Ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence after breast-conserving surgery: insights into biology and treatment.

Despite modern surgical and irradiation techniques, ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence (IBTR) accounts for 5-15% of all cancer recurrence in women treated with breast conservative treatment. Historically, this event has been treated definitively with salvage mastectomy and completion axillary clearance. However, many local recurrences are small and without nodal involvement at presentation. Thus, there has been an interest in performing a surgical de-escalation procedure in the breast and the axilla. The current guidelines do not provide detailed descriptions and treatment suggestions for these selected patients, resulting in inconsistent treatment strategies. Moreover, the methods to define true recurrence (TR) and new primary tumor (NP) for IBTR remain controversial. Most developed classification methods mainly rely on clinical and pathological criteria, limiting the accuracy of the discerption and causing misclassification. In this editorial, we will discuss the current trends in surgical de-escalation for patients with IBTR. Moreover, we will focus on recent IBTR innovations, highlighting molecular-integrated classification and multimodal staging methods for clinical practice and postoperative surveillance strategies.

Omission of axillary surgery for ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence with negative nodes after previous breast-conserving surgery: is it oncologically safe?

PURPOSE: Salvage mastectomy is traditionally recommended for patients who developed ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence (IBTR) in light of previous breast irradiation. However, it remains controversial whether surgical axillary staging (SAS) is necessary for IBTR patients with negative nodes. This study aimed to evaluate the oncologic safety of omitting SAS for IBTR. METHODS: We retrospectively identified patients who developed invasive IBTR with negative nodes after undergoing breast-conserving surgery (BCS) from 2010 to 2018. Patterns of care in nodal staging were analyzed based on prior axillary staging status. Clinicopathologic characteristics and adjuvant treatment of the initial tumor, as well as the IBTR, were compared between the SAS and no SAS groups. Kaplan-Meier method and Cox regression model were utilized to compare the locoregional recurrence-free survival (LRRFS), distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS), and overall survival (OS) rates after IBTR removal between the two groups. RESULTS: A total of 154 IBTR patients were eligible for final analysis. Compared to the no SAS group, SAS group was less likely to undergo ALND (15.1 vs 73.3%, p < 0.001) at initial BCS, had a longer recurrence interval (2.8 vs 2.1 years, p = 0.03), and were more likely to have discordant molecular subtype (35.8 vs 12.9%, p = 0.001) and different quadrant location (37.7 vs 19.8%, p = 0.02) with primary tumor. However, the extent of axillary staging did not affect systemic or radiation recommendations. In the subgroup of patients without previous ALND, the clinicopathologic characteristics were roughly comparable. No significant differences were observed in LRRFS, DMFS or OS between the two groups. CONCLUSION: For node-negative IBTR patients, we observed selection bias on the basis of prior ALND, shorter recurrence interval, and concordant molecular subtype favoring no SAS but comparable LRRFS, DMFS, and OS. These results support a wider consideration of sparing SAS in the management of IBTR, especially in patients without previous ALND.

Genetic interactions reveal distinct biological and therapeutic implications in breast cancer.

Co-occurrence and mutual exclusivity of genomic alterations may reflect the existence of genetic interactions, potentially shaping distinct biological phenotypes and impacting therapeutic response in breast cancer. However, our understanding of them remains limited. Herein, we investigate a large-scale multi-omics cohort (n = 873) and a real-world clinical sequencing cohort (n = 4,405) including several clinical trials with detailed treatment outcomes and perform functional validation in patient-derived organoids, tumor fragments, and in vivo models. Through this comprehensive approach, we construct a network comprising co-alterations and mutually exclusive events and characterize their therapeutic potential and underlying biological basis. Notably, we identify associations between TP53mut-AURKAamp and endocrine therapy resistance, germline BRCA1mut-MYCamp and improved sensitivity to PARP inhibitors, and TP53mut-MYBamp and immunotherapy resistance. Furthermore, we reveal that precision treatment strategies informed by co-alterations hold promise to improve patient outcomes. Our study highlights the significance of genetic interactions in guiding genome-informed treatment decisions beyond single driver alterations.

Lipid Intake and Breast Cancer Risk: Is There a Link? A New Focus and Meta-Analysis.

Objective: To determine if there is an association between total lipid intake, saturated fatty acid (SFA), Poly- and Mono-Unsaturated Fatty Acid (PUFA and MUFA) and cholesterol intake and breast cancer risk. Materials and Methods: We conducted a systematic review of the literature and a meta-analysis following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. We included all cohort and case-control studies published up to December 2020 with subgroup analysis according to menopausal status. Results: We included 44 articles for analysis. There was no association between total fat, SFA, MUFA, PUFA and cholesterol intake and breast cancer in the general population and in pre-menopausal women. In postmenopausal women, high SFA consumption was associated with increased breast cancer risk in case-control studies [relative risk (RR): 1.12; confidence interval (CI) 95%: 1.03-1.21; p = 0.006 but not in cohort studies (RR: 1.01; CI 95%: 0.85-1.19; p = 0.93). Conclusion: There was a weak association between high SFA consumption and breast cancer risk in post-menopausal women, however there was high heterogeneity for this analysis. As lipids can have different actions in the same family, studies should rather focus on specific lipid consumption.

Spatiotemporal Patterns of Loco-Regional Recurrence After Breast-Conserving Surgery.

BACKGROUND: Loco-regional recurrences (LRR) following breast-conserving surgery (BCS) remain a heterogeneous class of disease that has significant variation in its biological behavior and prognosis. METHODS: To delineate the spatiotemporal patterns of LRR after BCS, we analyzed the data of 4325 patients treated with BCS from 2006 to 2016. Clinico-pathological and treatment specific factors were analyzed using the Cox proportional hazards model to identify factors predictive for LRR events. Recurrence patterns were scrutinized based on recurrence type and recurrence-free interval (RFI). Annual recurrence rates (ARR) were compared according to recurrence type and molecular subtype. RESULTS: With a median follow-up of 66 months, 120 (2.8%) LRRs were recorded as the first site of failure. Age, pathologic stage, and molecular subtype were identified as predictors of LRR. The major recurrence type was ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence, which mainly (83.6%) occurred ≤5y post surgery. In the overall population, ARR curves showed that relapse peaked in the first 2.5 years. Patients with regional nodal recurrence, shorter RFI, and synchronous distant metastasis were associated with a poorer prognosis. HER2-positive disease had a higher rate of LRR events, more likely to have in-breast recurrence, and had an earlier relapse peak in the first 2 years after surgery. CONCLUSIONS: LRR risk following BCS is generally low in Chinese ethnicity. Different recurrence patterns after BCS were related to distinct clinical outcomes. Management of LRR should be largely individualized and tailored to the extent of disease, the molecular profile of the recurrence, and to baseline clinical variables.