Clinical Trials for the Surgical Oncologist: Opportunities and Hurdles

Long-term outcome in patients with nodal-positive breast cancer treated with sentinel lymph node biopsy alone after neoadjuvant chemotherapy

PURPOSE

Sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) has yet to be accepted as the standard staging procedure in node positive (cN1) breast cancer patients who had clinical complete response in the axilla (cN0) following neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC), due to the presumed high false negative rate associated with SLNB in such scenario. This study aimed to determine whether there is a significant difference in the axillary recurrence rate (ARR) and long-term survival in this group of patients, receiving SLNB alone versus axillary lymph node dissection (ALND).

METHODS

A retrospective cohort of cN1 patients who were rendered cN0 by NAC from January 2014 to December 2018 were identified from the Asan Medical Center database. Patients' characteristics and outcomes were collected and analyzed.

RESULTS

902 cN1 patients treated with NAC and turned cN0 were identified. 477 (52.9%) patients achieved complete pathological response in the axilla (ypN0). At a median follow up of 65 months, ARR was 3.2% in the SLNB only group and 1.8% in the ALND group (p = 0.398). DFS and OS were significantly worse in patients with ALND as compared to patients with SLNB only (p = 0.011 and 0.047, respectively). We noted more patients in the ALND group had T3-4 tumor. In the subgroup analysis, we showed that in the T1-2 subgroup (n = 377), there was no statistically significant difference in DFS and OS (p = 0.242 and 0.671, respectively) between SLNB only and ALND group.

CONCLUSION

Our findings suggest that cN1 patients who were converted to ypN0 following NAC may be safely treated with SLNB only.

The Development of Investigator-Initiated Clinical Trials in Surgical Oncology

Investigator-initiated trials (IITs) are designed by principal investigators who identify important, unaddressed clinical gaps and opportunities to answer these questions through clinical trials. Surgical oncologists are poised to lead IITs due to their multidisciplinary clinical practice and substantial research background. The process of developing, organizing, and implementing IITs is multifaceted and involves important steps including (but not limited to) navigating regulatory requirements, obtaining funding, and meeting enrollment targets. Here, the authors explore the steps, methodology, and barriers of IIT development by surgical oncologists and highlight the importance of IITs in oncology.

The Impact of COVID-19 on National Clinical Trials Network Breast Cancer Trials

Purpose of review

The COVID-19 pandemic has had a devastating impact on virtually all aspects of the healthcare system, including oncology clinical trials. The purpose of this review is to describe the impact of the pandemic on national breast cancer clinical trials.

Recent findings

Of the 61 breast cancer–specific cooperative group breast cancer clinical trials open to accrual during the pandemic, 32% of them received supplementary tailored guidance regarding current and foreseeable challenges for clinical sites and investigators due to COVID-19. Many clinical trial sites reported decreases in enrollment and accrual, drastic disruptions to protocol, and challenges related to research infrastructure, staff burden, and assuring social distancing.

Summary

The challenges early in pandemic led to many operational changes in clinical trials, including use of electronic consent for enrollment, telemedicine visits, and mail order pharmacy. The pandemic highlighted aspects of breast cancer clinical trial that could be modernized while maintaining research integrity.