Impact of breast surgical procedure on survival in BRCA mutated patients with invasive breast cancer: Mastectomy versus conservative treatment.

INTRODUCTION: Patients with BRCA1/2 mutations have a higher risk of developing breast cancer compared to the wild-type population. For patients with a BRCA mutation, there are no specific recommendations for surgical management. The aim of this study was therefore to retrospectively investigate overall survival (OS) and recurrence-free survival (RFS) of BRCA mutated patients with localized invasive breast cancer, by comparing conservative surgery versus mastectomy. METHODS: This study was based on data from the Côte d'Or breast and gynecological cancer registry. Data from patients with a constitutional BRCA1/2 mutation who presented with invasive breast cancer were collected retrospectively from 1998 to 2018. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to describe RFS and OS. RESULTS: A total of 104 patients were included in the analysis, of whom 69 had conservative surgery and 35 underwent mastectomy. Regarding survival, there was no significant difference in OS (HR =1.49; 95 % confidence interval (CI) [0.76-2.93], p = 0.25). Similarly, there was no significant difference in RFS (HR =1.40; 95 % CI [0.81-2.40], p = 0.22), survival without homolateral recurrence (HR =0.88; 95 % CI [0.30-2.61], p = 0.89), without contralateral recurrence (HR =1.50; 95 % CI [0.55-4.09], p = 0.42), or without distant metastatic recurrence (HR =1.42, 95 % CI [0.69-2.90], p = 0.33). CONCLUSION: In invasive breast cancer in a patient with a germline BRCA1/2 mutation, conservative surgery, when possible, appears to be a feasible option over total mastectomy, with no difference in overall survival. However, the patient should be informed of the aggressive nature of recurrence in this population requiring chemotherapy in most cases.

Prognostic stratification ability of the CPS+EG scoring system in HER2-low and HER2-zero early breast cancer treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy.

BACKGROUND: The CPS+EG scoring system was initially described in unselected early breast cancer (eBC) patients treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC), leading to refined prognostic stratification, and thus helping to select patients for additional post-NAC treatments. It remains unknown whether the performance is the same in new biological breast cancer entities such as the HER2-low subtype. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Outcomes (disease-free (DFS) and overall survival OS)) of 608 patients with HER2-non amplified eBC and treated with NAC were retrospectively analyzed according to CPS-EG score. We compared the prognostic stratification abilities of the CPS+EG in HER2-low and HER2-0 eBC, analyzing ER+ and ER- tumors separately. RESULTS: In ER+ eBC, the CPS+EG scoring system seems to retain a prognostic value, both in HER2-low and HER2-0 tumors, by distinguishing populations with significantly different outcomes (good: score 0-1, poor: score 2-3, and very poor: score 4-5). Using C-indices for DFS and OS, CPS+EG provided the highest prognostic information in ER+ eBC, especially in HER2-0 tumors. In contrast, in ER- eBC, the CPS+EG does not appear to be able to distinguish different outcome groups, either in HER2-low or HER2-0 tumors. In ER- eBC, C-indices for DFS and OS were highest for pathological stage, reflecting the predominant prognostic importance of residual disease in this subtype. CONCLUSIONS: HER2-low status does not influence the prognostic performance of the CPS+EG score. Our results confirm the usefulness of the CPS+EG score in stratifying the prognosis of ER+ eBC after NAC, for both HER2-0 and HER2-low tumors. For ER- eBC, HER2-low status does not influence the performance of the CPS+EG score, which was lower than that of the pathological stage alone.