Search

Purpose: Phyllodes tumors of the breast are rare fibroepithelial lesions that are classified as benign, borderline or malignant. There is little consensus on best practice for the work-up, management, and follow-up of patients with phyllodes tumors of the breast, and evidence-based guidelines are lacking. Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional survey of surgeons and oncologists with the aim to describe current clinical practice in the management of phyllodes tumors. The survey was constructed in REDCap and distributed between July 2021 and February 2022 through international collaborators in sixteen countries across four continents. Results: A total of 419 responses were collected and analyzed. The majority of respondents were experienced and worked in a university hospital. Most agreed to recommend a tumor-free excision margin for benign tumors, increasing margins for borderline and malignant tumors. The multidisciplinary team meeting plays a major role in the treatment plan and follow-up. The vast majority did not consider axillary surgery. There were mixed opinions on adjuvant treatment, with a trend towards more liberal regiments in patients with locally advanced tumors. Most respondents preferred a five-year follow-up period for all phyllodes tumor types. Conclusions: This study shows considerable variation in clinical practice managing phyllodes tumors. This suggests the potential for overtreatment of many patients and the need for education and further research targeting appropriate surgical margins, follow-up time and a multidisciplinary approach. There is a need to develop guidelines that recognize the heterogeneity of phyllodes tumors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: In clinically node-positive breast cancer patients receiving neoadjuvant systemic therapy (NST), nodal metastases can be initially marked and then removed during surgical axillary staging. Marking methods vary significantly in terms of feasibility and cost. The purpose of the extended TATTOO trial was to report on the false-negative rate (FNR) of the low-cost method carbon tattooing. Methods: The international prospective single-arm TATTOO trial included clinically node-positive breast cancer patients planned for NST from November 2017 to January 2021. For the present analysis, patients who received both the targeted procedure with or without an additional sentinel lymph node (SLN) biopsy and a completion axillary lymph node dissection (ALND) were selected. Primary endpoint was the FNR. Results: Out of 172 included patients, 149 had undergone a completion ALND. The detection rate for the tattooed node was 94.6% (141 out of 149). SLN biopsy was attempted in 132 out of 149 patients with a detection rate of 91.7% (121 out of 132). SLN and tattooed node were identical in 58 out of 121 individuals (47.9%). The combined procedure, i.e. targeted axillary dissection (TAD) was successful in 147 of 149 cases (98.7%). Four out of 65 patients with a clinically node-negative status after NST had a negative TAD but metastases on ALND, corresponding to a FNR of 6.2%. All false-negative TAD procedures were performed in the first 2 years of the trial (2018–2019, p = 0.022). Conclusion: Carbon tattooing is a feasible marking method for TAD with a high detection rate and an acceptably low FNR. The TATTOO trial was preregistered as prospective trial before initiation at the University of Rostock, Germany (DRKS00013169). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: None of the key randomised trials on the omission of axillary lymph node dissection (ALND) in sentinel lymph-positive breast cancer have reported external validity, even though results indicate selection bias. Our aim was to assess the external validity of the ongoing randomised SENOMAC trial by comparing characteristics of Swedish SENOMAC trial participants with non-included eligible patients registered in the Swedish National Breast Cancer Register (NKBC). Methods: In the ongoing non-inferiority European SENOMAC trial, clinically node-negative cT1–T3 breast cancer patients with up to two sentinel lymph node macrometastases are randomised to undergo completion ALND or not. Both breast-conserving surgery and mastectomy are eligible interventions. Data from NKBC were extracted for the years 2016 and 2017, and patient and tumour characteristics compared with Swedish trial participants from the same years. Results: Overall, 306 NKBC cases from non-participating and 847 NKBC cases from participating sites (excluding SENOMAC participants) were compared with 463 SENOMAC trial participants. Patients belonging to the middle age groups (p = 0.015), with smaller tumours (p = 0.013) treated by breast-conserving therapy (50.3 versus 47.1 versus 65.2%, p < 0.001) and less nodal tumour burden (only 1 macrometastasis in 78.8 versus 79.9 versus 87.3%, p = 0.001) were over-represented in the trial population. Time trends indicated, however, that differences may be mitigated over time. Conclusions: This interim external validity analysis specifically addresses selection mechanisms during an ongoing trial, potentially increasing generalisability by the time full accrual is reached. Similar validity checks should be an integral part of prospective clinical trials. Trial registration: NCT 02240472, retrospective registration date September 14, 2015 after trial initiation on January 31, 2015 [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: The timing of sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) in the context of neoadjuvant systemic therapy (NAST) in breast cancer is still controversial. SLNB before NAST has been evaluated in few single-institution studies in which axillary lymph node dissection (ALND), however, was commonly not performed in case of a negative SLNB. We investigated the potential clinical relevance of SLNB before NAST by performing ALND in all patients after NAST. Methods: This national multicenter trial prospectively enrolled clinically node-negative breast cancer patients planned for NAST at 13 recruiting Swedish hospitals between October 2010 and December 2015. SLNB before NAST was followed by ALND after NAST in all individuals. Repeat SLNB after NAST was encouraged but not mandatory. Results: SLNB before NAST was performed in 224 patients. The identification rate was 100% (224/224). The proportion of patients with a negative SLNB before NAST but positive axillary lymph nodes after NAST was 7.4% (nine of 121 patients, 95% CI 4.0-13.5). Among those with a positive SLNB before NAST, 23.2% (86/112) had further positive lymph nodes after NAST. Conclusions: In clinically node-negative patients, SLNB before NAST is highly reliable. With this sequence, ALND and regional radiotherapy can be safely omitted in patients with a negative SLNB provided good clinical response to NAST. Additionally, SLNB-positive patients upfront will receive correct nodal staging unaffected by NAST and be consequently offered adjuvant locoregional treatment according to current guidelines pending the results of ongoing randomized trials. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Patients with clinically node-positive breast cancer planned for neoadjuvant systemic therapy (NAST) may draw advantages from the nodal downstaging effect and reduce the extent of axillary surgery with sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) performed after NAST. Since there are concerns about lower sentinel lymph node (SLN) detection and higher false-negative rates (FNR) in this setting, our aim was to define the accuracy of SLNB after NAST. Methods: This Swedish national multicenter trial prospectively recruited 195 breast cancer patients from ten hospitals with T1-T4d biopsy-proven node-positive disease planned for NAST between October 1, 2010 and December 31, 2015. Clinically node-negative axillary status after NAST was not mandatory. SLNB was always attempted and followed by a completion axillary lymph node dissection (ALND). Results: The SLN identification rate was 77.9% (152/195) but improved to 80.7% (138/171) with dual mapping. The median number of SLNs was two (range 1-5). A positive SLNB was found in 52% (79/152), almost 66% (52/79) of whom had additional positive non-sentinel lymph nodes. The overall pathologic nodal response rate was 33.3% (66/195). The overall FNR was 14.1% (13/92) but decreased to 4% (2/50) when only patients with two or more sentinel nodes were analyzed. Conclusions: In biopsy-proven node-positive breast cancer, SLNB after NAST is feasible even though the identification rate is lower than in clinically node-negative patients. Since the overall FNR is unacceptably high, the omission of ALND should only be considered if two or more SLNs are identified. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Whether young age at diagnosis of breast cancer is an independent risk factor for death remains controversial, and the question whether young age should be considered in treatment decisions is still to be answered. Methods: From a population-based cohort of 22,017 women with breast cancer, all women <35 years ( n = 471) were compared to a random sample of 700 women aged 35-69 years from the same cohort. Information on patient and tumor characteristics, treatment, and follow-up was collected from the medical records. Tissue microarrays were produced for analysis of classical biomarkers. Breast cancer-specific survival (BCSS), distant disease-free survival (DDFS), and locoregional recurrence-free survival (LRFS) by age were compared using women 50-69 years as reference. Results: At 10 years follow-up, women <35 years and 35-39 years had a worse BCSS [age <35 years 69 % (HR 2.75, 95 % CI 1.93-3.94), age 35-39 years 76 % (HR 2.33, 95 % CI 1.54-3.52), age 40-49 years 84 % (HR 1.53, 95 % CI 0.97-2.39), and age 50-69 years 89 % (reference)]. The worse BCSS was statistically significant in stages I-IIa and Luminal B tumors. At multivariate analysis age <35 years and 35-39 years confined a risk in LRFS (HR 2.13, 95 % CI 1.21-3.76 and HR 1.97, 95 % CI 1.06-3.68) but not in DDFS and BCSS. In the subgroup of women <40 years with luminal tumors stage I-IIa, low age remained an independent risk factor also in DDFS (HR 1.87, 95 % CI 1.03-3.44). Conclusion: Young women have a high risk of systemic disease even when diagnosed in an early stage. The excess risk of relapse is most pronounced in Luminal B tumors, where low age is an independent prognostic factor of DDFS and LRFS. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Results from several randomised mammography screening trials haveshown that it is possible to reduce mortalityin breast cancer by mammographic screening at leastfor women above 50 years of age. Thepurpose of this article is to present dataon mortality in breast cancer in study andcontrol groups of the Stockholm trial after 11years of followup, to analyse which age groupbenefits most from screening. In March 1981, 40,318women in Stockholm, aged 40 through 64 years,entered a randomized trial of breast cancer screeningby single view mammography alone, versus no interventionin a control group of 20 000 women.Two screening rounds were performed and the attendancerate was over 80% in the two rounds.During 1986 the control group was invited onceto screening. Totally 428 and 217 cases ofbreast cancer were diagnosed in the study andcontrol groups respectively. After a mean follow-up of11.4 years a nonsignificant mortality reduction of 26%was observed for the whole study group, witha relative risk (RR) of death in breastcancer of 0.74 (CI(confidence interval)=0.5–1.1). Forwomen aged 50–64 years a significant 38% mortalityreduction was observed with a RR of 0.62(CI=0.38–1.0). For women aged 40–49 yearsno effect on mortality was found, with aRR of death in breast cancer of 1.08(CI=0.54–2.17). The breakpoint for benefit inthis study seemed to be at 50 yearsof age when 5-year age groups were analysed,but this tendency is uncertain because of thelow statistical power in the analysis of theyounger age groups. Long screening intervals, the useof single-view mammography, and the fact that morethan 50% of the women in age group40–49 years were still below 50 years ofage when the study was closed, were allfacts that could have influenced the results inage group 40–49 years. Larger studies are neededto answer the question whether mammographic screening canbe successful in younger age groups. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A comparison of transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) and computed tomography (CT) for staging of rectal carcinoma was performed. Thirty-two patients were examined by TRUS and 30 by CT. The results of these preoperative examinations were compared with postoperative histopathological findings. TRUS had an accuracy of 81% and it predicted perirectal tumor growth with a sensitivity of 90% and a specificity of 67%, whereas the corresponding figures for CT were 52%, 67%, and 27%. These findings indicate that TRUS is more efficient than CT in staging local tumor growth in rectal cancer. Neither technique, however, can reliably identify lymph node metastases, since no correlation was found between lymph node size as observed on CT and TRUS and tumor involvement as evaluated histopathologically. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Sequencing-based breast cancer diagnostics have the potential to replace routine biomarkers and provide molecular characterization that enable personalized precision medicine. Here we investigate the concordance between sequencing-based and routine diagnostic biomarkers and to what extent tumor sequencing contributes clinically actionable information. We applied DNA- and RNA-sequencing to characterize tumors from 307 breast cancer patients with replication in up to 739 patients. We developed models to predict status of routine biomarkers (ER, HER2,Ki-67, histological grade) from sequencing data. Non-routine biomarkers, including mutations in BRCA1, BRCA2 and ERBB2(HER2), and additional clinically actionable somatic alterations were also investigated. Concordance with routine diagnostic biomarkers was high for ER status (AUC = 0.95;AUC(replication) = 0.97) and HER2 status (AUC = 0.97;AUC(replication) = 0.92). The transcriptomic grade model enabled classification of histological grade 1 and histological grade 3 tumors with high accuracy (AUC = 0.98;AUC(replication) = 0.94). Clinically actionable mutations in BRCA1, BRCA2 and ERBB2(HER2) were detected in 5.5% of patients, while 53% had genomic alterations matching ongoing or concluded breast cancer studies. Sequencing-based molecular profiling can be applied as an alternative to histopathology to determine ER and HER2 status, in addition to providing improved tumor grading and clinically actionable mutations and molecular subtypes. Our results suggest that sequencing-based breast cancer diagnostics in a near future can replace routine biomarkers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]