Management of the axilla in postmenopausal patients with cN0 hormone receptor-positive/HER2-negative breast cancer treated with neoadjuvant endocrine therapy and its prognostic impact.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the differences in nodal positivity if the sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) is performed before or after neoadjuvant endocrine therapy (NET) in breast cancer patients, and its impact on prognosis. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was performed in a single center including 91 postmenopausal cases with clinically node-negative and hormone receptor-positive/HER2-negative (HR + /HER2-) breast cancer, treated with NET and SLNB. SLNB was done pre-NET until 2014, and post-NET thereafter. Axillary lymph node dissection (ALND) was indicated only in SLNB macrometastasis, although in selected elderly patients, it was omitted. Kaplan-Meier survival curves were estimated in relation to the status of the axilla, and the differences assessed using the log-rank test. RESULTS: Between December 2006 and March 2022, SLNB was performed pre-NET in 14 cases and post-NET in 77. Both groups were similar in baseline tumor and patient characteristics. SLNB positivity was similar regardless of whether SLNB was performed before (5/14, 35.7%) or after NET (27/77, 37%), with 2/14 SLN macrometastases in the pre-NET cohort and 17/77 in the post-NET cohort. Only three patients (18.7%) with SLN macrometastasis had > 3 positive nodes following ALND. The 5-year overall survival and distant disease-free survival were 92.4% and 94.8%, respectively, with no significant differences according to SLNB status (p 0.5 and 0.8, respectively). CONCLUSION: SLN positivity did not differ according to its timing (before or after NET). Therefore, NET has no effect on lymph node clearance. Furthermore, the prognosis is good regardless of the axillary involvement. Therefore, factors other than axillary involvement may affect the prognosis in these patients.

Genomic characterization and tumor evolution in paired samples of metaplastic breast carcinoma.

Metaplastic breast carcinomas are a rare and heterogeneous group of tumors (0.5-2%). They are mainly triple negative tumors but they present poorer chemotherapy responses and worse prognosis than other triple negative tumors. The aim of our study was to characterize the molecular profile and tumor evolution in matched (primary-relapse) tumor samples from patients with early-stage metaplastic breast carcinomas who had disease recurrence/progression. We performed genomic profiling of tumor biopsies at least from two different time points of their tumor evolution. Tumor samples were analyzed by DNA-Next Generation Sequencing (Illumina 2 x 75bp) using the Action OncoKitDX panel (Imegen-Health in Code group), which includes point mutations in 50 genes, CNVs, and fusion genes. Only pathogenic and likely pathogenic variants were considered for analysis and they were categorized following the ComPerMed criteria. We analyzed 21 matched tumor samples (8 primary and 13 relapse/progression samples). Genomic profiling of matched tumor samples revealed that mutations present in primary tumors are generally maintained in the relapse/disease progression. We did not find a significant increase in point mutations between primary and relapse/progression samples, although gene amplifications were found more frequently in relapse/progression samples. Tumor samples harbored high frequency of TP53 (100%) and TERT promoter (29%) mutations, and of MYC amplifications (80% of which in relapse/progression samples). No PI3KCA mutations were found, but PTEN variations were enriched in 38% of samples (10% mutations and 28% deletions). FGFR1 amplifications were identified in 13% of samples (primary tumor only). Neither ERBB2 nor EGFR gene amplifications were detected. The most frequent pathogenic alterations occurred in cycle regulation's genes, including TP53 and TERT promoter mutations, and MYC amplifications. Relapse/progression samples were highly enriched for MYC amplification. Larger studies are required to better characterize these tumors, and identify new strategies to improve the prognosis of these patients.

Digital quantification of KI-67 in breast cancer.

Ki-67 proliferative index (Ki-67) is a predictive and prognostic factor in breast cancer (BC). However, some international committees do not recommend its use in routine practice due to insufficient clinical evidence and lack of standardisation and assessment method reproducibility. Scoring of Ki-67 by digital pathology may contribute to overcome these drawbacks. We evaluated 136 core biopsies of BC patients and calculated the correlation of Ki-67 scored by two breast pathologists with two methods, eyeballing visual assessment (EB) on the microscope and digital image analysis (DI), both assessed from hot spot areas (HS) and the average between hot and cold spot areas (AVE). Good and higher correlation between pathologists was observed for HS using DI in comparison to EB (0.861 vs. 0.828). Correlation in HS with both methods was very similar in homogeneous tumours (0.869 vs. 0.866). Lower correlation was found in heterogeneous tumours if EB was used instead of DI (0.691 vs. 0.838). Good agreement with DI in AVE areas was observed in both homogenous and heterogeneous tumours (0.898 and 0.887). Concordance of tumour molecular profiles based on Ki-67 was better using DI in comparison to EB (Kappa index, 0.589 vs. 0675). Whereas EB and DI were alike in homogeneous tumour, DI improved agreement in heterogeneous tumours, particularly in AVE areas. Subgroup analysis for tumour grades also showed improvement of correlation by DI in AVE areas in all G1/G2/G3 groups. Digital pathology using AVE method can be useful for Ki-67 scoring in daily practice, especially in heterogeneous and G2 tumours, by a substantial improvement of agreement between observers and results accuracy.