients with invasive breast cancer with multiple lesions and/or disease spanning ≥ 5 cm who underwent OPS from 2012 to 2018. Clinicopathologic features, mastectomy rate, chemotherapy use, and recurrence were evaluated.

RESULTS

Overall, 100 patients were identified. Average disease span was 62.8 ± 20.1 mm, with an average of 2.9 lesions (range 1-13). 'No ink on tumor' was achieved at the index operation in 80 patients; 13 patients underwent completion mastectomy to achieve adequate margins. Eighty-one patients completed radiation therapy. Breast conservation was possible in 50/58 (86%) patients who did not receive chemotherapy. Forty-two patients received chemotherapy (8 neoadjuvant, 34 adjuvant), of whom 37 (88%) achieved breast conservation. Twenty-six patients with high-risk features received adjuvant chemotherapy. Oncotype DX testing demonstrated the need for chemotherapy in an additional eight patients. After a median follow-up of 40 months, four patients had a local recurrence, including two who declined radiation therapy.

CONCLUSIONS

OPS can facilitate breast conservation in most patients with traditional indications for mastectomy. Additionally, OPS may reduce unnecessary chemotherapy, especially in patients who qualify for Oncotype DX testing. Further study evaluating long-term oncologic and cosmetic outcomes is warranted.

Successful Lumpectomy in a Patient With Multicentric Breast Cancer

When there is extensive breast cancer, patients typically undergo mastectomy. However, lumpectomy may still be performed for patients who are motivated to avoid a mastectomy and understand the risk for positive margins requiring second surgery in unique cases. This report details the surgical management and clinical reasoning behind lumpectomy for a multicentric breast cancer spanning 5 cm. The lumpectomy was a success with negative margins on final pathology.

The Radiologist's Role in a Breast Multidisciplinary Tumor Board

Breast multidisciplinary tumor boards (MTBs) play an important role in determining treatment. This article serves as a guide for the radiologist participating in a breast MTB, as the information presented at MTB can significantly influence treatment plans and dictate future steps for further patient work-up. Multidisciplinary tumor board preparation involves a careful review of the patient's history while gathering all relevant imaging studies, and reinterpreting them when appropriate. Presented images should be carefully selected, annotated, and displayed clearly before providing final recommendations for localization and incompletely assessed findings. Anatomic staging factors from the AJCC Breast Cancer Staging System, such as tumor size and degree of suspected skin involvement, should be described. In addition, there are many other types of information that the treatment specialists want to know. The surgeon is interested in anatomic information that will help them decide whether breast conservation therapy is feasible or if local structures, such as the nipple, can be spared. The radiation oncologist may need to know whether accelerated partial breast irradiation is feasible or if postmastectomy radiation therapy is indicated. The medical oncologist is looking for factors that may provide an indication for neoadjuvant therapy and ensuring there is a reliable follow-up method for evaluating the response to treatment, such as comparative MRI. Additionally, all specialists need to know the extent of suspected nodal involvement. By clearly and comprehensively presenting this information to the rest of the MTB team, the radiologist provides a vital contribution that guides treatment and ensures adherence to clinical guidelines.

Ipsilateral and Concurrent Breast Cancer and Atypical Ductal Hyperplasia: Does Atypia Also Need Surgical Excision?

BACKGROUND

Standard-of-care management of atypical ductal hyperplasia (ADH) is surgical excision. Multiple studies have identified features of ADH in patients at low risk for upgrade who may benefit from omission of surgical excision. Patients with an ipsilateral breast cancer have been excluded from studies investigating observation for the management of ADH.

METHODS

This was a retrospective review of women with both a breast cancer and an ipsilateral separate site of ADH diagnosed on percutaneous biopsy, who underwent excision of both sites from 2008 to 2018. Radiographic and pathologic features of ADH and cancer were analyzed, including imaging size, biopsy modality, distance between sites, cancer subtype, grade, prognostic markers, ADH foci, and presence of necrosis or micropapillary features. Final pathology at the ADH site was used to determine upgrade. Multivariable logistic regression was performed to identify variables significantly associated with ADH upgrade to malignancy.

RESULTS

Among 62 women meeting the inclusion criteria, 11 (17.7%) upgraded to malignancy [9 ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS), 2 invasive cancer] at the site of ADH. Upgrade was significantly higher with ipsilateral DCIS (p = 0.03), ultrasound biopsy at the ADH site (p = 0.01), and ADH with necrosis (p = 0.04). The group at lowest risk for upgrade had stereotactic biopsy and ADH without necrosis (0% upgrade).

CONCLUSION

The presence of breast cancer does not significantly increase the likelihood for upgrade at a separate site of ipsilateral concurrent ADH above contemporary reported upgrade rates of ADH alone (10-30%). When considering breast conservation for breast cancer, omitting excision of the site of ADH can be considered when low-risk features are present.

A Case-Control Study Examining Disparities in Clinical Trial Participation Among Breast Surgical Oncology Patients

BACKGROUND

Clinical trial participation among racial and ethnic minorities remains low despite national efforts. We sought to determine how participation in clinical trials by breast surgical oncology patients has changed over time and what characteristics are associated with participation.

METHODS

Women with breast cancer enrolled in National Cancer Institute-sponsored, cooperative-group trials from 2000 to 2012 and who underwent oncologic surgery (n = 17 125) were compared with trial-eligible women in the National Cancer Database diagnosed in 2000-2012 (n = 792 719). Race-specific trial participation was plotted over time by income and reported as a proportion of the combined cohorts. Factors associated with trial participation were estimated using logistic regression; we report odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). A P value less than  .05 was considered statistically significant for all analyses. All tests were two-sided.

RESULTS

Participation declined across all groups over time because of a decrease in the scale and number of trials. In 2000-2003, Asian-Pacific Islander (7.17%), Hispanic (3.48%), and white (7.13%) patients from the highest income group had higher participation than their lower-income counterparts (Asian-Pacific Islander: 3.95%; Hispanic: 2.67%; white: 5.96%), but by 2008-2012, only high-income white patients participated more than lower-income whites (0.32% vs 0.25%, all P < .01). Black (OR = 0.80, 95% CI = 0.75 to 0.85) and Hispanic (OR = 0.84, 95% CI = 0.77 to 0.92) patients were less likely to participate than whites, but there were statistically significant interactions between income and race and ethnicity, with high-income black patients being approximately 50% less likely to participate than lower-income blacks (all P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

Multifaceted interventions addressing the intersectionality of race, ethnicity, and other patient characteristics are needed to address persistent disparities in trial participation among breast surgical oncology patients.

Multicentric breast cancer with heterogeneous histopathology: a multidisciplinary review

Multiple synchronous (multifocal or multicentric) ipsilateral breast cancers with heterogeneous histopathology are a rare clinical occurrence, however, their incidence is increasing due to the use of MRI for breast cancer screening and staging. Some studies have demonstrated poorer clinical outcomes for this pattern of breast cancer, but there is no evidence to guide clinical practice. In this multidisciplinary review, we reflect on pathology and molecular characteristics, imaging findings, surgical management including conservation and reconstructive options and approach to the axilla, and the role of chemotherapy and radiotherapy. Multidisciplinary discussions appear decisive in planning an appropriate surgical choice and defining the correct systemic treatment tailored to each clinical condition.

Multifocal and multicentric breast cancer, is it time to think again?

Multifocal multicentric breast cancer has traditionally been considered a contraindication to breast conserving surgery because of concerns regarding locoregional control and risk of disease recurrence. However, the evidence supporting this practice is limited. Increasingly, many breast surgeons are advocating breast conservation in selected cases. This short narrative review summarises current evidence on the role of surgery in multifocal multicentric breast cancer and shows that when technically feasible the option of breast conservation is oncologically safe.