BEAUTY and the breast: is adjuvant chemotherapy the right time for a beauty boost? Lessons learned from a large randomized controlled trial.

PURPOSE: Beauty care (BTC) is offered at many cancer hospitals having a great uptake among patients. Nevertheless, its benefits in the Quality of life (QoL) of cancer survivors have not been assessed so far. METHODS: Our study aims to determine whether BTC improves patients' QoL related to their body image measured by the BRBI scale of the QLQ-BR23 questionnaire at the end of adjuvant chemotherapy, after breast cancer (BC) surgery. The BEAUTY study is a prospective, randomized, controlled intervention trial. The following patient-reported outcomes were filled before initiation of chemotherapy (T1) and after their last cycle (T2): EORTC QLQ-C30, QLQ-BR23, and Body Image Scale (BIS). Primary objective was improvement in the BIS of BR23 (BRBI). A qualitative assessment of patients' experience was performed at each cycle through a relevant questionnaire. RESULTS: In total, 269 (67%) patients filled BRBI at T1 and T2. Mean BRBI scores substantially decreased between T1 and T2 and were not different with or without BTC (p = 0.88). Qualitative assessment suggests impact of BTC in physical well-being and avoids thoughts related to the disease. CONCLUSION: A substantial proportion of patients have a poor body image and chemotherapy induced a substantial degradation of BRBI scores. Although BTC does not seem to impact BRBI scores, the qualitative assessment suggests some benefit of BTC in other domains. Our study highlights the need to assess patients-perceived body image and build tailored interventions at this critical phase of their disease and generates hypothesis for the impact of BTC among BC patients. Clinical trial registration The study is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov under the NCT01459003 number since October 25, 2011.

Higher antitumor activity of trabectedin in germline BRCA2 carriers with advanced breast cancer as compared to BRCA1 carriers: A subset analysis of a dedicated phase II trial.

Specific alkylators may allow synthetic lethality among patients with germline BRCA1/2-mutations related cancers. The tetrahydroisoquinolone trabectedin administered at 1.3 mg/m2 as a 3-h intravenous infusion every 3 weeks showed activity in patients with pretreated metastatic breast cancer (MBC) and BRCA germline mutations, but mainly in BRCA2 carriers. Data from a phase II study were retrospectively analyzed to compare the efficacy and safety of this trabectedin dose and schedule in pretreated MBC patients bearing germline BRCA1/2 mutations. The primary efficacy endpoint was the objective response rate (ORR) as per Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors (RECIST) by independent expert review. Duration of response (DR) and progression-free survival (PFS) were secondary efficacy endpoints. Safety was evaluated using the National Cancer Institute Common Toxicity Criteria (NCI-CTC). Data from 26 BRCA1-mutated and 13 BRCA2-mutated patients were analyzed. 69% of BRCA1-mutated cancers were triple-negative vs. 31% of BRCA2-mutated ones. 77% of BRCA1 and 31% of BRCA2 carriers were platinum-pretreated. The ORR in BRCA2-mutated patients was higher than in BRCA1-mutated patients (33.3% vs. 9.1%). DR ranged for 1.4-6.8 months in BRCA2-mutated patients and for 1.5-1.7 months in BRCA1-mutated patients. More BRCA2-mutated patients had disease stabilization for ≥4 months (25.0% vs. 9.1%) and their median PFS was longer (4.7 vs. 2.5 months). Trabectedin was well tolerated in both patient subtypes. In conclusion, trabectedin showed higher antitumor activity in relapsed MBC patients with germline BRCA2 mutations than in those with BRCA1 mutations.

The challenge of rapid diagnosis in oncology: Diagnostic accuracy and cost analysis of a large-scale one-stop breast clinic.

PURPOSE: Rapid diagnosis is a key issue in modern oncology, for which one-stop breast clinics are a model. We aimed to assess the diagnosis accuracy and procedure costs of a large-scale one-stop breast clinic. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 10,602 individuals with suspect breast lesions attended the Gustave Roussy's regional one-stop breast clinic between 2004 and 2012. The multidisciplinary clinic uses multimodal imaging together with ultrasonography-guided fine needle aspiration for masses and ultrasonography-guided and stereotactic biopsies as needed. Diagnostic accuracy was assessed by comparing one-stop diagnosis to the consolidated diagnosis obtained after surgery or biopsy or long-term monitoring. The medical cost per patient of the care pathway was assessed from patient-level data collected prospectively. RESULTS: Sixty-nine percent of the patients had masses, while 31% had micro-calcifications or other non-mass lesions. In 75% of the cases (87% of masses), an exact diagnosis could be given on the same day. In the base-case analysis (i.e. considering only benign and malignant lesions at one-stop and at consolidated diagnoses), the sensitivity of the one-stop clinic was 98.4%, specificity 99.8%, positive and negative predictive values 99.7% and 99.0%. In the sensitivity analysis (reclassification of suspect, atypical and undetermined lesions), diagnostic sensitivity varied from 90.3% to 98.5% and specificity varied from 94.3% to 99.8%. The mean medical cost per patient of one-stop diagnostic procedure was €420. CONCLUSIONS: One-stop breast clinic can provide timely and cost-efficient delivery of highly accurate diagnoses and serve as models of care for multiple settings, including rapid screening-linked diagnosis.

[Molecular signatures of breast cancer: What clinical utility?]. / Les signatures moléculaires commerciales: quelle utilité clinique ?

The role of molecular signatures in the adjuvant management of breast cancer remains a debated topic. Discussions should take into account the level of scientific validation, the impact on practice, the expected benefits and financing issues. This article presents the key points for a rational use of commercial molecular signatures.

Ki67--no evidence for its use in node-positive breast cancer.

The expression of Ki67 in breast cancer has been associated with the luminal B phenotype, a high risk of relapse, and likelihood of good response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Several guidelines propose assays to determine Ki67 expression levels to select which patients with early stage breast cancer and 1-3 positive axillary nodes should not receive adjuvant chemotherapy. We discuss why oncologists should not rely on the use of this biomarker for patients with early stage breast cancer and only 1-3 positive axillary nodes. First, Ki67 staining lacks analytical validity. Second, the performance of the biomarker for prognostic purposes is poor, with no compelling evidence to indicate that patients with oestrogen receptor (ER)-positive disease, low Ki67 expression and 1-3 positive axillary nodes have a very low risk of disease relapse. Finally, no robust evidence indicates that Ki67 staining predicts the efficacy of adjuvant chemotherapy. Overall, evidence does not support withholding adjuvant chemotherapy in patients with ER-positive, Ki67-low breast cancer and 1-3 positive nodes without risk in daily practice.