Clinical impact of delaying initiation of adjuvant chemotherapy in patients with early triple negative breast cancer.

PURPOSE: The optimal time to initiation of adjuvant chemotherapy (TTAC) for triple negative breast cancer (TNBC) patients is unclear. This study evaluates the association between TTAC and survival in TNBC patients. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective study using data from a cohort of TNBC patients diagnosed between January 1, 2010 to December 31, 2018, registered in the Tumor Centre Regensburg was conducted. Data included demographics, pathology, treatment, recurrence and survival. TTAC was defined as days from primary surgery to first dose of adjuvant chemotherapy. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to evaluate impact of TTAC on overall survival (OS) and 5-year OS. RESULTS: A total of 245 TNBC patients treated with adjuvant chemotherapy and valid TTAC data were included. Median TTAC was 29 days. The group receiving systemic therapy within 22 to 28 days after surgery had the most favorable outcome, with median OS of 10.2 years. Groups receiving systemic therapy between 29-35 days, 36-42 days, and more than 6 weeks after surgery had significantly decreased median survival, with median OS of 8.3 years, 7.8 years, and 6.9 years, respectively. Patients receiving therapy between 22-28 days had significantly better survival compared to those receiving therapy between 29-35 days (p = 0.043), and patients receiving therapy after 22-28 days also demonstrated significantly better survival compared to those receiving therapy after more than 43 days (p = 0.033). CONCLUSION: Timing of adjuvant systemic therapy can influence OS in TNBC patients. Efforts should be made to avoid unnecessary delays in administering chemotherapy to ensure timely initiation of systemic therapy and optimize patient outcomes.

Does timing of neoadjuvant chemotherapy influence the prognosis in patients with early triple negative breast cancer?

PURPOSE: For patients with triple negative breast cancer (TNBC), the optimal time to initiate neoadjuvant chemotherapy (TTNC) is unknown. This study evaluates the association between TTNC and survival in patients with early TNBC. METHODS: A retrospective study using data from of a cohort of TNBC patients diagnosed between January 1, 2010 to December 31, 2018 registered in the Tumor Centre Regensburg was performed. Data included demographics, pathology, treatment, recurrence, and survival. Interval to treatment was defined as days from pathology diagnosis of TNBC to first dose of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT). The Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression methods were used to evaluate the impact of TTNC on overall survival (OS) and 5 year OS. RESULTS: A total of 270 patients were included. Median follow up was 3.5 years. The 5-year OS estimates according to TTNC were 77.4%, 66.9%, 82.3%, 80.6%, 88.3%, 58.3%, 71.1% and 66.7% in patients who received NACT within 0-14, 15-21, 22-28, 29-35, 36-42, 43-49, 50-56 and > 56 days after diagnosis. Patients who received systemic therapy early had the highest estimated mean OS of 8.4 years, while patients who received systemic therapy after more than 56 days survived an estimated 3.3 years. CONCLUSION: The optimal time interval between diagnosis and NACT remains to be determined. However, starting NACT more than 42 days after diagnosis of TNBC seems to reduce survival. Therefore, it is strongly recommended to carry out the treatment in a certified breast center with appropriate structures, in order to enable an adequate and timely care.

Automated breast ultrasound (ABUS) for intraoperative margin control on surgical specimens in breast conserving surgery.

PURPOSE: As breast-conserving surgery (BCS) has become the standard for treatment of early breast cancer, the need for new technologies to improve intraoperative margin assessment has become clear. Close or positive margins during BCS lead to additional surgeries, treatment delay, additional stress for patients and increasing healthcare cost. Automated three-dimensional breast ultrasound (ABUS) systems are meant to overcome the shortcomings of hand-held ultrasound (HHUS). In this study, we investigate the feasibility of ABUS to conduct ultrasound on surgical specimens in breast conserving therapy. METHODS: In this monocentric, non-interventional study, specimens of 40 women were examined via ABUS. A construction with isotonic saline solution, gel pads and ABUS membranes was invented by our team to produce images of breast cancer specimens using ABUS. Evaluation of the ABUS images was carried out by two independent physicians trained on ABUS evaluation. RESULTS: ABUS was conducted on 40 specimens. 90% of the generated images were of high quality. Measured tumor sizes with ABUS were bigger than measured tumor size with HHUS (mean tumor size 22.9 vs. 18.1 mm, CI 2.38-7.35, p < 0.05). The mean difference between the ABUS tumor size and the pathological tumor size was 1.8 mm (CI - 0.84-4.53, p = 0.17). The mean difference between the HHUS tumor size and the pathological tumor size was 3.2 mm (CI - 5.35 to - 1.03, p = 0.005). CONCLUSION: ABUS seems to be a suitable method to conduct specimen ultrasound. Further studies are required to evaluate the accuracy of ABUS for intraoperative margin assessment and possible implementation in clinical work routine.

Feasibility of ABUS as an Alternative to Handheld Ultrasound for Response Control in Neoadjuvant Breast Cancer Treatment.

INTRODUCTION: The Invenia Automated Breast Ultrasound Screening (ABUS) is indicated as an adjunct to mammography for breast cancer screening in asymptomatic women with high-density breast tissue. ABUS provides time-efficient evaluation of the 3-dimensional recordings within 3 to 6 minutes. The role and advantages of ABUS in everyday clinical practice, especially in routine examination during neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT), is not clear. The aim of this monocentric, noninterventional retrospective study is to evaluate the use of ABUS in patients who are under NACT treatment for response control. METHODS: Regular sonographic response check with handheld ultrasound (HHUS) examination and with ABUS were conducted in 83 women who underwent NACT. The response controls were conducted every 3 to 6 weeks during NACT. The handheld sonography was performed with GE Voluson S8. Handheld sonographic measurements and ABUS measurements were compared with the final pathologic tumor size. RESULTS: There was no statistical difference between the measurements with HHUS examination or ABUS compared with final pathologic tumor size (P = .47). The average difference from ABUS measured tumor size to final pathologic tumor size was 9.8 mm. The average difference from handheld measured tumor size to final pathologic tumor size was 9/3 mm. Both the specificity of ABUS and HHUS examination in predicting pathologic complete remission was 100%. CONCLUSION: ABUS seems to be a suitable method to conduct response control in neoadjuvant breast cancer treatment. ABUS may facilitate preoperative planning and offers remarkable time saving for physicians compared with HHUS examination and thus should be considered for clinical practice.

Adjuvant chemotherapy for breast cancer patients with axillary lymph node micrometastases.

BACKGROUND: The axillary lymph node status is one of the most important prognostic factors in patients with early breast cancer. However, the impact of axillary lymph node micrometastases on survival remains unclear. There are no consistent recommendations for adjuvant chemotherapy (CHT). In this context, we aimed to investigate the impact of micrometastases on the clinical outcome of breast cancer patients according to the adjuvant CHT performed. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We conducted a retrospective population-based registry study of 26,465 patients aged between 24 and 97 years with primary breast cancer diagnosed between 2003 and 2017. Of these patients, 8856 with early breast cancer were eligible for analysis: 8316 (93.9%) were node negative and 540 (6.1%) had lymph node micrometastases. RESULTS: The median follow-up was 7.2 years, with a confidence interval (CI) of 7.1-7.3 years. Patients with lymph node micrometastases (pN1mi) without adjuvant CHT have reduced 10-year overall survival (OS) and recurrence-free survival (RFS) compared to patients who had axillary lymph node micrometastases and received an adjuvant CHT. However, this effect disappeared after adjustment for age, tumor size and tumor grading. Furthermore, in the group of patients with lymph node micrometastases, the administration of adjuvant CHT did not improve OS or RFS, compared to patients with lymph node micrometastases without adjuvant CHT: hazard ratio for treated patients was 1.51 (95% CI 0.80-2.85, p = 0.208) for OS and 1.12 (95% CI 0.63-1.97, p = 0.705) for RFS. CONCLUSION: Patients with axillary lymph node micrometastases showed a comparable outcome to node negative patients and their outcome was not significantly improved with CHT. Thus, axillary lymph node micrometastases should not be considered in the treatment decision.