ABSTRACT
PURPOSE: To compare the diagnostic performance (detection, assessment of correct disease extent and multifocality/centricity) of Contrast-Enhanced Mammography (CEM) Versus Breast Magnetic Resonance (MRI) in the study of lobular neoplasms. METHODS: We retrospectively selected all the patients who underwent surgery for a lobular breast neoplasm, either an in situ or an invasive tumor, and had undergone both breast CEM and MRI examinations during the pre-surgical planning. Wilcoxon Signed Rank test was performed to assess the differences between size measurements using the different methods and the post-surgical pathological measurements, considered the gold standard. The agreement in identifying multifocality/multicentricity among the different methods and the pathology was assessed using the Kappa statistics. RESULTS: We selected 19 patients, of which one presented a bilateral neoplasm. Then, the images of these 19 patients were analyzed, for a total of 52 malignant breast lesions. We found no significant differences between the post-surgical pathological size of the lesions and the calculated size with CEM and MRI (p-value of the difference respectively 0.71 and 0.47). In all 20 cases, neoplasm detection was possible both with CEM and MRI. CEM and MRI showed an excellent ability to identify multifocal and multicentric cases (K statistic equal to 0.93 for both the procedures), while K statistic was 0.11 and 0.59 for FFDM and US, respectively. CONCLUSION: The findings of this study suggest that CEM is a reliable imaging technique in the preoperative setting of patients with lobular neoplasm, with comparable results to breast MRI.
Subject(s)
Breast Neoplasms , Humans , Female , Breast Neoplasms/diagnostic imaging , Breast Neoplasms/surgery , Retrospective Studies , Contrast Media , Mammography/methods , Magnetic Resonance Imaging/methods , Magnetic Resonance Spectroscopy , Sensitivity and SpecificityABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: To offer an extensive retrospective experience on the management of male breast cancer. METHODS: A multicenter retrospective observational cohort study was conducted, including male patients diagnosed with breast cancer (invasive or in situ) in 12 Italian breast units from January 1975 to December 2019. Patients aged 18 years or older were assessed for eligibility. Exclusion criteria were metastatic cancer at diagnosis, previous cancer(s), received neoadjuvant treatment, incomplete data on (neo) adjuvant treatment(s), and/or follow-up data. Data on radiological examinations, demographic characteristics, risk factors, histological features, receptor status, treatments, and follow-up were collected. RESULTS: In a series of 671 male patients with breast cancer assessed for eligibility, 403 (28 in situ and 375 invasive neoplasms) were included in the study. All included patients underwent surgery. The median age at surgery was 63.8 years (IQR 56.1-72.1). In 68% of cases, patients underwent echography, and in 55.1%, a mammography. Most patients were ER and PR positive (63.8%), HER2 negative (80.4%), with high (≥ 20%) Ki67 values (61.3%), and luminal B subtype (51.1%). The 10-year overall survival was 73.6% (95% CI 67.0-79.1) for invasive breast cancer and 90% (95% CI 65.6-97.4) for in situ breast cancer. In patients with invasive breast cancer, at univariable analysis, having a G3 tumor (vs. G1), pT2/3/4 (vs. pT1), pN2/3 (vs. pN0), luminal B subtype with Ki67 ≥ 20% (vs. Luminal A), were significantly associated with a higher risk of death. In multivariable analyses, pT2/3/4 (vs. pT1) remained significantly associated with a higher risk of death (HR 3.14, 95% CI 1.83-5.39), and having a HER2 positive or a triple-negative subtype (vs. Luminal A) was also significantly associated with a higher risk of mortality (HR 4.76, 95% CI 1.26-18.1). CONCLUSION: Male breast cancer is a rare disease, the better understanding of which is necessary for a more effective diagnostic and therapeutic approach.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: To explore the correlation between pathological and radiological response to preoperative treatments and outcome in surgically treated patients with myxofibrosarcoma (MFS) and undifferentiated pleomorphic sarcoma (UPS). METHODS: All consecutive patients with primary localized MFS and UPS of the extremities and trunk wall surgically treated with curative intent at our center (2005-2021) were included. Clinical data including residual visible tumor (VT%) on surgical specimen and Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumor (RECIST) were retrieved. Kaplan-Meier curves for overall survival and disease-free survival, and cumulative incidence of local relapse and distant metastasis were estimated in a competing risk framework according to RECIST and VT%, overall and by treatment group. Cox and Fine and Gray multivariable models were performed. RESULTS: Of 693 patients affected by primary MFS and UPS, 233 (66 MFS and 167 UPS) were treated by neoadjuvant chemotherapy (naChT), radiotherapy (naRT), or both (naChT-RT). VT% was ≤5% in 13/46 (28.2%), 24/99 (24.2%), and 40/88 (45.4%) patients, respectively. There were 11/46 (29.7%), 22/99 (22.7%), and 23/88 (26.1%) RECIST partial responses and 18/46 (48.6%), 59/99 (60.8%), and 60/88 (68.2%) RECIST stable disease, respectively. In naChT, a trend for a better survival was observed when VT% ≤5% (p = .09), whereas RECIST partial responses and stable disease had the same outcome. VT% was not associated with outcome in naRT or naChT-RT, whereas RECIST response was. CONCLUSION: In primary localized MFS and UPS treated with neoadjuvant therapies, VT% seems more relevant than size reduction after naChT, whereas the opposite is true when naRT is administered alone or concurrent to ChT.
ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: The aim of the present study was to compare the effect of radiotherapy (RT) on abdominal recurrence-free survival (ARFS) in patients with primary retroperitoneal sarcoma treated in the EORTC-STBSG-62092 (STRASS) phase 3 randomized controlled trial (STRASS cohort) and off-trial (STREXIT cohort) and to pool STRASS and STREXIT data to test the hypothesis that RT improves ARFS in patients with liposarcoma. BACKGROUND: The STRASS trial did not show any difference in ARFS between patients treated with preoperative radiotherapy+surgery (RT+S) versus surgery alone (S). METHODS: All consecutive adult patients not enrolled in STRASS and underwent curative-intent surgery for a primary retroperitoneal sarcoma with or without preoperative RT between 2012 and 2017 (STRASS recruiting period) among ten STRASS-recruiting centres formed the STREXIT cohort. The effect of RT in STREXIT was explored with a propensity score (PS)-matching analysis. Primary endpoint was ARFS defined as macroscopically incomplete resection or abdominal recurrence or death of any cause, whichever occurred first. RESULTS: STRASS included 266 patients, STREXIT included 831 patients (727 after excluding patients who received preoperative chemotherapy, 202 after 1:1 PS-matching). The effect of RT on ARFS in STRASS and 1:1 PS-matched STREXIT cohorts, overall and in patients with liposarcoma, was similar. In the pooled cohort analysis, RT administration was associated with better ARFS in patients with liposarcoma [N=321, hazard ratio (HR), 0.61; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.42-0.89]. In particular, patients with well-differentiated liposarcoma and G1-2 dedifferentiated liposarcoma (G1-2 DDLPS, n=266) treated with RT+S had better ARFS (HR, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.40-0.97) while patients with G3 DDLPS and leiomyosarcoma had not. At the current follow-up, there was no association between RT and overall survival or distant metastases-free survival. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, preoperative RT was associated with better ARFS in patients with primary well-differentiated liposarcoma and G1-2 DDLPS.
Subject(s)
Liposarcoma , Retroperitoneal Neoplasms , Sarcoma , Adult , Humans , Sarcoma/radiotherapy , Sarcoma/surgery , Liposarcoma/radiotherapy , Liposarcoma/surgery , Retroperitoneal Neoplasms/radiotherapy , Retroperitoneal Neoplasms/surgery , Retroperitoneal Space , Proportional Hazards Models , Neoplasm Recurrence, LocalABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Surgery is the treatment mainstay in retroperitoneal sarcoma (RPS), a frontline comprehensive approach based on tumor removal en bloc with adherent viscera is mandatory especially for liposarcoma, where the normal retroperitoneal fat is undistinguishable from the well-differentiated tumor component.1-5 In this video, a reproducible and standardized six-stage approach to a primary right retroperitoneal liposarcoma is presented. PATIENT AND METHODS: A 23-cm right retroperitoneal, well-differentiated liposarcoma was diagnosed in a 68-year-old female patient in December 2021. The tumor involved the right kidney and adrenal gland; displacing anteriorly the right colon, the duodenum, and the pancreatic head; and invading part of the ipsilateral psoas muscle. After the publication of the STRASS trial and STREXIT results,6,7 neoadjuvant radiotherapy was delivered to a total dose of 50.4 Gy in 28 fractions with stable disease. Virtual 3D reconstruction of regional anatomy by Visible Patient was performed preoperatively. RESULTS: The patient underwent right retroperitoneal mass resection en bloc with ipsilateral kidney and adrenal gland, colon, psoas muscle, and portion of ipsilateral diaphragm. Of note, the resection of the psoas muscle was performed to obtain a safe posterior margin and accomplish a better clearance of fat of the posterior abdominal wall. This can be limited to the psoas fascia whenever the tumor is not adherent to it. A six-stage approach was performed, as described in the supplementary video file. CONCLUSIONS: RPS resection is complex and requires a broad range of surgical expertise. A staged approach that can be followed in virtually all cases is highly recommended to achieve an optimal tumor resection.
Subject(s)
Liposarcoma , Retroperitoneal Neoplasms , Sarcoma , Female , Humans , Aged , Liposarcoma/radiotherapy , Liposarcoma/surgery , Liposarcoma/pathology , Sarcoma/pathology , Retroperitoneal Neoplasms/surgery , Retroperitoneal Neoplasms/pathology , Retroperitoneal Space/pathologyABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Image-guided vacuum-assisted breast biopsy (VABB) of the tumour bed, performed after neoadjuvant therapy, is increasingly being used to assess residual cancer and to potentially identify to identify pathological complete response (pCR). In this study, the accuracy of preoperative VABB specimens was assessed and compared with surgical specimens in patients with triple-negative or human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-positive invasive ductal breast cancer after neoadjuvant therapy. As a secondary endpoint, the performance of contrast-enhanced MRI of the breast and PET-CT for response prediction was assessed. METHODS: This single-institution prospective pilot study enrolled patients from April 2018 to April 2021 with a complete response on imaging (iCR) who subsequently underwent VABB before surgery. Those with a pCR at VABB were included in the primary analysis of the accuracy of VABB. The performance of imaging (MRI and PET-CT) was analysed for prediction of a pCR considering both patients with an iCR and those with residual disease at postneoadjuvant therapy imaging. RESULTS: Twenty patients were included in the primary analysis. The median age was 44 (range 35-51) years. At surgery, 18 of 20 patients showed a complete response (accuracy 90 (95 per cent exact c.i. 68 to 99) per cent). Only two patients showed residual ductal intraepithelial neoplasia of grade 2 and 3 respectively. In the secondary analysis, accuracy was similar for MRI and PET-CT (77 versus 78 per cent; P = 0.76). CONCLUSION: VABB in patients with an iCR might be a promising method to select patients for de-escalation of surgical treatment in triple-negative or HER2-positive breast cancer. The present results support such an approach and should inform the design of future trials on de-escalation of surgery.
Subject(s)
Breast Neoplasms , Humans , Adult , Middle Aged , Female , Breast Neoplasms/diagnostic imaging , Breast Neoplasms/surgery , Pilot Projects , Prospective Studies , Neoadjuvant Therapy , Positron Emission Tomography Computed Tomography , Breast/diagnostic imaging , Breast/pathology , Image-Guided Biopsy/methodsABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer 22092-62092 STRASS trial failed to demonstrate the superiority of neoadjuvant radiotherapy (RT) over surgery alone in patients with retroperitoneal sarcoma. Therefore, an RT quality-assurance program was added to the study protocol to detect and correct RT deviations. The authors report results from the trial RT quality-assurance program and its potential effect on patient outcomes. METHODS: To evaluate the effect of RT compliance on survival outcomes, a composite end point was created. It combined the information related to planning target volume coverage, target delineation, total dose received, and overall treatment time into 2 groups: non-RT-compliant (NRC) for patients who had unacceptable deviation(s) in any of the previous categories and RT-compliant (RC) otherwise. Abdominal recurrence-free survival (ARFS) and overall survival were compared between the 2 groups using a Cox proportional hazard model adjusted for known prognostic factors. RESULTS: Thirty-six of 125 patients (28.8%) were classified as NRC, and the remaining 89 patients (71.2%) were classified as RC. The 3-year ARFS rate was 66.8% (95% confidence interval [CI], 55.8%-75.7%) and 49.8% (95% CI, 32.7%-64.8%) for the RC and NRC groups, respectively (adjusted hazard ratio, 2.32; 95% CI, 1.25-4.32; P = .008). Local recurrence after macroscopic complete resection occurred in 13 of 89 patients (14.6%) versus 2 of 36 patients (5.6%) in the RC and NRC groups, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The current analysis suggests a significant benefit in terms of ARFS in favor of the RC group. This association did not translate into less local relapses after complete resection in the RC group. Multidisciplinary collaboration and review of cases are critical to avoid geographic misses, especially for rare tumors like retroperitoneal sarcoma.
Subject(s)
Guideline Adherence , Retroperitoneal Neoplasms , Sarcoma , Soft Tissue Neoplasms , Disease-Free Survival , Humans , Neoadjuvant Therapy , Neoplasm Recurrence, Local/pathology , Proportional Hazards Models , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , Retroperitoneal Neoplasms/radiotherapy , Retroperitoneal Neoplasms/surgery , Sarcoma/radiotherapy , Sarcoma/surgery , Soft Tissue Neoplasms/radiotherapy , Soft Tissue Neoplasms/surgery , Survival RateABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to compare robotic mastectomy with open classical technique outcomes in breast cancer patients. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: As the use of robotic nipple sparing mastectomy continues to rise, improved understanding of the surgical, oncologic, and quality of life outcomes is imperative for appropriate patient selection as well as to better understand indications, limits, advantages, and dangers. METHODS: In a phase III, open label, single-center, randomized controlled trial involving 80 women with breast cancer (69) or with BRCA mutation (11), we compared the outcome of robotic and open nipple sparing mastectomy. Primary outcomes were surgical complications and quality of life using specific validated questionnaires. Secondary objective included oncologic outcomes. RESULTS: Robotic procedure was 1 hour and 18 minutes longer than open (P < 0.001). No differences in the number or type of complications (P = 0.11) were observed. Breast-Q scores in satisfaction with breasts, psychosocial, physical and sexual well-being were significantly higher after robotic mastectomy versus open procedure. Respect to baseline, physical and sexual well-being domains remained stable after robotic mastectomy, whereas they significantly decreased after open procedure (P < 0.02). The overall Body Image Scale questionnaire score was 20.7â±â13.8 versus 9.9â±â5.1 in the robotic versus open groups respectively, P < 0.0001. At median follow-up 28.6months (range 3.7-43.3), no local events were observed. CONCLUSIONS: Complications were similar among groups upholding the robotic technique to be safe. Quality of life was maintained after robotic mastectomy while significantly decrease after open surgery. Early follow-up confirm no premature local failure.ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03440398.
Subject(s)
Breast Neoplasms , Mammaplasty , Robotic Surgical Procedures , Breast Neoplasms/genetics , Breast Neoplasms/psychology , Breast Neoplasms/surgery , Female , Humans , Mammaplasty/methods , Mastectomy/methods , Mutation , Nipples/surgery , Quality of LifeABSTRACT
PURPOSE: To present an overview of the management of male patients with Ductal Carcinoma In Situ of the breast (male DCIS). METHODS: We retrospectively studied all male patients with a diagnosis of pure DCIS from January 1999 to December 2018: 20 patients were identified in our cancer referral center. We collected data regarding clinical presentation, age of onset, radiological features, receptor status of the neoplasm, histological type, and the follow-up of those patients. RESULTS: The median age was 62 years (range 21-80). All patients underwent surgery, in 15/20 (75%) cases a mastectomy was carried out. Two patients (10%) underwent endocrine treatment and 1/20 (5%) underwent radiotherapy. The receptor status for 15/20 patients was documented: 13/15 patients were ER+/Pr+. In 3 cases the Ki 67% was positive (i.e., > 20%). All cases were negative for Her2. The median follow-up time was 9.0 years (IQR 4.0-13.7). Only one patient had an ipsilateral recurrence with the finding of an infiltrating carcinoma in the same breast after 14 years. The 5-year disease-free survival was 92.9%. CONCLUSION: Pure DCIS in men is an extremely rare disease: proper diagnosis and management allow an excellent prognosis.
Subject(s)
Breast Neoplasms, Male , Breast Neoplasms , Carcinoma, Ductal, Breast , Carcinoma, Intraductal, Noninfiltrating , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Young Adult , Breast Neoplasms/diagnostic imaging , Breast Neoplasms/therapy , Carcinoma, Ductal, Breast/pathology , Carcinoma, Intraductal, Noninfiltrating/diagnostic imaging , Carcinoma, Intraductal, Noninfiltrating/therapy , Ki-67 Antigen , Mastectomy , Mastectomy, Segmental , Neoplasm Recurrence, Local/pathology , Referral and Consultation , Retrospective StudiesABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: The improved outcome of extremity soft tissue sarcoma patients surgically treated until 2007 at the authors' institution was previously reported. This study updates the analysis at a later follow-up and extends the patients' cohort to assess changes in outcomes over time for extremity and superficial trunk soft tissue sarcoma (ESTSTS) treated at a single referral center. METHODS: All consecutive patients with primary localized adult-type ESTSTS surgically treated at the authors' institution between 1987 and 2017 were included and divided into group 1 (1987-2002) and group 2 (2003-2017) according to primary surgery year. Crude cumulative incidence (CCI) of sarcoma-specific mortality (SSM), local recurrence (LR), and distant metastases (DM) were calculated in a competing-risks framework. DM-free survival (DMFS) and post-DM survival were also assessed. RESULTS: The study identified 2382 patients. The median follow-up was 104 months (range, 63-127 months), and the post-DM follow-up was 76 months (range, 37-126 months). Since 2003, an increased adoption of preoperative treatments was observed: the use of chemotherapy, radiotherapy and combined chemoradiotherapy went from 10.5% to 23.7%, from 1.7% to 17.8%, and from 1% to 11.8% respectively. This change in treatment strategies was associated to an improvement in CCI-SSM (27.8% vs 19.5%; P < 0.001), CCI-LR (14.1 vs 7.5%; P < 0.001), DMFS (57.9% vs 65.8%; P = 0.004), and post-DM (12.2% vs 20.1%; P = 0.012), but not in CCI-DM. CONCLUSIONS: Increased adoption of preoperative treatments and greater availability of medical agents in the recent years were associated to better outcomes. New treatments are eagerly awaited for further improvement of outcome for ESTSTS patients because no major changes have been observed since 2003.
Subject(s)
Sarcoma , Soft Tissue Neoplasms , Adult , Extremities/pathology , Follow-Up Studies , Humans , Neoplasm Recurrence, Local/pathology , Retrospective Studies , Sarcoma/pathology , Soft Tissue Neoplasms/pathology , Survival RateABSTRACT
Metronomic chemotherapy is a treatment option for metastatic breast cancer (MBC) patients who require prolonged disease control without cumulative toxicity. Data available on the efficacy and tolerability of prolonged usage of metronomic therapy are limited. We analyzed patients with MBC, enrolled in a clinical trial, who obtained a prolonged clinical benefit for a duration of at least 12 months with vinorelbine 30 or 40 mg orally three times a week, cyclophosphamide 50 mg daily and capecitabine 500 mg three times a day (VEX regimen). The patients were treated at the European Institute of Oncology, Milan. We identified 67 MBC patients. The median age before starting the VEX regimen was 53 years. There were 59 patients (88%) who had hormone-receptors positive and HER2 negative BC. We had 37 patients who received VEX as the first-line treatment for MBC, while 30 patients were pretreated. The objective response rate was 49% (95% CI, 37-62). The median duration of VEX treatment after the first year was 14 months (min-max range 0.3-81.3 months). The progression-free survival at 3 years was 25.4% (95% CI, 15.7-36.2) and at 4 years was 18.5% (95% CI, 10.1-28.8 time 0 corresponds to 1 year after starting VEX). A total of 25 patients required a dose reduction, 7% of patients experienced G3 hand and foot syndrome. Metronomic VEX regimen can induce prolonged clinical benefit in MBC. On the basis of this long-term safety evaluation, there is no evidence of specific cumulative or delayed toxicities with metronomic chemotherapy.
Subject(s)
Administration, Metronomic , Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols/therapeutic use , Breast Neoplasms/drug therapy , Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols/administration & dosage , Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols/adverse effects , Breast Neoplasms/pathology , Capecitabine/therapeutic use , Cyclophosphamide/therapeutic use , Female , Humans , Middle Aged , Neoplasm Metastasis , Progression-Free Survival , Vinorelbine/therapeutic useABSTRACT
PURPOSE: To compare the accuracy of Contrast-Enhanced Spectral Mammography (CESM), MG, US, and breast MRI in estimating the size of breast lesions requiring surgery. The postoperative histology size of the lesion was used as the gold standard. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Two hundred thirty-three non-benign lesions in 189 patients were included in the analyses. All the selected patients underwent CESM and at least one other conventional diagnostic exam (US, MG, or MRI). Subsequently, all the patients underwent surgery preceded by cytological/histological examination. The largest diameter of the lesion at imaging was measured by a radiologist with more than 10 years' experience and then compared with the size of the lesion in the histological sample at the surgery (gold standard). RESULTS: Among the 233 breast lesions, 196 were evaluated with US, 206 with MG and 160 with MRI. We found no statistically significant differences between size measurements using CESM and MRI compared with the measurements at the surgery (p value 0.63 and 0.51), whereas a significant difference was found for MG and US (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: CESM is a reliable method for estimating the size of breast lesions: its performance seems superior to US and MG and comparable to MRI.
Subject(s)
Breast Neoplasms , Neoplasms , Humans , Female , Contrast Media , Mammography/methods , Breast/diagnostic imaging , Magnetic Resonance Imaging/methods , Breast Neoplasms/diagnostic imaging , Breast Neoplasms/surgery , Breast Neoplasms/pathology , Sensitivity and SpecificityABSTRACT
We aimed to investigate the association between the radiomic features of contrast-enhanced spectral mammography (CESM) images and a specific receptor pattern of breast neoplasms. In this single-center retrospective study, we selected patients with neoplastic breast lesions who underwent CESM before a biopsy and surgical assessment between January 2013 and February 2022. Radiomic analysis was performed on regions of interest selected from recombined CESM images. The association between the features and each evaluated endpoint (ER, PR, Ki-67, HER2+, triple negative, G2-G3 expressions) was investigated through univariate logistic regression. Among the significant and highly correlated radiomic features, we selected only the one most associated with the endpoint. From a group of 321 patients, we enrolled 205 malignant breast lesions. The median age at the exam was 50 years (interquartile range (IQR) 45-58). NGLDM_Contrast was the only feature that was positively associated with both ER and PR expression (p-values = 0.01). NGLDM_Coarseness was negatively associated with Ki-67 expression (p-value = 0.02). Five features SHAPE Volume(mL), SHAPE_Volume(vx), GLRLM_RLNU, NGLDM_Busyness and GLZLM_GLNU were all positively and significantly associated with HER2+; however, all of them were highly correlated. Radiomic features of CESM images could be helpful to predict particular molecular subtypes before a biopsy.
Subject(s)
Breast Neoplasms , Humans , Middle Aged , Female , Breast Neoplasms/diagnostic imaging , Breast Neoplasms/pathology , Retrospective Studies , Ki-67 Antigen , Contrast Media , Mammography/methodsABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: In the randomised, phase 3 equivalence trial on electron intraoperative radiotherapy (ELIOT), accelerated partial breast irradiation (APBI) with the use of intraoperative radiotherapy was associated with a higher rate of ipsilateral breast tumour recurrence (IBTR) than whole-breast irradiation (WBI) in patients with early-stage breast cancer. Here, we aimed to examine the planned long-term recurrence and survival outcomes from the ELIOT trial. METHODS: This single-centre, randomised, phase 3 equivalence trial was done at the European Institute of Oncology (Milan, Italy). Eligible women, aged 48-75 years with a clinical diagnosis of a unicentric breast carcinoma with an ultrasound diameter not exceeding 25 mm, clinically negative axillary lymph nodes, and who were suitable for breast-conserving surgery, were randomly assigned (1:1) via a web-based system, with a random permuted block design (block size of 16) and stratified by clinical tumour size, to receive post-operative WBI with conventional fractionation (50 Gy given as 25 fractions of 2 Gy, plus a 10 Gy boost), or 21 Gy intraoperative radiotherapy with electrons (ELIOT) in a single dose to the tumour bed during surgery. The trial was open label and no-one was masked to treatment group assignment. The primary endpoint was the occurrence of IBTR. The trial was designed assuming a 5-year IBTR rate of 3% in the WBI group and equivalence of the two groups, if the 5-year IBTR rate in the ELIOT group did not exceed a 2·5 times excess, corresponding to 7·5%. Overall survival was the secondary endpoint. The main analysis was done by intention to treat. The cumulative incidence of IBTR events and overall survival were assessed at 5, 10, and 15 years of follow-up. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01849133. FINDINGS: Between Nov 20, 2000, and Dec 27, 2007, 1305 women were enrolled and randomly assigned: 654 to the WBI group and 651 to the ELIOT group. After a median follow-up of 12·4 years (IQR 9·7-14·7), 86 (7%) patients developed IBTR, with 70 (11%) cases in the ELIOT group and 16 (2%) in the WBI group, corresponding to an absolute excess of 54 IBTRs in the ELIOT group (HR 4·62, 95% CI 2·68-7·95, p<0·0001). In the ELIOT group, the 5-year IBTR rate was 4·2% (95% CI 2·8-5·9), the 10-year rate was 8·1% (6·1-10·3), and the 15-year rate was 12·6% (9·8-15·9). In the WBI group, the 5-year IBTR rate was 0·5% (95% CI 0·1-1·3), the 10-year rate was 1·1% (0·5-2·2), and the 15-year rate was 2·4% (1·4-4·0). At final follow-up on March 11, 2019, 193 (15%) women had died from any cause, with no difference between the two groups (98 deaths in the ELIOT group vs 95 in the WBI group; HR 1·03, 95% CI 0·77-1·36, p=0·85). In the ELIOT group, the overall survival rate was 96·8% (95% CI 95·1-97·9) at 5 years, 90·7% (88·2-92·7) at 10 years, and 83·4% (79·7-86·4) at 15 years; and in the WBI group, the overall survival rate was 96·8% (95·1-97·9) at 5 years, 92·7% (90·4-94·4) at 10 years, and 82·4% (78·5-85·6) at 15 years. We did not collect long-term data on adverse events. INTERPRETATION: The long-term results of this trial confirmed the higher rate of IBTR in the ELIOT group than in the WBI group, without any differences in overall survival. ELIOT should be offered to selected patients at low-risk of IBTR. FUNDING: Italian Association for Cancer Research, Jacqueline Seroussi Memorial Foundation for Cancer Research, Umberto Veronesi Foundation, American Italian Cancer Foundation, The Lombardy Region, and Italian Ministry of Health.
Subject(s)
Breast Neoplasms/radiotherapy , Electrons/therapeutic use , Neoplasm Recurrence, Local/epidemiology , Adult , Aged , Breast/radiation effects , Breast Neoplasms/mortality , Breast Neoplasms/pathology , Breast Neoplasms/surgery , Female , Humans , Middle AgedABSTRACT
PURPOSE: The need for systematic reexcision in patients who underwent unplanned excision (UE) for extremity and superficial trunk soft tissue sarcoma (ESTSTS) has been questioned. We investigated the outcome of patients who underwent reexcision for ESTSTS compared with primarily resected at our institution and the prognostic impact of microscopic residual disease (MR) in the reexcision specimen. METHODS: Primary ESTSTS patients surgically treated at our institution between 1997 and 2017 were divided in three groups: primarily resected (A), reexcised after macroscopically complete UE (B), and incomplete UE (C). Weighted overall survival (OS), crude cumulative incidence of local relapse (CCI-LR), and distant metastasis (CCI-DM) were calculated and compared. In group B, multivariable models were performed to assess factors associated with the outcomes. RESULTS: A total of 1962 patients were identified: 1076, 697 and 189 in groups A, B, and C, respectively. Overall median follow-up was 85 months. Seven-year weighted-OS was 73.8%, 84.1%, and 80.7% (p < 0.001) for groups A, B, and C respectively. Seven-year CCI-LR and DM were 5.0% and 25.3%, 12.1% and 15.8%, and 13.6% and 29.4% (both p < 0.001) for groups A, B, and C, respectively. At multivariable analysis, the presence MR was associated with LR (p < 0.001) but not with OS nor CCI-DM. CONCLUSIONS: UE and the presence of MR at pathology in reexcision specimen are associated to a higher risk of LR but not to a higher risk of DM or lower OS. After macroscopic complete UE, postponing reexcision until a LR occurs may be considered on an individualized basis.
Subject(s)
Neoplasm Recurrence, Local , Sarcoma , Extremities/surgery , Follow-Up Studies , Humans , Neoplasm Recurrence, Local/surgery , Retrospective Studies , Sarcoma/surgeryABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: The outcome of patients with retroperitoneal sarcomas (RPS) depends mainly on tumor biology and completeness of surgical resection. However, some patients are deemed not resectable for various reasons. This study analyzed a series of primary RPS patients to describe rate and reasons of primary inoperability at a large referral center. METHODS: All consecutive patients affected by primary localized RPS referred for surgical treatment at our institution between January 1, 2013 and December 31, 2017 were analyzed. Patients were split in two groups: those who underwent surgical resection with curative intent, and those who were not resected. RESULTS: A total of 322 patients were available for the current analysis: 285 (88.5%) underwent resection with curative intent, and 37 (11.5%) did not. Twenty of 322 (6.2%) patients who did not undergo resection had a technically unresectable tumor, whereas the remaining 18 of 322 (5.6%) were not amenable to a major surgical procedure due to comorbidities/poor performance status. The dominant technical reason was involvement of the celiaco-mesenteric vessels. At a median follow-up from the diagnosis of 34 months, 24 of 37 (64.9%) nonoperated and 48 of 285 (16.8%) operated patients died. The corresponding 4-year overall survival were 10.3% and 83.4%, respectively (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Roughly, 10% of patients who presented with localized primary RPS at a large referral institution were not resected. An attempt to standardize the definition of resectability for primary localized RPS should be made considering anatomic, biologic, and patient-related factors.
Subject(s)
Retroperitoneal Neoplasms , Sarcoma , Humans , Neoplasm Recurrence, Local , Referral and Consultation , Retroperitoneal Neoplasms/surgery , Retrospective Studies , Sarcoma/surgery , Survival RateABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Unlike for extremity sarcomas, the efficacy of radiotherapy for retroperitoneal sarcoma is not established. The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of preoperative radiotherapy plus surgery versus surgery alone on abdominal recurrence-free survival. METHODS: EORTC-62092 is an open-label, randomised, phase 3 study done in 31 research institutions, hospitals, and cancer centres in 13 countries in Europe and North America. Adults (aged ≥18 years) with histologically documented, localised, primary retroperitoneal sarcoma that was operable and suitable for radiotherapy, who had not been previously treated and had a WHO performance status and American Society of Anesthesiologists score of 2 or lower, were centrally randomly assigned (1:1), using an interactive web response system and a minimisation algorithm, to receive either surgery alone or preoperative radiotherapy followed by surgery. Randomisation was stratified by hospital and performance status. Radiotherapy was delivered as 50·4 Gy (in 28 daily fractions of 1·8 Gy) in either 3D conformal radiotherapy or intensity modulated radiotherapy, and the objective of surgery was a macroscopically complete resection of the tumour mass with en-bloc organ resection as necessary. The primary endpoint was abdominal recurrence-free survival, as assessed by the investigator, and was analysed in the intention-to-treat population. Safety was analysed in all patients who started their allocated treatment. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01344018. FINDINGS: Between Jan 18, 2012 and April 10, 2017, 266 patients were enrolled, of whom 133 were randomly assigned to each group. The median follow-up was 43·1 months (IQR 28·8-59·2). 128 (96%) patients from the surgery alone group had surgery, and 119 (89%) patients in the radiotherapy and surgery group had both radiotherapy and surgery. Median abdominal recurrence-free survival was 4·5 years (95% CI 3·9 to not estimable) in the radiotherapy plus surgery group and 5·0 years (3·4 to not estimable) in the surgery only group (hazard ratio 1·01, 95% CI 0·71-1·44; log rank p=0·95). The most common grade 3-4 adverse events were lymphopenia (98 [77%] of 127 patients in the radiotherapy plus surgery group vs one [1%] of 128 patients in the surgery alone group), anaemia (15 [12%] vs ten [8%]), and hypoalbuminaemia (15 [12%] vs five [4%]). Serious adverse events were reported in 30 (24%) of 127 patients in the radiotherapy plus surgery group, and in 13 (10%) of 128 patients in the surgery alone group. One (1%) of 127 patients in the radiotherapy plus surgery group died due to treatment-related serious adverse events (gastropleural fistula), and no patients in the surgery alone group died due to treatment-related serious adverse events. INTERPRETATION: Preoperative radiotherapy should not be considered as standard of care treatment for retroperitoneal sarcoma. FUNDING: European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer, and European Clinical Trials in Rare Sarcomas.
Subject(s)
Neoadjuvant Therapy , Retroperitoneal Neoplasms/radiotherapy , Sarcoma/radiotherapy , Aged , Disease-Free Survival , Europe , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Neoadjuvant Therapy/adverse effects , North America , Radiotherapy, Adjuvant/adverse effects , Radiotherapy, Conformal/adverse effects , Retroperitoneal Neoplasms/pathology , Retroperitoneal Neoplasms/surgery , Sarcoma/pathology , Sarcoma/surgery , Treatment OutcomeABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Solitary fibrous tumor (SFT) is a rare mesenchymal malignancy. Although surgery is potentially curative, the local relapse risk is high after marginal resections. Given the lack of prospective clinical trial data, the objective of the current study was to better define the role of perioperative radiotherapy (RT) in various SFT presentations by location. METHODS: This was retrospective study performed across 7 sarcoma centers. Clinical information was retrieved from all adult patients with extrameningeal, primary, localized SFT who were treated between 1990 and 2018 with surgery alone (S) compared with those who also received perioperative RT (S+RT). Differences in treatment characteristics between subgroups were tested using analysis of variance statistics and propensity score matching. Local control and overall survival rates were calculated from the start of treatment until progression or death from any cause. RESULTS: Of all 549 patients, 428 (78%) underwent S, and 121 (22%) underwent S+RT. The median follow-up was 52 months. After correction for mitotic count and surgical margins, S+RT was significantly associated with a lower risk of local progression (hazard ratio, 0.19: P = .029), an observation further confirmed by propensity score matching (P = .012); however, this association did not translate into an overall survival benefit. CONCLUSIONS: The results from this retrospective study investigating perioperative RT in patients with primary extrameningeal SFT suggest that combining RT with surgery in the management of this patient population is significantly associated with a reduced risk of local failures, especially in patients who have less favorable resection margins and in those who have tumors with a high mitotic count.
Subject(s)
Solitary Fibrous Tumors/radiotherapy , Solitary Fibrous Tumors/surgery , Analysis of Variance , Combined Modality Therapy/statistics & numerical data , Disease Progression , Extremities , Female , Follow-Up Studies , Head and Neck Neoplasms/mortality , Head and Neck Neoplasms/radiotherapy , Head and Neck Neoplasms/surgery , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Mitotic Index , Progression-Free Survival , Propensity Score , Retroperitoneal Neoplasms/mortality , Retroperitoneal Neoplasms/radiotherapy , Retroperitoneal Neoplasms/surgery , Retrospective Studies , Solitary Fibrous Tumor, Pleural/mortality , Solitary Fibrous Tumor, Pleural/radiotherapy , Solitary Fibrous Tumor, Pleural/surgery , Solitary Fibrous Tumors/mortality , Survival Rate , TorsoABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Chemotherapy-induced alopecia (CIA) is a distressing side effect of cancer therapy. The trial aimed to assess feasibility and effectiveness of scalp-cooling system DigniCap® to prevent CIA in primary breast cancer patients receiving an anthracycline containing adjuvant chemotherapy (CT). METHODS: Hair loss (HL) was evaluated by patient self-assessment and by the physician according to the Dean's scale at baseline and after each cycle of CT. The primary efficacy endpoint was the patient self-assessment HL score evaluated at least 3 weeks after completing CT. A Dean's scale score of 0-2 (i.e. HL ≤50%) was considered a success. RESULTS: From July 2014 to November 2016, 139 consecutive breast cancer patients were enrolled and received at least one treatment with scalp cooling. Fifty-six out of 131 evaluated patients successfully prevented HL (43%, 95% CI: 34-51%). Twenty-four patients (32%) discontinued the scalp cooling because of alopecia or scalp-cooling related AE, three patients had missing information on CIA, and 48 patients (64%) had a HL greater than 50% after CT. No serious AEs were reported. CONCLUSIONS: DigniCap® System resulted as a promising medical device to be safely integrated in supportive care of early breast cancer patients. Longer follow-up is needed to assess long-term safety and feasibility. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03712696.
Subject(s)
Alopecia/prevention & control , Anthracyclines/adverse effects , Breast Neoplasms/drug therapy , Adult , Aged , Alopecia/chemically induced , Breast Neoplasms/psychology , Cold Temperature , Female , Humans , Middle Aged , Prospective Studies , Quality of Life , ScalpABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: Retroperitoneal sarcomas (RPS) lie in the retroperitoneal space and are covered by a peritoneal layer. However, some RPS have an intraperitoneal component (IPC), which invades into the peritoneal cavity. The significance of such a clinical presentation is unknown. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed our prospectively maintained institutional database of RPS, along with intraoperative photographs taken to document the primary tumor extent at laparotomy. The effects of IPC on overall survival (OS), local recurrence (LR), and distant metastasis (DM) were evaluated. RESULTS: IPC was present in 81 of 493 patients (16.4%). It was significantly associated with older age (64 vs. 59, p = 0.008), gender (67% vs. 33% males, p = 0.005), and multifocality (11.1% vs. 0.5%; p < 0.0001). IPC was not associated with size or any specific histology, while it showed a weak association with high malignancy grade (40.7% vs. 28.6% in G3 tumors; p = 0.076). At a median follow-up of 32 months IPC was associated with worse 5-year OS (54% vs. 74%, p < 0.001) and crude cumulative incidence (CCI) of LR (5-year CCI of LR: 38% vs. 19%, p = 0.001), but not to CCI of DM. However, multivariable models showed that IPC's effect on OS (HR: 1.52, 95% CI 0.92-2.49, p = 0.1) and LR (HR: 1.34, 95% CI 0.8-2.26, p = 0.27) could be sufficiently explained by other known risk factors. CONCLUSIONS: IPC is associated with increased LR and decreased survival. However, the effect of IPC on prognosis is predominantly related to other tumor characteristics already included in published nomograms. IPC should not be a contraindication to a proper surgical resection.