Adjuvant chemotherapy for breast cancer after preoperative chemotherapy: A propensity score matched analysis.

Although identified to be at a higher risk of relapse, no consensus exists on the treatment of breast cancer (BC) patients with no pathological complete response after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC). The benefit of adjuvant chemotherapy (ADJ) in this context has scarcely been studied. We evaluated the benefit of administrating adjuvant chemotherapy in a real life cohort of BC patients with invasive residual disease after NAC. 1199 female BC patients with T1-3NxM0 invasive tumors receiving NAC at Institut Curie from 2002 to 2012 were included in the analysis. 1061 had been treated by NAC only, whereas 138 had received additional adjuvant chemotherapy after NAC (FUN protocol: 5-FU-Vinorelbine). We compared disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) rates between patients having received NAC only and patients having received NAC+ADJ. To ensure comparability of our populations, we used a propensity score (which defines the probability of treatment assignment conditional on observed baseline covariates) and matched each patient having received NAC+ADJ (n = 138) with a patient having received NAC only that had a similar propensity score value. Before propensity score matching, DFS and OS rates were significantly lower in the NAC+ADJ group compared to NAC only, after 3 years, 5 years and 10 years follow-up (p<0.01). After one-to-one PS matching, the two groups were comparable (n = 276 patients; 138 patients in each group). No significant difference was found regarding DFS (p = 0.87) or OS (p = 0.59) rates, neither in global population, nor by pathological subtype. Although our study did not show a benefit of administrating ADJ with FUN protocol (5-Florouracil- Vinorelbine) to BC patients with residual disease after NAC, further studies are warranted to determine the impact of other adjuvant regimens. Thereby, patients with little chance of responding to particular regimens could avoid the toxicity of futile therapy, and be study participants in evaluations of novel treatment strategies

Breast Magnetic Resonance Image Analysis for Surgeons Using Virtual Reality: A Comparative Study

International audiencePURPOSE The treatment of breast cancer, the leading cause of cancer and cancer mortality among women worldwide, is mainly on the basis of surgery. In this study, we describe the use of a medical image visualization tool on the basis of virtual reality (VR), entitled DIVA, in the context of breast cancer tumor localization among surgeons. The aim of this study was to evaluate the speed and accuracy of surgeons using DIVA for medical image analysis of breast magnetic resonance image (MRI) scans relative to standard image slice-based visualization tools. MATERIALS AND METHODS In our study, residents and practicing surgeons used two breast MRI reading modalities: the common slice-based radiology interface and the DIVA system in its VR mode. Metrics measured were compared in relation to postoperative anatomical-pathologic reports. RESULTS Eighteen breast surgeons from the Institut Curie performed all the analysis presented. The MRI analysis time was significantly lower with the DIVA system than with the slice-based visualization for residents, practitioners, and subsequently the entire group ( P < .001). The accuracy of determination of which breast contained the lesion significantly increased with DIVA for residents ( P = .003) and practitioners ( P = .04). There was little difference between the DIVA and slice-based visualization for the determination of the number of lesions. The accuracy of quadrant determination was significantly improved by DIVA for practicing surgeons ( P = .01) but not significantly for residents ( P = .49). CONCLUSION This study indicates that the VR visualization of medical images systematically improves surgeons' analysis of preoperative breast MRI scans across several different metrics irrespective of surgeon seniority

Prognostic value of the Residual Cancer Burden index according to breast cancer subtype: Validation on a cohort of BC patients treated by neoadjuvant chemotherapy

International audienceIntroduction: The Residual Cancer Burden (RCB) quantifies residual disease after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC). Its predictive value has not been validated on large cohorts with long-term follow up. The objective of this work is to independently evaluate the prognostic value of the RCB index depending on BC subtypes (Luminal, HER2-positive and triple negative (TNBCs)).Methods: We retrospectively evaluated the RCB index on surgical specimens from a cohort of T1-T3NxM0 BC patients treated with NAC between 2002 and 2012. We analyzed the association between RCB index and relapse-free survival (RFS), overall survival (OS) among the global population, after stratification by BC subtypes.Results: 717 patients were included (luminal BC (n = 222, 31%), TNBC (n = 319, 44.5%), HER2-positive (n = 176, 24.5%)). After a median follow-up of 99.9 months, RCB index was significantly associated with RFS. The RCB-0 patients displayed similar prognosis when compared to the RCB-I group, while patients from the RCB-II and RCB-III classes were at increased risk of relapse (RCB-II versus RCB-0: HR = 3.25 CI [2.1-5.1] p<0.001; RCB-III versus RCB-0: HR = 5.6 CI [3.5-8.9] p<0.001). The prognostic impact of RCB index was significant for TNBC and HER2-positive cancers; but not for luminal cancers (Pinteraction = 0.07). The prognosis of RCB-III patients was poor (8-years RFS: 52.7%, 95% CI [44.8-62.0]) particularly in the TNBC subgroup, where the median RFS was 12.7 months.Conclusion: RCB index is a reliable prognostic score. RCB accurately identifies patients at a high risk of recurrence (RCB-III) with TNBC or HER2-positive BC who must be offered second-line adjuvant therapies

Impact of the Area of Residence of Ovarian Cancer Patients on Overall Survival

Survival disparities persist in ovarian cancer and may be linked to the environments in which patients live. The main objective of this study was to analyze the global impact of the area of residence of ovarian cancer patients on overall survival. The data were obtained from the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) database. We included all the patients with epithelial ovarian cancers diagnosed between 2010 and 2016. The areas of residence were analyzed by the hierarchical clustering of the principal components to group similar counties. A multivariable Cox proportional hazards model was then fitted to evaluate the independent effect of each predictor on overall survival. We included a total of 16,806 patients. The clustering algorithm assigned the 607 counties to four clusters, with cluster 1 being the most disadvantaged and cluster 4 having the highest socioeconomic status and best access to care. The area of residence cluster remained a statistically significant independent predictor of overall survival in the multivariable analysis. The patients living in cluster 1 had a risk of death more than 25% higher than that of the patients living in cluster 4. This study highlights the importance of considering the sociodemographic factors within the patient’s area of residence when developing a care plan and follow-up

Residual cancer burden after neoadjuvant chemotherapy and long-term survival outcomes in breast cancer: a multicentre pooled analysis of 5161 patients.

BackgroundPrevious studies have independently validated the prognostic relevance of residual cancer burden (RCB) after neoadjuvant chemotherapy. We used results from several independent cohorts in a pooled patient-level analysis to evaluate the relationship of RCB with long-term prognosis across different phenotypic subtypes of breast cancer, to assess generalisability in a broad range of practice settings.MethodsIn this pooled analysis, 12 institutes and trials in Europe and the USA were identified by personal communications with site investigators. We obtained participant-level RCB results, and data on clinical and pathological stage, tumour subtype and grade, and treatment and follow-up in November, 2019, from patients (aged ≥18 years) with primary stage I-III breast cancer treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by surgery. We assessed the association between the continuous RCB score and the primary study outcome, event-free survival, using mixed-effects Cox models with the incorporation of random RCB and cohort effects to account for between-study heterogeneity, and stratification to account for differences in baseline hazard across cancer subtypes defined by hormone receptor status and HER2 status. The association was further evaluated within each breast cancer subtype in multivariable analyses incorporating random RCB and cohort effects and adjustments for age and pretreatment clinical T category, nodal status, and tumour grade. Kaplan-Meier estimates of event-free survival at 3, 5, and 10 years were computed for each RCB class within each subtype.FindingsWe analysed participant-level data from 5161 patients treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy between Sept 12, 1994, and Feb 11, 2019. Median age was 49 years (IQR 20-80). 1164 event-free survival events occurred during follow-up (median follow-up 56 months [IQR 0-186]). RCB score was prognostic within each breast cancer subtype, with higher RCB score significantly associated with worse event-free survival. The univariable hazard ratio (HR) associated with one unit increase in RCB ranged from 1·55 (95% CI 1·41-1·71) for hormone receptor-positive, HER2-negative patients to 2·16 (1·79-2·61) for the hormone receptor-negative, HER2-positive group (with or without HER2-targeted therapy; p&lt;0·0001 for all subtypes). RCB score remained prognostic for event-free survival in multivariable models adjusted for age, grade, T category, and nodal status at baseline: the adjusted HR ranged from 1·52 (1·36-1·69) in the hormone receptor-positive, HER2-negative group to 2·09 (1·73-2·53) in the hormone receptor-negative, HER2-positive group (p&lt;0·0001 for all subtypes).InterpretationRCB score and class were independently prognostic in all subtypes of breast cancer, and generalisable to multiple practice settings. Although variability in hormone receptor subtype definitions and treatment across patients are likely to affect prognostic performance, the association we observed between RCB and a patient's residual risk suggests that prospective evaluation of RCB could be considered to become part of standard pathology reporting after neoadjuvant therapy.FundingNational Cancer Institute at the US National Institutes of Health