Search

Simple Summary Most breast cancers are small and can be treated using breast-conserving surgery. Since these tumors are non-palpable, they require a localization step that helps the surgeon to decide which tissue needs to be removed. The oldest localization technique is a guidewire placed into the tumor before surgery, usually using ultrasound or mammography. Afterwards, the surgeon removes the tissue around the wire tip. However, this technique has several disadvantages: It can cause the patient discomfort, requires a radiologist or another professional specialized in breast diagnostics to perform the procedure shortly before surgery, and 15-20% of patients need a second surgery to completely remove the tumor. Therefore, new techniques have been developed but most of them have not yet been examined in large, prospective, multicenter studies. In this review, we discuss all available techniques and present the MELODY study that will investigate their safety, with a focus on patient, surgeon, and radiologist preference. Background: Surgical excision of a non-palpable breast lesion requires a localization step. Among available techniques, wire-guided localization (WGL) is most commonly used. Other techniques (radioactive, magnetic, radar or radiofrequency-based, and intraoperative ultrasound) have been developed in the last two decades with the aim of improving outcomes and logistics. Methods: We performed a systematic review on localization techniques for non-palpable breast cancer. Results: For most techniques, oncological outcomes such as lesion identification and clear margin rate seem either comparable with or better than for WGL, but evidence is limited to small cohort studies for some of the devices. Intraoperative ultrasound is associated with significantly higher negative margin rates in meta-analyses of randomized clinical trials (RCTs). Radioactive techniques were studied in several RCTs and are non-inferior to WGL. Smaller studies show higher patient preference towards wire-free localization, but little is known about surgeons\" and radiologists\" attitudes towards these techniques. Conclusions: Large studies with an additional focus on patient, surgeon, and radiologist preference are necessary. This review aims to present the rationale for the MELODY (NCT05559411) study and to enable standardization of outcome measures for future studies.

Simple Summary Most breast cancers are small and can be treated using breast-conserving surgery. Since these tumors are non-palpable, they require a localization step that helps the surgeon to decide which tissue needs to be removed. The oldest localization technique is a guidewire placed into the tumor before surgery, usually using ultrasound or mammography. Afterwards, the surgeon removes the tissue around the wire tip. However, this technique has several disadvantages: It can cause the patient discomfort, requires a radiologist or another professional specialized in breast diagnostics to perform the procedure shortly before surgery, and 15-20% of patients need a second surgery to completely remove the tumor. Therefore, new techniques have been developed but most of them have not yet been examined in large, prospective, multicenter studies. In this review, we discuss all available techniques and present the MELODY study that will investigate their safety, with a focus on patient, surgeon, and radiologist preference. Background: Surgical excision of a non-palpable breast lesion requires a localization step. Among available techniques, wire-guided localization (WGL) is most commonly used. Other techniques (radioactive, magnetic, radar or radiofrequency-based, and intraoperative ultrasound) have been developed in the last two decades with the aim of improving outcomes and logistics. Methods: We performed a systematic review on localization techniques for non-palpable breast cancer. Results: For most techniques, oncological outcomes such as lesion identification and clear margin rate seem either comparable with or better than for WGL, but evidence is limited to small cohort studies for some of the devices. Intraoperative ultrasound is associated with significantly higher negative margin rates in meta-analyses of randomized clinical trials (RCTs). Radioactive techniques were studied in several RCTs and are non-inferior to WGL. Smaller studies show higher patient preference towards wire-free localization, but little is known about surgeons' and radiologists' attitudes towards these techniques. Conclusions: Large studies with an additional focus on patient, surgeon, and radiologist preference are necessary. This review aims to present the rationale for the MELODY (NCT05559411) study and to enable standardization of outcome measures for future studies.

High-quality randomised clinical trials testing moderately fractionated breast radiotherapy have clearly shown that local control and survival is at least as effective as with 2 Gy daily fractions with similar or reduced normal tissue toxicity. Fewer treatment visits are welcomed by patients and their families, and reduced fractions produce substantial savings for health-care systems. Implementation of hypofractionation, however, has moved at a slow pace. The oncology community have now reached an inflection point created by new evidence from the FAST-Forward five-fraction randomised trial and catalysed by the need for the global radiation oncology community to unite during the COVID-19 pandemic and rapidly rethink hypofractionation implementation. The aim of this paper is to support equity of access for all patients to receive evidence-based breast external beam radiotherapy and to facilitate the translation of new evidence into routine daily practice. The results from this European Society for Radiotherapy and Oncology Advisory Committee in Radiation Oncology Practice consensus state that moderately hypofractionated radiotherapy can be offered to any patient for whole breast, chest wall (with or without reconstruction), and nodal volumes. Ultrafractionation (five fractions) can also be offered for non-nodal breast or chest wall (without reconstruction) radiotherapy either as standard of care or within a randomised trial or prospective cohort. The consensus is timely; not only is it a pragmatic framework for radiation oncologists, but it provides a measured proposal for the path forward to influence policy makers and empower patients to ensure equity of access to evidence-based radiotherapy.

INTRODUCTION: Neoadjuvant systemic therapy (NST) is increasingly applied in breast cancer to improve surgical and oncological outcome. Approximately 21% of patients receiving NST achieve pathological complete response (pCR) of the breast. There is disagreement on the definition of pCR with respect to residual DCIS (ypT0 versus ypT0/is). The aim of this retrospective study was to determine the percentage of breast pCR (ypT0) and residual DCIS (ypTis), and its association with clinicopathological variables, in patients treated with NST and surgery.MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients with invasive breast cancer treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy, with or without targeted therapy, in the period of 2010-2019 were selected from the Netherlands Cancer Registry (NCR). Descriptive statistics and multivariable logistic regression analyses were used to analyse the percentage of ypT0 and ypTis and its association with clinicopathological variables.RESULTS: From the NCR database, 20495 patients were included, of whom 5847 (28.5%) achieved breast pCR (ypT0) and 881 (4.3%) showed residual DCIS (ypTis). The percentage of ypTis was highest in HER2+ tumour subtypes (ER+HER2+ 7.9%, ER-HER2+ 9.8%, ER+HER2- 2.1%, triple negative 3.3%, p < 0.001). Multivariable logistic regression analyses demonstrated high tumour grade (OR 2.00, p = 0.003) and HER2+ tumour subtype (ER+HER2+ OR 3.58, ER-HER2+ OR 4.37, p < 0.001) as independent predictors for ypTis.CONCLUSION: pCR (ypT0) was achieved in 5847 (28.5%) patients receiving NST and residual DCIS (ypTis) was found in 881 (4.3%) patients. Consequently, the rate of pCR may be affected by ypTis when not excluded from the definition. The percentage of ypTis is highest in HER2+ subtypes.

In our study, we aimed to evaluate the pathological response rates and side effect profile of adding pertuzumab to the treatment of HER2+ locally advanced, inflammatory, or early-stage breast cancer. This study was conducted by the Turkish Oncology Group (TOG) with data collected from 32 centers. Our study was multicentric, and a total of 364 patients were included. The median age of the patients was 49 years (18-85 years). Two hundred fifteen (60%) of the cases were hormone receptor/HER2+ positive(ER+ or PR+, or both), and 149 (40%) of them were HER2-rich (ER and PR negative). The number of complete responses was 124 (54%) in the docetaxel+trastuzumab+pertuzumab arm and 102 (45%) in the paclitaxel+trastuzumab+pertuzumab arm, and there was no difference between the groups in terms of complete response. In 226 (62%) patients with complete response, a significant correlation was found with DCIS, tumor focality, removed lymph node, and ER status P < 0.05. Anemia, nausea, vomiting, myalgia, alopecia, and mucosal inflammation were significantly higher in the docetaxel arm, P < 0.05. In our study, no statistical difference was found between the before-after echocardiography values. DCIS positivity in biopsy before neoadjuvant chemotherapy, tumor focality; the number of lymph nodes removed and ER status were found to be associated with pCR. In conclusion, we think that studies evaluating pCR-related clinicopathological variables and radiological imaging features will play a critical role in the development of nonsurgical treatment approaches.