0～Ⅱ期乳腺癌外科保守治疗的疗效观察

目的：探讨早期乳腺癌保守性外科治疗的效果。方法：我院1990年6月－2000年4月对临床早期癌125例行乳房象限切除术加淋巴结清扫术，其中0期3例，I期89例，Ⅱ期33例。全组患者术后乳房放疗102例，未放疗23例。浸润性癌围手术期化疗7周。腋淋巴结阳性术后常规放疗，此后6－12个月内追加12－16次化疗。ER阳性服用TAM 2－5年。此外，选用同期0、I、Ⅱ期仿根治术或根治术常规综合治疗95例做对照观察。结果：1）病理检查：125个象限切除标本中断端阳性10例（8．0％），均以管内癌形式出现。腋淋巴结平均检出16．8枚，阳性率15．2％；2）生存情况：125例随诊，＞3年85例，＞5年63例，全部生存。仅1例术后2．5年局部复发，1例术后2年骨转移带瘤生存；随诊＜3年40例，1例术后1年肺转移带瘤生存；对照组95例，1例肺转移死亡。结论：早期乳腺癌保守性外科治疗与仿根治术，根治术效果相似且能保持乳房良好外形，是I、Ⅱ期乳腺癌理想的治疗方法。     

73例乳腺癌术后胸壁复发因素及预后分析

目的：探讨乳腺癌术后胸壁局部复发因素及预后意义。方法：对73例乳腺癌术后胸壁复发患者进行回顾性分析。结果：本组患者占同期全部乳腺癌病例的4．02％，其中50例(68．5％)胸壁复发发生在术后2年内，复发后34例(46．6％)于2年内死亡。结论：乳腺癌原发肿瘤分期晚、腋下淋巴结癌转移数多、复发率高；原发灶雌激素受体(ER)及孕激素受体(PR)阴性患者．复发多出现在术后2年内。术后胸壁复发时，复发病灶情况及治疗效果是影响预后的因素之一，以手术为主的综合治疗可提高其远期疗效。     

乳腺癌术后局部复发与远处转移的关系

目的：探讨乳腺癌术后局部复发与远处转移的关系。方法：根据1993－1999年收治的局部复发与远处转移的68例乳腺癌患者复发与转移出现的先后顺序及比例进行回顾性分析。结果：无局部复发而发生远处转移19例,局部复发伴远处转移49例。49例中先有局部复发而后出现远处转移者33例,占67．3％;局部复发同时伴有远处转移者16例,占32．7％。结论：乳腺癌术后远处转移与局部复发有关,且多发生在局部复发后1年左右。     

CT随诊以早期发现食管癌术后转移与复发

中国医学科学院肿瘤医院影像诊断科主任医师周纯武等自1989年始，用CY随诊食管癌术后患者。分析150例转移或复发病例CT结果，发现食管癌术后转移主要表现为纵隔及锁骨上区淋巴结肿大，大者直接侵及甲状腺、气管及支气管，甚至形成气管疾。其次是吻合口或胸胃复发。远处转移主要发生在胸膜、骨骼、肝脏等处。除小的淋巴结转移位于气管、食管为，压迫喉返神经，早期可出现声嘶外，待出现吞咽困难、咳血、胸痛等症状时，病变都已较大，再治难奏效。约15％食管癌术后转移者无明显临床症状，是由O随诊被早期发现而得到早期治疗的。Cf在发现淋…     

18F-FDG联合99mTc-MDP显像在乳腺癌术后随访中的应用

目的：探讨^18F—FDG符合探测显像联合^99mTc—MDP骨显像在乳腺癌手术化疗后早期随访中，监测其复发及转移的临床应用价值。方法：81例乳腺癌患者手术化疗后3年内，分别行^18F—FDG符合探测显像、^99mTc—MDP骨显像、CT显像，计算灵敏度、特异性、准确性。结果：81例乳腺癌手术化疗后患者中，经病理检查或临床及其他影像学诊断转移31例，^18F—FDG符合探测显像对复发及转移患者监测的灵敏度、特异性、准确性分别为74．2％、92．0％、85．2％；CT显像对复发及转移患者监测的灵敏度、特异性、准确性分别为58．1％、88．0％、76．5％；^18F—FDG符合探测显像联合^99mTc—MDP骨显像诊断对复发及转移患者监测的灵敏度、特异性、准确性分别为93．5％、92．0％、92．6％。结论：^18F—FDG符合探测显像联合^99mTc—MDP骨显像对乳腺癌手术化疗后患者的早期随访中，灵敏度、特异性、准确性均较高。对监测其复发及转移具有重要的临床应用价值。     

肾癌肾切除术后的腹部CT扫描

分析７０例肾癌肾切除术后的腹部ＣＴ扫描。肾切除后局部空虚，邻近器官移位充填局部，腰大肌形态不变／丰满。早期术后改变为肾床内包裹性积液／积血和软组织增厚，均发生在４个月内，随诊见病变明显缩小。７０例中，１５例出现局部复发／转移，有１０例发生在２年内，其中２例无临床症状，由常规ＣＴ复查发现。复发由外科手术证实４例，其余均根据临床随诊及影象学表现诊断。１５例中肾床复发６例，切口复发５例，肾上腺转移４例，     

胃癌术后随访中CEA和CA19-9联合检测的临床意义

目的：探讨血清CEA和CA19-9联合检测对胃癌根治术后有无复发和(或)转移的诊断实用价值。方法：57例胃癌患者，在根治术后第1年的每2个月，第2年的每3个月、第3年的每6个月、第4∽5年中的每1年均分别作血清CEA及CA19-99联合检测；术后第1年，每半年作一次胃镜、腹部B超、胸片检查，以后的2∽5年，每年作一次胃镜、腹部B超、胸片检查。凡血清CEA及(或)12A19-9阳性者即作胃镜及(或)肠镜、腹部B超、胸片等相关检查。凡胃镜及腹部B超等检查提示复发或转移者、有腹部不适、大便性状改变、食欲下降、体重减轻等症状者即作血清CEA及CA19-9检查。结果：34例被证实复发及(或)转移。其中CEA及CA19-9检测的阳性率分别为44．12％和58．82％；CEA和CA19-9同时检测，对胃癌复发和(或)转移的总发现率为85．29％。检查证实有局部复发和(或)转移者，大多与肝、胆、胰转移有关。结论：血清CEA和CA19-9联合检测，可明显弥补单项检测的不足，可提高对胃癌术后复发及转移的发现率。     

肺癌患者淋巴结微转移灶的检测的预后价值

目的：通过免疫组化的方法检测非小细胞肺癌患术后常规病理检查阴性的淋巴结的微转移灶，研究其预后价值。方法：用免疫组化角蛋白(CK)染色的方法检测术后常规病理学检查阴性的淋巴结中的微转移灶，以此研究非小细胞肺癌患淋巴结微转移灶的检出和患生存期的关系。结果：在39例患的90枚阴性淋巴结中22例患(56．4％)的26枚淋巴结(28．89％)检出微转移灶。有无复发转移患的淋巴结微转移率有显性差异(81％vs39％，P=0．02)；有无微转移灶的患的生存期各为32个月和48个月，3年生存率各为35％和75％(P=0．0178)。结论：淋巴结微转移灶的检测可以作为非小细胞肺癌患手术后的一个重要的预后指标。     

乳腺癌术后放疗对局部复发的影响

目的：评价乳腺癌术后放疗的作用。方法：选择117例根治术后乳腺癌患者，用x^2检验比较3年局部复发率。结果：全组3年局部复发率12．8％，无内乳、腋窝复发患者。胸壁复发占局部复发的80％(12／15)。无腋窝淋巴结转移，但乳腺肿块位于内象限、中央区或腋窝淋巴结转移1—3个的80例中，3年局部复发率为8．75％，对于接受或未接受术后放疗患者分别为10．3％、7．3％，差异无显著性(P＞0．05)。对于乳腺肿块＜5cm或≥5cm患者分别为3．17％、29．41％，差异有显著性(P＝0．004)。结论：无腋窝淋巴结转移但乳腺肿块位于内象限、中央区或腋窝淋巴结转移1—3个可不作为术后常规术后放疗指征，但此种情况下若乳腺肿块≥5cm，或腋窝淋巴结转移≥4个，尤其当腋窝淋巴结转移＞10个时，应该进行包括胸壁照射在内的术后放疗。     

乳腺癌根治术后得发转移43例临床分析

本文分析了影响乳腺癌根治术和发转移的因素，43例乳腺癌采用根治术，术后^60Co放射治疗，化疗后局部复发7例（16．3％），远处淋巴结转移8例（18．6％），骨转移13例（30％），肺转移12例（285），肝转移12例（28％），胸膜转移6例（14％），手术时临床分期越早，术后复发转移时间越长，腺癌、单纯癌术后复发时间较长，浸润性导管癌、髓样癌术后复发时间较短，腋淋巴结（＋）术后复发时间短，绝经前患者术后复发时间较短；据上认为：乳腺癌根治术后复发转移与手术时临床分期、腋淋巴结（＋），病理类型及月经状况有关。     

A retrospective study of first indicators of breast cancer recurrence

This study was performed to evaluate the first indicators of breast cancer recurrence in 1,145 patients treated at the University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, between July 1973 and December 1980. Twenty patients were excluded due to incomplete data, resulting in a total number of 1,125 evaluable patients. Data collection included the first metastatic site and its means of detection (symptoms, self-examination, physical examination performed by a physician, and the results of blood and radiological tests). Whether recurrence was found at the scheduled follow-up visits or between the scheduled visits was also analyzed. Symptoms were the primary indicator of relapse for 648 cases (57.6% of the study population). An additional 361 cases (32.1% of the total group) were detected by self-examination or by physician-performed physical examination. Other investigations, e.g. bone scans, liver scans, chest X-rays, and blood tests, revealed recurrent disease in only 116 patients (10. 3% of the population). Among the 1,125 patients, 254 recurrences (22. 6% of the study population) were detected at the scheduled follow-up surveillance and, among these, 64.6% were found by history or physical examination. The distribution of metastatic sites and first indicators of metastases remained constant over time. The scheduled follow-up visits detected a mean of 25.9% of relapses during the first 36 months, while after 36 months only 16.3% of relapses were detected by systematic monitoring. There were no statistically significant differences in disease-free overall survival rates between symptomatic and asymptomatic patients at the time the first recurrence was detected. Moreover, the disease-free and overall survival rates appeared to be the same in symptomatic and asymptomatic patients, whether or not the recurrence was detected by a scheduled follow-up examination. Two conclusions emerged from the present study. Extensive, routine laboratory investigations are not justifiable following curative treatment of primary breast cancer, and it seems reasonable and cost-effective to reduce follow-up surveillance to careful history and physical examination only. The actual method of surveillance does not significantly affect the time interval to metastasis detection and seems inefficient. Clearly, more sensitive methods are needed for earlier detection of recurrent metastatic breast cancer. In addition, early detection of metastases would be even more valuable if more effective treatment modalities of recurrent or metastatic breast cancer were available.     

Detection of the first recurrence during intensive follow-up of breast cancer patients

BACKGROUND: Breast cancer patients are routinely followed after primary treatment. Many intensive diagnostic methods (tumor markers, chest X-ray, mammography, liver echography, bone scans) are performed periodically. However, it remains to be determined how often attempts should be made to detect the first recurrence of breast cancer by these methods. METHODS: To evaluate the effect of imaging diagnosis and tumor markers, we analyzed methods of detection of first recurrence sites during intensive follow-up of breast cancer patients. RESULTS: Of 550 female patients who had been surgically treated between July 1992 and December 1996, 65 recurrent cases had been diagnosed as of December 1997. Thirty cases (46%) had been found as a result of symptoms related to the site of recurrence and 14 cases (22%) were detected by physical examination. In the remaining 21 cases (32%), detection was by other methods: in eight cases by imaging diagnosis, in three cases based on abnormal tumor markers and in 10 cases by imaging diagnosis and abnormal tumor markers. Twenty-nine cases (45%) followed every 1-3 months had presented with symptoms at routine or interval appointments. There was a significant difference between first recurrence sites (loco-regional, bone and viscera) and the methods of detection (symptoms, physical examination and other diagnostic methods) (P < 0.0001). However, no statistical difference in overall survival after operation was observed between the 30 cases found as a result of symptoms and the 35 cases detected by physical examination or other diagnostic methods. CONCLUSIONS: Taken together with ASCO's surveillance guidelines (J Clin Oncol 1997;15:2149-56), intensive follow-up of breast cancer patients should be limited to high-risk breast cancer patients, especially those who enter randomized clinical trials. A careful history and physical examination are in practice indicated every 3-6 months for 3 years and then every 6 months for the following 2 years.      

Pattern of follow-up care and early relapse detection in breast cancer patients

Routine breast cancer follow-up aims at detecting second primary breast cancers and loco regional recurrences preclinically. We studied breast cancer follow-up practice and mode of relapse detection during the first 5 years of follow-up to determine the efficiency of the follow-up schedule. The Netherlands Cancer Registry provided data of 6,509 women, operated for invasive non-metastatic breast cancer in 2003–2004. In a random sample including 144 patients, adherence to follow-up guideline recommendations was studied. Mode of relapse detection was studied in 124 patients with a second primary breast cancer and 160 patients with a loco regional recurrence. On average 13 visits were performed during the first 5 years of the follow-up, whereas nine were recommended. With one, two and three medical disciplines involved, the number of visits was 9, 14 and 18, respectively. Seventy-five percent (93/124) of patients with a second primary breast cancer, 42 % (31/74) of patients with a loco regional recurrence after breast conserving surgery and 28 % (24/86) of patients with a loco regional recurrence after mastectomy had no symptoms at detection. To detect one loco regional recurrence or second primary breast cancer preclinically, 1,349 physical examinations versus 262 mammography and/or MRI tests were performed. Follow-up provided by only one discipline may decrease the number of unnecessary follow-up visits. Breast imaging plays a major and physical examination a minor role in the early detection of second primary breast cancers and loco regional recurrences. The yield of physical examination to detect relapses early is low and should therefore be minimised.     

Follow-Up Strategies and Detection of Recurrent Breast Cancer in the Modern Era

Background: Regular history assessments and physical examination with annual breast imaging have been recommended as the standard surveillance protocol for breast cancer patients who underwent curative-intent therapy. Based on randomized studies conducted in the 2000s, surveillance with regular chest or abdominal imaging, chemistry panels, or tumor marker measurements does not improve survival in such patients. Given the remarkable recent improvements of systemic therapy, we hypothesized that more intensive surveillance may lead to early detection and improve treatment outcomes in the modern era. Methods: We retrospectively evaluated the follow-up strategies and benefits of investigations used in usual practice. Breast cancer patients who had initial adjuvant therapy were recruited and classified according to the receipt of standard follow-up (history, physical examination, and annual breast imaging) or alternative follow-up (surveillance with at least annual chest or abdominal imaging or biannual liver function testing). The primary outcome was overall survival. Secondary outcomes included disease-free survival and the indicator of recurrence detection. Results: Of 412 recruited patients, 213 (51.7%) and 199 patients (49.3%) were included in the standard follow-up group and alternative follow-up group, respectively. Among 90 patients (21%) with disease recurrence, the most frequent indicators of recurrence were newly reported symptoms or physical examination abnormalities (64%), followed by abnormal breast imaging (23%) and abnormal chest X-ray (10%). After a median follow-up of 85 months, approximately 90% of patients remained alive after 5 years in both groups. The mean overall survival was similar between the standard and alternative follow-up groups (154.5 months vs. 151.9 months, p = 0.54). There was no difference in terms of the proportion of interval visits, specific cancer treatment received, and disease-free survival. Conclusion: Standard follow-up with history assessments, physical examination, and annual breast imaging remains the recommended surveillance strategy in the modern era. Alternative follow-up strategy did not improve oncologic outcomes.     

Relation between the method of detection of initial breast carcinoma and the method of detection of subsequent ipsilateral local recurrence and contralateral breast carcinoma

BACKGROUND: Mammography and physical examination are routine methods for the detection of ipsilateral local recurrence and contralateral breast carcinoma in patients initially undergoing breast conservation treatment. The current study reports the relation between the method of detection of the initial breast carcinoma and the method of detection of subsequent ipsilateral local recurrence and contralateral breast carcinoma. METHODS: A retrospective review was performed of the records of female patients with initial American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) Stage I and II invasive breast carcinoma who developed ipsilateral local recurrence or contralateral breast carcinoma after breast conservation treatment. The method of detection of local recurrence in the ipsilateral breast and the method of detection of contralateral breast carcinoma were compared with the method of detection of the primary tumor. RESULTS: There were 125 ipsilateral breast local recurrences and 71 contralateral breast carcinoma cases detected. Of the 125 recurrences in the ipsilateral breast, 38% (48 recurrences) were detected by mammography only, 37% (46 recurrences) were detected by physical examination only, and 25% (31 recurrences) were detected by both methods. Of the 71 contralateral breast carcinoma cases, 53% (38 cases) were detected by mammography only, 23% (16 cases) were detected by physical examination only, and 24% (17 cases) were detected by both methods. When the primary tumors were detected by mammography only, 21% of the local recurrences (3 of 14 local recurrences) and 19% of the contralateral breast carcinoma cases (4 of 21 cases) were detected by physical examination only. When the primary tumors were detected by physical examination only, 24% of the local recurrences (14 of 58 local recurrences) and 42% of the contralateral breast carcinoma cases (8 of 19 cases) were detected by mammography only. When stratified by the interval between diagnosis of the primary tumor and ipsilateral local recurrence or contralateral breast carcinoma (< or = 5 years vs. > 5 years) or age of the patient at the time of ipsilateral breast recurrence or contralateral breast carcinoma (age < or = 49 years vs. age > or = 50 years), both breast examination and mammography were found to be important in the detection of locally recurrent tumor and contralateral breast carcinoma in each subgroup of the patients, regardless of the method of presentation of the primary tumor. CONCLUSIONS: Both mammography and physical examination were found to be significant in the detection of locally recurrent tumor in the ipsilateral breast and in the detection of contralateral breast carcinoma, regardless of the method of detection of the primary tumor.     

A retrospective study of earliest indicators of recurrence in patients on Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group adjuvant chemotherapy trials for breast cancer. A preliminary report

A retrospective review of the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group adjuvant chemotherapy studies EST 5177 and EST 6177 was performed in order to ascertain the first indicator of relapse in women with breast cancer and pathologically positive axillary lymph nodes. Of 856 evaluable patients, 208 have relapsed. In 175 patients who relapsed, the first indicator could be clearly identified: symptoms, 36%; patient self-examination, 18.3%; physical examination by the physician, 19.4%; abnormal blood chemistries, 12%; bone scans, 8%; chest x-rays, 5.1%; and mammograms, 1.1%. Although 74% of recurrences are therefore detected clinically, in a sizable proportion (26%), the ancillary tests were the earliest indicators of relapse. The manner of detection was not influenced by nodal, estrogen receptor (ER), or menopausal status. These results suggest that the follow-up schedule currently employed by ECOG appears reasonable.     

Follow-up in breast cancer: does routine clinical examination improve outcome? A systematic review of the literature

Multiple guidelines exist for the follow-up of breast cancer, with no agreement on frequency or duration. The contribution of routine clinical examination for the detection of potentially treatable relapse, and the impact this has on survival, is unknown. In this study, we systematically review the literature to establish the proportion of potentially treatable locoregional relapses and new contralateral breast cancers detected by clinical examination, mammography and patient self-examination. We analyse whether method of detection of relapse influences outcome. The methods used were systematic review of the literature. MEDLINE, EMBASE, CancerLit, Web of Sciences and EBM reviews were the data sources for the systematic review. All studies with information on proportion of relapses detected by clinical examination, mammography and self-examination were included. A total of 30-40% of potentially treatable relapses are detected by patient self-examination. In studies published before 2000, 15% of such relapse is mammographically detected with 46% detected by routine clinical examination. In those published after 2000, 40% are mammographically detected with 15% detected on routine clinical examination. Patients with ipsilateral breast relapse detected clinically appear to do less well than those with relapse detected by self-examination or mammography. Routine clinical surveillance is responsible for detection of fewer potentially treatable relapses in more modern cohorts as experience with mammography increases. There is no evidence to suggest that clinical examination confers a survival advantage compared with other methods of detection. The data in this analysis suggest that a review of the guidelines on follow-up after breast cancer should be undertaken.     

American Cancer Society/American Society of Clinical Oncology Breast Cancer Survivorship Care Guideline

Answer questions and earn CME/CNE The purpose of the American Cancer Society/American Society of Clinical Oncology Breast Cancer Survivorship Care Guideline is to provide recommendations to assist primary care and other clinicians in the care of female adult survivors of breast cancer. A systematic review of the literature was conducted using PubMed through April 2015. A multidisciplinary expert workgroup with expertise in primary care, gynecology, surgical oncology, medical oncology, radiation oncology, and nursing was formed and tasked with drafting the Breast Cancer Survivorship Care Guideline. A total of 1073 articles met inclusion criteria; and, after full text review, 237 were included as the evidence base. Patients should undergo regular surveillance for breast cancer recurrence, including evaluation with a cancer‐related history and physical examination, and should be screened for new primary breast cancer. Data do not support performing routine laboratory tests or imaging tests in asymptomatic patients to evaluate for breast cancer recurrence. Primary care clinicians should counsel patients about the importance of maintaining a healthy lifestyle, monitor for post‐treatment symptoms that can adversely affect quality of life, and monitor for adherence to endocrine therapy. Recommendations provided in this guideline are based on current evidence in the literature and expert consensus opinion. Most of the evidence is not sufficient to warrant a strong evidence‐based recommendation. Recommendations on surveillance for breast cancer recurrence, screening for second primary cancers, assessment and management of physical and psychosocial long‐term and late effects of breast cancer and its treatment, health promotion, and care coordination/practice implications are made. CA Cancer J Clin 2016;43–73. © 2015 American Cancer Society.     

Impact on survival of early detection of isolated breast recurrences after the primary treatment for breast cancer: a meta-analysis

Purpose The purpose was to establish the impact on survival of early detection of a local recurrence of breast cancer as compared to late detection. Design A meta-analysis was carried out using Cochrane review manager software (RevMan version 4.2). Studies were included if women were treated for primary breast cancer without evidence of distant metastasis at primary diagnosis and if these concerned routine follow-up strategies focusing on the early detection of curable recurrences. Data regarding the risk for death were derived from each study. Multi level models were used to study heterogeneity by using MLWin. Results Thirteen studies concerning 2,263 patients were included. Early detection of breast cancer recurrences during follow-up gave a significantly better survival as compared to late detected recurrences (HR: 1.68 (95% CI: 1.48–1.91)). Survival was better when the recurrence was found by mammography instead of physical examination or in patients without symptoms as compared to those with symptoms (HR: 2.44 (95% CI: 1.78–3.35); HR: 1.56 (95% CI: 1.36–1.79), respectively). If all breast cancer recurrences would be detected earlier, that 5–8 deaths (i.e. an absolute reduction in mortality of 17–28%) would be avoided by performing routine follow-up during a 10 year-period for 1,000 breast cancer patients. Conclusion These data support the hypothesis that detection of isolated loco-regional or contra-lateral breast cancer recurrences in patients without symptoms has beneficial impact on survival of breast cancer patients when compared to late symptomatic detection.     

American Society of Clinical Oncology 1998 update of recommended breast cancer surveillance guidelines.

OBJECTIVE: To determine an effective, evidence-based, postoperative surveillance strategy for the detection and treatment of recurrent breast cancer. Tests are recommended only if they have an impact on the outcomes specified by American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) for clinical practice guidelines. POTENTIAL INTERVENTION: All tests described in the literature for postoperative monitoring were considered. In addition, the data were critically evaluated to determine the optimal frequency of monitoring. OUTCOME: Outcomes of interest include overall and disease-free survival, quality of life, toxicity reduction, and secondarily cost-effectiveness. EVIDENCE: A search was performed to determine all relevant articles published over the past 20 years on the efficacy of surveillance testing for breast cancer recurrence. These publications comprised both retrospective and prospective studies. VALUES: Levels of evidence and guideline grades were rated by a standard process. More weight was given to studies that tested a hypothesis directly relating testing to one of the primary outcomes in a randomized design. BENEFITS, HARMS, AND COSTS: The possible consequences of false-positive and -negative tests were considered in evaluating a preference for one of two tests providing similar information. Cost alone was not a determining factor. RECOMMENDATIONS: The attached guidelines and text summarize the updated recommendations of the ASCO breast cancer expert panel. Data are sufficient to recommend monthly breast self-examination, annual mammography of the preserved and contralateral breast, and a careful history and physical examination every 3 to 6 months for 3 years, then every 6 to 12 months for 2 years, then annually. Data are not sufficient to recommend routine bone scans, chest radiographs, hematologic blood counts, tumor markers (carcinoembryonic antigen, cancer antigen [CA] 15-5, and CA 27.29), liver ultrasonograms, or computed tomography scans. VALIDATION: The recommendations of the breast cancer expert panel were evaluated and supported by the ASCO Health Services Research Committee reviewers and the ASCO Board of Directors.