Search

Background: This study aimed to assess the performance of currently available risk calculators in a cohort of patients with malignant peripheral nerve sheath tumors (MPNST) and to create an MPNST-specific prognostic model including type-specific predictors for overall survival (OS). Methods: This is a retrospective multicenter cohort study of patients with MPNST from 11 secondary or tertiary centers in The Netherlands, Italy and the United States of America. All patients diagnosed with primary MPNST who underwent macroscopically complete surgical resection from 2000 to 2019 were included in this study. A multivariable Cox proportional hazard model for OS was estimated with prespecified predictors (age, grade, size, NF-1 status, triton status, depth, tumor location, and surgical margin). Model performance was assessed for the Sarculator and PERSARC calculators by examining discrimination (C-index) and calibration (calibration plots and observed-expected statistic; O/E-statistic). Internal-external cross-validation by different regions was performed to evaluate the generalizability of the model. Results: A total of 507 patients with primary MPNSTs were included from 11 centers in 7 regions. During follow-up (median 8.7 years), 211 patients died. The C-index was 0.60 (95% CI 0.53-0.67) for both Sarculator and PERSARC. The MPNST-specific model had a pooled C-index of 0.69 (95%CI 0.65-0.73) at validation, with adequate discrimination and calibration across regions. Conclusions: The MPNST-specific MONACO model can be used to predict 3-, 5-, and 10-year OS in patients with primary MPNST who underwent macroscopically complete surgical resection. Further validation may refine the model to inform patients and physicians on prognosis and support them in shared decision-making.

Background: Trials have demonstrated the safety of omitting completion axillary lymph node dissection in patients with cT1-2 N0 breast cancer operated with breast-conserving surgery who have limited metastatic burden in the sentinel lymph node. The aim of this registry study was to provide insight into the oncological safety of omitting completion axillary treatment in patients operated with mastectomy who have limited-volume sentinel lymph node metastasis. Methods: Women diagnosed in 2013-2014 with unilateral cT1-2 N0 breast cancer treated with mastectomy, with one to three sentinel lymph node metastases (pN1mi-pN1a), were identified from the Netherlands Cancer Registry, and classified by axillary treatment: no completion axillary treatment, completion axillary lymph node dissection, regional radiotherapy, or completion axillary lymph node dissection followed by regional radiotherapy. The primary endpoint was 5-year regional recurrence rate. Secondary endpoints included recurrence-free interval and overall survival, among others. Results: In total, 1090 patients were included (no completion axillary treatment, 219 (20.1%); completion axillary lymph node dissection, 437 (40.1%); regional radiotherapy, 327 (30.0%); completion axillary lymph node dissection and regional radiotherapy, 107 (9.8%)). Patients in the group without completion axillary treatment had more favourable tumour characteristics and were older. The overall 5-year regional recurrence rate was 1.3%, and did not differ significantly between the groups. The recurrence-free interval was also comparable among groups. The group of patients who did not undergo completion axillary treatment had statistically significantly worse 5-year overall survival, owing to a higher percentage of non-cancer deaths. Conclusion:In this registry study of patients with cT1-2 N0 breast cancer treated with mastectomy, with low-volume sentinel lymph

Background: The ACOSOG-Z0011- and the AMAROS-trial obviated the need for axillary surgery in most sentinel node-positive (SLN+) breast cancer patients undergoing breast-conserving surgery (BCS). Data for patients who undergo mastectomy is scarce. The purpose of this study was to investigate patterns of axillary treatment in SLN+ patients treated by mastectomy in the years after the publication of landmark studies regarding axillary treatment in SLN+ breast cancer patients undergoing BCS. Methods: This was a population-based study in cT1-3N0M0 breast cancer patients treated by mastectomy and staged as SLN+ between 2009 and 2018. The performance of an axillary lymph node dissection (ALND) and/or administration of postmastectomy radiotherapy (PMRT) were primary outcomes and were studied over time. Results: The study included 10,633 patients. The frequency of ALND performance decreased from 78% in 2009 to 10% in 2018, whereas PMRT increased from 4 to 49% (P < 0.001). In ≥N1a patients, ALND performance decreased from 93 to 20%, whereas PMRT increased to 70% (P < 0.001). In N1mi and N0itc patients, ALND was abandoned during the study period, whereas PMRT increased to 38% and 13% respectively (P < 0.001), respectively. Age, tumor subtype, N-stage, and hospital type affected the likelihood that patients underwent ALND. Conclusions: In this study in SLN+ breast cancer patients undergoing mastectomy, use of ALND decreased drastically over time. By the end of 2018 most ≥N1a patients received PMRT as the only adjuvant axillary treatment, whereas the majority of N1mi and N0itc patients received no additional treatment.

During the last decade completion axillary lymph node dissection (cALND) was gradually omitted in sentinel lymph node positive (SLN+) breast cancer patients. However, adoption varies among hospitals. We analyzed factors associated with the omission of cALND in all Dutch SLN+ patients. As one of the focus hospital-related factors we defined “innovative” as the percentage of gene-expression profile (GEP) deployment within the indicated group of patients per hospital as a proxy for early adoption of innovations. cT1-2N0M0 SLN+ patients treated between 2011 and 2018 were selected from the Netherlands Cancer Registry. Hospitals were defined to be innovative based on their GEP use. Multivariable logistic regression (MLR) was performed to assess the relationship between innovative capacity, patient-, treatment- and hospital-related characteristics and cALND performance. 14 317 patients were included. Treatment in a hospital with high innovative capacity was associated with a lower probability of receiving cALND (OR 0.69, OR 0.46 and OR 0.35 in modestly, fairly and very innovative, respectively). Other factors associated with a lower probability of receiving a cALND were age 70 and 79 years and ≥79 years (ORs 0.59 [95% CI: 0.50-0.68] and 0.21 [95% CI: 0.17-0.26]) and treatment in an academic hospital (OR 0.41 [95% CI: 0.33-0.51]). Factors associated with an increased probability of undergoing cALND were HR−/HER2− tumors (OR 1.46 [95% CI: 1.19-1.80]), macrometastatic lymph node involvement (OR 6.37 [95% CI: 5.70-7.13]) and mastectomy (OR 4.57 [95% CI: 4.09-5.10]). Patients treated in a hospital that early adopted innovations were less likely to receive cALND. Our findings endorse the need for studies on barriers and facilitators of implementing innovations.

Objective: To assess tumor behavior and the efficacy of active surveillance (AS) in patients with desmoid-type fibromatosis (DTF). Summary of Background Data: AS is recommended as initial management for DTF patients. Prospective data regarding the results of AS are lacking. Methods: In this multicenter prospective cohort study (NTR4714), adult patients with non-intraabdominal DTF were followed during an initial AS approach for 3 years. Tumor behavior was evaluated according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors. Cumulative incidence of the start of an active treatment and progression-free survival (PFS) were calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Factors predictive for start of active treatment were assessed by Cox regression analyses. Results: A total of 105 patients started with AS. Median tumor size at baseline was 4.1cm (interquartile range 3.0-6.6). Fifty-seven patients had a T41A CTNNB1 mutation; 14 patients a S45F CTNNB1 mutation. At 3 years, cumulative incidence of the start of active treatment was 30% (95% confidence interval [CI] 21-39) and PFS was 58% (95% CI 49-69). Median time to start active treatment and PFS were not reached at a median follow-up of 33.7 months. During AS, 32% of patients had stable disease, 28% regressed, and 40% demonstrated initial progression. Larger tumor size (≥5 cm; hazard ratio = 2.38 [95% CI 1.15-4.90]) and S45F mutation (hazard ratio = 6.24 [95% CI 1.92-20.30]) were associated with the start of active treatment. Conclusions: The majority DTF patients undergoing AS do not need an active treatment and experience stable or regressive disease, even after initial progression. Knowledge about the natural behavior of DTF will help to tailor the follow-up schedule to the individual patient.