Application of ACOSOG Z1071: Effect of Results on Patient Care and Surgical Decision-Making

Adherence Rate to Alliance for Clinical Trials in Oncology Z0011 Trial Based on Breast Cancer Subtype

BACKGROUND

The American College of Surgeons Oncology Group Z0011 (ACOSOG Z0011 or Z11) trial demonstrated no survival advantage with completion axillary lymph node dissection (ALND) for patients with T1-2 breast cancer, 1 to 2 positive SLNs who received adjuvant chemoradiation therapy. More than 70% of the cohort had estrogen receptor (ER)+ tumors. There is paucity of data on the adherence rate to Z11, as well as a dearth of data on the applicability of Z11 for the different subtypes. We conducted a large hospital-based study to evaluate the adherence rate to Z11 based on subtypes.

STUDY DESIGN

The National Cancer Database was queried to evaluate 33,859 patients diagnosed with T1-2, N1, and M0 breast cancer treated with lumpectomy with negative margins, and adjuvant chemoradiation therapy between 2012 and 2018. Patients were classified into 3 groups: (1) ER+/HER2-, (2) ER-/HER2-, and (3) HER2+ regardless of ER status. The revised Scope of the Regional Lymph Node Surgery 2012 was used to classify patients into those who underwent an SLN or ALND. Differences in use of ALND by subtypes were compared. The Kaplan-Meier method and log-rank test were used to compare overall survival (OS). A p value of <0.05 was considered statistically significant.

RESULTS

For ER+/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-, ER-/HER2-, and HER2+ tumors, the rate of ALND was 43.6%, 50.2%, and 47.8%, respectively. The 5-year OS for SLN and ALND for the entire cohort was 94.0% and 93.1% (p = 0.0004); for ER+/HER2-, it was 95.4% and 94.7% (p = 0.04); for ER-/HER2-, it was 84.1% and 84.3% (p = 0.41); for HER2+, it was 94.2% and 93.2% (p = 0.20). Multivariable cox proportional hazard regression analysis demonstrated no significant survival differences between SLN and ALND (p = 0.776).

CONCLUSIONS

Z11 is applicable for women with early N1 disease, regardless of subtypes. ALND did not confer a survival advantage over SLN. Despite this, up to 50% of patients who fit Z11 criteria continue to undergo ALND.

AGO Recommendations for the Surgical Therapy of the Axilla After Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy: 2021 Update

For many decades, the standard procedure to treat breast cancer included complete dissection of the axillary lymph nodes. The aim was to determine histological node status, which was then used as the basis for adjuvant therapy, and to ensure locoregional tumour control. In addition to the debate on how to optimise the therapeutic strategies of systemic treatment and radiotherapy, the current discussion focuses on improving surgical procedures to treat breast cancer. As neoadjuvant chemotherapy is becoming increasingly important, the surgical procedures used to treat breast cancer, whether they are breast surgery or axillary dissection, are changing. Based on the currently available data, carrying out SLNE prior to neoadjuvant chemotherapy is not recommended. In contrast, surgical axillary management after neoadjuvant chemotherapy is considered the procedure of choice for axillary staging and can range from SLNE to TAD and ALND. To reduce the rate of false negatives during surgical staging of the axilla in pN+ _CNB stage before NACT and ycN0 after NACT, targeted axillary dissection (TAD), the removal of > 2 SLNs (SLNE, no untargeted axillary sampling), immunohistochemistry to detect isolated tumour cells and micro-metastases, and marking positive lymph nodes before NACT should be the standard approach. This most recent update on surgical axillary management describes the significance of isolated tumour cells and micro-metastasis after neoadjuvant chemotherapy and the clinical consequences of low volume residual disease diagnosed using SLNE and TAD and provides an overview of this yearʼs AGO recommendations for surgical management of the axilla during primary surgery and in relation to neoadjuvant chemotherapy.

The Role of Oncotype DX® Recurrence Score in Predicting Axillary Response After Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy in Breast Cancer

INTRODUCTION

Oncotype DX^® recurrence score (RS) is well-recognized for guiding decision making in adjuvant chemotherapy; however, the predictive capability of this genomic assay in determining axillary response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NCT) has not been established.

METHODS

Using the National Cancer Data Base (NCDB), we identified patients diagnosed with T1-T2, clinically N1/N2, estrogen receptor-positive/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (ER +/HER2 -) invasive ductal carcinoma of the breast between 2010 and 2015. Patients with an Oncotype DX^® RS who received NCT were included. RS was defined as low (< 18), intermediate (18-30), or high (> 30). Unadjusted and adjusted analyses were performed to determine the association between axillary pathologic complete response (pCR) and RS.

RESULTS

This study included a total of 158 women. RS was low in 56 (35.4%) patients, intermediate in 62 (39.2%) patients, and high in 40 (25.3%) patients. The majority of patients presented with clinical N1 disease (89.2%). Axillary pCR was achieved in 23 (14.6%) patients. When stratifying patients with axillary pCR by RS, 11 (47.8%) patients had a high RS, 6 (26.1%) patients had an intermediate RS, and 6 (26.1%) patients had a low RS. Comparing cohorts by RS, 27.5% of patients with high RS tumors had an axillary pCR, compared with only 9.7% in the intermediate RS group, and 10.7% in the low RS group (p = 0.0268).

CONCLUSION

Our findings demonstrate that Oncotype DX^® RS is an independent predictor of axillary pCR in patients with ER +/HER2 - breast cancers receiving NCT. A greater proportion of patients with a high RS achieved axillary pCR. These results support Oncotype DX^® as a tool to improve clinical decision making in axillary management.

Are breast biopsy markers underused?

INTRODUCTION

To evaluate current use of breast biopsy markers (BBM) amongst Australian and New Zealand radiologists.

METHODS

Radiologists attending a national breast conference were invited to complete an online survey addressing demographics, BBM use following ultrasound, stereotactic, tomosynthesis and MRI-guided biopsy, frequency of early BBM displacement, preoperative lesion localisation (PLL) and axillary BBM use.

RESULTS

Overall response rate was 52% (60/115). The majority (n = 45) 75% practiced in Australia. 98% had BBMs available in their practice, 40% reported BBM costs weren't covered by insurance. 27% would use BBMs more often if they were, with some utilising smaller gauge devices for lesion sampling to minimise need for BBM use and patient out-of-pocket costs. Ultrasound-guided procedures were associated with lower rates of clinically significant BBM displacement (P = 0.001). Considering PLL, 44% were able to perform US-guided PLL in <25% of cases. Poor sonographic visibility was the commonest reason why this wasn't possible. In the axilla, BBMs were mainly used to mark positive nodes in pre-neoadjuvant chemotherapy patients.

CONCLUSION

This survey is the first to provide data on BBM use amongst a sample of predominantly Australian and New Zealand radiologists, and provides compelling evidence of significantly lower incidence of BBM displacement with US-guided procedures. Our results suggest some radiologists may hesitate to use BBMs due to cost, and this can influence their choice of biopsy technique. Provision of a Medicare item Number for BBMs may lead to increased adoption of best practice guidelines for preoperative diagnosis of breast lesions.

Impact of surgical intervention trials on healthcare: A systematic review of assessment methods, healthcare outcomes, and determinants

BACKGROUND

Frameworks used in research impact evaluation studies vary widely and it remains unclear which methods are most appropriate for evaluating research impact in the field of surgical research. Therefore, we aimed to identify and review the methods used to assess the impact of surgical intervention trials on healthcare and to identify determinants for surgical impact.

METHODS

We searched journal databases up to March 10, 2020 for papers assessing the impact of surgical effectiveness trials on healthcare. Two researchers independently screened the papers for eligibility and performed a Risk of Bias assessment. Characteristics of both impact papers and trial papers were summarized. Univariate analyses were performed to identify determinants for finding research impact, which was defined as a change in healthcare practice.

RESULTS

Sixty-one impact assessments were performed in 37 included impact papers. Some surgical trial papers were evaluated in more than one impact paper, which provides a total of 38 evaluated trial papers. Most impact papers were published after 2010 (n = 29). Medical records (n = 10), administrative databases (n = 22), and physician's opinion through surveys (n = 5) were used for data collection. Those data were analyzed purely descriptively (n = 3), comparing data before and after publication (n = 29), or through time series analyses (n = 5). Significant healthcare impact was observed 49 times and more often in more recent publications. Having impact was positively associated with using medical records or administrative databases (ref.: surveys), a longer timeframe for impact evaluation and more months between the publication of the trial paper and the impact paper, data collection in North America (ref.: Europe), no economic evaluation of the intervention, finding no significant difference in surgical outcomes, and suggesting de-implementation in the original trial paper.

CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS

Research impact evaluation receives growing interest, but still a small number of impact papers per year was identified. The analysis showed that characteristics of both surgical trial papers and impact papers were associated with finding research impact. We advise to collect data from either medical records or administrative databases, with an evaluation time frame of at least 4 years since trial publication.

Breast Cancer Statistics in Korea in 2017: Data from a Breast Cancer Registry

This article describes the breast cancer statistics in Korea, including the incidence, type of surgical procedure, stage, and molecular subtype, using the Korean Breast Cancer Society (KBCS) and Korea Central Cancer Registry data. There were a total of 26,534 new breast cancer diagnoses in 2017 in Korea, of which 4,139 were carcinoma in situ cases and 22,395 were invasive cancer cases. The age standardized rate of breast cancer was 75.3 per 100,000 women in 2017 (63.0 of invasive carcinoma and 12.3 of carcinoma in situ), and it has been steadily increasing across all age groups. Breast cancer occurred most commonly in the 40–49 age group. Compared to 2016, breast conserving surgery (BCS) has increased, and 67.4% of patients were treated with BCS in 2017. The proportions of stage 0 and stage I have continued to increase, accounting for 60.7%. The most common subtype of breast cancer was hormone receptor (HR) positive and human epidermal growth factor receptor-2 (HER2) negative type comprising 65.9% of the cases, whereas HR negative and HER2 positive type was the rarest comprising 10.2% of the cases. The 5-year relative survival rate of breast cancer patients had increased by 14.0% from 79.2% in 1993–1995 to 93.2% in 2013–2017. It is essential to actively enter breast cancer data into the KBCS registry to improve our understanding.

Axillary ultrasound for prediction of response to neoadjuvant therapy in the context of surgical strategies to axillary dissection in primary breast cancer: a systematic review of the current literature

PURPOSE

Data on the optimal treatment strategy for patients undergoing neoadjuvant therapy (NAT) who initially presented with metastatic nodes and convert to node-negative disease (cN+ → ycN0) are limited. Since NAT leads to axillary downstaging in 20-60% of patients, the question arises whether these patients might be offered less-invasive procedures than axillary dissection, such as sentinel node biopsy or targeted removal of lymph nodes marked before therapy.

METHODS

We performed a systematic review of clinical studies on the use of axillary ultrasound for prediction of response to NAT and ultrasound-guided marking of metastatic nodes for targeted axillary dissection.

RESULTS

The sensitivity of ultrasound for prediction of residual node metastasis was higher than that of clinical examination and MRI/PET in most studies; specificity ranged in large trials from 37 to 92%. The diagnostic performance of ultrasound after NAT seems to be associated with tumor subtype: the positive predictive value was highest in luminal, the negative in triple-negative tumors. Several trials evaluated the usefulness of ultrasound for targeted axillary dissection. Before NAT, nodes were most commonly marked using ultrasound-guided clip placement, followed by ultrasound-guided placement of a radioactive seed. After chemotherapy, the clip was detected on ultrasound in 72-83% of patients; a comparison of sonographic visibility of different clips is lacking. Detection rate after radioactive seed placement was ca. 97%.

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, ultrasound improves prediction of axillary response to treatment in comparison to physical examination and serves as a reliable guiding tool for marking of target lymph nodes before the start of treatment. High quality and standardization of the examination is crucial for selection of patients for less-invasive surgery.