A Randomized Trial of Robotic Mastectomy Versus Open Surgery in Women With Breast Cancer or BrCA Mutation.

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 20.7 ±â€Š13.8 versus 9.9 ±â€Š5.1 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.

Oncoplastic Breast-Conserving Surgery for Synchronous Multicentric and Multifocal Tumors: Is It Oncologically Safe? A Retrospective Matched-Cohort Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Oncoplastic surgery is a well-established approach that combines breast-conserving treatment for breast cancer and plastic surgery techniques. Although this approach already has been described for multicentric and multifocal tumors, no long-term oncologic follow-up evaluation and no comparison with patients undergoing mastectomy have been published. This study aimed to evaluate whether oncoplastic surgery is a safe and reliable treatment for managing invasive primary multicentric and multifocal breast cancer. METHODS: The study compared a consecutive series of 100 patients with multicentric or multifocal tumors who had undergone oncoplastic surgery (study group) with 100 patients who had multicentric or multifocal tumors and had undergone mastectomy (control group) during a prolonged period. The end points evaluated were disease-free survival (DFS), overall survival (OS), cumulative incidence of local recurrence (CI-L), regional recurrence (CI-R), and distant recurrence (CI-D), all measured from the date of surgery. RESULTS: The OS and DFS were similar between the two groups. The incidence of local events was higher in the oncoplastic group, whereas the incidence of regional events was slightly higher in the mastectomy group. These differences were not statistically significant. The cumulative incidence of distant events was similar between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: To the authors' knowledge, the current study provides the best available evidence suggesting that the oncoplastic approach is a safe and reliable treatment for managing invasive multifocal and multicentric breast cancers.

Consensus Statement on Robotic Mastectomy-Expert Panel From International Endoscopic and Robotic Breast Surgery Symposium (IERBS) 2019.

OBJECTIVES: To achieve a consensus statement on robotic mastectomy. BACKGROUND: Robotic-assisted surgery has gained much attention especially the results of few case series reporting on the technical feasibility, safety and early oncologic outcomes of robotic-assisted mastectomy in a few centers worldwide. The aim of this consensus statement was to develop and provide standardized guidelines on robotic mastectomy based on consensus statement by a panel of experts from indications to outcome measures and indicators, thereby providing a valuable guide for breast surgeons worldwide. METHODOLOGY: An internationally representative expert panel of 10 surgeons was invited to participate in the generation of a consensus statement. 52 statements were created in 6 domains: indications, contraindications, technical considerations, patient counseling, outcome measures and indicators, training and learning curve assessment. Experts were asked to vote if they agree, disagree or of the opinion that the statement should be rephrased. Two electronic rounds via online survey of iterative rating and feedback were anonymously completed, followed by a final round of in-person meeting during the inaugural International Endoscopic and Robotic Breast Surgery Symposium 2019 from May 24 to 25, 2019. Consensus was reached when there was at least 80% agreement on each statement. RESULTS: A total of 53 statements with at least 80% agreement were generated after 3 rounds of voting; 21 statements from first round of voting, 20 statements from second round of voting and 12 statements from the final round of in-person meeting. All experts agreed that the consensus statement served as expert recommendations but not mandatory for a successful and safe practice of robotic mastectomy. CONCLUSION: Robotic mastectomy is a promising technique and could well be the future of minimally invasive breast surgery whereas proving to be safe and feasible. The first consensus statement on robotic mastectomy from an international panel of experts serves as an extremely important milestone and provides recommendations for breast surgeons keen to embark on this technique.

Feasibility and surgical impact of Z0011 trial criteria in a single-Institution practice.

The purpose of this study is the evaluation of clinical and surgical impact of the Z0011 trial criteria on the management of breast cancer (BC) patients undergoing breast conservative surgery (BCS) at the European Institute of Oncology (IEO). We studied 1386 patients who underwent BCS and sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) from July 2016 to July 2018. Clinical evaluation, breast ultrasound, mammogram, and cyto/histological examination were performed for all patients at the time of diagnosis. Frozen sections of the sentinel lymph node (SLN) were not performed for any patient. Patients who underwent neo-adjuvant therapy were excluded. To evaluate the results before and after the introduction of Z0011 criteria, a group of 1425 patients with the same characteristics who underwent BCS and SLNB from July 2013 to July 2015 were analyzed. We studied the characteristics of the patients by nodal status, and we observed that T stage, tumor grade, and lymphovascular invasion were statistically related with the highest rate of positive SLN. Of the 1386 patients who underwent surgery after the introduction of the Z011 trial, 1156 patients (83.4%) had negative SLN, 230 patients (16.6%) had positive SLN. Subsequent axillary lymph node dissection (ALND) was performed in only 7 cases (3.0%). Of the 1425 patients operated before the introduction of the Z0011 trial, 216 patients had subsequent ALND (15%). The reduction in the number of ALND performed after the introduction of Z0011 is statistically significant, and this could result in a remarkable reduction of the comorbidities of our patients.

Update on the Feasibility and Progress on Robotic Breast Surgery.

BACKGROUND: Robotic nipple-sparing mastectomy (RNSM) may allow for more precise anatomic dissection and improved cosmetic outcomes over conventional open nipple-sparing mastectomy; however, data regarding the feasibility and safety of the procedure are limited. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to present and discuss perioperative surgical outcomes and early oncologic follow-up data on consecutive patients undergoing RNSM from June 2014 to January 2019. METHODS: Patients underwent RNSM and immediate robotic breast reconstruction through an axillary incision at a single institution. Perioperative data, complications at 3 months postoperatively, pathological data, and adjuvant therapies were recorded. Local recurrence-free, disease-free, and overall survival were analyzed. RESULTS: Overall, 73 women underwent 94 RNSM procedures. Indications were invasive breast cancer in 39 patients, ductal carcinoma in situ in 17 patients, and BRCA mutation in 17 patients. Mean surgery time was 3 h and 32 min. One-step reconstruction with implant occurred in 89.4% of procedures. The rate of complications requiring reoperation was 4.3%, and the rate of flap or nipple necrosis was 1.1%. Median follow-up was 19 months (range 3.1-44.8). No local recurrences occurred. Overall survival at 12, 24, or 60 months was 98% (95% confidence interval 86-100%). CONCLUSION: We observed a low complication rate in 94 consecutive RNSM procedures, demonstrating the procedure is technically feasible and safe. We found no early local failures at 19 months follow-up. Long-term follow-up is needed to confirm oncologic safety. Future clinical trials to study the advantages and disadvantages of RNSM are warranted.

Management of Multifocal-Multicentric Breast Cancer: Current Perspective.

The incidence of multifocal (MF) and multicentric (MC) breast cancer has a wide variation among different clinical studies, mostly due to the lack of a standardized classification and definition of these two separate entities. The optimal surgical treatment for multiple ipsilateral breast cancer remains a long debated subject. Multifocal and multicentric breast cancer is usually considered a relative contraindication for breast conserving therapy (BCT). In this narrative review we analyzed differences between MC and MF early breast cancer, the role of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in detection of multiple breast lesions, and its role in the surgical approach. We evaluate data from the literature about feasibility of breast conservative surgery and loco-regional treatment modalities. Recent studies brought evidence that treatment of patients with MC/MF breast cancer with BCT plus radiotherapy and adjuvant systemic therapy can have low-rates for in-breast recurrence. Prospective studies are needed to confirm these findings.

Oncoplastic Breast-Conserving Surgery for Tumors Larger than 2 Centimeters: Is it Oncologically Safe? A Matched-Cohort Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Oncoplastic surgery is a well-established approach that combines conserving treatment for breast cancer and plastic surgery techniques. Although this approach has been described for T2 tumors, no long-term oncologic follow-up and no comparison with patients undergoing mastectomy has been published. The purpose of the study was to demonstrate that oncoplastic surgery is a safe and reliable treatment for managing invasive primary T2 breast cancer. METHODS: We compared a consecutive series of 193 T2 patients who have undergone oncoplastic surgery (study group) with 386 T2 patients who have undergone mastectomy (control group). The endpoints evaluated were disease-free survival (DFS), overall survival (OS), cumulative incidence of local recurrence (CI-L), regional recurrence (CI-R), and distant recurrence (CI-D), all measured from the date of surgery. RESULTS: Median follow-up is 7.4 years. The OS is similar within the two groups: 87.3 and 87.1 % at 10 years in the ONC group and control group, respectively (p value, adjusted for multifocality and tumor size, 0.74). Also, the DFS is similar in both groups: 60.9 and 56.3 % at 10 years in the ONC group and control group, respectively. The incidence of local events is slightly higher in the oncoplastic group, whereas the incidence of regional events is slightly higher in the mastectomy group. These differences are not statistically significant. The cumulative incidence of distant events is similar within the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: To our knowledge, the present study provides the best available evidence to suggest that oncoplastic approach is a safe and reliable treatment for managing invasive pT2 breast cancers.

Physical activity and/or dietary intervention in overweight or obese breast cancer survivors: results of the InForma randomized trial.

PURPOSE: This study aimed to test the efficacy of a 6-month intervention on weight loss in a group of overweight or obese breast cancer (BC) survivors. We promoted adherence to a healthy diet or/and to increase physical activity, making use of a step counter device. Here we present results regarding the change in anthropometric measures and blood parameters. METHODS: 266 women treated for BC with a BMI ≥ 25 kg/m2 were randomized to a 6-month intervention into four arms: Dietary Intervention (DI); Physical Activity Intervention (PAI); Physical Activity and Dietary Intervention (PADI); Minimal Intervention (MI). Women were offered individualized counseling by a dietitian, a physiotherapist and a psychologist. Participants were followed up for an additional 18 months. RESULTS: 231 women completed the 6-month intervention and 167 completed the additional 18-month follow-up. Respectively, 37.5% and 36.7% of women included in the DI and PADI arm reached the objective of the trial (weight reduction > 5%). Significant weight and circumferences decrease was observed at 6-month in the four arms. Weight decrease was more pronounced in the DI (-4.7% ± 5.0%) and PADI (-3.9% ± 4.5%) arms, persisted over time (at 12 and 24 months), where counseling was mainly focused on the dietic component. The intervention had an effect on the glucose level with a significant reduction in whole population (-0.9 ± 11.7 p-value 0.02) and most pronounced in the PADI arm (-2.4 ± 7.8 p-value 0.03). CONCLUSIONS: Lifestyle intervention mainly focused on the dietetic component and making use of a step counter improved body weight, circumferences and glucose levels. IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS: A personalized approach yields a potential clinical benefit for BC survivors.

Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy vs No Axillary Surgery in Patients With Small Breast Cancer and Negative Results on Ultrasonography of Axillary Lymph Nodes: The SOUND Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) is the standard of care for axillary node staging of patients with early breast cancer (BC), but its necessity can be questioned since surgery for examination of axillary nodes is not performed with curative intent. Objective: To determine whether the omission of axillary surgery is noninferior to SLNB in patients with small BC and a negative result on preoperative axillary lymph node ultrasonography. Design, Setting, and Participants: The SOUND (Sentinel Node vs Observation After Axillary Ultra-Sound) trial was a prospective noninferiority phase 3 randomized clinical trial conducted in Italy, Switzerland, Spain, and Chile. A total of 1463 women of any age with BC up to 2 cm and a negative preoperative axillary ultrasonography result were enrolled and randomized between February 6, 2012, and June 30, 2017. Of those, 1405 were included in the intention-to-treat analysis. Data were analyzed from October 10, 2022, to January 13, 2023. Intervention: Eligible patients were randomized on a 1:1 ratio to receive SLNB (SLNB group) or no axillary surgery (no axillary surgery group). Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point of the study was distant disease-free survival (DDFS) at 5 years, analyzed as intention to treat. Secondary end points were the cumulative incidence of distant recurrences, the cumulative incidence of axillary recurrences, DFS, overall survival (OS), and the adjuvant treatment recommendations. Results: Among 1405 women (median [IQR] age, 60 [52-68] years) included in the intention-to-treat analysis, 708 were randomized to the SLNB group, and 697 were randomized to the no axillary surgery group. Overall, the median (IQR) tumor size was 1.1 (0.8-1.5) cm, and 1234 patients (87.8%) had estrogen receptor-positive ERBB2 (formerly HER2 or HER2/neu), nonoverexpressing BC. In the SLNB group, 97 patients (13.7%) had positive axillary nodes. The median (IQR) follow-up for disease assessment was 5.7 (5.0-6.8) years in the SLNB group and 5.7 (5.0-6.6) years in the no axillary surgery group. Five-year distant DDFS was 97.7% in the SLNB group and 98.0% in the no axillary surgery group (log-rank P = .67; hazard ratio, 0.84; 90% CI, 0.45-1.54; noninferiority P = .02). A total of 12 (1.7%) locoregional relapses, 13 (1.8%) distant metastases, and 21 (3.0%) deaths were observed in the SLNB group, and 11 (1.6%) locoregional relapses, 14 (2.0%) distant metastases, and 18 (2.6%) deaths were observed in the no axillary surgery group. Conclusions and Relevance: In this randomized clinical trial, omission of axillary surgery was noninferior to SLNB in patients with small BC and a negative result on ultrasonography of the axillary lymph nodes. These results suggest that patients with these features can be safely spared any axillary surgery whenever the lack of pathological information does not affect the postoperative treatment plan. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02167490.

Frequency of CDH1 Germline Mutations in Non-Gastric Cancers.

Hereditary Diffuse Gastric Cancer (HDGC) is a complex inherited syndrome caused by CDH1 germline mutations. DGC is the hallmark cancer of this genetic predisposition, but several other cancers are associated with these CDH1 mutations. In this review, we revised all studies reporting CDH1 mutations in non-GC patients. The selected studies included: (a) families aggregating with GC and other cancers, both, and (b) families presenting only non-gastric tumors association. Among non-gastric tumors, our results show that CDH1 mutations are most frequently identified in breast cancer. The frequency of missense mutations is higher in the non-GC group, as the age at diagnosis in this group. Moreover, the predominant CDH1 mutation affects the extracellular domain. Our data suggest that CDH1 genetic testing should be considered also in other cancers, especially breast tumors.

Ipsilateral axillary recurrence after breast conservative surgery: The protective effect of whole breast radiotherapy.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Whole breast radiotherapy (WBRT) is one of the possible reasons for the low rate of axillary recurrence after breast-conserving surgery (BCS). PATIENTS AND METHODS: We retrospectively collected data from 4,129 consecutive patients with breast cancer ⩽2cm and negative sentinel lymph node who underwent BCS between 1997 and 2007. We compared the risk of axillary lymph node recurrence between patients treated by WBRT (n=2939) and patients who received partial breast irradiation (PBI; n=1,190) performed by a single dose of electron intraoperative radiotherapy. RESULTS: Median tumour diameter was 1.1cm in both WBRT and PBI. Women who received WBRT were significantly younger and expressed significantly more multifocality, extensive in situ component, negative oestrogen receptor status and HER2 over-expression than women who received PBI. After a median follow-up of 8.3years, 37 and 28 axillary recurrences were observed in the WBRT and PBI arm, respectively, corresponding to a 10-year cumulative incidence of 1.3% and 4.0% (P<0.001). Multivariate analysis resulted in a hazard ratio of 0.30 (95% CI 0.17-0.51) in favour of WBRT. CONCLUSIONS: In this large series of women with T1 breast cancer and negative sentinel lymph node treated by BCS, WBRT lowered the risk of axillary recurrence by two thirds as compared to PBI.

Robotic nipple-sparing mastectomy for the treatment of breast cancer: Feasibility and safety study.

BACKGROUND: We previously devised and reported on an innovative surgical technique of robotic nipple-sparing mastectomy and immediate robotic breast reconstruction. Here we describe the outcome of the first 29 such consecutive procedures performed on breast cancer patients to assess feasibility, reproducibility and safety. METHODS: The following morbidity factors were tested: operation time, conversion rate to open technique, length of hospitalization, registration of complications for 1 year postoperatively and their characterization as either minor, major, or multiple, depending on clinical severity and treatment required. RESULTS: The total duration of the final robotic surgeries of our series was around 3 h, showing a very rapid learning curve. The conversion rate due to technical problems was 2 of the 29 procedures (6,9%). No major complications, including hematoma, seroma, skin or nipple-areola injury or necrosis or infection were observed for any case. Two patients had a small degree of blistering from internal electrocautery in the breast skin flap, both of which resolved in one week without any specific therapy. No systemic complications were observed. CONCLUSION: The low conversion rate to open surgery, the rapid learning curve and the low rate of post-operative complications observed in this preliminary series lead us to endorse a prospective study aimed at evaluating patient satisfaction.