The detection of early breast cancer: three-year results from a diagnostic breast clinic

The initial results from a diagnostic breast clinic in which clinical examination, x-ray mammography and ultrasound are used to establish a diagnosis during a single patient-visit are described. In 3461 patient-visits, 82 histologically-proven breast cancers were detected. Fifty-two per cent of these cancers were 2 cm or less in diameter and 61% had no axillary lymph-node metastases. Fifteen cancers were impalpable lesions which were detected by mammography alone. The over-all malignant-to-benign biopsy ratio was 1:2.7; for impalpable tumours, this ratio was 1:3.9. The role of such a diagnostic breast clinic is discussed, and attention is drawn to a relatively low attendance of women in the "high-risk" age group of over 50 years of age.     

多西他赛+卡铂联合曲妥珠单抗方案对早期人表皮生长因子受体2阳性乳腺癌的新辅助治疗效果

目的探讨多西他赛+卡铂联合曲妥珠单抗(TCH)方案对早期人表皮生长因子受体2(HER2)阳性乳腺癌的新辅助治疗效果。方法回顾性分析2013年1月至2018年12月北京大学第一医院乳腺疾病中心经治的522例早期HER2阳性乳腺癌患者的临床资料,占同期收治早期浸润性乳腺癌患者的21.80%(522/2 394)。其中113例接受TCH方案进行新辅助治疗,年龄[M(QR)]52(13)岁(范围:23~69岁)。记录TCH方案新辅助治疗后病理完全缓解(pCR,ypT0N0M0期)的例数,采用Miller-Payne标准进行病理学评价。采用Kaplan-Meier法计算无病生存率和总体生存率,采用Log-rank检验比较组间生存差异。结果接受曲妥珠单抗规范治疗患者(294例)的无病生存率优于未规范治疗患者(177例)(84.4%比72.4%,χ²=4.095,P=0.046)。发生3~4级不良反应的患者占全部患者的15.9%(18/113),包括3~4级中性粒细胞减少12例,腹泻6例。31例患者获得pCR(ypT0N0M0),pCR率为27.4%(31/113)。pCR患者与非pCR患者的无病生存率和总体生存率无差异(91.8%比85.0%,92.5%比90.5%,P值均>0.05)。病理学评价为G4~5的患者无病生存率优于G1~3患者(89.6%比81.5%,χ²=5.340,P=0.021),而总体生存率的差异无统计学意义(91.4%比89.1%,χ²=1.008,P=0.315)。结论早期HER2阳性乳腺癌采用TCH方案行新辅助治疗的效果较好,新辅助治疗后病理学评价为G4~5的患者的无病生存率更高。     

Should oncoplastic breast conserving surgery be used for the treatment of early stage breast cancer? Using the GRADE approach for development of clinical recommendations

IntroductionThe potential advantages of oncoplastic breast conserving surgery (BCS) have not been validated in robust studies that constitute high levels of evidence, despite oncoplastic techniques being widely adopted around the globe. There is hence the need to define the precise role of oncoplastic BCS in the treatment of early breast cancer, with consensual recommendations for clinical practice.MethodsA panel of world-renowned breast specialists was convened to evaluate evidence, express personal viewpoints and establish recommendations for the use of oncoplastic BCS as primary treatment of unifocal early stage breast cancers using the GRADE approach.ResultsAccording to the results of the systematic review of literature, the panelists were asked to comment on the recommendation for use of oncoplastic BCS for treatment of operable breast cancer that is suitable for breast conserving surgery, with the GRADE approach. Based on the voting outcome, the following recommendation emerged as a consensus statement: Oncoplastic breast conserving surgery should be recommended versus standard breast conserving surgery for the treatment of operable breast cancer in adult women who are suitable candidates for breast conserving surgery (with very low certainty of evidence).DiscussionThis review has revealed a low level of evidence for most of the important outcomes in oncoplastic surgery with lack of any randomized data and absence of standard tools for evaluation of clinical outcomes and especially patients’ values.Despite areas of controversy, about one-third (36%) of panel members expressed a strong recommendation in support of oncoplastic BCS. Presumably, this reflects a synthesis of views on the relative complexity of these techniques, associated complications, impact on quality of life and costs.     

Survival outcomes after breast-conserving therapy compared with mastectomy for patients with early-stage metaplastic breast cancer: a population-based study of 2412 patients

BackgroundPrevious studies revealed that patients with early-stage metaplastic breast cancer (MBC) underwent mastectomy more often than breast-conserving therapy (BCT) mainly due to the larger tumor size. This study was performed to compare the survival outcomes following BCT versus mastectomy for patients with early-stage MBC.MethodsSurveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database was used to identify women diagnosed with early-stage MBC (T1-3N0-3M0) between 2001 and 2016, who were treated with either BCT or mastectomy. We assessed overall survival (OS) and breast cancer-specific survival (BCSS) using the Kaplan-Meier method and hazard ratios using Cox proportional hazards models.ResultsA total of 2412 MBC patients were identified, 881 (36.5%) of whom underwent BCT and 1531(63.5%) underwent mastectomy. The median follow-up time was 73 months. Most of patients had older age (≥50 years old), larger tumor size, higher American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) stage and hormone receptor negativity. After adjustment for confounding variables, patients who underwent BCT had significantly improved OS (5-year OS: 84.3% vs 62.5%; 10-year OS: 73.0% vs 52.1%; adjusted HR = 0.76, 95%CI: 0.59–0.97, p = 0.028) and BCSS (5-year BCSS: 89.1% vs 70.8%; 10-year BCSS: 83.9% vs 67.5%; adjusted HR = 0.72, 95%CI: 0.53–0.96, p = 0.026) than those who underwent mastectomy, and this improvement remained significant for all T and N stages of MBC except for N2-3 stage.ConclusionBCT conferred improved OS and BCSS compared with mastectomy for patients with early-stage MBC, and the improvement persisted in almost all of the subgroups of different T and N stages.     

Do hospital type or caseload make a difference in chemotherapy treatment patterns for early breast cancer? Results from 104 German institutions, 2008–2017

BackgroundOver the past decade, chemotherapy has been used more selectively in early breast cancer (EBC) due to better risk stratification. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) has evolved to the primary treatment option. The type and size of hospitals is known to have a substantial influence on the kinds of treatment they provide, and therefore on patient outcomes (e.g. rates for pathological complete response, pCR), but it is not yet known how this has affected delivery of chemotherapy for EBC in Germany.MethodsThis study analyzed chemotherapy use and pCR rates after NACT for EBC patients treated at 104 German institutions 2008–2017. Institutions were separated into associated hospital type (university hospital; teaching hospital; community hospital) and annual caseload (≤100; 101–250; >250 cases/year).ResultsOverall, 124,084 patients were included, of whom 11.6% were treated at university hospitals, 63.1% at teaching hospitals, and 25.3% at community hospitals. In total, 46,274 (37.3%) received chemotherapy, of whom 44,765 had information available about systemic treatment and surgery. From 2008 to 2017, chemotherapy use declined from 48.3% to 36.4% for university hospitals, from 40.7% to 30.3% for teaching hospitals, and from 42.4% to 33.7% for community hospitals. Furthermore, the proportion of NACT increased the most in university hospitals (from 32.0% to 68.1%); whereas, the rate of pCR (defined as ypT0 ypN0) increased irrespective of institutional type. Analyses regarding annual caseload did not show any differences.ConclusionsThe results from this large, nationwide cohort reflect a more selective use of chemotherapy in Germany, irrespective of institutional type or case load.     

The effect of postmastectomy radiation therapy on high-risk patients with T1-2N0 breast cancer

BackgroundThe prognostic impact of postmastectomy radiation therapy (PMRT) on high-risk patients with T1-2N0 breast cancer is controversial. We aimed to investigate the effect of PMRT on high-risk patients with T1-2N0 breast cancer.MethodsA total of 3439 patients diagnosed with T1-2N0 breast cancer who received mastectomy between 2000 and 2016 in our institute were retrospectively analyzed. Leveraging the Fine and Gray competing risks regression in unirradiated patients, risk factors of locoregional recurrence (LRR) were identified. All patients were stratified into high-risk (3 or 4 risk factors) and low-risk (no more than 2 risk factors) groups. The prognostic effect of PMRT was estimated in two subgroups. This subgroup analysis was also performed in patients with T2N0 breast cancer.ResultsThe median follow-up was 89 months. The 5-year cumulative incidence of LRR was 2.2% in unirradiated patients. Tumor size, estrogen receptor (ER) status, histologic grade and lymphovascular invasion (LVI) were identified as independent risk factors of LRR. In the high-risk group, PMRT was correlated with a 8.3% risk reduction of 5-year LRR, 7.8% risk reduction of 5-year distant recurrence (DR), and 6.4% risk reduction of 5-year breast cancer mortality (BCM), whereas it was not correlated with LRR, DR, or BCM in low-risk group. In patients with T2N0 breast cancer, PMRT was associated with decreased LRR, DR and BCM in high-risk group, other than low-risk group.ConclusionsPMRT presented heterogenous effect on patients with T1-2N0 breast cancer. Patients at high risk of LRR were more likely to benefit from PMRT.     

Research on the cutoff tumor size of omitting radiotherapy for BCSS after breast conserving surgery in women aged 65 years or oder with low-risk invasive breast carcinoma: Results based on the SEER database

BackgroundRadiotherapy after breast-conserving surgery (BCS) is not always necessary in older women staged T1N0M0 with low-risk invasive breast cancer, but few studies have concluded the detailed tumor size as a reference for avoiding radiotherapy. The study was conducted to explore and identify the optimal cutoff tumor size.MethodsThe study population was from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database in 2010–2016. Propensity score matching was used to balance the confounders between groups. Predictors associated with survival were analyzed by Kaplan–Meier, X-tile, Cox proportional hazards model and competing risk model.ResultsA total of 52049 women and 3846 deaths were included in the cohort with a median follow-up of 34 months. Based on the cutoff value determined by X-tile analysis, the study population were divided into small tumor group (≤14 mm in diameter) and large tumor group (>14 mm in diameter). Small tumors and radiotherapy were correlated with better breast cancer-specific survival (BCSS). In subgroup analysis, the absolute benefit of BCSS in 6 years attributed to radiotherapy was only 0.90% (RT vs. non- RT:98.77% vs. 97.87%) for patients with small tumors but up to 3.33% (RT vs. non- RT:97.10% vs. 93.77%) for those with large tumors.ConclusionSmall tumors and adjuvant radiotherapy were associated with improved long-term prognosis, and 14 mm in diameter was the cutoff tumor size of omitting radiotherapy for patients aged 65 or older with T1N0M0 stage, ER+ and HER2-breast carcinoma after BCS.     

Why is appropriate healthcare inaccessible for many European breast cancer patients? – The EBCC 12 manifesto

In Europe, inappropriate reimbursement and funding rules and regulations act as disincentives to best breast cancer care or, at worst, hinder best care. This problem was the focus of the 12th European Breast Cancer Conference (EBCC) manifesto, discussed during the virtual conference. As patient involvement is indispensable in driving changes to clinical practice, Europa Donna the European patient advocacy group was closely involved in the 12th manifesto.Reimbursement policies have rarely evolved with advances in breast cancer care such as outpatient (ambulatory) care rather than inpatient admission, use of oral or subcutaneous anti-cancer drugs rather than day-hospital intravenous administration, oncoplastic surgery techniques to minimize mastectomy rates, breast reconstructive surgery, risk-reducing surgery for BRCA mutation carriers, or use of hypo-fractionated breast radiation therapy. Although each European country, region and centre will have to understand how their reimbursement policies may hinder best care and find their own solutions, the problems are similar throughout Europe and some solutions can be broadly applied.This manifesto is not calling for more funding or demanding changes that will result in more expensive care. Reimbursement, if better aligned with guidelines and optimal clinical practice, will deliver more cost-effective healthcare. This will release resources, support more equitable use of finite funding and resources, so allowing more European breast cancer patients to benefit from evidence-based treatment recommended by national and international guidelines.     

Positive microscopic surgical margins: Is there an association with survival in resected small gastrointestinal stromal tumors?

BackgroundFew studies evaluate the relationships between surgical approach, histologic margin, and overall survival in gastrointestinal stromal tumor. We test the hypothesis that margin positive resection is associated with compromised overall survival.MethodsWe queried the National Cancer Data Base to identify patients undergoing resections for gastrointestinal stromal tumors ≤3 cm in size between 2010 and 2015. Multivariable logistic regression was used to identify factors associated with positive microscopic margins on final pathology. Cox proportional hazard methods were used to evaluate factors associated with overall survival.Results2064 patients met inclusion criteria; 135 (6.5%) had a microscopically positive surgical margin. On multivariable regression, minimally invasive approach was not associated with risk of a positive margin (OR 1.06 95% CI [0.71, 1.59]). On Cox analysis, positive margin status was not associated with OS (R1: 1.03, CI [0.46–2.31], reference R0).ConclusionsPositive microscopic surgical margins are not associated with compromised overall survival in patients undergoing resection of small gastrointestinal stromal tumors. Minimally invasive surgical approaches do not compromise oncologic outcomes in these cases.