Neoadjuvant Concurrent Radiotherapy and Chemotherapy in Early Breast Cancer Patients: Long-Term Results of a Prospective Phase II Trial

Background: Neoadjuvant concurrent radiochemotherapy makes it possible to increase the breast conservation rate. This study reports the long term outcome of this treatment. Methods: From 2001 to 2003, 59 women with T2–3 N0–2 M0 invasive breast cancer (BC) not amenable to upfront breast conserving treatment (BCS) were included in this prospective, non-randomized phase II study. Chemotherapy (CT) consisted of four cycles of continuous 5-FU infusion and Vinorelbine. Starting concurrently with the second CT cycle, normofractionated RT was delivered to the breast and LN. Breast surgery was then performed. Results: Median follow-up (FU) was 13 years [3–18]. BCS was performed in 41 (69%) patients and mastectomy in 18 patients, with pathological complete response rate of 27%. Overall and distant-disease free survivals rates at 13 years were 70.9% [95% CI 59.6–84.2] and 71.5% [95% CI 60.5–84.5] respectively. Loco regional and local controls rates were 83.4% [95% CI 73.2–95.0] and 92.1% [95% CI 83.7–100], respectively. Late toxicity (CTCAE-V3) was assessed in 51 patients (86%) with a median follow-up of 13 years. Fifteen presented grade 2 fibrosis (29.4%), 8 (15.7%) had telangiectasia, and 1 had radiodermatitis. Conclusions: This combined treatment provided high long-term local control rates with limited side-effects.

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.

Risk-Reducing Mastectomy and Reconstruction Following Prophylactic Breast Irradiation: Hope Sustained

Risk-reducing mastectomy (RRM) is often advocated for BRCA1/2 mutation carriers who face a heightened lifetime risk of breast cancer. However, many carrier patients seek alternative risk-reducing measures. In a phase II nonrandomized trial, we previously reported that prophylactic irradiation to the contralateral breast among BRCA carriers undergoing breast-conserving treatment significantly reduced subsequent contralateral breast cancer. Herein, we report the outcome of salvage mastectomy and reconstruction in 11 patients that suffered reoccurrences of breast cancer in either the ipsilateral or contralateral breast or elected to have the procedure for risk reduction during the eight-year follow-up period. Patients’ satisfaction with the procedure and physicians’ assessment of the cosmetic outcome were not inferior for previously irradiated compared to non-irradiated breasts. Although the numbers are small, the results are encouraging and sustain hope in a challenging population. Our findings support continuing research as well as a discussion of risk-reduction alternatives besides mastectomy, including prophylactic breast irradiation, in BRCA1/2 mutation carriers.

Type of recurrence, cause of death and second neoplasms among 737 patients with ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast: 15-year follow-up.

e12592 Background: The aim of the study is to assess the results of the treatment of 737 consecutive patients with DCIS with particular attention to the character of recurrences, other neoplasms and causes of deaths. Methods: A retrospective analysis was carried out of 737 consecutive DCIS patients treated in one institution in the years 1996-2011. The percentage of failures, causes of death, cumulated recurrence risk, DFS, OS depending on the method of treatment (mastectomy, breast conserving treatment BCT, breast conserving surgery BCS), was calculated. Results: 66 recurrences (42% DCIS, 58% invasive) were reported: 61 recurrences in the breast, 5 outside the breast. The comparison of mammography images before the initial treatment and after local recurrence revealed the true recurrence in the breast in 48/61 (79%) of cases. The cumulated recurrence risk after 15-year observation, after mastectomy, BCT and BCS was 3.2%, 19.5% and 31.2 %, respectively (p < 0.001). 15-year DFS after mastectomy, BCT and BCS was 72%, 65% and 48%, respectively (p < 0.001). 15-year OS after mastectomy, BCT and BCS was 75%, 83% and 70%, respectively, p = 0.329. In the course of the whole observation period 124 other neoplastic lesions in 121 patients (16%) were reported including 58 (8%) contralateral breast cancers. Deaths due to DCIS progression were reported in 4 (0.5%) of patients. An overwhelming majority (74/86) of deaths was linked to the age of the patients or other diseases, including other neoplasms. Conclusions: The highest recurrence risk reported in patients after BCS was unacceptable and, moreover, it kept growing over the fifteen years of observation. 79% of recurrences in the treated breast were true recurrences. Local recurrences were effectively treated without influence on OS. The percentage of deaths due to DCIS was low.

Repeat breast-conserving treatment of ipsilateral breast cancer recurrence: a nationwide survey amongst breast surgeons and radiation oncologists in the Netherlands

Background In line with the paradigm to minimize surgical morbidity in patients with primary breast cancer, there is increasing evidence for the safety of a repeat breast-conserving treatment (BCT) of an ipsilateral breast tumour recurrence (IBTR) in selected patients. The conditions for the feasibility of a repeat BCT vary widely in literature. In clinical practice, many physicians have ongoing concerns about the oncological safety and possible toxicity of repeat BCT. Aim To investigate the attitude of Dutch breast surgeons and radiation oncologists towards repeat BCT and to report on their experiences with, objections against and perceived requirements to consider a repeat BCT in case of IBTR. Patients and methods An online survey consisting of a maximum of 26 open and multiple-choice questions about repeat BCT for IBTR was distributed amongst Dutch breast surgeons and radiation oncologists. Results Forty-nine surgeons representing 49% of Dutch hospitals and 20 radiation oncologists representing 70% of Dutch radiation oncology centres responded. A repeat BCT was considered feasible in selected cases by 28.7% of breast surgeons and 55% of radiation oncologists. The most important factors to consider a repeat BCT for both groups were the patient’s preference to preserve the breast and surgical feasibility of a second lumpectomy. Arguments against a repeat BCT were based on the perceived unacceptable toxicity and cosmesis of a second course of radiotherapy. The technique of preference for re-irradiation would be partial breast irradiation (PBI) according to all radiation oncologists. Differentiating between new primary tumours (NPT) and true recurrences (TR) was reported to be done by 57.1% of breast surgeons and 60% of radiation oncologists. The most important reason to differentiate between NPT and TR was to establish prognosis and to consider whether a repeat BCT would be feasible. Conclusion An increasing number of Dutch breast cancer specialists is considering a repeat BCT feasible in selected cases, at the patient’s preference and with partial breast re-irradiation.

Repeat breast-conserving treatment of ipsilateral breast cancer recurrence: a nationwide survey amongst breast surgeons and radiation oncologists in the Netherlands

BACKGROUND In line with the paradigm to minimize surgical morbidity in patients with primary breast cancer, there is increasing evidence for the safety of a repeat breast-conserving treatment (BCT) of an ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence (IBTR) in selected patients. The conditions for the feasibility of a repeat BCT vary widely in literature. In clinical practice, many physicians have ongoing concerns about the oncological safety and possible toxicity of repeat BCT.AIM To investigate the attitude of Dutch breast surgeons and radiation oncologists towards repeat BCT and to report on their experiences with, objections against, and perceived requirements to consider a repeat BCT in case of IBTR.PATIENTS AND METHODS An online survey consisting of a maximum of 26 open and multiple choice questions about repeat BCT for IBTR was distributed amongst Dutch breast surgeons and radiation oncologists.RESULTS Forty-nine surgeons representing 49% of Dutch hospitals and 20 radiation oncologists representing 70% of Dutch radiation oncology centers responded. A repeat BCT was considered feasible in selected cases by 28.7% of breast surgeons and 55% of radiation oncologists. The most important factors to consider a repeat BCT for both groups were the patient’s preference to preserve the breast and surgical feasibility of a second lumpectomy. Arguments against a repeat BCT were based on the perceived unacceptable toxicity and cosmesis of a second course of radiotherapy. The technique of preference for re-irradiation would be partial breast irradiation (PBI) according to all radiation oncologists. Differentiating between new primary tumours (NPT) and true recurrences (TR) was reported to be done by 57.1% of breast surgeons and 60% of radiation oncologists. The most important reason to differentiate between NPT and TR was to establish prognosis and to consider whether a repeat BCT would be feasible.CONCLUSION An increasing number of Dutch breast cancer specialists is considering a repeat BCT feasible in selected cases, at the patient’s preference and with partial breast re-irradiation.

Breast-conserving treatment in oncoplastic times: indications, cosmesis, and quality of life

Breast-conserving treatment was established as an oncologically safe procedure for breast cancer. However, the cosmetic outcomes of breast-conserving treatments are often unsatisfactory. In this scenario, oncoplastic breast-conserving surgery incorporated plastic surgery concepts and techniques into the oncological treatment in order to ensure better cosmesis, thus increasing the indications for breast-conserving treatment. At the same time, oncoplastic breast-conserving surgery is usually presented as a generic term, which should be evaluated taking many aspects into account: indication, patient selection, the surgery itself, cosmetic quality, and quality of life — data that are still scarce in the literature.