PIK3CA-AKT pathway predominantly acts in developing ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence long after breast-conserving surgery

Dynamic change of cancer genome profiling in metachronous bilateral breast cancer with BRCA pathogenic variant

A 61-year-old woman with BRCA2 pathogenic variant had been treated for 20 years and showed dynamic changes in the genomic profile of her metachronous bilateral breast cancer and metastases. She underwent right breast conservation surgery at age 42-Genome 1, lung metastasis and left axillary lymph node metastasis at age 51, partial excision under local anesthesia for left breast cancer at age 53-Genome 2, left axillary lymph node dissection was added 6 month later-Genome 3. Then, olaparib was administered, and subsequently, left mastectomy was performed for the recurrence of left breast cancer at age 59-Genome 4. Genomic profile of the tumor was analyzed at four points (Genome 1-3 were analyzed by in house breast cancer panel, and Genome 4 was analyzed by Foundation One CDx). Two interesting findings emerged from these analyses. First, the genomic profile revealed that the left axillary lymph node metastasis, considered histologically from right breast cancer, was a metastasis from the left breast cancer. The second finding is that as the disease progressed, mutation profile became more diverse. The profile of the left breast cancer removed after olaparib and other treatments showed reversion mutation of BRCA2 and was diagnosed as tumor mutation burden high. Subsequent response to pembrolizumab was favorable.

Ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence after breast-conserving surgery: insights into biology and treatment

Despite modern surgical and irradiation techniques, ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence (IBTR) accounts for 5-15% of all cancer recurrence in women treated with breast conservative treatment. Historically, this event has been treated definitively with salvage mastectomy and completion axillary clearance. However, many local recurrences are small and without nodal involvement at presentation. Thus, there has been an interest in performing a surgical de-escalation procedure in the breast and the axilla. The current guidelines do not provide detailed descriptions and treatment suggestions for these selected patients, resulting in inconsistent treatment strategies. Moreover, the methods to define true recurrence (TR) and new primary tumor (NP) for IBTR remain controversial. Most developed classification methods mainly rely on clinical and pathological criteria, limiting the accuracy of the discerption and causing misclassification. In this editorial, we will discuss the current trends in surgical de-escalation for patients with IBTR. Moreover, we will focus on recent IBTR innovations, highlighting molecular-integrated classification and multimodal staging methods for clinical practice and postoperative surveillance strategies.

Proteogenomics decodes the evolution of human ipsilateral breast cancer

Ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence (IBTR) is a clinically important event, where an isolated in-breast recurrence is a potentially curable event but associated with an increased risk of distant metastasis and breast cancer death. It remains unclear if IBTRs are associated with molecular changes that can be explored as a resource for precision medicine strategies. Here, we employed proteogenomics to analyze a cohort of 27 primary breast cancers and their matched IBTRs to define proteogenomic determinants of molecular tumor evolution. Our analyses revealed a relationship between hormonal receptors status and proliferation levels resulting in the gain of somatic mutations and copy number. This in turn re-programmed the transcriptome and proteome towards a highly replicating and genomically unstable IBTRs, possibly enhanced by APOBEC3B. In order to investigate the origins of IBTRs, a second analysis that included primaries with no recurrence pinpointed proliferation and immune infiltration as predictive of IBTR. In conclusion, our study shows that breast tumors evolve into different IBTRs depending on hormonal status and proliferation and that immune cell infiltration and Ki-67 are significantly elevated in primary tumors that develop IBTR. These results can serve as a starting point to explore markers to predict IBTR formation and stratify patients for adjuvant therapy.

Omission of axillary surgery for ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence with negative nodes after previous breast-conserving surgery: is it oncologically safe?

Purpose

Salvage mastectomy is traditionally recommended for patients who developed ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence (IBTR) in light of previous breast irradiation. However, it remains controversial whether surgical axillary staging (SAS) is necessary for IBTR patients with negative nodes. This study aimed to evaluate the oncologic safety of omitting SAS for IBTR.

Methods

We retrospectively identified patients who developed invasive IBTR with negative nodes after undergoing breast-conserving surgery (BCS) from 2010 to 2018. Patterns of care in nodal staging were analyzed based on prior axillary staging status. Clinicopathologic characteristics and adjuvant treatment of the initial tumor, as well as the IBTR, were compared between the SAS and no SAS groups. Kaplan–Meier method and Cox regression model were utilized to compare the locoregional recurrence-free survival (LRRFS), distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS), and overall survival (OS) rates after IBTR removal between the two groups.

Results

A total of 154 IBTR patients were eligible for final analysis. Compared to the no SAS group, SAS group was less likely to undergo ALND (15.1 vs 73.3%, p < 0.001) at initial BCS, had a longer recurrence interval (2.8 vs 2.1 years, p = 0.03), and were more likely to have discordant molecular subtype (35.8 vs 12.9%, p = 0.001) and different quadrant location (37.7 vs 19.8%, p = 0.02) with primary tumor. However, the extent of axillary staging did not affect systemic or radiation recommendations. In the subgroup of patients without previous ALND, the clinicopathologic characteristics were roughly comparable. No significant differences were observed in LRRFS, DMFS or OS between the two groups.

Conclusion

For node-negative IBTR patients, we observed selection bias on the basis of prior ALND, shorter recurrence interval, and concordant molecular subtype favoring no SAS but comparable LRRFS, DMFS, and OS. These results support a wider consideration of sparing SAS in the management of IBTR, especially in patients without previous ALND.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s10549-022-06708-y.