Primary tumor extirpation in breast cancer patients who present with stage IV disease is associated with improved survival

Radiation therapy of the primary tumour and oligometastatic sites in patients with breast cancer with synchronous metastases: A literature review

De novo metastatic breast cancer represents 5 to 8% of all breast cancers (2500 new cases per year in France). Systemic treatment is the cornerstone of treatment, whereas radiation therapy usually has a palliative intent. Advances in systemic and local treatments (surgery and radiation therapy) have substantially improved overall survival. In the recent breast cancer statistics in the United States, the 5-year relative survival for patients diagnosed during 2012-2018 was 29% for stage IV (Breast Cancer Statistics). Thus, an increasing proportion of metastatic breast cancers present a prolonged complete response to systemic therapy, which raises the question of the impact of local treatment on patient survival. Radiation therapy has shown its value for early breast cancer, but its place in the local management of the primary tumour or oligometastatic sites for de novo metastatic breast cancer remains under debate. This article is a literature review assessing the role of radiation therapy directed to the primary tumour and oligometastatic sites of breast cancer in patients with synchronous metastases, in order to highlight clinicians in their therapeutic decision.

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.

The Evolving Role of Cryosurgery in Breast Cancer Management: A Comprehensive Review

Breast cancer is the most commonly diagnosed type of cancer, accounting for approximately one in eight cancer diagnoses worldwide. In 2020, there were approximately 2.3 million new cases of breast cancer globally, resulting in around 685,000 deaths. Consequently, there is an ongoing need to develop innovative therapeutic approaches that can improve both clinical outcomes and patient quality of life. The use of ultra-low cryogenic temperatures, facilitated by cryogenic media such as liquid nitrogen, has revolutionized the biomedical field and opened up new possibilities for advanced clinical treatments, including cryosurgery. Cryosurgery has demonstrated its feasibility as a minimally invasive technique for destroying breast tumors and eliciting a significant antitumor immune response in the host. This feature sets cryosurgery apart from other ablative techniques. It has been shown to be well tolerated and effective, offering several advantages such as simplicity, the avoidance of general anesthesia, minimal pain, low morbidity, short recovery time, cost-effectiveness, and notably, improved aesthetic outcomes. The reviewed studies indicate that cryosurgery holds promise in the management of early-stage breast cancer and metastatic disease, especially in triple-negative and Her2-positive molecular subtypes in conjunction with checkpoint inhibitors and anti-Her2 antibodies, respectively. Furthermore, the effectiveness of cryosurgery in the management of ductal carcinoma in situ should be investigated as an alternative modality to surgery or surveillance. The minimally invasive nature of cryosurgery has the potential to significantly enhance the quality of life for patients.

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.

Locoregional treatment of de novo stage IV breast cancer in the era of modern oncology

Approximately 6% of metastatic breast cancers arise de novo. While systemic therapy (ST) remains the treatment backbone as for patients with metachronous metastases, locoregional treatment (LRT) of the primary tumor remains a controversial method. The removal of the primary has an established role for palliative purposes, but it is unclear if it could also determine a survival benefit. Retrospective evidence and pre-clinical studies seem to support the removal of the primary as an effective approach to improve survival. On the other hand, most randomized evidence suggests avoiding LRT. Both retrospective and prospective studies suffer several limitations, ranging from selection bias and outdated ST to a small sample of patients. In this review we discuss available data and try to identify subgroups of patients which could benefit the most from LRT of the primary, to facilitate clinical practice decisions, and to hypothesize future studies design on this topic.

Radiotherapy of the Primary Disease for Synchronous Metastatic Cancer: A Systematic Review

In the case of synchronous metastatic disease, the local treatment of primary tumors by radiotherapy has long been reserved for palliative indications. The emergence of the concept of oligometastatic and oligopersistent diseases, the advent of new systemic therapies enabling longer overall survival with an enhanced quality of life, a better understanding of the biologic history of metastatic spread, and technical advances in radiation therapy are revolutionizing the management of patients with de novo metastatic cancer. The prognosis of these patients has been markedly improved and many studies have investigated the survival benefits from the local treatment of various primary tumors in cases of advanced disease at the time of diagnosis or in the case of oligopersistence. This article provides an update on the place of irradiation of the primary tumor in cancer with synchronous metastases, and discusses its interest through published or ongoing trials.

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.

A Novel Nomogram Model to Identify Candidates and Predict the Possibility of Benefit From Primary Tumor Resection Among Female Patients With Metastatic Infiltrating Duct Carcinoma of the Breast: A Large Cohort Study

Background

The impact of primary site surgery on survival remains controversial in female patients with stage IV breast cancer. The purpose of this study was to investigate the role of primary tumor surgery in patients with stage IV breast cancer and concurrently develop a nomogram to identify which patients will benefit from surgery.

Methods

We retrospectively searched the SEER database for female patients newly diagnosed with stage IV breast infiltrating duct carcinoma (BIDC) between 2010 and 2015 and then divided them into surgery and non-surgery groups. The propensity score matching (PSM) method was implemented to eliminate the bias, and Kaplan–Meier survival analysis was generated to compare the overall survival (OS) and cancer-specific survival (CSS) between the two groups. After PSM, Cox regression analyses were performed to determine the independent protective value of primary tumor surgery, while logistic regression analyses were utilized to uncover significant predictors of surgical benefit and establish a screening nomogram for female patients with stage IV BIDC. Nomogram performance was evaluated by calibration curves, receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves, and decision curve analysis (DCA).

Result

5,475 patients with stage IV BIDC were included in this study, and 2,375 patients (43.38%) received primary tumor surgery. After PSM, the median CSS was 53 months (95% CI: 46.84–59.16) in the surgery group compared with only 33 months (95% CI: 30.05–35.95) in the non-surgery group. We further found that primary tumor surgery was an independent protective factor for patients with stage IV BIDC. The independent factors affecting the benefit of locoregional surgery in patients with stage IV BIDC included histological grade, T stage, molecular subtype, lung metastasis, liver metastasis, brain metastasis, and marital status. The AUC of the nomogram was 0.785 in the training set and 0.761 in the testing set. The calibration curves and DCA confirmed that the nomogram could precisely predict the possibility of benefit from primary tumor resection.

Conclusion

Our study suggested that primary tumor surgery improved the prognosis of female patients with stage IV BIDC and developed a nomogram to quantify the probability of surgical benefit to help identify surgical candidates clinically.

Metastatic breast cancer: Who benefits from surgery?

BACKGROUND

We sought to identify characteristics of metastatic breast cancer (MBC) patients who may benefit most from primary tumor resection.

METHODS

Recursive partitioning analysis (RPA) was used to categorize non-surgical patients with de novo MBC in the NCDB (2010-2015) into 3 groups (I/II/III) based on 3-year overall survival (OS). After bootstrapping (BS), group-level profiles were applied, and the association of surgery with OS was estimated using Cox proportional hazards models.

RESULTS

All patients benefitted from surgery (median OS, surgery vs no surgery): 72.7 vs 42.9 months, 47.3 vs 30.4 months, 23.8 vs 14.4 months (all p < 0.001) in BS-groups I, II, and III, respectively. After adjustment, surgery remained associated with improved OS (HR 0.52, 95% CI 0.50-0.55). The effect of surgery on OS differed quantitatively across groups.

CONCLUSION

Prognostic groups may inform the degree of benefit from surgery, with the greatest benefit seen in those with the most favorable survival.

Locoregional Therapy in De novo Metastatic Breast Cancer: A Retrospective Cohort Study

Objective: Whether locoregional therapy (LRT) should be performed in patients with de novo metastatic breast cancer (dnMBC) has been debated. Here we report the survival outcomes of LRT in patients with dnMBC, focusing on the association of surgical timings and surgical margins with survival in this patient population. Methods: The retrospective study included patients with dnMBC in our hospital, between March 1, 2007 and December 31, 2017. Overall survival (OS) was evaluated by means of a stratified log-rank test and summarized with the use of Kaplan–Meier methods. Results: A total of 153 patients were included, of whom 87 underwent LRT and 66 systemic therapy alone (STA). LRT showed a significant OS benefit over STA (HR, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.39 to 0.99; P  =  .043). The OS of LRT group and STA group were 39 months (95% CI, 33.6 to 44.4 months) and 24.6 months (95% CI, 20.6 to 28.6 months), respectively. The benefit was consistent across most subgroups. The OS of patients undergoing surgery was better than that of patients without surgery (HR, 0.58; 95% CI, 0.35 to 0.94; P  =  .0001), and there was difference in survival improvement at different surgical timings (surgery before chemotherapy, during chemotherapy, and after chemotherapy) (P  =  .0001). The survival benefit of surgery after chemotherapy was significantly greater than that of the other 2 options (HR, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.63 to 0.94). Moreover, compared with patients with positive margins, the OS of patients with negative margins was significantly improved (HR, 0.22; 95% CI, 0.13 to 0.37; P < .001). Conclusions: Our results suggest that LRT is associated with improved OS in women with dnMBC, and patients who had surgery after systemic chemotherapy with negative surgical margins, are expected to benefit more.

Effects of Primary Tumor Resection on Metastatic Breast Cancer Survival and the Predictive Power of Neutrophil: Lymphocyte Ratio on Prognosis

Objective

The aim was to investigate the effect of primary tumor resection (PTR) on survival in metastatic breast cancer patients and to assess the power of the neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) regarding the prediction of prognosis in this patient group.

Materials and Methods

Female patients diagnosed with and starting treatment for metastatic breast cancer from 2003 to 2016 in the general surgery and oncology clinics at a single center were retrospectively reviewed. Pre-treatment NLR value and survival situations were evaluated.

Results

A total of 117 patients were enrolled. The disease-specific survival (DSS) of the patients was 41.4 months. When stratified into PTR and systemic treatment (ST) groups, there was no difference in the survival (p = 0.054); 43.5 months in the PTR group vs 30.7 months in the ST group. When hormone receptor (HR)-positive/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-negative subgroups were analyzed, DSS was significantly longer (p = 0.02) in the PTR group (55.4 months) compared to the ST group (41.8 months). Finally, in patients with an NLR of <2.3, DSS was significantly longer (p = 0.03) in the PTR group (56.1 months) compared to the ST group (25.2 months).

Conclusion

These results suggest that DSS can be increased with PTR in selected patients with a diagnosis of metastatic breast cancer. NLR may be useful in selecting patients for appropraite treatment modality.

Clinical information and management status of de novo stage IV breast cancer patients: a Chinese multicenter investigation (CSBrS-002)

BACKGROUND

Although de novo stage IV breast cancer is so far incurable, it has entered an era of individualized treatment and chronic disease management. Based on systemic treatment, whether the surgical resection of primary or metastatic foci of de novo stage IV breast cancer can bring survival benefits is currently controversial. We aimed to explore the clinicopathological factors and current status of the management of de novo stage IV breast cancer in China to provide a reference for clinical decisions.

METHODS

Based on the assistance of Chinese Society of Breast Surgery, a retrospective study was conducted to analyze the clinical data of patients with de novo stage IV breast cancer in 33 centers from January 2017 to December 2018. The relationship between basic characteristic (age, menstrual status, family history, reproductive history, pathological type, estrogen receptor [ER] status, progesterone receptor [PR] status, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 [HER2] status, Ki-67 percentage, and molecular subtype), and metastasis sites (lung metastasis, liver metastasis, and bone metastasis) was examined by Pearson Chi-square tests.

RESULTS

A total of 468 patients with de novo stage IV breast cancer were enrolled. The median age of the enrolled patients was 51.5 years. The most common pathological type of primary lesion was invasive carcinoma (97.1%). Luminal A, luminal B, HER2 overexpressing, and triple-negative subtypes accounted for 14.3%, 51.8%, 22.1%, and 11.8% of all cases, respectively. Age, PR status, and HER2 status were correlated with lung metastasis (χ2 = 6.576, 4.117, and 8.643 and P = 0.037, 0.043, and 0.003, respectively). Pathological type, ER status, PR status, and molecular subtype were correlated with bone metastasis (χ2 = 5.117, 37.511, 5.224, and 11.603 and P = 0.024, <0.001, 0.022, and 0.009, respectively). Age, PR status, HER2 status, Ki-67 percentage, and molecular subtype were correlated with liver metastasis (χ2 = 11.153, 13.378, 10.692, 21.206, and 17.684 and P = 0.004, <0.001, 0.001, <0.001, and 0.001, respectively). Combined treatment with paclitaxel and anthracycline was the most common first-line chemotherapy regimen for patients with de novo stage IV breast cancer (51.7%). Overall, 91.5% of patients used paclitaxel-containing regimens. Moreover, 59.3% of hormone receptor-positive patients underwent endocrine therapy.

CONCLUSIONS

In 2018, 1.07% of patients from all studied centers were diagnosed with de novo stage IV breast cancer. This study indicated that 95.1% of patients received systemic therapy and 54.2% of patients underwent surgical removal of the primary lesion in China.

Is Surgical Management of Primary Beneficial in Metastatic Breast Cancer??

Metastatic breast cancer is not a curable disease, but women with metastatic disease are living longer. Although the relative survival has improved in recent years still patients who present with metastatic disease have a less than 30% 5-year survival. Historically, removal of the primary breast tumor has been offered to these patients only for palliation. However, there have been recent reports that removal of the primary tumor may improve survival. These are mostly retrospective studies limited by selection bias. Prospective and randomized trials have not shown a clear survival advantage. Although the definitive role of removal of the primary tumor in metastatic breast cancer is not settled, it is critical to understand the complexities of this debate in order to make further gains in breast cancer survivorship.

Additional radiotherapy to breast-conserving surgery is an optional treatment for de novo stage IV breast cancer: A population-based analysis

Background

We aim to assess the value of locoregional treatment (LRT) including breast‐conserving surgery (BCS), mastectomy (MAST), and radiotherapy (RT) in patients with de novo stage IV breast cancer.

Methods

Patients with de novo stage IV breast cancer were retrospectively identified from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database between 2004 and 2014. Kaplan‐Meier analysis, log‐rank tests, propensity score matching (PSM), and the multivariate Cox proportional model were used for statistical analysis.

Results

A total of 5798 patients were identified including 849 (14.6%), 763 (13.2%), 2338 (40.3%), and 1848 (31.9%) who received BCS alone, BCS+RT, MAST alone, and MAST+RT, respectively. The proportions of receiving BCS decreased from 35.9% in 2004 to 26.2% in 2014 (p = 0.002), and the probability of patients receiving MAST increased from 64.1% in 2004 to 74.8% in 2014 (p = 0.002). Before PSM, there was a significant difference in breast cancer‐specific survival (BCSS) among the treatment arms. Patients who received RT had better BCSS, the 5‐year BCSS was 40.5%, 52.3%, 41.5%, and 47.7% in patients treated with BCS alone, BCS+RT, MAST alone, and MAST+RT, respectively (p < 0.001). In the PSM cohort, patients treated with BCS alone had lower 5‐year BCSS compared to those treated with BCS+RT (43.9% and 52.1%, p = 0.002). However, there were comparable 5‐year BCSS between BCS+RT and MAST alone groups (51.3% and 50.1%, p = 0.872), and BCS+RT and MAST+RT cohorts (51.5% and 55.7%, p = 0.333). Similar results were confirmed in multivariate analysis.

Conclusions

Postoperative RT improves BCSS in patients with de novo stage IV breast cancer, and BCS+RT shows a non‐inferior outcome compared to MAST+RT. BCS+RT may be the optimal local management of de novo stage IV breast cancer.

Breast Subtypes and Prognosis of Breast Cancer Patients With Initial Bone Metastasis: A Population-Based Study

Background

Metastatic breast cancer (MBC) is a highly heterogeneous disease and bone is one of the most common metastatic sites. This retrospective study was conducted to investigate the clinical features, prognostic factors and benefits of surgery of breast cancer patients with initial bone metastases.

Methods

From 2010 to 2015, 6,860 breast cancer patients diagnosed with initial bone metastasis were analyzed from Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database. Univariate and Multivariable analysis were used to identify prognostic factors. A nomogram was performed based on the factors selected from cox regression result. Survival curves were plotted according to different subtypes, metastatic burdens and risk groups differentiated by nomogram.

Results

Hormone receptor (HR) positive/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) positive patients showed the best outcome compared to other subtypes. Patients of younger age (<60 years old), white race, lower grade, lower T stage (<=T2), not combining visceral metastasis tended to have better outcome. About 37% (2,249) patients received surgery of primary tumor. Patients of all subtypes could benefit from surgery. Patients of bone-only metastases (BOM), bone and liver metastases, bone and lung metastases also showed superior survival time if surgery was performed. However, patients of bone and brain metastasis could not benefit from surgery (p = 0.05). The C-index of nomogram was 0.66. Cutoff values of nomogram point were identified as 87 and 157 points, which divided all patients into low-, intermediate- and high-risk groups. Patients of all groups showed better overall survival when receiving surgery.

Conclusion

Our study has provided population-based prognostic analysis in patients with initial bone metastatic breast cancer and constructed a predicting nomogram with good accuracy. The finding of potential benefit of surgery to overall survival will cast some lights on the treatment tactics of this group of patients.

Locoregional Surgery in Metastatic Breast Cancer: Do Concomitant Metabolic Aspects Have a Role on the Management and Prognosis in this Setting?

Although they cannot be considered curative, the new therapeutic integrated advances in metastatic breast cancer (MBC) have substantially improved patient outcomes. Traditionally, surgery was confined to palliation of symptomatic or ulcerating lumps. Data suggest, in some cases, a possible additive role for more aggressive locoregional surgical therapy in combination with systemic treatments in the metastatic setting, although a low level of evidence has been shown in terms of improvement in overall survival in MBC patients treated with surgery and medical treatment compared to medical treatment alone. In this light, tumor heterogeneity remains a challenge. To effectively reshape the therapeutic approach to MBC, careful consideration of who is a good candidate for locoregional resection is paramount. The patient’s global health condition, impacting on cancer progression and morbidity and their associated molecular targets, have to be considered in treatment decision-making. In particular, more recently, research has been focused on the role of metabolic derangements, including the presence of metabolic syndrome, which represent well-known conditions related to breast cancer recurrence and distant metastasis and are, therefore, involved in the prognosis. In the present article, we focus on locoregional surgical strategies in MBC and whether concomitant metabolic derangements may have a role in prognosis.

The role of postoperative radiotherapy after primary tumor resection in patients with de novo stage IV breast cancer

AIM

This study was undertaken to investigate the role of postoperative radiotherapy (PORT) including post-breast conserving radiotherapy (PBCRT) and post-mastectomy radiotherapy (PMRT) in stage IV breast cancer patients who underwent planned primary tumor resection (PTR).

METHODS

This study enrolled 112 patients diagnosed with de novo stage IV breast cancer who were treated with potentially curative PTR with or without PORT. The primary outcome was overall survival (OS), and the secondary outcomes were locoregional recurrence-free survival (LRRFS) and distant progression-free survival (DPFS).

RESULTS

At a median follow-up of 48.9 months (range, 3.5-183.4 months), the median OS was 54.9 months (range, 5.3-185.9 months) with a 5 year OS rate of 59.6%. Lower clinical T stage, Luminal A or B type tumors and PBCRT were significantly predictive of longer OS. The 5 year LRRFS and DMFS rates were 79.0% and 34.3%, respectively. In multivariate analysis for LRRFS, the PBCRT arm demonstrated significant superiority compared to the No PORT arm. A comparison of patients who did and did not receive PORT showed that patients with disseminated metastasis more likely did not receive PORT and were excluded from the analysis. PBCRT arm demonstrated significantly superior LRRFS of 100% while PMRT and No PORT arm demonstrated 81.5% and 84.0%, respectively CONCLUSIONS: De novo stage IV breast cancer patients who received planned PTR showed favorable survival outcomes compared with historical cohorts. PTR may be predictive of a good prognosis, especially in patients with luminal A or B type tumors. PORT, especially PBCRT was predictive of LRRFS, suggesting that patients may benefit from this treatment.

Role of locoregional surgery in patients with de novo stage IV breast cancer: analysis of real-world data from China

Stage IV breast cancer is metastatic breast cancer (MBC). Because real-world data are lacking in China, our research attempts to explore the effect of locoregional surgery on the prognosis of patients with MBC. A total of 987 patients from 10 hospitals and 2 databases in East China (2004–2018) were included in this study. Overall, 47% of patients underwent locoregional surgery, and 53% did not. Surgeons tended to perform surgery on patients with small tumours (T1/T2), positive hormone receptor (HR) markers, and metastatic sites confined to a single organ and non-visceral sites (bone only/others) (each p < 0.05). Kaplan–Meier survival curves and the log-rank test showed that median survival was longer for patients who had locoregional surgery than for those who did not (45.00 vs. 28.00 months; p < 0.001). Patients who underwent surgery after systemic treatment had better survival than those who underwent surgery immediately (p < 0.001). In most subgroups, overall survival (OS) was significantly longer in the surgery group than in the no-surgery group (each p < 0.05), except for brain metastases and triple negative breast cancer. Therefore, we concluded that locoregional surgery for the primary tumour in MBC patients was associated with a marked reduction in risk of dying except for patients with brain metastases or triple-negative subtype.

Axillary surgical approach in metastatic breast cancer patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis

A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted to evaluate the benefit of an axillary surgical approach on overall survival and secondarily of breast surgery amongst patients with metastatic breast cancer which is considered to be an incurable disease. However, an axillary surgical approach showed no association with overall survival in patients with metastatic breast cancer. The true impact of locoregional therapies on long-term outcomes remains unknown, and randomised clinical trials are needed.

[Treatment of primary disease with irradiation in case of de novo metastatic breast cancer]

Synchronous metastatic breast cancer accounts for 5 to 6% of all breast cancers in Western countries, which corresponds to nearly 2500 new cases per year in France. Irradiation of the primary tumour in cases of metastatic disease at diagnosis was historically reserved for palliative indications. However, progress in systemic treatments, a better understanding of the biological basis of metastatic dissemination, the genesis of the concept of oligometastatic disease and ablative treatments directed towards metastases are revolutionizing the management of patients with de novo stage IV breast cancer. Survival of these patients has improved markedly over the years, and several studies have investigated the carcinological benefit of local treatment of the breast tumour in patients with advanced diseases at diagnosis. This article provides an update on the role of irradiation of the primary tumour in breast cancer with synchronous metastases, and discusses its interest through published or ongoing trials.

Development of an Individualized Prediction Calculator for the Benefit of Postoperative Radiotherapy in Patients with Surgically Resected De Novo Stage IV Breast Cancer

PURPOSE

Locoregional treatment has been increasingly adopted for metastatic breast cancer at presentation. This study aims to develop an individualized calculator to predict the benefit of postoperative radiotherapy (PORT) for patients with surgically resected de novo stage IV breast cancer.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

We searched the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database for patients diagnosed with stage IV breast cancer between 2010 and 2014. After applying exclusion criteria, a total of 4473 patients were included in the analysis. Propensity score matching was used to balance the individual characteristics of the patients. After identifying the significant prognosticators, a nomogram was developed using multivariate regression models and internally validated. A web-based calculator was then constructed using a fitted survival prediction model.

RESULTS

With a median follow-up of 34 months, the three-year overall survival (OS) rates were 54.1% in the surgery alone group and 63.5% in the surgery + PORT group (p < 0.001). The survival benefit of PORT was maintained after propensity score matching (p < 0.001). Interaction testing of the prognostic variables found significant interactions between PORT and the presence of brain metastasis (p = 0.001), and between PORT and hormonal receptor expression (p = 0.018). After reviewing the performance of various models, a log-normal distributed survival model was adopted, with a C-index of 0.695. A calibration plot verified that the predicted survival rates were strongly correlated with the actual OS rates. A web-based survival calculator was constructed to provide individualized estimates of survival according to PORT.

CONCLUSION

PORT significantly improved OS rates, though the individual benefit was affected by a number of factors. We successfully developed a nomogram and web-based calculator that predicted the prognosis according to PORT in patients with surgically resected de novo stage IV breast cancer. These tools are expected to be useful in clinical practice and in the design of related trials.

Role of surgery in patients with synchronous metastatic breast cancer: Is there a need for axillary lymph node removal?

INTRODUCTION

About 6% of women with breast cancer present with synchronous metastases. Treatment remains palliative in international recommendations but the impact of loco-regional surgery remains controversial.

OBJECTIVE

We conducted a multicentre, cohort study to evaluate the impact of axillary lymph node (ALN) surgery on overall survival in stage IV breast cancer at diagnosis.

METHODS

Patients presenting with breast cancer and synchronous metastases between 2005 and 2014 were included. Follow up was conducted up to 1st June 2018. The only exclusion criterion was a history of previous malignancies. Breast surgery was defined as lumpectomy or mastectomy. Axillary surgery included full ALN dissection, and sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB). If the SLN was invaded on the frozen section, full axillary dissection was performed.

RESULTS

152 patients were included. 71 women had no surgery, 81 had primary site surgery of which 64 (79%) had breast and axillary surgery and 17 (21%) breast surgery only. 5-year overall survival was 59.8% (95% CI=[49.5; 69.5]) for women with breast and axillary surgery, 23.5% (95% CI=[15.6; 33]) for women with breast surgery only and 9.8% (95% CI=[4.7; 17.5]) for women without any surgery, p < 0.001. Combined with breast surgery, axillary surgery significantly added a mean of 33 months to patient overall survival.

CONCLUSION

ALN surgery combined with breast surgery in metastatic breast cancer significantly increased overall survival. Thus surgical indications should not differ from those in women with breast cancer without metastases.

Locoregional therapy of the primary tumour in de novo stage IV breast cancer in 216 066 patients: A meta-analysis

Patients presenting with de novo stage IV metastatic breast cancer have a complex disease which is normally treated with palliative intent and systemic therapy. However, there is mounting evidence that resection of the primary tumour and/or localised radiotherapy (locoregional therapy; LRT) could be associated with overall survival improvements. We aimed to conduct a meta-analysis to inform decision making. Using the PubMed, Cochrane and Ovid SP databases, a literature review and meta-analysis were conducted to assess the effect of LRT on overall survival. Studies were analysed for the impact of LRT on survival. All forms of LRT resulted in a significant 31.8% reduction in mortality (N = 42; HR = 0.6823 (95% CI 0.6365; 0.7314)). Surgical resection resulted in a significant 36.2% reduction in mortality (N = 37; HR = 0.6379 (95% CI 0.5974; 0.6811)). The prospective trials reported a 19.23% reduction in mortality which was not statistically significant (N = 3, HR = 0.8077 (95% CI 0.5704; 1.1438). 216 066 patients were included. This is the largest meta-analysis regarding this question to date. Our meta-analysis shows that LRT of the primary tumour seems to improve overall survival in de novo stage IV disease. Therefore, this therapeutic option should be considered in selected patients after a careful multidisciplinary discussion.

The Impact of Locoregional Treatment on Survival in Patients With Metastatic Breast Cancer: A National Cancer Database Analysis

BACKGROUND

Although systemic therapy is the standard treatment for metastatic breast cancer, the value of locoregional treatment (LRT) of the primary tumor and its impact on survival is controversial. This study evaluates survival outcomes in patients with metastatic breast cancer after receiving LRT (surgery and/or radiation therapy) of the primary tumor.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The National Cancer Database was used to identify 16,128 qualifying cases of metastatic breast cancer who received systemic therapy with or without LRT from 2004 to 2013. Treatment modality was divided into surgery (Sx), radiation therapy (RT), surgery followed by RT (Sx + RT), and no LRT. The median survival and 3-year actuarial survival rates (OS) were analyzed for each treatment group. On multivariate analyses, adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were computed using Cox regression modeling to adjust for patient and clinicopathologic characteristics.

RESULTS

Overall, the median follow-up was 28.3 months, and the median survival for all patients was 37.2 months. With 9761 deaths reported, the estimated 3-year OS was 51.3%. The Sx + RT group (n = 2166) had the highest 3-year OS of 69.4%, followed by the Sx group (n = 4293) with 57.6%, the no LRT group (n = 8955) with 44.3%, and the RT group (n = 714) with 41.5% (P < .0001). On multivariate analysis, compared with the no LRT group, a decreased HR was noted in patients receiving Sx (adjusted HR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.65-0.71; P < .0001) and Sx + RT (adjusted HR, 0.46; 95% CI, 0.43-0.49; P < .0001).

CONCLUSION

LRT, especially surgery followed by RT, in addition to systemic therapy, was associated with improved survival in patients with metastatic breast cancer.

Effect of primary tumor resection on overall survival in patients with stage IV breast cancer

We aimed to evaluate the effect of primary tumor resection on overall survival in stage IV breast cancer patients. In total, 284 breast cancer patients presenting with breast cancer at stage IV at initial diagnosis, between 2001 and 2014, were enrolled in the study. Patients were divided into two groups based on surgical resection of the primary tumor. Overall survival (OS) between the two groups was analyzed. Patients in the surgery group (n = 92) had smaller tumors than those in the no-surgery group (n = 192, T0-1:17.7% vs 34.8%, P < 0.001). The surgery group more often had negative nodal status (5.7% vs 33.7%, P < 0.001). Multiple metastatic organ sites were more common in the no-surgery group than in the surgery group (55.7% vs 15.2%, P < 0.001). The surgery group showed a better OS than the no-surgery group (P = 0.01). Multivariate analysis showed that surgical resection of primary tumors tended to be associated with improved OS (HR = 0.67, P = 0.055). T stage, ER, HER2 and metastatic organ sites were independent prognostic factors for OS in multivariate analysis. Surgical resection of the primary tumor may be a treatment option for patients with stage IV disease and may not have a negative effect on overall survival.

Redrawing the Lines: The Next Generation of Treatment in Metastatic Breast Cancer

Although not considered curative in nature, new therapeutic advances in metastatic breast cancer (MBC) have substantially improved patient outcomes. This article discusses the state-of-the-art and emerging therapeutic options for management of MBC. BC systemic therapy targets multiple key pathways, including estrogen receptor signaling, HER2 signaling, and phosphoinositide 3-kinase (PI3K)/protein kinase B (AKT)/mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) signaling. Other therapeutic strategies include targeting DNA repair, inhibiting immune checkpoints, and developing antibody-drug conjugates. Although surgery historically was reserved for palliation of symptomatic, large, or ulcerating masses, some data suggest a possibly expanding role for more aggressive locoregional therapy in combination with systemic therapy. As technology develops, biomarker-specific, line-agnostic, and receptor-agnostic treatment strategies will redraw the current lines of MBC care. However, tumor heterogeneity remains a challenge. To effectively reshape our approach to MBC, careful consideration of the patient perspective, the costs and value of novel treatments, and accessibility (especially in developing countries) is paramount.

Surgery of primary tumor improves the survival of newly diagnosed metastatic melanoma: a population-based, propensity-matched study

BACKGROUND

For the melanoma patients who are with the primary tumor and metastatic disease concurrently (the newly diagnosed metastatic patients), the effect of primary tumor surgery on survival has never been discussed.

OBJECTIVE

We sought to estimate this effect based on data from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We identified patients with newly diagnosed metastatic melanoma from 2004 to 2015. The effect of primary tumor surgery was assessed by using Cox proportional hazard regression modeling and propensity score matching.

RESULTS

Eight thousand three hundred and forty-one patients who had been diagnosed with primary melanoma and metastatic disease at the same time were included in this analysis, of whom 2,554 (30.6%) received primary tumor surgery. In multivariable analysis of the unmatched cohort, primary tumor surgery was an independent protective factor of overall survival (HR =0.617, 95% CI 0.565-0.674; P<0.001) and melanoma-specific survival (HR =0.599, 95% CI 0.537-0.668; P<0.001). In the matched cohort, primary tumor surgery was still associated with better overall survival (13 vs 6 months, P<0.001) and melanoma-specific survival (18 vs 6 months, P<0.001).

CONCLUSION

Our results reveal the benefit of primary tumor surgery on the survival of patients with newly diagnosed metastatic melanoma and may fill in the gaps of guidelines for this population.

IRB

IRB approval is not required because the SEER data are freely accessible.

Survival impact of primary site surgery on metastatic breast cancer patients at diagnosis

BACKGROUND

Stage IV breast cancer was considered to be an incurable disease. Primary site surgery used to be reserved to control local complications. In the present study, we compared the survival of women who received therapeutic breast surgery for stage IV breast cancer at initial diagnosis to the survival of those who did not.

METHODS

Two French hospitals databases were retrospectively screened from 2005 to 2012. We identified all women with metastatic breast cancer at diagnosis. Patients' data were obtained by a review of their medical history. Data were analyzed according the four breast cancer subtypes (luminal A, luminal B, her 2 and triple negative).

RESULTS

One hundred thirty nine women were included, of whom 69 had primary site surgery. TNM stage and phenotypes of breast cancer were comparable in the two groups but operated women were younger than women who did not (p<0.0001). Average follow-up was 31±23.3 months [1-97]. Through logistic regression, we observed that tumor resection decreased death hazard ratio vs no surgery: HR 0.33, 95% CI [0.16-0.66] p=0.001. In the surgery group, there was no survival difference if women received chemotherapy (p=0.23). There were more patients with only one metastatic site in the surgery group (p=0.002) and they had been more treated with systemic therapy. When we compared tumor phenotypes individually, surgery increased survival on luminal A breast cancer patients (p<.0001).

CONCLUSION

Women with luminal A breast cancer and synchronous metastasis seemed to benefit from surgery. The development of a national reporting system or registers for outcomes would facilitate the investigation of the disease across a multitude of aspects of stage IV breast cancer.

Reconstruction in the Metastatic Breast Cancer Patient: Results from the National Cancer Database

PURPOSE

Modern treatments are prolonging life for metastatic breast cancer patients. Reconstruction in these patients is controversial. The purpose of this study was to characterize de novo metastatic breast cancer patients who undergo mastectomy and reconstruction and to report complication and survival rates.

METHODS

We queried the National Cancer Database for de novo metastatic breast cancer patients, who underwent systemic therapy and mastectomy with reconstruction (R) or without reconstruction (NR) between 2004 and 2013. Patient-tumor characteristics, mortality, and readmissions were compared. Propensity score matched analysis was performed, and survival was calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method.

RESULTS

A total of 8554 patients fulfilled study criteria (n = 980/11.5% R vs. n = 7574/88.5% NR). There was a significant increase in reconstruction rates by year: 5.2% in 2004, 14.3% in 2013 (p < 0.0001). Compared with the NR patients, R patients were younger (mean age 49 vs. 58 years, p < 0.0001), more hormone receptor-positive (76.1% vs. 70.5%, p = 0.0004), had lower grade disease (p = 0.0082), and fewer sites of metastases (85.7% had 1 metastasis; 14.3% had ≥ 2 R vs. 79% had 1; 21% had ≥ 2 NR, p = 0.0002). R patients received more hormonal and chemotherapy than NR but equally received radiation. Median overall survival of the total cohort was 45 months, and median overall survivals of R and NR groups by matched analysis were 56.7 and 55.3 months respectively (p = 0.86). Thirty-day mortality (0.2%-R, 0.3%-NR, p = 0.56) and readmissions (5.9%-R, 5.8%-NR, p = 0.81) were similar; 90-day mortality also was similar (1.1%-R vs. 1.6%-NR, p = 0.796).

CONCLUSIONS

There is an increasing trend to reconstruct metastatic breast cancer patients with low complication rates, without survival compromise. Impact on quality of life warrants further assessment.

Role of Operative Management in Stage IV Breast Cancer

The role of operative therapy in stage IV breast cancer continues to evolve with advances in therapy and improvements in survival among this population. Traditionally surgery was performed with palliative intent to alleviate symptoms related to the intact breast primary. Several retrospective studies have challenged this paradigm, demonstrating survival advantage with surgery in de novo metastatic disease. Prospective studies are ongoing and maturing data. A comprehensive approach to local therapy following systemic therapy may be beneficial to achieve improved survival outcome associated with stage IV- no evidence of disease and to decrease local failure in inflammatory breast cancer.

Breast surgery for metastatic breast cancer

BACKGROUND

Metastatic breast cancer is not a curable disease, but women with metastatic disease are living longer. Surgery to remove the primary tumour is associated with an increased survival in other types of metastatic cancer. Breast surgery is not standard treatment for metastatic disease, however several recent retrospective studies have suggested that breast surgery could increase the women's survival. These studies have methodological limitations including selection bias. A systematic review mapping all randomised controlled trials addressing the benefits and potential harms of breast surgery is ideal to answer this question.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of breast surgery in women with metastatic breast cancer.

SEARCH METHODS

We conducted searches using the MeSH terms 'breast neoplasms', 'mastectomy', and 'analysis, survival' in the following databases: the Cochrane Breast Cancer Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE (by PubMed) and Embase (by OvidSP) on 22 February 2016. We also searched ClinicalTrials.gov (22 February 2016) and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (24 February 2016). We conducted an additional search in the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) conference proceedings in July 2016 that included reference checking, citation searching, and contacting study authors to identify additional studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

The inclusion criteria were randomised controlled trials of women with metastatic breast cancer at initial diagnosis comparing breast surgery plus systemic therapy versus systemic therapy alone. The primary outcomes were overall survival and quality of life. Secondary outcomes were progression-free survival (local and distant control), breast cancer-specific survival, and toxicity from local therapy.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently conducted trial selection, data extraction, and 'Risk of bias' assessment (using Cochrane's 'Risk of bias' tool), which a third review author checked. We used the GRADE tool to assess the quality of the body of evidence. We used the risk ratio (RR) to measure the effect of treatment for dichotomous outcomes and the hazard ratio (HR) for time-to-event outcomes. We calculated 95% confidence intervals (CI) for these measures. We used the random-effects model, as we expected clinical or methodological heterogeneity, or both, among the included studies.

MAIN RESULTS

We included two trials enrolling 624 women in the review. It is uncertain whether breast surgery improves overall survival as the quality of the evidence has been assessed as very low (HR 0.83, 95% CI 0.53 to 1.31; 2 studies; 624 women). The two studies did not report quality of life. Breast surgery may improve local progression-free survival (HR 0.22, 95% CI 0.08 to 0.57; 2 studies; 607 women; low-quality evidence), while it probably worsened distant progression-free survival (HR 1.42, 95% CI 1.08 to 1.86; 1 study; 350 women; moderate-quality evidence). The two included studies did not measure breast cancer-specific survival. Toxicity from local therapy was reported by 30-day mortality and did not appear to differ between the two groups (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.14 to 6.90; 1 study; 274 women; low-quality evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Based on existing evidence from two randomised clinical trials, it is not possible to make definitive conclusions on the benefits and risks of breast surgery associated with systemic treatment for women diagnosed with metastatic breast cancer. Until the ongoing clinical trials are finalised, the decision to perform breast surgery in these women should be individualised and shared between the physician and the patient considering the potential risks, benefits, and costs of each intervention.

Hormone receptor status may impact the survival benefit of surgery in stage iv breast cancer: a population-based study

Introduction

The role of surgery in stage IV breast cancer is controversial. We used the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database to explore the impact of surgery on the survival of patients with stage IV breast cancer.

Methods

In total, 10,441 eligible stage IV breast cancer patients from 2004 to 2008 were included. They were divided into four groups as follows: R0 group (patients who underwent primary site and distant metastatic site resection), primary site resection group, metastases resection group, and no resection group.

Results

The four groups achieved a median survival time (MST) of 51, 43, 31 and 21 months, respectively, P < 0.001. The Cox proportional hazards model showed that the R0 group, primary resection group and metastases resection group had a good survival benefit, with hazard ratios of 0.558 (95% CI, 0.471-0.661), 0.566 (95% CI, 0.557-0.625) and 0.782 (95% CI, 0.693-0.883), respectively. In the hormone receptor (HR)-positive population, the R0 group (MST = 66 m, 5-year OS = 54.1%) gained an additional survival benefit compared with the primary resection group (MST = 52 m; 5-year OS = 44.9%; P < 0.001). The metastases resection group (MST = 38 m; 5-year OS = 31.7%) survived longer than the no resection group (MST = 28 m; 5-year OS = 22.0%; P < 0.001). In the HR-negative population, the R0 group and primary resection group had a similar survival (P = 0.691), and the metastases resection group had a similar outcome to that of the no resection group (P = 0.526).

Conclusion

Patients who underwent surgery for stage IV breast cancer showed better overall survival than the no resection group. Cytoreductive surgery could provide a survival benefit in HR+ stage IV breast cancer; however, in the HR- population, extreme caution should be exercised when considering surgery.

The impact of surgical excision of the primary tumor in stage IV breast cancer on survival: a meta-analysis

Introduction

Approximately 5% of primary breast cancer patients present de novo stage IV breast cancer, for whom systematic therapy is the mainstream treatment. The role of surgical excision of the primary tumor has been controversial due to inconsistent results of relevant studies. Recently, with the reports of some relevant preclinical data, retrospective studies and randomized clinical trials, we've got more evidence to reexamine the issue. Based on those above, a literature review and meta-analysis was performed to determine whether surgery of the primary tumor could improve overall survival in the setting of stage IV breast cancer.

Materials and Methods

A comprehensive search of PubMed, OVID, American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) symposium documents, European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) symposium documents and San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium (SABCS) symposium documents was performed to identify published literature that evaluated survival benefits from excision of the primary tumor in the setting of stage IV breast cancer. Data were extracted in review of appropriate studies by the authors independently. The primary endpoint was overall survival following surgical removal of the primary tumor. Secondary endpoints were the impacts of surgery on progression free survival (PFS) and time to progression (TTP).

Results

Data from 19 retrospective studies showed a pooled hazard ratio of 0.65 (95% confidence interval (95% CI), 0.60-0.71, P < 0.01= for overall survival (OS), indicating a 35% reduction in risk of mortality in patients who underwent surgical excision of the primary tumor. Nevertheless, the analysis of 3 randomized clinical trials revealed a pooled hazard ratio of 0.85 (95% CI, 0.59–1.21, P = 0.359) for OS in the surgical group. According to the meta-regression, the survival benefit was independent of age, tumor size, site of the metastases, and PR or HER-2 status, acceptance of systematic therapies and radiotherapy and inversely correlated with the ER+ status of the population included.

Conclusions

This is the first meta-analysis that includes both retrospective and prospective studies regarding the impact of surgery of the primary tumor on survival in stage IV breast cancer patients. According to the analytical results, we do not recommend surgery of the primary tumor as routine therapy for stage IV breast cancer. However, for those who are supposed to have long life expectancy, physicians could discuss it with these patients, put forward surgery as a therapy choice and perform the operation under deliberation.

Cryoablation of Primary Breast Cancer in Patients with Metastatic Disease: Considerations Arising from a Single-Centre Data Analysis

Background

Patients presenting with stage IV breast cancer might benefit by removal of the primary tumor. We report our experience with CT-guided cryoablation of the primary tumor, with the aim of evaluating its role in this subgroup of patients.

Patients and Methods

Data of 35 patients with mean age of 58 years with breast cancer at stage IV submitted to CT-guided cryoablation of the primary tumor between 2010 and 2016 were prospectively evaluated. All patients, except three, were preoperatively and postoperatively evaluated with breast MRI to assess the extent of tumor necrosis. Retreatment was performed in case of incomplete ablation.

Results

Mean tumor size was 3.02 ± 1.4 cm. Six patients had multicentric disease. Complete tumor necrosis was 85.7% and 100% at 2-month and 6-month follow-up, respectively, as 5 patients with tumors > 3 cm required a redo cryoablation. No patient developed major complications. Minor side effects occurred in 30 patients (82%). All patients were discharged the same day of the procedure. During a mean follow-up of 46 months (range 3–84), 7 patients (20%) experienced local recurrences that were treated with redo cryoablation, and 7 (20%) died for disease progression.

Conclusions

Our results suggest that cryoablation of the primary tumor is safe and effective in the treatment of patients presenting with stage IV breast cancer.

Locoregional Treatment of the Primary Tumor in Patients With De Novo Stage IV Breast Cancer: A Radiation Oncologist's Perspective

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to assess the outcomes of patients with de novo stage IV breast cancer after locoregional treatment (LRT) of primary site.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We studied 245 patients diagnosed with de novo stage IV breast cancer. LRT of the primary tumor (+ systemic therapy) was performed in 82 (34%) patients (surgery, 27; surgery + radiotherapy (RT), 46; and RT, 9). Among those undergoing surgery, 64 (88%) patients underwent mastectomy, and 9 (12%) patients underwent breast-conserving surgery (BCS). Local recurrence-free survival (LRFS) and overall survival (OS) were investigated, and propensity score matching was used to balance patient distributions.

RESULTS

The 5-year LRFS and OS rates were 27% and 50%, respectively. Advanced T stage (T4), liver or brain metastasis, ≥ 5 metastatic sites, and absence of hormone therapy were significant adverse factors for LRFS, whereas T4 stage and absence of hormone therapy were significant for OS. The LRT group demonstrated significantly more favorable outcomes (5-year LRFS, 61%; 5-year OS, 71%), especially after surgery. After matching, survival rates remained significantly higher for patients who received LRT (5-year LRFS, 62% vs. 20%; P < .001; 5-year OS, 73% vs. 45%; P = .02). BCS + RT was superior to mastectomy ± RT, which can be attributed to more patients with a low tumor burden undergoing BCS + RT. Outcomes were better with post-mastectomy RT in selected patients (≥ N2, ≥ T3, or T2N1).

CONCLUSIONS

Upfront LRT including RT is an important option together with systemic therapies for de novo stage IV breast cancer.

Surgery of the primary tumor improves survival in women with stage IV breast cancer in Southwest China: A retrospective analysis

The International Consensus Guidelines for advanced breast cancer (ABC) considers that the surgery of the primary tumor for stage IV breast cancer patients does not usually improve the survival. However, studies have showed that resection of the primary tumor may benefit these patients. The correlation between surgery and survival remains unclear.The impact of surgery and other clinical factors on overall survival (OS) of stage IV patients is investigated in West China Hospital. Female patients diagnosed with stage IV breast cancer between 1999 and 2014 were included (N = 223). Univariate and multivariate analysis assessed the association between surgery and OS.One hundred seventy-seven (79.4%) underwent surgery for the primary tumor, and 46 (20.6%) had no surgery. No significant differences were observed in age at diagnosis, T-stage, N-stage, histological grade, molecular subtype, hormone receptor (HR), and number of metastatic sites between 2 groups. Patients in the surgery group had dramatically longer OS (45.6 vs 21.3 months, log-rank P < .001). In univariate analysis, survival was associated with surgical treatment, residence, tumor size, lymph node, HR status, hormonal therapy, and radiotherapy. In multivariate analysis, surgery was an independent prognostic factor for OS [hazard ratio (HR), 0.569; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.329-0.984, P = .044]. Additional independent prognostic factors were hormonal therapy (HR, 0.490; 95% CI 0.300-0.800) and radiotherapy (HR, 0.490; 95% CI 0.293-0.819). In addition, a favorable impact of surgery was observed by subgroup analysis.Our study showed that surgery of the primary breast tumor has a positive impact on OS in with stage IV breast cancer patients.

The role and indications of aggressive locoregional therapy in metastatic inflammatory breast cancer

We seek to confirm the effect and explore the indications of aggressive locoregional management in patients with metastatic inflammatory breast cancer (IBC). Between 2003 and 2014, we reviewed the records of 156 patients with metastatic IBC from five large centers of Breast Surgery in the region of central south of China. Clinicopathologic data were collected to access overall survival (OS), prognostic factors and the indications for locoregional treatment. 75 (48%) patients underwent aggressive locoregional therapy. Patients in locoregional therapy group had a median OS of 24 months compared with 17 months of those in no locoregional therapy group. 2-year OS rate of these two groups was 52% and 32%, separately. Locoregional therapy (HR = 0.556; 95% CI 0.385–0.803; p = 0.002) was confirmed to be an independent prognostic factor, which could significantly improve OS of patients with metastatic IBC. For locoregional therapy group, statistical differences were observed in all subgroups stratified by the factors that were significant in univariate analysis except in the subgroups of stable disease, Charlson comorbidity index ≥3 and cerebral metastasis. Therefore, systemic therapy efficacy, Charlson comorbidity index and cerebral metastasis status appeared to be important indexes for choice of locoregional therapy in different individuals.

Surgical treatment of the primary tumour improves the overall survival in patients with metastatic breast cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Traditionally, stage IV metastatic breast cancer has been treated with systemic therapy and/or radiotherapy in order to decrease cancer-associated symptoms, maintain quality of life and control disease burden. Previous research suggests that surgical treatment of the primary tumour may prolong survival, as well achieve local control of disease. Using the PubMed and Ovid SP databases, a literature review and meta-analysis was performed in order to assess whether surgical resection of the primary tumour in metastatic breast cancer prolongs survival. In this meta-analysis, a pooled hazard ratio of 0.63 (95% confidence interval, 0.58-0.7; P<0.0001) was revealed, equating to a 37% reduction in risk of mortality in patients that underwent surgical resection of the primary tumour. Therefore, it was concluded that surgery of the primary tumour in stage IV breast cancer appears to offer a survival benefit in metastatic patients.

Surgery of the primary tumor in de novo metastatic breast cancer: To do or not to do?

Approximately five percent of all breast cancer patients in developed countries present with distant metastases at initial diagnosis. Due to its incurability, metastatic breast cancer is generally treated with systemic therapies to achieve disease control and reduce tumor-related symptoms. Primary treatments for metastatic breast cancer are chemotherapy, endocrine- and biologic therapy, whereas surgery with or without radiotherapy is usually performed to treat impending wound issues. Since 2002, several retrospective non-randomized clinical studies have shown that extirpation of the primary tumor correlates with a significantly improved survival in patients with primary metastatic breast cancer. Others have argued that this survival benefit associated with surgery may be due to selection biases. Therefore, in the absence of published results from randomized controlled trials carried out in India and Turkey and completion of a trial in the United States, there is no clear conclusion on whether surgical excision of the primary breast cancer translates into a survival benefit for patients with de novo metastatic disease. Furthermore, timing and type of surgical procedure, as well as selection of patients who could benefit the most from this approach, represent additional points of uncertainty. Despite the epidemiological burden of this condition, there are no guidelines on how to manage breast cancer patients presenting with de novo metastatic breast cancer; and decisions are often left to provider and patient preferences. Here, we present a critical overview of the literature focusing on the rationale and potential role of primary tumour excision in patients with de novo metastatic breast cancer.

[Locoregional surgery for stage IV breast cancer patients]

Three to 6% of women newly diagnosed with breast cancers have stage IV disease. Overall survival was improved during the last few years (16-45 months). The treatment of stage IV breast cancer has traditionally been palliative with surgical resection reserved for symptomatic wound complications. Since 2000, several retrospective studies have compared surgery versus no local therapy in women presenting with stage IV breast cancer with an intact primary tumor. All showed a survival advantage for the surgical cohort. However, these studies are limited by the fact that it is not possible to control for biases that led to surgical resection of the primary tumor. Several prospective randomized trials have been undertaken. We have partial results for two of them and they show no survival differences between patients who benefit from local surgery and patients who did not have surgery. However, breast surgery is at low risk of complication, if not considering psychological aspect of mastectomy, and can be proposed to patients with no progression after first chemotherapy. Conservative management can be an option, but surgery must be optimal with negative margins. No benefit of axillary surgery has been shown but this treatment can lead to complications and impact quality of life of patients. Therefore, axillary node resection is not recommended for stage IV breast cancer. Finally, radiotherapy can be an alternative option of local therapy associated or no to surgery in stage IV breast cancer.

[Surgical treatment of the primary tumor in stage IV breast cancer]

INTRODUCTION

The aim of the study was to analyze the impact of loco-regional surgery on survival of patients with stage IV breast cancer.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Retrospective study that included patients with breast cancer and synchronous metastases. Patients with ECOG above 2 and high-risk patients were excluded. The following variables were evaluated: age, tumor size, nodal involvement, histological type, histological grade, hormone receptor status, HER2 overexpression, number of affected organs, location of metastases and surgical treatment. The impact of surgery and several clinical and pathologic variables on survival was analyzed by Cox regression model.

RESULTS

A total of 69 patients, of whom 36 (52.2%) underwent surgery (study group) were included. After a mean follow-up of 34 months, the median survival of the series was 55 months and no significant differences between the study group and the group of patients without surgery (P=0.187) were found. Two factors associated with worse survival were identified: the number of organs with metastases (HR=1.69, IC 95%: 1.05-2.71) and triple negative breast cancer (HR=3.49, IC 95%: 1.39-8.74). Loco-regional surgery, however, was not associated with survival.

CONCLUSIONS

Loco-regional surgical treatment was not associated with improved survival inpacientes with stage IV breast cancer. The number of organs with metastases and tumors were triple negative prognostic factors for survival.

Current challenges and future perspectives of radiotherapy for locally advanced breast cancer

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To discuss current issues in the field of radiation oncology for locally advanced breast cancer (LABC).

RECENT FINDINGS

Large randomized studies involving nodal irradiation have recently been completed. The incremental benefit of treating the internal mammary nodes (IMNs) remains controversial. A randomized study specifically evaluating internal mammary node radiation (IMNR) failed to demonstrate significant benefit. A high impact, population-based study detected a proportional increase in major coronary events with increasing radiation dose. Advanced treatment techniques should be employed to reduce cardiac exposure. In patients with stage IV breast cancer (BCa), there is increasing evidence to suggest that locoregional treatments may improve overall survival (OS). Radiotherapy alone, without surgery, may provide equivalent local control and OS in patients with distant metastasis. High-dose stereotactic radiation regimens can be used to treat breast tumors with good local control rates in as few as three visits.BCa biomarkers are predictive of locoregional recurrence risk and should be used to guide radiotherapy in conjunction with standard staging. Clinically validated genetic profiling can measure tumor radiosensitivity and also help to predict normal tissue toxicity.

SUMMARY

We are entering an era of personalized radiotherapy for LABC. Radiation treatments must be tailored to each individual patient's risk and intrinsic tumor biology.