The Impact of an Electromagnetic Seed Localization Device Versus Wire Localization on Breast-Conserving Surgery: A Matched-Pair Analysis.

BACKGROUND: For breast-conserving surgery (BCS), several alternatives to wire localization (WL) have been developed. The newest, electromagnetic seed localization (ESL), provides three-dimensional navigation using the electrosurgical tool. This study assessed operative times, specimen volumes, margin positivity, and re-excision rates for ESL and WL. METHODS: Patients who had ESL-guided breast-conserving surgery between August 2020 and August 2021 were reviewed and matched one-to-one with patients who had WL based on surgeon, procedure type, and pathology. Variables were compared between ESL and WL using Wilcoxon rank-sum and Fisher's exact tests. RESULTS: The study matched 97 patients who underwent excisional biopsy (n = 20) or partial mastectomy with (n = 53) or without (n = 24) sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) using ESL. The median operative time for ESL versus WL for lumpectomy was 66 versus 69 min with SLNB (p = 0.76) and 40 versus 34.5 min without SLNB (p = 0.17). The median specimen volume was 36 cm3 using ESL versus 55 cm3 using WL (p = 0.001). For the patients with measurable tumor volume, excess tissue was greater using WL versus ESL (median, 73.2 vs. 52.5 cm3; p = 0.017). The margins were positive for 10 (10 %) of the 97 ESL patients and 18 (19 %) of the 97 WL patients (p = 0.17). In the ESL group, 6 (6 %) of the 97 patients had a subsequent re-excision compared with 13 (13 %) of the 97 WL patients (p = 0.15). CONCLUSIONS: Despite similar operative times, ESL is superior to WL, as evidenced by decreased specimen volume and excess tissue excised. Although the difference was not statistically significant, ESL resulted in fewer positive margins and re-excisions than WL. Further studies are needed to confirm that ESL is the most advantageous of the two methods.

A tool to predict disparities in the timeliness of surgical treatment for breast cancer patients in the USA.

PURPOSE: Breast cancer outcomes are impaired by both delays and disparities in treatment. This study was performed to assess their relationship and to provide a tool to predict patient socioeconomic factors associated with risk for delay. METHODS: The National Cancer Database was reviewed between 2004 and 2017 for patients with non-metastatic breast cancer managed with upfront surgery. Times to treatment were measured from the date of diagnosis. Patient, tumor, and treatment factors were assessed with attention paid to sociodemographic variables. RESULTS: 514,187 patients remained after exclusions, with 84.3% White, 10.8% Black, 3.7% Asian, and Hispanics comprising 5.6% of the cohort. Medicaid and uninsured patients had longer mean adjusted time to surgery (≥ 46 days) versus private (36.7 days), Medicare (35.9 days), or other governmental insurance (39.8 days). After adjustment, Black race and Hispanic ethnicity were most impactful, adding 6.0 and 6.4 preoperative days, 10.9 and 11.5 days to chemotherapy, 11.1 and 9.1 days to radiation, and 12.5 and 8.9 days to endocrine therapy, respectively. Income, education, and insurance, among other factors, also affected delay. A nomogram, including race and sociodemographic factors, was created to predict the risk of preoperative delay. CONCLUSION:  Significant disparities exist in timeliness of care for factors, including but not limited to, race and ethnicity. Although exact causes cannot be discerned, these data indicate population subsets whose intervals of care risk being longer than those specified by national quality standards. The nomogram created here may help direct resources to those at highest risk of incurring a treatment delay.

Neoadjuvant Endocrine Therapy and Delays in Surgery for Ductal Carcinoma in Situ: Implications for the Coronavirus Pandemic.

BACKGROUND: Surgical delays are associated with invasive cancer for patients with ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS). During the Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome-Coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic, neoadjuvant endocrine therapy (NET) was used as a bridge until postponed surgeries resumed. This study sought to determine the impact of NET on the rate of invasive cancer for patients with a diagnosis of DCIS who have a surgical delay compared with those not treated with NET. METHODS: Using the National Cancer Database, the study identified women with hormone receptor-positive (HR+) DCIS. The presence of invasion on final pathology was evaluated after stratifying by receipt of NET and by intervals based on time from diagnosis to surgery (≤30, 31-60, 61-90, 91-120, or 121-365 days). RESULTS: Of 109,990 women identified with HR+ DCIS, 276 (0.3%) underwent NET. The mean duration of NET was 74.4 days. The overall unadjusted rate of invasive cancer was similar between those who received NET ((15.6%) and those who did not (12.3%) (p = 0.10). In the multivariable analysis, neither the use nor the duration of NET were independently associated with invasion, but the trend across time-to-surgery categories demonstrated a higher rate of upgrade to invasive cancer in the no-NET group (p < 0.001), but not in the NET group (p = 0.97). CONCLUSIONS: This analysis of a pre-COVID cohort showed evidence for a protective effect of NET in HR+ DCIS against the development of invasive cancer as the preoperative delay increased, although an appropriately powered prospective trial is needed for a definitive answer.

Does the false-negative rate for 1 or 2 negative sentinel nodes after neo-adjuvant chemotherapy translate into a high local recurrence rate?

Prospective trials demonstrate that sentinel node (SN) biopsy after neo-adjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) has a significant false-negative rate (FNR) when only 1 or 2 SNs are removed. It is unknown whether this increased FNR correlates with an elevated risk of recurrence. Tumor Registry data at an NCI-Designated Comprehensive Cancer Center were reviewed from 2004 to 2018 for patients having a negative SN biopsy after NACT. Among 190 patients with histologically negative nodes after NACT having 1 (n = 42), 2 (n = 46), and ≥3 (n = 102) SNs, axillary recurrences occurred in 7.14%, 0%, and 1.96% (p = 0.09), breast recurrences occurred in 2.38%, 6.52%, and 0.98% (p = 0.12), and distance recurrences occurred in 16.67%, 8.70%, and 7.84% (p = 0.27), respectively. Time to first recurrence did not differ by SN count (p = 0.41). After adjustment for age, race, clinical stage, and receptor status, there were no differences in the rates of axillary (p = 0.26), breast (p = 0.44), or distance recurrence (p = 0.24) by numbers of SNs harvested. Median follow-up was 46.8 months. Despite higher post-NACT FNRs reported in randomized trials for patients having <3 sentinel nodes, recurrence rates were not significantly different for 1 versus 2 versus ≥3 SNs. This suggests that patients having 1 or 2 post-NACT SNs identified may not necessitate axillary dissection.

Intergroup Randomized Phase III Study of Postoperative Oxaliplatin, 5-Fluorouracil, and Leucovorin Versus Oxaliplatin, 5-Fluorouracil, Leucovorin, and Bevacizumab for Patients with Stage II or III Rectal Cancer Receiving Preoperative Chemoradiation: A Trial of the ECOG-ACRIN Research Group (E5204).

BACKGROUND: The addition of bevacizumab to chemotherapy improved outcomes for patients with metastatic colon cancer. E5204 was designed to test whether the addition of bevacizumab to mFOLFOX6, following neoadjuvant chemoradiation and definitive surgery, could improve overall survival (OS) in patients with stage II/III adenocarcinoma of the rectum. SUBJECTS, MATERIALS, AND METHODS: Patients with stage II/III rectal cancer who had completed neoadjuvant 5-fluorouracil-based chemoradiation and had undergone complete resection were enrolled. Patients were randomized to mFOLFOX6 (Arm A) or mFOLFOX6 with bevacizumab (Arm B) administered every 2 weeks for 12 cycles. RESULTS: E5204 registered only 355 patients (17% of planned accrual goal) as it was terminated prematurely owing to poor accrual. At a median follow-up of 72 months, there was no difference in 5-year overall survival (88.3% vs. 83.7%) or 5-year disease-free survival (71.2% vs. 76.5%) between the two arms. The rate of treatment-related grade ≥ 3 adverse events (AEs) was 68.8% on Arm A and 70.7% on Arm B. Arm B had a higher proportion of patients who discontinued therapy early as a result of AEs and patient withdrawal than did Arm A (32.4% vs. 21.5%, p = .029).The most common grade 3-4 treatment-related AEs were neutropenia, leukopenia, neuropathy, diarrhea (without prior colostomy), and fatigue. CONCLUSION: At 17% of its planned accrual, E5204 did not meet its primary endpoint. The addition of bevacizumab to FOLFOX6 in the adjuvant setting did not significantly improve OS in patients with stage II/III rectal cancer. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: At 17% of its planned accrual, E5204 was terminated early owing to poor accrual. At a median follow-up of 72 months, there was no significant difference in 5-year overall survival (88.3% vs. 83.7%) or in 5-year disease-free survival (71.2% vs. 76.5%) between the two arms. Despite significant advances in the treatment of rectal cancer, especially in improving local control rates, the risk of distant metastases and the need to further improve quality of life remain a challenge. Strategies combining novel agents with chemoradiation to improve both distant and local control are needed.

Preoperative Delays in the Treatment of DCIS and the Associated Incidence of Invasive Breast Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Although treatment delays have been associated with survival impairment for invasive breast cancer, this has not been thoroughly investigated for ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS). With trials underway to assess whether DCIS can remain unresected, this study was performed to determine whether longer times to surgery are associated with survival impairment or increased invasion. METHODS: A population-based study of prospectively collected national data derived from women with a clinical diagnosis of DCIS between 2004 and 2014 was conducted using the National Cancer Database. Overall survival (OS) and presence of invasion were assessed as functions of time by evaluating five intervals (≤ 30, 31-60, 61-90, 91-120, 121-365 days) between diagnosis and surgery. Subset analyses assessed those having pathologic DCIS versus invasive cancer on final pathology. RESULTS: Among 140,615 clinical DCIS patients, 123,947 had pathologic diagnosis of DCIS and 16,668 had invasive ductal carcinoma. For all patients, 5-year OS was 95.8% and unadjusted median delay from diagnosis to surgery was 38 days. With each delay interval increase, added relative risk of death was 7.4% (HR 1.07; 95% CI 1.05-1.10; P < 0.001). On final pathology, 5-year OS for noninvasive patients was 96.0% (95% CI 95.9-96.1%) versus 94.9% (95% CI 94.6-95.3%) for invasive patients. Increasing delay to surgery was an independent predictor of invasion (OR 1.13; 95% CI 1.11-1.15; P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Despite excellent OS for invasive and noninvasive cohorts, invasion was seen more frequently as delay increased. This suggests that DCIS trials evaluating nonoperative management, which represents infinite delay, require long term follow up to ensure outcomes are not compromised.

Time to Surgery and the Impact of Delay in the Non-Neoadjuvant Setting on Triple-Negative Breast Cancers and Other Phenotypes.

BACKGROUND: Characterization of breast cancer phenotypes has improved our ability to predict breast cancer behavior. Triple-negative (TN) breast cancers have higher and earlier rates of distant events. It has been suggested that this behavior necessitates treating TNs faster than others, including use of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) if time to surgery is not rapid. METHODS: A review of women diagnosed with non-inflammatory, invasive breast cancer was conducted using the National Cancer Database for patients not having NACT, diagnosed between 2010 and 2014. Changes in overall survival due to delay were measured by phenotype. RESULTS: Overall, 351,087 patients met the inclusion criteria, including 36,505 (10.4%) TNs, 77.9% hormone receptor-positive (HR+) and 11.7% human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-enriched (HER2+). Phenotype, among other factors, was predictive of treatment delays. Adjusted median days from diagnosis to surgery and chemotherapy were 29.9, 31.6 and 31.5 (p< 0.001), and 72.7, 78.0 and 74.4 (p< 0.001) for TNs, HR+ and HER2+ cancers, respectively. After diagnosis, OS declined for all patients per month of preoperative delay (hazard ratio 1.104; p< 0.001). In models separating or combining surgery and chemotherapy, this survival decline did not vary by breast cancer phenotype (p > 0.3). CONCLUSIONS: Delays cause small but measurable effects overall, but the effect on survival does not differ among breast cancer phenotypes. Our data suggest that urgency between diagnosis and surgery or chemotherapy is similar for breast cancers of different subtypes. Although NACT is sometimes advocated solely to avoid treatment delays, this study does not suggest a greater surgical urgency for TNs compared with other breast cancer phenotypes.

Breast conservation versus mastectomy in patients with T3 breast cancers (> 5 cm): an analysis of 37,268 patients from the National Cancer Database.

PURPOSE: Breast conservation therapy (BCT) is standard for T1-T2 tumors, but early trials excluded breast cancers > 5 cm. This study was performed to assess patterns and outcomes of BCT for T3 tumors. METHODS: We reviewed the National Cancer Database (NCDB) for noninflammatory breast cancers > 5 cm, between 2004 and 2011 who underwent BCT or mastectomy (Mtx) with nodal evaluation. Patients with skin or chest wall involvement were excluded. Patients having clinical T3 tumors were analyzed to determine outcomes based upon presentation, with those having pathologic T3 tumors, subsequently assessed, irrespective of presentation. Overall survival (OS) was analyzed using multivariable Cox proportional hazards models, with adjusted survival curves estimated using inverse probability weighting. RESULTS: After exclusions, 37,268 patients remained. Median age and tumor size for BCT versus Mtx were 53 versus 54 years (p < 0.001) and 6.0 versus 6.7 cm (p < 0.001), respectively. Predictors of BCT included age, race, location, facility type, year of diagnosis, tumor size, grade, histology, nodes examined and positive, and administration of chemotherapy and radiotherapy. OS was similar between Mtx and BCT (p = 0.36). This held true when neoadjuvant chemotherapy patients were excluded (p = 0.39). BCT percentages declined over time (p < 0.001), while tumor sizes remained the same (p = 0.77). Median follow-up was 51.4 months. CONCLUSIONS: OS for patients with T3 breast cancers is similar whether patients received Mtx or BCT, confirming that tumor size should not be an absolute BCT exclusion. Declining use of BCT for tumors > 5 cm in younger patients may be accounted for by recent trends toward mastectomy.

Impact of PET/CT for Restaging Patients With Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer After Neoadjuvant Chemoradiation.

BACKGROUND: A major challenge in identifying candidates for nonoperative management of locally advanced rectal cancer is predicting pathologic complete response (pCR) following chemoradiation. We evaluated pre- and post-CRT PET-CT imaging to predict pCR and prognosis in this set of patients undergoing resection after neoadjuvant therapy. METHODS: We retrospectively identified patients from 2002 to 2015 with locally advanced rectal cancer who underwent CRT, pre- and post-CRT PET-CT imaging, and resection. Univariate and multivariate analysis was performed and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were generated to evaluate the association of PET-CT characteristics with pCR and survival. ROC curves were generated to define optimal cutoff points for predictive PET-CT characteristics. RESULTS: 125 patients were included. pCR rate was 28%, and follow-up was 48 mo. On multivariable analysis, patients who had a pCR had lower median post-CRT maximal standardized uptake value (SUVmax) (3.2 versus 5.2, P = 0.009) and higher median %SUV decrease (72 versus 58%, P = 0.009). ROC curves were generated for %SUVmax decrease (AUC = 0.70) and post-CRT SUV (AUC = 0.69). Post-CRT SUVmax <4.3 and %SUVmax decrease of >66% were equally predictive of pCR with a sensitivity of 65%, specificity of 72%, PPV of 44%, and NPV of 86%. Median 5-y overall and relapse-free survival were improved for patients with post-CRT SUV <4.3 (OS: 86 versus 66%, P = 0.01; RFS: 75 versus 52%, P = 0.01) or %SUV decrease of >66% (OS, 82 versus 66%, P = 0.05; RFS, 75 versus 54%, P = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: PET/CT may be useful in identifying patients who did not achieve pCR, as well as overall survival in patients undergoing CRT for rectal cancer. Patients with a post-CRT SUV of >4.3 should be considered for operative management, as an estimated 86% of these patients will not have a pCR.

Impact of Proximal Vascular Ligation on Survival of Patients with Colon Cancer.

In an effort to optimize further the surgical management of colon cancer, many groups have advocated extended lymphadenectomy as a strategy to improve completeness of resection and lymph node harvest. This review evaluates lymphadenectomy according to the definitions for extent of lymph node dissection based on the guidelines provided by the Japanese Society of Cancer of the Colon and Rectum and the contemporary concepts of complete mesocolic excision and central vascular ligation. The proposed benefits of a D3 or central nodal dissection along root vessels in colon cancer is improving accuracy of lymph node evaluation and ensuring complete removal of lymph nodes that may harbor undetected tumor cells or other undefined immunologic processes important for metastases. Metastasis to central lymph nodes occurs in 1 to 8% of patients with colon cancer and is most commonly seen in T3 and T4 tumors. Although central lymph node metastasis is associated with decreased survival after resection, resection of the nodes, when present, may confer a survival benefit analogous to resection of metastasis at distant sites. Current data support a standardized anatomic approach to colonic resection with complete resection of the mesocolic envelope and ligation at least to the D2 level.

Omission of radiotherapy after breast conservation surgery in the postneoadjuvant setting.

BACKGROUND: Breast conservation therapy (BCT) consists of breast conservation surgery (BCS) and radiotherapy (RT). Neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) can downstage tumors, broadening BCS eligibility in patients requiring mastectomy. However, tumor downstaging does not obviate need for RT. This study evaluated factors that predict RT omission after NACT and BCS. METHODS: The National Cancer Database was queried for women with unilateral, clinical stage II-III breast cancer, treated with NACT and BCS between 2008 and 2012. Patients not receiving RT after NACT and BCS were identified. A subgroup analysis was performed eliminating patients for whom RT was recommended but not received. RESULTS: Among 10,220 patients meeting study eligibility, 974 (9.53%) did not receive RT after BCS. Predictors of RT omission included older age, insurance status, facility type, facility region, more recent year of diagnosis, receptor status unknown, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 status positive or unknown, and positive margins. Factors increasing the likelihood of RT receipt included cN3 disease, receptor positivity, and primary downstaging. Race, Hispanicity, education, income, comorbidities, rural versus urban setting, histology, grade, and nodal stage change were not associated with RT omission. When excluding the 314 patients for whom RT was recommended but not received, age, Medicaid insurance, facility type, facility region, receptor status unknown, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 status unknown, and positive margins were predictors of RT omission. CONCLUSIONS: Race, comorbidities, and socioeconomic status were not predictors of RT omission. It remains unclear whether omission of RT in some cases is due to lack of physician knowledge. Further efforts are needed to ensure that physicians and patients recognize that RT is a vital and required part of BCT, even after NACT.

Predictive Value of Leukocyte- and Platelet-Derived Ratios in Rectal Adenocarcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Advances in treatment of rectal cancer have improved survival, but there is variability in response to therapy. Recent data suggest the utility of the lymphocyte-to-monocyte ratio (LMR), neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR), and platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio (PLR) in predicting survival. Our aim was to examine these ratios in rectal cancer patients and determine whether any association exists with overall survival (OS). METHODS: Using prospectively maintained institutional data, a query was completed for clinical stage II-III rectal adenocarcinoma patients treated from 2002 to 2016. We included patients who had a complete blood count collected before neoadjuvant chemoradiation (pre-CRT) and again before surgery (post-CRT). The LMR, NLR, and PLR were calculated for the pre-CRT and post-CRT time points. Potential cutpoints associated with OS differences were determined using maximally selected rank statistics. Survival curves were compared using log-rank tests and were adjusted for age and stage using Cox regression. RESULTS: A total of 146 patients were included. Cutpoints were significantly associated with OS for pre-CRT ratios but not for post-CRT ratios. Within the pretreatment group, a "low" (<2.86) LMR was associated with decreased OS (log-rank P = 0.004). In the same group, a "high" (>4.47) NLR and "high" PLR (>203.6) were associated with decreased OS (log-rank P < 0.001). With covariate adjustment for age, and separately for final pathologic stage, the associations between OS and LMR, NLR, and PLR each retained statistical significance. CONCLUSIONS: If obtained before the start of neoadjuvant chemoradiation, LMR, NLR, and PLR values are accurate predictors of 5-y OS in patients with locally advanced rectal adenocarcinoma.

Pathologic response following treatment for locally advanced rectal cancer: Does location matter?

BACKGROUND: Despite advances in the treatment of rectal adenocarcinoma, the management of locally advanced disease remains a challenge. The standard of care for patients with stages II and III rectal cancer includes neoadjuvant chemoradiation followed by total mesorectal excision and postoperative chemotherapy. Much effort has been dedicated to the identification of predictive factors associated with pathologic complete response (pCR). The aim of our study was to examine our institutional experience and determine whether any association exists between anatomic tumor location and the rate of pCR. We hypothesized that lesions more than 6 cm from the anal verge are more likely to achieve a pCR. METHODS: Using data from our prospectively maintained tumor registry, a query was completed to identify all patients with locally advanced rectal adenocarcinoma who underwent treatment at Fox Chase Cancer Center from 2002 to 2015. Demographics, pretreatment, posttreatment, and final pathologic TNM staging data were collected as well as treatment intervals in days, recurrence status, overall survival, and disease-free survival. Patients with incomplete endoscopic data, staging information, survival, or recurrence status were excluded. The primary outcome measured was the degree of pathologic response. Logistic regression was used to adjust for covariates. RESULTS: Of the 135 patients eligible in the study cohort, 39% were female and 61% were male. Regarding initial clinical stage, 43% were stage II and 57% were stage III. A total of 29% had a pCR, 43% had partial pathologic response, and 28% had no response to neoadjuvant treatment. Tumor location ranged from 0 to 13 cm from the anal verge. Longitudinal tumor length was recorded in 111 patients, facilitating the calculation of mean tumor distance from the anal verge. This ranged from 0 to 15.5 cm. Univariate and multivariable analyses were completed using pCR as a primary outcome. No statistically significant difference was noted based on tumor location, regardless of measurement approach. CONCLUSIONS: Anatomic location of cancer of the rectum does not affect pCR after neoadjuvant therapy and subsequent surgical resection.

Impact of rheumatoid arthritis on radiation-related toxicity and cosmesis in breast cancer patients: a contemporary matched-pair analysis.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the impact of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) on toxicity and cosmesis in women undergoing radiotherapy for breast cancer. METHODS: We queried an institutional database for women with RA treated with external beam radiotherapy for breast cancer between 1981 and 2016. Matching each patient to three controls without RA was attempted. Radiation toxicity was graded using CTCAE 4.0. Cosmesis was graded using the Global Harris Scoring System of Excellent, Good, Fair, or Poor. Grade 2+ (G2+) acute and late toxicities were compared between women with RA and their matched pairs using a generalized estimating equation (GEE). Wilcoxon test and mixed effects model were used to compare the cosmesis between two groups. RESULTS: Forty women with RA at time of radiation were matched to 117 controls. The median radiation dose was 60 Gy (50-66 Gy) and the median follow-up was 94 months (1-354 months). When comparing the women with RA to their matched pairs, there was no significant difference in the rates of G2+ acute toxicity (25.0 vs. 13.7%, O 2.1, CI 0.91-4.9) or G2+ late toxicity (7.5 vs. 4.3%, OR 1.8, CI 0.48-6.8). Mean cosmesis was between Good and Excellent for both groups of patients, although women with RA were less likely to get Excellent cosmesis compared to their matched pairs (OR 0.35, CI 0.15-0.84). CONCLUSIONS: Among women with RA, radiation for breast cancer was well tolerated without significantly increased toxicity. Their cosmesis was generally Good to Excellent, although they might be less likely to get Excellent cosmesis compared to their matched pairs.

Breast conservation versus mastectomy for patients with T3 primary tumors (>5 cm): A review of 5685 medicare patients.

BACKGROUND: Although breast conservation therapy (BCT) is standard for breast cancer treatment, patients with tumors measuring >5 cm have been excluded from clinical trials. Nevertheless, only a few small retrospective series to date have compared BCT with mastectomy for tumors measuring >5 cm. The current study was performed to determine whether survival is equivalent for BCT versus mastectomy using a large national data set. METHODS: Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER)-Medicare-linked cases were identified for patients aged ≥ 66 years undergoing breast conservation for invasive, noninflammatory, nonmetastatic breast cancer between 1992 and 2009. Propensity score-based adjustment was used to account for demographics and tumor and treatment factors. RESULTS: A total of 5685 patients with tumors measuring >5.0 cm underwent breast surgery, with 15.6% receiving BCT. Mean ages of the patients and tumor sizes were similar. Predictors of BCT included neoadjuvant chemotherapy and postoperative radiotherapy use, higher income, breast cancer as a first malignancy, and a higher Charlson Comorbidity Index. Predictors of mastectomy included younger age, nonductal histology, higher grade, numbers of lymph nodes examined and found to be positive, American Joint Committee on Cancer stage III disease, postoperative chemotherapy use, and residential region of the country. Adjusted overall and breast cancer-specific survival were not different between patients treated with BCT and mastectomy (hazard ratio, 0.934; 95% confidence interval, 0.791-1.103 [P = .419] for overall survival; and subdistribution hazard ratio, 1.042; 95% confidence interval, 0.793-1.369 [P = .769] for breast cancer-specific survival), with each improving over time. The median follow-up was 7.0 years. CONCLUSIONS: For Medicare patients with tumors measuring >5 cm, survival is similar between those treated with BCT and mastectomy as for patients with smaller primary tumors. Despite exclusion from randomized trials, BCT may remain an option for patients with larger tumors when deemed clinically and cosmetically amenable to surgical resection.

Patterns of multidisciplinary care in the management of non-metastatic invasive breast cancer in the United States Medicare patient.

PURPOSE: Multidisciplinary care (MDC) in managing breast cancer is resource-intensive and growing in prevalence anecdotally, although care patterns are poorly characterized. We sought to determine MDC patterns and effects on care in the United States Medicare patient. METHODS: Patients diagnosed with non-metastatic invasive breast cancer from 1992-2009 were reviewed using the Survival, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER)-Medicare linked dataset. MDC was defined as a post-diagnosis, preoperative visit with a surgical, medical, and radiation oncologist. Same-day MDC (MDCSD) was the MDC subset having all three visits on one date. RESULTS: Among 88,865 patients, MDC was utilized in 2.9 %, with 14.1 % of these having MDCSD. MDC use did not vary by stage, but MDC patients were more likely to be younger, black, receive lumpectomy, have fewer nodes examined, and receive radiotherapy. MDCSD patients were more likely than non-MDC patients to be black, receive mastectomy, and receive radiotherapy. MDC and MDCSD use increased over time and varied by geographic region, with rural patients less likely to receive MDC (OR 0.54 [95 % CI 0.45-0.65]) and MDCSD (OR 0.32 [95 % CI 0.19-0.54]). Radiotherapy after breast conserving surgery, used in 86.2 % of non-MDC patients, was administered to 90.2 % of MDC (p < 0.001) and 92.6 % of MDC(SD) (p = 0.096) patients. Post-mastectomy radiotherapy was administered in 52.0 % of non-MDC patients, 63.8 % of MDC (p = 0.050), and 89.1 % of MDC(SD) (p = 0.011) patients after propensity score adjustment. CONCLUSION: While increasing, few Medicare patients undergo MDC and MDCSD is rare. MDC may improve quality and MDCSD should be considered for patient convenience. While not yet widespread, efforts should integrate MDC and MDCSD across the U.S.

Phase II Trial of Preoperative Radiation With Concurrent Capecitabine, Oxaliplatin, and Bevacizumab Followed by Surgery and Postoperative 5-Fluorouracil, Leucovorin, Oxaliplatin (FOLFOX), and Bevacizumab in Patients With Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer: 5-Year Clinical Outcomes ECOG-ACRIN Cancer Research Group E3204.

LESSONS LEARNED: The 5-year oncologic outcomes from the trial regimen were excellent. However, the neoadjuvant and surgical toxicity of this regimen was significant and was the primary reason for the low compliance with adjuvant systemic therapy.Due to the lack of an improvement in the pathologic complete response rate, the substantial associated toxicity, and the negative phase III trials of adjuvant bevacizumab in colon cancer, this regimen will not be pursued for further study. BACKGROUND: The addition of bevacizumab to chemotherapy improves overall survival for metastatic colorectal cancer. We initiated a phase II trial to evaluate preoperative capecitabine, oxaliplatin, and bevacizumab with radiation therapy (RT) followed by surgery and postoperative 5-fluorouracil, leucovorin, oxaliplatin (FOLFOX), and bevacizumab for locally advanced rectal cancer. The purpose of this report is to describe the 5-year oncologic outcomes of this regimen. METHODS: In a phase II Simon two-stage design study, we evaluated preoperative treatment with capecitabine (825 mg/m(2) b.i.d. Monday-Friday), oxaliplatin (50 mg/m(2) weekly), bevacizumab (5 mg/kg on days 1, 15, and 29), and RT (50.4 Gy). Surgery was performed by 8 weeks after RT. Beginning 8-12 weeks after surgery, patients received FOLFOX plus bevacizumab (5 mg/kg) every 2 weeks for 12 cycles (oxaliplatin stopped after 9 cycles). The primary endpoint was a pathologic complete response (path-CR) rate of 30%. Fifty-seven patients with resectable T3/T4 rectal adenocarcinoma were enrolled between 2006 and 2010. RESULTS: Of 57 enrolled patients, 53 were eligible and included in the analysis. Forty-eight (91%) patients completed preoperative therapy, all of whom underwent curative surgical resection. Nine patients (17%) achieved path-CR. There were 29 worst grade 3 events, 8 worst grade 4 events, and 2 patient deaths, 1 of which was attributed to study therapy. Twenty-six patients (54%) began adjuvant chemotherapy. After a median follow-up period of 41 months, the 5-year overall survival (OS) rate for all patients was 80%. Only 2 patients experienced cancer recurrence: 1 distant (liver) and 1 loco-regional (pelvic lymph nodes), respectively. Both of these patients are still alive. The 5-year relapse-free survival rate was 81%. CONCLUSION: Despite the path-CR primary endpoint of this trial not being reached, the 5-year OS and recurrence-free survival rates were excellent. However, the neoadjuvant and surgical toxicity of this regimen was significant and was the primary reason for the low compliance with adjuvant systemic therapy. Because of the lack of an improvement in the path-CR rate, the substantial associated toxicity, and the negative phase III trials of adjuvant bevacizumab in colon cancer, this regimen will not be pursued for further study.