Real-World Evidence on the Use of Endocrine Therapy for Ductal Carcinoma In Situ in Patients Treated With Breast-Conserving Surgery Followed by Postoperative Radiation Therapy: A Brazilian Retrospective Cohort Study.

INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND: This study aims to evaluate the reproducibility of findings from randomized controlled trials regarding adjuvant hormone therapy (HT) for breast ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) in a real-life scenario. MATERIALS/METHODS: This retrospective cohort study used Fundação Oncocentro de São Paulo database. It included DCIS patients DCIS who received breast-conserving surgery and postoperative radiation therapy. The endpoints were local control (LC), breast cancer-specific survival (BCSS), and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: We analyzed 2192 patients treated between 2000 and 2020. The median FU was 48.99 months. Most patients (53.33%; n = 1169) received adjuvant HT. Patients not receiving adjuvant HT tend to be older (P = .021) and have a lower educational level (P < .001). At the end of FU, 1.5% of patients had local recurrence, and there was no significant difference between groups (P = .19). The 10-year OS and BCSS were 89.4% and 97.5% for adjuvant HT versus 91.5% and 98.5% for no adjuvant HT, respectively, and there were no significant differences between groups. The 10-year OS was 93.25% for medium/high education level versus 87.31% for low (HR for death 0.51; 95% CI, 0.32-0.83; P = .007). CONCLUSIONS: The benefits of adjuvant HT for DCIS were not reproduced in a Brazilian cohort. Education significantly impacted survival and HT usage, reflecting the influence of socioeconomic factors. These findings can allow for more precise interventions.

Intramammary sentinel lymph node with capsular extravasation in breast cancer.

Sentinel lymph node biopsy has been developed as the standard of treatment in breast cancer. Status of axillary sentinel lymph node is known to be a significant prognostic factor. Nevertheless, involvement of an intramammary lymph node with metastasis in breast cancer is a rare radiological and clinical presentation, and with extracapsular extravasation even more uncommon. Historically, reported series of patients with intramammary lymph node diagnosed by final histological examination are small in number and clinical significance of metastasis is still unclear. Here, we report a case of conservative breast cancer surgery with 3 intramammary sentinel lymph nodes containing metastasis and extracapsular extravasation. After multidisciplinary consensus, the patient was surgically reapproached with mastectomy. Even though the 3 intramammary sentinel lymph nodes were positive for metastases, pathology examination did not reveal any signs of malignancy in the mastectomy specimen.

Nipple-sparing mastectomy for breast cancer and risk-reducing surgery: the Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center experience.

BACKGROUND: Nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM) has been gathering increased recognition as an alternative to more traditional mastectomy approaches. Initially, questions concerning its oncologic safety limited the use of NSM. Nevertheless, mounting evidence supporting the practice of NSM for both prophylactic and oncologic purposes is leading to its more widespread use and broadened indications. METHODS: Using a prospectively maintained database, we reviewed our experience of 353 NSM procedures performed in 200 patients over the past 10 years. RESULTS: The indications for surgery were: 196 prophylactic risk-reduction (55.5%), 74 ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) (20.8%), 82 invasive cancer (23.2%), and 1 phyllodes tumor (0.5%). The nipple areolar complex (NAC) was entirely preserved in 341 mastectomies (96.7%). There were 11 patients (3.1%) who were found to have cancer at the nipple margin, warranting further excision. A total of 69 breasts (19.5%) had some degree of skin desquamation or necrosis, but only 12 (3.3%) required operative debridement, of which 3 breasts (1%) necessitated removal of a breast implant. Also, 6 patients (2%) were treated for infection. Of the 196 prophylactic NSMs, 11 specimens (5.6%) were found to harbor occult cancer (8 DCIS and 3 invasive cancers). One patient who underwent NSM for invasive ductal carcinoma in 2006 developed metastatic disease to her brain. No other recurrences are attributable to the 353 NSMs. CONCLUSIONS: The trends demonstrate the increasing acceptance of NSM as a prophylactic procedure as well as for therapeutic purposes. Although NSM is not standard, our experience supports the selective use of NSM in both prophylactic and malignant settings.