The Shifting Paradigm for Breast Cancer Surgery in Patients Undergoing Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy

Oncologic Outcomes of Immediate Breast Reconstruction in the Setting of Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy: A Long-term Follow-up Study of a Matched Cohort

PURPOSE

Despite the increasing use of immediate breast reconstruction (IBR), its oncologic safety in the setting of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) needs to be comprehensively clarified in breast cancer management. The objective of the present study was to analyze the oncologic safety of IBR following NACT.

METHODS

In total, 587 patients with breast cancer who underwent a total mastectomy (TM) with IBR after NACT between 2008 and 2017 at a single institution were retrospectively reviewed. The reviewed patients with IBR following skin-sparing mastectomy (SSM) or nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM) were matched 1:3 to patients who underwent TM alone after NACT. Matching variables included age, clinical T and N stages before NACT, response to NACT, pathologic T and N stages, and molecular subtypes.

RESULTS

After propensity score matching, 95 patients who underwent IBR following SSM/NSM after NACT (IBR group) and 228 patients who underwent TM alone after NACT (TM group) were selected. The median follow-up period was 73 (range, 5-181) months after matching. After matching, there were no significant differences between the two groups in 5-year locoregional recurrence-free survival (88.8% vs. 91.2%, p = 0.516), disease-free survival (67.3% vs. 76.6%, p = 0.099), distant metastasis-free survival (71.9% vs. 81.9%, p = 0.057), or overall survival (84.1% vs. 91.5, p = 0.061) rates. In multivariate analyses, conducting IBR was not associated with increased risks for locoregional recurrence, any recurrence, distant metastasis, or overall death.

CONCLUSION

Our findings suggest that IBR following SSM/NSM elicits comparable long-term oncologic outcomes to those of TM alone in the setting of NACT.

Meta-Analysis of Shrinkage Mode After Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy for Breast Cancers: Association With Hormonal Receptor

Background

Patients with concentric shrinkage mode after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) is considered to be ideal candidates for breast conserving treatment (BCT). While, what proportion of patients would represent CSM have not been well defined. This study was conducted to pool the rates of concentric shrinkage mode (CSM) in patients undergoing NAC, determine the impact of hormonal receptor on the shrinkage mode after NAC and estimate the rates of the CSM in various subgroups.

Methods

We conducted a systematic review following the guidelines for Meta-Analyses and Systematic reviews for the PRISMA guidelines. We systematically searched the literature about shrinkage mode after NAC from PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, The Cochrane Library, CNKI, Wanfang database published from January 2002 to June 2020 on breast cancer shrinkage mode after NAC and carefully screened the literature by using eligibility criteria: (1) patients with primary breast cancer treated with NAC; (2) publications with available data of shrinkage mode measured by magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), or data of pathology and hormonal receptor. The association between shrinkage mode and hormonal receptor was estimated using Stata 15.1 software.

Results

This analysis included a total of 2434 tumors from 23 papers. The included studies were heterogeneous (I2 = 89.4%, P<0.01). Random effects model was used to estimate the overall rates of CSM: 56.6% [95%CI (50.5%, 62.7%)]. According to the analysis of hormonal receptor, 10 of the paper was included for HR+ (hormone receptor positive) type analysis and the rate of CSM for HR+ type was 45.7% [95%CI (36.4%, 55.0%)]; 9 of the paper was used for HR- type (hormone receptor negative) analysis and the incidence of HR-CSM is 63.1% [95%CI (50.0%, 76.1%)]; with HR+ type as the control, the OR of the HR- CSM rate is 2.32 (1.32, 4.08) folds of HR+ type. From subgroup analyses, the CSM% of luminal A, luminal B, Her2+, and triple negative were 29.7% (16.5%, 42.8%); 47.2% (19.1%, 75.3%); 59.0% (39.7%, 78.3%); 66.2% (52.8%, 79.6%), respectively.

Conclusions

Breast cancer patients undergoing NAC did not get an ideal odds ratio of CSM. The incidence of CSM in breast cancer after NAC is associated with hormonal receptor. Patients with triple-negative breast cancers have the highest rates of CSM after NAC. More care should be taken to select patients with the luminal subtypes for BCT throughout NAC.

Utilization of neoadjuvant chemotherapy in high-risk, node-negative early breast cancer

BACKGROUND

Controversy exists regarding the optimal sequence of chemotherapy among women with operable node-negative breast cancers with high-risk tumor biology. We evaluated national patterns of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) use among women with early-stage HER2+, triple-negative (TNBC), and high-risk hormone receptor-positive (HR+) invasive breast cancers.

METHODS

Women ≥18 years with cT1-2/cN0 HER2+, TNBC, or high recurrence risk score (≥31) HR+ invasive breast cancers who received chemotherapy were identified in the National Cancer Database (2010-2016). Cochran-Armitage and logistic regression examined temporal trends and likelihood of undergoing NACT versus adjuvant chemotherapy based on patient age and molecular subtype.

RESULTS

Overall, 96,622 patients met study criteria; 25% received NACT and 75% underwent surgery first, with comparable 5-year estimates of overall survival (0.90, 95% CI 0.892-0.905 vs 0.91, 95% CI 0.907-0.913). During the study period, utilization of NACT increased from 14% to 36% and varied according to molecular subtype (year*molecular subtype p < 0.001, p-corrected < 0.001). Women with HER2+ (OR 4.17, 95% CI 3.70-4.60, p < 0.001, p-corrected < 0.001) and TNBC (OR 3.81, 95% CI 3.38-4.31, p < 0.001, p-corrected < 0.001) were more likely to receive NACT over time, without a change in use among those with HR+ disease (OR 1.58, 95% CI 0.88-2.87, p = 0.13, p-corrected = 0.17).

CONCLUSION

Among women with early-stage triple-negative and HER2+ breast cancers, utilization of NACT increased over time, a trend that correlates with previously reported improved rates of pCR and options post-neoadjuvant treatment with residual disease. Future research is needed to better understand multidisciplinary decisions for NACT and implications for breast cancer patients.

Breast cancer-The catalyst of contemporary trials design

Surgical trials in breast cancer have catalyzed contemporary trial design for solid organ cancers and are a prime example of surgeons taking the lead in clinical trial design. Surgeons have lead trials that have improved patient outcomes and quality of life without sacrificing oncologic safety. We have evolved from radical mastectomy to breast conservation and sentinel node biopsy. Contemporary trial design in breast cancer now focus on personalizing care based on tumor genomics.

Surgical Treatment after Neoadjuvant Systemic Therapy in Young Women with Breast Cancer: Results from a Prospective Cohort Study

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to investigate eligibility for breast-conserving surgery (BCS) pre- and post-neoadjuvant systemic therapy (NST), and trends in the surgical treatment of young breast cancer patients.

BACKGROUND

Young women with breast cancer are more likely to present with larger tumors and aggressive phenotypes, and may benefit from NST. Little is known about how response to NAC influences surgical decisions in young women.

METHODS

The Young Women's Breast Cancer Study (YWS), a multicenter prospective cohort of women diagnosed with breast cancer at age ≤40, enrolled 1302 patients from 2006 to 2016. Disease characteristics, surgical recommendations, and reasons for choosing mastectomy among BCS-eligible patients were obtained through the medical record. Trends in use of NST, rate of clinical and pathologic complete response (cCR and pCR), and surgery were also assessed.

RESULTS

Of 1117 women with unilateral stage I-III breast cancer, 315 (28%) received NST. Pre-NST, 26% were BCS eligible, 17% were borderline eligible, and 55% were ineligible. After NST, BCS eligibility increased from 26% to 42% (p < 0.0001). Among BCS-eligible patients after NST (n = 133), 41% chose mastectomy with reasons being patient preference (53%), BRCA or TP53 mutation (35%) and family history (5%). From 2006 to 2016, the rates of NST (p = 0.0012), cCR (p < 0.0001) and bilateral mastectomy (p < 0.0001) increased, but the rate of BCS did not increase (p = 0.34).

CONCLUSION

While the proportion of young women eligible for BCS increased after NST, many patients choose mastectomy, suggesting that surgical decisions are often driven by factors beyond extent of disease and treatment response.

The Influence of Patient Exposure to Breast Reconstruction Approaches and Education on Patient Choices in Breast Cancer Treatment

BACKGROUND

The landscape of surgical and medical management and patient choices for breast cancer treatment changes as breast reconstruction and oncoplastic approaches improve and diversify. Increased access to breast reconstruction, in addition to patient education, influences the breast cancer patient. Therefore, the examination of the possible impact of reconstructive surgery on all stages of the breast cancer management per se seemed timely.

METHODS

Plastic surgery consults were arranged for 520 new patients diagnosed with breast cancer (2012-2016) including patients with noninvasive breast cancer but at high risk of further cancer development. To test the plastic surgery impact on patient choices regarding the management of the cancer, a subset of 90 patients was identified to test the plastic surgery impact on patient choices. These patients were referred to plastic surgery, following the first round of consultations by surgical and medical oncologists with only the preliminary oncological management plan defined. After a plastic surgery consultation, but prior to finalization of the overall oncological management plan, they were surveyed on the subject of modification of their personal choices and requests pertaining to their cancer management.

RESULTS

In this subset of 90 patients 40 (44%) returned to their surgical or medical oncologist considering changes of the primary management plan after their plastic surgery consultation. Twenty-six (28%) ultimately altered their plan, and the following patient-driven changes were made: mastectomy as opposed to lumpectomy (18 patients [20%]), contralateral prophylactic mastectomy (11 patients [12%]), nipple/areola removal as opposed to nipple/areola sparing suggested by the oncologists (5 patients [6%]), oncoplastic breast reduction as part of lumpectomy (5 patients [6%]), and other modifications (3 patients [3%]).

CONCLUSIONS

Decisions for altering the preliminary oncologic plan or choosing a specific alternative (eg, lumpectomy plus radiation vs mastectomy) resulted from patient education on (1) reconstructive options, (2) aesthetic pitfalls and results. and (3) their interfacing with the oncological outcomes. Ultimately, plastic surgeons influence the multispecialty breast cancer management and patient decision-making process. Therefore, oncological literacy for plastic surgeons is essential to provide state-of-the-art breast cancer care and avoidance of suboptimal patient decisions.

Contralateral Prophylactic Mastectomy Use After Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy

BACKGROUND

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) for breast cancer increases breast-conserving surgery (BCS) rates, but many women opt for mastectomy with contralateral prophylactic mastectomy (CPM). Here we evaluate factors associated with CPM use in women undergoing mastectomy post-NAC.

METHODS

A retrospective institutional NAC database review identified women with clinical stage I-III, unilateral invasive breast cancer undergoing unilateral mastectomy (UM) or CPM mastectomy from 9/2013 to 12/2017. Clinical/pathologic characteristics, imaging, and presence of contraindications to BCS post-NAC were compared, with subset analysis of BCS candidates. The multivariable analysis was adjusted for potential confounders.

RESULTS

Five hundred sixty-nine women underwent mastectomy after NAC, 297 (52%) UM and 272 (48%) CPM. On univariable analysis, younger age, BRCA+, lower pre-NAC clinical stage, pathologic complete response, and axillary surgery extent were associated with CPM (all p < 0.01). Favorable post-NAC clinical factors of no residual palpable disease, clinically negative nodes, complete response on breast imaging, and no post-NAC contraindication to BCS were also associated with CPM (all p < 0.01). On multivariable analysis, young age (odds ratio [OR] 0.93, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.91-0.95), lower pre-NAC stage (OR 0.51, 95% CI 0.34-0.77), and no contraindication to BCS (OR 3.12, 95% CI 2.02-4.82) were significantly associated with CPM. Among the 203 (35%) women who had no contraindications to BCS post-NAC, 145 (71%) underwent CPM. BRCA+ and family history were reasons more frequently cited for mastectomy among CPM than UM (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

CPM was performed in 48% of women undergoing mastectomy after NAC; younger women with earlier-stage cancers were more likely to undergo CPM. While increased use of CPM in women with more favorable disease is medically appropriate, our findings indicate a lost opportunity for use of BCS.

Overuse of Neo-adjuvant Chemotherapy for Primary Breast Cancer

In recent years, there has been a wider use of chemotherapy in the pre-operative setting for breast cancer (i.e., as neo-adjuvant chemotherapy). Most clinicians would agree that neo-adjuvant chemotherapy is justified for patients with inflammatory breast cancer, locally advanced breast cancer, or patients with large tumors and small breasts who are keen to undergo breast-conserving surgery. However, in the USA and many other western countries, neo-adjuvant chemotherapy is now used for greater numbers of breast cancer patients who do not fall within these categories. Yet, randomized trials have consistently shown that there are no differences in overall survival (OS) between breast cancer patients treated with neo-adjuvant chemotherapy versus adjuvant chemotherapy. However, neo-adjuvant chemotherapy may increase the risk of loco-regional recurrence after breast-conserving surgery, perhaps because of an increased risk of leaving behind residual tumor foci. Moreover, the effects of neo-adjuvant chemotherapy on the primary tumor does not appear to be a suitable way for assessing the potential overall benefits of systemic therapy regimens on distant micrometastases and risk of death. Yet, based on the results of the KATHERINE and CREATE-X trials, one might argue that neo-adjuvant chemotherapy should be recommended for patients with HER-2-positive and triple-negative tumors to identify the subsets of patients who do not achieve pathologic complete response (PCR). Patients with HER-2-positive tumors who do not achieve PCR may benefit from additional treatment with T-DM1, and those with triple-negative tumors who do not achieve PCR may benefit from additional treatment with capecitabine.

The effect of treatment on patient-reported distress after breast cancer diagnosis

BACKGROUND

The National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) Distress Thermometer (DT) uses a 10-point scale (in which 0 indicates no distress and 10 indicates extreme distress) to measure patient-reported distress. In the current study, the authors sought to examine the relationship between treatment and NCCN DT scores in patients with breast cancer over time.

METHODS

The authors included women aged ≥18 years who were diagnosed with stage 0 to stage IV breast cancer (according to the seventh edition of the American Joint Commission on Cancer staging system) at a 3-hospital health system from January 2014 to July 2016. Linear mixed effects models adjusted for covariates including stage of disease, race/ethnicity, insurance, and treatment sequence (neoadjuvant vs adjuvant) were used to estimate adjusted mean changes in the DT score (MSCs) per week for patients undergoing lumpectomy, mastectomy only, and mastectomy with reconstruction (MR).

RESULTS

The authors analyzed 12,569 encounters for 1029 unique patients (median score, 4; median follow-up, 67 weeks). Patients treated with MR (118 patients) were younger and more likely to be married, white, and privately insured compared with patients undergoing lumpectomy (620 patients) and mastectomy only (291 patients) (all P < .01). After adjusting for covariates, distress scores were found to decline significantly across all 3 surgical cohorts, with patients undergoing MR found to have both the most preoperative distress and the greatest decline in distress prior to surgery (MSC/week: -0.073 for MR vs -0.031 for lumpectomy vs -0.033 for mastectomy only; P = .001). Neoadjuvant therapy was associated with a longitudinal decline in distress for patients treated with lumpectomy (-1.023) and mastectomy only (-0.964). Over time, ductal carcinoma in situ (-0.503) and black race (-1.198) were found to be associated with declining distress among patients treated with lumpectomy and MR, respectively, whereas divorced patients who were treated with mastectomy only (0.948) and single patients treated with lumpectomy (0.476) experienced increased distress (all P < .05).

CONCLUSIONS

When examined longitudinally in consecutive patients, the NCCN DT can provide patient-reported data to inform expectations and guide targeted support for patients with breast cancer.

National trends in contralateral prophylactic mastectomy in women with locally advanced breast cancer

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Women with unilateral early-stage breast cancer are increasingly choosing contralateral prophylactic mastectomy (CPM) despite the absence of survival benefits and increased risk of surgical complications. Data are lacking on whether this trend extends to women with clinically locally advanced nonmetastatic (cT4M0) cancer. This study aims to estimate national CPM trends in women with unilateral cT4M0 breast cancer.

METHODS

Women aged ≥ 18 years, who underwent mastectomy during 2004 to 2014 for unilateral cT4M0 breast cancer were identified using the National Cancer Database and grouped as all locally advanced (T4), chest wall invasion, skin nodule/ulceration, or both (T4abc), and inflammatory (T4d) cancer. Poisson regression for trends and logistic modeling for predictors of CPM were performed.

RESULTS

Of 23 943 women, 41% had T4abc disease and 35% T4d. Cumulative CPM rates were 15%, 23%, and 18%, for the T4abc, T4d, and all T4 groups, respectively. Trend analysis revealed a significant upsurge in CPM demonstrating 12% annual growth for T4abc tumors, 8% for T4d and 9% for all T4 (all P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Increasing numbers of women with unilateral cT4M0 breast cancer are undergoing CPM. This rising trend warrants further research to understand stakeholders' preferences in surgical decision-making for women with locally advanced breast cancer.