Patient-Reported Outcomes in Patients Undergoing Lumpectomy With and Without Defect Closure.

BACKGROUND: The effect of lumpectomy defect repair (a level 1 oncoplastic technique) on patient-reported breast satisfaction among patients undergoing lumpectomy has not yet been investigated. METHODS: Patients undergoing lumpectomy at our institution between 2018 and 2020 with or without repair of their lumpectomy defect during index operation, comprised our study population. The BREAST-Q quality-of-life questionnaire was administered preoperatively, and at 6 months, 1 year, and 2 years postoperatively. Satisfaction and quality-of-life domains were compared between those who did and did not have closure of their lumpectomy defect, and compared with surgeon-reported outcomes. RESULTS: A total of 487 patients met eligibility criteria, 206 (42%) had their partial mastectomy defect repaired by glandular displacement. Median breast volume, as calculated from the mammogram, was smaller in patients undergoing defect closure (826 cm3 vs. 895 cm3, p = 0.006). There were no statistically significant differences in satisfaction with breasts (SABTR), physical well-being of the chest (PWB-CHEST), or psychosocial well-being (PsychWB) scores between the two cohorts at any time point. While patients undergoing defect closure had significantly higher sexual well-being (SexWB) scores compared with no closure (66 vs. 59, p = 0.021), there were no predictors of improvement in SexWB scores over time on multivariable analysis. Patients' self-reported scores positively correlated with physician-reported outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Despite a larger lumpectomy-to-breast volume ratio among patients undergoing defect repair, satisfaction was equivalent among those whose defects were or were not repaired at 2 years postsurgery. Defect repair was associated with clinically relevant improvement in patient-reported sexual well-being.

A multi-institutional prediction model to estimate the risk of recurrence and mortality after mastectomy for T1-2N1 breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: Post-mastectomy radiation therapy (PMRT) in women with pathologic stage T1-2N1M0 breast cancer is controversial. METHODS: Data from five North American institutions including women undergoing mastectomy without neoadjuvant therapy with pT1-2N1M0 breast cancer treated from 2006 to 2015 were pooled for analysis. Competing-risks regression was performed to identify factors associated with locoregional recurrence (LRR), distant metastasis (DM), overall recurrence (OR), and breast cancer mortality (BCM). RESULTS: A total of 3532 patients were included for analysis with a median follow-up time among survivors of 6.8 years (interquartile range [IQR], 4.5-9.5 years). The 2154 (61%) patients who received PMRT had significantly more adverse risk factors than those patients not receiving PMRT: younger age, larger tumors, more positive lymph nodes, lymphovascular invasion, extracapsular extension, and positive margins (p < .05 for all). On competing risk regression analysis, receipt of PMRT was significantly associated with a decreased risk of LRR (hazard ratio [HR], 0.21; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.14-0.31; p < .001) and OR (HR, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.62-0.94; p = .011). Model performance metrics for each end point showed good discrimination and calibration. An online prediction model to estimate predicted risks for each outcome based on individual patient and tumor characteristics was created from the model. CONCLUSIONS: In a large multi-institutional cohort of patients, PMRT for T1-2N1 breast cancer was associated with a significant reduction in locoregional and overall recurrence after accounting for known prognostic factors. An online calculator was developed to aid in personalized decision-making regarding PMRT in this population.

Use of a supervised machine learning model to predict Oncotype DX risk category in node-positive patients older than 50 years of age.

PURPOSE: The use of the Oncotype DX recurrence score (RS) to predict chemotherapy benefit in patients with hormone receptor-positive/HER2 negative (HR+/HER2-) breast cancer has recently expanded to include postmenopausal patients with N1 disease. RS availability is limited in resource-poor settings, however, prompting the development of statistical models that predict RS using clinicopathologic features. We sought to assess the performance of our supervised machine learning model in a cohort of patients > 50 years of age with N1 disease. METHODS: We identified patients > 50 years of age with pT1-2N1 HR+/HER2- breast cancer and applied the statistical model previously developed in a node-negative cohort, which uses age, pathologic tumor size, histology, progesterone receptor expression, lymphovascular invasion, and tumor grade to predict RS. We measured the model's ability to predict RS risk category (low: RS ≤ 25; high: RS > 25). RESULTS: Our cohort included 401 patients, 60.6% of whom had macrometastases, with a median of 1 positive node. The majority of patients had a low-risk observed RS (85.8%). For predicting RS category, the model had specificity of 97.3%, sensitivity of 31.8%, a negative predictive value of 87.9%, and a positive predictive value of 70.0%. CONCLUSION: Our model, developed in a cohort of node-negative patients, was highly specific for identifying cN1 patients > 50 years of age with a low RS who could safely avoid chemotherapy. The use of this model for identifying patients in whom genomic testing is unnecessary would help decrease the cost burden in resource-poor settings as reliance on RS for adjuvant treatment recommendations increases.

Supervised machine learning model to predict oncotype DX risk category in patients over age 50.

PURPOSE: Routine use of the oncotype DX recurrence score (RS) in patients with early-stage, estrogen receptor-positive, HER2-negative (ER+/HER2-) breast cancer is limited internationally by cost and availability. We created a supervised machine learning model using clinicopathologic variables to predict RS risk category in patients aged over 50 years. METHODS: From January 2012 to December 2018, we identified patients aged over 50 years with T1-2, ER+/HER2-, node-negative tumors. Clinicopathologic data and RS results were randomly split into training and validation cohorts. A random forest model with 500 trees was developed on the training cohort, using age, pathologic tumor size, histology, progesterone receptor (PR) expression, lymphovascular invasion (LVI), and grade as predictors. We predicted risk category (low: RS ≤ 25, high: RS > 25) using the validation cohort. RESULTS: Of the 3880 tumors identified, 1293 tumors comprised the validation cohort in patients of median (IQR) age 62 years (56-68) with median (IQR) tumor size 1.2 cm (0.8-1.7). Most tumors were invasive ductal (80.3%) of low-intermediate grade (80.5%) without LVI (80.9%). PR expression was ≤ 20% in 27.3% of tumors. Specificity for identifying RS ≤ 25 was 96.3% (95% CI 95.0-97.4) and the negative predictive value was 92.9% (95% CI 91.2-94.4). Sensitivity and positive predictive value for predicting RS > 25 was lower (48.3 and 65.1%, respectively). CONCLUSION: Our model was highly specific for identifying eligible patients aged over 50 years for whom chemotherapy can be omitted. Following external validation, it may be used to triage patients for RS testing, if predicted to be high risk, in resource-limited settings.

Concordance Between 21-Gene Recurrence Scores in Multifocal or Multicentric Breast Carcinomas Differs by Age and Histologic Subtype.

BACKGROUND: Among patients with multifocal or multicentric (MF/MC) breast cancer (BC) of similar morphology, concordance in Oncotype DX recurrence scores (RS) between tumors has been reported to be 87%. The effect of age and variation in histologic subtypes on RS concordance according to TAILORx criteria is unknown. METHODS: We identified patients with MF/MC, estrogen receptor-positive, HER2-negative, node-negative BC with two or more RS results treated at our institution from 2009 to 2018. Patients were analyzed by age group (≤ 50 and > 50 years). Low- and high-risk cut-offs were RS ≤ 25 and > 25 for age > 50 years, and RS ≤ 20 and > 20 for age ≤ 50 years. RS concordance was defined as no change in management based on RS variation between lesions. RESULTS: Overall, 120 patients with MF/MC BC were identified-82 (68.3%) aged > 50 years and 38 (31.7%) aged ≤ 50 years. Patients aged ≤ 50 years had higher mean RS for both multifocal (20 vs. 14; p = 0.006) and multicentric (17 vs. 13; p = 0.003) tumors and more frequently had high-risk tumors (p < 0.0001). Among patients aged > 50 years, 95.1% had RS concordance between tumors (same subtype, 98.2%; variable subtype, 88.9%; p = 0.1). Among patients aged ≤ 50 years, RS concordance was 81.6%. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with MF/MC BC, RS concordance was high, particularly in those aged > 50 years with tumors of the same histologic subtype. RS testing of one focus may be sufficiently prognostic and predictive in patients aged > 50 years, regardless of subtype concordance. Testing of individual foci should be considered in patients aged ≤ 50 years due to a higher likelihood of RS discordance.

A machine learning model that classifies breast cancer pathologic complete response on MRI post-neoadjuvant chemotherapy.

BACKGROUND: For breast cancer patients undergoing neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC), pathologic complete response (pCR; no invasive or in situ) cannot be assessed non-invasively so all patients undergo surgery. The aim of our study was to develop and validate a radiomics classifier that classifies breast cancer pCR post-NAC on MRI prior to surgery. METHODS: This retrospective study included women treated with NAC for breast cancer from 2014 to 2016 with (1) pre- and post-NAC breast MRI and (2) post-NAC surgical pathology report assessing response. Automated radiomics analysis of pre- and post-NAC breast MRI involved image segmentation, radiomics feature extraction, feature pre-filtering, and classifier building through recursive feature elimination random forest (RFE-RF) machine learning. The RFE-RF classifier was trained with nested five-fold cross-validation using (a) radiomics only (model 1) and (b) radiomics and molecular subtype (model 2). Class imbalance was addressed using the synthetic minority oversampling technique. RESULTS: Two hundred seventy-three women with 278 invasive breast cancers were included; the training set consisted of 222 cancers (61 pCR, 161 no-pCR; mean age 51.8 years, SD 11.8), and the independent test set consisted of 56 cancers (13 pCR, 43 no-pCR; mean age 51.3 years, SD 11.8). There was no significant difference in pCR or molecular subtype between the training and test sets. Model 1 achieved a cross-validation AUROC of 0.72 (95% CI 0.64, 0.79) and a similarly accurate (P = 0.1) AUROC of 0.83 (95% CI 0.71, 0.94) in both the training and test sets. Model 2 achieved a cross-validation AUROC of 0.80 (95% CI 0.72, 0.87) and a similar (P = 0.9) AUROC of 0.78 (95% CI 0.62, 0.94) in both the training and test sets. CONCLUSIONS: This study validated a radiomics classifier combining radiomics with molecular subtypes that accurately classifies pCR on MRI post-NAC.

Microscopic Extracapsular Extension in Sentinel Lymph Nodes Does Not Mandate Axillary Dissection in Z0011-Eligible Patients.

BACKGROUND: In the ACOSOG (American College of Surgeons Oncology Group) Z0011 trial and the AMAROS (After Mapping of the Axilla: Radiotherapy or Surgery?) trial, matted nodes with gross extracapsular extension (ECE), a risk factor for locoregional recurrence, were an indication for axillary lymph node dissection (ALND), but the effect of microscopic ECE (mECE) in the sentinel lymph nodes (SLNs) on recurrence was not examined. METHODS: Between 2010 and 2017, 811 patients with cT1-2N0 breast cancer and SLN metastasis were prospectively managed according to Z0011 criteria, with ALND for those with more than two positive SLNs or gross ECE. Management of mECE was not specified. In this study, we compare outcomes of patients with one to two positive SLNs with and without mECE, treated with SLN biopsy alone (n = 685). RESULTS: Median patient age was 58 years, and median tumor size was 1.7 cm. mECE was identified in 210 (31%) patients. Patients with mECE were older, had larger tumors, and were more likely to be hormone receptor positive and HER2 negative, have two positive SLNs, and receive nodal radiation. At a median follow-up of 41 months, no isolated axillary failures were observed. There were 11 nodal recurrences; two supraclavicular ± axillary, four synchronous with breast, and five with distant failure. The five-year rate of any nodal recurrence was 1.6% and did not differ by mECE (2.3% vs. 1.3%; p = 0.84). No differences were observed in local (p = 0.08) or distant (p = 0.31) recurrence rates by mECE status. CONCLUSIONS: In Z0011-eligible patients, nodal recurrence rates in patients with mECE are low after treatment with SLN biopsy alone, even in the absence of routine nodal radiation. The presence of mECE should not be considered a routine indication for ALND.

A Consensus Definition and Classification System of Oncoplastic Surgery Developed by the American Society of Breast Surgeons.

BACKGROUND: Several definitions of oncoplastic surgery have been reported in the literature. In an effort to facilitate communication regarding oncoplastic surgery to patients, trainees, and among colleagues, the American Society of Breast Surgeons (ASBrS) aimed to create a consensus definition and classification system for oncoplastic surgery. METHODS: We performed a comprehensive literature search for oncoplastic surgery definitions using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Following this, a consensus definition and classification system was created by the ASBrS. RESULTS: Overall, 30 articles defining oncoplastic surgery were identified, with several articles contradicting each other. The ASBrS definition for oncoplastic surgery defines this set of breast-conserving operations using volume displacement and volume replacement principles as: "Breast conservation surgery incorporating an oncologic partial mastectomy with ipsilateral defect repair using volume displacement or volume replacement techniques with contralateral symmetry surgery as appropriate". Volume displacement is defined as closing the lumpectomy defect and redistributing the resection volume over the preserved breast, and is divided into two levels: level 1 (< 20%) and level 2 (20-50%). Volume replacement includes those situations when volume is added using flaps or implants to correct the partial mastectomy defect. CONCLUSION: The ASBrS oncoplastic surgery definition and classification system provides language to facilitate discussion and teaching of oncoplastic surgery among breast surgeons, trainees, and patients.

Is Clinical Exam of the Axilla Sufficient to Select Node-Positive Patients Who Downstage After NAC for SLNB? A Comparison of the Accuracy of Clinical Exam Versus MRI.

BACKGROUND: The National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) endorses sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) in patients with clinically positive axillary nodes who downstage after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC). In this study, we compared the accuracy of post-NAC MRI to clinical exam alone in predicting pathologic status of sentinel lymph nodes in cN1 patients. METHODS: We identified patients with T0-3, N1 breast cancer who underwent NAC and subsequent SLNB from March 2014 to July 2017. Patients were grouped based on whether a post-NAC MRI was done. MRI accuracy in predicting SLN status was assessed versus clinical exam alone. RESULTS: A total of 450 patients met initial study criteria; 269 were analyzed after excluding patients without biopsy-confirmed nodal disease, palpable disease after NAC, and failed SLN mapping. Median age was 49 years. Post-NAC MRI was done in 68% (182/269). Patients undergoing lumpectomy vs mastectomy more frequently received a post-NAC MRI (88 vs 54%, p < 0.001). All other clinicopathologic parameters were comparable between those who did and did not have a post-NAC MRI. Thirty percent (55/182) had abnormal lymph nodes on MRI. Among these, 58% (32/55) had a positive SLN on final pathology versus 42% (53/127) of patients with no abnormal lymph nodes on MRI and 52% (45/87) of patients who had clinical exam alone (p = 0.09). MRI sensitivity was 38%, specificity was 76%, and overall SLN status prediction accuracy was 58%. CONCLUSIONS: Post-NAC MRI is no more accurate than clinical exam alone in predicting SLN pathology in patients presenting with cN1 disease. Abnormal lymph nodes on MRI should not preclude SLNB.

Does nonmetastatic inflammatory breast cancer have a worse prognosis than other nonmetastatic T4 cancers?

BACKGROUND: Both patients with inflammatory breast cancer (IFLBC) and patients with noninflammatory T4 breast cancer (non-IFLBC) have a heavy disease burden in the breast; whether the unique biology of IFLBC conveys a higher locoregional recurrence (LRR) risk and worse outcomes in comparison with other T4 lesions is uncertain. Here the outcomes of patients with IFLBC and patients with non-IFLBC treated with modern multimodality therapy are compared. METHODS: Patients with nonmetastatic T4 breast cancer treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy, mastectomy, and radiation therapy between 2006 and 2016 were identified. Recurrences and survival were compared between patients with IFLBC and patients with non-IFLBC overall and stratified by receptor subtype. RESULTS: For 199 T4 patients, the median age was 52 years, and the median clinical tumor size was 7 cm. One hundred seventeen (59%) had IFLBC. With a median follow-up of 41 months, 4 patients had isolated LRR; all cases occurred in patients with IFLBC. The 5-year isolated LRR rate for patients with IFLBC was 4.8%. Overall, 14 patients had both LRR and distant recurrence (DR); 47 had DR only. The 5-year distant recurrence-free survival (DRFS) rates were similar for patients with IFLBC and patients with non-IFLBC (63% vs 71%; log-rank P = .14). The 5-year DRFS rate was lowest among triple-negative (TN) patients (43%) and was significantly lower for patients with TN IFLBC versus patients with non-IFLBC (28% vs 62%; log-rank P = .02). The 5-year overall survival rates (71% vs 74%; log-rank P = .4) and cancer-specific survival rates (74% vs 79%; log-rank P = .23) did not differ between IFLBC and non-IFLBC. CONCLUSIONS: Although IFLBC is often considered a unique biologic subtype, patients with IFLBC and patients with non-IFLBC had similar outcomes with modern multimodality therapy; isolated LRR was uncommon. The TN subtype in patients with IFLBC is associated with poor outcomes, and this indicates the need for new treatment approaches in this group.

Most Breast Cancer Patients with T1-2 Tumors and One to Three Positive Lymph Nodes Do Not Need Postmastectomy Radiotherapy.

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVE: Guidelines concur that postmastectomy radiation therapy (PMRT) in T1-2 tumors with one to three positive (+) lymph nodes (LNs) decreases locoregional recurrence (LRR) but advise limiting PMRT to patients at highest risk to balance against potential harms. In this study, we identify the risks of LRR after mastectomy in patients with T1-2N1 disease, treated with modern chemotherapy, and identify predictors of LRR when omitting PMRT. METHODS: Patients with T1-2N1 breast cancer undergoing mastectomy between 1995 and 2006 were categorized by receipt of PMRT. The Chi square test compared the clinicopathologic features between both groups, and Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression analysis was used to determine the rates of LRR, recurrence-free survival (RFS), and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: Overall, 1087 patients (924 no PMRT, 163 PMRT) were included in the study, with a median follow-up of 10.8 years (range 0-21). We identified 63 LRRs (56 no PMRT, 7 PMRT), and 10-year rates of LRR with and without PMRT were 4.0% and 7.0%, respectively. Patients receiving PMRT were younger (p = 0.019), had larger tumors (p = 0.0013), higher histologic grade (p = 0.029), more positive LNs (p < 0.0001), lymphovascular invasion (LVI) (p < 0.0001), extracapsular nodal extension (p < 0.0001), and macroscopic LN metastases (p < 0.0001). There was no difference in LRR, RFS, or OS between groups. On multivariate analysis, age < 40 years (p < 0.0001) and LVI (p < 0.0001) were associated with LRR in those not receiving PMRT. CONCLUSION: Consistent with the guidelines, 85% of patients with T1-2N1 were spared PMRT at our center, while maintaining low LRR. Age < 40 years and the presence of LVI are significantly associated with LRR in those not receiving PMRT.

Results from the American Society of Breast Surgeons Oncoplastic Surgery Committee 2017 Survey: Current Practice and Future Directions.

INTRODUCTION: Oncoplastic surgery is emerging as a validated, safe, patient-centric approach to breast cancer surgery in the United States. The American Society of Breast Surgeons Oncoplastic Surgery Committee (ASBrS-OSC) conducted a survey to assess the scope of practice and level of interest in oncoplastic surgery among its members. Furthermore, the group sought to identify barriers to incorporating oncoplastic skills in a surgeon's practice. METHODS: A 10-question survey was administered in March 2017 to the entire ASBrS membership using an online format. Three solicitations were sent. Unique identifiers allowed a single response. RESULTS: Of the 2655 surveys sent out, 708 members responded. Nearly all (99%) respondents had at least some interest in oncoplastic surgery. The current rates of performing nipple-sparing mastectomy, adjacent tissue transfer, and breast reduction with lumpectomy were 80, 60, and 51%, respectively. A minority of respondents reported independently performing breast reductions/mammaplasties (19%) or contralateral symmetrization (10%). Barriers to learning oncoplastic surgery included surgeon's time and access to oncoplastic educational material/courses. Most respondents felt that training courses and videos may allow them to better incorporate oncoplastic techniques in their practices. CONCLUSIONS: The interest in oncoplastic surgery among U.S. surgeons is significant, yet there are barriers to incorporate these surgical techniques into a breast surgeon's practice. As professional organizations provide access to effective training and enduring educational resources, breast surgeons will be enabled to develop their oncoplastic skill set and safely offer these techniques to their patients.

Influence of Age on the Clinical Outcome of Breast Cancer for Men and the Development of Second Primary Cancers.

BACKGROUND: Low incidence of breast cancer in men (BCM) (< 1% of all breast cancers) has led to a paucity of outcome data. This study evaluated the impact of age on BCM outcomes. METHODS: For this study, BCM patients treated between 2000 and 2011 were stratified by age (≤ 65 or > 65 years). Kaplan-Meier methods were used to compare overall survival (OS) and breast cancer-specific survival (BCSS). Competing-risk methods analyzed time to second primary cancers (SPCs), with any-cause death treated as a competing risk. RESULTS: The study identified 152 BCM patients with a median age of 64 years (range 19-96 years). The median body mass index (BMI) was 28 kg/m2. Men age 65 years or younger (n = 78, 51%) were more overweight/obese than men older than 65 years (n = 74, 49%) (89% vs 74%, respectively; P = 0.008). Both groups had similar nodal metastases rates (P = 0.4), estrogen receptor positivity (P = 1), and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)neu overexpression (P = 0.6). Men 65 years of age or younger were more likely to receive chemotherapy (P = 0.002). The median follow-up period was 5.8 years (range 0.1-14.4 years). The 5-year OS was 86% (95% confidence interval [CI] 80-93%), whereas the 5-year BCSS was 95% (95% CI 91-99%). The BCM patients 65 years of age and younger had better OS (P = 0.003) but not BCSS (P = 0.8). The 5-year cumulative incidence of SPC was 8.4% (95% CI 3.4-13.4%). The prior SPC rate was higher for men older than 65 years (n = 20, 31%) than for those age 65 years or younger (n = 7, 11%) (P = 0.008). This did not account for differences in life years at risk. No difference was observed in SPC cumulative incidence stratified by age (P = 0.3). CONCLUSIONS: Men 65 years of age or younger received more chemotherapy and had improved OS, but not BCSS, compared with men older than 65 years. For all BCM, SPC is a risk, and appropriate screening may be warranted.

Axillary Dissection and Nodal Irradiation Can Be Avoided for Most Node-positive Z0011-eligible Breast Cancers: A Prospective Validation Study of 793 Patients.

OBJECTIVE: To determine rates of axillary dissection (ALND) and nodal recurrence in patients eligible for ACOSOG Z0011. BACKGROUND: Z0011 demonstrated that patients with cT1-2N0 breast cancers and 1 to 2 involved sentinel lymph nodes (SLNs) having breast-conserving therapy had no difference in locoregional recurrence or survival after SLN biopsy alone or ALND. The generalizability of the results and importance of nodal radiotherapy (RT) is unclear. METHODS: Patients eligible for Z0011 had SLN biopsy alone. Prospectively defined indications for ALND were metastases in ≥3 SLNs or gross extracapsular extension. Axillary imaging was not routine. SLN and ALND groups and radiation fields were compared with chi-square and t tests. Cumulative incidence of recurrences was estimated with competing risk analysis. RESULTS: From August 2010 to December 2016, 793 patients met Z0011 eligibility criteria and had SLN metastases. Among them, 130 (16%) had ALND; ALND did not vary based on age, estrogen receptor, progesterone receptor, or HER2 status. Five-year event-free survival after SLN alone was 93% with no isolated axillary recurrences. Cumulative 5-year rates of breast + nodal and nodal + distant recurrence were each 0.7%. In 484 SLN-only patients with known RT fields (103 prone, 280 supine tangent, 101 breast + nodes) and follow-up ≥12 months, the 5-year cumulative nodal recurrence rate was 1% and did not differ significantly by RT fields. CONCLUSIONS: We confirm that even without preoperative axillary imaging or routine use of nodal RT, ALND can be avoided in a large majority of Z0011-eligible patients with excellent regional control. This approach has the potential to spare substantial numbers of women the morbidity of ALND.

Estimating the OncotypeDX score: validation of an inexpensive estimation tool.

BACKGROUND: OncotypeDX, a multi-gene expression assay, has been incorporated into clinical practice as a prognostic and predictive tool. However, its use in resource-constrained international healthcare systems is limited. Here we develop and validate a simplified model using clinicopathologic criteria to predict OncotypeDX score. METHODS: Patients with estrogen receptor (ER) and/or progesterone receptor (PR)-positive and HER2-negative invasive ductal carcinoma for whom the OncotypeDX test was successfully performed between 09/2008 and 12/2011 were retrospectively identified. Tumor size, nuclear and histologic grade, lymphovascular invasion, and ER and PR status were extracted from pathology reports. Data were split into a training dataset comprising women tested 09/2008-04/2011, and a validation dataset comprising women tested 04/2011-12/2011. Using the training dataset, linear regression analysis was used to identify factors associated with OncotypeDX score, and to create a simplified risk score and identify risk cutoffs. RESULTS: Estrogen and progesterone receptors, tumor size, nuclear and histologic grades, and lymphovascular involvement were independently associated with OncotypeDX. The full model explained 39% of the variation in the test data, and the simplified risk score and cutoffs assigned 57% of patients in the test data to the correct risk category (OncotypeDX score <18, 18-30, >30). 41% of patients were predicted to have OncotypeDX score <18, of these 83, 16, and 2% had true scores of <18, 18-30, and >30, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Awaiting an inexpensive test that is prognostic and predictive, our simplified tool allows clinicians to identify a fairly large group of patients (41%) with very low chance of having high-risk disease (2%).

First international consensus conference on standardization of oncoplastic breast conserving surgery.

PURPOSE: To obtain consensus recommendations for the standardization of oncoplastic breast conserving surgery (OPS) from an international panel of experts in breast surgery including delegates from the German, Austrian and Swiss societies of senology. METHODS: A total of 52 questions were addressed by electronic voting. The panel's recommendations were put into context with current evidence and the report was circled in an iterative open email process until consensus was obtained. RESULTS: The panelists considered OPS safe and effective for improving aesthetic outcomes and broadening the indication for breast conserving surgery (BCS) towards larger tumors. A slim majority believed that OPS reduces the rate of positive margins; however, there was consensus that OPS is associated with an increased risk of complications compared to conventional BCS. The panel strongly endorsed patient-reported outcomes measurement, and recommended selected scales of the Breast-Q™-Breast Conserving Therapy Module for that purpose. The Clough bi-level classification was recommended for standard use in clinical practice for indicating, planning and performing OPS, and the Hoffmann classification for surgical reports and billing purposes. Mastopexy and reduction mammoplasty were the only two recognized OPS procedure categories supported by a majority of the panel. Finally, the experts unanimously supported the statement that every OPS procedure should be tailored to each individual patient. CONCLUSIONS: When implemented into clinical practice, the panel recommendations may improve safety and effectiveness of OPS. The attendees agreed that there is a need for prospective multicenter studies to optimize patient selection and for standardized criteria to qualify and accredit OPS training centers.

Oncologic Outcomes After Treatment for MRI Occult Breast Cancer (pT0N+).

BACKGROUND: Studies assessing outcomes in occult breast cancer have often included women treated before the routine use of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). This study examined outcomes for patients presenting with axillary adenopathy and no primary breast tumor detectable by MRI or other imaging methods. METHODS: All patients with axillary nodal metastases consistent with breast carcinoma and no breast primary tumor detectable by physical exam, mammography, or MRI treated between 1 January 1996 and 30 June 2011 were identified from an institutional database. Data were collected on local, regional, and distant recurrences. RESULTS: For the study, 38 patients were identified. Modified radical mastectomy (MRM) was performed for 13 of the patients, whereas 25 of the patients underwent axillary dissection (ALND) and whole-breast radiotherapy (WBRT). Most of the women had pathologic N1 disease [median number of positive nodes, 2 (MRM cohort) and 3 (ALND + WBRT cohort); p = 0.38]. All the patients received chemotherapy, and 30 (79%) of the 38 patients received an anthracycline and taxane. Regional nodal radiation was used for 60% of those with ALND + WBRT and for all 46% of the MRM patients who received chest wall radiotherapy. During a median follow-up period of 7 years, there were no nodal recurrences. Two patients treated with ALND + WBRT had in-breast recurrences, whereas none in the MRM group experienced a local recurrence. The proportion that experienced distant disease was similar between the MRM cohort (1 of 13) and the ALND + WBRT cohort (2 of 25). CONCLUSION: Breast cancer presenting as axillary adenopathy with no detectable primary tumor is rare. Breast conservation with WBRT is a viable option for patients with a diagnosis of occult breast cancer and a negative preoperative MRI.