A UK based two-centre review of multifocality and its role in the treatment of papillary thyroid cancer

IntroductionMultifocality is increasingly observed in papillary thyroid carcinoma (PTC) due to improvements in imaging and histopathological analysis. However, its significance in management, particularly as a sole risk-factor, remains controversial. This study aimed to investigate the prognostic value of multifocality in predicting recurrence following thyroid lobectomy in a contemporary group of PTC patients managed in the UK.MethodsPatients with PTC in NHS Lothian (2009-19) and Guys and St Thomas NHS Foundation Trust (2012-19) were identified. Categorical variables were compared using Chi-squared or Fisher's exact test. Five-year recurrence free survival (RFS) were analysed using Kaplan-Meier method and compared using log-rank.ResultsOf 828 patients; 492 (59%) had unifocal and 336 (41%) multifocal disease on final pathology. A higher rate of pathological nodal disease (22%v36%,p < 0.001), total thyroidectomy (TT) (78%v92%,p < 0.001) and radioactive iodine (RAI) (57%v75%,p < 0.001) was demonstrated in patients with multifocality. With a median follow-up of 50 months, overall 5-year RFS was 96.5%; 96.5% for unifocal versus 96.6% for multifocal disease (p = 0.695). Recurrence was not shown to be associated with multifocality on either univariate or multivariate analysis. Amongst patients with T1/2N0M0 disease (n = 341), more patients were treated with TT and RAI with multifocal compared to unifocal disease (<0.001). Only two patients within this group recurred during follow up, both of whom had multifocal disease and were treated with TT and RAI (5yRFS100%v98.1%,p = 0.051).ConclusionMultifocality is a common feature of PTC but does not appear to be an independent predictor of outcome. Therefore, treatment intensification on the basis of multifocality alone seems unwarranted.     

Second invasive breast cancers in patients treated with breast-conserving therapy

ObjectiveSecond breast cancers after breast-conserving therapy (BCT) include ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence (IBTR) and metachronous contralateral breast cancer (CBC). Each IBTR is further classified as true recurrence (TR) or new primary tumor (NP). We aim to compare survival outcomes of TR, NP and CBC, and explore the optimal treatments.Methods168,427 patients with primary breast cancer who underwent BCT between 1990 and 2005 were identified in the SEER database. The risks of IBTR and CBC were estimated by annual hazard rate. The breast cancer-specific survival (BCSS) were assessed using multivariable Cox regression analysis.ResultsWith median follow-up of 13 years after BCT, 5413 patients developed an IBTR and 4050 patients had a CBC. The risk of IBTR peaked between 10 and 15 years after BCT, while the risk of CBC distributed evenly. 45.9% of IBTRs were classified as a TR and 54.1% as an NP. The time interval from primary breast cancer to NP was longer than to TR and CBC (P < 0.001). Patients with TR had a poorer BCSS than NP (P = 0.003) and CBC (P = 0.002). There was no difference in BCSS between mastectomy and repeat BCT for treating TR (P = 0.584) or NP (P = 0.243). The BCSS of CBCs treated with BCT was better than mastectomy (P = 0.010). Chemotherapy didn't improve the survival of patients with TR (P = 0.058). However, TRs with grade III or negative hormone receptors benefited from chemotherapy significantly.ConclusionPatients with TR had a poorer BCSS than NP and CBC. Classifying IBTR may provide clinical significance for treatments.     

The role of radioactive iodine-125 seed localization in breast-conserving therapy following neoadjuvant chemotherapy

BackgroundNeoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) is increasingly used in the framework of breast-conserving therapy (BCT). Localization of the initial tumor is essential to guide surgical resection after NAC. This study describes the results obtained with I-125 seed localization in BCT including NAC.Patients and methodsBetween January 2009 and December 2010, 85 patients treated with NAC and BCT after I-125 seed localization were included. Radiological and pathological response and resection margins were retrospectively evaluated.ResultsBCT was carried out in 85 patients without secondary local excisions. Nineteen patients with unifocal tumors and seven patients with multifocal tumors showed a complete pathological response (P = 0.18). Tumor-free resection margins were obtained in 78 patients (50 patients with unifocal and 28 patients with multifocal tumors, P = 0.27). Focally involved margins were found in four patients (two patients with a unifocal and two patients with a multifocal tumor, P = 0.27). A subsequent mastectomy was carried out in three patients (two patients with multifocal tumors, P = 0.29).ConclusionsBCT after NAC can be carried out successfully after initial localization with I-125 seeds in both unifocal and multifocal breast tumors with complete resection rates of >90%.     

Characterisation of multifocal breast cancer using the 70-gene signature in clinical low-risk patients enrolled in the EORTC 10041/BIG 03-04 MINDACT trial

BackgroundIn multifocal breast cancer, guidelines recommend basing adjuvant systemic treatment decisions on characteristics of the largest lesion, disregarding multifocality as an independent prognosticator. We assessed the association between multifocal disease and both the 70-gene signature (70-GS), and distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS) in clinical low-risk breast cancer patients enrolled in the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer 10041/BIG 03-04 Microarray In Node-negative and 1 to 3 positive lymph node Disease may Avoid ChemoTherapy (MINDACT) trial.Patients and methodsThe analysed population consisted of enrolled patients in the MINDACT trial with clinical low-risk disease, defined by a modified Adjuvant! Online cut-off for the 10-year risk of recurrent disease or death. Eligibility criteria of MINDACT dictate that patients with multifocal disease could be included if the different lesions had similar pathological characteristics. The presence of multifocal disease was deducted from the case report form (CRF)-question for sum of diameter for all invasive tumour foci. Clinicopathological characteristics and gene expression of patients with unifocal and multifocal (largest lesion) disease were compared. Subsequently, the association between multifocal disease and the 70-GS was evaluated as well as the association between multifocality and 5-year DMFS.ResultsThe study included 3090 clinical low-risk patients with unifocal and 238 patients with multifocal disease. Apart from a higher prevalence of lobular tumours (21.8% versus 10.8%, by local pathology), we did not observe differences in baseline characteristics between multifocal and unifocal tumours. Patients with multifocal tumours were more likely to be at high genomic risk as compared to patients with unifocal tumours (22.7% versus 17.3%, odds ratio [OR] 1.45, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.02–2.07, P = 0.038). We did not find a significant association between tumour focality and DMFS (97.1% for unifocal versus 96.9% for multifocal, hazard ratio [HR] = 1.55, 95% CI 0.68–3.46, P = 0.172), nor a signal for a potential interaction between the prognostic effect of the 70-GS and focality of the tumour regarding DMFS.ConclusionIn the group of clinical low-risk MINDACT patients, multifocal tumours were more likely to have a high-risk 70-GS profile compared to unifocal tumours. We did not observe a significant interaction between multifocality and the 70-GS with respect to survival without distant metastasis in these patients.     

Is breast-conserving therapy a safe option for patients with tumor multicentricity and multifocality?

BackgroundWe compared outcomes after breast-conserving therapy (BCT) and mastectomy in multicentric (MC)/multifocal (MF) versus unifocal breast cancer.Patients and methodsWomen with stage I–II disease were classified as having unifocal or MC/MF disease. MC/MF and other prognostic factors were compared using binary logistic regression analysis. Univariate and multivariate analyses (MVAs) for relapse were carried out using cumulative incidence curves and Fine and Gray regression models. For the BCT group, matched analysis was added.ResultsMedian follow-up was 7.9 years, 11 983 having BCT (unifocal: 11 683, MC/MF: 300) and 7771 having mastectomy (unifocal: 6884, MC/MF: 887). MC/MF patients treated with BCT were 50–69 years old, free of extensive ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS), and had smaller tumors. The cumulative 10-year local recurrence rates among unifocal and MC/MF disease were 4.6% [95% confidence interval (CI) 4.1% to 5.0%] versus 5.5% (95% CI 2.6% to 9.9%) for the BCT group, P = 0.76 and 5.8% (95% CI 5.2% to 6.5%) versus 6.5% (95% CI 4.7% to 8.7%) for the mastectomy group, P = 0.77. MC/MF was not a significant factor for relapse or survival on MVA. In the matched analysis, relapse rates were similar in the unifocal and MC/MF groups, P = 0.60.ConclusionBCT is a reasonable option in selected MC/MF cases, particularly those women aged 50–69 years old with small (<1 cm) MF tumors and without an extensive DCIS component.     

Long-term Survival Comparison of Repeated Breast-conserving Surgery Versus Mastectomy for Patients with DCIS with Ipsilateral Breast Tumor Recurrence: A Real-world Longitudinal Study

BackgroundAlthough patients diagnosed with ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) harbor excellent overall survival (OS) after breast-conserving therapy, the evidence regarding to surgical management for ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence (IBTR) is scarce. This study aimed to assess the prognosis of repeated breast-conserving surgery (BCS) versus mastectomy for IBTR in DCIS survivors.Materials and MethodsHerein, 5344 DCIS cases with IBTR were identified during 702,748 person-years of follow-up, 3532 (66.09%) received mastectomy, and 1812 (33.91%) received repeated BCS. Cox regression and competing risk regression were employed to estimate multivariable-adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for OS and breast cancer–specific survival (BCSS), which was respectively calculated within spontaneous and matched cohorts.ResultsAfter adjustment for confounders, no statistically significant survival difference was observed between the repeated BCS and mastectomy for patients with DCIS with IBTR. The stratified analyses further revealed that patients with DCIS with IBTR receiving repeated BCS combined with radiation therapy were associated with both superior OS (HR, 0.79; CI, 0.64-0.98; P = .04) and BCSS (HR, 0.54; CI, 0.33-0.90; P = .02) compared with counterparts undergoing mastectomy. Furthermore, patients with DCIS who were age older than 60 years at IBTR diagnosis benefit from repeated BCS with radiotherapy (HR, 0.44; CI, 0.24-0.84; P = .01) than mastectomy.ConclusionWe suggest that repeated BCS with radiation therapy deserves consideration when DCIS survivors suffered IBTR. The choice of surgical management should be tailored based on patients’ age at IBTR diagnosis and size of recurrent disease.     

Cytoreductive surgery for metastatic gastrointestinal stromal tumors followed by sunitinib compared to followed by imatinib-a multi-center cohort study

BackgroundThe progression-free survival (PFS) is not optimal when imatinib was recommended for treatment of gastrointestinal stromal tumor (GIST) undergoing surgery after tumor local or multifocal progression.MethodsWe evaluate PFS of patients undergoing R0 resection or optimal cytoreductive surgery followed by sunitinib therapy compared with imatinib after tumor unifocal or multifocal progression.ResultsFrom January 2006 to June 2017, ninety-seven patients from thirteen medical centers were enrolled. Fifty-six patients continued imatinib therapy and 41 patients switched sunitinib treatment directly after R0 resection or optimal cytoreductive surgery. The PFS of sunitinib group was longer than that of imatinib group (30.0 months vs 12.0 months, p = 0.009). In subgroup analysis, the PFS of the sunitinib and imatinib groups were 25.5 months and 12.0 months in patients with tumor multifocal progression (p = 0.008), and 39.0 months and 13.0 months in patients with unifocal progression (p = 0.156), respectively. PFS of postoperative sunitinib group was also superior to the total PFS of postoperative imatinib group (PFS of postoperative imatinib plus PFS of subsequent sunitinib therapy (30.0 months vs 21.0 months, p = 0.012). The overall survival in the sunitinib and imatinib groups were 37.0 months and 33.0 months, respectively (p = 0.794).ConclusionsSurgery followed by sunitinib in GIST patients with unifocal or multifocal progression on imatinib may improve PFS, compared with surgery followed by imatinib.     

Positive or close margins in breast conserving surgery: Is re-excision always necessary?

Background

More than half of re-excision specimens after breast conserving surgery (BCS) are found to be free of residual tumor at definitive histology. The aim of this study was to identify clinicopathological factors along with intrinsic subtypes of the tumor (luminal A, luminal B, HER2-overexpressing, triple-negative) associated with residual tumor in re-excision or mastectomy specimen.

Methods

Two hundred forty-eight patients with initial BCS, who underwent one or more re-excisions or mastectomy because of close or positive margins were reviewed.

Results

Residual cancer was found in 50% of re-excision(s) or mastectomy specimens. Patients with multifocality (vs unifocality; OR = 5.2; 95% CI, 2.6–10.4) or positive nodes (vs negative nodes; OR = 2.5; 95% CI, 1.4–4.4), or positive margins (vs close margins; OR = 1.7; 95% CI = 1.0–2.9) were more likely to have residual tumor in re-excision or mastectomy specimen compared to others.

Conclusion

Our results suggest that further surgery is often indicated in patients with node positive or multifocal cancers or positive margins after BCS since residual disease cannot be ruled out. Re-excision or mastectomy could be omitted in patients with close margins with favorable factors such unifocal tumor or node negative disease.     

Multicentric and multifocal versus unifocal breast cancer: is the tumor-node-metastasis classification justified?

For classification of breast cancer (BC), tumor-node-metastasis (TNM) staging has been considered state of the art for more than 50 years. The T category is well defined, and in multicentric and multifocal tumors, tumor size is assessed by the largest tumor focus. The aim of this study was to compare multicentric/multifocal tumor spread in breast cancer with unifocal disease and to evaluate the diagnostic relevance of multifocality. A retrospective analysis was performed on survival related events in a series of 5,691 breast cancer patients between 1963 and 2007. By matched-pair analysis, patients were entered into two comparable groups of 288 patients after categorizing them as having multifocal/multicentric or unifocal breast cancers. Matching criteria were tumor size, grading, and hormone receptor status, which were equally distributed between both groups (P = 1.000 each). Disease free survival and the occurrence of relapse or of metastatic disease were evaluated. Cox’s regression analysis was used for multivariate analysis. In the unifocal group, the mean breast cancer-specific survival time was 221.6 months as opposed to 203.3 months in the multicentric/multifocal group (P < 0.001, log-rank test). The occurrence of local relapse and distant metastasis was significantly increased in the multifocal group in comparison to the unifocal equivalent group (P < 0.001 and P < 0.003, respectively). Cox regression analysis for multivariate analyses demonstrated focality and centricity to be highly significant predictors for reduced overall survival (P = 0.016), local relapse (P = 0.001) and distant metastasis (P = 0.038). Tumor size, histopathological grading, hormone receptor status, and staging of lymph nodes are well-established prognostic parameters. Additionally, the number of foci should be considered as an independent prognostic parameter, which is currently not reflected in the TNM classification. We conclude that multicentric/multifocal BC is an independent BC risk factor and should be included in the risk assessment by re-evaluating the current TNM classification of the UICC.     

Ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence (IBTR) in patients with operable breast cancer who undergo breast-conserving treatment after receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy: Risk factors of IBTR and validation of the MD Anderson Prognostic Index

BACKGROUND:

There is limited information about the risk factors for ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence (IBTR) after patients undergo breast‐conserving surgery plus radiotherapy (breast‐conserving treatment [BCT]) subsequent to neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC). The objective of the current study was to analyze these risk factors.

METHODS:

The authors collected data from 375 patients who underwent BCT and received NAC and analyzed the risk of IBTR associated with undergoing BCT after NAC. The usefulness of the MD Anderson Prognostic Index (MDAPI) for IBTR also was validated using the current data set.

RESULTS:

The median follow‐up was 47.8 months, and the 4‐year IBTR‐free survival rate was 95.6%. Multivariate analysis demonstrated that estrogen receptor (ER) status and multifocality of the residual tumor were associated significantly with IBTR‐free survival. In addition, patients who had ER‐positive and human epidermal growth factor 2 (HER2)‐negative tumors did not develop IBTR during the observation period. Although prognostic stratification according to MDAPI was relatively good for the prediction of IBTR in the study patients, the IBTR rate in the high‐risk group was not very high and was lower than that in the intermediate‐risk group. Multivariate analyses demonstrated that IBTR was an independent predictive factor for overall survival.

CONCLUSIONS:

ER status and multifocality of the residual tumor after NAC were independent predictors of IBTR after BCT. The MDAPI was barely adaptable to the study patients in terms of predicting IBTR. Patients with ER‐positive and HER2‐negative tumors had a favorable prognosis, whereas patients who developed IBTR after NAC had significantly worse overall survival. The authors propose a new IBTR prognostic index using the 2 factors that were identified as predictive of IBTR: ER status and multifocality of the residual tumor. Cancer 2012. © 2012 American Cancer Society.     

Surgical management of BRCA-mutation carriers: A single institution experience

IntroductionThe optimal surgical management of BRCA-mutation carriers remains a subject of debate. To evaluate the appropriateness of breast cancer (BC) treatment, the oncological outcomes of BRCA-mutation carriers treated either with breast-conserving therapy (BCT) or mastectomy were compared. Additionally, the role of bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy (BSO) and potential independent predictive factors for BC treatment were analyzed.Materials and methodsWe retrospectively reviewed all the consecutive patients with a pathogenic germline mutation in the BRCA1/2 genes tested at our Institution between July 2008 and October 2018. Primary end-points were disease-free survival (DFS), distant disease-free survival (DDFS), and overall survival (OS).ResultsThe characteristics and outcomes of 124 BRCA-associated BC patients were analyzed. Overall, 69 (55.7%) and 55 (44.3%) patients underwent BCT and mastectomy, respectively; 72 (58.1%) patients underwent BSO. After a median interval of 13.3 months, 24 patients underwent mastectomy after primary BCT. There was no significant difference in terms of DFS, DDFS, and OS between patients treated with BCT or mastectomy (p = 0.39,p = 0.27,p = 0.265, respectively). Patients treated with BSO had significantly better DDFS and OS compared to ovarian conservation (p = 0.033,p = 0.040, respectively). Three independent predictive factors for BCT were identified: age ≤41 years, genetic testing performed post-operatively, and breast tumors ≤21 mm.ConclusionsOur data suggest that BRCA-mutation carriers treated with BCT present similar oncological outcomes compared to mastectomy. Ovarian preservation decreases survival. Young BRCA-mutated patients with small BCs may not need up-front mastectomy, and BSO might be performed when ovarian cancer risk epidemiologically rises and potential reproductive desire is fulfilled.     

Effect of Breast Conservation Therapy vs Mastectomy on Overall Survival and Breast Cancer-Specific Survival Among Men With Stage I-II Breast Cancer: Analysis of SEER, 2000-2018

BackgroundMale breast cancer is a rare malignant tumor, and outcomes of breast conservation therapy (BCT) are currently lacking.MethodThe retrospective, population-based cohort study included 1369 stage I-II (T1–2 N0–1 M0) male breast cancer patients from the SEER database (2000-2018). The patients were grouped in two groups: BCT group and mastectomy group, according to surgical and radiation therapy. Kaplan-Meier method and univariable Cox proportional hazard analysis were used to compare overall survival (OS) and breast cancer-specific survival (BCSS) between two treatment groups. Propensity score matching (PSM) was performed to balance the confounding factors.ResultsOf the 1369 men, 97 (7%) patients received BCT, 1272 (93%) received mastectomy alone. The 5- and 10-year OS rates were 92.3% and 80.7% for BCT group compared with 80.4% and 61.4% for mastectomy group. The 5- and 10-year BCSS rates were 96.5% and 93.9% for patients undergoing BCT, as compared with 93.1% and 84.4% for patients undergoing mastectomy. Compared with mastectomy group, BCT group showed improved OS (hazard ratio [HR], 0.294; 95% CI 0.138-0.623, P = .002) and BCSS (hazard ratio [HR], 0.182; 95% CI 0.040-0.820, P = .027). Of the 791 patients with T1 stage, BCT showed insignificant association with OS (hazard ratio [HR], 0.555; 95% CI 0.207-1.488, P = .242) and BCSS (hazard ratio [HR], 1.217; 95% CI 0.171-8.675, P = .844).ConclusionThe results of this cohort study suggest that BCT is at least equivalent to mastectomy in male breast cancer patients. The underlying mechanism of this association needs further research.     

A quantitative assessment of the number of disease foci in papillary thyroid cancer

AimMultifocality is a frequent feature of papillary thyroid carcinoma (PTC). Its prognostic value is controversial although national guidelines recommend treatment intensification if present. However, multifocality is not a binary but discrete variable. This study aimed to examine the association between increasing number of foci and risk of recurrence following treatment.Methods577 patients with PTC were identified with median follow-up of 61 months. Number of foci were taken from pathology reports. Log-rank test was used to assess significance. Multivariate analysis was performed and Hazard Ratios were calculated.ResultsOf 577 patients, 206(35%) had multifocal disease and 36(6%) recurred. 133(23%), 89(15%) and 61(11%) had 3+, 4+ or 5+ foci respectively. The 5-year RFS stratified by number of foci was 95%v93% for 2+foci (p = 0.616), 95%v96% for 3+foci (p = 0.198) and 89%v96% for 4+foci (p = 0.022). The presence of 4 foci was associated with an over 2-fold risk of recurrence (HR 2.296, 95% CI 1.106–4.765, p = 0.026) although this was not independent of TNM staging. Of the 206 multifocal patients, 31(5%) had 4+foci as their sole risk factor for treatment intensification.ConclusionAlthough multifocality per se does not confer worse outcome in PTC, finding 4+foci is associated with worse outcome and could therefore be appropriate as a cut-off for treatment intensification. In our cohort, 5% of patients had 4+foci as a sole indication for treatment intensification, suggesting that such a cut off could impact clinical management.     

Multifocal breast cancer and survival: Each focus does matter particularly for larger tumours

PurposeThe objective of this study is to determine whether the aggregate tumour size of every focus in multifocal breast cancer more accurately predicts 10-year survival than current staging systems which use the largest or dominant tumour size.Patients and methodsThis study examined the original histological reports of 848 consecutive patients with invasive breast cancer treated in New South Wales (NSW), Australia between 1 April 1995 and 30 September 1995. Multifocal tumours were assessed using two estimates of pathologic tumour size: largest tumour focus diameter and the aggregate diameter of every tumour focus. The 10-year survival of patients with multifocal tumours measured in both ways was compared to that with unifocal tumours.ResultsAt a median follow-up of 10.4 years, 27 of 94 patients (28.7%) with multifocal breast cancer have died of breast cancer compared to 141 of 754 (18.7%) with unifocal breast cancer (P = .022). Ten-year survival was not affected by size for tumours measuring 20 mm or less, whether or not dominant tumour size (87.9%) or aggregate tumour size (87.0%) was used for multifocal tumours, compared to unifocal tumours (88.1%). For tumours larger than 20 mm, 10-year survival was 72.1% for unifocal tumours compared to 54.7% (P = .008) for multifocal tumours using dominant tumour size, but this was 69.5% and not significant when multifocal tumours were classified using aggregate tumour size (P = .49). Multivariate analysis also confirmed the above-mentioned results after adjustment for important prognostic factors.ConclusionAggregate size of every focus should be considered along with other prognostic factors for metastasis when treatment is planned. The current convention of using the largest (dominant) lesion as a measure of stage and associated breast cancer survival needs further validation.     

Patient Satisfaction Following Level II Oncoplastic Breast Surgery: A Comparison with Mastectomy Utililizing the Breast-Q Questionnaire will be published in Surgical Oncology

IntroductionOncoplastic breast surgery (OBS) is increasingly used to decrease the deformity in breast conserving therapy (BCT) for breast cancer. We aimed to evaluate patient reported satisfaction following level II OBS and mastectomy utilizing the BREAST-Q questionnaire.MethodsPatients who underwent level II OBS BCT and those who underwent mastectomies were distributed the BREAST-Q post-reduction/mammoplasty module. Clinicopathological data were collected from review of patient charts. Results were scored using the standardized scoring system (Q-score). Results of the OBS group were compared to those in the mastectomy group.ResultsA total of 88 patients who underwent level II OBS and 101 patients who underwent mastectomy completed the questionnaire. Mann-Whitney odds estimator demonstrated higher satisfaction with breasts (1.51, 95% CI [1.04–2.25], p = 0.026) and higher psychosocial well-being (1.51, 95% CI [1.04–2.15], p = 0.022) in those who underwent OBS compared to mastectomy.ConclusionResults demonstrate a high satisfaction with breasts and improved psychosocial wellbeing in patients who underwent level II OBS compared to those undergoing mastectomy. These results demonstrate that OBS should be considered in patients where mastectomy otherwise would be necessary. Further larger multi-institutional studies are necessary to examine the effect of OBS on the quality of life of breast cancer patients.     

Repeat breast-conserving therapy for ipsilateral breast cancer recurrence: A systematic review

The standard of care for patients with an ipsilateral breast tumour recurrence (IBTR) after breast-conserving therapy (BCT) is a salvage mastectomy. However, there is growing interest in the feasibility of repeat BCT for these patients. This systematic review contains the latest insights on BCT options for patients with an IBTR after initial BCT.A PubMed literature search was performed for articles on BCT options for IBTR after primary lumpectomy followed by radiotherapy. Weighted estimates were calculated for 5- and 10-year local control, distant metastasis-free and overall survival rates. Secondary outcomes were toxicity, cosmesis and quality of life.In total, 34 studies were eligible for analysis, of which 5 reported on repeat breast-conserving surgery (BCS) alone, 10 with mixed populations (BCS ± RT and/or mastectomy), 18 on repeat BCS followed by re-irradiation (whole-breast or partial) and one on quality of life. The weighted estimates for 5-year overall survival for repeat BCS and repeat BCS followed by reirradiation were 77% and 87%, respectively. Five-year local control was 76% for repeat BCS alone and 89% for repeat BCS followed by re-irradiation. Grade III-IV toxicity rates after re-irradiation varied from 0 to 21%, whereas the cosmesis was excellent-good in 29–100% of patients and unacceptable in 0–18%.Repeat BCS followed by re-irradiation, with either whole breast or partial breast re-irradiation, seems a feasible alternative to mastectomy in case of IBTR, in selected patients. Toxicity rates are low and the cosmetic outcome is good, but the size and follow-up of the published patient series is limited.     

Outcome After Ipsilateral Breast Tumor Recurrence in Patients With Early-Stage Breast Cancer Treated With Accelerated Partial Breast Irradiation

PurposeLimited outcomes exist in patients who develop an ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence (IBTR) after accelerated partial breast irradiation (APBI). The purpose of this study was to evaluate these outcomes and patterns of failure in our cohort of patients undergoing APBI.Methods and MaterialsA total of 534 patients with early-stage breast cancer were treated with APBI between 1993 and 2010. Clinical, pathologic, and treatment-related variables were analyzed. Clinical outcomes, including further IBTR, regional recurrence, disease-free survival, cause-specific survival, and overall survival were analyzed.ResultsEighteen (3.3%) patients developed an IBTR, for a 5-year actuarial rate of 2.0%; 14 (77.8%) of the recurrences were thought to represent new primary cancers. After IBTR, 13 (72.2%) patients were managed with salvage mastectomy and 4 (22.2%) patients with a second attempt at breast-conserving therapy. Five-year rates of disease-free survival, cause-specific survival, and overall survival after salvage mastectomy for IBTR were 81%, 100%, and 100%, respectively. In the 4 patients treated with a second attempt at breast-conserving therapy, no IBTR, axillary failure, regional recurrence, or distant metastases were noted at 5 years.ConclusionsIBTRs that developed after APBI resulted in excellent clinical outcomes comparable with those observed after whole-breast irradiation.     

Effect of multifocality and multicentricity on outcome in early stage breast cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Women with multifocal or multicentric breast tumors (multifocality henceforth) have been reported to have greater probability of nodal metastasis and relapse and worse survival than women with unifocal tumors. However, these associations have been inconsistent and multifocality is not taken into account by staging guidelines and prognostic models. A systematic review of electronic databases identified publications exploring the association between multifocality and overall survival (OS), disease-free survival (DFS), disease-specific survival (DSS), and loco-regional relapse (LRR). The hazard ratios (HRs) for OS and DFS for multifocal compared to unifocal tumors were extracted from multivariable analyses and included in a meta-analysis. For studies not reporting multivariable analyses, odds ratios (OR) were estimated from Kaplan–Meier curves for all endpoints at 5 and 10 years. Twenty-two studies comprising 67,557 women were included. Multifocality was reported in 9.5 % of patients. Classical prognostic factors were well balanced between unifocal and multifocal populations. In multivariable analyses, multifocality was associated with significantly worse OS (HR 1.65; P = 0.02), and a non-significant association with worse DFS (HR 1.96; P = 0.07). In univariable analyses, multifocality was associated with worse OS, DFS, DSS, and LRR at 5 years (OR 1.39, P = 0.02; OR 1.52, P = 0.02; OR 1.56, P = 0.03; and OR 3.23, P = 0.02, respectively). Similar estimates were observed at 10 years, but statistical significance was only reached for DSS and LRR. Mutifocality appears to be associated with a worse prognosis, however, substantial inter-study heterogeneity limits the precise determination of increased risk. Further validation of the independent prognostic impact of multifocality is warranted.     

Breast Cancer Multifocality and Multicentricity and Locoregional Recurrence

Background.

The impact of multifocal (MF) or multicentric (MC) breast cancer on locoregional (LR) control rates is unknown.

Methods.

MF was defined as two or more separate invasive tumors in the same quadrant of the breast. MC was defined as two or more separate invasive tumors occupying more than one quadrant of the same breast. Patients were categorized by LR treatment: breast conservation therapy (BCT; n = 256), mastectomy (n = 466), or mastectomy plus postmastectomy radiation therapy (PMRT; n = 184). All patients with MC disease had mastectomy (10 patients treated with BCT for MC disease were excluded). The Kaplan-Meier product limit method was used to calculate 5-year LR control rate. Cox proportional hazards models were used to determine independent associations of multifocality or multicentricity with LR control.

Results.

A total of 906 patients had either MF disease (n = 673) or MC disease (n = 233). With median follow-up of 52 months, the 5-year LR control rate was 99% for MF, 96% for MC, and 98% for unifocal tumors (p = .44). Subset analysis revealed no difference in LR control regardless of the LR treatment (p = .67 for BCT, p = .37 for mastectomy, p = .29 for mastectomy plus PMRT). There were five in-breast recurrences after BCT in the MF group. MF and MC did not have an independent impact on LR control rate on multivariate analysis.

Conclusion.

MF and MC disease are not independent risk factors for LR recurrence. Patients with MF and MC breast cancer had rates of LR control similar to those of their unifocal counterparts. These data suggest that BCT is a safe option for patients with MF tumors and that MF or MC disease alone is not an indication for PMRT.     

High-risk factors for lymph node metastasis in contralateral central compartment in unilateral papillary thyroid carcinoma（cT1N0）

ObjectiveThe incidence of papillary thyroid carcinoma (PTC) increases yearly. Central lymph node metastasis (CLNM) is common in PTC. Many studies have addressed ipsilateral CLNM; however, few studies have evaluated contralateral CLNM. The purpose of this study is to investigate the high-risk factors of lymph node metastasis in the contralateral central compartment of cT1 stage in PTC.MethodsIn total, 369 unilateral PTC (cT1N0) patients who underwent total-thyroidectomy with bilateral central lymph node dissection (CLND) between 2013 and 2016 in our hospital were retrospectively enrolled. Univariate and multivariate analyses identified the high-risk factors for contralateral CLNM of PTC.ResultsThe total metastasis rate of the ipsilateral central neck compartment was 31.71% (117/369). The total metastasis rate of the contralateral central neck compartment was 8.13% (30/369). The multivariate analysis showed that multifocality (p = 0.009), ipsilateral CLNM (p＜0.001), number of ipsilateral CLNM ＞2 (p = 0.006), tumor located at the inferior pole (p = 0.032) and tumor diameter ＞ 1 cm (p = 0.029) were independent risk factors for contralateral CLNM at cT1 stage in PTC, with odds ratios (ORs) of,4.132 (95% confidence intervals (CI): 1.430–11.936) ，8.591 (95% CI: 3.200–23.061) ，0.174 (95% CI: 0.050–0.601) ，0.353 (95% CI: 0.136–0.917)and 0.235 (95% CI: 0.064–0863), respectively.ConclusionThe combinational use of these risk factors will help surgeons devise an appropriate surgical plan preoperatively. This information could provide reference for the readers who are interested and help to determine the optimal extent of CLND in patients with PTC, especially for cT1b patients.