Breast最新文献

Background

The results of the OlympiA study led to the approval of a PARP inhibitor (olaparib) as adjuvant treatment for early breast cancer (eBC) at high risk of relapse in patients with a germline BRCA1/2 mutation (gBRCAm). However, the proportion of patients in routine practice who meet the “high-risk” criteria applied in the OlympiA study, and for whom gBRCAm testing would now be mandatory, remains unknown.

Patients and methods

In this population-based study, we use unique data from the French specialized Côte d'Or Breast and Gynecological Cancer Registry, to assess the real-life proportion, and long-term prognosis of patients treated for eBC between 2005 and 2015 with standard treatment, and at “high risk” of relapse according to the OlympiA trial criteria.

Results

We included 3483 patients treated for HER2-negative eBC (N = 380 with ER-, and N = 3103 with ER + tumor). We found N = 62 (1.8 %) patients with gBRCA1/2 mutations. A total of 494 patients (14.2 %) were classified as “high risk” according to the Olympia criteria; 55 % with ER-tumors, and 9.1 % with ER + tumors, respectively. Despite more intensive systemic treatments in “high risk” patients, 10-year overall survival was much worse in these “high risk” patients compared to the others: 60.1 % vs 83.8 % in ER-tumors, and 55.4 % vs 84.1 % in ER + tumors. Our estimates of net survival show an even greater difference.

Conclusion

This study provides real-life insights into the prevalence and prognosis of patients with high-risk eBC, in a context where the approval of adjuvant olaparib requires careful reorganization of care, so as not to overlook a patient with gBRCAm who could benefit from adjuvant olaparib.

Introduction

The use of primary systemic therapy (PST) in early invasive breast cancer is routine but there are concerns about risk of locoregional recurrence.

Methods

We conducted a systematic literature review to identify studies of locoregional treatment and recurrence in patients with early invasive breast cancer who received non-endocrine PST.

Results

We identified 112 studies (18 prospective trials and 94 non-interventional studies). The use of surgery and radiotherapy after PST was recorded in 65 (58 %) and 50 (45 %) of studies respectively. 66 (59 %) studies reported locoregional recurrence. Cumulative 5-year locoregional recurrence risks varied from 1 % to 23 %. Locoregional recurrence was higher in patients under the age of 40, those who did not achieve a pathological complete remission after PST, had ER-negative or HER2 negative tumours, were recorded to have inoperable disease before PST, and did not have radiotherapy. LRR rates in these studies have not fallen over the overall calendar period of patient enrollment (1999–2016).

Conclusion

The recording of locoregional treatments and outcomes is suboptimal in studies of PST and efforts to improve this are required. In the absence of randomised evidence, our findings may help to inform care and guideline development. We were unable to exclude concern that the use of PST is associated with a higher than desired risk of locoregional recurrence.

Background

We introduced an adapted Lyman normal-tissue complication probability (NTCP) model, incorporating clinical risk factors and censored time-to-event data, to estimate the risk of major adverse cardiac events (MACE) following left breast cancer radiotherapy (RT).

Materials and methods

Clinical characteristics and MACE data of 1100 women with left-side breast cancer receiving postoperative RT from 2005 to 2017 were retrospectively collected. A modified generalized Lyman NTCP model based on the individual left ventricle (LV) equivalent uniform dose (EUD), accounting for clinical risk factors and censored data, was developed using maximum likelihood estimation. Subgroup analysis was performed for low-comorbidity and high-comorbidity groups.

Results

Over a median follow-up 7.8 years, 64 patients experienced MACE, with higher mean LV dose in affected individuals (4.1 Gy vs. 2.9 Gy). The full model accounting for clinical factors identified D₅₀ = 43.3 Gy, m = 0.59, and n = 0.78 as the best-fit parameters. The threshold dose causing a 50 % probability of MACE was lower in the high-comorbidity group (D₅₀ = 30 Gy) compared to the low-comorbidity group (D₅₀ = 45 Gy). Predictions indicated that restricting LV EUD below 5 Gy yielded a 10-year relative MACE risk less than 1.3 and 1.5 for high-comorbidity and low-comorbidity groups, respectively.

Conclusion

Patients with comorbidities are more susceptible to cardiac events following breast RT. The proposed modified generalized Lyman model considers nondosimetric risk factors and addresses incomplete follow-up for late complications, offering comprehensive and individualized MACE risk estimates post-RT.

Purpose

In breast cancer (BC) patients with clinical axillary lymph node metastasis (cN+) undergoing neoadjuvant therapy (NAT), precise axillary lymph node (ALN) assessment dictates therapeutic strategy. There is a critical demand for a precise method to assess the axillary lymph node (ALN) status in these patients.

Materials and methods

A retrospective analysis was conducted on 160 BC patients undergoing NAT at Fujian Medical University Union Hospital. We analyzed baseline and two-cycle reassessment dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI (DCE-MRI) images, extracting 3668 radiomic and 4096 deep learning features, and computing 1834 delta-radiomic and 2048 delta-deep learning features. Light Gradient Boosting Machine (LightGBM), Support Vector Machine (SVM), RandomForest, and Multilayer Perceptron (MLP) algorithms were employed to develop risk models and were evaluated using 10-fold cross-validation.

Results

Of the patients, 61 (38.13 %) achieved ypN0 status post-NAT. Univariate and multivariable logistic regression analyses revealed molecular subtypes and Ki67 as pivotal predictors of achieving ypN0 post-NAT. The SVM-based “Data Amalgamation” model that integrates radiomic, deep learning features, and clinical data, exhibited an outstanding AUC of 0.986 (95 % CI: 0.954–1.000), surpassing other models.

Conclusion

Our study illuminates the challenges and opportunities inherent in breast cancer management post-NAT. By introducing a sophisticated, SVM-based “Data Amalgamation” model, we propose a way towards accurate, dynamic ALN assessments, offering potential for personalized therapeutic strategies in BC.

Introduction

Breast cancer is the most common cancer among women. The surgical treatment of breast cancer has transitioned progressively from radical mastectomy to breast-conserving surgery. In this meta-analysis, we are aiming to compare oncoplastic breast-conserving surgery (OS) with conventional breast-conserving surgery (BCS) in terms of efficacy and safety.

Methods

We searched Medline, Web of Science, Embase, Cochrane databases, Clinicaltrial.gov, and CNKI until April 30, 2024. Data from cohort studies and randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were included. Outcomes included primary outcomes (re-excision, local recurrence, positive surgical margin, mastectomy), secondary outcomes and safety outcomes. The Cochrane Risk of Bias Assessment Tool and Newcastle-Ottawa Scale were used to evaluate the quality of outcomes.

Results

Our study included 52 studies containing 46,835 patients. Primary outcomes comprise re-excision, local recurrence, positive surgical margin, and mastectomy, there were significant differences favoring OS over BCS (RR 0.68 [0.56, 0.82], RR 0.62 [0.47, 0.82], RR 0.76 [0.59, 0.98], RR 0.66 [0.44, 0.98] respectively), indicating superior efficacy of OS. Additionally, OS demonstrated significant aesthetic benefits (RR 1.17 [1.03, 1.33] and RR 1.34 [1.18, 1.52]). While total complications were significantly fewer in the OS group (RR 0.70 [0.53, 0.94]), the differences in specific complications were not significant. Furthermore, subgroup analyses were conducted based on nationality, sample size, quality, and type.

Conclusion

OS demonstrates either superior or at least comparable outcomes across various aspects when compared to BCS.

Purpose

Fertility issues are of great concern for young women undergoing treatment for breast cancer (BC). Fertility preservation (FP) protocols using controlled ovarian stimulation (COS) with letrozole have been widely used with overall good results. However, letrozole cannot be used in every country in this context. This study aimed to assess the efficacy of tamoxifen for COS in women with early BC undergoing FP.

Methods

This multicentric prospective study included patients aged 18–40, diagnosed with stage I, II and III invasive BC, undergoing tamoxifen-COS before adjuvant or neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC). The primary endpoint was the efficacy of tamoxifen-COS protocol evaluated by the number of oocytes collected and vitrified. Secondary endpoints included the time interval before chemotherapy, breast cancer (BC) recurrence rates, and reproductive outcomes.

Results

Ninety-five patients were included between 2014 and 2017, aged 31.5 ± 4 years on average. 37.9 % received NAC and 62.1 % received adjuvant chemotherapy. FP procedure was successful in 89.5 % of the cycles. The mean number of collected and vitrified oocytes was 12.8 ± 7.9 and 9.8 ± 6.2, respectively. The mean duration of COS was 10.4 ± 1.9 days. Median time before chemotherapy initiation was 3.6 weeks (IQR 3.1; 4.1) for women receiving NAC. Five-year relapse-free and overall survival rates were in-line with those expected in this population. Twenty-one women had spontaneous full-term pregnancies, while 5 underwent IVF cycles with frozen-thawed oocytes, without pregnancy.

Conclusion

Tamoxifen-COS protocols appear to be feasible before adjuvant or NAC treatment in young BC patients and efficient in terms of oocyte yield.

Purpose

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of the combination of olaparib plus trastuzumab in patients with HER2-positive advanced breast cancer (ABC) and germinal BRCA mutations (gBRCAm).

Methods

OPHELIA (NCT03931551) was a single-arm, open-label, phase 2 clinical trial. Patients aged ≥18 years diagnosed with HER2-positive ABC with germinal deleterious mutations in BRCA1 or BRCA2 who had received at least one prior systemic regimen for advanced disease were enrolled. Patients received olaparib plus trastuzumab until disease progression, unacceptable toxicity, or consent withdrawal. The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed clinical benefit rate for at least 24 weeks as per RECIST v.1.1. Key secondary endpoints included overall response rate (ORR) and safety profile.

Results

A total of 68 pre-treated HER2-positive ABC patients were screened. Due to slow accrual the trial was stopped after enrolling 5 patients instead of the planned sample size of 20. Four patients achieved clinical benefit (80.0 %, 95 % CI; 28.4–99.5, p < 0.001) and the primary endpoint was met. The ORR was 60.0 % (95 % CI; 14.7–94.7), including one complete response. Four (80.0 %) patients experienced at least one treatment-related treatment-emergent adverse event (TEAE). Most TEAEs were grade 1 or 2. There were no treatment-related deaths and no new safety signals were identified.

Conclusions

This study suggests that the combination of olaparib plus trastuzumab may be effective and safe in pre-treated patients with HER2-positive gBRCAm ABC. This ABC patient population should be further studied and not be pre-emptively excluded from clinical trials of targeted therapy for BRCA1/2-driven cancers.

As breast screening services move towards use of healthcare AI (HCAI) for screen reading, research on public views of HCAI can inform more person-centered implementation. We synthesise reviews of public views of HCAI in general, and review primary studies of women's views of AI in breast screening. People generally appear open to HCAI and its potential benefits, despite a wide range of concerns; similarly, women are open towards AI in breast screening because of the potential benefits, but are concerned about a wide range of risks. Women want radiologists to remain central; oversight, evaluation and performance, care, equity and bias, transparency, and accountability are key issues; women may be less tolerant of AI error than of human error. Using our recent Australian primary study, we illustrate both the value of informing participants before collecting data, and women's views. The 40 screening-age women in this study stipulated four main conditions on breast screening AI implementation: 1) maintaining human control; 2) strong evidence of performance; 3) supporting familiarisation with AI; and 4) providing adequate reasons for introducing AI. Three solutions were offered to support familiarisation: transparency and information; slow and staged implementation; and allowing women to opt-out of AI reading. We provide recommendations to guide both implementation of AI in healthcare and research on public views of HCAI. Breast screening services should be transparent about AI use and share information about breast screening AI with women. Implementation should be slow and staged, providing opt-out options if possible. Screening services should demonstrate strong governance to maintain clinician control, demonstrate excellent AI system performance, assure data protection and bias mitigation, and give good reasons to justify implementation. When these measures are put in place, women are more likely to see HCAI use in breast screening as legitimate and acceptable.