Survival Comparisons between Breast Conservation Surgery and Mastectomy Followed by Postoperative Radiotherapy in Stage I-III Breast Cancer Patients: Analysis of the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (Seer) Program Database

Systematic construction of composite radiation therapy dataset using automated data pipeline for prognosis prediction

BACKGROUND

Existing research on medical data has primarily focused on single time-points or single-modality data. This study aims to collect all data generated during radiotherapy comprehensively to improve the treatment and prognosis of patients with malignant tumors.

METHODS

The data collected from each medical institution were transmitted to the lead organization, where they underwent a file integrity check and were processed using a data pipeline. The key metadata of the collected data were compiled into a database, which were examined by data analysts to identify outliers based on theoretical and institution-specific characteristics. Appropriate filters were applied and the filtered data were subsequently reviewed by artificial intelligence (AI)-based models and researchers for radiotherapy organ slides. Finally, they were annotated by specialists.

RESULTS

The final dataset included 30,136 three-dimensional cone-beam computed tomography scans and 5,019 tabular data entries collected from 5,019 patients. It comprised 2,043,162 Digital Imaging and Communications in Medicine-format files with a total file size of 832 GB. Quality verification of the data using AI models revealed high classification performance for most organs, with relatively poor performance for the rectum. Overall, the macro AUROC value was 0.947.

CONCLUSIONS

This study implemented an automated data pipeline and AI-based verification to enhance the quality of collected radiotherapy data. The constructed dataset can be utilized for various types of future research and is expected to contribute to the improvement of radiotherapy efficiency.

Revisiting surgical margins for invasive breast cancer patients treated with breast conservation therapy - Evidence for adopting a 1 mm negative width

Clinical trials have demonstrated conclusively the non-inferiority of breast-conserving surgery followed by breast radiation therapy (BCT) compared with mastectomy for the treatment of early-stage invasive breast cancer (BC). The definition of the required surgical margin to ensure adequate removal of the cancer by BCT to obtain an acceptable low local recurrence (LR) rate remains controversial. Meta-analyses published by Houssami et al. in 2010 and 2014 demonstrated significantly lower LR rates for patients with a negative margin compared with those with positive (ink on tumour) or close (defined as ≤1 mm or ≤2 mm) margins. Neither meta-analysis addressed whether 'no ink on tumour' was adequate to define a negative margin because of a lack of data. Nevertheless, in 2014, the Society of Surgical Oncology (SSO) and the American Society for Radiation Oncology (ASTRO) with advice from pathologists reviewed these data together and published guidelines recommending that a margin of 'no ink on tumour' was sufficient to define a clear margin in BCT. Subsequently, clinical practice has varied with some national and international bodies endorsing 'no ink on tumour', whilst others have recommended a ≥1 mm margin as acceptable margins for BCT. A more recent meta-analysis conducted by Bundred and colleagues in 2022 did have sufficient data to compare 'no ink on tumour' and 1 mm and concluded that 1 mm rather than 'no ink on tumour', should be used as a minimum negative margin, and recommended that international guidelines be revised. The current review presents a balanced assessment of the evidence relating margin width and local recurrence after BCT. This review concludes that guidelines should consider re-defining a negative margin as ≥1 mm rather than 'no ink on tumour' in the context of BCT, recognising there will be variation to tailor therapy for any individual patient situation to ensure optimal patient care.

Are Current Survival Prediction Tools Useful When Treating Subsequent Skeletal-related Events From Bone Metastases?

BACKGROUND

Bone metastasis in advanced cancer is challenging because of pain, functional issues, and reduced life expectancy. Treatment planning is complex, with consideration of factors such as location, symptoms, and prognosis. Prognostic models help guide treatment choices, with Skeletal Oncology Research Group machine-learning algorithms (SORG-MLAs) showing promise in predicting survival for initial spinal metastases and extremity metastases treated with surgery or radiotherapy. Improved therapies extend patient lifespans, increasing the risk of subsequent skeletal-related events (SREs). Patients experiencing subsequent SREs often suffer from disease progression, indicating a deteriorating condition. For these patients, a thorough evaluation, including accurate survival prediction, is essential to determine the most appropriate treatment and avoid aggressive surgical treatment for patients with a poor survival likelihood. Patients experiencing subsequent SREs often suffer from disease progression, indicating a deteriorating condition. However, some variables in the SORG prediction model, such as tumor histology, visceral metastasis, and previous systemic therapies, might remain consistent between initial and subsequent SREs. Given the prognostic difference between patients with and without a subsequent SRE, the efficacy of established prognostic models-originally designed for individuals with an initial SRE-in addressing a subsequent SRE remains uncertain. Therefore, it is crucial to verify the model's utility for subsequent SREs.

QUESTION/PURPOSE

We aimed to evaluate the reliability of the SORG-MLAs for survival prediction in patients undergoing surgery or radiotherapy for a subsequent SRE for whom both the initial and subsequent SREs occurred in the spine or extremities.

METHODS

We retrospectively included 738 patients who were 20 years or older who received surgery or radiotherapy for initial and subsequent SREs at a tertiary referral center and local hospital in Taiwan between 2010 and 2019. We excluded 74 patients whose initial SRE was in the spine and in whom the subsequent SRE occurred in the extremities and 37 patients whose initial SRE was in the extremities and the subsequent SRE was in the spine. The rationale was that different SORG-MLAs were exclusively designed for patients who had an initial spine metastasis and those who had an initial extremity metastasis, irrespective of whether they experienced metastatic events in other areas (for example, a patient experiencing an extremity SRE before his or her spinal SRE would also be regarded as a candidate for an initial spinal SRE). Because these patients were already validated in previous studies, we excluded them in case we overestimated our result. Five patients with malignant primary bone tumors and 38 patients in whom the metastasis's origin could not be identified were excluded, leaving 584 patients for analysis. The 584 included patients were categorized into two subgroups based on the location of initial and subsequent SREs: the spine group (68% [399]) and extremity group (32% [185]). No patients were lost to follow-up. Patient data at the time they presented with a subsequent SRE were collected, and survival predictions at this timepoint were calculated using the SORG-MLAs. Multiple imputation with the Missforest technique was conducted five times to impute the missing proportions of each predictor. The effectiveness of SORG-MLAs was gauged through several statistical measures, including discrimination (measured by the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve [AUC]), calibration, overall performance (Brier score), and decision curve analysis. Discrimination refers to the model's ability to differentiate between those with the event and those without the event. An AUC ranges from 0.5 to 1.0, with 0.5 indicating the worst discrimination and 1.0 indicating perfect discrimination. An AUC of 0.7 is considered clinically acceptable discrimination. Calibration is the comparison between the frequency of observed events and the predicted probabilities. In an ideal calibration, the observed and predicted survival rates should be congruent. The logarithm of observed-to-expected survival ratio [log(O:E)] offers insight into the model's overall calibration by considering the total number of observed (O) and expected (E) events. The Brier score measures the mean squared difference between the predicted probability of possible outcomes for each individual and the observed outcomes, ranging from 0 to 1, with 0 indicating perfect overall performance and 1 indicating the worst performance. Moreover, the prevalence of the outcome should be considered, so a null-model Brier score was also calculated by assigning a probability equal to the prevalence of the outcome (in this case, the actual survival rate) to each patient. The benefit of the prediction model is determined by comparing its Brier score with that of the null model. If a prediction model's Brier score is lower than the null model's Brier score, the prediction model is deemed as having good performance. A decision curve analysis was performed for models to evaluate the "net benefit," which weighs the true positive rate over the false positive rate against the "threshold probabilities," the ratio of risk over benefit after an intervention was derived based on a comprehensive clinical evaluation and a well-discussed shared-decision process. A good predictive model should yield a higher net benefit than default strategies (treating all patients and treating no patients) across a range of threshold probabilities.

RESULTS

For the spine group, the algorithms displayed acceptable AUC results (median AUCs of 0.69 to 0.72) for 42-day, 90-day, and 1-year survival predictions after treatment for a subsequent SRE. In contrast, the extremity group showed median AUCs ranging from 0.65 to 0.73 for the corresponding survival periods. All Brier scores were lower than those of their null model, indicating the SORG-MLAs' good overall performances for both cohorts. The SORG-MLAs yielded a net benefit for both cohorts; however, they overestimated 1-year survival probabilities in patients with a subsequent SRE in the spine, with a median log(O:E) of -0.60 (95% confidence interval -0.77 to -0.42).

CONCLUSION

The SORG-MLAs maintain satisfactory discriminatory capacity and offer considerable net benefits through decision curve analysis, indicating their continued viability as prediction tools in this clinical context. However, the algorithms overestimate 1-year survival rates for patients with a subsequent SRE of the spine, warranting consideration of specific patient groups. Clinicians and surgeons should exercise caution when using the SORG-MLAs for survival prediction in these patients and remain aware of potential mispredictions when tailoring treatment plans, with a preference for less invasive treatments. Ultimately, this study emphasizes the importance of enhancing prognostic algorithms and developing innovative tools for patients with subsequent SREs as the life expectancy in patients with bone metastases continues to improve and healthcare providers will encounter these patients more often in daily practice.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III, prognostic study.

Oncoplastic Surgery Outcomes in the Older Breast Cancer Population: A Matched-Cohort Comparison Study

BACKGROUND

Oncoplastic breast surgery (OBS) is a form of breast conservation surgery (BCS) that involves a partial mastectomy followed by immediate volume displacement or volume replacement surgical techniques. To date, there are few studies evaluating OBS in older patients. Therefore, we sought to determine if outcomes differed between patients 65 years and older versus younger patients who underwent oncoplastic surgical procedures.

METHODS

A retrospective chart review was performed for all oncoplastic breast operations within a single health system from 2015 to 2021. Patients were stratified by age, with patients 65 years and older (OBS65+) identified and then matched with younger patients (OBS <65) based on BMI. Primary outcomes were positive margin rates and overall complication rates; secondary outcomes were locoregional recurrence (LR), distant recurrence (DR), disease-free survival (DFS), overall survival (OS), and long-term breast asymmetry.

RESULTS

A total of 217 patients underwent OBS over the 6-year period, with 22% being OBS65+. Preoperatively, older patients experienced higher American Anesthesia (ASA) scores, Charlson Co-morbidity index (CCI) scores, and higher rates of diabetes mellitus, hypertension, and grade 3 breast ptosis. Despite this, no significant differences were found between primary or secondary outcomes compared to younger patients undergoing the same procedures.

CONCLUSIONS

Oncoplastic breast reconstruction is a safe option in patients 65 years and older, with overall similar recurrence rates, positive margin rates, and survival when compared to younger patients. Although the older cohort of patients had greater preoperative risk, there was no difference in overall surgical complication rates or outcomes. Supporting the argument that all oncoplastic breast reconstruction techniques should be offered to eligible patients, irrespective of age.

Patient-Reported Outcomes and Complication Profiles of Implant-Based Breast Reconstruction in Patients With Postmastectomy Radiation Therapy

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to investigate the patient-reported outcomes (PROs) and complications of distinct implant-based breast reconstruction modality for patients with postmastectomy radiation therapy (PMRT).

METHODS

A retrospective review was conducted on breast cancer patients with stage II-III disease who performed implant-based breast reconstruction following with PMRT between September 2016 and April 2022. The patients were categorized into two matched groups: (1) patients receiving prepectoral breast reconstruction (PBR) or (2) subpectoral breast reconstruction (SBR) followed by PMRT. Following reconstruction, the patients were further compared for PMRT with the tissue expander (PMRT-TE) versus PMRT with permanent implant (PMRT-PI). PROs were measured with BREAST-Q questionnaire. Early and late complications were recorded and analyzed.

RESULTS

A total of 55 eligible patients were recruited. Patients who underwent PBR reported significantly higher satisfaction with breasts scores (P = 0.003) compared with the SBR group. The PMRT-TE group had higher satisfaction with breasts (P = 0.001) but lower physical well-being (P = 0.029) scores compared with PMRT-PI group. Moreover, patients in SBR cohort had a higher risk of capsular contracture (Baker grade III or IV) (20.5% vs 6.3%) and implant dislocation (48.7% vs 12.5%) than patients in PBR cohort. Patients in PMRT-PI group had a slightly higher rate of capsular contracture (Baker grade III or IV) than PMRT-TE group (20.8% vs 12.9%).

CONCLUSIONS

PBR was associated with lower rates of late complications, especially for implant dislocation, and higher satisfaction with breasts scores compared to SBR. In addition, compared to PMRT-TE with PMRT-PI, patients in PMRT-TE cohort reported superior PROs of satisfaction with breasts.

Overall survival after mastectomy versus breast-conserving surgery with adjuvant radiotherapy for early-stage breast cancer: meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Breast-conserving surgery with adjuvant radiotherapy and mastectomy are currently offered as equivalent surgical options for early-stage breast cancer based on RCTs from the 1970s and 1980s. However, the treatment of breast cancer has evolved and recent observational studies suggest a survival advantage for breast-conserving surgery with adjuvant radiotherapy. A systematic review and meta-analysis was undertaken to summarize the contemporary evidence regarding survival after breast-conserving surgery with adjuvant radiotherapy versus mastectomy for women with early-stage breast cancer.

METHODS

A systematic search of MEDLINE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), and Embase that identified studies published between 1 January 2000 and 18 December 2023 comparing overall survival after breast-conserving surgery with adjuvant radiotherapy versus mastectomy for patients with unilateral stage 1-3 breast cancer was undertaken. The main exclusion criteria were studies evaluating neoadjuvant chemotherapy, rare breast cancer subtypes, and specific breast cancer populations. The ROBINS-I tool was used to assess risk of bias, with the overall certainty of evidence assessed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) tool. Studies without critical risk of bias were included in a quantitative meta-analysis.

RESULTS

From 11 750 abstracts, 108 eligible articles were identified, with one article including two studies; 29 studies were excluded from the meta-analysis due to an overall critical risk of bias, 42 studies were excluded due to overlapping study populations, and three studies were excluded due to reporting incompatible results. A total of 35 observational studies reported survival outcomes for 909 077 patients (362 390 patients undergoing mastectomy and 546 687 patients undergoing breast-conserving surgery with adjuvant radiotherapy). The pooled HR was 0.72 (95% c.i. 0.68 to 0.75, P < 0.001), demonstrating improved overall survival for patients undergoing breast-conserving surgery with adjuvant radiotherapy. The overall certainty of the evidence was very low.

CONCLUSION

This meta-analysis provides evidence suggesting a survival advantage for women undergoing breast-conserving surgery with adjuvant radiotherapy for early-stage breast cancer compared with mastectomy. Although these results should be interpreted with caution, they should be shared with patients to support informed surgical decision-making.

Molecular subtypes of breast cancer predicting clinical benefits of radiotherapy after breast-conserving surgery: a propensity-score-matched cohort study

BACKGROUND

Based on the molecular expression of cancer cells, molecular subtypes of breast cancer have been applied to classify patients for predicting clinical outcomes and prognosis. However, further evidence is needed regarding the influence of molecular subtypes on the efficacy of radiotherapy (RT) after breast-conserving surgery (BCS), particularly in a population-based context. Hence, the present study employed a propensity-score-matched cohort design to investigate the potential role of molecular subtypes in stratifying patient outcomes for post-BCS RT and to identify the specific clinical benefits that may emerge.

METHODS

From 2006 to 2019, the present study included 59,502 breast cancer patients who underwent BCS from the Taiwan National Health Insurance Research Database. Propensity scores were utilized to match confounding variables between patients with and without RT within each subtype of breast cancer, namely luminal A, luminal B/HER2-negative, luminal B/HER2-positive, basal-like, and HER2-enriched ones. Several clinical outcomes were assessed, in terms of local recurrence (LR), regional recurrence (RR), distant metastasis (DM), disease-free survival (DFS), and overall survival (OS).

RESULTS

After post-BCS RT, patients with luminal A and luminal B/HER2-positive breast cancers exhibited a decrease in LR (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] = 0.18, p < 0.0001; and, 0.24, p = 0.0049, respectively). Furthermore, reduced RR and improved DFS were observed in patients with luminal A (aHR = 0.15, p = 0.0004; and 0.29, p < 0.0001), luminal B/HER2-negative (aHR = 0.06, p = 0.0093; and, 0.46, p = 0.028), and luminal B/HER2-positive (aHR = 0.14, p = 0.01; and, 0.38, p < 0.0001) breast cancers. Notably, OS benefits were found in patients with luminal A (aHR = 0.62, p = 0.002), luminal B/HER2-negative (aHR = 0.30, p < 0.0001), basal-like (aHR = 0.40, p < 0.0001), and HER2-enriched (aHR = 0.50, p = 0.03), but not luminal B/HER2-positive diseases. Remarkably, when considering DM, luminal A patients who received RT demonstrated a lower cumulative incidence of DM than those without RT (p = 0.02).

CONCLUSION

In patients with luminal A breast cancer who undergo BCS, RT could decrease the likelihood of tumor metastasis. After RT, the tumor's hormone receptor status may predict tumor control regarding LR, RR, and DFS. Besides, the HER2 status of luminal breast cancer patients may serve as an additional predictor of OS after post-BCS RT. However, further prospective studies are required to validate these findings.

Epidemiology trends and progress in breast cancer survival: earlier diagnosis, new therapeutics

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

In this review we will critically appraise the latest evidence on breast cancer (BC) survival trends and discuss how these may reflect breakthroughs in early diagnosis and treatment approaches. We will address the wide global inequalities in BC survival and review the ongoing initiatives aimed at improving cancer control worldwide.

RECENT FINDINGS

BC outcomes have improved in high-income countries during the last decades, following the implementation of strategies for early detection and optimal multimodality treatment. Novel therapeutics, such as anti-HER2 targeted treatments, have also contributed to the progress in BC survival. However, BC mortality is still high in low-income countries, due to the lack of optimal healthcare infrastructures. In the context of marked inequities in BC management across world regions, international collaborations such as the Global Breast Cancer Initiative and the Global Initiative for Cancer Registry Development work to foster capacity-building in developing countries, tackle the burden of BC and deliver the Sustainable Development Goals by 2030.

SUMMARY

Collection of robust, high-quality data from population-based cancer registries is crucial to drive and refine public health interventions. Population-based data are also the litmus paper to evaluate the real-world impact of clinical advances and monitor progress.

Surgical options for patients with early-stage breast cancer and pathogenic germline variants: an oncologist perspectives

Breast cancer continues to be the most common cancer diagnosed among women worldwide. Family history of breast cancer is frequently encountered, and 5-15% of patients may carry inherited pathogenic germline variants, identification of which can be helpful for both; patients themselves and their unaffected close relatives. The availability and affordability of molecular diagnostics, like next generation sequencing (NGS), had resulted in wider adoption of such technologies to detect pathogenic variants of cancer-predisposing genes. International guidelines had recently broadened the indications for germline genetic testing to include much more patients, and also expanded the testing to include multi-gene panels, while some professional societies are calling for universal testing of all newly diagnosed patients with breast cancer, regardless of their age, personal or family history. The risk of experiencing a contralateral breast cancer (CBC) or ipsilateral recurrence, is well known. Such risk is highest with variants like BRCA1 and BRCA2, but less well-studied with other less common variants. The optimal local therapy for women with BRCA-associated breast cancer remains controversial, but tends to be aggressive and may involve bilateral mastectomies, which may not have any survival advantage. Additionally, surgical management of unaffected women, known to carry a pathogenic cancer-predisposing gene, may vary from surveillance to bilateral mastectomies, too. The oncological safety, and the higher satisfaction of unaffected women and patients with new surgical techniques, like the skin-sparing (SSM) and nipple-sparing (NSM) mastectomies, eased up the process of counselling. In this review, we address the oncological safety of less aggressive surgical options for both; patients and unaffected carriers.

Pathologic Response of Associated Ductal Carcinoma In Situ to Neoadjuvant Systemic Therapy: A Systematic Review

Contrary to traditional assumptions, recent evidence suggests that neoadjuvant systemic therapy (NST) given for invasive breast cancer may eradicate co-existent ductal carcinoma in-situ (DCIS), which may facilitate de-escalation of breast resections. The aim of this systematic review was to assess the eradication rate of DCIS by NST given for invasive breast cancer. Searches were performed in MEDLINE using appropriate search terms. Six studies (N = 659) in which pathological data were available regarding the presence of DCIS prior to neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) were identified. Only one study investigating the impact of neoadjuvant endocrine therapy (NET) met the search criteria. After pooled analysis, post-NACT pathology showed no residual DCIS in 40.5% of patients (267/659; 95% CI: 36.8-44.3). There was no significant difference in DCIS eradication rate between triple negative breast cancer (TNBC) and HER2-positive disease (45% vs. 46% respectively). NET achieved eradication of DCIS in 15% of patients (9/59). Importantly, residual widespread micro-calcifications after NST did not necessarily indicate residual disease. In view of the results of the pooled analysis, the presence of extensive DCIS prior to NST should not mandate mastectomy and de-escalation to breast conserving surgery (BCS) should be considered in patients identified by contrast enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (CE-MRI).