Multicentric breast cancer with heterogeneous histopathology: a multidisciplinary review

Increasing opportunities for breast-conserving therapy in multiple ipsilateral breast cancer: Dutch nationwide study

INTRODUCTION

An increasing number of breast cancer patients undergo breast-conserving surgery (BCS), but multiple ipsilateral breast cancer (MIBC) is still considered a relative contraindication for breast conservation. This study provides an update on trends in the surgical management for MIBC over a 10-year period.

METHODS

Nationwide data from the Netherlands Cancer Registration of all patients diagnosed with breast cancer between 2011 and 2021 were analysed. The primary outcomes of this study were the incidence of MIBC and the trend in breast surgery type among patients between 2011 and 2021. Secondary outcomes were the positive resection margin rates in patients treated with BCS, the proportion of patients requiring re-excision and overall survival.

RESULTS

In total, 114 433 patients (83%) with unifocal breast cancer and 23 932 patients (17%) with MIBC were identified. The incidence of MIBC was stable (17%) over the years. Overall BCS rates, both primary and after neoadjuvant chemotherapy, increased in MIBC from 29% in 2011 to 41% in 2021. Re-excision was performed in 1348 patients (n = 8455, 16%). The 5-year OS estimate for patients with MIBC treated with BCS was 93%. The pathological complete response (pCR) in MIBC patients treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by mastectomy was 23%.

CONCLUSION

The breast conservation rate in MIBC has increased over the last decade. In addition, 23% of MIBC patients treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by mastectomy achieved a pCR. This suggests increasing opportunities for even more BCS in MIBC.

Association of Molecular Biomarker Heterogeneity With Treatment Pattern and Disease Outcomes in Multifocal or Multicentric Breast Cancer

Purpose

This study aimed to evaluate the rates of estrogen receptor (ER), progesterone receptor (PR), human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2), and Ki67 heterogeneity in multifocal or multicentric breast cancer (MMBC) and its association with treatment pattern and disease outcomes.

Methods

MMBC patients with ER, PR, HER2, and Ki67 results for each tumor focus were retrospectively analyzed using Kappa test and categorized into the homogeneous group (Homo group) and the heterogeneous group (Hetero group). Chi-square tests were performed to compare the clinical features and treatment options between the groups. Disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) rates were estimated from Kaplan–Meier curves and compared between two groups.

Results

A total of 387 patients were included, and 93 (24.0%) were classified into the Hetero group. Adjuvant endocrine therapy was more frequently assigned for patients in the Hetero group than in the Homo group (84.9% vs. 71.7%, p = 0.046). There was no difference in terms of adjuvant anti-HER2 therapy (28.3% vs. 19.6%, p = 0.196) and chemotherapy (69.9% vs. 69.8%, p = 0.987) usage between the two groups. At a median follow-up of 36 months, DFS rates were 81.2% for the Hetero group and 96.5% for the Homo group (p = 0.041; adjusted HR, 2.95; 95% CI, 1.04–8.37). The estimated 3-year OS rates for the groups were 95.8% and 99.5%, respectively (p = 0.059; adjusted HR, 5.36; 95% CI, 0.97–29.69).

Conclusion

Heterogeneity of ER, PR, HER2, or Ki67 was present in 24.0% patients with MMBC. Biomarkers heterogeneity influenced adjuvant endocrine therapy usage and was associated with worse disease outcomes, indicating further clinical evaluation.

Systematic review and meta-analysis of the efficacy and safety of psychological intervention nursing on the quality of life of breast cancer patients

BACKGROUND

With the increasing incidence of breast cancer, breast cancer patients suffered from psychological problems in different degrees. There was no unified conclusion on whether psychological intervention nursing can improve the quality of life (QOL) of breast cancer patients. This meta-analysis aimed to explore the impact of psychological nursing interventions on the quality of life of breast cancer patients.

METHODS

We retrieved related articles from both English databases (including PubMed, Medline, and Embase) and Chinese databases [including China Biology Medicine DISC (CBMdisc), China National Knowledge Network (CNKI), Wanfang, and China Science and Technology Journal Database (VIP]. All of the databases were searched using a combination of the following search terms: psychological intervention nursing, psychological nursing, psychotherapy, breast loss, radical mastectomy, modified radical mastectomy, and quality of life. The quality of the included literature was assessed using RevMan 5.3 provided by the Cochrane system.

RESULTS

A total of 12 articles were included, and the meta-analysis results showed that the quality of life questionnaire core 30 (QLQ-C 30) was evaluated, and there was heterogeneity among the studies (P<0.00001, I2=92%). There was no statistical difference between the intervention group and the control group [standardized mean difference (SMD) =0.58, 95% confidence interval (CI): -0.11-1.27, P=0.10]. Short Form 36 Questionnaire (SF-36) was evaluated, and there was no heterogeneity among the studies (P=0.40, I2=0%). The fixed effect model was used for Meta-analysis. There were statistical differences between the intervention group and the control group [mean difference (MD) =6.12, 95% CI: 5.17-7.06, P<0.00001]. According to the evaluation of functional assessment of cancer therapy (FACT), there is heterogeneity among the studies (P=0.003, I2=83%). There were statistical differences between the intervention group and the control group (MD =12.74, 95% CI: 6.34-19.14, P<0.0001).

DISCUSSION

Psychological nursing intervention can significantly improve the quality of life of patients with missing breasts undergoing radical mastectomy, which has certain guiding significance for the formulation of clinically effective nursing measures.

Breast Cancer Surgery: New Issues

Since ancient times, breast cancer treatment has crucially relied on surgeons and clinicians making great efforts to find increasingly conservative approaches to cure the tumor. In the Halstedian era (mid-late 19th century), the predominant practice consisted of the radical and disfiguring removal of the breast, much to the detriment of women's psycho-physical well-being. Thanks to enlightened scientists such as Professor Umberto Veronesi, breast cancer surgery has since impressively progressed and adopted a much more conservative approach. Over the last three decades, a better understanding of tumor biology and of its significant biomarkers has made the assessment of genetic and molecular profiles increasingly important. At the same time, neo-adjuvant treatments have been introduced, and great improvements in genetics, imaging technologies and in both oncological and reconstructive surgical techniques have been made. The future of breast cancer management must now rest on an ever more precise and targeted type of surgery that, through an increasingly multidisciplinary and personalized approach, can ensure oncological radicality while offering the best possible quality of life.

Multifocality and Multicentrality in Breast Cancer: Comparison of the Efficiency of Mammography, Contrast-Enhanced Spectral Mammography, and Magnetic Resonance Imaging in a Group of Patients with Primarily Operable Breast Cancer

BACKGROUND

The multifocality and multicentrality of breast cancer (MFMCC) are the significant aspects that determine a specialist's choice between applying breast-conserving therapy (BCT) or performing a mastectomy. This study aimed to assess the usefulness of mammography (MG), contrast-enhanced spectral mammography (CESM), and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in women diagnosed with breast cancer before qualifying for surgical intervention to visualize other (additional) cancer foci.

METHODS

The study included 60 breast cancer cases out of 630 patients initially who underwent surgery due to breast cancer from January 2015 to April 2019. MG, CESM, and MRI were compared with each other in terms of the presence of MFMCC and assessed for compliance with the postoperative histopathological examination (HP).

RESULTS

Histopathological examination confirmed the presence of MFMCC in 33/60 (55%) patients. The sensitivity of MG in detecting MFMCC was 50%, and its specificity was 95.83%. For CESM, the sensitivity was 85.29%, and the specificity was 96.15%. For MRI, all the above-mentioned parameters were higher as follows: sensitivity-91.18%; specificity-92.31%.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with MFMCC, both CESM and MRI are highly sensitive in the detection of additional cancer foci. Both CESM and MRI change the extent of surgical intervention in every fourth patient.

Oncoplastic Breast-Conserving Surgery for Synchronous Multicentric and Multifocal Tumors: Is It Oncologically Safe? A Retrospective Matched-Cohort Analysis

Background

Oncoplastic surgery is a well-established approach that combines breast-conserving treatment for breast cancer and plastic surgery techniques. Although this approach already has been described for multicentric and multifocal tumors, no long-term oncologic follow-up evaluation and no comparison with patients undergoing mastectomy have been published. This study aimed to evaluate whether oncoplastic surgery is a safe and reliable treatment for managing invasive primary multicentric and multifocal breast cancer.

Methods

The study compared a consecutive series of 100 patients with multicentric or multifocal tumors who had undergone oncoplastic surgery (study group) with 100 patients who had multicentric or multifocal tumors and had undergone mastectomy (control group) during a prolonged period. The end points evaluated were disease-free survival (DFS), overall survival (OS), cumulative incidence of local recurrence (CI-L), regional recurrence (CI-R), and distant recurrence (CI-D), all measured from the date of surgery.

Results

The OS and DFS were similar between the two groups. The incidence of local events was higher in the oncoplastic group, whereas the incidence of regional events was slightly higher in the mastectomy group. These differences were not statistically significant. The cumulative incidence of distant events was similar between the two groups.

Conclusions

To the authors’ knowledge, the current study provides the best available evidence suggesting that the oncoplastic approach is a safe and reliable treatment for managing invasive multifocal and multicentric breast cancers.

A Survey of Breast Pathologists' Practice in Staging Multiple Foci of Invasive Carcinoma

BACKGROUND

The American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) staging system is the reference standard for describing the extent of neoplastic disease on the basis of the size of primary tumor (T), and the presence of regional lymph node (N) involvement and distant metastasis (M). Multiple foci of invasive breast carcinoma may pose staging challenges to the reporting pathologist. We set out to evaluate the practice of local breast pathologists with regard to staging of multiple foci of invasive carcinoma.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Breast pathologists were surveyed at a Community of Interest in Breast Pathology meeting. The live voting survey contained 6 case-based scenarios of multiple foci of invasive mammary carcinoma of the same or different histologic type and with unilateral or bilateral involvement. A supporting illustration was provided for each case.

RESULTS

There was poor interobserver agreement with no consensus reached among the respondents in any of the cases. Staging choices varied from staging tumors together irrespective of histology or procedure type to staging tumors of the same histologic type together, or staging each tumor focus separately. Confusion was particularly evident when tumor foci with different histologic types were present.

CONCLUSION

Inconsistencies exist in the reporting of AJCC pathologic TNM stage for multiple foci of invasive carcinoma. The results serve as a reminder that education and strict adherence to the AJCC guidelines is essential for establishing standard practice in order to provide accurate cancer staging and ensure optimal clinical management.

A "Third Wheel" Effect in Health Decision Making Involving Artificial Entities: A Psychological Perspective

In the near future, Artificial Intelligence (AI) is expected to participate more and more in decision making processes, in contexts ranging from healthcare to politics. For example, in the healthcare context, doctors will increasingly use AI and machine learning devices to improve precision in diagnosis and to identify therapy regimens. One hot topic regards the necessity for health professionals to adapt shared decision making with patients to include the contribution of AI into clinical practice, such as acting as mediators between the patient with his or her healthcare needs and the recommendations coming from artificial entities. In this scenario, a "third wheel" effect may intervene, potentially affecting the effectiveness of shared decision making in three different ways: first, clinical decisions could be delayed or paralyzed when AI recommendations are difficult to understand or to explain to patients; second, patients' symptomatology and medical diagnosis could be misinterpreted when adapting them to AI classifications; third, there may be confusion about the roles and responsibilities of the protagonists in the healthcare process (e.g., Who really has authority?). This contribution delineates such effects and tries to identify the impact of AI technology on the healthcare process, with a focus on future medical practice.