Challenges and Controversies in Breast Surgery

St. Gallen/Vienna 2023: Optimization of Treatment for Patients with Primary Breast Cancer - A Brief Summary of the Consensus Discussion

The St. Gallen Consensus Conference on early breast cancer treatment 2023 was again a live event and took place in Vienna, Austria. After 4 years and one virtual event due to the pandemic, more than 2,800 participants from over 100 countries came together in Vienna, and the 2023 St. Gallen/Vienna conference was a great success. Over 3 days, the global faculty reviewed the most important evidence published during the last 2 years and debated over controversial topics, and finally, the consensus votes aimed to define the impact of the new data on everyday routine practice. Focuses of this year's conference were radiotherapy and local management of the axilla, genetics, and their impact on treatment, as well as the role of the immune system and tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes in pathological reports and treatment decision-making. The traditional panel votes were moderated for the first time by Harold Burstein from Boston, and with questions previously voted on and live voting, the panel managed for the most part to clarify the critical questions. This report by editors of BREAST CARE summarizes the results of the 2023 international panel votes with respect to locoregional and systemic treatment as a brief news update but does not intend to replace the official St. Gallen Consensus publication that not just reports but also interprets the panel votes and will follow shortly in a major oncological journal. The next (19th) St. Gallen International Breast Cancer Conference will again take place in Vienna (save the date: March 12-15, 2025).

Breast surgery after neoadjuvant therapy

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The standard of care in breast surgery has changed, from mastectomy to breast conserving surgery whenever possible, and from axillary dissection to sentinel node biopsy. Neoadjuvant systemic approaches have broadened the indications for organ-conserving and less mutilating surgery, but also raise important questions of balancing locoregional treatment de-escalation and protecting excellent long-term outcomes.

RECENT FINDINGS

Recent studies have aimed at investigating the safety of de-escalating surgical approaches not only in the upfront breast surgery situation but also after neoadjuvant systemic therapy. This pertains to both the safety of breast conserving surgery - including more complex oncoplastic approaches - within the new (posttherapeutic) anatomical extent of the residual disease, but more controversially to de-escalating surgical treatment of the axilla. While sentinel node biopsy appears to be the standard of care for node-negative disease also after primary systemic therapy, the optimal procedure in situations of posttherapeutic node-positive disease remains highly controversial.

SUMMARY

Both breast and axillary surgery after neoadjuvant systemic therapy for women with breast cancer has undergone multiple paradigm changes in recent years. For the primary tumor in the breast, breast-conserving surgery constitutes the standard of care, and unnecessary mastectomies should be strongly discouraged. For axillary surgery, sentinel-node biopsy should be aimed at, and completion axillary dissections minimized for situations of extensive disease and or poor neoadjuvant treatment response. Additional techniques such as targeted axillary dissection are currently under evaluation in clinical trials.

ESMO Management and treatment adapted recommendations in the COVID-19 era: Breast Cancer

The global preparedness and response to the rapid escalation to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV)-2-related disease (COVID-19) to a pandemic proportion has demanded the formulation of a reliable, useful and evidence-based mechanism for health services prioritisation, to achieve the highest quality standards of care to all patients. The prioritisation of high value cancer interventions must be embedded in the agenda for the pandemic response, ensuring that no inconsistency or discrepancy emerge in the health planning processes.The aim of this work is to organise health interventions for breast cancer management and research in a tiered framework (high, medium, low value), formulating a scheme of prioritisation per clinical cogency and intrinsic value or magnitude of benefit. The public health tools and schemes for priority setting in oncology have been used as models, aspiring to capture clinical urgency, value in healthcare, community goals and fairness, while respecting the principles of benevolence, non-maleficence, autonomy and justice.We discuss the priority health interventions across the cancer continuum, giving a perspective on the role and meaning to maintain some services (undeferrable) while temporarily abrogate some others (deferrable). Considerations for implementation and the essential link to pre-existing health services, especially primary healthcare, are addressed, outlining a framework for the development of effective and functional services, such as telemedicine.The discussion covers the theme of health systems strategising, and why oncology care, in particular breast cancer care, should be maintained in parallel to pandemic control measures, providing a pragmatic clinical model within the broader context of public healthcare schemes.