Distinct presentation of melanoma in Black patients may inform strategies to improve outcomes.

INTRODUCTION: Melanoma guidelines stem largely from data on non-Hispanic White (NHW) patients. We aimed to identify features of melanoma within non-Hispanic Black (NHB) patients to inform strategies for earlier detection and treatment. METHODS: From 2004 to 2019 Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) data, we identified nonmetastatic melanoma patients with known TN category and race. Kaplan-Meier cancer-specific survival (CSS) estimates and multivariable Cox proportional hazard modeling analyses were performed. RESULTS: Of 492 597 patients, 1499 (0.3%) were NHB, who were younger (21% vs. 17% age <50) and more commonly female (54% vs. 41%) than NHW, both p < 0.0005. For NHBs, lower extremity was the most common site (52% vs. 15% for NHWs, p < 0.0001), T category was higher (55% Tis-T1 vs. 82%; 27% T3-T4 vs. 8%, p < 0.0001) and stage at presentation was higher (19% Stage III, vs. 6%, p < 0.0001). Within the NHB cohort, males were older, and more often node-positive than females. Five-year Stage III CSS was 42% for NHB males versus 71% for females, adjusting for age and clinical nodal status (hazard ratio 2.48). CONCLUSIONS: NHB melanoma patients presented with distinct tumor characteristics. NHB males with Stage III disease had inferior CSS. Focus on this high-risk patient cohort to promote earlier detection and treatment may improve outcomes.

Neoadjuvant cobimetinib and atezolizumab with or without vemurafenib for high-risk operable Stage III melanoma: the Phase II NeoACTIVATE trial.

Both targeted therapies and immunotherapies provide benefit in resected Stage III melanoma. We hypothesized that the combination of targeted and immunotherapy given prior to therapeutic lymph node dissection (TLND) would be tolerable and drive robust pathologic responses. In NeoACTIVATE (NCT03554083), a Phase II trial, patients with clinically evident resectable Stage III melanoma received either 12 weeks of neoadjuvant vemurafenib, cobimetinib, and atezolizumab (BRAF-mutated, Cohort A, n = 15), or cobimetinib and atezolizumab (BRAF-wild-type, Cohort B, n = 15) followed by TLND and 24 weeks of adjuvant atezolizumab. Here, we report outcomes from the neoadjuvant portion of the trial. Based on intent to treat analysis, pathologic response (≤50% viable tumor) and major pathologic response (complete or near-complete, ≤10% viable tumor) were observed in 86.7% and 66.7% of BRAF-mutated and 53.3% and 33.3% of BRAF-wild-type patients, respectively (primary outcome); these exceeded pre-specified benchmarks of 50% and 30% for major pathologic response. Grade 3 and higher toxicities, primarily dermatologic, occurred in 63% during neoadjuvant treatment (secondary outcome). No surgical delays nor progression to regional unresectability occurred (secondary outcome). Peripheral blood CD8 + TCM cell expansion associated with favorable pathologic responses (exploratory outcome).

Endocrine-Sensitive Disease Rate in Postmenopausal Patients With Estrogen Receptor-Rich/ERBB2-Negative Breast Cancer Receiving Neoadjuvant Anastrozole, Fulvestrant, or Their Combination: A Phase 3 Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Adding fulvestrant to anastrozole (A+F) improved survival in postmenopausal women with advanced estrogen receptor (ER)-positive/ERBB2 (formerly HER2)-negative breast cancer. However, the combination has not been tested in early-stage disease. Objective: To determine whether neoadjuvant fulvestrant or A+F increases the rate of pathologic complete response or ypT1-2N0/N1mic/Ki67 2.7% or less residual disease (referred to as endocrine-sensitive disease) over anastrozole alone. Design, Setting, and Participants: A phase 3 randomized clinical trial assessing differences in clinical and correlative outcomes between each of the fulvestrant-containing arms and the anastrozole arm. Postmenopausal women with clinical stage II to III, ER-rich (Allred score 6-8 or >66%)/ERBB2-negative breast cancer were included. All analyses were based on data frozen on March 2, 2023. Interventions: Patients received anastrozole, fulvestrant, or a combination for 6 months preoperatively. Tumor Ki67 was assessed at week 4 and optionally at week 12, and if greater than 10% at either time point, the patient switched to neoadjuvant chemotherapy or immediate surgery. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was the endocrine-sensitive disease rate (ESDR). A secondary outcome was the percentage change in Ki67 after 4 weeks of neoadjuvant endocrine therapy (NET) (week 4 Ki67 suppression). Results: Between February 2014 and November 2018, 1362 female patients (mean [SD] age, 65.0 [8.2] years) were enrolled. Among the 1298 evaluable patients, ESDRs were 18.7% (95% CI, 15.1%-22.7%), 22.8% (95% CI, 18.9%-27.1%), and 20.5% (95% CI, 16.8%-24.6%) with anastrozole, fulvestrant, and A+F, respectively. Compared to anastrozole, neither fulvestrant-containing regimen significantly improved ESDR or week 4 Ki67 suppression. The rate of week 4 or week 12 Ki67 greater than 10% was 25.1%, 24.2%, and 15.7% with anastrozole, fulvestrant, and A+F, respectively. Pathologic complete response/residual cancer burden class I occurred in 8 of 167 patients and 17 of 167 patients, respectively (15.0%; 95% CI, 9.9%-21.3%), after switching to neoadjuvant chemotherapy due to week 4 or week 12 Ki67 greater than 10%. PAM50 subtyping derived from RNA sequencing of baseline biopsies available for 753 patients (58%) identified 394 luminal A, 304 luminal B, and 55 nonluminal tumors. A+F led to a greater week 4 Ki67 suppression than anastrozole alone in luminal B tumors (median [IQR], -90.4% [-95.2 to -81.9%] vs -76.7% [-89.0 to -55.6%]; P < .001), but not luminal A tumors. Thirty-six nonluminal tumors (65.5%) had a week 4 or week 12 Ki67 greater than 10%. Conclusions and Relevance: In this randomized clinical trial, neither fulvestrant nor A+F significantly improved the 6-month ESDR over anastrozole in ER-rich/ERBB2-negative breast cancer. Aromatase inhibition remains the standard-of-care NET. Differential NET response by PAM50 subtype in exploratory analyses warrants further investigation. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01953588.

Pregnancy-associated melanoma: characteristics and outcomes from 2002 to 2020.

Melanoma diagnosed within 1 year of pregnancy is defined as pregnancy-associated melanoma (PAM). No robust data on how pregnancy influences melanoma nor guidelines for PAM management exist. With IRB approval, female patients with a pathology-confirmed melanoma diagnosis within 1 year of pregnancy treated at our institution from 2000 to 2020 were identified. Controls from the cancer registry were matched 1 : 4 when available on decade of age, year of surgery (±5), and stage. We identified 83 PAM patients with median follow-up of 86 months. Mean age at diagnosis was 31 years. 80% AJCC V8 stage I, 2.4% stage II, 13% stage III, 4.8% stage IV. Mean Breslow thickness was 0.79 mm and 3.6% exhibited ulceration. The mean mitotic rate was 0.76/mm 2 . In terms of PAM management, 98.6% of ESD patients and 86.7% of LSD patients received standard-of-care therapy per NCCN guidelines for their disease stage. No clinically significant delays in treatment were noted. Time to treatment from diagnosis to systemic therapy for LSD patients was an average of 46 days (95% CI: 34-59 days). Comparing the 83 PAM patients to 309 controls matched on age, stage, and year of diagnosis, similar 5-year overall survival (97% vs. 97%, P  = 0.95) or recurrence-free survival (96% vs. 96%, P  = 0.86) was observed. The outcomes of PAM following SOC treatment at a highly specialized center for melanoma care were comparable to non-PAM when matched by clinical-pathologic features. Specialty center care is encouraged for women with PAM.

Assessment of the effect of the American Society of Breast Surgery guidelines on contralateral prophylactic mastectomy rates for unilateral breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: In July 2016, the American Society of Breast Surgeons published guidelines discouraging contralateral prophylactic mastectomy for average-risk women with unilateral breast cancer. We incorporated these into practice with structured patient counseling and aimed to assess the effect of this initiative on contralateral prophylactic mastectomy rates. METHODS: We evaluated female patients with unilateral breast cancer undergoing mastectomy at our institution from January 2011 to November 2022. Variables associated with contralateral prophylactic mastectomy and trends over time were analyzed using the Wilcoxon rank sum test or χ2 analysis as appropriate. RESULTS: Among 3,208 patients, (median age 54 years) 1,366 (43%) had a unilateral mastectomy, and 1,842 (57%) also had a concomitant contralateral prophylactic mastectomy. Across all patients, contralateral prophylactic mastectomy rates significantly decreased post-implementation from 2017 to 2019 (55%) vs 2015 to 2016 (62%) (P = .01) but increased from 2020 to 2022 (61%). Immediate breast reconstruction rate was 70% overall (81% with contralateral prophylactic mastectomy and 56% without contralateral prophylactic mastectomy, P < .001). Younger age, White race, mutation status, and earlier stage were also associated with contralateral prophylactic mastectomy. Genetic testing increased from 27% pre-guideline to 74% 2020 to 2022, as did the proportion of patients with a pathogenic variant (4% pre-guideline vs 11% from 2020-2022, P < .001), of whom 91% had a contralateral prophylactic mastectomy. Among tested patients without a pathogenic variant and patients not tested, contralateral prophylactic mastectomy rates declined from 78% to 67% and 48% to 38% pre -and post-guidelines, respectively, P < .001. CONCLUSION: Implementation of specific patient counseling was effective in decreasing contralateral prophylactic mastectomy rates. While recognizing that patient choice plays a significant role in the decision for contralateral prophylactic mastectomy, further educational efforts are warranted to affect contralateral prophylactic mastectomy rates, particularly in the setting of negative genetic testing.

Repeat sentinel lymph node surgery for locally recurrent breast cancer after prior mastectomy.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Current NCCN guidelines discourage repeat sentinel lymph node (SLN) surgery in patients with local recurrence (LR) of breast cancer following prior mastectomy. This study addresses the feasibility and therapeutic impact of this approach. METHODS: We identified 73 patients managed with repeat SLN surgery for post-mastectomy isolated LR. Lymphatic mapping was performed using radioisotope with or without lymphoscintigraphy and/or blue dye. Successful SLN surgery was defined as retrieval of ≥1 SLN. RESULTS: SLN surgery was successful in 65/73 (89%), identifying a median of 2 (range 1-4) SLNs, with 10/65 (15%) SLN-positive. Among these, 5/10 (50%) proceeded to ALND. In unsuccessful cases, 1/8 (13%) proceeded to ALND. Seven of 10 SLN-positive patients and 50/55 SLN-negative patients received adjuvant radiotherapy. Chemotherapy was administered in 31 (42%) and endocrine therapy in 50 of 57 HR+ patients (88%). After 28 months median follow-up, eight patients relapsed with the first site local in two, distant in five, and synchronous local/distant in one. No nodal recurrences were observed. CONCLUSIONS: SLN surgery for patients with LR post-mastectomy is feasible and informative. This approach appears oncologically sound, decreases axillary dissection rates and may be used to tailor adjuvant radiation target volumes and systemic therapies.

Society for Immunotherapy of Cancer (SITC) clinical practice guideline on immunotherapy for the treatment of melanoma, version 3.0.

Since the first approval for immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) for the treatment of cutaneous melanoma more than a decade ago, immunotherapy has completely transformed the treatment landscape of this chemotherapy-resistant disease. Combination regimens including ICIs directed against programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1) with anti-cytotoxic T lymphocyte antigen-4 (CTLA-4) agents or, more recently, anti-lymphocyte-activation gene 3 (LAG-3) agents, have gained regulatory approvals for the treatment of metastatic cutaneous melanoma, with long-term follow-up data suggesting the possibility of cure for some patients with advanced disease. In the resectable setting, adjuvant ICIs prolong recurrence-free survival, and neoadjuvant strategies are an active area of investigation. Other immunotherapy strategies, such as oncolytic virotherapy for injectable cutaneous melanoma and bispecific T-cell engager therapy for HLA-A*02:01 genotype-positive uveal melanoma, are also available to patients. Despite the remarkable efficacy of these regimens for many patients with cutaneous melanoma, traditional immunotherapy biomarkers (ie, programmed death-ligand 1 expression, tumor mutational burden, T-cell infiltrate and/or microsatellite stability) have failed to reliably predict response. Furthermore, ICIs are associated with unique toxicity profiles, particularly for the highly active combination of anti-PD-1 plus anti-CTLA-4 agents. The Society for Immunotherapy of Cancer (SITC) convened a panel of experts to develop this clinical practice guideline on immunotherapy for the treatment of melanoma, including rare subtypes of the disease (eg, uveal, mucosal), with the goal of improving patient care by providing guidance to the oncology community. Drawing from published data and clinical experience, the Expert Panel developed evidence- and consensus-based recommendations for healthcare professionals using immunotherapy to treat melanoma, with topics including therapy selection in the advanced and perioperative settings, intratumoral immunotherapy, when to use immunotherapy for patients with BRAFV600-mutated disease, management of patients with brain metastases, evaluation of treatment response, special patient populations, patient education, quality of life, and survivorship, among others.

Society for Immunotherapy of Cancer (SITC) clinical practice guideline on immunotherapy for the treatment of melanoma, version 3.0

Since the first approval for immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) for the treatment of cutaneous melanoma more than a decade ago, immunotherapy has completely transformed the treatment landscape of this chemotherapy-resistant disease. Combination regimens including ICIs directed against programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1) with anti-cytotoxic T lymphocyte antigen-4 (CTLA-4) agents or, more recently, anti-lymphocyte-activation gene 3 (LAG-3) agents, have gained regulatory approvals for the treatment of metastatic cutaneous melanoma, with long-term follow-up data suggesting the possibility of cure for some patients with advanced disease. In the resectable setting, adjuvant ICIs prolong recurrence-free survival, and neoadjuvant strategies are an active area of investigation. Other immunotherapy strategies, such as oncolytic virotherapy for injectable cutaneous melanoma and bispecific T-cell engager therapy for HLA-A*02:01 genotype-positive uveal melanoma, are also available to patients. Despite the remarkable efficacy of these regimens for many patients with cutaneous melanoma, traditional immunotherapy biomarkers (ie, programmed death-ligand 1 expression, tumor mutational burden, T-cell infiltrate and/or microsatellite stability) have failed to reliably predict response. Furthermore, ICIs are associated with unique toxicity profiles, particularly for the highly active combination of anti-PD-1 plus anti-CTLA-4 agents. The Society for Immunotherapy of Cancer (SITC) convened a panel of experts to develop this clinical practice guideline on immunotherapy for the treatment of melanoma, including rare subtypes of the disease (eg, uveal, mucosal), with the goal of improving patient care by providing guidance to the oncology community. Drawing from published data and clinical experience, the Expert Panel developed evidence- and consensus-based recommendations for healthcare professionals using immunotherapy to treat melanoma, with topics including therapy selection in the advanced and perioperative settings, intratumoral immunotherapy, when to use immunotherapy for patients with BRAFV600- mutated disease, management of patients with brain metastases, evaluation of treatment response, special patient populations, patient education, quality of life, and survivorship, among others.

Lessons learned from the COVID-19 pandemic: Using telemedicine for pre-operative surgical evaluation in breast disease.

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES: The COVID-19 pandemic motivated telemedicine care to decrease potential exposures for both patients and staff. We hypothesized that select breast surgical patients can be successfully evaluated pre-operatively with telemedicine. METHODS: With institutional review board approval, patients with telemedicine surgical consults between 1 March 2020 and 31 August 2020 were identified retrospectively from our prospective breast surgical registry. The frequency of successful pre-operative evaluation using telemedicine alone was assessed, defined as cases in which surgery was completed on the planned day without changes to the surgical plan after physical examination in the pre-operative area. Differences in disease presentation, patient characteristics, and complications were evaluated by whether the first in-person visit occurred on the day of surgery versus the prior. RESULTS: A total of 374 patients underwent breast surgery between 1 March 2020 and 31 August 2020, of which 96 (25.7%) had a telemedicine consultation. After the telemedicine visit, 38 patients (39.6%) had additional in-person visits with the breast surgeon prior to their operative date, and 58 patients (60.4%) did not. Forty-five patients underwent breast-conserving therapies, 41 mastectomies (25 with reconstruction), two axillary dissections, and eight excisional biopsies. All surgeries were completed on the planned operative day, with no changes in surgical plans. Patients with telemedicine only prior to surgery were more likely to speak English (100% vs. 92.1%, p = 0.02) and have lower body mass index (median 24.9 vs. 29.2, p = 0.01). The frequency of in-person pre-operative visits varied significantly by surgeon (p < 0.001). Age, American Society of Anaesthesiologists score, distance from facility, clinical T/N category, surgery type, and complications did not differ between groups. CONCLUSIONS: Telemedicine can be utilized successfully for select breast surgical patients, with the ability to proceed to surgery in the majority of patients without additional in-person visits.

Intermediate-thickness melanoma: A population-based study of surgical quality metrics.

BACKGROUND: Variability in guideline compliance for melanoma lymph node surgery is partially attributable to controversy about patient selection. Prior data has indicated suboptimal practice of sentinel lymph node biopsy and undertreatment of clinically node-positive disease, predating Multicenter Selective Lymphadenectomy Trial II publication. To minimize bias, we studied compliance with lymph node surgery guidelines in T2/T3 (intermediate-thickness) melanoma patients, where the greatest agreement exists. METHODS: T2/T3 and metastasis 0 melanoma cases were identified from 2004 to 2018 Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results data. Analysis used Cochran-Armitage test for trends, multivariable logistic regression, and Kaplan-Meier survival estimates. RESULTS: Of 66,319 eligible T2/T3 patients, 57,211 were clinically node negative; 2,191 were clinically node positive; 6,197 were clinical node unreported; and 19,044/66,319 (28.8%) had no lymph node surgery. Among clinically node-negative patients, 36,433 (63.7%) underwent sentinel lymph node biopsy and 31,026 (85.2%) were pathologically node negative; 1,499 clinically node-positive patients (68.4%) had a lymph node dissection. Lymph node dissection rates declined from 2004 to 2018, 79.8% to 32.0% for clinically node-negative/pathologically node-positive patients and 80.4% to 61.2% for clinically node-positive/pathologically node-positive patients (both P < .0001). For clinically node-negative patients, lymph node surgery compliance improved from 63.7% (2004) to 70.4% (2018) (P < .0001). Compliance correlated with younger age, male sex, tumor mitotic rate, and site (extremity > trunk/head/neck) in multivariable analysis and improved 5-year cancer-specific survival (90.0% vs 83.4%) (all P < .0001). CONCLUSIONS: Despite clear guidelines, one-third of intermediate-thickness melanoma patients in a recent cohort did not have recommended lymph node surgery. Lymph node status is a key determinant of the relative benefit of adjuvant systemic therapy and the need for active surveillance of pathologically node-positive/clinically node-negative patients. These data highlighted a clinical care gap. Efforts to improve guideline compliance are a logical strategy to improve cancer outcomes for intermediate-thickness melanoma patients.

Anorectal melanoma.

Anorectal melanoma is an aggressive mucosal melanoma subtype with a poor prognosis. Although recent advancements have been seen for cutaneous melanoma, the optimal treatment paradigm for management of anorectal melanoma is evolving. In this review, we highlight differences in the pathogenesis of mucosal versus cutaneous melanoma, new concepts of staging for mucosal melanoma, updates to surgical management of anorectal melanoma, and current data for adjuvant radiation and systemic therapy in this unique patient population.

Long-term outcomes of intraoperatively-placed applicator brachytherapy for rapid completion of breast conserving treatment: An analysis of a prospective registry data.

Background and purpose: To evaluate the long-term outcome of accelerated partial breast irradiation utilizing intraoperatively placed applicator-based brachytherapy (ABB) in early-stage breast cancer. Materials and methods: From our prospective registry, 223 patients with pTis-T2, pN0/pN1mic breast cancer were treated with ABB. The median treatment duration including surgery and ABB was 7 days. The prescribed doses were 32 Gy/8 fx BID (n = 25), 34 Gy/10 fx BID (n = 99), and 21 Gy/3 fx QD (n = 99). Endocrine therapy (ET) adherence was defined as completion of planned ET or ≥ 80% of the follow-up (FU) period. Cumulative incidence of ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence (IBTR) was estimated and influencing factors for IBTR-free survival rate (IBTRFS) were analyzed. Results: 218/223 patients had hormone receptor-positive tumors, including 38 (17.0%) with Tis and 185 (83.0%) with invasive cancer. After a median FU of 63 months, 19 (8.5%) patients had recurrence [17 (7.6%) with an IBTR]. Rates of 5-year IBTRFS and DFS were 92.2% and 91.1%, respectively. The 5-year IBTRFS rates were significantly higher for post-menopausal women (93.6% vs. 66.4%, p = 0.04), BMI < 30 kg/m2 (97.4% vs. 88.1%, p = 0.02), and ET-adherence (97.5% vs. 88.6%, p = 0.02). IBTRFS did not differ with dose regimens. Conclusions: Postmenopausal status, BMI < 30 kg/m2, and ET- adherence predicted favorable IBTRFS. Our results highlight the importance of careful patient selection for ABB and encouragement of ET compliance.

Trimodality Therapy Improves Disease Control in Radiation-Associated Angiosarcoma of the Breast.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the impact of trimodality treatment versus monotherapy or dual therapy for radiation-associated angiosarcoma of the breast (RAASB) after prior breast cancer treatment. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: With Institutional Review Board approval, we identified patients diagnosed with RAASB and abstracted data on disease presentation, treatment, and oncologic outcomes. Trimodality therapy included (i) taxane induction, (ii) concurrent taxane/radiation, and then (iii) surgical resection with wide margins. RESULTS: A total of 38 patients (median age 69 years) met inclusion criteria. Sixteen received trimodality therapy and 22 monotherapy/dual therapy. Skin involvement and disease extent were similar in both groups. All trimodality patients required reconstructive procedures for wound closure/coverage, compared with 48% of monotherapy/dual therapy patients (P < 0.001). Twelve of 16 (75%) patients receiving trimodality therapy had a pathologic complete response (pCR). With median follow-up of 5.6 years, none had local recurrence, 1 patient (6%) had distant recurrence, and no patients died. Among 22 patients in the monotherapy/dual therapy group, 10 (45%) had local recurrence, 8 (36%) had distant recurrence, and 7 (32%) died of disease. Trimodality therapy demonstrated significantly better 5-year recurrence-free survival [RFS; 93.8% vs. 42.9%; P = 0.004; HR, 7.6 (95% confidence interval, CI: 1.3-44.2)]. Combining all patients with RAASB regardless of treatment, local recurrence was associated with subsequent distant recurrence (HR, 9.0; P = 0.002); distant recurrence developed in 3 of 28 (11%) patients without local recurrence compared with 6 of 10 (60%) with local recurrence. The trimodality group had more surgical complications that required reoperation or prolonged healing. CONCLUSIONS: Trimodality therapy for RAASB was more toxic but is promising, with a high rate of pCR, durable local control, and improved RFS.

Clinical outcomes and prognostic factors in triple-negative invasive lobular carcinoma of the breast.

PURPOSE: Triple-negative invasive lobular carcinoma (TN-ILC) of breast cancer is a rare disease and the clinical outcomes and prognostic factors are not well-defined. METHODS: Women with stage I-III TN-ILC or triple-negative invasive ductal carcinoma (TN-IDC) of the breast undergoing mastectomy or breast-conserving surgery between 2010 and 2018 in the National Cancer Database were included. Kaplan-Meier curves and multivariate Cox proportional hazard regression were used to compare overall survival (OS) and evaluate prognostic factors. Multivariate logistic regression was performed to analyze the factors associated with pathological response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy. RESULTS: The median age at diagnosis for women with TN-ILC was 67 years compared to 58 years in TN-IDC (p < 0.001). There was no significant difference in the OS between TN-ILC and TN-IDC in multivariate analysis (HR 0.96, p = 0.44). Black race and higher TNM stage were associated with worse OS, whereas receipt of chemotherapy or radiation was associated with better OS in TN-ILC. Among women with TN-ILC receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy, the 5-year OS was 77.3% in women with a complete pathological response (pCR) compared to 39.8% in women without any response. The odds of achieving pCR following neoadjuvant chemotherapy were significantly lower in women with TN-ILC compared to TN-IDC (OR 0.53, p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Women with TN-ILC are older at diagnosis but have similar OS compared to TN-IDC after adjusting for tumor and demographic characteristics. Administration of chemotherapy was associated with improved OS in TN-ILC, but women with TN-ILC were less likely to achieve complete response to neoadjuvant therapy compared to TN-IDC.

Neoadjuvant Immunotherapy in Melanoma: The Paradigm Shift.

Clinical stage III melanoma, defined as resectable RECIST measurable nodal disease with or without in-transit metastases, represents approximately 15% of new melanoma diagnoses every year with additional cases presenting as recurrent nodal disease following previous treatment of a primary melanoma. The standard of care for patients with resectable clinical stage III melanoma is surgical resection, consisting of therapeutic lymph node dissection and/or resection of in-transit disease and consideration of adjuvant systemic therapy and occasionally adjuvant radiation. These patients have high rates of regional recurrence and progression to metastatic disease postsurgery, highlighting the need for better treatment options. With the success of immune checkpoint inhibitors in both the adjuvant and metastatic settings, the use of these agents in the neoadjuvant setting has been an emerging area of research interest. In this chapter, we will discuss the rationale for neoadjuvant immunotherapy; review impactful clinical trials; and define response monitoring, surgical considerations, emerging therapies, and unanswered questions for neoadjuvant therapy as a recent paradigm shift in the management of clinical stage III melanoma.

Clinical Outcomes and Prognostic Factors in Triple-Negative Invasive Lobular Carcinoma of the Breast.

Purpose: Triple-negative invasive lobular carcinoma (TN-ILC) of breast cancer is a rare disease and the clinical outcomes and prognostic factors are not well-defined. Methods: Women with stage I-III TN-ILC or triple-negative invasive ductal carcinoma (TN-IDC) of the breast undergoing mastectomy or breast-conserving surgery between 2010 and 2018 in the National Cancer Database were included. Kaplan-Meier curves and multivariate Cox proportional hazard regression were used to compare overall survival (OS) and evaluate prognostic factors. Multivariate logistic regression was performed to analyze the factors associated with pathological response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Results: The median age at diagnosis for women with TN-ILC was 67 years compared to 58 years in TN-IDC (p<0.001). There was no significant difference in the OS between TN-ILC and TN-IDC in multivariate analysis (HR 0.96, p=0.44). Black race and higher TNM stage were associated with worse OS, whereas receipt of chemotherapy or radiation was associated with better OS in TN-ILC. Among women with TN-ILC receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy, the 5-year OS was 77.3% in women with a complete pathological response (pCR) compared to 39.8% in women without any response. The odds of achieving pCR following neoadjuvant chemotherapy were significantly lower in women with TN-ILC compared to TN-IDC (OR 0.53, p<0.001). Conclusion: Women with TN-ILC are older at diagnosis but have similar OS compared to TN-IDC after adjusting for tumor and demographic characteristics. Administration of chemotherapy was associated with improved OS in TN-ILC, but women with TN-ILC were less likely to achieve complete response to neoadjuvant therapy compared to TN-IDC.

Setting the Standard for Cutaneous Melanoma Wide Local Excision: An Overview of the American College of Surgeons Commission on Cancer Standard 5.5.

The purpose of this article is to review the objectives of the American College of Surgeons Commission on Cancer Operative Standards with a specific focus on Standard 5.5, which pertains to curative intent wide local excision of primary cutaneous melanoma lesions. We review the details and rationale of the standard itself, including its requirement to include specific elements and responses in synoptic format in operative reports.

International Center-Level Variation in Utilization of Completion Lymph Node Dissection and Adjuvant Systemic Therapy for Sentinel Lymph Node-Positive Melanoma at Major Referral Centers.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to determine overall trends and center-level variation in utilization of completion lymph node dissection (CLND) and adjuvant systemic therapy for sentinel lymph node (SLN)-positive melanoma. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Based on recent clinical trials, management options for SLN-positive melanoma now include effective adjuvant systemic therapy and nodal observation instead of CLND. It is unknown how these findings have shaped practice or how these contemporaneous developments have influenced their respective utilization. METHODS: We performed an international cohort study at 21 melanoma referral centers in Australia, Europe, and the United States that treated adults with SLN-positive melanoma and negative distant staging from July 2017 to June 2019. We used generalized linear and multinomial logistic regression models with random intercepts for each center to assess center-level variation in CLND and adjuvant systemic treatment, adjusting for patient and disease-specific characteristics. RESULTS: Among 1109 patients, performance of CLND decreased from 28% to 8% and adjuvant systemic therapy use increased from 29 to 60%. For both CLND and adjuvant systemic treatment, the most influential factors were nodal tumor size, stage, and location of treating center. There was notable variation among treating centers in management of stage IIIA patients and use of CLND with adjuvant systemic therapy versus nodal observation alone for similar risk patients. CONCLUSIONS: There has been an overall decline in CLND and simultaneous adoption of adjuvant systemic therapy for patients with SLN-positive melanoma though wide variation in practice remains. Accounting for differences in patient mix, location of care contributed significantly to the observed variation.

Racial-ethnic variations in phyllodes tumors among a multicenter United States cohort.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Previous studies have identified racial-ethnic differences in the diagnostic patterns and recurrence outcomes of women with phyllodes tumors (PT). However, these studies are generally limited in size and generalizability. We therefore sought to explore racial-ethnic differences in age, tumor size, subtype, and recurrence in a large US cohort of women with PT. METHODS: We performed an 11-institution retrospective review of women with PT from 2007 to 2017. Differences in age at diagnosis, tumor size and subtype, and recurrence-free survival according to race-ethnicity. RESULTS: Women of non-White race or Hispanic ethnicity were younger at the time of diagnosis with phyllodes tumor. Non-Hispanic Other women had a larger proportion of malignant PT. There were no differences in recurrence-free survival in our cohort. CONCLUSIONS: Differences in age, tumor size, and subtype were small. Therefore, the workup of young women with breast masses and the treatment of women with PT should not differ according to race-ethnicity. These conclusions are supported by our finding that there were no differences in recurrence-free survival.