Prognostic role of preoperative circulating systemic inflammatory response markers in primary breast cancer: meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Circulating markers of the systemic inflammatory response are prognostic in several cancers, but their role in operable breast cancer is unclear. A systematic review and meta-analysis of the literature was carried out. METHODS: A search of electronic databases up to August 2020 identified studies that examined the prognostic value of preoperative circulating markers of the systemic inflammatory response in primary operable breast cancer. A meta-analysis was carried out for each marker with more than three studies, reporting a HR and 95 per cent confidence interval for disease-free survival (DFS), breast cancer-specific survival (BCSS) or overall survival (OS). RESULTS: In total, 57 studies were reviewed and 42 were suitable for meta-analysis. Higher neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) was associated with worse overall survival (OS) (pooled HR 1.75, 95 per cent c.i. 1.52 to 2.00; P < 0.001), disease-free survival (DFS) (HR 1.67, 1.50 to 1.87; P < 0.001), and breast cancer-specific survival (BCSS) (HR 1.89, 1.35 to 2.63; P < 0.001). This effect was also seen with an arithmetically-derived NLR (dNLR). Higher platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio (PLR) was associated with worse OS (HR 1.29, 1.10 to 1.50; P = 0.001) and DFS (HR 1.58, 1.33 to 1.88; P < 0.001). Higher lymphocyte-to-monocyte ratio (LMR) was associated with improved DFS (HR 0.65, 0.51 to 0.82; P < 0.001), and higher C-reactive protein (CRP) level was associated with worse BCSS (HR 1.22, 1.07 to 1.39; P = 0.002) and OS (HR 1.24, 1.14 to 1.35; P = 0.002). CONCLUSION: Current evidence suggests a role for preoperative NLR, dNLR, LMR, PLR, and CRP as prognostic markers in primary operable breast cancer. Further work should define their role in clinical practice, particularly reproducible thresholds and molecular subtypes for which these may be of most value.

Antibiotic prophylaxis in breast cancer surgery (PAUS trial): randomised clinical double-blind parallel-group multicentre superiority trial.

BACKGROUND: Participants were patients with invasive breast cancer undergoing primary surgery. The aim was to test whether a single dose of amoxicillin-clavulanic acid would reduce wound infection at 30 days postoperatively, and to identify risk factors for infection. METHODS: Participants were randomised to either a single bolus of 1.2 g intravenous amoxicillin-clavulanic acid after the induction of anaesthesia (intervention) or no antibiotic (control). The primary outcome was the incidence of wound infection at 30 days postoperatively. RESULTS: There were 871 evaluable patients. Of these, 438 received prophylactic antibiotic and 433 served as controls. Seventy-one (16.2 per cent) patients in the intervention group developed a wound infection by 30 days, while there were 83 (19.2 per cent) infections in the control group. This was not statistically significant (odds ratio (OR) 0.82, 95 per cent c.i. 0.58 to 1.15; P = 0.250). The risk of infection increased for every 5 kg/m2 of BMI (OR 1.29, 95 per cent c.i. 1.10 to 1.52; P = 0.003). Patients who were preoperative carriers of Staphylococcus aureus had an increased risk of postoperative wound infection; however, there was no benefit of preoperative antibiotics for patients with either a high BMI or who were carriers of S. aureus. CONCLUSION: There was no statistically significant or clinically meaningful reduction in wound infection at 30 days following breast cancer surgery in patients who received a single dose of amoxicillin-clavulanic acid preoperatively. REGISTRATION NUMBER: N0399145605 (National Research Register).

There is little research about antibiotics in breast cancer surgery. Surgeons are not certain whether or not to use antibiotics for their patients. The aim of the Prophylactic Antibiotic Use in Surgery (PAUS) trial was to ask a question, 'Do preoperative antibiotics have any benefit for patients having surgery for breast cancer?' In the PAUS trial patients were given information to decide whether they wished to take part in the trial or not. Participants were randomly placed in one of two groups. Half were given one dose of the amoxicillin­clavulanic acid antibiotic at the time of their operation. The other half had no antibiotic. Neither the patient nor the surgeon knew which group the patient was in. Patients were carefully checked until 30 days after their operation for signs of wound infection. Altogether, 871 patients agreed to take part in the PAUS trial. Of these, 438 patients had the antibiotic and 433 had no antibiotic. The PAUS trial showed that there was no difference in the number of wound infections when comparing the two groups. Seventy-one patients (16.2 per cent) who had been given the antibiotic developed a wound infection by 30 days versus 83 (19.2 per cent) in the group who had not been given the antibiotic. This trial shows that antibiotics may not be needed for breast cancer surgery. PAUS may help to cut down on unnecessary antibiotic use.

Variation in the management of elderly patients in two neighboring breast units is due to preferences and attitudes of health professionals.

Introduction: Elderly breast cancer patients have been shown to be managed less aggressively than younger patients. There is evidence that their management varies between institutions. We audited the management of elderly patients in two neighboring units in Glasgow and aimed to identify reasons for any differences in practice found. Methods: Patients aged ≥70 years, who were managed for a new diagnosis of breast cancer in the two units between 2009 and 2013, were identified from a prospectively maintained database. Tumor pathology, treatment details, postcode and consultant in charge of care were obtained from the same database. Comorbidities were obtained from each patient's electronic clinical record. Questionnaires were distributed to members of each multidisciplinary teams. Results: 487 elderly patients in Unit 1 and 467 in Unit 2 were identified. 76.2% patients in Unit 1 were managed surgically compared to 63.7% in Unit 2 (p<0.0001). There was no difference between the two units in patient age, tumor pathology, deprivation or comorbidity. 16.2% patients managed surgically in Unit 1 had a comorbidity score of 6 and above compared to 11% of surgically managed patients in Unit 2 (p=0.036). Responses to questionnaires suggested that staff at Unit 1 were more confident of the safety of general anesthetic in elderly patients and were more willing to consider local anesthetic procedures. Conclusion: A higher proportion of patients aged >70 years with breast cancer were managed surgically in Unit 1 compared to Unit 2. Reasons for variation in practice seem to be related to attitudes of medical professionals toward surgery in the elderly, rather than patient or pathological factors.

Oncoplastic breast conservation occupies a niche between standard breast conservation and mastectomy - A population-based prospective audit in Scotland.

INTRODUCTION: The role of oncoplastic breast conservation (OBC) surgery is not fully defined in terms of whether it is equivalent to standard breast conservation (SBC), or more an alternative to mastectomy, or whether it occupies its own niche somewhere between the two. Therefore, we have carried out a population-based prospective audit of the current OBC practice in Scotland. METHODS: All patients diagnosed with breast cancer in the whole of Scotland between 01/01/2014 and 31/12/2015 were prospectively recorded within the National Managed Clinical Networks databases. Patients treated with OBC were compared to patients who had SBC, mastectomy and mastectomy with immediate reconstruction (MIR). RESULTS: 8075 patients were included (OBC:217(2.7%); SBC:5241(64.9%); mastectomy:1907(23.6%); MIR:710(8.8%)). OBC patients were younger than SBC or mastectomy, but older than MIR (p < 0.0001). OBC patients were between SBC and mastectomy patients in terms of clinical and pathological tumour size (all p < 0.001), rates of lobular cancers (v.SBC:p = 0.015 and v.mastectomy:p < 0.001), high-grade tumours (v.SBC:p = 0.030 and v.mastectomy:p = 0.008), ER negative (v.SBC: p = 0.042) and HER-2 positive (v.SBC: p = 0.003) tumours, and nodal metastasis (v.mastectomy: p < 0.001). More OBC patients received (neo)adjuvant chemo- and hormonal therapy (p ≤ 0.001), adjuvant radiotherapy (p = 0.005), trastuzumab (p < 0.001) than SBC. More OBC patients presented through screening (v.mastectomy/MIR: p < 0.0001). Time to surgery from diagnosis was longer for OBC than SBC/mastectomy (p < 0.0001), but shorter than MIR (p = 0.007). CONCLUSION: This national audit demonstrates that OBC occupies its own niche between SBC, mastectomy and MIR in the surgical treatment of breast cancer in Scotland. We recommend that OBC should be recorded separately in other national breast cancer registries.

The role of gamma delta T lymphocytes in breast cancer: a review.

Gammadelta T (γδT) lymphocytes have provoked interest in oncology, particularly as regards their potential use in immunotherapy, because of their unique ability to recognise antigens without a requirement for major histocompatibility complex antigen presentation, and to quickly activate an anti-tumour response. However, work in some cancers has suggested that they also have pro-tumourigenic activity. Their role in breast cancer is unclear. This review outlines the evidence to date in in vitro studies, in vivo mouse models and in human studies regarding the role of γδT lymphocytes in breast cancer. We describe the seemingly opposing roles of the predominantly circulating Vγ9Vδ2+ subtype, which can suppress tumour growth through direct cytotoxicity, induction of apoptosis and inhibition of angiogenesis, and the predominantly tumour-infiltrating γδ1+ subtype which can promote tumour growth and spread through immunosuppressant effects. We summarise the evidence in breast cancer for the mechanisms of action of γδT lymphocytes and describe how factors in the tumour microenvironment may affect their function, polarising them towards a pro-tumourigenic, immune-suppressing role. We also describe the experience to date of γδT lymphocytes in immunotherapy for breast cancer and suggest the direction of work going forward, particularly as regards different breast cancer subtypes.