A multigene expression assay to predict local recurrence risk for ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast

Evaluation of tumor infiltrating lymphocytes as a prognostic biomarker in patients with ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast

PURPOSE

To assess the association between tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) in ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) samples and disease recurrence.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study included women aged 18 years and older who underwent treatment between January 2007 and December 2020. Male patients, individuals diagnosed with invasive or microinvasive disease based on anatomopathological examination of surgical specimens, and those with a personal history of any other cancers were excluded. Additionally, the presence of "touching TILs" (lymphocytes in direct contact with tumor cells) and periductal desmoplasia were evaluated as complementary methods to represent the immunological microenvironment. The primary outcome was relapse-free survival based on TIL quantification adjusted for potential confounders. Pathologists assessed TILs in the sample with the highest tumor representation and quantified them as a percentage. Survival was evaluated using Kaplan‒Meier curves, log-rank tests, and Cox regression models.

RESULTS

A total of 191 patients met the eligibility criteria. The mean follow-up duration was 77.2 months, with a recurrence rate of 9.2%. Patients with TILs ≥ 17% had a greater risk of recurrence (HR 2.97, 95% CI 1.17-7.51; p = 0.02). Additionally, focal necrosis (HR 6.4, 95% CI 1.39-34.71; p = 0.018) or comedonecrosis (HR 4.53, 95% CI 1.34-15.28; p = 0.015) were associated with increased recurrence risk. According to the multivariate model, comedonecrosis and TILs ≥ 17% were significantly associated with recurrence (p = 0.034 and p = 0.035, respectively). Regarding the evaluations of "touching TILs" and periductal desmoplasia, no statistical significance was found when assessing their association with disease recurrence.

CONCLUSION

In our cohort, a high percentage of TILs (≥ 17%) and the presence of comedonecrosis were independently associated with DCIS recurrence.

Outcomes from low-risk ductal carcinoma in situ: a systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

The current standard of treatment for ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) is surgery with or without adjuvant radiotherapy. With a growing debate about overdiagnosis and overtreatment of low-risk DCIS, active surveillance is being explored in several ongoing trials. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the recurrence of low-risk DCIS under various treatment approaches.

METHODS

PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane were searched for studies reporting ipsilateral breast tumour event (IBTE), contralateral breast cancer (CBC), and breast cancer-specific survival (BCSS) rates at 5 and 10 years in low-risk DCIS. The primary outcome was invasive IBTE (iIBTE) defined as invasive progression in the ipsilateral breast.

RESULTS

Thirty three eligible studies were identified, involving 47,696 women with low-risk DCIS. The pooled 5-year and 10-year iIBTE rates were 3.3% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.3, 8.1) and 5.9% (95% CI: 3.8, 9.0), respectively. The iIBTE rates were significantly lower in patients who underwent surgery compared to those who did not, at 5 years (3.5% vs. 9.0%, P = 0.003) and 10 years (6.4% vs. 22.7%, P = 0.008). Similarly, the 10-year BCSS rate was higher in the surgery group (96.0% vs. 99.6%, P = 0.010). In patients treated with breast-conserving surgery, additional radiotherapy significantly reduced IBTE risk, but not total-CBC risk.

CONCLUSION

This review showed a lower risk of progression and better survival in women who received surgery and additional RT for low-risk DCIS. However, our findings were primarily based on observational studies, and should be confirmed with the results from the ongoing trials.

Ductal Carcinoma In Situ

In breast cancer (BC) pathogenesis models, normal cells acquire somatic mutations and there is a stepwise progression from high-risk lesions and ductal carcinoma in situ to invasive cancer. The precancer biology of mammary tissue warrants better characterization to understand how different BC subtypes emerge. Primary methods for BC prevention or risk reduction include lifestyle changes, surgery, and chemoprevention. Surgical intervention for BC prevention involves risk-reducing prophylactic mastectomy, typically performed either synchronously with the treatment of a primary tumor or as a bilateral procedure in high-risk women. Chemoprevention with endocrine therapy carries adherence-limiting toxicity.

Reporting tumor genomic test results to SEER registries via linkages

BACKGROUND

Precision medicine has become a mainstay of cancer care in recent years. The National Cancer Institute (NCI) Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) Program has been an authoritative source of cancer statistics and data since 1973. However, tumor genomic information has not been adequately captured in the cancer surveillance data, which impedes population-based research on molecular subtypes. To address this, the SEER Program has developed and implemented a centralized process to link SEER registries' tumor cases with genomic test results that are provided by molecular laboratories to the registries.

METHODS

Data linkages were carried out following operating procedures for centralized linkages established by the SEER Program. The linkages used Match*Pro, a probabilistic linkage software, and were facilitated by the registries' trusted third party (an honest broker). The SEER registries provide to NCI limited datasets that undergo preliminary evaluation prior to their release to the research community.

RESULTS

Recently conducted genomic linkages included OncotypeDX Breast Recurrence Score, OncotypeDX Breast Ductal Carcinoma in Situ, OncotypeDX Genomic Prostate Score, Decipher Prostate Genomic Classifier, DecisionDX Uveal Melanoma, DecisionDX Preferentially Expressed Antigen in Melanoma, DecisionDX Melanoma, and germline tests results in Georgia and California SEER registries.

CONCLUSIONS

The linkages of cancer cases from SEER registries with genomic test results obtained from molecular laboratories offer an effective approach for data collection in cancer surveillance. By providing de-identified data to the research community, the NCI's SEER Program enables scientists to investigate numerous research inquiries.

A prognostic and predictive computational pathology immune signature for ductal carcinoma in situ: retrospective results from a cohort within the UK/ANZ DCIS trial

BACKGROUND

The density of tumour-infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) could be prognostic in ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS). However, manual TIL quantification is time-consuming and suffers from interobserver and intraobserver variability. In this study, we developed a TIL-based computational pathology biomarker and evaluated its association with the risk of recurrence and benefit of adjuvant treatment in a clinical trial cohort.

METHODS

In this retrospective cohort study, a computational pathology pipeline was developed to generate a TIL-based biomarker (CPath TIL categories). Subsequently, the signature underwent a masked independent validation on H&E-stained whole-section images of 755 patients with DCIS from the UK/ANZ DCIS randomised controlled trial. Specifically, continuous biomarker CPath TIL score was calculated as the average TIL density in the DCIS microenvironment and dichotomised into binary biomarker CPath TIL categories (CPath TIL-high vs CPath TIL-low) using the median value as a cutoff. The primary outcome was ipsilateral breast event (IBE; either recurrence of DCIS [DCIS-IBE] or invasive progression [I-IBE]). The Cox proportional hazards model was used to estimate the hazard ratio (HR).

FINDINGS

CPath TIL-score was evaluable in 718 (95%) of 755 patients (151 IBEs). Patients with CPath TIL-high DCIS had a greater risk of IBE than those with CPath TIL-low DCIS (HR 2·10 [95% CI 1·39-3·18]; p=0·0004). The risk of I-IBE was greater in patients with CPath TIL-high DCIS than those with CPath TIL-low DCIS (3·09 [1·56-6·14]; p=0·0013), and the risk of DCIS-IBE was non-significantly higher in those with CPath TIL-high DCIS (1·61 [0·95-2·72]; p=0·077). A significant interaction (pinteraction=0·025) between CPath TIL categories and radiotherapy was observed with a greater magnitude of radiotherapy benefit in preventing IBE in CPath TIL-high DCIS (0·32 [0·19-0·54]) than CPath TIL-low DCIS (0·40 [0·20-0·81]).

INTERPRETATION

High TIL density is associated with higher recurrence risk-particularly of invasive recurrence-and greater radiotherapy benefit in patients with DCIS. Our TIL-based computational pathology signature has a prognostic and predictive role in DCIS.

FUNDING

National Cancer Institute under award number U01CA269181, Cancer Research UK (C569/A12061; C569/A16891), and the Breast Cancer Research Foundation, New York (NY, USA).

Epigenetic activation of SOX11 is associated with recurrence and progression of ductal carcinoma in situ to invasive breast cancer

BACKGROUND

Risk of recurrence and progression of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) to invasive cancer remains uncertain, emphasizing the need for developing predictive biomarkers of aggressive DCIS.

METHODS

Human cell lines and mouse models of disease progression were analyzed for candidate risk predictive biomarkers identified and validated in two independent DCIS cohorts.

RESULTS

RNA profiling of normal mammary and DCIS tissues (n = 48) revealed that elevated SOX11 expression correlates with MKI67, EZH2, and DCIS recurrence score. The 21T human cell line model of DCIS progression to invasive cancer and two mouse models developing mammary intraepithelial neoplasia confirmed the findings. AKT activation correlated with chromatin accessibility and EZH2 enrichment upregulating SOX11 expression. AKT and HER2 inhibitors decreased SOX11 expression along with diminished mammosphere formation. SOX11 was upregulated in HER2+ and basal-like subtypes (P < 0.001). Longitudinal DCIS cohort (n = 194) revealed shorter recurrence-free survival in SOX11+ than SOX11- patients (P = 0.0056 in all DCIS; P < 0.0001 in HER2+ subtype) associated with increased risk of ipsilateral breast event/IBE (HR = 1.9, 95%CI = 1.2-2.9; P = 0.003).

DISCUSSION

Epigenetic activation of SOX11 drives recurrence of DCIS and progression to invasive cancer, suggesting SOX11 as a predictive biomarker of IBE.

Molecular Expression Assays Improve the Prediction of Local and Invasive Local Recurrence After Breast-Conserving Surgery for Ductal Carcinoma In Situ

PURPOSE

Ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) is routinely treated with adjuvant radiotherapy (RT) after breast-conserving surgery (BCS). The inability to accurately estimate an individual's risk of local recurrence (LR) and invasive LR using clinicopathologic factors (CPF) contributes to the overtreatment of DCIS. We examined the impact of the 12-gene DCIS Score (DS) and the 21-gene Recurrence Score (RS) on the accuracy of predicting LR and invasive LR.

METHODS

A population-based cohort diagnosed with pure DCIS treated with BCS ± RT from 1994 to 2003 was used. All patients had expert pathology review and assessment of the DS and RS. Predictive models (CPF alone, DS + CPF, and RS + CPF) were developed using multivariable Cox regression analyses to predict 10-year LR and invasive LR risks. Models were evaluated on the basis of c-statistic, -2log likelihood estimate (-2LLE), and Akaike information criterion. Calibration was performed using bootstrap resamples, with replacement.

RESULTS

The cohort includes 1,226 women treated with BCS; 712 received RT. 194 women (15.8%) experienced ipsilateral LR as a first event; 112 were invasive. Models including the DS or RS performed better in predicting the 10-year risk of LR compared with models on the basis of CPF alone with excellent calibration. The two molecular-based models also performed better in predicting invasive LR compared with the CPF model but the model incorporating the RS did not perform better in the prediction of invasive LR compared with the DS-based model.

CONCLUSION

Models incorporating the DS or RS more accurately predicted the 10-year risk of LR and invasive LR after BCS compared with models on the basis of CPF alone. Inclusion of the RS, compared with DS, did not improve the prediction of the 10-year risk of invasive LR.

Ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast: finding the balance between overtreatment and undertreatment

Ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) accounts for 15-25% of all breast cancer diagnoses. Its prognosis is excellent overall, the main risk being the occurrence of local breast events, as most cases of DCIS do not progress to invasive cancer. Systematic screening has greatly increased the incidence of this non-obligate precursor of invasion, lending urgency to the need to identify DCIS that is prone to invasive progression and distinguish it from non-invasion-prone DCIS, as the latter can be overdiagnosed and therefore overtreated. Treatment strategies, including surgery, radiotherapy, and optional endocrine therapy, decrease the risk of local events, but have no effect on survival outcomes. Active surveillance is being evaluated as a possible new option for low-risk DCIS. Considerable efforts to decipher the biology of DCIS have led to a better understanding of the factors that determine its variable natural history. Given this variability, shared decision making regarding optimal, personalised treatment strategies is the most appropriate course of action. Well designed, risk-based de-escalation studies remain a major need in this field.

Adherence to guideline recommendations for follow-up in patients with DCIS at a large teaching hospital in the Netherlands

PURPOSE

Ductal-carcinoma in situ (DCIS) is a pre-invasive form of breast cancer with good prognosis. Follow-up guidelines in the Netherlands are currently the same as for invasive breast cancer. Due to fear of invasive breast cancer or recurrence, it is hypothesized that follow-up for DCIS after treatment is more intense in practice resulting in potentially unnecessary high costs. This study investigates the follow-up in practice for patients with DCIS compared to the recommendations in order to inform clinicians and policy makers how to utilize these guidelines.

METHODS

Patients diagnosed with pure DCIS between 2004 and 2014 were followed up until 2018. Information on duration and frequency of follow-up visits, reasons and decision makers for shortening, and prolonging follow-up was collected. Prolonged follow-up was defined as deviation from the Dutch guideline: more than 5 years of follow-up and older than 60 years.

RESULTS

Of the 227 patients the mean number of visits per year was 1.4 and mean years of follow-up was 6.0. Thirty-three percent had prolonged follow-up and 26% shorter follow-up than recommended. A majority (78%) of decision for prolonged follow-up was being made by clinicians.

CONCLUSION

Follow-up duration is in almost half of patients with DCIS according to guidelines and with most prolonged follow-up only up to a year longer than recommended. In most cases suspicious findings and the timing of the population screening program appeared to cause prolonged follow-up. If accepted by patients and clinicians, future DCIS specific guidelines should address these reasons and tailor to the individual risks.

Update on Management of Ductal Carcinoma in Situ

Ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) represents 18% to 25% of all diagnosed breast cancers, and is a noninvasive, nonobligate precursor lesion to invasive cancer. The diagnosis of DCIS represents a wide range of disease, including lesions with both low and high risk of progression to invasive cancer and recurrence. Over the past decade, research on the topic of DCIS has focused on the possibility of tailoring treatment for patients according to their risk for progression and recurrence, which is based on clinicopathologic, biomolecular and genetic factors. These efforts are ongoing, with recently completed and continuing clinical trials spanning the continuum of cancer care. We conducted a review to identify recent advances on the topic of diagnosis, risk stratification and management of DCIS. While novel imaging techniques have increased the rate of DCIS diagnosis, questions persist regarding the optimal management of lesions that would not be identified with conventional methods. Additionally, among trials investigating the potential for omission of surgery and use of active surveillance, 2 trials have completed accrual and 2 clinical trials are continuing to enroll patients. Identification of novel genetic patterns is expanding our potential for risk stratification and aiding our ability to de-escalate radiation and systemic therapies for DCIS. These advances provide hope for tailoring of DCIS treatment in the near future.

Clinical Biomarkers of Tumour Radiosensitivity and Predicting Benefit from Radiotherapy: A Systematic Review

Modern advanced radiotherapy techniques have improved the precision and accuracy of radiotherapy delivery, with resulting plans being highly personalised based on individual anatomy. Adaptation for individual tumour biology remains elusive. There is an unmet need for biomarkers of intrinsic radiosensitivity that can predict tumour response to radiation to facilitate individualised decision-making, dosing and treatment planning. Over the last few decades, the use of high throughput molecular biology technologies has led to an explosion of newly discovered cancer biomarkers. Gene expression signatures are now used routinely in clinic to aid decision-making regarding adjuvant systemic therapy. They have great potential as radiotherapy biomarkers. A previous systematic review published in 2015 reported only five studies of signatures evaluated for their ability to predict radiotherapy benefits in clinical cohorts. This updated systematic review encompasses the expanded number of studies reported in the last decade. An additional 27 studies were identified. In total, 22 distinct signatures were recognised (5 pre-2015, 17 post-2015). Seventeen signatures were 'radiosensitivity' signatures and five were breast cancer prognostic signatures aiming to identify patients at an increased risk of local recurrence and therefore were more likely to benefit from adjuvant radiation. Most signatures (15/22) had not progressed beyond the discovery phase of development, with no suitable validated clinical-grade assay for application. Very few signatures (4/17 'radiosensitivity' signatures) had undergone any laboratory-based biological validation of their ability to predict tumour radiosensitivity. No signatures have been assessed prospectively in a phase III biomarker-led trial to date and none are recommended for routine use in clinical guidelines. A phase III prospective evaluation is ongoing for two breast cancer prognostic signatures. The most promising radiosensitivity signature remains the radiosensitivity index (RSI), which is used to calculate a genomic adjusted radiation dose (GARD). There is an ongoing phase II prospective biomarker-led study of RSI/GARD in triple negative breast cancer. The results of these trials are eagerly anticipated over the coming years. Future work in this area should focus on (1) robust biological validation; (2) building biobanks alongside large radiotherapy randomised controlled trials with dose variance (to demonstrate an interaction between radiosensitivity signature and dose); (3) a validation of clinical-grade cost-effective assays that are deliverable within current healthcare infrastructure; and (4) an integration with biomarkers of other determinants of radiation response.

Expression of immune-related genes and breast cancer recurrence in women with ductal carcinoma in situ

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) is a non-obligate precursor of invasive breast cancer with highly variable clinical behavior, but risk stratification is still challenging. We sought to identify immune-related gene expression signatures of pure DCIS associated with different risks of breast cancer recurrence.

METHODS

A retrospective nested case-control study of 143 pure DCIS was performed including 70 women with subsequent ipsilateral breast event (IBE, in situ or invasive; cases) and 73 DCIS women with no IBE and matched for age, tumor size, treatment, hormone receptors/HER2 status, and follow-up time (controls). RNA was extracted from DCIS samples and subjected to next-generation sequencing gene expression analysis of 395 immune-related genes. Correlations between DCIS immune-related gene expression and IBE were analyzed using weighted Cox regression for nested case-control data.

RESULTS

Eight immune-related genes were differentially expressed between cases and controls. MAGEA10 expression (present vs. absent) and high expression levels of IFNA17 and CBLB (Q4 vs. Q1) were observed more frequently in DCIS of women with subsequent IBE, mainly invasive (p-valueFDR < 0.05). Conversely, expression of IL3RA1, TAGAP, TNFAIP8, and high expression levels of CCL2 and LRP1 were associated with a lower risk of IBE (p-valueFDR < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

This exploratory analysis of pure DCIS showed significant differences in immune-related gene expression profiles between women with and with no subsequent IBE, particularly as invasive IBE. These results, after additional validation, could improve risk stratification and management of DCIS patients.

Tools to Guide Radiation Oncologists in the Management of DCIS

Similar to invasive breast cancer, ductal carcinoma in situ is also going through a phase of changes not only from a technical but also a conceptual standpoint. From prescribing radiotherapy to everyone to personalized approaches, including radiotherapy omission, there is still a lack of a comprehensive framework to guide radiation oncologists in decision making. Many pieces of the puzzle are finding their place as high-quality data mature and are disseminated, but very often, the interpretation of risk factors and the perception of risk remain very highly subjective. Sharing the therapeutic choice with patients requires effective communication for an understanding of risks and benefits, facilitating an informed decision that does not increase anxiety and concerns about prognosis. The purpose of this narrative review is to summarize the current state of knowledge to highlight the tools available to radiation oncologists for managing DCIS, with an outlook on future developments.

Progression from ductal carcinoma in situ to invasive breast cancer: molecular features and clinical significance

Ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) represents pre-invasive breast carcinoma. In untreated cases, 25-60% DCIS progress to invasive ductal carcinoma (IDC). The challenge lies in distinguishing between non-progressive and progressive DCIS, often resulting in over- or under-treatment in many cases. With increasing screen-detected DCIS in these years, the nature of DCIS has aroused worldwide attention. A deeper understanding of the biological nature of DCIS and the molecular journey of the DCIS-IDC transition is crucial for more effective clinical management. Here, we reviewed the key signaling pathways in breast cancer that may contribute to DCIS initiation and progression. We also explored the molecular features of DCIS and IDC, shedding light on the progression of DCIS through both inherent changes within tumor cells and alterations in the tumor microenvironment. In addition, valuable research tools utilized in studying DCIS including preclinical models and newer advanced technologies such as single-cell sequencing, spatial transcriptomics and artificial intelligence, have been systematically summarized. Further, we thoroughly discussed the clinical advancements in DCIS and IDC, including prognostic biomarkers and clinical managements, with the aim of facilitating more personalized treatment strategies in the future. Research on DCIS has already yielded significant insights into breast carcinogenesis and will continue to pave the way for practical clinical applications.

Nonclinical factors associated with the treatment of older women with newly diagnosed low-grade ductal carcinoma in situ

BACKGROUND

Ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) is the most common form of noninvasive breast cancer and is associated with an excellent prognosis. As a result, there is concern about overdiagnosis and overtreatment of DCIS because most patients with DCIS are treated as though they have invasive breast cancer and undergo either breast-conserving surgery (BCS)-most commonly followed by radiation therapy (RT)-or mastectomy. Little research to date has focused on nonclinical factors influencing treatments for DCIS.

METHODS

Population-based data were analyzed from five state cancer registries (California, Florida, New Jersey, New York, and Texas) on women aged 65 years and older newly diagnosed with DCIS during the years 2003 to 2014 using a retrospective cohort design and multinominal logistic modeling. The registry records with Medicare enrollment data and fee-for-service claims to obtain treatments (BCS alone, BCS with RT, or mastectomy) were merged. Surgeon practice structure was identified through physician surveys and internet searches.

RESULTS

Patients of surgeons employed by cancer centers or health systems were less likely to receive BCS with RT or mastectomy than patients of surgeons in single specialty or multispecialty practices. There also was substantial geographic variation in treatments, with patients in New York, New Jersey, and California being less likely to receive BCS with RT or mastectomy than patients in Texas or Florida.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings suggest nonclinical factors including the culture of the practice and/or financial incentives are significantly associated with the types of treatment received for DCIS. Increasing awareness and targeted efforts to educate physicians about DCIS management among older women with low-grade DCIS could reduce patient harm and yield substantial cost savings.

Lumpectomy without radiation for ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast: 20-year results from the ECOG-ACRIN E5194 study

We report the 20-year rate of ipsilateral breast event (IBE) for patients with ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) treated with lumpectomy without radiation on a non-randomized prospective clinical trial. Patients were enrolled in cohort 1: low- or intermediate-grade DCIS, size ≤ 2.5 cm (n = 561); or cohort 2: high-grade DCIS, size ≤ 1 cm (n = 104). The Kaplan-Meier method was used to estimate time-to-event distributions. Cox proportional hazard methods were used to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) and tests for significance for event times. 561 patients were enrolled in cohort 1 and 104 in cohort 2. After central pathology review, 26% in cohort 1 were recategorized as high-grade and 26% in cohort 2 as low- or intermediate-grade. Mean DCIS size was similar at 7.5 mm in cohort 1 and 7.8 mm in cohort 2. Surgical margin was ≥3 mm in 96% of patients, and about 30% received tamoxifen. Median follow-up was 19.2 years. There were 104 IBEs, of which 54 (52%) were invasive. The IBE and invasive IBE rates increased in both cohorts up to 15 years, then plateaued. The 20-year IBE rates were 17.8% for cohort 1 and 28.7% for cohort 2 (p = 0.005), respectively. Invasive IBE occurred in 9.8% and 15.1% (p = 0.09), respectively. On multivariable analysis, IBE risk increased with size and was higher in cohort 2, but grade and margin width were not significantly associated with IBE. For patients with DCIS treated with excision without radiation, the rate of IBE increased with size and assigned cohort mostly in the first 15 years.

Personalizing the Treatment of Women with Ductal Carcinoma In Situ (DCIS) Using the DCIS Score: A Qualitative Study on Score Use

BACKGROUND

A twelve-gene molecular expression assay (DCIS score) may help guide radiation oncology treatment under specific circumstances. We undertook a study to examine radiation oncologist (RO), surgeon, and decision maker views on implementing the DCIS score in practice for women with low-risk DCIS.

METHODS

We conducted a qualitative study involving telephone interviews that were audio-recorded and transcribed. Two researchers conducted a thematic analysis of transcripts.

RESULTS

Twenty-eight individuals (ROs, breast cancer surgeons, and cancer policy decision makers) were invited to participate; 22 out of the 28 people (79%) agreed. The final sample included 20 participants: 11 of 13 (85%) ROs, 5 of 7 (71%) surgeons, and 4 of 8 (50%) decision makers. Most ROs expressed concerns about overtreatment but could not predict with certainty which low-risk patients could safely avoid radiation. The DCIS score was viewed as contributing valuable personalized risk information as part of treatment decision making that included clinicopathological factors and women's preferences. Future implementation would require guidelines with input from the oncology team.

CONCLUSIONS

ROs had concerns about the overtreatment of women with DCIS, but lacked the tools to reliably predict which women could safely avoid radiation. By providing oncologists and women with personalized tumor information, the DCIS score was an important component of treatment decision making.

A randomized Phase I pre-operative window trial of transdermal endoxifen in women planning mastectomy: Evaluation of dermal safety, intra-mammary drug distribution, and biologic effects

Breast cancer prevention only requires local exposure of the breast to active drug. However, oral preventive agents entail systemic exposure, causing adverse effects that limit acceptance by high-risk women. Drug-delivery through the breast skin is an attractive option, but requires demonstration of dermal safety and drug distribution throughout the breast. We formulated the tamoxifen metabolite (E/Z)-endoxifen for transdermal delivery and tested it in a placebo-controlled, double-blinded Phase I trial with dose escalation from 10 to 20 mg daily. The primary endpoint was dermal toxicity. Thirty-two women planning mastectomy were randomized (2:1) to endoxifen-gel or placebo-gel applied to both breasts for 3-5 weeks. Both doses of endoxifen-gel incurred no dermal or systemic toxicity compared to placebo. All endoxifen-treated breasts contained the drug at each of five sampling locations; the median per-person tissue concentration in the treated participants was 0.6 ng/g (IQR 0.4-1.6), significantly higher (p < 0.001) than the median plasma concentration (0.2 ng/mL, IQR 0.2-0.2). The median ratio of the more potent (Z)-isomer to (E)-isomer at each breast location was 1.50 (IQR 0.96-2.54, p < 0.05). No discernible effects of breast size or adiposity on tissue concentrations were observed. At the endoxifen doses and duration used, and the tissue concentration achieved, we observed a non-significant overall reduction of tumor proliferation (Ki67 LI) and significant downregulation of gene signatures known to promote cancer invasion (FN1, SERPINH1, PLOD2, PDGFA, ITGAV) (p = 0.03). Transdermal endoxifen is an important potential breast cancer prevention agent but formulations with better dermal penetration are needed.

Long-term follow-up of complex oncoplastic breast-conserving surgery, standard breast conservation and skin-sparing mastectomy in DCIS - a register-based study

BACKGROUND

Few studies evaluate oncological safety in complex oncoplastic breast-conserving surgery(C-OBCS) for DCIS. It still needs to be defined whether it is equivalent to standard breast conservation(S-BCS) or an alternative to skin-sparing mastectomy(SSM). This study compares local recurrence rates(LR), disease-free survival(DFS) and overall survival (OS) between the three surgical techniques.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective register-based study on LR, DFS and OS of patients operated with S-BCS(n=1388), C-OBCS (n=106) or skin-sparing mastectomy (n=218) for DCIS diagnosed 2007-2020. Data was extracted from the Norwegian Breast Cancer Registry.

RESULTS

In the S-BCS, C-OBCS and SSM groups, median age was 60, 58 and 51 years (p<0.001), median size 15, 25, and 40 mm (p<0.001) and median follow-up 55, 48 and 76 months. At ten years, the overall LR was 12.7%, 14.3% for S-BCS, 11.2% for C-OBCS and 6.8% for SSM. Overall DFS at ten years was 82.3%, 80.5% for S-BCS, 82.4% for C-OBCS and 90.4% for SSM. At ten years, the OS was 93.8%, 93.0% in S-BCS, 93.3% in C-OBCS and 96.6% in the SSM group. Weighted Kaplan Meier plots showed that SSM had a significantly higher DFS than S-BCS (p=0.003) and C-OBCS (p=0.029). DFS in C-OBCS versus S-BCS and the difference in OS was not significant (p=0.264).

CONCLUSION

SSM had a significantly higher DFS than S-BCS and C-OBCS. The difference in DFS between S-BCS and C-OBCS, and OS between the three groups was not statistically significant. Our study suggests that C-OBCS is a safe alternative to S-BCS and SSM.

Presurgical Oral Tamoxifen vs Transdermal 4-Hydroxytamoxifen in Women With Ductal Carcinoma In Situ: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance

Oral tamoxifen citrate benefits women with ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS), but concern about toxic effects has limited acceptance. Previous pilot studies have suggested transdermal 4-hydroxytamoxifen gel has equivalent antiproliferative efficacy to oral tamoxifen, with low systemic exposure.

Objective

To demonstrate that 4-hydroxytamoxifen gel applied to the breast skin is noninferior to oral tamoxifen in its antiproliferative effect in DCIS lesions.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This randomized, double-blind, phase 2 preoperative window trial was performed at multicenter breast surgery referral practices from May 31, 2017, to January 27, 2021. Among 408 women with estrogen receptor-positive DCIS who were approached, 120 consented and 100 initiated study treatment. The most common reasons for nonparticipation were surgical delay, disinterest in research, and concerns about toxic effects. Data were analyzed from January 26, 2021, to October 5, 2022.

Intervention

Random assignment to oral tamoxifen citrate, 20 mg/d, and gel placebo or 4-hydroxytamoxifen gel, 2 mg/d per breast, and oral placebo, for 4 to 10 weeks, followed by DCIS resection.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The primary end point was absolute change in DCIS Ki-67 labeling index (Ki67-LI). Secondary end points included 12-gene DCIS Score, breast tissue tamoxifen metabolite concentrations, tamoxifen-responsive plasma protein levels, and patient-reported symptoms. Noninferiority of Ki67-LI reduction by 4-hydroxytamoxifen gel was tested using analysis of covariance; within- and between-arm comparisons were performed with paired t tests for mean values or the Wilcoxon rank sum test for medians.

Results

Of 90 participants completing treatment (mean [SD] age, 55 [11] years; 8 [8.9%] Asian, 16 [17.8%] Black, 8 [8.9%] Latina, and 53 [58.9%] White), 15 lacked residual DCIS in the surgical sample, leaving 75 evaluable for the primary end point analysis (40 in the oral tamoxifen group and 35 in the 4-hydroxytamoxifen gel group). Posttreatment Ki67-LI was 3.3% higher (80% CI, 2.1%-4.6%) in the 4-hydroxytamoxifen gel group compared with the oral tamoxifen group, exceeding the noninferiority margin (2.6%). The DCIS Score decreased more with oral tamoxifen treatment (-16 [95% CI, -22 to -9.4]) than with 4-hydroxytamoxifen gel (-1.8 [95% CI, -5.8 to 2.3]). The median 4-hydroxytamoxifen concentrations deep in the breast were nonsignificantly higher in the oral tamoxifen group (5.7 [IQR, 4.0-7.9] vs 3.8 [IQR, 1.3-7.9] ng/g), whereas endoxifen was abundant in the oral tamoxifen group and minimal in the 4-hydroxytamoxifen gel group (median, 13.0 [IQR, 8.9-20.6] vs 0.3 [IQR, 0-0.3] ng/g; P < .001). Oral tamoxifen caused expected adverse changes in plasma protein levels and vasomotor symptoms, with minimal changes in the transdermal group.

Conclusions and Relevance

In this randomized clinical trial, antiproliferative noninferiority of 4-hydroxytamoxifen gel to oral tamoxifen was not confirmed, potentially owing to endoxifen exposure differences. New transdermal approaches must deliver higher drug quantities and/or include the most potent metabolites.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02993159.

Is it Time to Retire the Term of Low-Grade Ductal Carcinoma in Situ and Replace it With Ductal Neoplasia?

As the leading cause of cancer morbidity and the second leading cause of cancer mortality among women, breast cancer continues to remain a major global public health problem. Consequently, significant attention has been directed toward early breast cancer detection and prevention. As a result, the number of image-detected biopsies has increased, and minimally invasive diagnostic procedures have almost replaced open surgical biopsies. Therefore, pathologists are expected to provide more information with less tissue and diagnose increasing numbers of atypical proliferative breast lesions, in situ lesions, and small breast carcinomas. This is a difficult task, as reflected by continuous reports highlighting the challenges associated with morphologic distinction between atypical ductal hyperplasia and low-grade ductal carcinoma in situ. The current interobserver variability among pathologists to accurately define these two entities often leads to silent overdiagnosis and overtreatment. Up to now, there are no reproducible morphologic features and/or any reliable biomarkers that can accurately separate the above-mentioned entities. Despite these reports, patients diagnosed with low-grade ductal carcinoma in situ are subject to cancer therapy regardless of the fact that low-grade ductal carcinoma in situ is known to be an indolent lesion. Studies have shown that low and high-grade ductal carcinoma in situ are genetically different forms of breast cancer precursors; however, the term ductal carcinoma in situ is followed by cancer therapy regardless of the grade and biology of the tumor. In contrast, patients with the diagnoses of atypical ductal hyperplasia do not undergo cancer therapy. In the current article, attempts are made to highlight the continuous dilemma in distinction between atypical ductal hyperplasia and low-grade ductal carcinoma in situ. Going forward, we suggest that low-grade ductal carcinoma in situ be referred to as ductal neoplasia. This alternative terminology allows for different management and follow-up strategies by eliminating the word carcinoma.

Can Molecular Biomarkers Help Reduce the Overtreatment of DCIS?

Ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS), especially in the era of mammographic screening, is a commonly diagnosed breast tumor. Despite the low breast cancer mortality risk, management with breast conserving surgery (BCS) and radiotherapy (RT) is the prevailing treatment approach in order to reduce the risk of local recurrence (LR), including invasive LR, which carries a subsequent risk of breast cancer mortality. However, reliable and accurate individual risk prediction remains elusive and RT continues to be standardly recommended for most women with DCIS. Three molecular biomarkers have been studied to better estimate LR risk after BCS-Oncotype DX DCIS score, DCISionRT Decision Score and its associated Residual Risk subtypes, and Oncotype 21-gene Recurrence Score. All these molecular biomarkers represent important efforts towards improving predicted risk of LR after BCS. To prove clinical utility, these biomarkers require careful predictive modeling with calibration and external validation, and evidence of benefit to patients; on this front, further research is needed. Most trials do not incorporate molecular biomarkers in evaluating de-escalation of therapy for DCIS; however, one-the Prospective Evaluation of Breast-Conserving Surgery Alone in Low-Risk DCIS (ELISA) trial-incorporates the Oncotype DX DCIS score in defining a low-risk population and is an important next step in this line of research.

Adherence Disparities and Utilization Trends of Oncotype Dx Assay: A National Cancer Database Study

INTRODUCTION

Oncotype Dx (ODX) is a genetic assay that analyzes tumor recurrence risk and provides chemotherapy recommendations for T1-T2 stage, hormone receptor-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor-negative, and nodal-negative breast cancer patients. Despite its established validity, the utilization of this assay is suboptimal. The study aims to evaluate factors that are associated with adherence rate with the testing guidelines and examine changes in utilization trends.

METHODS

This is a retrospective study, utilizing data from the National Cancer Database from 2010 to 2017. Patients who met the ODX testing guidelines were first evaluated for testing adherence. Secondly, all patients who underwent ODX testing were assessed to evaluate the trend in ODX utilization.

RESULTS

A total of 429,648 patients met the criteria for ODX, and 43.4% of this population underwent testing. Advanced age, racial minorities, low-income status, well-differentiated tumor grade, uninsured status, and treatment at community cancer centers were associated with a decreased likelihood of receiving ODX in eligible patients. Additionally, a notable amount of testing was performed on patients who did not meet the ODX testing criteria. Among the 295,326 patients that underwent ODX testing, 16.6% of patients were node-positive and 1.8% had T3 or T4 stage tumors.

CONCLUSIONS

A considerable number of patients who were eligible for ODX did not receive it, indicating potential barriers to care and disparities in breast cancer treatment. ODX usage has been expanded to broader patient populations, indicating more research is needed to validate the effectiveness of the assay in these patient groups.

A living biobank of patient-derived ductal carcinoma in situ mouse-intraductal xenografts identifies risk factors for invasive progression

Ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) is a non-obligate precursor of invasive breast cancer (IBC). Due to a lack of biomarkers able to distinguish high- from low-risk cases, DCIS is treated similar to early IBC even though the minority of untreated cases eventually become invasive. Here, we characterized 115 patient-derived mouse-intraductal (MIND) DCIS models reflecting the full spectrum of DCIS observed in patients. Utilizing the possibility to follow the natural progression of DCIS combined with omics and imaging data, we reveal multiple prognostic factors for high-risk DCIS including high grade, HER2 amplification, expansive 3D growth, and high burden of copy number aberrations. In addition, sequential transplantation of xenografts showed minimal phenotypic and genotypic changes over time, indicating that invasive behavior is an intrinsic phenotype of DCIS and supporting a multiclonal evolution model. Moreover, this study provides a collection of 19 distributable DCIS-MIND models spanning all molecular subtypes.

Associations of clinicopathological factors with local treatment and survival outcome in elderly patients with ductal carcinoma in situ

Background

Local treatment for ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) remains controversial for elderly patients. This study aims to evaluate the association of local treatment, clinicopathological factors, and survival in elderly DCIS patients.

Methods

Patients ≥ 60 years diagnosed with DCIS from January 2009 to December 2018 were retrospectively included. Local treatment including breast surgery, axillary lymph node (ALN) surgery, and radiotherapy were analyzed among subgroups (age of 60-69, 70-79, and ≥ 80 years), and their associations with clinicopathological features and prognostic outcome were further evaluated.

Results

A total of 331 patients were included. Eventually 86 patients received breast conserving surgery (BCS) and 245 patients received mastectomy. ALN surgery was omitted in 62 patients. Age and tumor size were independent factors that influenced the breast and ALN surgery (P < 0.05). Compared with patients aging 60-69, patients ≥ 80 years were more likely to receive BCS (OR 4.28, 95% CI 1.33-13.78, P = 0.015) and be exempt from ALN surgery (OR 0.19, 95% CI 0.05-0.69, P = 0.011). Patients with tumor >1.5 cm were significantly less likely to receive BCS (OR 0.45, 95%CI 0.25-0.83, P = 0.011) and more likely to receive ALN surgery (OR 4.41, 95%CI 1.96-10.48, P = 0.001) compared to patients with tumor ≤ 1.5 cm. Postoperative radiotherapy was performed in 48.8% patients who received BCS. Age was the only factor that associated with the radiotherapy decision after BCS in elderly DCIS patients (P = 0.025). No significant recurrence-free survival difference was observed among patients receiving different local treatments.

Conclusions

Age was related to the choice of local treatment in elderly DCIS patients, but different treatment patterns didn't impact disease outcome.

Ductal Carcinoma In Situ (DCIS) and Microinvasive DCIS: Role of Surgery in Early Diagnosis of Breast Cancer

Advances in treatments, screening, and awareness have led to continually decreasing breast cancer-related mortality rates in the past decades. This achievement is coupled with early breast cancer diagnosis. Ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) and microinvasive breast cancer have increasingly been diagnosed in the context of mammographic screening. Clinical management of DCIS is heterogenous, and the clinical significance of microinvasion in DCIS remains elusive, although microinvasive DCIS (DCIS-Mi) is distinct from "pure" DCIS. Upfront surgery has a fundamental role in the overall treatment of these breast diseases. The growing number of screen-detected DCIS diagnoses with clinicopathological features of low risk for local recurrence (LR) allows more conservative surgical options, followed by personalised adjuvant radiotherapy plans. Furthermore, studies are underway to evaluate the validity of surgery omission in selected low-risk categories. Nevertheless, the management, the priority of axillary surgical staging, and the prognosis of DCIS-Mi remain the subject of debate, demonstrating how the paucity of data still necessitates adequate studies to provide conclusive guidelines. The current scientific scenario for DCIS and DCIS-Mi surgical approach consists of highly controversial and diversified sources, which this narrative review will delineate and clarify.

Predicting Breast Cancer Events in Ductal Carcinoma In Situ (DCIS) Using Generative Adversarial Network Augmented Deep Learning Model

Standard clinicopathological parameters (age, growth pattern, tumor size, margin status, and grade) have been shown to have limited value in predicting recurrence in ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) patients. Early and accurate recurrence prediction would facilitate a more aggressive treatment policy for high-risk patients (mastectomy or adjuvant radiation therapy), and simultaneously reduce over-treatment of low-risk patients. Generative adversarial networks (GAN) are a class of DL models in which two adversarial neural networks, generator and discriminator, compete with each other to generate high quality images. In this work, we have developed a deep learning (DL) classification network that predicts breast cancer events (BCEs) in DCIS patients using hematoxylin and eosin (H & E) images. The DL classification model was trained on 67 patients using image patches from the actual DCIS cores and GAN generated image patches to predict breast cancer events (BCEs). The hold-out validation dataset (n = 66) had an AUC of 0.82. Bayesian analysis further confirmed the independence of the model from classical clinicopathological parameters. DL models of H & E images may be used as a risk stratification strategy for DCIS patients to personalize therapy.

Molecular Signatures in Ductal Carcinoma In Situ (DCIS): A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

CONTEXT

Adjuvant radiotherapy (RT) after breast-conserving surgery (BCS) for ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) is debated as benefits are inconstant. Molecular signatures for DCIS have been developed to stratify the risk of local recurrence (LR) and therefore guide the decision of RT.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate, in women with DCIS treated by BCS, the impact of adjuvant RT on LR according to the molecular signature risk stratification.

METHODOLOGY

We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of five articles including women with DCIS treated by BCS and with a molecular assay performed to stratify the risk, comparing the effect of BCS and RT versus BCS alone on LR including ipsilateral invasive (InvBE) and total breast events (TotBE).

RESULTS

The meta-analysis included 3478 women and evaluated two molecular signatures: Oncotype Dx DCIS (prognostic of LR), and DCISionRT (prognostic of LR and predictive of RT benefit). For DCISionRT, in the high-risk group, the pooled hazard ratio of BCS + RT versus BCS was 0.39 (95%CI 0.20-0.77) for InvBE and 0.34 (95%CI 0.22-0.52) for TotBE. In the low-risk group, the pooled hazard ratio of BCS + RT versus BCS was significant for TotBE at 0.62 (95%CI 0.39-0.99); however, it was not significant for InvBE (HR = 0.58 (95%CI 0.25-1.32)), Discussion: Molecular signatures are able to discriminate high- and low-risk women, high-risk ones having a significant benefit of RT in the reduction of invasive and in situ local recurrences, while in low-risk ones RT did not have a benefit for preventing invasive breast recurrence. The risk prediction of molecular signatures is independent of other risk stratification tools developed in DCIS, and have a tendency toward RT de-escalation. Further studies are needed to assess the impact on mortality.

A Novel Biosignature Identifies Patients With DCIS With High Risk of Local Recurrence After Breast Conserving Surgery and Radiation Therapy

PURPOSE

There is an unmet need to identify women diagnosed with ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) with a low risk of in-breast recurrence (IBR) after breast conserving surgery (BCS), which could omit radiation therapy (RT), and also to identify those with elevated IBR risk remaining after BCS plus RT. We evaluated a novel biosignature for a residual risk subtype (RRt) to help identify patients with elevated IBR risk after BCS plus RT.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Women with DCIS treated with BCS with or without RT at centers in the US, Australia, and Sweden (n = 926) were evaluated. Patients were classified into 3 biosignature risk groups using the decision score (DS) and the RRt category: (1) Low Risk (DS ≤2.8 without RRt), (2) Elevated Risk (DS >2.8 without RRt), and (3) Residual Risk (DS >2.8 with RRt). Total and invasive IBR rates were assessed by risk group and treatment.

RESULTS

In patients at low risk, there was no significant difference in IBR rates with or without RT (total, P = .8; invasive IBR, P = .7), and there were low overall 10-year rates (total, 5.1%; invasive, 2.7%). In patients with elevated risk, IBR rates were decreased with RT (total: hazard ratio [HR], 0.25; P < .001; invasive: HR, 0.28; P = .005); 10-year rates were 20.6% versus 4.9% (total) and 10.9% versus 3.1% (invasive). In patients with residual risk, although IBR rates decreased with RT after BCS (total: HR, 0.21; P < .001; invasive: HR, 0.29; P = .028), IBR rates remained significantly higher after RT compared with patients with elevated risk (HR, 2.5; 95% CI, 1.2-5.4; P = .018), with 10-year rates of 42.1% versus 14.7% (total) and 18.3% versus 6.5% (invasive).

CONCLUSIONS

The novel biosignature identified patients with 3 distinct risk profiles: Low Risk patients with a low recurrence risk with or without adjuvant RT, Elevated Risk patients with excellent outcomes after BCS plus RT, and Residual Risk patients with an elevated recurrence risk remaining after BCS plus RT, warranting potential intensified or alternative treatment approaches.

Identifying recurrences and metastasis after ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) of the breast

Ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) of the breast is a non-invasive tumour that has the potential to progress to invasive ductal carcinoma (IDC). Thus, it represents a treatment dilemma: alone it does not present a risk to life, however, left untreated it may progress to a life-threatening condition. Current clinico-pathological features cannot accurately predict which patients with DCIS have invasive potential, and therefore clinicians are unable to quantify the risk of progression for an individual patient. This leads to many women being over-treated, while others may not receive sufficient treatment to prevent invasive recurrence. A better understanding of the molecular features of DCIS, both tumour-intrinsic and the microenvironment, could offer the ability to better predict which women need aggressive treatment, and which can avoid therapies carrying significant side-effects and such as radiotherapy. In this review, we summarise the current knowledge of DCIS, and consider future research directions.

Towards the development of DCIS risk prediction models

Ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) has a variable natural history, with a poorly understood biology. In this issue of Cancer Cell, Strand et. al. use two well-annotated DCIS repositories to identify an 812-gene classifier that associates with high risk of DCIS recurrence and define novel DCIS subtypes that informs future studies.

Molecular classification and biomarkers of clinical outcome in breast ductal carcinoma in situ: Analysis of TBCRC 038 and RAHBT cohorts

Ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) is the most common precursor of invasive breast cancer (IBC), with variable propensity for progression. We perform multiscale, integrated molecular profiling of DCIS with clinical outcomes by analyzing 774 DCIS samples from 542 patients with 7.3 years median follow-up from the Translational Breast Cancer Research Consortium 038 study and the Resource of Archival Breast Tissue cohorts. We identify 812 genes associated with ipsilateral recurrence within 5 years from treatment and develop a classifier that predicts DCIS or IBC recurrence in both cohorts. Pathways associated with recurrence include proliferation, immune response, and metabolism. Distinct stromal expression patterns and immune cell compositions are identified. Our multiscale approach employed in situ methods to generate a spatially resolved atlas of breast precancers, where complementary modalities can be directly compared and correlated with conventional pathology findings, disease states, and clinical outcome.

Clinicopathologic Features, Treatment Patterns, and Disease Outcomes in a Modern, Prospective Cohort of Young Women Diagnosed with Ductal Carcinoma In Situ

BACKGROUND

Ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) is uncommon and understudied in young women. The objective of this study is to describe clinicopathologic features, treatment, and oncologic outcomes in a modern cohort of women aged ≤ 40 years with DCIS.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients with DCIS were identified from the Young Women's Breast Cancer Study, a multisite prospective cohort of women diagnosed with stage 0-IV breast cancer at age ≤ 40 years, enrolled from 2006 to 2016. Clinical data were collected from patient surveys and medical records. Pathologic features were examined by central review. Data were summarized with descriptive statistics and groups were compared with χ² and Fisher's exact tests.

RESULTS

Among the 98 patients included, median age of diagnosis was 38 years; 36 (37%) patients were symptomatic on presentation. DCIS nuclear grade was high in 35%, intermediate in 50%, and low in 15% of lesions; 36% of lesions had comedonecrosis. The majority of patients underwent bilateral mastectomy (57%), 16 (16%) underwent unilateral mastectomy, and 26 (27%) underwent lumpectomy, most of whom received radiation. Few (13%) patients were receiving tamoxifen therapy 1 year postdiagnosis. Over a median follow-up of 8.4 years, six patients (6%) had disease recurrence, including five locoregional and one distant event.

CONCLUSIONS

A high proportion of young women with DCIS underwent mastectomy with or without contralateral prophylactic mastectomy. Although DCIS was frequently symptomatic on presentation and exhibited unfavorable pathologic factors, clinicopathologic features were overall heterogeneous and few recurrences occurred. This underscores the need for careful consideration of treatment options in young women with DCIS.

Learning to distinguish progressive and non-progressive ductal carcinoma in situ

Ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) is a non-invasive breast neoplasia that accounts for 25% of all screen-detected breast cancers diagnosed annually. Neoplastic cells in DCIS are confined to the ductal system of the breast, although they can escape and progress to invasive breast cancer in a subset of patients. A key concern of DCIS is overtreatment, as most patients screened for DCIS and in whom DCIS is diagnosed will not go on to exhibit symptoms or die of breast cancer, even if left untreated. However, differentiating low-risk, indolent DCIS from potentially progressive DCIS remains challenging. In this Review, we summarize our current knowledge of DCIS and explore open questions about the basic biology of DCIS, including those regarding how genomic events in neoplastic cells and the surrounding microenvironment contribute to the progression of DCIS to invasive breast cancer. Further, we discuss what information will be needed to prevent overtreatment of indolent DCIS lesions without compromising adequate treatment for high-risk patients.

The clinical significance of HER2 expression in DCIS

HER2 is an established prognostic and predictive marker for patients with invasive breast cancer. The clinical and biological significance of HER2 overexpression in patients with ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) remains poorly defined. DCIS is a heterogeneous disease and some patients with DCIS will not progress to invasive breast cancer. However, clinically significant recurrence rates have been reported after breast-conserving surgery for DCIS and approximately half of these cases will be life-threatening invasive recurrences. Since the incidence of DCIS is rising due to the widespread use of screening mammography, there is robust interest in selecting high-risk DCIS patients that may benefit from adjuvant therapies. Molecular prognostic and predictive models in early invasive breast cancer help clinicians identify patients that will benefit from chemotherapy. Molecular subtyping and profiling could also be useful in treating DCIS patients. According to current practice guidelines, HER2 testing is not recommended in DCIS patients. Nevertheless, evidence suggests that HER2-positive DCIS cases may be associated with adverse clinicopathological parameters and increased recurrence rates. This review summarizes the existing body of evidence linking HER2 expression and ipsilateral breast cancer recurrence in DCIS. HER2, as well as its correlation with other clinicopathological markers might be a useful prognostic and predictive marker, helping clinical decision-making in DCIS patients.

Spatial genomics maps the structure, nature and evolution of cancer clones

Genome sequencing of cancers often reveals mosaics of different subclones present in the same tumour1-3. Although these are believed to arise according to the principles of somatic evolution, the exact spatial growth patterns and underlying mechanisms remain elusive4,5. Here, to address this need, we developed a workflow that generates detailed quantitative maps of genetic subclone composition across whole-tumour sections. These provide the basis for studying clonal growth patterns, and the histological characteristics, microanatomy and microenvironmental composition of each clone. The approach rests on whole-genome sequencing, followed by highly multiplexed base-specific in situ sequencing, single-cell resolved transcriptomics and dedicated algorithms to link these layers. Applying the base-specific in situ sequencing workflow to eight tissue sections from two multifocal primary breast cancers revealed intricate subclonal growth patterns that were validated by microdissection. In a case of ductal carcinoma in situ, polyclonal neoplastic expansions occurred at the macroscopic scale but segregated within microanatomical structures. Across the stages of ductal carcinoma in situ, invasive cancer and lymph node metastasis, subclone territories are shown to exhibit distinct transcriptional and histological features and cellular microenvironments. These results provide examples of the benefits afforded by spatial genomics for deciphering the mechanisms underlying cancer evolution and microenvironmental ecology.

Breast cancer gene expression signatures: development and clinical significance-a narrative review

Background and Objective

Breast cancer gene expression signatures are developing rapidly and are expected to better understand the intrinsic features of the tumor, and also to optimize the treatment strategy in clinical practice. This review is to summarize the controversy and consensus in clinical practice of gene expression signatures, and to provide our perspective on these issues as well as recommendation for future direction.

Methods

We reviewed English publications in PubMed related to breast cancer gene expression signatures from 2002 to 2022.

Key Content and Findings

Five mature commercial gene expression signatures: Oncotype, MammaPrint, Prosigna/PAM50, EndoPredict and Breast Cancer Index (BCI) are available to provide the prognostic and predictive assessment. Although they could help to evaluate the risk of recurrence and to predict the benefits of certain treatments, their applications remain challenging. Treatment decisions should be determined by a combination of related clinical pathological factors in clinical practice.

Conclusions

Gene expression signatures could assist in the determination of the adjuvant therapy of early-stage breast cancer. The prospective randomized clinical trials showed that chemotherapy may be exempted in low-risk patients. More sufficient data are expected for the application in radiotherapy, extended endocrine therapy, and neoadjuvant treatment. The treatment cannot be determined by a single factor but by comprehensive assessments of clinicopathological factors, test purpose, and cost-effectiveness. Patients will benefit from personalized treatments with the publication of further evidence.

MiRNA expression deregulation correlates with the Oncotype DX® DCIS score

Background

Current clinical criteria do not discriminate well between women who will or those who will not develop ipsilateral invasive breast cancer (IBC), or a DCIS recurrence after a ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) diagnosis. The 12-gene Oncotype DX® DCIS assay (RT qPCR gene-based scoring system) was established and shown to predict the risk of subsequent ipsilateral IBC or DCIS recurrence. Recent studies have shown that microRNA (miRNA) expression deregulation can contribute to the development of IBC, but very few have evaluated miRNA deregulation in DCIS lesions. In this study, we sought to determine whether specific miRNA expression changes may correlate with Oncotype DX® DCIS scores.

Methods

For this study, we used archived formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded (FFPE) specimens from 41 women diagnosed with DCIS between 2012 and 2018. The DCIS lesions were stratified into low (n = 26), intermediate (n = 10), and high (n = 5) risk score groups using the Oncotype DX® DCIS assay. Total RNA was extracted from DCIS lesions by macro-dissection of unstained FFPE sections, and next-generation small-RNA sequencing was performed. We evaluated the correlation between miRNA expression data and Oncotype score, as well as patient age. RT-qPCR validations were performed to validate the topmost differentially expressed miRNAs identified between the different risk score groups.

Results

MiRNA sequencing of 32 FFPE DCIS specimens from the three different risk group scores identified a correlation between expression deregulation of 17 miRNAs and Oncotype scores. Our analyses also revealed a correlation between the expression deregulation of 9 miRNAs and the patient’s age. Based on these results, a total of 15 miRNAs were selected for RT-qPCR validation. Of these, miR-190b (p = 0.043), miR-135a (p = 0.05), miR-205 (p = 0.00056), miR-30c (p = 0.011), and miR-744 (p = 0.038) showed a decreased expression in the intermediate/high Oncotype group when compared to the low-risk score group. A composite risk score was established using these 5 miRNAs and indicated a significant association between miRNA expression deregulation and the Oncotype DX® DCIS Score (p < 0.0021), between high/intermediate and low risk groups.

Conclusions

Our analyses identified a subset of 5 miRNAs able to discriminate between Oncotype DX® DCIS score subgroups. Together, our data suggest that miRNA expression analysis may add value to the predictive and prognostic evaluation of DCIS lesions.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13058-022-01558-4.

Patterns of Care and Utilization of Radiation for Women With Good-Risk Ductal Carcinoma In Situ: A National Cancer Database Analysis

Purpose/objective(s)

Lumpectomy followed by whole-breast radiation therapy (WBRT) provides a 50% recurrence rate reduction in ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) patients when compared to lumpectomy alone. Certain factors increase the risk of recurrence, including higher nuclear grade, large size, age less than 50, and close margins. RTOG 9804 demonstrated a reduction in local failure after WBRT with the use of adjuvant radiation in women with "good-risk disease" (mammographically detected, measuring less than or equal to 2.5 cm, with a predominant nuclear grade of 1 or 2, and a margin of greater than or equal to 1 cm, or a negative re-excision). The purpose of this study is to retrospectively identify the patterns of care in women with low-risk DCIS utilizing the National Cancer Database (NCDB). We hypothesize that with the utilization of hypofractionation, there may be an increase in the delivery of RT for these "good-risk" patients.

Materials/methods

The National Cancer Database was queried to identify women treated with lumpectomy for <2.5 cm, nuclear grade 1 or 2 DCIS of the breast from 2004 to 2016. Data were collected regarding age, tumor size, endocrine therapy use, ER receptor status, race, insurance type, and distance from the treatment center. The distance was stratified into quartiles consisting of 0-3.9, 4-8, 8.1-15.8, and > 15.8 miles, respectively. Radiation fractionation was collected and categorized as hypofractionation, standard fractionation, or other if fractionation could not be ascertained. Clinical and patient-related factors were compared between patients who received radiation and those who received no radiation. The frequency distributions between categorical variables were compared using the Chi-square test. Multivariable logistic regression was used to identify covariables that impacted the receipt of radiation.

Results

The eligibility criteria were met by a total of 12,846 patients. Of those, 6,600 (51.4%) received adjuvant WBRT. On multivariable regression, patients whose tumors were ER (OR 1.24, P<0.001) and those who had not received endocrine therapy (OR 2.24, P<0.001) were more likely to receive WBRT. Factors less likely to receive WBRT included increasing age over 50 (age 50-65 OR 0.83, P<0.001; age>65 OR 0.58, P<0.001), and distance of >15.8 miles (OR 0.78, P<0.001). The fractionation technique was categorized as standard or hypofractionated in 52.2% of patients. Of those, the use of hypofractionation increased from 0.4% in 2004 to 8.9% in 2010 and to 53.8% in 2016.

Conclusion

This NCDB analysis demonstrated that patients who meet the RTOG 9804 criteria for "good-risk" DCIS are less likely to receive RT as time progresses despite an increase in the utilization of hypofractionation techniques. Overall, slightly more than half of these patients receive adjuvant RT.

Radiation doses and fractionation schedules in non-low-risk ductal carcinoma in situ in the breast (BIG 3-07/TROG 07.01): a randomised, factorial, multicentre, open-label, phase 3 study

BACKGROUND

Whole breast irradiation (WBI) after conservative surgery for ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) reduces local recurrence. We investigated whether a tumour bed boost after WBI improved outcomes, and examined radiation dose fractionation sensitivity for non-low-risk DCIS.

METHODS

The study was an international, randomised, unmasked, phase 3 trial involving 136 participating centres of six clinical trials organisations in 11 countries (Australia, New Zealand, Singapore, Canada, the Netherlands, Belgium, France, Switzerland, Italy, Ireland, and the UK). Eligible patients were women aged 18 years or older with unilateral, histologically proven, non-low-risk DCIS treated by breast-conserving surgery with at least 1 mm of clear radial resection margins. They were assigned to one of four groups (1:1:1:1) of no tumour bed boost versus boost after conventional versus hypofractionated WBI, or randomly assigned to one of two groups (1:1) of no boost versus boost after each centre prespecified conventional or hypofractionated WBI. The conventional WBI used was 50 Gy in 25 fractions, and hypofractionated WBI was 42·5 Gy in 16 fractions. A boost dose of 16 Gy in eight fractions, if allocated, was delivered after WBI. Patients and clinicians were not masked to treatment allocation. The primary endpoint was time to local recurrence. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT00470236).

FINDINGS

Between June 25, 2007, and June 30, 2014, 1608 patients were randomly assigned to have no boost (805 patients) or boost (803 patients). Conventional WBI was given to 831 patients, and hypofractionated WBI was given to 777 patients. Median follow-up was 6·6 years. The 5-year free-from-local-recurrence rates were 92·7% (95% CI 90·6-94·4%) in the no-boost group and 97·1% (95·6-98·1%) in the boost group (hazard ratio 0·47; 0·31-0·72; p<0·001). The boost group had higher rates of grade 2 or higher breast pain (10% [8-12%] vs 14% [12-17%], p=0·003) and induration (6% [5-8%] vs 14% [11-16%], p<0·001).

INTERPRETATION

In patients with resected non-low-risk DCIS, a tumour bed boost after WBI reduced local recurrence with an increase in grade 2 or greater toxicity. The results provide the first randomised trial data to support the use of boost radiation after postoperative WBI in these patients to improve local control. The international scale of the study supports the generalisability of the results.

FUNDING

National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia, Susan G Komen for the Cure, Breast Cancer Now, OncoSuisse, Dutch Cancer Society, Canadian Cancer Trials Group.

Molecular signatures of in situ to invasive progression for basal-like breast cancers: An integrated mouse model and human DCIS study

Ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) of the breast is a non-obligate precursor of Invasive Ductal Carcinoma (IDC) and thus the identification of features that may predict DCIS progression would be of potential clinical value. Experimental mouse models can be used to address this challenge by studying DCIS-to-IDC biology. Here we utilize single cell RNA sequencing (scRNAseq) on the C3Tag genetically engineered mouse model that forms DCIS-like precursor lesions and for which many lesions progress into end-stage basal-like molecular subtype IDC. We also perform bulk RNAseq analysis on 10 human synchronous DCIS-IDC pairs comprised of estrogen receptor (ER) positive and ER-negative subsets and utilize 2 additional public human DCIS data sets for comparison to our mouse model. By identifying malignant cells using inferred DNA copy number changes from the murine C3Tag scRNAseq data, we show the existence of cancer cells within the C3Tag pre-DCIS, DCIS, and IDC-like tumor specimens. These cancer cells were further classified into proliferative, hypoxic, and inflammatory subpopulations, which change in frequency in DCIS versus IDC. The C3Tag tumor progression model was also associated with increase in Cancer-Associated Fibroblasts and decrease in activated T cells in IDC. Importantly, we translate the C3Tag murine genomic findings into human DCIS where we find common features only with human basal-like DCIS, suggesting there are intrinsic subtype unique DCIS features. This study identifies several tumor and microenvironmental features associated with DCIS progression and may also provide genomic signatures that can identify progression-prone DCIS within the context of human basal-like breast cancers.

Prognostic value of tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes in DCIS: a meta-analysis

Background

Tumor infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) have been shown to be associated with the prognosis of breast ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS). In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we investigated the role of TILs and TIL subsets in predicting the recurrence risk of DCIS.

Method

PubMed, Medline, Web of Science, Embase and Cochrane were searched to identify publications investigating the prognostic role of TILs in DCIS. After study screening, data extraction and risk of bias assessment, a meta-analysis was performed to assess the association between TILs (total TILs, CD4+, CD8+, FOXP3+, PD-L1+ TILs) and the risk of DCIS recurrence.

Results

A pooled analysis indicated that dense stromal TILs in DCIS were associated with a higher recurrence risk (HR 2.11 (95% CI 1.35–3.28)). Subgroup analysis showed that touching TILs (HR 4.73 (95% CI 2.28–9.80)) was more precise than the TIL ratio (HR 1.49 (95% CI 1.11–1.99)) in estimating DCIS recurrence risk. Moreover, the prognostic value of TILs seemed more suitable for patients who are diagnosed with DCIS and then undergo surgery (HR 2.77, (95% CI 1.26–6.07)) or surgery accompanied by radiotherapy (HR 2.26, (95% CI 1.29–3.95)), than for patients who receive comprehensive adjuvant therapies (HR 1.16, (95% CI 1.35–3.28)). Among subsets of TILs, dense stromal PD-L1+ TILs were valuable in predicting higher recurrence risk of DCIS.

Conclusion

This systematic review and meta-analysis suggested a non-favorable prognosis of TILs and stromal PD-L1+ TILs in DCIS and indicated an appropriate assessment method for TILs and an eligible population.

Prediction Models and Decision Aids for Women with Ductal Carcinoma In Situ: A Systematic Literature Review

Simple Summary

Ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) is a potential precursor to invasive breast cancer (IBC). Although in many women DCIS will never become breast cancer, almost all women diagnosed with DCIS undergo surgery with/without radiotherapy. Several studies are ongoing to de-escalate treatment for DCIS. Multiple decision support tools have been developed to aid women with DCIS in selecting the best treatment option for their specific goals. The aim of this study was to identify these decision support tools and evaluate their quality and clinical utility. Thirty-three studies were reviewed, in which four decision aids and six prediction models were described. While some of these models might be promising, most lacked important qualities such as tools to help women discuss their options or good quality validation studies. Therefore, the need for good quality, well validated decision support tools remains unmet.

Abstract

Even though Ductal Carcinoma in Situ (DCIS) can potentially be an invasive breast cancer (IBC) precursor, most DCIS lesions never will progress to IBC if left untreated. Because we cannot predict yet which DCIS lesions will and which will not progress, almost all women with DCIS are treated by breast-conserving surgery +/− radiotherapy, or even mastectomy. As a consequence, many women with non-progressive DCIS carry the burden of intensive treatment without any benefit. Multiple decision support tools have been developed to optimize DCIS management, aiming to find the balance between over- and undertreatment. In this systematic review, we evaluated the quality and added value of such tools. A systematic literature search was performed in Medline(ovid), Embase(ovid), Scopus and TRIP. Following the PRISMA guidelines, publications were selected. The CHARMS (prediction models) or IPDAS (decision aids) checklist were used to evaluate the tools’ methodological quality. Thirty-three publications describing four decision aids and six prediction models were included. The decision aids met at least 50% of the IPDAS criteria. However, most lacked tools to facilitate discussion of the information with healthcare providers. Five prediction models quantify the risk of an ipsilateral breast event after a primary DCIS, one estimates the risk of contralateral breast cancer, and none included active surveillance. Good quality and external validations were lacking for all prediction models. There remains an unmet clinical need for well-validated, good-quality DCIS risk prediction models and decision aids in which active surveillance is included as a management option for low-risk DCIS.