What Proportion of BRCA-Associated Breast Cancer Is Human Epidermal Growth Factor 2-Low and Eligible for Additional Targeted Therapy?

INTRODUCTION: DESTINY B04 provided clinical meaning to a new classification of human epidermal growth factor 2 (HER2) expression in breast cancer: HER2-low. Patients with germline breast cancer type 1 gene pathogenic variants (gBRCA1) often develop triple negative breast cancer (TNBC), but the proportion who could be classified as HER2-low and qualify for an additional targeted therapy option is unknown. This study aims to characterize the proportion of gBRCA1 or germline breast cancer type 2 gene pathogenic variants patients for whom these novel targeted therapies may be an option. METHODS: We performed a retrospective chart review of patients with gBRCA1/2 treated at our institution for invasive breast cancer from 2000 to 2021. Synchronous or metachronous contralateral breast cancers were recorded separately. HER2 status was determined by immunohistochemistry and fluorescence in situ hybridization. We excluded patients without complete HER2 data. RESULTS: Among the 95 breast cancers identified in our cohort of 85 gBRCA1/2 patients, 41 (43%) were TNBC, 38 (40%) were hormone receptor positive (HR+)/HER2-negative, and 16 (17%) were HER2-positive based on standard conventions. We found that 82% of the HR+/HER2-cancers and 66% of TNBCs would be reclassified as HER2-low. After stratifying by BRCA gene status, 64% of cancers in patients with gBRCA1 and 58% of cancers in patients with germline breast cancer type 2 gene pathogenic variants were HER2-low. CONCLUSIONS: A significant portion of gBRCA1/2 patients who were previously diagnosed with TNBC or HR+/HER2- breast cancer would now be classified as HER2-low and could be considered for the use of trastuzumab deruxtecan in the metastatic setting. Outcome differences from therapy changes in this cohort should now be assessed.

Comparative analysis of the efficacy and functionality of abdominoplasty versus minimally invasive techniques in the surgical treatment of diastasis rectus abdominis in postpartum women.

INTRODUCTION: This review aims to describe the surgical options available for treatment of diastasis recti in postpartum women, as well as compare the effectiveness of these treatment options. Historically, diastasis recti has been repaired through open procedures, such as abdominoplasty. More recently, studies have explored other methods for the treatment of diastasis recti, including various minimally invasive surgical options. METHODS: Twelve studies ranging from 2015 to 2022 were included in this analysis. Studies were identified using PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library. Studies that met the inclusion criteria were analyzed descriptively. Statistical comparison of surgical outcomes between studies was performed using Fisher's Exact Test in SPSS. RESULTS: Minimally invasive approaches were categorized as laparoscopic preaponeurotic approaches, robotic approaches, and enhanced-view/extended totally extraperitoneal (eTEP) approaches. These techniques were compared to two open approaches: abdominoplasty and miniabdominoplasty. There were no significant differences in the rate of seromas, surgical site infections/complications, or hematomas between abdominoplasty and minimally invasive surgical techniques (p > 0.05). Among the minimally invasive techniques, no significant differences in readmission rates were reported (p > 0.05). Additionally, no significant differences in recurrence rates were seen following minimally invasive or abdominoplasty repairs, except for the increased recurrence rates seen with the r-TARRD robotic technique (p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Although current data on minimally invasive approaches is limited, our review reveals that both open and minimally invasive approaches are viable options for diastasis recti repair in postpartum women. Identifying the optimal approach for diastasis recti repair should rely on the patient's desired treatment outcome. If the patient indicates a desire for the removal of excess abdominal subcutaneous tissue, abdominoplasty may be a better surgical approach. Alternatively, if the patient puts a greater emphasis on shorter recovery time and smaller surgical incisions/scars, minimally invasive approaches may be a better surgical option.