Primary surgery versus no surgery in synchronous metastatic breast cancer: patient-reported quality-of-life outcomes of the prospective randomized multicenter ABCSG-28 Posytive Trial

Enhancing Early-Stage Breast Cancer Survivorship: Evidence-Based Strategies, Surveillance Testing, and Imaging Guidelines

Addressing the challenges of survivorship necessitates a comprehensive, patient-centered approach, focusing on mitigating risk through lifestyle modification, identifying distant recurrence, and optimization of breast imaging. This article will discuss the current and emerging clinical strategies for the survivorship period, advocating a multidisciplinary and comprehensive approach. In this manner, early-stage breast cancer survivors are empowered to navigate their journey with enhanced knowledge, facilitating a transition to life beyond cancer.

Seizing the moment: The time for harnessing electronic patient-reported outcome measures for enhanced and sustainable metastatic breast cancer care is now

The sustainability of healthcare systems is under pressure. Unlike care for many other chronic diseases, cancer care has yet to empower patients in effectively self-managing both the medical and emotional consequences of their condition, including adapting to changes in lifestyle and work, which is essential to achieve optimal health and recovery. Although proposed as a potential solution for sustainable healthcare and support for optimal health and recovery already decades ago, practical implementation of digital care lags behind. We believe electronic patient reported outcome measures (ePROMs) could play an important role in creating sustainable healthcare, both to guide complex treatment pathways and to empower survivors to self-manage consequences of diagnosis and treatment. That is, ePROMs can be used for screening and monitoring of symptoms, but also for treatment decision-making and to facilitate communication about quality of life. We therefore see opportunities for improvements in quality of care, quality of life, and survival of cancer patients, as well as research opportunities, as ePROMs collection can lead to better understanding of care needs. The '10 Actions for Change report' of the Advanced Breast Cancer Global Alliance stresses a critical need for improvement of care for metastatic breast cancer (MBC) patients. We therefore in this paper focus on MBC care and research.

Locoregional therapy containing surgery in metastatic breast cancer: Systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

The role of locoregional therapy (LRT) containing surgery and systematic therapy in metastatic breast cancer patients remains controversial. This study investigated the effect of LRT in patients who were initially diagnosed with metastatic breast cancer (MBC) on overall survival (OS), locoregional progression-free survival (PFS), and distant systemic PFS.

METHODS

The related keywords were searched in MEDLINE/PubMed, SCOPUS, and Web of Science databases up to August 15th, 2022. Hazard ratios (HR) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were pooled by the random-effects model.

RESULTS

Seven articles with 1626 participants compared LRT with only systemic therapy (ST) for patients with de novo MBC. LRT did not improve (p = 0.28) OS compared to ST (HR: 0.83, 95% CI: 0.60, 1.16). LRT significantly improved locoregional PFS outcomes compared to ST (HR: 0.31, 95% CI: 0.15, 0.60, p = 0.001). LRT significantly (p = 0.001) improved OS in patients with solitary bone metastases (HR: 0.48; 95% CI: 0.35-0.67).

CONCLUSION

LRT improves locoregional PFS. Furthermore, LRT improves OS in patients with solitary bone metastases.

Breast surgery for patients with de novo metastatic breast cancer: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

The role of breast surgery in the treatment of patients with de novo metastatic breast cancer(dnMBC) remains controversial, with conflicting trial results. We did a meta-analysis to comprehensively investigate and assess whether breast surgery is associated with survival and quality of life outcomes in patients with dnMBC.We systematically searched PubMed, Embase, Google Scholar, Scopus, and Web of Science, from database inception to March 30, 2022, for randomized controlled trials(RCTs) that compared breast surgery or locoregional therapy with non-surgical treatment based on systemic therapy for managing dnMBC.We also reviewed abstracts and presentations from major conference proceedings. We excluded non-randomised trials and considered only papers published in English. The primary outcomes were overall survival(OS),locoregional progression-free survival(LPFS), distant progression-free survival(DPFS), and quality of life(QoL). The quality of RCTs was appraised with the Cochrane Collaboration risk of bias tool. Random-effects model or fixed effects model were used to calculate the effect sizes of included RCTs.Quality of evidence was assessed with GRADE criteria. Data analysis was performed with STATA 17.0. A total of 1018 women from seven randomized clinical trials were included in the analysis. Pooled analyses revealed that compared with systemic therapy, breast surgery was not associated with beneficial outcomes in OS(hazard ratio [HR],0.87; 95%CI,0.68 to 1.11; I2 = 53.08 %; p = 0.265),DPFS(HR,1.20; 95%CI,0.94 to 1.54; I2 = 86.45 %; p = 0.136), or QoL-global health status (standardized mean difference[SMD],0.08; 95%CI,-0.15 to 0.32; I2 = 79.45 %; p = 0.478) and QoL-mental-physical functionality(SMD,-0.19; 95%CI,-0.50 to 0.13; I2 = 0.00 %; p = 0.255), but was associated with a benefit in LPFS(HR,0.27; 95%CI,0.19 to 0.38; I2 = 84.16 %; p < 0.001). These findings were consistent in subgroup analyses of the timing of surgery, site and number of metastases and tumor molecular subtype. The evidence grade was moderate because of the substantial heterogeneity among studies. Based on the RCTs evidence, we found that breast surgery may benefit locoregional control but does not prolong OS and improve QoL in patients with dnMBC. The Prospero registration number: CRD42020206460.

Patient-Reported Outcome Measures to Improve the Care Continuum for Patients With Metastatic Breast Cancer: Opportunities and Implications for Nursing Practice

OBJECTIVES

Albeit treatable, metastatic breast cancer (MBC) remains incurable. To achieve remaining life years lived well, extended survival should be balanced with optimal health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and timely initiated supportive, palliative, and end-of-life care. The Advanced Breast Cancer (ABC) Global Alliance identified 10 urgent and actionable goals for the decade between 2015 and 2025 to achieve substantial improvement in the lives of patients living with ABC, including MBC. Enhancements are needed for HRQoL, research, quality of care, and survival. We explore the potential of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in addressing these gaps and aim to describe opportunities and current initiatives for improving the MBC care continuum through PROMs.

DATA SOURCES

Narrative description of recent literature on MBC and PROMs.

CONCLUSION

We believe PROMs can make valuable contributions to seven of the 10 goals described: 1) enhancing the understanding of MBC through high-quality data collection, 2) improving HRQoL and raising consideration of survival versus HRQoL, 2) prolonging survival, 4) increasing referral to nonclinical support services, 5) supporting patient-healthcare provider communication, 6) encouraging improvements in healthcare access, and 7) supporting meeting patients' informational needs.

IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING PRACTICE

Maximizing the benefits of PROMs requires effective implementation. Because nurses and nurse practitioners are at the forefront of care, they can offer a comprehensive understanding of patients' needs and play a crucial role in facilitating the integration of PROMs into routine care for MBC patients and ultimately optimizing patients' outcomes and life years and months left.

Effectiveness, safety, and impact on quality of life of eribulin-based therapy in heavily pretreated patients with metastatic breast cancer: A real-world analysis

INTRODUCTION

Eribulin is currently recommended for the treatment of patients with metastatic breast cancer (MBC) pre-treated with taxanes and anthracyclines. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of eribulin and its impact on health-related quality of life in heavily pre-treated patients with MBC.

METHODS

Data from MBC patients who had received eribulin-based therapy at Beijing Cancer Hospital between January 2020 and July 2022 were analyzed retrospectively. Progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), objective response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR), adverse effects (AEs) and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) were assessed.

RESULTS

Data from 118 patients who had received eribulin to treat MBC were included. Median PFS was 4.2 months and median OS had not been reached. The ORR was 13.6% (16/118) and DCR was 75.4% (89/118). The median PFS in patients who received eribulin in second-line (26/118), third-line (29/118), or fourth-line or later (63/118) was 4.5, 4.2, and 3.9 months, respectively. The median OS in patients who received eribulin in third- or later line (n = 92) was 14.1 months. Patients who received eribulin combination therapy had a significantly longer median PFS compared with those who received eribulin monotherapy (4.5 vs. 3.4 months, p = 0.007) and there was a trend towards a longer median OS (not reached vs. 12.1 months). The most common grade 3-4 adverse events were neutropenia (22.9%), leukocytopenia (13.6%) and asthenia/fatigue (8.5%), without significant differences in safety between eribulin monotherapy and combination therapy. Quality of life was similar in patients who received eribulin monotherapy and combination therapy, except for cognitive function and nausea and vomiting symptoms, which were better with combination therapy.

CONCLUSIONS

The present study suggests that eribulin-based therapy is an effective treatment option and well tolerated for heavily pre-treated patients with MBC. Eribulin combination therapy might improve PFS and HRQoL compared with eribulin monotherapy.

AGO Recommendations for the Diagnosis and Treatment of Patients with Locally Advanced and Metastatic Breast Cancer: Update 2023

The Breast Committee of the Arbeitsgemeinschaft Gynäkologische Onkologie (German Gynecological Oncology Group, AGO) presents the 2023 update of the evidence-based recommendations for the diagnosis and treatment of patients with locally advanced and metastatic breast cancer (mBC).

Novel models by machine learning to predict prognosis of breast cancer brain metastases

BACKGROUND

Breast cancer brain metastases (BCBM) are the most fatal, with limited survival in all breast cancer distant metastases. These patients are deemed to be incurable. Thus, survival time is their foremost concern. However, there is a lack of accurate prediction models in the clinic. What's more, primary surgery for BCBM patients is still controversial.

METHODS

The data used for analysis in this study was obtained from the SEER database (2010-2019). We made a COX regression analysis to identify prognostic factors of BCBM patients. Through cross-validation, we constructed XGBoost models to predict survival in patients with BCBM. Meanwhile, a BCBM cohort from our hospital was used to validate our models. We also investigated the prognosis of patients treated with surgery or not, using propensity score matching and K-M survival analysis. Our results were further validated by subgroup COX analysis in patients with different molecular subtypes.

RESULTS

The XGBoost models we created had high precision and correctness, and they were the most accurate models to predict the survival of BCBM patients (6-month AUC = 0.824, 1-year AUC = 0.813, 2-year AUC = 0.800 and 3-year survival AUC = 0.803). Moreover, the models still exhibited good performance in an externally independent dataset (6-month: AUC = 0.820; 1-year: AUC = 0.732; 2-year: AUC = 0.795; 3-year: AUC = 0.936). Then we used Shiny-Web tool to make our models be easily used from website. Interestingly, we found that the BCBM patients with an annual income of over USD$70,000 had better BCSS (HR = 0.523, 95%CI 0.273-0.999, P < 0.05) than those with less than USD$40,000. The results showed that in all distant metastasis sites, only lung metastasis was an independent poor prognostic factor for patients with BCBM (OS: HR = 1.606, 95%CI 1.157-2.230, P < 0.01; BCSS: HR = 1.698, 95%CI 1.219-2.365, P < 0.01), while bone, liver, distant lymph nodes and other metastases were not. We also found that surgical treatment significantly improved both OS and BCSS in BCBM patients with the HER2 + molecular subtypes and was beneficial to OS of the HR-/HER2- subtype. In contrast, surgery could not help BCBM patients with HR + /HER2- subtype improve their prognosis (OS: HR = 0.887, 95%CI 0.608-1.293, P = 0.510; BCSS: HR = 0.909, 95%CI 0.604-1.368, P = 0.630).

CONCLUSION

We analyzed the clinical features of BCBM patients and constructed 4 machine-learning prognostic models to predict their survival. Our validation results indicate that these models should be highly reproducible in patients with BCBM. We also identified potential prognostic factors for BCBM patients and suggested that primary surgery might improve the survival of BCBM patients with HER2 + and triple-negative subtypes.

Role of Surgery in Metastatic Breast Cancer: Insights from a Narrative Review

Metastatic breast cancer is difficult to cure and has a worse prognosis with higher rates of mortality. Recently, breast surgery is believed to improve the survival rates among these women, but due to limited evidence, definite conclusions cannot be made. Therefore, we undertook this narrative review to synthesize the evidence from existing studies to assess the effectiveness of locoregional surgery and surgery of metastatic sites in improving the outcomes among women diagnosed with metastatic cancer disease along with the summary of current treatment guidelines. We reviewed PubMed and Embase and included both observational studies and randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that were published in English between 2000 and 2021. Outcomes were either survival, quality of life, toxicity related to local treatment assessed by mortality at the end of one month, progression-free survival, and breast cancer-specific survival. The main effect size assessed was hazard ratio with their 95% CIs. After literature search, we found 8 observational studies and 3 RCTs. The findings of the observational studies revealed that breast cancer surgery improves survival from 30% to 50% among women. However, findings from RCTs were mixed for local and distant progression survival. Surgery improved the local progression-free survival but worsened the distant progression-free survival. Besides, there was no effect of breast surgery on quality of life. Regarding the surgery of metastatic site, studies are complex with mixed findings and variation in survival depending upon the type of metastatic site and response to initial systematic therapy and other factors. Based on the existing mixed evidence, it is not possible to make firm and definite conclusions about the effectiveness of breast surgery in improving the survival or quality of life among women with metastatic breast cancer. In future, more RCTs are required with a larger sample size to confirm the findings of observational studies.

Machine learning predicts the prognosis of breast cancer patients with initial bone metastases

Background

Bone is the most common metastatic site of patients with advanced breast cancer and the survival time is their primary concern; however, we lack accurate predictive models in clinical practice. In addition to this, primary surgery for breast cancer patients with bone metastases is still controversial.

Method

The data used for analysis in this study were obtained from the SEER database (2010-2019). We made a COX regression analysis to identify prognostic factors of patients with bone metastatic breast cancer (BMBC). Through cross-validation, we constructed an XGBoost model to predicting survival in patients with BMBC. We also investigated the prognosis of patients treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy plus surgical and chemotherapy alone using propensity score matching and K-M survival analysis.

Results

Our validation results showed that the model has high sensitivity, specificity, and correctness, and it is the most accurate one to predict the survival of patients with BMBC (1-year AUC = 0.818, 3-year AUC = 0.798, and 5-year survival AUC = 0.791). The sensitivity of the 1-year model was higher (0.79), while the specificity of the 5-year model was higher (0.86). Interestingly, we found that if the time from diagnosis to therapy was ≥1 month, patients with BMBC had even better survival than those who started treatment immediately (HR = 0.920, 95%CI 0.869-0.974, P < 0.01). The BMBC patients with an income of more than USD$70,000 had better OS (HR = 0.814, 95%CI 0.745-0.890, P < 0.001) and BCSS (HR = 0.808 95%CI 0.735-0.889, P < 0.001) than who with income of < USD$50,000. We also found that compared with chemotherapy alone, neoadjuvant chemotherapy plus surgical treatment significantly improved OS and BCSS in all molecular subtypes of patients with BMBC, while only the patients with bone metastases only, bone and liver metastases, bone and lung metastases could benefit from neoadjuvant chemotherapy plus surgical treatment.

Conclusion

We constructed an AI model to provide a quantitative method to predict the survival of patients with BMBC, and our validation results indicate that this model should be highly reproducible in a similar patient population. We also identified potential prognostic factors for patients with BMBC and suggested that primary surgery followed by neoadjuvant chemotherapy might increase survival in a selected subgroup of patients.

Primary-Site Local Therapy for Patients with De Novo Metastatic Breast Cancer: An Educational Review

BACKGROUND

Until 2001, the paradigm guiding the management of women with de novo metastatic breast cancer (dnMBC) stipulated that primary-site locoregional therapy (PSLT) did not alter the course of metastatic disease and was necessary only for palliation of symptoms. Since 2002, retrospective data have begun questioning this paradigm. However, selection biases driving an observed survival advantage associated with PSLT in dnMBC were quickly recognized and led to several randomized clinical trials (RCTs) addressing this question.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Four published RCTs have since tested the value of PSLT added to systemic therapy (ST) or not, with overall survival (OS) as the primary end point. The results of three published trials show no OS benefit for the addition of PSLT: Indian Tata Memorial, U.S./Canada E2108, and Austrian POSYTIVE (although POSYTIVE did not reach full accrual). The fourth RCT (Turkey, MF07-01) shows an OS benefit for PSLT at 5 years (42 % vs 24 % in the ST arm; hazard ratio [HR], 0.66; 95 % confidence interval [CI], 0.49-0.88). However, the 5-year survival in the PSLT arm of MF07-01 is similar to that in both arms of E2108, suggesting that the worse survival in the ST arm of MF07-01 is a result of biologically worse disease (from imbalanced randomization). Locoregional control was improved by PSLT in all trials, but without improvement in quality of life.

CONCLUSIONS

The current evidence fails to refute the 20th century paradigm guiding management of de novo metastatic breast cancer. Discussion continues regarding the survival value of PSLT for patients with bone-only disease or oligometastases, but unbiased evidence is lacking.

Psychosocial Aspects of Living Long Term with Advanced Cancer and Ongoing Systemic Treatment: A Scoping Review

(1) Background: Studies examining the psychosocial impact of living long term on systemic treatment in advanced cancer patients are scarce. This scoping review aimed to answer the research question “What has been reported about psychosocial factors among patients living with advanced cancer receiving life-long systemic treatment?”, by synthesizing psychosocial data, and evaluating the terminology used to address these patients; (2) Methods: This scoping review was conducted following the five stages of the framework of Arksey and O’Malley (2005); (3) Results: 141 articles published between 2000 and 2021 (69% after 2015) were included. A large variety of terms referring to the patient group was observed. Synthesizing qualitative studies identified ongoing uncertainty, anxiety and fear of disease progression or death, hope in treatment results and new treatment options, loss in several aspects of life, and worries about the impact of disease on loved ones and changes in social life to be prominent psychosocial themes. Of 82 quantitative studies included in the review, 76% examined quality of life, 46% fear of disease progression or death, 26% distress or depression, and 4% hope, while few studies reported on adaptation or cognitive aspects. No quantitative studies focused on uncertainty, loss, or social impact; (4) Conclusion and clinical implications: Prominent psychosocial themes reported in qualitative studies were not included in quantitative research using specific validated questionnaires. More robust studies using quantitative research designs should be conducted to further understand these psychological constructs. Furthermore, the diversity of terminology found in the literature calls for a uniform definition to better address this specific patient group in research and in practice.

AGO Recommendations for the Diagnosis and Treatment of Patients with Locally Advanced and Metastatic Breast Cancer: Update 2022

The Breast Committee of the Arbeitsgemeinschaft Gynäkologische Onkologie (German Gynecological Oncology Group, AGO) presents the 2022 update of the evidence-based recommendations for the diagnosis and treatment of patients with locally advanced and metastatic breast cancer.

Modern Breast Cancer Surgery 1st Central-Eastern European Professional Consensus Statement on Breast Cancer

This text is based on the recommendations accepted by the 4th Hungarian Consensus Conference on Breast Cancer, modified on the basis of the international consultation and conference within the frames of the Central-Eastern European Academy of Oncology. The recommendations cover non-operative, intraoperative and postoperative diagnostics, determination of prognostic and predictive markers and the content of cytology and histology reports. Furthermore, they address some specific issues such as the current status of multigene molecular markers, the role of pathologists in clinical trials and prerequisites for their involvement, and some remarks about the future.

Surgical Management of Metastatic Breast Cancer: A Mini Review

Breast cancer with distant metastases is a systemic disease. While systemic therapies are the main treatment strategy, locoregional therapy for metastatic breast cancer (MBC) is generally palliative only. However, recent progress in systemic and local therapies has improved the prognosis of patients with MBC and some may expect long-term survival. More vigorous local therapies for MBC may, therefore, be clinically justified in selected patients. A number of clinical trials and studies have investigated the clinical significance of surgical therapy for primary tumors and distant metastases in patients with MBC. Four prospective randomized trials and multiple retrospective studies have investigated the benefit of surgical resection of primary lesions in patients with MBC, with conflicting results. There have been a number of case-control studies examining the impact of surgical resection of distant metastases, but the benefit of this approach in terms of survival is controversial because selection bias is unavoidable in retrospective studies. The present review discusses the state of the literature relating to local management of the primary breast cancer through surgical resection and surgical management of distant metastatic lesions including pulmonary and liver metastases with future perspectives.

Early Local Therapy for the Primary Site in De Novo Stage IV Breast Cancer: Results of a Randomized Clinical Trial (EA2108)

PURPOSE

Distant metastases are present in 6% or more of patients with newly diagnosed breast cancer. In this context, locoregional therapy for the intact primary tumor has been hypothesized to improve overall survival (OS), but clinical trials have reported conflicting results.

METHODS

Women presenting with metastatic breast cancer and an intact primary tumor received systemic therapy for 4-8 months; if no disease progression occurred, they were randomly assigned to locoregional therapy for the primary site (surgery and radiotherapy per standards for nonmetastatic disease) or continuing sysmetic therapy. The primary end point was OS; locoregional control and quality of life were secondary end points. The trial design provided 85% power to detect a 19.3% absolute difference in the 3-year OS rate in randomly assigned patients. The stratified log-rank test and Cox proportional hazards model were used to compare OS between arms. Cumulative incidence of locoregional progression was compared using Gray's test. Quality-of-life assessment used standard instruments.

RESULTS

Of 390 participants enrolled, 256 were randomly assigned: 131 to continued systemic therapy and 125 to early locoregional therapy. The 3-year OS was 67.9% without and 68.4% with early locoregional therapy (hazard ratio = 1.11; 90% CI, 0.82 to 1.52; P = .57). The median OS was 53.1 months (95% CI, 47.9 to not estimable) in the systemic therapy arm and 54.9 months (95% CI, 46.7 to not estimable) in the locoregional therapy arm. Locoregional progression was less frequent in those randomly assigned to locoregional therapy (3-year rate: 16.3% v 39.8%; P < .001). Quality-of-life measures were largely similar between arms.

CONCLUSION

Early locoregional therapy for the primary site did not improve survival in patients presenting with metastatic breast cancer. Although it was associated with improved locoregional control, this had no overall impact on quality of life.

Radiotherapy and radiosensitization in breast cancer: Molecular targets and clinical applications

Relatively poor survival outcomes are observed in advanced or metastatic breast cancer, where local control of the primary or metastatic disease may be achieved by surgical resection, local ablative and radiation therapies. Radioresistance, poses a major challenge in achieving durable oncologic outcomes, mandating development of novel management strategies. Although multimodality approaches that combine radiotherapy with chemotherapy, or systemic agents, are utilized for radiosensitization and treatment of various malignancies, this approach has not yet found its clinical application in breast cancer. Some agents for breast cancer treatment can serve as radiosensitizers, creating an opportunity to enhance effects of radiation while providing systemic disease control. Hence, combination of radiotherapy with radiosensitizing agents have the potential to improve oncologic outcomes in advanced or metastatic breast cancer. This review discusses molecular targets for radiosensitization and novel systemic agents that have potential for clinical use as radiosensitizers in breast cancer.

Metastasectomy versus radiation of secondary sites in stage IV breast cancer: Analysis from a national cancer registry

PURPOSE

Locoregional therapy at primary or secondary sites in breast cancer may be associated with improved survival as compared to systemic therapy alone. We explored the sociodemographic and clinicopathologic factors associated with the use of radiation versus surgical resection of metastatic sites (metastasectomy) in patients with de novo stage IV breast cancer, followed by the associated overall survival.

METHODS

We sampled the National Cancer Database for patients with de novo stage IV breast cancer, (2010-2017) and described cohort's characteristics using univariate analyses. We identified 5 subgroups based on malignant site involvement: 1. Bone only, 2. Brain only, 3. Liver only, 4. Lung only, and 5. Metastasis involving >1 site. Kaplan-Meier modeling with log-rank testing and multivariate Cox Regression analysis were used to explore differences in overall survival between those that received radiation at secondary sites and those that underwent metastasectomy.

RESULTS

N = 22,749patients were included in this analysis. Radiation (81.2%) was used more commonly than metastasectomy (28.8%). Metastasectomy was associated with better median overall survival across all 5 cohorts (p < .001), with the survival benefit being the most pronounced with lung only (OS: 56.9 months; HR 0.8, 95% CI 0.7-0.9, p = .032), or liver only (OS: 41.6 months; HR: 0.9; 95% CI: 0.7-1.1, p < .001) metastasis.

CONCLUSION

Metastasectomy in patients with de novo stage IV breast cancer may be associated with improved overall survival as compared to radiation of secondary lesions, particularly in those with only liver or lung involvement. Prospective randomized controlled trials investigating surgical resection of metastatic sites in patients with breast cancer are warranted.

Primary tumor resection in patients with stage IV breast cancer: 10-year experience

The role of surgery in the management of stage IV breast cancer is controversial. Existing studies in Stage IV breast cancer have not closely evaluated the role of patient response to induction systemic therapy (IST) in its relationship to survival outcomes. We identified all patients with a diagnosis of de novo stage IV breast cancer who underwent surgery of their primary tumor from January 2008 to December 2018. Patients were grouped according to their response in the primary disease site into progression (progressive primary disease) or no progression (nonprogressive primary; comprising complete, partial and stable response). We identified a total of 45 stage IV breast cancer patients who underwent operative intervention of their primary breast tumor. Prior to surgical intervention, progression in the primary site during IST was identified in 13/42 patients (31%), of whom four patients also had progression in the distant disease. The 5-year survival was higher in the nonprogressive primary (74%) than the progressive primary disease group (52%) which did not reach statistical significance (p = 0.08). Age, pathologic tumor size, clinical nodal status, number of positive lymph nodes, and distant disease response to systemic therapy were significantly associated with survival. In this single institution experience, select patients with stage IV breast cancer at initial diagnosis who underwent resection of the primary tumor following systemic therapy achieved favorable overall and distant progression-free survival. Surgery is reasonable to consider for local palliation or in selected patients who have excellent response to systemic therapy and good performance status.

Predicting the survival benefit of local surgery in patients aged 70 years or older with stage IV breast cancer: A population-based analysis

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to establish individualized nomograms to predict survival outcomes in older female patients with stage IV breast cancer who did or did not undergo local surgery, and to determine which patients could benefit from surgery.

METHODS

A total of 3,129 female patients with stage IV breast cancer aged ≥70 years between 2010 and 2015 were included in the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results program. Multivariate Cox regression analysis was used to identify risk factors for overall survival (OS) and breast cancer-specific survival (BCSS). Survival analysis was performed using the Kaplan-Meier plot and log-rank test. Nomograms and risk stratification models were constructed.

RESULTS

Patients who underwent surgery had better OS (HR = 0.751, 95% CI [0.668-0.843], P < 0.001) and BCSS (HR = 0.713, 95% CI [0.627-0.810], P < 0.001) than patients who did not undergo surgery. Patients with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive, lung or liver metastases may not benefit from surgery. In the stratification model, low-risk patients benefited from surgery (OS, HR = 0.688, 95% CI [0.568-0.833], P < 0.001; BCSS, HR = 0.632, 95% CI [0.509-0.784], P < 0.001), while patients in the high-risk group had similar outcomes (OS, HR = 0.920, 95% CI [0.709-1.193], P = 0.509; BCSS, HR = 0.953, 95% CI [0.713-1.275], P = 0.737).

CONCLUSION

Older female patients with stage IV breast cancer who underwent surgery had better OS and BCSS than those who did not in each specific subgroup. Patients in low- or intermediate-risk group benefit from surgery while those in the high-risk group do not.

Measuring Quality of Life Using Patient-Reported Outcomes in Real-World Metastatic Breast Cancer Patients: The Need for a Standardized Approach

Simple Summary

Metastatic breast cancer (MBC) remains incurable despite treatment improvements. The health-related quality of life is a multidimensional entity which covers physical, psychological and social dimensions. It is an important outcome particularly in patients with metastatic disease, as the primary goal of therapy is no longer curation, but to provide the best possible quality of life weighted against treatment risks and adverse symptoms. Patient-reported outcomes reflecting the quality of life are usually measured with validated questionnaires to evaluate treatment strategies based on symptom burden and to improve care delivery. This review shares insights into the role of patient-reported outcome measurements in MBC patients and describes the heterogeneity of current questionnaires. We conclude that an up-to-date and standardized outcome set is needed, containing relevant domains referring to individual needs to improve the quality of life assessment among MBC patients. This is a prerequisite to learn about how they could impact the clinical care pathway.

Abstract

Metastatic breast cancer (MBC) patients are almost always treated to minimize the symptom burden, and to prolong life without a curative intent. Although the prognosis of MBC patients has improved in recent years, the median survival after diagnosis is still only 3 years. Therefore, the health-related quality of life (HRQoL) should play a leading role in making treatment decisions. Heterogeneity in questionnaires used to evaluate the HRQoL in MBC patients complicates the interpretability and comparability of patient-reported outcomes (PROs) globally. In this review, we aimed to provide an overview of PRO instruments used in real-world MBC patients and to discuss important issues in measuring HRQoL. Routinely collecting symptom information using PROs could enhance treatment evaluation and shared decision-making. Standardizing these measures might help to improve the implementation of PROs, and facilitates collecting and sharing data to establish valid comparisons in research. This is a prerequisite to learn about how they could impact the clinical care pathway. In addition, the prognostic value of intensified PRO collection throughout therapy on survival and disease progression is promising. Future perspectives in the field of PROs and MBC are described.