Clinical Imaging of the Heterogeneous Group of Triple-negative Breast Cancer

BACKGROUND/AIM Triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) can be divided into subtypes of basal-like (BL), mesenchymal-like (ML), luminal androgen receptor (LAR), and immunomodulatory (IM). The aim of our study was to assess whether there are distinct radiologic features within the different TNBC subtypes and whether this has potential clinical impact. PATIENTS AND METHODS Imaging pictures of 135 patients with TNBC were re-evaluated. TNBC subtyping was performed on asservated tumor tissue using a panel of antibodies. RESULTS Mammographic margins of LAR-TNBC were more often spiculated (24.3% versus 0-4.1%). BL-TNBC presented more frequent a mass without calcification in mammogram than other subtypes (71.4% versus 48.6-57.9%). In ultrasound, ML and LAR were described more often with smooth borders. CONCLUSION The histopathological subtype of TNBC influences its presentation in ultrasound and mammogram. This can reflect a different growth pattern of the subtypes and may have an impact on the early diagnosis of TNBC

Third International Consensus Conference on lesions of uncertain malignant potential in the breast (B3 lesions)

The heterogeneous group of B3 lesions in the breast harbors lesions with different malignant potential and progression risk. As several studies about B3 lesions have been published since the last Consensus in 2018, the 3rd International Consensus Conference discussed the six most relevant B3 lesions (atypical ductal hyperplasia (ADH), flat epithelial atypia (FEA), classical lobular neoplasia (LN), radial scar (RS), papillary lesions (PL) without atypia, and phyllodes tumors (PT)) and made recommendations for diagnostic and therapeutic approaches. Following a presentation of current data of each B3 lesion, the international and interdisciplinary panel of 33 specialists and key opinion leaders voted on the recommendations for further management after core-needle biopsy (CNB) and vacuum-assisted biopsy (VAB). In case of B3 lesion diagnosis on CNB, OE was recommended in ADH and PT, whereas in the other B3 lesions, vacuum-assisted excision was considered an equivalent alternative to OE. In ADH, most panelists (76%) recommended an open excision (OE) after diagnosis on VAB, whereas observation after a complete VAB-removal on imaging was accepted by 34%. In LN, the majority of the panel (90%) preferred observation following complete VAB-removal. Results were similar in RS (82%), PL (100%), and FEA (100%). In benign PT, a slim majority (55%) also recommended an observation after a complete VAB-removal. VAB with subsequent active surveillance can replace an open surgical intervention for most B3 lesions (RS, FEA, PL, PT, and LN). Compared to previous recommendations, there is an increasing trend to a de-escalating strategy in classical LN. Due to the higher risk of upgrade into malignancy, OE remains the preferred approach after the diagnosis of ADH

Patients' preferences for subcutaneous trastuzumab versus conventional intravenous infusion for the adjuvant treatment of HER2-positive early breast cancer: final analysis of 488 patients in the international, randomized, two-cohort PrefHer study

PrefHer revealed compelling and consistent patient preference for subcutaneous (s.c.) trastuzumab, regardless of delivery by single-use injection device or hand-held syringe. s.c. trastuzumab was well-tolerated and safety data, including immunogenicity, were consistent with previous reports. No new safety signals were identified compared with the known intravenous trastuzumab profile in early breast cance

Oncoplastic breast consortium recommendations for mastectomy and whole breast reconstruction in the setting of post-mastectomy radiation therapy

Aim: Demand for nipple-and skin-sparing mastectomy (NSM/SSM) with immediate breast reconstruction (BR) has increased at the same time as indications for post-mastectomy radiation therapy (PMRT) have broadened. The aim of the Oncoplastic Breast Consortium initiative was to address relevant questions arising with this clinically challenging scenario. Methods: A large global panel of oncologic, oncoplastic and reconstructive breast surgeons, patient advocates and radiation oncologists developed recommendations for clinical practice in an iterative process based on the principles of Delphi methodology. Results: The panel agreed that surgical technique for NSM/SSM should not be formally modified when PMRT is planned with preference for autologous over implant-based BR due to lower risk of long-term complications and support for immediate and delayed-immediate reconstructive approaches. Nevertheless, it was strongly believed that PMRT is not an absolute contraindication for implant-based or other types of BR, but no specific recom-mendations regarding implant positioning, use of mesh or timing were made due to absence of high-quality evidence. The panel endorsed use of patient-reported outcomes in clinical practice. It was acknowledged that the shape and size of reconstructed breasts can hinder radiotherapy planning and attention to details of PMRT techniques is important in determining aesthetic outcomes after immediate BR. Conclusions: The panel endorsed the need for prospective, ideally randomised phase III studies and for surgical and radiation oncology teams to work together for determination of optimal sequencing and techniques for PMRT for each patient in the context of BRPeer reviewe

Oncoplastic Breast Consortium consensus conference on nipple-sparing mastectomy.

Purpose Indications for nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM) have broadened to include the risk reducing setting and locally advanced tumors, which resulted in a dramatic increase in the use of NSM. The Oncoplastic Breast Consortium consensus conference on NSM and immediate reconstruction was held to address a variety of questions in clinical practice and research based on published evidence and expert panel opinion. Methods The panel consisted of 44 breast surgeons from 14 countries across four continents with a background in gynecology, general or reconstructive surgery and a practice dedicated to breast cancer, as well as a patient advocate. Panelists presented evidence summaries relating to each topic for debate during the in-person consensus conference. The iterative process in question development, voting, and wording of the recommendations followed the modified Delphi methodology. Results Consensus recommendations were reached in 35, majority recommendations in 24, and no recommendations in the remaining 12 questions. The panel acknowledged the need for standardization of various aspects of NSM and immediate reconstruction. It endorsed several oncological contraindications to the preservation of the skin and nipple. Furthermore, it recommended inclusion of patients in prospective registries and routine assessment of patient-reported outcomes. Considerable heterogeneity in breast reconstruction practice became obvious during the conference. Conclusions In case of conflicting or missing evidence to guide treatment, the consensus conference revealed substantial disagreement in expert panel opinion, which, among others, supports the need for a randomized trial to evaluate the safest and most efficacious reconstruction techniques

Atypical ductal hyperplasia and the risk of underestimation: tissue sampling method, multifocality, and associated calcification significantly influence the diagnostic upgrade rate based on subsequent surgical specimens

BACKGROUND Risk assessment and therapeutic options are challenges when counselling patients with an atypical ductal hyperplasia (ADH) to undergo either open surgery or follow-up only. METHODS We retrospectively analyzed a series of ADH lesions and assessed whether the morphological parameters of the biopsy materials indicated whether the patient should undergo surgery. A total of 207 breast biopsies [56 core needle biopsies (CNBs) and 151 vacuum-assisted biopsies (VABs)] histologically diagnosed as ADH were analyzed retrospectively, together with subsequently obtained surgical specimens. All histological slides were re-analyzed with regard to the presence/absence of ADH-associated calcification, other B3 lesions (lesion of uncertain malignant potential), extent of the lesion, and the presence of multifocality. RESULTS The overall underestimation rate for the whole cohort was 39% (57% for CNB, 33% for VAB). In the univariate analysis, the method of biopsy (CNB vs VAB, p = 0.002) and presence of multifocality in VAB specimens (p = 0.0176) were significant risk factors for the underestimation of the disease (ductal carcinoma in situ or invasive cancer detected on subsequent open biopsy). In the multivariate logistic regression model, the absence of calcification (p = 0.0252) and the presence of multifocality (unifocal vs multifocal ADH, p = 0.0147) in VAB specimens were significant risk factors for underestimation. CONCLUSIONS Multifocal ADH without associated calcification diagnosed by CNB tends to have a higher upgrade rate. Because the upgrade rate was 16.5% even in the group with the lowest risk (VAB-diagnosed unifocal ADH with calcification), we could not identify a subgroup that would not require an open biopsy

Diagnostic delay in moderately/poorly differentiated breast cancer types

Background Diagnostic delay of breast cancer related to the false-negative assessment of the healthcare provider leads to tumor progression and might worsen the outcome. Previous studies found some factors associated with provider-related diagnostic delay; however, tumor biology has tended not to be considered. The aim of our study was to find differences in diagnostic delay of poorly differentiated breast cancer types. Methods Data of 970 patients with newly diagnosed moderately/poorly differentiated (G2/3) breast cancer at the age ≥40 years was retrospectively analyzed regarding breast cancer type, diagnostic delay and its consequence, clinical factors and physician’s assessment. Multivariate analysis was used to evaluate associated factors with diagnostic delay. Results We observed a diagnostic delay in 3.8% (n = 37) of all patients. Mean delay time was 128 days, and clinically relevant tumor growth was observed in 43.2% of these cases. Delay was significantly higher in the group of triple-negative breast cancer (9.9% versus 2.7, 5.3 and 1.8% in hormonal receptor (HR)+/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)−, HR−/Her2+ and HR+/Her2+, respectively; P value <0.001). Age, breast density and reason for presentation were not correlated to diagnostic delay. Conclusion Patients with triple-negative breast cancer are at higher risk of receiving a false-negative assessment and experiencing a diagnostic delay. Our results emphasize the importance of a detailed consideration of clinical risk factors and provider training and suggest a broad indication for a core needle biopsy

Illusions of fusions: Assessing cervical vertebral fusion on lateral cephalograms, multidetector computed tomographs, and cone-beam computed tomographs

INTRODUCTION: The aims of this study were to compare lateral cephalograms with other radiologic methods for diagnosing suspected fusions of the cervical spine and to validate the assessment of congenital fusions and osteoarthritic changes against the anatomic truth. METHODS: Four cadaver heads were selected with fusion of vertebrae C2 and C3 seen on a lateral cephalogram. Multidetector computed tomography (MDCT) and cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) were performed and assessed by 5 general radiologists and 5 oral radiologists, respectively. Vertebrae C2 and C3 were examined for osseous fusions, and the left and right facet joints were diagnosed for osteoarthritis. Subsequently, the C2 and C3 were macerated and appraised by a pathologist. Descriptive analysis was performed, and interrater agreements between and within the groups were computed. RESULTS: All macerated specimens showed osteoarthritic findings of varying degrees, but no congenital bony fusion. All observers agreed that no fusion was found on MDCT or CBCT. They disagreed on the prevalence of osteoarthritic deformities (general radiologists/MDCT, 100%; oral radiologists/CBCT, 93.3%) and joint space assessment in the facet joints (kappa = 0.452). The agreement within the rater groups differed considerably (general radiologists/MDCT, kappa = 0.612; oral radiologists/CBCT, kappa = 0.240). CONCLUSIONS: Lateral cephalograms do not provide dependable data to assess the cervical spine for fusions and cause false-positive detections. Both MDCT interpreted by general radiologists and CBCT interpreted by oral radiologists are reliable methods to exclude potential fusions. Degenerative osteoarthritic changes are diagnosed more accurately and consistently by general radiologists evaluating MDCT

Adjuvant treatment recommendations for patients with ER-positive/HER2-negative early breast cancer by Swiss tumor boards using the 21-gene recurrence score (SAKK 26/10)

BACKGROUND: To evaluate the effect of Recurrence Score® results (RS; Oncotype DX® multigene assay ODX) on treatment recommendations by Swiss multidisciplinary tumor boards (TB). METHODS: SAKK 26/10 is a multicenter, prospective cohort study of early breast cancer patients: Eligibility: R0-resection, ≥10% ER+ malignant cells, HER2-, pN0/pN1a. Patients were stratified into low-risk (LR) and non-low-risk (NLR) groups based on involved nodes (0 vs 1-3) and five additional predefined risk factors. Recommendations were classified as hormonal therapy (HT) or chemotherapy plus HT (CT + HT). Investigators were blinded to the statistical analysis plan. A 5%/10% rate of recommendation change in LR/NLR groups, respectively, was assumed independently of RS (null hypotheses). RESULTS: Two hundred twenty two evaluable patients from 18 centers had TB recommendations before and after consideration of the RS result. A recommendation change occurred in 45 patients (23/154 (15%, 95% CI 10-22%) in the LR group and 22/68 (32%, 95% CI 22-45%) in the NLR group). In both groups the null hypothesis could be rejected (both p < 0.001). Specifically, in the LR group, only 5/113 (4%, 95% CI 1-10%) with HT had a recommendation change to CT + HT after consideration of the RS, while 18/41 (44%, 95% CI 28-60%) of patients initially recommended CT + HT were subsequently recommended only HT. In the NLR group, 3/19 (16%, 95% CI 3-40%) patients were changed from HT to CT + HT, while 19/48 (40%, 95% CI 26-55%) were changed from CT + HT to HT. CONCLUSION: There was a significant impact of using the RS in the LR and the NLR group but only 4% of LR patients initially considered for HT had a recommendation change (RC); therefore these patients could forgo ODX testing. A RC was more likely for NLR patients considered for HT. Patients considered for HT + CT have the highest likelihood of a RC based on RS

Anesthesia and circulating tumor cells in primary breast cancer patients: a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND: The effect of anesthetic drugs on cancer outcomes remains unclear. This trial aimed to assess postoperative circulating tumor cell counts-an independent prognostic factor for breast cancer-to determine how anesthesia may indirectly affect prognosis. It was hypothesized that patients receiving sevoflurane would have higher postoperative tumor cell counts. METHODS: The parallel, randomized controlled trial was conducted in two centers in Switzerland. Patients aged 18 to 85 yr without metastases and scheduled for primary breast cancer surgery were eligible. The patients were randomly assigned to either sevoflurane or propofol anesthesia. The patients and outcome assessors were blinded. The primary outcome was circulating tumor cell counts over time, assessed at three time points postoperatively (0, 48, and 72 h) by the CellSearch assay. Secondary outcomes included maximal circulating tumor cells value, positivity (cutoff: at least 1 and at least 5 tumor cells/7.5 ml blood), and the association between natural killer cell activity and tumor cell counts. This trial was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02005770). RESULTS: Between March 2014 and April 2018, 210 participants were enrolled, assigned to sevoflurane (n = 107) or propofol (n = 103) anesthesia, and eventually included in the analysis. Anesthesia type did not affect circulating tumor cell counts over time (median circulating tumor cell count [interquartile range]; for propofol: 1 [0 to 4] at 0 h, 1 [0 to 2] at 48 h, and 0 [0 to 1] at 72 h; and for sevoflurane: 1 [0 to 4] at 0 h, 0 [0 to 2] at 48 h, and 1 [0 to 2] at 72 h; rate ratio, 1.27 [95% CI, 0.95 to 1.71]; P = 0.103) or positivity. In one secondary analysis, administrating sevoflurane led to a significant increase in maximal tumor cell counts postoperatively. There was no association between natural killer cell activity and circulating tumor cell counts. CONCLUSIONS: In this randomized controlled trial investigating the effect of anesthesia on an independent prognostic factor for breast cancer, there was no difference between sevoflurane and propofol with respect to circulating tumor cell counts over time