Prognostic Importance of Axillary Lymph Node Response to Neoadjuvant Systemic Therapy on Axillary Surgery in Breast Cancer-A Single Center Experience.

Neoadjuvant systemic treatment (NST) is the standard treatment for HER2+, triple-negative (TN), and highly proliferative luminal HER2- early breast cancer. Pathologic complete response (pCR) after NST is associated with improved outcomes. We evaluated the predictive factors for axillary-pCR (AXpCR) and its impact on the extent of axillary node surgery. This retrospective study included 92 patients (median age of 50.4 years) with an initially node-positive disease. Patients were treated with molecular subtype-specific NST (4.3% were luminal A-like, 28.3% luminal HER2-, 26.1% luminal HER2+, 18.5% HER2+ non-luminal, and 22.8% TN). Axillary-, breast- and total-pCR were achieved in 52.2%, 48.9%, and 38% of patients, respectively. In a binary logistic regression model for the whole population, the only independent factor significantly associated with AXpCR was breast-pCR (OR 7.4; 95% CI 2.6-20.9; p < 0.001). In patients who achieved breast-pCR, aggressive subtypes (HER2+ and TN; OR 11.24) and clinical tumor stage (OR 0.10) had a significant impact on achieving AXpCR. Axillary lymph node dissection was avoided in 53.3% of patients. In conclusion, in node-positive patients with HER2+ and TN subtypes, who achieved breast-pCR after NST, de-escalation of axillary surgery could be considered in most cases.

The metastatic spread of breast cancer accelerates during sleep.

The metastatic spread of cancer is achieved by the haematogenous dissemination of circulating tumour cells (CTCs). Generally, however, the temporal dynamics that dictate the generation of metastasis-competent CTCs are largely uncharacterized, and it is often assumed that CTCs are constantly shed from growing tumours or are shed as a consequence of mechanical insults1. Here we observe a striking and unexpected pattern of CTC generation dynamics in both patients with breast cancer and mouse models, highlighting that most spontaneous CTC intravasation events occur during sleep. Further, we demonstrate that rest-phase CTCs are highly prone to metastasize, whereas CTCs generated during the active phase are devoid of metastatic ability. Mechanistically, single-cell RNA sequencing analysis of CTCs reveals a marked upregulation of mitotic genes exclusively during the rest phase in both patients and mouse models, enabling metastasis proficiency. Systemically, we find that key circadian rhythm hormones such as melatonin, testosterone and glucocorticoids dictate CTC generation dynamics, and as a consequence, that insulin directly promotes tumour cell proliferation in vivo, yet in a time-dependent manner. Thus, the spontaneous generation of CTCs with a high proclivity to metastasize does not occur continuously, but it is concentrated within the rest phase of the affected individual, providing a new rationale for time-controlled interrogation and treatment of metastasis-prone cancers.

Impact of Oncoplastic Breast Surgery on Rate of Complications, Time to Adjuvant Treatment, and Risk of Recurrence.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to compare the risk of complications and recurrence between oncoplastic and conventional breast surgery. METHODS: This is a retrospective analysis of a consecutive series of 436 patients with stage I-III breast cancer who underwent surgery at the University Hospital of Basel between 2011 and 2018. RESULTS: The nipple/skin-sparing mastectomy (NSM/SSM) group showed significantly more delayed wound healing (32.7 vs. 5.8%, p < 0.001) and skin necrosis (13.9 vs. 1.9%, p = 0.020) compared to conventional mastectomy (CM), which corresponded to significantly higher odds of short-term complications (OR 2.34, 95% CI 1.02-5.35, p = 0.044). The incidence rate of long-term morbidity in oncoplastic breast-conserving surgery (OBCS) was significantly higher compared to conventional breast-conserving surgery (CBCS; 25.5 vs. 11.3 per 100 patient years [PY], p < 0.001), in particular concerning chronic pain (13.3 vs. 6.6, p = 0.011) and lymphedema (4.1 vs. 0.4, p = 0.003). Seroma as a long-term morbidity occurred more often in the CM group compared to the NSM/SSM group (5.8 vs. 0.5 per 100 PY, p = 0.004). Patients received adjuvant treatment earlier after CM compared to NSM/SSM (HR 1.83, 95% CI 1.05-3.19, p = 0.034). There were no significant differences in the incidence of positive margins nor in the odds of recurrence after OBCS versus CBCS and after NSM/SSM versus CM. CONCLUSIONS: Even though the present study confirmed expected differences in complications and morbidity, it suggested that oncoplastic surgery is oncologically safe. Patients undergoing NSM/SSM should be followed closely to allow early detection and treatment of frequently associated complications and ensure timely start of adjuvant therapy.

Self-detection and clinical breast examination: comparison of the two "classical" physical examination methods for the diagnosis of breast cancer.

UNLABELLED: This is the first comprehensive analysis comparing specific aspects of tumor detection between the two "traditional" breast cancer detection methods self-detection (SD) and clinical breast examination (CBE). a) Which method is better in detecting smaller tumors? Both methods showed similar mean tumor diameters (SD: 22.1 mm vs. CBE: 21.9 mm; p = 0.991). b) Different frequency distributions of tumor locations would indicate that certain locations in the breast are more difficult to palpate: comparison of both methods showed comparable results (p = 0.835). c) General differences in tumor sizes with regard to certain locations would be of importance because the patients and/or the physicians could be educated to pay particular attention to certain locations during physical examination, where larger tumors tend to be found: tumors located in the central region were with 25.0 mm significantly larger than those in the peripheral regions of the breast (superior: 21.6 mm, p = 0.001; inferior: 21.6 mm, p = 0.015; lateral: 21.9 mm, p = 0.002; medial (20.9 mm, p = 0.001). Tumor sizes within the four peripheral regions did not differ significantly. d) Patients whose tumors were found by CBE were older than those whose tumors were found by SD (67 years vs. 60 years, p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: annual CBE should be an integral part of general medical care in older women.

Personal or first-degree family breast cancer history: which has higher impact on tumor detection and tumor size in breast cancer.

PURPOSE: A woman's risk of developing breast cancer (BC) is increased if she has a personal history (PH) or family history (FH) of the disease. We compared the impact of the two risk factors PH and FH on tumor detection and tumor size at diagnosis in a cohort of BC patients. METHODS: The study cohort comprised 1,037 invasive BC patients (≤70 years at diagnosis). From these, 92 patients (8.5%) had a positive PH and 151 patients (13.7%) had a positive first-degree FH. RESULTS: Compared to the tumors of patients without PH or FH, the lesions of patients who had a positive PH or a positive FH were more often found by radiologic breast examinations (RBE) (PH: 49.4%, FH: 43.4%, no PH/FH: 26.2%; both comparisons p < 0.001). In patients with a positive FH, the tumors were slightly less often found by RBE as in patients with a positive PH (p = 0.468). Patients with a positive PH or FH had smaller tumors compared with those without such a history (PH: 19.7 mm, FH: 19.6 mm, no PH/FH: 26.7 mm; p = 0.015/p < 0.001). The tumor sizes of patients with a positive PH were almost identical to those of patients with a positive FH (p = 0.999). CONCLUSIONS: In women with a positive FH or PH of BC, the increased awareness of BC risk led to the detection of smaller tumors compared to women who have not had this experience. However, comparison of the two risk factors showed that they had a similar impact on the RBE detection rate of BC lesions and that the tumor sizes were nearly identical.

Impact of breast cancer family history on tumor detection and tumor size in women newly-diagnosed with invasive breast cancer.

This study evaluated the impact of family history (FH) on tumor detection, the patient's age and tumor size at diagnosis in breast cancer (BC). Furthermore, we investigated whether the impact of FH on these features was dependent on degree of relationship, number of relatives with a BC history, or the age of the affected relative at the time that her BC was diagnosed. Out of the entire cohort (n = 1,037), 244 patients (23.5%) had a positive FH; 159 (15.3%) had first-degree relatives affected with BC and 85 patients (8.2%) had second-degree affected relatives. Compared to women who had no BC-affected relatives, the tumors of women who had positive FH were more often found by radiological breast examination (RBE: 31.7%/27.2%, p = 0.008), and they were smaller (general tumor size: 21.8 mm/26.4 mm, p = 0.003; size of tumors found by breast self-examination (BSE): 26.1 mm/30.6 mm, p = 0.041). However, this positive effect of increased use of BC screening and smaller tumor sizes was only observed in patients whose first-degree relatives were affected (comparison with second-degree affected relatives: RBE: 43.8%/24.7%; odds ratio 2.38, p = 0.007; general tumor size: 19.3 mm/26.3 mm; mean difference (MD) -6.9, p = 0.025; tumor size found by BSE: 22.5 mm/31.0 mm; MD -8.5, p = 0.044). When more second-degree relatives or older relatives were diagnosed with BC, the tumors of these patients were similarly often detected by RBE (relationship: 24.7%/27.2%, p = 0.641; age: 33.7 %/27.2 %, p = 0.177) and had similar tumor sizes (general size: 26.3 mm/26.4 mm, p = 0.960; BSE: 31.0 mm/30.6 mm, p = 0.902) as those of women without a FH. Women with a positive FH generally use mammography screening more often and perceive changes in the breast earlier than women without such history. The increased awareness of BC risk decreases if the relationship is more distant.