The Role of Post-Mastectomy Radiotherapy in T1-2N1 Breast Cancer Patients: Propensity Score Matched Analysis.

This study aimed to evaluate the role of post-mastectomy radiotherapy (PMRT) in T1-2N1 breast cancer. Between 2006 and 2014, a total of 504 patients with T1-2N1 breast cancer were analyzed. PMRT was administered to 71 patients, and 1:2 propensity score matching (PSM) was performed between the PMRT and non-PMRT groups. Loco-regional control (LRC), disease-free survival (DFS), and overall survival (OS) rates were compared according to PMRT status. Thirteen and one loco-regional recurrences were observed in the PMRT and non-PMRT groups, respectively. Before PSM, the 8-year LRC, DFS, and OS rates in the non-PMRT and PMRT groups were 98.5% and 96.5% (p = 0.426), 89.7% and 91.2% (p = 0.700), and 91.5% and 92.1% (p = 0.679), respectively. Corresponding rates were 95.6% and 96.5% (p = 0.365), 84.1% and 91.2% (p = 0.185), and 88.4% and 92.1% (p = 0.276), respectively, after PSM. Multivariate analysis showed that three lymph node metastases were prognostic for LRC and DFS rates and LVI for OS rate. Arm lymphedema developed in 32.4% of patients who received PMRT, which was significantly higher than the non-PMRT group (p < 0.001). Contributions of PMRT for improvement of treatments outcomes in T1-2N1 breast cancer patients were not evident, while the incidence of arm lymphedema significantly increased after PMRT. Further prospective trials are required to re-evaluate the role of PMRT.

Efficacy of post­mastectomy radiotherapy in patients with T1­2N1 breast cancer aged ≤35 years or with a positive HER­2 status.

Post-mastectomy radiotherapy (PMRT) is highly recommended for patients with breast cancer with one to three positive nodes; however, there remains some controversy regarding its use. The present retrospective study aimed to explore which patients may be able to avoid PMRT and its associated side effects. A total of 728 patients with T1-2N1 breast cancer who were treated with or without PMRT were included in the present study. The results suggested that PMRT significantly decreased the locoregional recurrence rate (LRR) [hazard ratio (HR)=5.602, 95% confidence interval (CI)=3.139-9.998, P<0.01; 3-year LRR: 4 vs. 17%] and improved overall survival (OS) (HR=0.651, 95% CI=0.437-0.971, P=0.03; 3-year OS: 91 vs. 87%) for patients with T1-2N1 breast cancer. By contrast, PMRT had no significant effect on the distant metastasis (DM) rate (HR=0.691, 95% CI=0.468-1.019, P=0.06; 3-year DM: 10 vs. 15%). Further stratified analysis revealed that PMRT did not reduce the LRR and DM, or improve OS in patients aged ≤35 years or in those with a positive human epidermal growth factor receptor-2 (HER-2) status. The analysis of 438 patients treated with PMRT revealed that patients aged ≤35 years or those with a positive HER-2 status were more likely to experience local recurrence even following PMRT. Thus, the benefits of using PMRT in patients with T1-2N1 breast cancer who are aged ≤35 years or in those with a positive HER-2 status need to be carefully considered. Further studies are required to confirm whether this patient group may be exempted from PMRT.

Is the prognosis of T1-2N1 colon cancer the same as that of T1-2N0 colon cancer after curative surgery?

Objectives: The prognoses of T1-2N0 and T1-2N1 colon cancer after curative surgery remain unclear. This study compared the prognoses of patients with T1-2N0 and T1-2N1 colon cancer after curative surgery.Materials and methods: We retrospectively evaluated 307 consecutive patients with T1-2N0/1 colon cancer who underwent radical surgery at our hospital between January 2010 and December 2016. There were 266 patients with T1-2N0 colon cancer and 41 patients with T1-2N1 colon cancer. After excluding patients with <12 retrieved lymph nodes, 179 patients with T1-2N0 and 32 with T1-2N1 colon cancer were included in the cohort.Results: Overall survival and disease-free survival did not differ between the T1-2N0 and T1-2N1 groups (p = 0.498 and p = 0.681, respectively). Overall survival and disease-free survival were not significantly different between the T1-2N1 + no chemotherapy and T1-2N1 + chemotherapy groups (p = 0.740 and p = 0.765, respectively). Additionally, overall survival and disease-free survival did not differ between the T1-2N0, T1-2N1 + no chemotherapy, and T1-2N1 + chemotherapy groups (p = 0.757 and p = 0.877, respectively), even after excluding patients with <12 retrieved lymph nodes.Conclusions: T1-2N1 has a prognosis as good as that of T1-2N0 colon cancer after curative surgery. Moreover, further research is needed to investigate the efficacy of adjuvant FOLFOX chemotherapy in T1-2N1.

Development and validation of nomograms for predicting survival outcomes in patients with T1-2N1 breast cancer to identify those who could not benefit from postmastectomy radiotherapy.

Purpose: In this study, we aimed to develop and validate nomograms for predicting the survival outcomes in patients with T1-2N1 breast cancer to identify the patients who could not benefit from postmastectomy radiotherapy (PMRT). Methods: Data from 10191 patients with T1-2N1 breast cancer were extracted from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database. Of them, 6542 patients who had not received PMRT formed the training set. Concurrently, we retrospectively enrolled 419 patients from the Affiliated Hospital of North Sichuan Medical College (NSMC), and 286 patients who did not undergo PMRT formed the external validation set. The least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO) and multivariate Cox regression analyses were used for selecting prognostic factors in the training set. Using the selected factors, two prognostic nomograms were constructed. The nomograms' performance was assessed using the concordance index (C-index), calibration curves, decision curve analysis (DCA), and risk subgroup classification. The stabilized inverse probability of treatment weights (IPTWs) was used to balance the baseline characteristics of the different risk groups. Finally, the survival outcomes and effectiveness of PMRT after IPTW adjustment were evaluated using adjusted Kaplan-Meier curves and Cox regression models. Results: The 8-year overall survival (OS) and breast cancer-specific survival (BCSS) rates for the SEER cohort were 84.3% and 90.1%, with a median follow-up time of 76 months, while those for the NSMC cohort were 84.1% and 86.9%, with a median follow-up time of 73 months. Moreover, significant differences were observed in the survival curves for the different risk subgroups (P < 0.001) in both SEER and NSMC cohorts. The subgroup analysis after adjustment by IPTW revealed that PMRT was significantly associated with improved OS and BCSS in the intermediate- (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.72, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.59-0.88, P=0.001; HR = 0.77, 95% CI: 0.62-0.95, P = 0.015) and high- (HR=0.66, 95% CI: 0.52-0.83, P<0.001; HR=0.74, 95% CI: 0.56-0.99, P=0.039) risk groups. However, PMRT had no significant effects on patients in the low-risk groups. Conclusion: According to the prognostic nomogram, we performed risk subgroup classification and found that patients in the low-risk group did not benefit from PMRT.

The role of radiologic extranodal extension in predicting prognosis and chemotherapy benefit for T1-2 N1 nasopharyngeal carcinoma: A multicenter retrospective study.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: This multicenter retrospective study aimed to investigated the prognostic value of unequivocal radiologic extranodal extension (rENE) and the efficacy of chemotherapy for stage T1-2 N1 nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC) in the IMRT era. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We included 1,082 patients treated in 2005-2017 from three centers. rENE was recorded as G1 (coalescent nodal mass comprising ≥ 2 inseparable nodes) or G2 (invading beyond perinodal fat to frankly infiltrate adjacent structures). Multivariable analysis (MVA) evaluated the prognostic value of rENE. The value of chemotherapy was assessed in rENE-positive (rENE + ) and rENE-negative (rENE - ) subset separately. RESULTS: Centers 1, 2, and 3 had 139/515 (27.0 %), 100/365 (27.4 %), and 43/202 (21.3 %) cN + patients with rENE, respectively. Compared to rENE-, rENE + patients had a worse distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS) and overall survival (OS) (all p < 0.001). MVA confirmed the prognostic of both G1-rENE and G2-rENE for distant metastasis [G1: hazard ratio (HR): 2.933, G2: HR: 6.942, all p < 0.001] and death (G1: HR: 1.587, p = 0.040; G2: HR: 6.162, p < 0.001). There was no significant difference for DMFS and OS between chemo-radiotherapy and radiotherapy alone in rENE + and rENE - groups (all p > 0.1). However, rENE + patients with a cumulative cisplatin/nedaplatin dose (CCND) of > 160 mg/m2 had an improved DMFS (p = 0.033) but no OS (p = 0.197). CONCLUSION: Unequivocal rENE is prognostic in patients with T1-2 N1 NPC. Addition of chemotherapy to radiotherapy did not affect DMFS and OS in rENE - patients. Chemotherapy with a CCND of > 160 mg/m2 improved DMFS in rENE + patients.

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.

Practical Model to Optimize the Strategy of Adjuvant Postmastectomy Radiotherapy in T1-2N1 Breast Cancer With Modern Systemic Therapy.

Purpose: The effect of adjuvant irradiation after mastectomy in early-stage breast cancer patients remains controversial. The present study aims to explore the clinical benefit obtained from adjuvant radiotherapy among post-mastectomy pT1-2N1 breast cancer patients who received adjuvant modern systemic therapy. Methods: Medical records of consecutive patients with pT1-2N1 breast cancer who received mastectomy in our institution between January 2009 and December 2016 were retrospectively reviewed. High-risk features consist of patient age, number of positive lymph nodes, T stage, and Ki67 index, which were developed previously at our institution using early-stage breast cancer patients after mastectomy without adjuvant radiotherapy. Differences of survival and local recurrence were compared between no-postmastectomy radiotherapy (PMRT) and PMRT group according to number of risk factors. The time-to-event curves were calculated by the Kaplan-Meier methods and compared by the log-rank test. Propensity score matching (PSM) was performed to reduce the imbalances in patient characteristics. Results: A total of 548 patients were enrolled (no-PMRT: 259 and PMRT: 289). After a median follow-up of 69 months, the 5-year rate of DFS, BCSS, and LRR in the overall cohort was 90.2%, 97.4%, and 3.6%, respectively. PMRT did not significantly improve DFS, BCSS, and LRRFS in the whole cohort. Patients were divided into low-risk (with no or one risk factor) and high-risk (with two or more risk factors) groups. According to the univariable and multivariable analysis, high-risk group (HR = 1.81, 95% CI 1.11-2.98, p = 0.02) was demonstrated as an independent risk factor for DFS. For the high-risk group, PMRT significantly improved DFS from 81.4% to 91.9% and BCSS from 95.5% to 98.6% and decreased the 5-year rate of LRR from 5.6% to 1.4%, respectively (p < 0.01, p = 0.05, and p = 0.06). However, no survival benefit from PMRT was observed in the low-risk group in terms of DFS, BCSS, and LRR (p = 0.45, p = 0.51, and p = 0.99, respectively). In multivariate analysis, PMRT remained an independent prognostic factor for DFS (HR = 0.50, 95% CI 0.24-1.00, p = 0.05) in the high-risk group. After PSM analysis, the survival benefit of PMRT was sustained in high-risk patients. Conclusion: PMRT significantly improved DFS in high-risk pT1-2N1 breast cancer patients, but not in low-risk patients. Independent validation of our scoring system is recommended.

Conditional survival for high-risk early-stage cervical cancer patients with lymph node metastasis after hysterectomy.

BACKGROUND: To estimate conditional survival (CS) for high-risk early-stage cervical cancer patients with lymph node metastasis after hysterectomy. METHODS: 1964 T1-2N1M0 cervical cancer patients who underwent primary hysterectomy from 2004 to 2015 were extracted from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Result (SEER) Program. Univariate and multivariate cox regression analysis were used to identify independent risk factors. 5-year conditional disease-specific survival (CDS5) and 5-year conditional relative survival (CRS5) were estimated. CDS5 and CRS5 stratified by risk factors were further calculated. RESULTS: CDS5 and CRS5 increased from 71.0% and 73.7% at 0-year to 89.2% and 91.7% at 5-year, respectively. Inversely, the actuarial disease-specific survival and RS dropped from 71.0% and 73.7% at 5-year to 63.3% and 67.6% at 10-year, respectively. Patients with unfavorable factors had a bigger gap between actuarial survival and CS. Both CDS5 and CRS5 curves across stratas of each prognostic factor had a tendency to level off with time elapsing. Notably, CRS5 couldn't exceed 95% even after 5-year follow-up except for patients with grade I disease (CRS5 at 5-year: 100%) or tumor size less than 2 cm (CRS5 at 5-year: 96%). CONCLUSION: CS increased over time while actuarial survival decreased as time passed. Patients with unfavorable factors had bigger improvement in CS than those with favorable factors. Excess mortality still existed in these patients after 5-year follow-up compared to the general population except for patients with grade I disease or tumor size <2 cm, who might gradually decrease follow-up times after 5-year.

Adjuvant regional nodal irradiation did not improve outcomes in T1-2N1 breast cancer after breast-conserving surgery: A propensity score matching analysis of BIG02/98 and BCIRG005 trials.

AIM: To determine whether the addition of regional nodal irradiation (RNI) to whole-breast irradiation (WBI) would improve outcomes over WBI alone in T1-2N1 breast cancer after breast-conserving surgery (BCS) and adjuvant systematic therapy. METHODS: Data were obtained from two randomized controlled trials (NCT00174655 and NCT00312208). Univariate and multivariate Cox-regression analysis were performed to investigate predictors for overall survival and disease-free survival. A 1:1 propensity score matching (PSM) analysis was applied to eliminate selection bias. RESULTS: With median follow-up 80 months (range: 3-155 months), the 5-year local regional recurrence in the WBI group was 2% vs. 5% (p = 0.28) in the WBI + supraclavicular radiotherapy, and the rate of 5-year distant metastasis in the WBI group was 7% vs. 13% in the WBI + supraclavicular radiotherapy (p = 0.0748); In addition, the 5-year local regional recurrence in the WBI group was 3% vs. 9% (p = 0.19) in the WBI + internal mammary irradiation (IMI); However, the rate of 5-year distant metastasis in the in the WBI group was significantly lower than that in the WBI + IMI (8% vs. 24%, p = 0.036). After PSM, cox-regression analysis indicated that neither RNI nor IMI in combination with WBI in T1-2N1 breast cancer was associated with an improved overall survival and disease-free survival when compared to WBI alone. CONCLUSION: The addition of RNI to WBI in T1-2N1 breast cancer after BCS and adjuvant systematic therapy did not improve outcomes in comparison with WBI alone. Further studies are still needed to identify patients who would most benefit from RNI in this patient population.

Comparison of long-term results between radiotherapy after breast-conserving surgery and postmastectomy radiotherapy in stage T1-2N1M0 breast cancer.

PURPOSE: Postoperative radiotherapy (RT) can improve survival for T1-2N1 breast cancer. However, there exists a concern whether BCS plus RT has the same or a superior therapeutic effect as that of mastectomy. In this study, we aimed to compare the long-term results between RT after BCS and postmastectomy RT in stage T1-2N1M0 breast cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Totally 1816 pathological stage T1-2N1M0 breast cancer patients were analyzed. The propensity score matching (PSM) method was used to select 196 pairs of patients between BCS and mastectomy receiving postoperative RT. Five-year locoregional relapse (LRR), locoregional relapse-free survival (LRFS), distant metastasis (DM), distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS), disease-free survival (DFS), breast cancer-specific survival (BCSS) were analyzed as endpoints. RESULTS: In the whole group, significant differences were observed in all endpoints (P<0.05) between the no-RT and RT groups. For patients receiving mastectomy, DM, DMFS, DFS and BCSS rates had no differences between the two groups. For patients without RT in the multivariable analysis, the molecular subtype was associated with each endpoint (P<0.05). Age, primary tumor site, tumor size, and LVI status were significantly associated with DM. The analysis of 196 pairs of patients selected by PSM showed that BCS plus RT resulted in a significantly lower 5-year DM rate (P=0.015) and superior survival in terms of the 5-year DMFS (P=0.046), DFS (P=0.049) and BCSS (P=0.024) compared with mastectomy. CONCLUSIONS: Postoperative radiotherapy remarkably improved survival in T1-2N1M0 breast cancer but not in the mastectomy subgroup, except for LRR and LRFS. Patients with BCS plus RT had better survival compared with those with postmastectomy radiation in terms of DM, DMFS, DFS and BCSS.