Level II Oncoplastic Surgery as an Alternative Option to Mastectomy with Immediate Breast Reconstruction in the Neoadjuvant Setting: A Multidisciplinary Single Center Experience

Young Women with Early-Stage Breast Cancer Treated with Upfront Surgery: Overview of Oncological Outcomes

Background: Breast cancer in young women aged < 40 years is rare and often aggressive with less favorable survival rates. The lack of systematic screening, later stage at diagnosis, and a more aggressive disease biology may all contribute to their poor prognosis. Data on the best management remain conflicting, especially those regarding surgical management, either breast-conserving or mastectomy. To our knowledge, there are limited studies surrounding the treatment of young women with early breast cancer, and this analysis evaluated the oncological outcomes for those patients who underwent surgery upfront. Methods: We conducted a retrospective study including 130 young women with early breast cancer from a total of 373 consecutive patients treated with upfront surgery between January 2016 and December 2021 at our institution. Local recurrence-free survival (LR-FS), distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS), disease-free survival (DFS), and overall survival (OS) were evaluated. Results: The median follow-up was 61.1 months (range, 25-95). A total of 92 (70.8%) patients underwent breast-conserving surgery, while 38 (29.2%) patients underwent conservative mastectomy with immediate implant breast reconstruction. In total, 8 of 130 patients (6.2%) developed a local recurrence in the treated breast, an7 (5.4%) patients presented distant metastasis. Overall, two (1.6%) patients died due to breast cancer recurrence. Conclusions: The results of our study interestingly support breast-conserving surgery in young patients with early-stage breast cancer. While appropriate breast-conserving surgery can achieve favorable oncological outcomes and can always be considered a valid alternative to conservative mastectomy in upfront surgery, a younger age at diagnosis should never be used alone to choose the type of surgery.

Locally advanced breast cancer patients should be cautious about the immediate breast reconstruction after mastectomy: a pooling analysis of safety and efficacy

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this study was to compare safety and efficacy outcomes between immediate breast reconstruction (IBR) and mastectomy alone in locally advanced breast cancer patients.

METHODS

We conducted a comprehensive literature search of PUBMED, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases. The primary outcomes evaluated were overall survival, disease-free survival, and local recurrence. The secondary outcome was the incidence of surgical complications. All data were analyzed using Review Manager 5.3.

RESULTS

Sixteen studies, involving 15,364 participants were included in this meta-analysis. Pooled data demonstrated that patients underwent IBR were more likely to experience surgical complications than those underwent mastectomy alone (HR: 3.96, 95%CI [1.07,14.67], p = 0.04). No significant difference was found in overall survival (HR: 0.94, 95%CI [0.73,1.20], p = 0.62), disease-free survival (HR: 1.03, 95%CI [0.83,1.27], p = 0.81), or breast cancer specific survival (HR: 0.93, 95%CI [0.71,1.21], p = 0.57) between IBR group and Non-IBR group.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study demonstrates that IBR after mastectomy does not affect the overall survival and disease-free survival of locally advanced breast cancer patients. However, IBR brings with it a nonnegligible higher risk of complications and needs to be fully evaluated and carefully decided.

The Role of Human Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor 2 (HER2)-Targeted Therapies in Early-Stage Breast Cancer: Current Practices, Treatment De-escalation, and Future Prospects

Human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-targeted therapy has transformed the treatment paradigm for early-stage HER2-positive breast cancer, providing personalized and effective interventions. This comprehensive review delves into the current state of HER2-targeted therapies, emphasizing pivotal clinical trials that have demonstrated their substantial impact on long-term outcomes. Combination therapies that integrate HER2-targeted agents with chemotherapy exhibit enhanced tumor responses, particularly in neoadjuvant settings. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) is explored for its role in tumor downsizing, facilitating breast-conserving surgery (BCS), and incorporating oncoplastic solutions to address both oncologic efficacy and aesthetic outcomes. Innovative axillary management post-NACT, such as targeted axillary dissection (TAD), is discussed for minimizing morbidity. The review further explores the delicate balance between maximal therapy and de-escalation, reflecting recent trends in treatment approaches. The therapeutic landscape of HER2-low breast cancer is examined, highlighting considerations in HER2-positive breast cancer with BReast CAncer gene (BRCA) mutations. Emerging immunotherapeutic strategies, encompassing immune checkpoint inhibitors and chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy, are discussed in the context of their potential integration into treatment paradigms. In conclusion, the evolving landscape of HER2-positive early-stage breast cancer treatment, characterized by targeted therapies and multidisciplinary approaches, underscores the need for ongoing research and collaborative efforts. The aim is to refine treatment strategies and enhance patient outcomes in this dynamic and rapidly evolving field.

Impact of Oncoplastic Surgery on Oncologic Outcomes in Patients with Breast Cancer

Background

For patients with breast cancer, oncoplastic surgery (OPS) serves as a valuable technique that allows for immediate reconstruction at the time of resection. While the aim of OPS is to improve breast cosmesis, it is critical to ensure OPS does not negatively impact appropriate cancer treatment.

Methods

Based on current literature, this study provides a broad overview on the potential oncologic advantages of OPS for patients diagnosed with breast cancer.

Results

OPS has been shown to be a safe and reliable approach with oncologic advantages. More specifically, OPS broadens the indications for breast conservation therapy (BCT); allows for a more generous margin of resection, thus decreasing rates of re-excision; and provides the opportunity to sample additional breast tissue, which may detect occult disease. Reduction mammaplasty may also decrease the risk for developing breast cancer. Importantly, in the era of multimodality therapy, long-term oncologic outcomes and postoperative surveillance algorithms appear to be similar when comparing patients who undergo OPS and BCT.

Conclusions

For patients with breast cancer, oncoplastic surgery has emerged as a valuable technique to improve breast cosmesis while achieving optimal oncologic outcomes. As the landscape of breast oncology continues to evolve, it is critical for a multidisciplinary team to be involved to guide management and reconstructive strategies.

An Innovative Scoring System to Select the Optimal Surgery in Breast Cancer after Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy

INTRODUCTION

The selection of surgery post-neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) is difficult and based on surgeons' expertise. The aim of this study was to create a post-NEoadjuvant Score System (pNESSy) to choose surgery, optimizing oncological and aesthetical outcomes.

METHODS

Patients (stage I-III) underwent surgery post-NACT (breast-conserving surgery (BCS), oncoplastic surgery (OPS), and conservative mastectomy (CMR) were included. Data selected were BRCA mutation, ptosis, breast volume, radiological response, MRI, and mammography pre- and post-NACT prediction of excised breast area. pNESSy was created using the association between these data and surgery. Area under the curve (AUC) was assessed. Patients were divided into groups according to correspondence (G1) or discrepancy (G2) between score and surgery; oncological and aesthetic outcomes were analyzed.

RESULTS

A total of 255 patients were included (118 BCS, 49 OPS, 88 CMR). pNESSy between 6.896-8.724 was predictive for BCS, 8.725-9.375 for OPS, and 9.376-14.245 for CMR; AUC was, respectively, 0.835, 0.766, and 0.825. G1 presented a lower incidence of involved margins (5-14.7%; p = 0.010), a better locoregional disease-free survival (98.8-88.9%; p < 0.001) and a better overall survival (96.1-86.5%; p = 0.017), and a better satisfaction with breasts (39.8-27.5%; p = 0.017) and physical wellbeing (93.5-73.6%; p = 0.001).

CONCLUSION

A score system based on clinical and radiological features was created to select the optimal surgery post-NACT and improve oncological and aesthetic outcomes.

The Evolving Approach to Breast Cancer: Moving toward De-Escalating Treatment and Personalized Medicine

In recent years, more attention has been directed to personalized medicine in the management and treatment of breast cancer (BC) [...].

Local Treatment of Triple-Negative Breast Cancer: Is Mastectomy Superior to Breast-Conserving Surgery?

Triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) is an aggressive type of breast cancer that lacks the expression of estrogen receptor (ER), progesterone receptor (PR) and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2). TNBC accounts for about 15% of breast cancers and has a poorer prognosis as compared with other subtypes of breast cancer. The more rapid onset of this cancer and its aggressiveness have often convinced breast surgeons that mastectomy could provide better oncological results. However, there is no relevant clinical trial that has assessed differences between breast-conserving surgery (BCS) and mastectomy (M) in these patients. This population-based study aimed to investigate the distinct outcomes between conservative treatment and M in a case series of 289 patients with TNBC treated over a 9-year period. This monocentric study retrospectively evaluated patients with TNBC who underwent upfront surgery at Fondazione Policlinico Agostino Gemelli IRCCS, in Rome, between 1 January 2013 and 31 December 2021. First, the patients were divided in two groups according to the surgical treatment received: BCS vs. M. Then, the patients were stratified into four risk subclasses based on combined T and N pathological staging (T1N0, T1N+, T2-4N0 and T2-4N+). The primary endpoint of the study was to evaluate locoregional disease-free survival (LR-DFS), distant disease-free survival (DDFS) and overall survival (OS) in the different subclasses. We analyzed 289 patients that underwent either breast-conserving surgery (247/289, 85.5%) or mastectomy (42/289, 14.5%). After a median follow-up of 43.2 months (49.7, 22.2-74.3), 28 patients (9.6%) developed a locoregional recurrence, 27 patients (9.0%) showed systemic recurrence and 19 patients (6.5%) died. No significant differences due to type of surgical treatment were observed in the different risk subclasses in terms of locoregional disease-free survival, distant disease-free survival and overall survival. With the limits of a retrospective, single-center study, our data seem to indicate similar efficacy in terms of locoregional control, distant metastasis and overall survival with the use of upfront breast-conserving surgery as compared with radical surgery in the treatment of TNBC. Therefore, TNBC should not be considered to be a contraindication for breast conservation.

Conservative Surgery in cT4 Breast Cancer: Single-Center Experience in the Neoadjuvant Setting

BACKGROUND

The diffusion of screening programs has resulted in a decrease of cT4 breast cancer diagnosis. The standard care for cT4 was neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NA), surgery, and locoregional or adjuvant systemic therapies. NA allows two outcomes: 1. improve survival rates, and 2. de-escalation of surgery. This de-escalation has allowed the introduction of conservative breast surgery (CBS). We evaluate the possibility of submitting cT4 patients to CBS instead of radical breast surgery (RBS) by assessing the risk of locoregional disease-free survival, (LR-DFS) distant disease-free survival (DDFS), and overall survival (OS).

METHODS

This monocentric, retrospective study evaluated cT4 patients submitted to NA and surgery between January 2014 and July 2021. The study population included patients undergoing CBS or RBS without immediate reconstruction. Survival curves were obtained using the Kaplan-Meyer method and compared using a Log Rank test.

RESULTS

At a follow-up of 43.7 months, LR-DFS was 70% and 75.9%, respectively, in CBS and RBS (p = 0.420). DDFS was 67.8% and 29.7%, respectively, (p = 0.122). OS was 69.8% and 59.8%, respectively, (p = 0.311).

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with major or complete response to NA, CBS can be considered a safe alternative to RBS in the treatment of cT4a-d stage. In patients with poor response to NA, RBS remained the best surgical choice.