Dose de-intensified 3-day photon, proton, or brachytherapy: a nonrandomized controlled partial breast irradiation trial.

BACKGROUND: The optimal approach for partial breast irradiation (PBI) is unknown. We investigated a novel de-intensified 3-fraction PBI regimen for photons, protons, and brachytherapy. METHODS: A multicenter nonrandomized controlled trial with primary outcome of adverse cosmesis at 3 years versus pre-PBI. Eligibility criteria were ≥ age 50 years treated with breast-conserving surgery for node-negative estrogen receptor positive (ER+) invasive breast cancer or any ductal carcinoma in-situ (DCIS) measuring ≤ 2.5 cm. Photon and proton PBI were prescribed 21.9 Gy (RBE) and brachytherapy 21 Gy in 3 fractions. Radiotherapy technique and use of adjuvant endocrine therapy was selected at physician and patient discretion. RESULTS: Between June 17, 2015 and July 13, 2017, 161 eligible patients were treated with photons (56), protons (49), or brachytherapy (56). Median patient age was 66.8 years. 126 (78.3%) had invasive breast cancer (all ER+) and 35 (21.7%) had DCIS (88.6% ER+). 54.0% of patients with invasive breast cancer and 25.8% of patients with ER+ DCIS initiated and adhered to prescribed endocrine therapy. The proportion of patients with adverse cosmesis (by trained nurse assessment) was 14.5% at baseline, 2.3% at 3 years (difference -12.2%, 95% CI (-100%, -6.4%)). Adverse cosmesis at last-follow-up, with median follow-up 5 years, was 5.7% by nurse assessment, 5.6% by panel assessment of digital photographs, and 5.2% by patient self-report. There were no observed clinically meaningful changes in other patient reported outcomes, and just two grade 2 or higher adverse events, both grade 2, in the brachytherapy cohort. 5-year local recurrence-free and progression-free survival were 98.0% and 95.5%, respectively. There were no local recurrences amongst 60 patients with invasive breast cancer and Ki67 ≤ 13.25%. CONCLUSIONS: De-intensified 3-day PBI provided favorable disease control, tolerability, and cosmetic outcomes, meeting the pre-specified criteria for acceptability. This approach is an attractive option for small node-negative ER+ BC and DCIS patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT02453737.

Datopotamab-deruxtecan in early-stage breast cancer: the sequential multiple assignment randomized I-SPY2.2 phase 2 trial.

Among the goals of patient-centric care are the advancement of effective personalized treatment, while minimizing toxicity. The phase 2 I-SPY2.2 trial uses a neoadjuvant sequential therapy approach in breast cancer to further these goals, testing promising new agents while optimizing individual outcomes. Here we tested datopotamab-deruxtecan (Dato-DXd) in the I-SPY2.2 trial for patients with high-risk stage 2/3 breast cancer. I-SPY2.2 uses a sequential multiple assignment randomization trial design that includes three sequential blocks of biologically targeted neoadjuvant treatment: the experimental agent(s) (block A), a taxane-based regimen tailored to the tumor subtype (block B) and doxorubicin-cyclophosphamide (block C). Patients are randomized into arms consisting of different investigational block A treatments. Algorithms based on magnetic resonance imaging and core biopsy guide treatment redirection after each block, including the option of early surgical resection in patients predicted to have a high likelihood of pathological complete response, the primary endpoint. There are two primary efficacy analyses: after block A and across all blocks for the six prespecified breast cancer subtypes (defined by clinical hormone receptor/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) status and/or the response-predictive subtypes). We report results of 103 patients treated with Dato-DXd. While Dato-DXd did not meet the prespecified threshold for success (graduation) after block A in any subtype, the treatment strategy across all blocks graduated in the hormone receptor-negative HER2-Immune-DNA repair deficiency- subtype with an estimated pathological complete response rate of 41%. No new toxicities were observed, with stomatitis and ocular events occurring at low grades. Dato-DXd was particularly active in the hormone receptor-negative/HER2-Immune-DNA repair deficiency- signature, warranting further investigation, and was safe in other subtypes in patients who followed the treatment strategy. ClinicalTrials.gov registration: NCT01042379 .

Datopotamab-deruxtecan plus durvalumab in early-stage breast cancer: the sequential multiple assignment randomized I-SPY2.2 phase 2 trial.

Sequential adaptive trial designs can help accomplish the goals of personalized medicine, optimizing outcomes and avoiding unnecessary toxicity. Here we describe the results of incorporating a promising antibody-drug conjugate, datopotamab-deruxtecan (Dato-DXd) in combination with programmed cell death-ligand 1 inhibitor, durvalumab, as the first sequence of therapy in the I-SPY2.2 phase 2 neoadjuvant sequential multiple assignment randomization trial for high-risk stage 2/3 breast cancer. The trial includes three blocks of treatment, with initial randomization to different experimental agent(s) (block A), followed by a taxane-based regimen tailored to tumor subtype (block B), followed by doxorubicin-cyclophosphamide (block C). Subtype-specific algorithms based on magnetic resonance imaging volume change and core biopsy guide treatment redirection after each block, including the option of early surgical resection in patients predicted to have a high likelihood of pathologic complete response, which is the primary endpoint assessed when resection occurs. There are two primary efficacy analyses: after block A and across all blocks for six prespecified HER2-negative subtypes (defined by hormone receptor status and/or response-predictive subtypes). In total, 106 patients were treated with Dato-DXd/durvalumab in block A. In the immune-positive subtype, Dato-DXd/durvalumab exceeded the prespecified threshold for success (graduated) after block A; and across all blocks, pathologic complete response rates were equivalent to the rate expected for the standard of care (79%), but 54% achieved that result after Dato-DXd/durvalumab alone (block A) and 92% without doxorubicin-cyclophosphamide (after blocks A + B). The treatment strategy across all blocks graduated in the hormone-negative/immune-negative subtype. No new toxicities were observed. Stomatitis was the most common side effect in block A. No patients receiving block A treatment alone had adrenal insufficiency. Dato-DXd/durvalumab is a promising therapy combination that can eliminate standard chemotherapy in many patients, particularly the immune-positive subtype.ClinicalTrials.gov registration: NCT01042379 .

In-Breast Tumor Progression During Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy: Impact on and Factors Influencing Distant Recurrence-Free Survival.

BACKGROUND: Most patients with breast cancer treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) experience clinical benefit, however, a small proportion progress. We aimed to characterize factors predicting in-breast tumor progression and impact on distant recurrence. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We reviewed all patients with clinical stage I-III breast cancer treated with NAC in 2006-2021 at our institution. We compared in-breast progressive disease (PD), defined as ≥ 20% increase in tumor size, with stable disease (SD) or response. Distant recurrence-free survival (DRFS) was analyzed using the Kaplan-Meier method and Cox proportional hazards regression. RESULTS: Of 1403 patients, 70 (5%) experienced in-breast PD, 243 (17%) SD, 560 (40%) partial response (PR), and 530 (38%) breast pathologic complete response (breast pCR, ypT0/Tis). The rate of PD varied by tumor subtype (8% in HR+/HER2-, 5% TNBC, 2% HER2+, p < 0.001). With median 48 months follow-up, the rates of DRFS were significantly different according to clinical breast response as follows: PD 56%, SD 68%, PR 82%, or breast pCR 93%, p < 0.001. In patients with PD on multivariable analysis, post-NAC grade (adjusted HR 2.9, p = 0.002) and ypT3-4 category (adjusted HR 2.4, p = 0.03) were the strongest predictors of DRFS. Combining these factors, 23% had neither, 44% had one, and 33% had both, which stratified outcome in PD with 3-year DRFS of 100%, 77%, and 30%, respectively (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: While in-breast PD during NAC is uncommon (5%), it predicts poor survival. Among patients with in-breast PD, post-NAC tumor grade and T category predict outcomes and may be useful to guide treatment escalation.

Change in Biomarker Profile After Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy is Prognostic and Common Among Patients with HER2+ Breast Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Rates of pathologic complete response (pCR) after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) for breast cancer have improved, especially among human epidermal growth factor 2-positive (HER2+) and triple-negative subtypes. The frequency and significance of biomarker profile change in residual disease are unclear. This study aimed to determine the rate of biomarker profile changes after NAC and the impact on clinical outcomes in a contemporary cohort. METHODS: Upon institutional review board approval, the study identified 634 consecutive patients treated with NAC between 2010 and 2022 at two academic institutions. The study cohort was focused on patients with residual disease who underwent biomarker profile retesting. Biomarker profile change for each subtype was compared across groups using Fisher-Irwin tests. Cox Proportional Hazards Model and Kaplan-Meier plots were performed to evaluate the association of changed versus unchanged biomarker profile with event-free survival. RESULTS: Biomarker retesting was performed for 259 (61.4 %) of 422 patients with residual disease. Biomarker profile change occurred in 18.1 % overall and was significantly higher among those with pre-NAC HER2+ disease (32.7 %, 17/52) than among those with HER2-disease (14.5 %, 30/207) (p = 0.004). Conversion of pre-NAC biomarker profiles of HR+HER2- and HR+HER2+ to triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) post-NAC may be associated with worse event-free survival, hazard ratios of 2.23 (95 % confidence interval [CI], 0.90-5.53; p = 0.08), trending toward significance, and 36.7 (95 % CI, 2.2-610.8; p = 0.01), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The results from one of the largest contemporary cohorts demonstrated that biomarker profile change in patients with residual disease after NAC was common. Furthermore, specific biomarker profile change in residual disease may have prognostic value. These findings strengthen the rationale for routine re-testing of biomarkers in residual disease after NAC.

Clipped Axillary Node as a Potential Surrogate for Overall Axillary Nodal Status in Inflammatory Breast Cancer Patients after Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy.

BACKGROUND: Axillary lymph node dissection is the current standard for management of the axilla in inflammatory breast cancer (IBC). The present study aims to determine whether the initially positive node identified by clip placement accurately represents the overall nodal status of axilla after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) in IBC. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A retrospective study was conducted on patients with IBC who underwent operation (2014-2023). For patients with IBC who had clip placement in a positive axillary node at diagnosis, operative notes, specimen radiographs, and pathology reports were reviewed to confirm final pathologic status of clipped nodes. RESULTS: In total, 92 patients with IBC (90 cN+) were identified (median age 54 years, 78% invasive ductal, 10% invasive lobular, and 12% mixed); 81 (90%) were biopsy-proven cN+, with a clip placed in the positive node for 62/81 (77%). All patients were treated with NAC and axillary surgery with median 19 (range 4-49) nodes removed. Among 28 (out of 56) patients with retrieved clipped nodes that were pathologically negative (ypN0), only 1 had an additional positive node with micrometastasis for a false negative rate of 4% (95% CI 1-19%). Conversely, 3/3 patients with isolated tumor cells (ITCs) only in the clipped node had additional axillary disease (ITCs in 1, macrometastasis in 2), and 20/23 (87%) of patients with pathologically positive clipped node (micrometastasis or greater) had additional positive nodes [19/20 (95%) with macrometastasis]. CONCLUSIONS: The clipped biopsy-positive axillary node in IBC accurately represented the post-NAC overall axillary nodal status. ITCs post-NAC should be considered positive as an indicator of additional nodes with metastasis.

ASO Author Reflections: Time to Explore Minimally Invasive Axillary Nodal Staging After Neo-Adjuvant Chemotherapy in Inflammatory Breast Cancer.

In inflammatory breast cancer (IBC), obstructed lymphatics present a barrier to sentinel node biopsy. In theory this challenge could be overcome by clipping the clinically positive node at presentation and surgically retrieving it after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC). If the clipped node accurately reflects the axillary status, then deescalation of axillary nodal dissection could be a possibility in IBC with complete pathological nodal response post-NAC.

Cancer Survivorship Care in the United States at Facilities Accredited by the Commission on Cancer.

Importance: Since 2021, American College of Surgeons Commission on Cancer (CoC) accreditation standards require providing a survivorship program for patients with adult-onset cancer treated with curative intent. Since more than 70% of all patients with cancer in the US are treated at CoC-accredited facilities, this presents an opportunity for a landscape analysis of survivorship care availability. Objective: To determine the prevalence, types, and outcomes of cancer survivorship services at CoC-accredited facilities. Design, Setting, and Participants: This survey study used an anonymous, online, cross-sectional survey conducted from May 4 to 25, 2023. Participants were CoC-accredited facilities in the US representing diverse CoC program categories, institutional characteristics, geographic regions, and practice types. Department of Veterans Affairs cancer programs were excluded due to data usage restrictions. Data were analyzed from July to October 2023. Exposure: CoC Survivorship Standard 4.8 was released in October 2019 and programs were expected to adhere to the Standard beginning January 1, 2021. Main Outcomes and Measures: Questions included self-reported survivorship program characteristics, availability of services aligned to CoC Survivorship Standard 4.8, and perceived program impacts. Response frequencies and proportions were determined in aggregate and by CoC program category. Results: There were 1400 eligible programs, and 384 programs participated (27.4% response rate). All regions and eligible program categories were represented, and most had analytic caseloads of 500 to 4999 patients in 2021. Most survivorship program personnel included nurses (334 programs [87.0%]) and social workers (278 programs [72.4%]), while physical (180 programs [46.9%]) and occupational (87 programs [22.7%]) therapists were less common. Services most endorsed as available for all survivors were screening for new cancers (330 programs [87.5%]), nutritional counseling (325 programs [85.3%]), and referrals to specialists (320 programs [84.7%]), while treatment summaries (242 programs [64.7%]), and survivorship care plans (173 programs [43.0%]), sexual health (217 programs [57.3%]), and fertility (214 programs [56.9%]) were less common. Survivorship services were usually delivered by cancer treatment teams (243 programs [63.3%]) rather than specialized survivorship clinics (120 programs [31.3%]). For resources needed, additional advanced practice clinicians with dedicated survivorship effort (205 programs [53.4%]) and electronic health record enhancements (185 programs [48.2%]) were most endorsed. Lack of referrals and low patient awareness were endorsed as the primary barriers. A total of 335 programs (87.2%) agreed that Survivorship Standard 4.8 helped advance their programs. Conclusions and Relevance: These findings of this survey study of CoC-accredited programs establish a benchmark for survivorship care delivery in the US, identify gaps in specific services and opportunities for intervention, contribute to longitudinal reevaluation for tracking progress nationally, and suggest the value of survivorship care standards.

Clipping the Positive Lymph Node in Patients with Clinically Node Positive Breast Cancer Treated with Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy: Impact on Axillary Surgery in the ISPY-2 Clinical Trial.

BACKGROUND: For patients with clinically node-positive (cN+) breast cancer undergoing neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC), retrieving previously clipped, biopsy-proven positive lymph nodes during sentinel lymph node biopsy [i.e., targeted axillary dissection (TAD)] may reduce false negative rates. However, the overall utilization and impact of clipping positive nodes remains uncertain. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed cN+ ISPY-2 patients (2011-2022) undergoing axillary surgery after NAC. We evaluated trends in node clipping and associations with type of axillary surgery [sentinel lymph node (SLN) only, SLN and axillary lymph node dissection (ALND), or ALND only] and event-free survival (EFS) in patients that were cN+ on a NAC trial. RESULTS: Among 801 cN+ patients, 161 (20.1%) had pre-NAC clip placement in the positive node. The proportion of patients that were cN+ undergoing clip placement increased from 2.4 to 36.2% between 2011 and 2021. Multivariable logistic regression showed nodal clipping was independently associated with higher odds of SLN-only surgery [odds ratio (OR) 4.3, 95% confidence interval (CI) 2.8-6.8, p < 0.001]. This was also true among patients with residual pathologically node-positive (pN+) disease. Completion ALND rate did not differ based on clip retrieval success. No significant differences in EFS were observed in those with or without clip placement, both with or without successful clip retrieval [hazard ratio (HR) 0.85, 95% CI 0.4-1.7, p = 0.7; HR 1.8, 95% CI 0.5-6.0, p = 0.3, respectively]. CONCLUSION: Clip placement in the positive lymph node before NAC is increasingly common. The significant association between clip placement and omission of axillary dissection, even among patients with pN+ disease, suggests a paradigm shift toward TAD as a definitive surgical management strategy in patients with pN+ disease after NAC.

Contemporary Axillary Surgical Management in Patients with Pathologically Node Positive Disease After Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy: A Survey of Members of the American Society of Breast Surgeons.

BACKGROUND: Axillary lymph node dissection (ALND) is increasingly omitted for breast cancer patients with pathologic nodal disease after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC). This study aimed to understand when and why surgeons consider omitting ALND after NAC. METHODS: The American Society of Breast Surgeons membership was surveyed, and responses were tabulated. To identify patterns, multiple correspondence analyses followed by cluster analysis on coordinates provided by the former were performed. Chi-squared analyses determined whether cluster characteristics were significantly (P < 0.05) associated with omission of ALND. RESULTS: Of members, 328/2172 (15.1%) completed the survey. Most (60.7%) always offer sentinel lymph node surgery to cN1 patients who respond to NAC, and many (43.9%) sometimes omit ALND in the setting of residual nodal disease. Respondents less often consider omitting ALND with increasing volume of pathologic nodal disease after NAC and are less likely to omit ALND among patients with cN1 disease at presentation than cN0 (P < 0.05 across all volumes). Respondents cited radiation administration (74.1%) and belief that ALND would not improve locoregional (48.2%), distant recurrence or survival (47.6%) outcomes when axillary radiation is administered as reasons to omit ALND. The respondent group comprising male private practice surgeons, practicing ≥ 21 years, consider omitting ALND significantly more frequently. CONCLUSIONS: Surgeons sometimes consider ALND omission for patients with pathologic nodal disease after NAC but are more likely to do so in cN0 patients and patients with smaller volumes of nodal disease. These decisions are largely based on perceived lack of oncologic benefit despite absence of prospective data supporting this deescalation.

Internal Mammary Lymphadenopathy Does Not Impact Oncologic Outcomes in Patients Treated with Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy: Results from the I-SPY2 Clinical Trial.

BACKGROUND: Internal mammary lymphadenopathy (IML) plays a role in breast cancer stage and prognosis. We aimed to evaluate method of IML detection, how IML impacts response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC), and oncologic outcomes. METHODS: We evaluated patients enrolled in the I-SPY-2 clinical trial from 2010 to 2022. We captured the radiographic method of IML detection (magnetic resonance imaging [MRI], positron emission tomography/computed tomography [PET/CT], or both) and compared patients with IML with those without. Rates of locoregional recurrence (LRR), distant recurrence (DR) and event-free survival (EFS) were compared by bivariate analysis. RESULTS: Of 2095 patients, 198 (9.5%) had IML reported on pretreatment imaging. The method of IML detection was 154 (77.8%) MRI only, 11 (5.6%) PET/CT only, and 33 (16.7%) both. Factors associated with IML were younger age (p = 0.001), larger tumors (p < 0.001), and higher tumor grade (p = 0.027). Pathologic complete response (pCR) was slightly higher in the IML group (41.4% vs. 34.0%; p = 0.03). There was no difference in breast or axillary surgery (p = 0.41 and p = 0.16), however IML patients were more likely to undergo radiation (68.2% vs. 54.1%; p < 0.001). With a median follow up of 3.72 years (range 0.4-10.2), there was no difference between IM+ versus IM- in LRR (5.6% vs. 3.8%; p = 0.25), DR (9.1% vs. 7.9%; p = 0.58), or EFS (61.6% vs. 57.2%; p = 0.48). This was true for patients with and without pCR. CONCLUSIONS: In this large cohort of patients treated with NAC, outcomes were not negatively impacted by IML. We demonstrated that IML influences treatment selection but is not a poor prognostic indicator when treated with modern NAC and multidisciplinary disease management.

Lymphedema Rates Following Axillary Lymph Node Dissection With and Without Immediate Lymphatic Reconstruction: A Prospective Trial.

BACKGROUND: Immediate lymphatic reconstruction (ILR) has been proposed to decrease lymphedema rates. The primary aim of our study was to determine whether ILR decreased the incidence of lymphedema in patients undergoing axillary lymph node dissection (ALND). METHODS: We conducted a two-site pragmatic study of ALND with or without ILR, employing surgeon-level cohort assignment, based on breast surgeons' preferred standard practice. Lymphedema was assessed by limb volume measurements, patient self-reporting, provider documentation, and International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision (ICD-10) codes. RESULTS: Overall, 230 patients with breast cancer were enrolled; on an intention-to-treat basis, 99 underwent ALND and 131 underwent ALND with ILR. Of the 131 patients preoperatively planned for ILR, 115 (87.8%) underwent ILR; 72 (62.6%) were performed by one breast surgical oncologist and 43 (37.4%) by fellowship-trained microvascular plastic surgeons. ILR was associated with an increased risk of lymphedema when defined as ≥10% limb volume change on univariable analysis, but not on multivariable analysis, after propensity score adjustment. We did not find a statistically significant difference in limb volume measurements between the two cohorts when including subclinical lymphedema (≥5% inter-limb volume change), nor did we see a difference in grade between the two cohorts on an intent-to-treat or treatment received basis. For all patients, considering ascertainment strategies of patient self-reporting, provider documentation, and ICD-10 codes, as a single binary outcome measure, there was no significant difference in lymphedema rates between those undergoing ILR or not. CONCLUSION: We found no significant difference in lymphedema rates between patients undergoing ALND with or without ILR.