Search

Purpose: Lymphedema is a potential complication of breast cancer treatment. This longitudinal substudy aimed to prospectively assess arm measurements and symptoms following neoadjuvant chemotherapy and axillary dissection in the ACOSOG/Alliance Z1071 trial to characterize the optimal approach to define lymphedema.Methods: Z1071 enrolled patients with cT0-4, N1-2, M0 disease treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy. All patients underwent axillary dissection. Bilateral limb volumes, circumferences, and related symptoms were assessed pre-surgery, 1-2 weeks post-surgery, and semiannually for 36 months. Lymphedema definitions included volume increase ≥ 10% or limb circumference increase ≥ 2 cm. Symptoms were assessed by the Lymphedema Breast Cancer Questionnaire.Results: In 488 evaluable patients, lymphedema incidence at 3 years by ≥ 10%-volume-increase was 60.3% (95% CI 55.0-66.2%) and by ≥ 2 cm-circumference increase was 75.4% (95% CI 70.8-80.2%). Symptoms of arm swelling and heaviness decreased from post-surgery for the first 18 months and then were relatively stable. The 3-year cumulative incidence of arm swelling and heaviness was 26.0% (95% CI 21.7-31.1%) and 30.9% (95% CI 26.3-36.3%), respectively. There was limited agreement between the two measurements (kappa 0.27) and between symptoms and measurements (kappa coefficients ranging from 0.05-0.09).Conclusions: Lymphedema incidence by limb volume and circumference gradually increased over 36 months post-surgery, whereas lymphedema symptoms were much lower. These findings underscore the importance of prospective surveillance and evaluation of both limb measurements and symptom assessment. Lymphedema incidence rates varied by definition. We recommend that ≥ 10% volume change criterion be used for lymphedema evaluation for referral for specialist care.Trial Registration: NCT00881361. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: We used two models to simulate a proposed noninferiority trial of radiotherapy (RT) omission in low-risk invasive breast cancer to illustrate how modeling could be used to predict the trial's outcomes, inform trial design, and contribute to practice debates.Methods: The proposed trial was a prospective randomized trial of no-RT vs RT in women age 40 to 74 years undergoing lumpectomy and endocrine therapy for hormone receptor-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative, stage I breast cancer with an Oncotype DX score of 18 or lower. The primary endpoint was recurrence-free interval (RFI), including locoregional recurrence, distant recurrence, and breast cancer death. Noninferiority required the two-sided 90% confidence interval of the RFI hazard ratio (HR) for no-RT vs RT to be entirely below 1.7. Model inputs included published data. The trial was simulated 1000 times, and results were summarized as percent concluding noninferiority and mean (standard deviation) of hazard ratios for Model GE and Model M, respectively.Results: Noninferiority was demonstrated in 18.0% and 3.7% for the two models. The respective means (SD) of the RFI hazard ratios were 1.8 (0.7) and 2.4 (0.9); most were locoregional recurrences. The mean five-year RFI rates for no-RT vs RT (SD) were 92.7% (2.9%) vs 95.5% (2.2%) and 88.4% (2.0%) vs 94.5% (1.6%). Both models showed little or no difference in breast cancer-specific or overall survival. Alternative definitions of low risk based on combinations of age and grade produced similar results.Conclusions: The proposed trial was unlikely to show noninferiority of omitting radiotherapy even using alternative definitions of low-risk, as the endpoint included local recurrence. Future trials regarding radiotherapy should address absolute reduction in recurrence and impact of type of recurrence on the patient. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The surgical management of breast cancer has changed considerably since the use of the Halstedian radical mastectomy early in the 20th century. Over the last 50 years, several landmark clinical trials from the USA and Europe have resulted in a paradigm shift in the management of breast cancer toward less radical forms of surgery with the combined use of multi-modality treatments including systemic chemotherapy, endocrine therapy, and radiotherapy. Advances in such research have established a new worldwide standard of care for breast cancer surgical management and treatment, which has become more patient centric and which places a higher emphasis on cosmesis and improved patient quality of life. In this chapter, we review the landmark clinical trials that have influenced surgical management for non-invasive and invasive breast cancer and that serve to guide current clinical practices to date. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence (IBTR) is the most common failure event after lumpectomy for ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS). We evaluated invasive IBTR (I-IBTR) and its influence on survival among participants in two National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project (NSABP) randomized trials for DCIS. Methods In the NSABP B-17 trial (accrual period: October 1, 1985, to December 31, 1990), patients with localized DCIS were randomly assigned to the lumpectomy only (LO, n = 403) group or to the lumpectomy followed by radiotherapy (LRT, n = 410) group. In the NSABP B-24 double-blinded, placebo-controlled trial (accrual period: May 9, 1991, to April 13, 1994), all accrued patients were randomly assigned to LRT+ placebo, (n=900) or LRT + tamoxifen (LRT + TAM, n = 899). Endpoints included I-IBTR, DCIS-IBTR, contralateral breast cancers (CBC), overall and breast cancer–specific survival, and survival after I-IBTR. Median follow-up was 207 months for the B-17 trial (N = 813 patients) and 163 months for the B-24 trial (N = 1799 patients). Results Of 490 IBTR events, 263 (53.7%) were invasive. Radiation reduced I-IBTR by 52% in the LRT group compared with LO (B-17, hazard ratio [HR] of risk of I-IBTR = 0.48, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.33 to 0.69, P < .001). LRT + TAM reduced I-IBTR by 32% compared with LRT + placebo (B-24, HR of risk of I-IBTR = 0.68, 95% CI = 0.49 to 0.95, P = .025). The 15-year cumulative incidence of I-IBTR was 19.4% for LO, 8.9% for LRT (B-17), 10.0% for LRT + placebo (B-24), and 8.5% for LRT + TAM. The 15-year cumulative incidence of all contralateral breast cancers was 10.3% for LO, 10.2% for LRT (B-17), 10.8% for LRT + placebo (B-24), and 7.3% for LRT + TAM. I-IBTR was associated with increased mortality risk (HR of death = 1.75, 95% CI = 1.45 to 2.96, P < .001), whereas recurrence of DCIS was not. Twenty-two of 39 deaths after I-IBTR were attributed to breast cancer. Among all patients (with or without I-IBTR), the 15-year cumulative incidence of breast cancer death was 3.1% for LO, 4.7% for LRT (B-17), 2.7% for LRT + placebo (B-24), and 2.3% for LRT + TAM. Conclusions Although I-IBTR increased the risk for breast cancer–related death, radiation therapy and tamoxifen reduced I-IBTR, and long-term prognosis remained excellent after breast-conserving surgery for DCIS. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Neo-adjuvant endocrine therapy has opened new alternatives for locally advanced breast cancer. Such therapy, which has permitted us to expand the treatment role of neo-adjuvant therapies, may be of great benefit to patient groups such as the elderly, those not suited for chemotherapy, and those whose response may not be optimal. This therapy also may be able to help us identify agents that could improve outcomes in the adjuvant setting as well as possible biologic predictors for outcome. The latest generation of endocrine therapy for breast cancer, aromatase inhibitors, has proved superior to tamoxifen in terms of toxicity and efficacy in the adjuvant setting and is currently being studied in other clinical trials. Current findings indicate that these agents are less toxic and better tolerated than neo-adjuvant chemotherapy and that third-generation anti-hormomal therapy offers improved tumor response compared with tamoxifen, which has resulted in increased breast conserving surgery. Biomarker findings of improved response in tumors that are both estrogen receptor positive and HER-2 positive as well as progesterone receptor positivity only will be important for planning future selective treatment and clinical trials. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this paper we provide a summary of several of the completed and ongoing surgical trials of the National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project, one of the cancer cooperative trials groups supported by the US National Cancer Institute. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses the effectiveness of a multigene expression assay in predicting the local recurrence risk for ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS). Based on the results of four randomized clinical studies, breast-conserving surgery (BCS) emerged as the accepted alternative approach to mastectomy for the treatment of DCIS. Some studies identified the genetic similarities of DCIS with an ipsilateral breast event (IBE).

Background: Ductal carcinoma in situ is currently managed with excision, radiotherapy, and adjuvant hormone therapy, usually tamoxifen. We postulated that an aromatase inhibitor would be safer and more effective. We therefore undertook this trial to compare anastrozole versus tamoxifen in postmenopausal women with ductal carcinoma in situ undergoing lumpectomy plus radiotherapy. Methods: The double-blind, randomised, phase 3 National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project (NSABP) B-35 trial was done in 333 participating NSABP centres in the USA and Canada. Postmenopausal women with hormone-positive ductal carcinoma in situ treated by lumpectomy with clear resection margins and whole-breast irradiation were enrolled and randomly assigned (1:1) to receive either oral tamoxifen 20 mg per day (with matching placebo in place of anastrozole) or oral anastrozole 1 mg per day (with matching placebo in place of tamoxifen) for 5 years. Randomisation was stratified by age (<60 vs ≥60 years) and patients and investigators were masked to treatment allocation. The primary outcome was breast cancer-free interval, defined as time from randomisation to any breast cancer event (local, regional, or distant recurrence, or contralateral breast cancer, invasive disease, or ductal carcinoma in situ), analysed by intention to treat. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00053898, and is complete. Findings: Between Jan 1, 2003, and June 15, 2006, 3104 eligible patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to the two treatment groups (1552 to tamoxifen and 1552 to anastrozole). As of Feb 28, 2015, follow-up information was available for 3083 patients for overall survival and 3077 for all other disease-free endpoints, with median follow-up of 9·0 years (IQR 8·2-10·0). In total, 212 breast cancer-free interval events occurred: 122 in the tamoxifen group and 90 in the anastrozole group (HR 0·73 [95% CI 0·56-0·96], p=0·0234). A significant time-by-treatment interaction (p=0·0410) became evident later in the study. There was also a significant interaction between treatment and age group (p=0·0379), showing that anastrozole is superior only in women younger than 60 years of age. Adverse events did not differ between the groups, except for thrombosis or embolism--a known side-effect of tamoxifen-for which there were 17 grade 4 or worse events in the tamoxifen group versus four in the anastrozole group. Interpretation: Compared with tamoxifen, anastrozole treatment provided a significant improvement in breast cancer-free interval, mainly in women younger than 60 years of age. This finding means that women will benefit from having a choice of effective agents for ductal carcinoma in situ. Funding: US National Cancer Institute and AstraZeneca Pharmaceuticals LP. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The NSABP B-35 trial compared 5 years of treatment with anastrozole versus tamoxifen for reducing subsequent occurrence of breast cancer in postmenopausal patients with ductal carcinoma in situ. This report assesses the effect of these drugs on quality of life and symptoms. Methods: The study was done at 333 hospitals in North America. Postmenopausal women with hormone-positive ductal carcinoma in situ treated by lumpectomy with clear resection margins and whole breast irradiation were randomly assigned to receive either tamoxifen (20 mg/day) or anastrazole (1 mg/day) for 5 years, stratified by age (<60 years vs ≥60 years). Patients and investigators were masked to treatment allocation. Patients completed questionnaires at baseline and every 6 months thereafter for 6 years. The primary outcomes were SF-12 physical and mental health component scale scores, and vasomotor symptoms (as per the BCPT symptom scale). Secondary outcomes were vaginal symptoms and sexual functioning. Exploratory outcomes were musculoskeletal pain, bladder symptoms, gynaecological symptoms, cognitive symptoms, weight problems, vitality, and depression. We did the analyses by intention to treat, including patients who completed questionnaires at baseline and at least once during follow-up. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT00053898. Findings: Between Jan 6, 2003, and June 15, 2006, 3104 patients were enrolled in the study, of whom 1193 were included in the quality-of-life substudy: 601 assigned to tamoxifen and 592 assigned to anastrozole. We detected no significant difference between treatment groups for: physical health scores (mean severity score 46·72 for tamoxifen vs 45·85 for anastrozole; p=0·20), mental health scores (52·38 vs 51·48; p=0·38), energy and fatigue (58·34 vs 57·54; p=0·86), or symptoms of depression (6·19 vs 6·39; p=0·46) over 5 years. Vasomotor symptoms (1·33 vs 1·17; p=0·011), difficulty with bladder control (0·96 vs 0·80; p=0·0002), and gynaecological symptoms (0·29 vs 0·18; p<0·0001) were significantly more severe in the tamoxifen group than in the anastrozole group. Musculoskeletal pain (1·50 vs 1·72; p=0·0006) and vaginal symptoms (0·76 vs 0·86; p=0·035) were significantly worse in the anastrozole group than in the tamoxifen group. Sexual functioning did not differ significantly between the two treatments (43·65 vs 45·29; p=0·56). Younger age was significantly associated with more severe vasomotor symptoms (mean severity score 1·45 for age <60 years vs 0·65 for age ≥60 years; p=0·0006), vaginal symptoms (0·98 vs 0·65; p<0·0001), weight problems (1·32 vs 1·02; p<0·0001), and gynaecological symptoms (0·26 vs 0·22; p=0·014). Interpretation: Given the similar efficacy of tamoxifen and anastrozole for women older than age 60 years, decisions about treatment should be informed by the risk for serious adverse health effects and the symptoms associated with each drug. For women younger than 60 years old, treatment decisions might be driven by efficacy (favouring anastrozole); however, if the side-effects of anastrozole are intolerable, then switching to tamoxifen is a good alternative. Funding: US National Cancer Institute, AstraZeneca Pharmaceuticals. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Summary: Background: The goals of axillary-lymph-node dissection (ALND) are to maximise survival, provide regional control, and stage the patient. However, this technique has substantial side-effects. The purpose of the B-32 trial is to establish whether sentinel-lymph-node (SLN) resection can achieve the same therapeutic goals as conventional ALND but with decreased side-effects. The aim of this paper is to report the technical success and accuracy of SLN resection plus ALND versus SLN resection alone. Methods: 5611 women with invasive breast cancer were randomly assigned to receive either SLN resection followed by immediate conventional ALND (n=2807; group 1) or SLN resection without ALND if SLNs were negative on intraoperative cytology and histological examination (n=2804; group 2) in the B-32 trial. Patients in group 2 underwent ALND if no SLNs were identified or if one or more SLNs were positive on intraoperative cytology or subsequent histological examination. Primary endpoints, including survival, regional control, and morbidity, will be reported later. Secondary endpoints are accuracy and technical success and are reported here. This trial is registered with the Clinical Trial registry, number NCT00003830. Findings: Data for technical success were available for 5536 of 5611 patients; 75 declined protocol treatment, had no SLNs removed, or had no SLN resection done. SLNs were successfully removed in 97·2% of patients (5379 of 5536) in both groups combined. Identification of a preincision hot spot was associated with greater SLN removal (98·9% [5072 of 5128]). Only 1·4% (189 of 13171) of SLN specimens were outside of axillary levels I and II. 65·1% (8571 of 13 171) of SLN specimens were both radioactive and blue; a small percentage was identified by palpation only (3·9% [515 of 13 171]). The overall accuracy of SLN resection in patients in group 1 was 97·1% (2544 of 2619; 95% CI 96·4–97·7), with a false-negative rate of 9·8% (75 of 766; 95% CI 7·8–12·2). Differences in tumour location, type of biopsy, and number of SLNs removed significantly affected the false-negative rate. Allergic reactions related to blue dye occurred in 0·7% (37 of 5588) of patients with data on toxic effects. Interpretation: The findings reported here indicate excellent balance in clinical patient characteristics between the two randomised groups and that the success of SLN resection was high. These findings are important because the B-32 trial is the only trial of sufficient size to provide definitive information related to the primary outcome measures of survival and regional control. Removal of more than one SLN and avoidance of excisional biopsy are important variables in reducing the false-negative rate. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]