Search

Northern Italy has been one of the European regions reporting the highest number of COVID‐19 cases and deaths. The pandemic spread has challenged the National Health System, requiring reallocation of most of the available health care resources to treat COVID‐19‐positive patients, generating a competition with other health care needs, including cancer. Patients with cancer are at higher risk of developing critical illness after COVID‐19 infection. Thus, mitigation strategies should be adopted to reduce the likelihood of infection in all patients with cancer. At the same time, suboptimal care and treatments may result in worse cancer‐related outcome. In this article, we attempt to estimate the individual risk–benefit balance to define personalized strategies for optimal breast cancer management, avoiding as much as possible a general untailored approach. We discuss and report the strategies our Breast Unit adopted from the beginning of the COVID‐19 outbreak to ensure the continuum of the best possible cancer care for our patients while mitigating the risk of infection, despite limited health care resources. Implications for Practice Managing patients with breast cancer during the COVID‐19 outbreak is challenging. The present work highlights the need to estimate the individual patient risk of infection, which depends on both epidemiological considerations and individual clinical characteristics. The management of patients with breast cancer should be adapted and personalized according to the balance between COVID‐19‐related risk and the expected benefit of treatments. This work also provides useful suggestions on the modality of patient triage, the conduct of clinical trials, the management of an oncologic team, and the approach to patients’ and health workers’ psychological distress., This article discusses strategies employed by an institution in Northern Italy to ensure the continuum of the best possible cancer care during the COVID‐19 pandemic for breast cancer patients while mitigating the risk of infection, despite limited health care resources.

Breast cancer (BC) metastasis accounts for the majority of deaths from BC. The rate of metastasis to uncommon sites is on the rise due to the more effective therapy prolonging survival and to the early detection on imaging. The evaluation of patient-reported symptoms is essential in detecting a recurrence as early as possible, which may impact survival. Hence, the knowledge of even the rare sites of BC metastasis is of paramount importance for the clinical interpretation of new symptoms in BC survivors. The term “unusual metastasis” defines a systemic failure with a frequency of ≤1% at each site and according to this unusual metastasis involve the central nervous system, secretory/endocrine organs and glands, internal organs and structures, and gynecological organs. The literature search was performed using the electronic database PubMed up to December 2018, with the following key words: {[rare(Title/Abstract)] OR [unusual(Title/Abstract)] OR [unconventional(Title/Abstract)]} AND {[metastases(Title/Abstract)] OR [metastasis(Title/Abstract)]} AND {[breast(Title/Abstract)]} AND {[cancer(Title/Abstract)] OR [tumor(Title/Abstract)] OR [tumour(Title/Abstract)] OR [neoplasm(Title/Abstract)]}. The search was limited to papers in English language. Of the 3,086 papers found, 757 were excluded as reporting animal models, 378 were not in English language, 1 was a duplicate of the same research, 1,414 did not report on BC metastases, 108 were previous review reviews on BC or tumour to tumour metastases; 428 papers were included in this review. Despite the improvements in BC management, most deaths from cancer result from metastases that are resistant to conventional therapies. In general, it is uncommon to find isolated rare metastases, the vast majority of these develops together with metastases in other sites, thus highlighting a worsening systemic disease. However, the early detection of even rare metastases represents the only chance to control the disease and prolong survival while waiting for the development of more effective systemic therapies.

The scientific data to guide the management of Peutz–Jeghers syndrome (PJS) are sparse. The available evidence has been reviewed and discussed by diverse medical specialists in the field of PJS to update the previous guideline from 2010 and formulate a revised practical guideline for colleagues managing PJS patients. Methods: Literature searches were performed using MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane. Evidence levels and recommendation strengths were assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE). A Delphi process was followed, with consensus being reached when ≥80% of the voting guideline committee members agreed. Recommendations and statements: The only recent guidelines available were for gastrointestinal and pancreatic management. These were reviewed and endorsed after confirming that no more recent relevant papers had been published. Literature searches were performed for additional questions and yielded a variable number of relevant papers depending on the subject addressed. Additional recommendations and statements were formulated. Conclusions: A decade on, the evidence base for recommendations remains poor, and collaborative studies are required to provide better data about this rare condition. Within these restrictions, multisystem, clinical management recommendations for PJS have been formulated.

Simple Summary PET/MRI is a relatively new, hybrid imaging tool that allows practitioners to obtain both a local and systemic staging in breast cancer patients in a single exam. To date, the available evidence is not sufficient to determine the role of PET/MRI in breast cancer management. The aims of this paper are to provide an overview of the current literature on PET/MRI in breast cancer, and to illustrate two ongoing trials aimed at defining the eventual role of PET/MRI in axillary staging in two different settings: patients with early breast cancer and patients with positive axillary nodes that are candidates for primary systemic therapy. In both cases, findings from PET/MRI will be compared with the final pathology and could be helpful to better tailor axillary surgery in the future. Abstract Axillary surgery in breast cancer (BC) is no longer a therapeutic procedure but has become a purely staging procedure. The progressive improvement in imaging techniques has paved the way to the hypothesis that prognostic information on nodal status deriving from surgery could be obtained with an accurate diagnostic exam. Positron emission tomography/magnetic resonance imaging (PET/MRI) is a relatively new imaging tool and its role in breast cancer patients is still under investigation. We reviewed the available literature on PET/MRI in BC patients. This overview showed that PET/MRI yields a high diagnostic performance for the primary tumor and distant lesions of liver, brain and bone. In particular, the results of PET/MRI in staging the axilla are promising. This provided the rationale for two prospective comparative trials between axillary surgery and PET/MRI that could lead to a further de-escalation of surgical treatment of BC. • SNB vs. PET/MRI 1 trial compares PET/MRI and axillary surgery in staging the axilla of BC patients undergoing primary systemic therapy (PST). • SNB vs. PET/MRI 2 trial compares PET/MRI and sentinel node biopsy (SNB) in staging the axilla of early BC patients who are candidates for upfront surgery. Finally, these ongoing studies will help clarify the role of PET/MRI in BC and establish whether it represents a useful diagnostic tool that could guide, or ideally replace, axillary surgery in the future.

Simple Summary Axillary dissection is a highly mobile procedure with severe lymphatic consequences. The off-label application of fibrin sealants in the axilla, with the sole aim to eliminate dead space and to provoke sealing of the disrupted lymphatic vessels at the end of axillary dissection, is an experimental procedure to reduce lymphatic morbidity. The aim of our systematic review and meta-analysis is to investigate the effects of fibrin sealants on lymphatic morbidity after axillary dissection. Our results show that this experimental procedure is able to decrease the total axillary drainage output, the number of days before the axillary drainage is removed, and the length of hospital stay. However, no effects on the occurrence rate of axillary lymphocele or on the surgical site complications rate were demonstrated Abstract Background: use of fibrin sealants following pelvic, paraaortic, and inguinal lymphadenectomy may reduce lymphatic morbidity. The aim of this meta-analysis is to evaluate if this finding applies to the axillary lymphadenectomy. Methods: randomized trials evaluating the efficacy of fibrin sealants in reducing axillary lymphatic complications were included. Lymphocele, drainage output, surgical-site complications, and hospital stay were considered as outcomes. Results: twenty-three randomized studies, including patients undergoing axillary lymphadenectomy for breast cancer, melanoma, and Hodgkin’s disease, were included. Fibrin sealants did not affect axillary lymphocele incidence nor the surgical site complications. Drainage output, days with drainage, and hospital stay were reduced when fibrin sealants were applied (p < 0.0001, p < 0.005, p = 0.008). Conclusion: fibrin sealants after axillary dissection reduce the total axillary drainage output, the duration of drainage, and the hospital stay. No effects on the incidence of postoperative lymphocele and surgical site complications rate are found.

This study evaluated the methods, technical aspects and impact of preoperative radiological guidance in radioguided occult lesion localisation (ROLL) for single nonpalpable breast lesions.A total of 288 patients underwent ROLL before surgery. Human serum albumin macroaggregates labelled with 3.7-7.4 MBq of technetium(99) were injected into the lesion. In the case of ultrasonographic guidance (221/288 patients), inoculum positioning resulted in a change of echogenicity at the lesion site. In the case of mammographic guidance (67/288 patients), iodinated contrast medium was injected following the radiotracer for subsequent mammographic evaluation. Patients underwent surgery within 24 h from ROLL. A gamma-detecting probe was used to locate the lesion during surgery and guide its removal. After excision, the specimen was examined by either ultrasonography or mammography to verify complete lesion removal before histological evaluation.The lesion was correctly localised in 281/288 patients (97.5%). One ROLL procedure failed because surgery could not be performed within 24 h and the radioactivity decayed. Of the six incorrect localisations, 2 were due to the radiological guidance and 4 to technetium(99) dispersion.Radiological guidance in ROLL ensured the outcome of the procedure of localisation and removal of single, nonpalpable breast lesions in the majority of cases.