Omitting Axillary Dissection in Breast Cancer with Sentinel-Node Metastases.

BACKGROUND: Trials evaluating the omission of completion axillary-lymph-node dissection in patients with clinically node-negative breast cancer and sentinel-lymph-node metastases have been compromised by limited statistical power, uncertain nodal radiotherapy target volumes, and a scarcity of data on relevant clinical subgroups. METHODS: We conducted a noninferiority trial in which patients with clinically node-negative primary T1 to T3 breast cancer (tumor size, T1, ≤20 mm; T2, 21 to 50 mm; and T3, >50 mm in the largest dimension) with one or two sentinel-node macrometastases (metastasis size, >2 mm in the largest dimension) were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to completion axillary-lymph-node dissection or its omission (sentinel-node biopsy only). Adjuvant treatment and radiation therapy were used in accordance with national guidelines. The primary end point was overall survival. We report here the per-protocol and modified intention-to-treat analyses of the prespecified secondary end point of recurrence-free survival. To show noninferiority of sentinel-node biopsy only, the upper boundary of the confidence interval for the hazard ratio for recurrence or death had to be below 1.44. RESULTS: Between January 2015 and December 2021, a total of 2766 patients were enrolled across five countries. The per-protocol population included 2540 patients, of whom 1335 were assigned to undergo sentinel-node biopsy only and 1205 to undergo completion axillary-lymph-node dissection (dissection group). Radiation therapy including nodal target volumes was administered to 1192 of 1326 patients (89.9%) in the sentinel-node biopsy-only group and to 1058 of 1197 (88.4%) in the dissection group. The median follow-up was 46.8 months (range, 1.5 to 94.5). Overall, 191 patients had recurrence or died. The estimated 5-year recurrence-free survival was 89.7% (95% confidence interval [CI], 87.5 to 91.9) in the sentinel-node biopsy-only group and 88.7% (95% CI, 86.3 to 91.1) in the dissection group, with a country-adjusted hazard ratio for recurrence or death of 0.89 (95% CI, 0.66 to 1.19), which was significantly (P<0.001) below the prespecified noninferiority margin. CONCLUSIONS: The omission of completion axillary-lymph-node dissection was noninferior to the more extensive surgery in patients with clinically node-negative breast cancer who had sentinel-node macrometastases, most of whom received nodal radiation therapy. (Funded by the Swedish Research Council and others; SENOMAC ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02240472.).

Completion axillary lymph node dissection for the identification of pN2-3 status as an indication for adjuvant CDK4/6 inhibitor treatment: a post-hoc analysis of the randomised, phase 3 SENOMAC trial.

BACKGROUND: In luminal breast cancer, adjuvant CDK4/6 inhibitors (eg, abemaciclib) improve invasive disease-free survival. In patients with T1-2, grade 1-2 tumours, and one or two sentinel lymph node metastases, completion axillary lymph node dissection (cALND) is the only prognostic tool available that can reveal four or more nodal metastases (pN2-3), which is the only indication for adjuvant abemaciclib in this setting. However, this technique can lead to substantial arm morbidity in patients. We aimed to pragmatically describe the potential benefit and harm of this strategy on the individual patient level in patients from the ongoing SENOMAC trial. METHODS: In the randomised, phase 3, SENOMAC trial, patients aged 18 years or older, of any performance status, with clinically node-negative T1-T3 breast cancer and one or two sentinel node macrometastases from 67 sites in five European countries (Denmark, Germany, Greece, Italy, and Sweden) were randomly assigned (1:1), via permutated block randomisation (random block size of 2 and 4) stratified by country, to either cALND or its omission (ie, they had a sentinel lymph node biopsy only). The primary outcome is overall survival, which is yet to be reported. In this post-hoc analysis, patients from the SENOMAC per-protocol population, with luminal oestrogen-receptor positive, HER2-negative, T1-2, histological grade 1-2 breast cancer, with tumour size of 5 cm or smaller were selected to match the characteristics of cohort 1 of the monarchE trial who would only have an indication for adjuvant abemaciclib if found to have 4 or more nodal metastases. The primary study objective was to determine the number of patients who developed patient-reported severe or very severe impairment of physical arm function after cALND (as measured by the Lymphedema Functioning, Disability, and Health [Lymph-ICF] Questionnaire) 1 year after surgery to avoid one invasive disease-free survival event at 5 years with 2 years of adjuvant abemaciclib, using invasive disease-free survival event data from cohort 1 of the monarchE trial. The SENOMAC trial is registered with ClincialTrials.gov, NCT02240472, and is closed to accrual and ongoing. FINDINGS: Between Jan 31, 2015, and Dec 31, 2021, 2766 patients were enrolled in SENOMAC and randomly assigned to cALND (n=1384) or sentinel node biopsy only (n=1382), of whom 2540 were included in the per-protocol population. 1705 (67%) of 2540 patients met this post-hoc study's eligibility criteria, of whom 802 (47%) had a cALND and 903 (53%) had a sentinel lymph node biopsy only. Median age at randomisation was 62 years (IQR 52-71), 1699 (>99%) of 1705 patients were female, and six (<1%) were male. Among 1342 patients who responded to questionnaires, after a median follow-up of 45·2 months (IQR 25·6-59·8; data cutoff Nov 17, 2023), patient-reported severe or very severe impairment of physical arm function was reported in 84 (13%) of 634 patients who had cALND versus 30 (4%) of 708 who had sentinel lymph node biopsy only (χ2 test p<0·0001). To avoid one invasive disease-free survival event at 5 years with adjuvant abemaciclib, cALND would need to be performed in 104 patients, and would result in nine patients having severe or very severe impairment of physical arm function 1 year after surgery. INTERPRETATION: As a method to potentially identify an indication for abemaciclib, and subsequently avoid invasive disease-free survival events at 5 years with 2 years of adjuvant abemaciclib, cALND carries a substantial risk of severe or very severe arm morbidity and so cALND should be discouraged for this purpose. FUNDING: Swedish Research Council, the Swedish Cancer Society, the Nordic Cancer Union, and the Swedish Breast Cancer Association.

Real-world use of multigene signatures in early breast cancer: differences to clinical trials.

PURPOSE: In Italy, Lombardy was the first region to reimburse multigene assays (MGAs) for patients otherwise candidates for chemotherapy. This is a real-world experience of MGAs usage in six referral cancer centers in Lombardy. METHODS: Among MGAs, Oncotype DX (RS) was used in 97% of cases. Consecutive patients tested with Oncotype DX from July 2020 to July 2022 were selected. The distribution of clinicopathologic features by RS groups (low RS: 0-25, high RS: 26-100) was assessed using chi-square and compared with those of the TAILORx and RxPONDER trials. RESULTS: Out of 1,098 patients identified, 73% had low RS. Grade and Ki67 were associated with RS (p < 0.001). In patients with both G3 and Ki67 > 30%, 39% had low RS, while in patients with both G1 and Ki67 < 20%, 7% had high RS. The proportion of low RS in node-positive patients was similar to that in RxPONDER (82% vs 83%), while node-negative patients with low RS were significantly less than in TAILORx (66% vs 86%, p < 0.001). The distribution of Grade was different from registration trials, with more G3 and fewer G1 (38% and 3%) than in TAILORx (18% and 27%) and RxPONDER (10% and 24%) (p < 0.001). Patients ≤ 50 years were overrepresented in this series (41%) than in TAILORx and RxPONDER (31% and 24%, respectively) (p < 0.001) and, among them, 42% were node positive. CONCLUSIONS: In this real-world series, Oncotype DX was the test almost exclusively used. Despite reimbursement being linked to pre-test chemotherapy recommendation, almost 3/4 patients resulted in the low-RS group. The significant proportion of node-positive patients ≤ 50 years tested indicates that oncologists considered Oncotype DX informative also in this population.

Optimising of axillary therapy in breast cancer: lessons from the past to plan for a better future.

In this narrative review, we aim to explore the ability of radiation therapy to eradicate breast cancer regional node metastasis. It is a journey through data of older trials without systemic therapy showing the magnitude of axillary therapy (surgery versus radiation) on cancer control. Considering that both systemic and loco-regional therapies were shown to reduce any recurrence with a complex interaction, our review includes surgical, radiation, and radiobiology consideration for breast cancer, and provide our view of future practise. The aim is to provide information optimise radiation therapy in the era of primary systemic therapy.

Applicability of magnetic seeds for target lymph node biopsy after neoadjuvant chemotherapy in initially node-positive breast cancer patients: data from the AXSANA study.

PURPOSE: Currently, various techniques are available to mark and selectively remove initially suspicious axillary lymph nodes (target lymph nodes, TLNs) in breast cancer patients receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT). To date, limited data are available on whether the use of magnetic seeds (MS) is suitable for localizing TLNs. This study aimed to investigate the feasibility of MS in patients undergoing target lymph node biopsy (TLNB) or targeted axillary dissection (TAD) after NACT. METHODS: Prospective data from the ongoing multicentric AXSANA study were extracted from selected patients in whom the TLN had been marked with an MS before NACT and who were enrolled from June 2020 to June 2023. The endpoints of the analysis were the detection rate, the rate of lost markers, and the potential impairment on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) assessment. RESULTS: In 187 patients from 27 study sites in seven countries, MS were placed into the TLN before NACT. In 151 of these, post-NACT surgery had been completed at the time of analysis. In 146 patients (96.0%), a TLN could successfully be detected. In three patients, the seed was removed but no lymphoid tissue was detected on histopathology. The rate of lost markers was 1.2% (2 out of 164 MS). In 15 out of 151 patients (9.9%), MRI assessment was reported to be compromised by MS placement. CONCLUSION: MS show excellent applicability for TLNB/TAD when inserted before NACT with a high DR and a low rate of lost markers. Axillary MS can impair MRI assessment of the breast. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04373655 (date of registration May 4, 2020).

Current trends in diagnostic and therapeutic management of the axilla in breast cancer patients receiving neoadjuvant therapy: results of the German-wide NOGGO MONITOR 24 survey.

PURPOSE: In the last 2 decades, the optimal management of the axilla in breast cancer patients receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) has been one of the most frequently discussed topics. Little is known about the attitudes of surgeons/radiologists towards new developments such as targeted axillary dissection. Therefore, the NOGGO conducted a survey to evaluate the current approach to axillary management. METHODS: A standardized digital questionnaire was sent out to > 200 departments in Germany between 7/2021 and 5/2022. The survey was supported by EUBREAST. RESULTS: In total, 116 physicians completed the survey. In cN0 patients scheduled to receive NACT, 89% of respondents recommended sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) after NACT. In case of ypN1mi(sn), 44% advised no further therapy, while 31% proposed ALND and 25% axillary irradiation. 64% of respondents recommended a minimally invasive axillary biopsy to cN + patients. TAD was used at the departments of 82% of respondents and was offered to all cN + patients converting to ycN0 by 57% and only to selected patients, usually based on the number of suspicious nodes at time of presentation, by 43%. The most common marking technique was a clip/coil. 67% estimated that the detection rate of their marker was very good or good. CONCLUSION: This survey shows a heterogenous approach towards axillary management in the neoadjuvant setting in Germany. Most respondents follow current guidelines. Since only two-thirds of respondents experienced the detection rate of the marker used at their department as (very) good, future studies should focus on the comparative evaluation of different marking techniques.

Axillary surgery after neoadjuvant therapy in initially node-positive breast cancer: international EUBREAST survey.

BACKGROUND: There is no consensus on axillary management after neoadjuvant therapy (NAT) in patients with clinically node-positive (cN+) breast cancer. To investigate current clinical practice, an international survey was conducted among breast surgeons and radiation oncologists. The aim of the first part of the survey was to provide a snapshot of international discrepancies regarding axillary surgery in this context. METHODS: The European Breast Cancer Research Association of Surgical Trialists (EUBREAST) developed a web-based survey containing 39 questions describing clinical scenarios in the setting of axillary management in patients with cN1 disease converting to ycN0 after NAT. The survey was then distributed to breast surgeons and radiation oncologists via 14 breast cancer societies between April and October 2021. RESULTS: Responses from 349 physicians in 45 countries were recorded. The most common post-NAT axillary surgery in patients with cN1 disease converting to ycN0 was targeted axillary dissection (54.2 per cent), followed by sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) alone (20.9 per cent), level 1-2 axillary lymph node dissection (ALND) (18.4 per cent), level 1-3 ALND (4 per cent), and targeted lymph node biopsy (2.5 per cent). For SLNB alone, dual tracers were most commonly used (62.3 per cent). Management varied widely in patients with ambiguous axillary status before initiation of treatment or a residual metastatic burden in the axilla after NAT. In patients with ycN+ tumours, ALND was the preferred surgical approach for 66.8 per cent of respondents. CONCLUSION: These results highlight the wide heterogeneity in surgical approaches to the axilla after NAT. To standardize the guidelines, further data from clinical research are urgently needed, which underlines the importance of the ongoing AXSANA (EUBREAST-3) study.

Breast conservation and axillary management after primary systemic therapy in patients with early-stage breast cancer: the Lucerne toolbox.

Primary systemic therapy is increasingly used in the treatment of patients with early-stage breast cancer, but few guidelines specifically address optimal locoregional therapies. Therefore, we established an international consortium to discuss clinical evidence and to provide expert advice on technical management of patients with early-stage breast cancer. The steering committee prepared six working packages to address all major clinical questions from diagnosis to surgery. During a consensus meeting that included members from European scientific oncology societies, clinical trial groups, and patient advocates, statements were discussed and voted on. A consensus was reached in 42% of statements, a majority in 38%, and no decision in 21%. Based on these findings, the panel developed clinical guidance recommendations and a toolbox to overcome many clinical and technical requirements associated with the diagnosis, response assessment, surgical planning, and surgery of patients with early-stage breast cancer. This guidance could convince clinicians and patients of the major clinical advancements purported by primary systemic therapy, the use of less extensive and more targeted surgery to improve the lives of patients with breast cancer.

Personalized Risk-Benefit Ratio Adaptation of Breast Cancer Care at the Epicenter of COVID-19 Outbreak.

Northern Italy has been one of the European regions reporting the highest number of COVID-19 cases and deaths. The pandemic spread has challenged the National Health System, requiring reallocation of most of the available health care resources to treat COVID-19-positive patients, generating a competition with other health care needs, including cancer. Patients with cancer are at higher risk of developing critical illness after COVID-19 infection. Thus, mitigation strategies should be adopted to reduce the likelihood of infection in all patients with cancer. At the same time, suboptimal care and treatments may result in worse cancer-related outcome. In this article, we attempt to estimate the individual risk-benefit balance to define personalized strategies for optimal breast cancer management, avoiding as much as possible a general untailored approach. We discuss and report the strategies our Breast Unit adopted from the beginning of the COVID-19 outbreak to ensure the continuum of the best possible cancer care for our patients while mitigating the risk of infection, despite limited health care resources. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Managing patients with breast cancer during the COVID-19 outbreak is challenging. The present work highlights the need to estimate the individual patient risk of infection, which depends on both epidemiological considerations and individual clinical characteristics. The management of patients with breast cancer should be adapted and personalized according to the balance between COVID-19-related risk and the expected benefit of treatments. This work also provides useful suggestions on the modality of patient triage, the conduct of clinical trials, the management of an oncologic team, and the approach to patients' and health workers' psychological distress.

Risk-Reducing Bilateral Salpingo-Oophorectomy for BRCA Mutation Carriers and Hormonal Replacement Therapy: If It Should Rain, Better a Drizzle than a Storm.

Women carrying a BRCA mutation have an increased risk of developing breast and ovarian cancer. The most effective strategy to reduce this risk is the bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy, with or without additional risk-reducing mastectomy. Risk-reducing bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy (RRBSO) is recommended between age 35 and 40 and between age 40 and 45 years for women carriers of BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations, respectively. Consequently, most BRCA mutation carriers undergo this procedure prior to a natural menopause and develop an anticipated lack of hormones. This condition has a detrimental impact on various systems, affecting both the quality of life and longevity; in particular, women carrying BRCA1 mutation, who are likely to have surgery earlier as compared to BRCA2. Hormonal replacement therapy (HRT) is the only effective strategy able to significantly compensate the hormonal deprivation and counteract menopausal symptoms, both in spontaneous and surgical menopause. Although recent evidence suggests that HRT does not diminish the protective effect of RRBSO in BRCA mutation carriers, concerns regarding the safety of estrogen and progesterone intake reduce the use in this setting. Furthermore, there is strong data demonstrating that the use of estrogen alone after RRBSO does not increase the risk of breast cancer among women with a BRCA1 mutation. The additional progesterone intake, mandatory for the protection of the endometrium during HRT, warrants further studies. However, when hysterectomy is performed at the time of RRBSO, the indication of progesterone addition decays and consequently its potential effect on breast cancer risk. Similarly, in patients conserving the uterus but undergoing risk-reducing mastectomy, the addition of progesterone should not raise significant concerns for breast cancer risk anymore. Therefore, BRCA mutation carriers require careful counselling about the scenarios following their RRBSO, menopausal symptoms or the fear associated with HRT use.

Oncoplastic Breast Consortium consensus conference on nipple-sparing mastectomy.

PURPOSE: Indications for nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM) have broadened to include the risk reducing setting and locally advanced tumors, which resulted in a dramatic increase in the use of NSM. The Oncoplastic Breast Consortium consensus conference on NSM and immediate reconstruction was held to address a variety of questions in clinical practice and research based on published evidence and expert panel opinion. METHODS: The panel consisted of 44 breast surgeons from 14 countries across four continents with a background in gynecology, general or reconstructive surgery and a practice dedicated to breast cancer, as well as a patient advocate. Panelists presented evidence summaries relating to each topic for debate during the in-person consensus conference. The iterative process in question development, voting, and wording of the recommendations followed the modified Delphi methodology. RESULTS: Consensus recommendations were reached in 35, majority recommendations in 24, and no recommendations in the remaining 12 questions. The panel acknowledged the need for standardization of various aspects of NSM and immediate reconstruction. It endorsed several oncological contraindications to the preservation of the skin and nipple. Furthermore, it recommended inclusion of patients in prospective registries and routine assessment of patient-reported outcomes. Considerable heterogeneity in breast reconstruction practice became obvious during the conference. CONCLUSIONS: In case of conflicting or missing evidence to guide treatment, the consensus conference revealed substantial disagreement in expert panel opinion, which, among others, supports the need for a randomized trial to evaluate the safest and most efficacious reconstruction techniques.

Prognostic relevance of peritumoral vascular invasion in immunohistochemically defined subtypes of node-positive breast cancer.

Prognostic factors to better identify subcategories of node-positive breast cancer patients candidate to adjuvant chemotherapy are needed. The prognostic significance of the extent of peritumoral vascular invasion (PVI) in patients with positive axillary nodes is a matter of controversy. No data are available on the role of PVI within immunohistochemically defined subtypes. 3,729 consecutive patients with primary invasive breast cancer and positive axillary nodes were operated and referred for interdisciplinary evaluation from April 1997 to December 2005. Patients were classified as Luminal A, Luminal B(HER2 negative), Luminal B(HER2 positive), Triple Negative and HER-2 positive. The distribution of PVI was as follows: absent 2,010 (54 %), moderate/focal 963 (142 + 821) (26 %), and extensive 756 (20 %). Patients with extensive PVI were more likely to be Luminal B(HER2 negative) (49.3 %), younger (35-50 years), to have larger tumors (>pT2) with higher grade, a higher extent of node involvement (>4 nodes) and higher proliferative index, compared with patients with absence or moderate/focal PVI (p < 0.0001). In the multivariate analysis, extensive PVI (vs. absent) was correlated with a significant higher risk of local recurrence (HR 1.42, 95 %CI, 1.03-1.95, p = 0.0301). The immunohistochemically defined Luminal A-like subtype had a significant better outcome in terms of DFS, OS and reduced incidence of distant metastases when compared with the other subtypes. The occurrence of extensive PVI correlates with an increased risk of local recurrence. Luminal A tumors, classified according to the most recent St. Gallen recommendations, had an excellent outcome irrespective to the occurrence of extensive PVI or lymph node metastases and might be a good candidate to personalized adjuvant treatments.

Conservative surgery for ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence.

The surgical and radiotherapeutic management of patients who develop an ipsilateral breast recurrence after primary conservative therapy remains controversial. Although current guidelines indicate the need for mastectomy for all recurrences, some reports in the literature suggest that a new conserving procedure (including repeat lumpectomy and second sentinel node biopsy) may be oncologically safe in selected patients. The rationale and current evidence for an appropriate second conservative approach are reviewed and discussed.

Intraoperative radiotherapy versus external radiotherapy for early breast cancer (ELIOT): a randomised controlled equivalence trial.

BACKGROUND: Intraoperative radiotherapy with electrons allows the substitution of conventional postoperative whole breast irradiation with one session of radiotherapy with the same equivalent dose during surgery. However, its ability to control for recurrence of local disease required confirmation in a randomised controlled trial. METHODS: This study was done at the European Institute of Oncology (Milan, Italy). Women aged 48-75 years with early breast cancer, a maximum tumour diameter of up to 2·5 cm, and suitable for breast-conserving surgery were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio (using a random permuted block design, stratified for clinical tumour size [<1·0 cm vs 1·0-1·4 cm vs ≥1·5 cm]) to receive either whole-breast external radiotherapy or intraoperative radiotherapy with electrons. Study coordinators, clinicians, and patients were aware of the assignment. Patients in the intraoperative radiotherapy group received one dose of 21 Gy to the tumour bed during surgery. Those in the external radiotherapy group received 50 Gy in 25 fractions of 2 Gy, followed by a boost of 10 Gy in five fractions. This was an equivalence trial; the prespecified equivalence margin was local recurrence of 7·5% in the intraoperative radiotherapy group. The primary endpoint was occurrence of ipsilateral breast tumour recurrences (IBTR); overall survival was a secondary outcome. The main analysis was by intention to treat. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01849133. FINDINGS: 1305 patients were randomised (654 to external radiotherapy and 651 to intraoperative radiotherapy) between Nov 20, 2000, and Dec 27, 2007. After a medium follow-up of 5·8 years (IQR 4·1-7·7), 35 patients in the intraoperative radiotherapy group and four patients in the external radiotherapy group had had an IBTR (p<0·0001). The 5-year event rate for IBRT was 4·4% (95% CI 2·7-6·1) in the intraoperative radiotherapy group and 0·4% (0·0-1·0) in the external radiotherapy group (hazard ratio 9·3 [95% CI 3·3-26·3]). During the same period, 34 women allocated to intraoperative radiotherapy and 31 to external radiotherapy died (p=0·59). 5-year overall survival was 96·8% (95% CI 95·3-98·3) in the intraoperative radiotherapy group and 96·9% (95·5-98·3) in the external radiotherapy group. In patients with data available (n=464 for intraoperative radiotherapy; n=412 for external radiotherapy) we noted significantly fewer skin side-effects in women in the intraoperative radiotherapy group than in those in the external radiotherapy group (p=0·0002). INTERPRETATION: Although the rate of IBTR in the intraoperative radiotherapy group was within the prespecified equivalence margin, the rate was significantly greater than with external radiotherapy, and overall survival did not differ between groups. Improved selection of patients could reduce the rate of IBTR with intraoperative radiotherapy with electrons. FUNDING: Italian Association for Cancer Research, Jacqueline Seroussi Memorial Foundation for Cancer Research, and Umberto Veronesi Foundation.

Axillary dissection versus no axillary dissection in patients with sentinel-node micrometastases (IBCSG 23-01): a phase 3 randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: For patients with breast cancer and metastases in the sentinel nodes, axillary dissection has been standard treatment. However, for patients with limited sentinel-node involvement, axillary dissection might be overtreatment. We designed IBCSG trial 23-01 to determine whether no axillary dissection was non-inferior to axillary dissection in patients with one or more micrometastatic (≤2 mm) sentinel nodes and tumour of maximum 5 cm. METHODS: In this multicentre, randomised, non-inferiority, phase 3 trial, patients were eligible if they had clinically non-palpable axillary lymph node(s) and a primary tumour of 5 cm or less and who, after sentinel-node biopsy, had one or more micrometastatic (≤2 mm) sentinel lymph nodes with no extracapsular extension. Patients were randomly assigned (in a 1:1 ratio) to either undergo axillary dissection or not to undergo axillary dissection. Randomisation was stratified by centre and menopausal status. Treatment assignment was not masked. The primary endpoint was disease-free survival. Non-inferiority was defined as a hazard ratio (HR) of less than 1·25 for no axillary dissection versus axillary dissection. The analysis was by intention to treat. Per protocol, disease and survival information continues to be collected yearly. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT00072293. FINDINGS: Between April 1, 2001, and Feb 28, 2010, 465 patients were randomly assigned to axillary dissection and 469 to no axillary dissection. After the exclusion of three patients, 464 patients were in the axillary dissection group and 467 patients were in the no axillary dissection group. After a median follow-up of 5·0 (IQR 3·6-7·3) years, we recorded 69 disease-free survival events in the axillary dissection group and 55 events in the no axillary dissection group. Breast-cancer-related events were recorded in 48 patients in the axillary dissection group and 47 in the no axillary dissection group (ten local recurrences in the axillary dissection group and eight in the no axillary dissection group; three and nine contralateral breast cancers; one and five [corrected] regional recurrences; and 34 and 25 distant relapses). Other non-breast cancer events were recorded in 21 patients in the axillary dissection group and eight in the no axillary dissection group (20 and six second non-breast malignancies; and one and two deaths not due to a cancer event). 5-year disease-free survival was 87·8% (95% CI 84·4-91·2) in the group without axillary dissection and 84·4% (80·7-88·1) in the group with axillary dissection (log-rank p=0·16; HR for no axillary dissection vs axillary dissection was 0·78, 95% CI 0·55-1·11, non-inferiority p=0·0042). Patients with reported long-term surgical events (grade 3-4) included one sensory neuropathy (grade 3), three lymphoedema (two grade 3 and one grade 4), and three motor neuropathy (grade 3), all in the group that underwent axillary dissection, and one grade 3 motor neuropathy in the group without axillary dissection. One serious adverse event was reported, a postoperative infection in the axilla in the group with axillary dissection. INTERPRETATION: Axillary dissection could be avoided in patients with early breast cancer and limited sentinel-node involvement, thus eliminating complications of axillary surgery with no adverse effect on survival. FUNDING: None.

Breast cancer highlights from 2023: Knowledge to guide practice and future research.

This narrative work highlights a selection of published work from 2023 with potential implications for breast cancer practice. We feature publications that have provided new knowledge immediately relevant to patient care or for future research. We also highlight guidelines that have reported evidence-based or consensus recommendations to support practice and evaluation in breast cancer diagnosis and treatment. The scope of selected highlights represents various domains and disciplines in cancer control, from prevention to treatment of early and advanced breast cancer.

Third national surgical consensus conference of the Italian Association of Breast Surgeons (ANISC) on management after neoadjuvant chemotherapy: The difficulty in reaching a consensus.

INTRODUCTION: Neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) has a profound impact on surgical management of breast cancer. For this reason, the Italian Association of Breast Surgeons (ANISC) promoted the third national Consensus Conference on this subject, open to multidisciplinary specialists. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The Consensus Conference was held on-line in November 2022, and after an introductory session with five core-team experts, participants were asked to vote on eleven controversial issues, while results were collected in real-time with a polling system. RESULTS: A total of 164 dedicated specialists from 74 Breast Centers participated. Consensus was reached for only three of the eleven issues, including: 1) the indication to assess the response with Magnetic Resonance Imaging (79 %); 2) the need to re-assess the biological factors of the residual tumor if present (96 %); 3) the possibility of omitting a formal axillary node dissection for cN1 patients if a pathologic Complete Response (pCR) was confirmed with analysis of one or more sentinel lymph nodes (82 %). The majority voted in favor of mapping both the breast and nodal lesions pre-NAC (59 %), and against the omission of sentinel lymph node biopsy in cN0 patients in the case of pathologic or clinical Complete Response (69 %). In cases of cT3/cN1+ tumors with pCR, only 8 % of participants considered appropriate the omission of Post-Mastectomy Radiation Therapy. CONCLUSION: There is still a wide variability in surgical approaches after NAC in the "real world". As NAC is increasingly used, multidisciplinary teams should be attuned to conforming their procedures to the rapid advances in this field.

Axillary clearance and chemotherapy rates in ER+HER2- breast cancer: secondary analysis of the SENOMAC trial.

Background: Randomized trials have shown that axillary clearance (AC) can safely be omitted in patients with sentinel lymph node-positive breast cancer. At the same time, de-escalation of chemotherapy in postmenopausal patients with ER+HER2- breast cancer may depend on detailed axillary nodal stage. The aim of this pre-specified secondary analysis of the SENOMAC trial was to investigate whether the choice of axillary staging affected the proportion of patients receiving adjuvant chemotherapy, and recurrence-free survival (RFS). Methods: Proportion receiving adjuvant chemotherapy was calculated according to AC or sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) only, menopausal status, and region of inclusion, for 2168 patients with clinically node-negative ER+HER2- breast cancer and 1-2 sentinel lymph node macrometastases included in the SENOMAC trial. Findings: In premenopausal patients, 514 out of 615 patients (83.6%) received adjuvant chemotherapy with no significant difference between randomization arms. In postmenopausal patients, the proportion receiving chemotherapy varied considerably by region and country (36.0-82.4%). In Denmark, where 194 out of 539 postmenopausal patients (36.0%) received adjuvant chemotherapy, rates differed significantly between the AC and the SLNB only arm (41.3% vs 31.4%, p = 0.019). After a median follow-up of 44.88 months for Danish postmenopausal patients, no significant difference was seen in 5-year RFS, which was 91% (85.6%-96.6%) for the SLNB only and 90.9% (86.3%-95.6%) for the AC arm (p = 0.42). Interpretation: When omitting axillary clearance, and thus reducing the risk of long-term arm morbidity, potential under-treatment of postmenopausal patients with ER+HER2- breast cancer may require the development of new predictive and imaging tools. Funding: Swedish Research Council, Swedish Cancer Society, Nordic Cancer Union, Swedish Breast Cancer Association.