Should breast surgery be considered for patients with de novo metastatic inflammatory breast cancer?

INTRODUCTION: We aimed to identify factors predicting surgery for de novo stage IV inflammatory breast cancer (IBC) and determine the association of surgery with overall survival (OS). METHODS: Female patients with unilateral AJCC clinical stage IV IBC treated 2010-2018 in the NCDB were identified. Logistic regression and multivariable proportional Cox hazards regressions determined factors associated with treatment and OS. RESULTS: Of 1049 patients, 29.1% underwent breast surgery (BS) and 70.9% had no surgery (NS). Increasing age and more recent treatment year were significantly associated with NS. 2-Year OS was superior in BS patients (71% vs 38% NS). Single-site and bone-only metastasis had no association with treatment type or OS. CONCLUSION: Contrary to guidelines, 1/3 of de novo stage IV IBC patients underwent BS, and had an independent OS benefit irrespective of extent or site of metastasis. Further research is needed to determine which patients with stage IV IBC should undergo BS.

Using MammaPrint on core needle biopsy to guide the need for axillary staging during breast surgery.

BACKGROUND: At present, the only opportunity to omit axillary staging is with Choosing Wisely criteria for women ages >70 y with cT1 2N0 estrogen receptor-positive/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative breast cancer. However, many women are diagnosed when pathologic node status-negative, raising the question of additional opportunities to omit sentinel lymph node biopsy. We sought to investigate the association between MammaPrint, a genomic test that estimates estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer recurrence risk, and pathologic node status, with the aim that low-risk MammaPrint could be considered for omission of sentinel lymph node biopsy if associated with pathologic node status-negative. METHODS: A single-institution database was queried for all women with cT1 2N0 estrogen receptor-positive/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative invasive breast cancer with breast surgery as their first treatment and MammaPrint performed from 2020 to 2021. Patient and tumor factors, including MammaPrint score, were compared with axillary node status for correlation. RESULTS: A total of 668 women met inclusion criteria, with a median age of 66 y. MammaPrint was low-risk luminal A in 481 (72%) and high-risk luminal B in 187 (28%). At the time of breast surgery, 588 (88%) had sentinel lymph node biopsy, 27 (4%) had axillary lymph node dissection, and 53 (7.9%) had no axillary staging. Most women in both the pathologic node status-negative and pathologic node status-positive cohorts had low-risk MammaPrint (355 [73.3%] pathologic node status-negative vs 91 [69.5%] pathologic node status-positive), and women with low-risk MammaPrint did not have a significantly lower risk of pathologic node status-positive (P = .377). CONCLUSION: Low-risk MammaPrint does not predict lower risk of pathologic node status-positive breast cancer. Based on our results, genomic testing does not appear to provide additional personalization for the ability to omit sentinel lymph node biopsy for patients outside of the Choosing Wisely guidelines.

Age disparities in triple-negative breast cancer treatment and outcomes: An NCDB analysis.

BACKGROUND: Race, access to care, and molecular features result in outcome disparities in triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC). We sought to determine the role of age in TNBC disparity by hypothesizing that younger patients receive more comprehensive treatment, resulting in survival differences. METHODS: The National Cancer Database was used to identify women with unilateral TNBC treated from 2005 through 2017. Patients were stratified by age (≤40, 41-70, >70); demographics, clinical characteristics, and treatment factors were compared. Logistic regression determined factors associated with treatment received. Survival outcomes were analyzed using a stratified log-rank test. RESULTS: Of the 168,715 patients, 16,287 (9.6%) were ≤40 years. Patients ≤40 were significantly more likely to present at higher clinical stage (P < .001) and receive neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC, P < .001). Bilateral mastectomy was the most common surgery for patients ≤40 (37%), whereas partial mastectomy was most often used in patients 41 to 70 years old (48%) and those >70 (49%) (P < .001). Patients ≤40 years were significantly more likely to undergo both NAC and mastectomy than those >40 (odds ratio 1.5, both P < .05) despite a greater in-breast tumor response in the youngest patients. Patients treated with mastectomy and axillary lymph node dissection had inferior survival outcomes compared to those treated with partial mastectomy and sentinel lymph node biopsy across all 3 age groups (P < .001). CONCLUSION: The clinical characteristics of TNBC differ significantly at the extremes of age, likely driving treatment decisions. Although patients ≤40 present with a more advanced disease and appropriately receive NAC, they also undergo more extensive surgery that does not yield a survival benefit. Further research is needed to determine if age disparity is due to oncologic factors or patient and provider preferences.

Guideline-Consistent Treatment for Inflammatory Breast Cancer Provides Associated Survival Benefit Independent of Age.

BACKGROUND: Guideline-consistent treatment (GCT) for inflammatory breast cancer (IBC) includes neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC), modified radical mastectomy (MRM), and radiation. We hypothesized that younger patients more frequently receive GCT, resulting in survival differences. METHODS: Using the National Cancer Database (2004-2018), female patients with unilateral IBC (by histology code and clinical stage T4d) were stratified by age (< 50, 50-65, > 65 years). Factors associated with NAC, MRM, radiation, and "GCT" (defined as all three treatments) were identified using multivariable logistic regression. Multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression identified predictors of overall survival. RESULTS: Of 3278 IBC patients, 30% were younger than 50 years, 44% were 50-65 years of age, and 26% were older than 65 years. The youngest group comprised the greatest proportion of non-White patients ([35%] vs. [29%] age 50-65 years and [23%] age > 65 years, p < 0.001) and was most often treated at academic facilities ([33%] vs. [28%] age 50-65 years; and [23%] age > 65, p < 0.001). Patients older than 65 years received NAC, MRM, and radiation less frequently, and only 35% underwent GCT (vs. [57%] age 50-65 years and [52%] age < 50 years; p < 0.001). On multivariable logistic regression, age older than 65 years independently predicted omission of NAC (odds ratio [OR], 0.36), MRM (OR, 0.56), and radiation (OR, 0.56) (all p < 0.001), and patients older than 65 years also were less likely to undergo GCT than patients 50-65 years of age (OR, 0.65; p = 0.001). GCT was associated with superior overall survival in all three age groups ([hazard ratio {HR}, 0.61] age < 50 years, [HR, 0.62] age 50-65 years, [HR, 0.53] age > 65 years; all p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Advanced age alone should not limit receipt of GCT for IBC. Multimodal care should be performed for IBC patients of all ages to improve oncologic outcomes for this aggressive breast cancer subtype.

Disparities in treatment and survival for patients with isolated colorectal liver metastases.

BACKGROUND: Surgical resection improves survival for patients with isolated colorectal liver metastasis. National studies on the disparities related to this topic are limited; therefore, we investigated factors that affect surgical treatment and survival. METHODS: We queried the National Cancer Database (2010-2017) for patients with isolated synchronous colorectal liver metastasis. Multivariable logistic regression and Cox proportional hazard regressions were used to identify factors associated with surgical resection, treatment at high-volume facilities, and overall survival. RESULTS: Of 34,050 patients with isolated colorectal liver metastasis, surgical resection (n = 7,810; 23.0%) was more likely among patients who were of high socioeconomic status (odds ratio = 1.16; 95% confidence interval, 1.04-1.31), traveled long distance for treatment (odds ratio = 1.48; 95% confidence interval, 1.31-1.66), and were treated at high-volume facilities (odds ratio = 4.86; 95% confidence interval, 14.45-5.30). Black patients were less likely to undergo resection (odds ratio = 0.75; 95% confidence interval, 0.69-0.82). Treatment at high-volume facility was more common among patients who were Black (odds ratio = 1.14; 95% confidence interval, 1.07-1.21), were of high socioeconomic status (socioeconomic status index 7: odds ratio = 1.21; 95% confidence interval, 1.11-1.31), and traveled long distance (odds ratio = 4.03; 95% confidence interval, 3.63-4.48) and less likely for nonmetropolitan residents and those of low socioeconomic status (P < .05). Patients of high socioeconomic status and those who traveled long distance, were treated at high-volume facilities, underwent surgical resection, and received perioperative chemotherapy had an associated survival advantage (P < .05 for all), whereas Black race was associated with poorer overall survival (P < .05). CONCLUSION: Nonmedical patient factors, such as race, socioeconomic status, and geography, are associated with treatment and survival for isolated colorectal liver metastases. Disparities persist after adjusting for surgical resection and treatment facility. These barriers must be addressed to improve care for vulnerable cancer patients.