Comparison of wait times across the breast cancer treatment pathway among screened women undergoing organized breast assessment versus usual care.

OBJECTIVE: The benefit of organized breast assessment on wait times to treatment among asymptomatic women is unknown. The Ontario Breast Screening Program (OBSP) offers screening and organized assessment through Breast Assessment Centres (BAC). This study compares wait times across the treatment pathway among screened women diagnosed with breast cancer through BAC and usual care (UC). METHODS: A retrospective design identified two concurrent cohorts of postmenopausal women aged 50-69 within the OBSP diagnosed with screen-detected invasive breast cancer and assessed in BAC (n = 2010) and UC (n = 1844) between 2002 and 2010. Demographic characteristics were obtained from the OBSP. Medical chart abstraction provided prognostic and treatment data. Multinomial logistic regression examined associations of assessment type with wait times from abnormal mammogram to surgery, chemotherapy or radiotherapy. RESULTS: Compared with through UC, postmenopausal women diagnosed through BAC were significantly less likely to have longer wait times (days) from an abnormal mammogram to definitive surgery (> 89 vs. ≤ 47; OR = 0.63; 95% CI = 0.52-0.77), from final surgery to radiotherapy (> 88 vs. ≤ 55; OR = 0.71; 95% CI = 0.54-0.93) and from final chemotherapy to radiotherapy (> 41 vs. ≤ 28; OR = 0.52; 95% CI = 0.36-0.76). Conversely, women assessed through BAC compared with through UC were more likely to experience longer wait times from final surgery to chemotherapy (> 64 vs. ≤ 40; OR = 1.49; 95% CI = 1.04-2.14). CONCLUSION: Shorter wait times to most treatments for postmenopausal women diagnosed in BAC further supports that women with an abnormal mammogram should be managed through organized assessment. Continued evaluation of factors influencing wait times to treatment is essential for quality improvement and patient outcomes.

The impact of organized breast assessment on survival by stage for screened women diagnosed with invasive breast cancer.

PURPOSE: Since 1998, the Ontario Breast Screening Program (OBSP) has offered organized assessment through Breast Assessment Centres (BAC). This study compares survival between screened women diagnosed with breast cancer who have undergone assessment through a BAC and usual care (UC). METHODS: A retrospective design identified two concurrent cohorts of women aged 50 to 69 within the OBSP diagnosed with screen-detected invasive breast cancer at a BAC (n = 2010) and UC (n = 1844) between 2002 and 2010 and followed until 2016. Demographic and assessment characteristics were obtained from the OBSP. Abstraction of medical charts provided prognostic and treatment data. Death data were assessed from the Registered Person's Database and the Ontario Registrar General All-Cause Mortality File. Multivariable Cox proportional hazards models compared overall survival by assessment type (BAC/UC), stratified by stage. RESULTS: There were 505 deaths during the study (BAC = 239; UC = 266). Among women with stage I screen-detected breast cancer, those diagnosed through a BAC had 31% reduced risk of all-cause mortality (HR = 0.69, 95% CI = 0.53-0.90) compared to UC. Diagnosis within 7 weeks of an abnormal mammogram reduced the hazard of death from all causes by 34% among all women with stage I breast cancers (HR = 0.66, 95% CI = 0.47-0.91), and was more likely in BAC (79.7%) than UC (66.9%). CONCLUSION: The significant improvement in overall survival for women with stage I screen-detected invasive breast cancer assessed through BACs further supports the recommendation that women with abnormal mammograms should be managed through organized assessment.

Evaluating wait times from screening to breast cancer diagnosis among women undergoing organised assessment vs usual care.

BACKGROUND: Timely coordinated diagnostic assessment following an abnormal screening mammogram reduces patient anxiety and may optimise breast cancer prognosis. Since 1998, the Ontario Breast Screening Program (OBSP) has offered organised assessment through Breast Assessment Centres (BACs). For OBSP women seen at a BAC, an abnormal mammogram is followed by coordinated referrals through the use of navigators for further imaging, biopsy, and surgical consultation as indicated. For OBSP women seen through usual care (UC), further diagnostic imaging is arranged directly from the screening centre and/or through their physician; results must be communicated to the physician who is then responsible for arranging any necessary biopsy and/or surgical consultation. This study aims to evaluate factors associated with diagnostic wait times for women undergoing assessment through BAC and UC. METHODS: Of the 2 147 257 women aged 50-69 years screened in the OBSP between 1 January 2002 and 31 December 2009, 155 866 (7.3%) had an abnormal mammogram. A retrospective design identified two concurrent cohorts of women diagnosed with screen-detected breast cancer at a BAC (n=4217; 47%) and UC (n=4827; 53%). Multivariable logistic regression analyses examined associations between wait times and assessment and prognostic characteristics by pathway. A two-sided 5% significance level was used. RESULTS: Screened women with breast cancer were two times more likely to be diagnosed within 7 weeks when assessed through a BAC vs UC (OR=1.91, 95% CI=1.73-2.10). In addition, compared with UC, women assessed through a BAC were significantly more likely to have their first assessment procedure within 3 weeks of their abnormal mammogram (OR=1.25, 95% CI=1.12-1.39), ⩽3 assessment procedures (OR=1.54, 95% CI=1.41-1.69), ⩽2 assessment visits (OR=1.86, 95% CI=1.70-2.05), and ⩾2 procedures per visit (OR=1.41, 95% CI=1.28-1.55). Women diagnosed through a BAC were also more likely than those in UC to have imaging (OR=1.99, 95% CI=1.44-2.75) or a biopsy (OR=3.69, 95% CI=2.64-5.15) vs consultation only at their first assessment visit, and two times more likely to have a core or FNA biopsy than a surgical biopsy (OR=2.08, 95% CI=1.81-2.40). Having ⩽2 assessment visits was more likely to reduce time to diagnosis for women assessed through a BAC compared with UC (BAC OR=10.58, 95% CI=8.96-12.50; UC OR=4.47, 95% CI=3.94-5.07), as was having ⩽3 assessment procedures (BAC OR=4.97, 95% CI=4.26-5.79; UC OR=2.95, 95% CI=2.61-3.33). Income quintile affected wait times only in women diagnosed in UC, with those in the two highest quintiles more likely to receive a diagnosis in 7 weeks. CONCLUSIONS: Women with screen-detected breast cancer in OBSP were more likely to have shorter wait times if they were diagnosed through organised assessment. This might be as a result of women diagnosed through a BAC having more procedures per visit, procedures scheduled in shorter intervals, and imaging or biopsy on their first visit. Given the significant improvement in timeliness to diagnosis, women with abnormal mammograms should be managed through organised assessment.

Predicting Anthracycline Benefit: TOP2A and CEP17-Not Only but Also.

PURPOSE: Evidence supporting the clinical utility of predictive biomarkers of anthracycline activity is weak, with a recent meta-analysis failing to provide strong evidence for either HER2 or TOP2A. Having previously shown that duplication of chromosome 17 pericentromeric alpha satellite as measured with a centromere enumeration probe (CEP17) predicted sensitivity to anthracyclines, we report here an individual patient-level pooled analysis of data from five trials comparing anthracycline-based chemotherapy with CMF (cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and fluorouracil) as adjuvant chemotherapy for early breast cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Fluorescent in situ hybridization for CEP17, HER2, and TOP2A was performed in three laboratories on samples from 3,846 of 4,864 eligible patients from five trials evaluating anthracycline-containing chemotherapy versus CMF. Methodologic differences did not affect HER2-to-CEP17 ratios but necessitated different definitions for CEP17 duplication: > 1.86 observed copies per cell for BR9601, NEAT, Belgian, and DBCG89D trials and > 2.25 for the MA.5 trial. RESULTS: Fluorescent in situ hybridization data were available in 89.3% (HER2), 83.9% (CEP17), and 80.6% (TOP2A) of 3,846 patient cases with available tissue. Both CEP17and TOP2A treatment-by-marker interactions remained significant in adjusted analyses for recurrence-free and overall survival, whereas HER2 did not. A combined CEP17 and TOP2A-adjusted model predicted anthracycline benefit across all five trials for both recurrence-free (hazard ratio, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.51 to 0.82; P = .001) and overall survival (hazard ratio, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.51 to 0.85; P = .005). CONCLUSION: This prospectively planned individual-patient pooled analysis of patient cases from five adjuvant trials confirms that patients whose tumors harbor either CEP17 duplication or TOP2A aberrations, but not HER2 amplification, benefit from adjuvant anthracycline chemotherapy.

Diagnostic concordance among pathologists interpreting breast biopsy specimens.

IMPORTANCE: A breast pathology diagnosis provides the basis for clinical treatment and management decisions; however, its accuracy is inadequately understood. OBJECTIVES: To quantify the magnitude of diagnostic disagreement among pathologists compared with a consensus panel reference diagnosis and to evaluate associated patient and pathologist characteristics. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Study of pathologists who interpret breast biopsies in clinical practices in 8 US states. EXPOSURES: Participants independently interpreted slides between November 2011 and May 2014 from test sets of 60 breast biopsies (240 total cases, 1 slide per case), including 23 cases of invasive breast cancer, 73 ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS), 72 with atypical hyperplasia (atypia), and 72 benign cases without atypia. Participants were blinded to the interpretations of other study pathologists and consensus panel members. Among the 3 consensus panel members, unanimous agreement of their independent diagnoses was 75%, and concordance with the consensus-derived reference diagnoses was 90.3%. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The proportions of diagnoses overinterpreted and underinterpreted relative to the consensus-derived reference diagnoses were assessed. RESULTS: Sixty-five percent of invited, responding pathologists were eligible and consented to participate. Of these, 91% (N = 115) completed the study, providing 6900 individual case diagnoses. Compared with the consensus-derived reference diagnosis, the overall concordance rate of diagnostic interpretations of participating pathologists was 75.3% (95% CI, 73.4%-77.0%; 5194 of 6900 interpretations). Among invasive carcinoma cases (663 interpretations), 96% (95% CI, 94%-97%) were concordant, and 4% (95% CI, 3%-6%) were underinterpreted; among DCIS cases (2097 interpretations), 84% (95% CI, 82%-86%) were concordant, 3% (95% CI, 2%-4%) were overinterpreted, and 13% (95% CI, 12%-15%) were underinterpreted; among atypia cases (2070 interpretations), 48% (95% CI, 44%-52%) were concordant, 17% (95% CI, 15%-21%) were overinterpreted, and 35% (95% CI, 31%-39%) were underinterpreted; and among benign cases without atypia (2070 interpretations), 87% (95% CI, 85%-89%) were concordant and 13% (95% CI, 11%-15%) were overinterpreted. Disagreement with the reference diagnosis was statistically significantly higher among biopsies from women with higher (n = 122) vs lower (n = 118) breast density on prior mammograms (overall concordance rate, 73% [95% CI, 71%-75%] for higher vs 77% [95% CI, 75%-80%] for lower, P < .001), and among pathologists who interpreted lower weekly case volumes (P < .001) or worked in smaller practices (P = .034) or nonacademic settings (P = .007). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: In this study of pathologists, in which diagnostic interpretation was based on a single breast biopsy slide, overall agreement between the individual pathologists' interpretations and the expert consensus-derived reference diagnoses was 75.3%, with the highest level of concordance for invasive carcinoma and lower levels of concordance for DCIS and atypia. Further research is needed to understand the relationship of these findings with patient management.

Digitized whole slides for breast pathology interpretation: current practices and perceptions.

Digital whole slide imaging (WSI) is an emerging technology for pathology interpretation; however, little is known about pathologists' practice patterns or perceptions regarding WSI. A national sample (N = 252) of pathologists from New Hampshire, Vermont, Washington, Oregon, Arizona, Alaska, Maine, and Minnesota were surveyed in this cross-sectional study (2011-2013). The survey included questions on pathologists' experience, WSI practice patterns, and perceptions using a six-point Likert scale. Agreement was summarized with descriptive statistics to characterize pathologists' use and perceptions of WSI. The majority of participating pathologists were males (63%) between 40 and 59 years of age (70%) and not affiliated with an academic medical center (72%). Experience with WSI was reported by 49%. Types of use reported included CME/board exams/teaching (28%), tumor board/clinical conference (22%), archival purposes (6%), consultative diagnosis (4%), research (4%), and other uses (12%). Most respondents (79%) agreed that accurate diagnoses can be made with this technology, and that WSI is useful for obtaining a second opinion (88%). However, 78% of pathologists agreed that digital slides are too slow for routine clinical interpretation. Fifty-nine percent agreed that the benefits of WSI outweigh concerns. The respondents were equally split as to whether they would like to adopt WSI (51%) or not (49%). About half of pathologists reported experience with the WSI technology, largely for CME, licensure/board exams, and teaching. Positive perceptions regarding WSI slightly outweigh negative perceptions. Understanding practice patterns with WSI as dissemination advances may facilitate concordance of perceptions with adoption of the technology.

Clinical and prognostic factors associated with diagnostic wait times by breast cancer detection method.

INTRODUCTION: Although prognostic differences between screen-detected, interval and symptomatic breast cancers are known, factors associated with wait times to diagnosis among these three groups have not been studied. METHODS: Of the 16,373 invasive breast cancers diagnosed between January 1, 1995 and December 31, 2003 in a cohort of Ontario women aged 50 to 69, a random sample (N = 2,615) were selected for chart abstraction. Eligible women were classified according to detection method; screen-detected (n = 1181), interval (n = 319) or symptomatic (n = 406). Diagnostic wait time was calculated from the initial imaging or biopsy to breast cancer diagnosis. Logistic regression analysis examined associations between diagnostic wait times dichotomized as greater or less than the median and demographic, clinical and prognostic factors separately for each detection cohort. RESULTS: Women who underwent an open biopsy had significantly longer than median wait times to diagnosis, compared to women who underwent a fine needle aspiration or core biopsy; (screen-detected OR = 2.76, 95% CI = 2.14-3.56; interval OR = 2.56, 95% CI = 1.50-4.35; symptomatic OR = 5.56, 95% CI = 3.33-9.30). Additionally, screen-detected breast cancers diagnosed with stage II and symptomatic cancers diagnosed at stage III or IV had significantly shorter diagnostic wait times compared to those diagnosed at stage 1 (OR = 0.66 95% CI = 0.50-0.87 and OR = 0.46, 95% CI = 0.25-0.85 respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Our study is consistent with expedited diagnostic work-up for breast cancers with more advanced prognostic features. Furthermore, women who had an open surgical biopsy had a greater than the median diagnostic wait time, irrespective of detection method.

Understanding diagnostic variability in breast pathology: lessons learned from an expert consensus review panel.

AIMS: To gain a better understanding of the reasons for diagnostic variability, with the aim of reducing the phenomenon. METHODS AND RESULTS: In preparation for a study on the interpretation of breast specimens (B-PATH), a panel of three experienced breast pathologists reviewed 336 cases to develop consensus reference diagnoses. After independent assessment, cases coded as diagnostically discordant were discussed at consensus meetings. By the use of qualitative data analysis techniques, transcripts of 16 h of consensus meetings for a subset of 201 cases were analysed. Diagnostic variability could be attributed to three overall root causes: (i) pathologist-related; (ii) diagnostic coding/study methodology-related; and (iii) specimen-related. Most pathologist-related root causes were attributable to professional differences in pathologists' opinions about whether the diagnostic criteria for a specific diagnosis were met, most frequently in cases of atypia. Diagnostic coding/study methodology-related root causes were primarily miscategorizations of descriptive text diagnoses, which led to the development of a standardized electronic diagnostic form (BPATH-Dx). Specimen-related root causes included artefacts, limited diagnostic material, and poor slide quality. After re-review and discussion, a consensus diagnosis could be assigned in all cases. CONCLUSIONS: Diagnostic variability is related to multiple factors, but consensus conferences, standardized electronic reporting formats and comments on suboptimal specimen quality can be used to reduce diagnostic variability.

Intranodal papillary epithelial proliferations: a local process with a spectrum of morphologies and frequent association with papillomas in the breast.

Lymph nodes, particularly those draining in major anatomic sites like axilla, pelvis, and neck are potential sites for the occasional presence of ectopic tissue, usually representative of the organ being drained. Owing to the uncertainty surrounding the processes causing such findings, and particularly in the setting of lymph node dissection and sampling for cancer staging, intranodal epithelial inclusions, rare as they may be, might be fertile soil for overdiagnosis of metastatic disease. Intranodal papillary inclusions are particularly problematic and challenging because of their complex architecture that may easily mimic a metastasis. From the files of the Breast Consultation Service, Department of Pathology at the Vanderbilt University Medical Center in Nashville, we identified 6 cases in which histopathologic examination of axillary lymph nodes revealed intranodal papillary inclusions (papillary epithelial proliferations). One case showed atypical ductal hyperplasia, 1 showed low-grade ductal carcinoma in situ, and 1 showed usual ductal hyperplasia. The corresponding breast lesions were papillomas in 5 of 6 cases, 2 of which displayed atypical ductal hyperplasia, whereas 3 showed low-grade ductal carcinoma in situ. One case showed intermediate-grade invasive ductal carcinoma, and the associated intranodal papilloma lacked atypia. Our findings suggest that intranodal papillary proliferations are often, although not exclusively, associated with papillary and noninvasive breast neoplasms, hence highlighting the origin of these intranodal lesions as independent de novo nodal processes rather than metastatic deposits.

Impact of familial risk and mammography screening on prognostic indicators of breast disease among women from the Ontario site of the Breast Cancer Family Registry.

Although several studies have found screen-detected cancers in women with familial breast cancer risk have favorable prognostic features compared with symptomatic cancers, the impact of level of familial risk is unknown. A cohort of 899 first-degree female relatives of cases of breast cancer from the Ontario site of the Breast Cancer Family Registry was followed for 2 years. Logistic regression analyses compared diagnoses of breast cancer or benign breast disease (BBD) between women at high (n = 258, 28.7 %) versus low/moderate (n = 641, 71.3 %) familial risk. Similar analyses compared prognostic features of invasive cancers and BBD by level of familial risk and mammography screening status. Among 899 women, 44 (4.9 %) were diagnosed with invasive breast cancer and/or ductal carcinoma in situ, and 56 (6.2 %) with BBD. Women with high familial risk were significantly more likely to be diagnosed with breast cancer [odds ratio (OR) = 2.84, 95 % confidence interval (CI) 1.50-5.38] than low/moderate risk women, particularly if diagnosed at age ≥50 (OR = 2.99, 95 % CI 1.37-6.56) or screened with mammography (OR = 3.33, 95 % CI 1.54-7.18). High risk women were more likely to be diagnosed with BBD (OR = 1.94, 95 % CI 1.03-3.66). Level of familial risk was not associated with prognostic features. Cancers among unscreened women were larger (OR = 9.72, 95 % CI 1.01-93.61) and diagnosed at stage II or above (OR = 7.80, 95 % CI 1.18-51.50) compared with screen-detected cancers. Screening mammography may be effective for women with a first-degree family history of breast cancer, irrespective of level of familial risk.

Factors associated with wait times across the breast cancer treatment pathway in Ontario.

BACKGROUND: Longer times from diagnosis to breast cancer treatment are associated with poorer prognosis. This study examined factors associated with wait times by phase in the breast cancer treatment pathway. METHODS: There were 1760 women eligible for the study, aged 50-69 diagnosed in Ontario with invasive breast cancer from 1995-2003. Multivariate logistic regression examined factors associated with greater than median wait times for each phase of the treatment pathway; from diagnosis to definitive surgery; from final surgery to radiotherapy without chemotherapy and from final surgery to chemotherapy. RESULTS: The median wait times were 17 days (Inter Quartile Range (IQR) = 0-31) from diagnosis to definitive surgery, 44 days (IQR = 34-56) from final surgery to postoperative chemotherapy and 75 days (IQR = 57-97) from final surgery to postoperative radiotherapy. Diagnosis during 2000-2003 compared to 1995-1999 was associated with significantly longer wait times for each phase of the treatment pathway. Higher income quintile was associated with longer wait time from diagnosis to surgery (OR = 1.47, 95% CI = 1.05-2.06) and shorter wait times from final surgery to radiotherapy (OR = 0.60, 95% CI = 0.37-0.96). Greater stage at diagnosis was associated with shorter wait times from diagnosis to definitive surgery (stage III vs I: OR = 0.49, 95% CI = 0.34-0.71). CONCLUSIONS: While diagnosis during the latter part of the study period was associated with significantly longer wait times for all phases of the treatment pathway, there were variations in the associations of stage and income quintile with wait times by treatment phase. Continued assessment of factors associated with wait times across the breast cancer treatment pathway is important, as they indicate areas to be targeted for quality improvement with the ultimate goal of improving prognosis.

Clinical-pathologic significance of cancer stem cell marker expression in familial breast cancers.

Human breast cancer cells with a CD44(+)/CD24(-/low) or ALDH1+ phenotype have been demonstrated to be enriched for cancer stem cells (CSCs) using in vitro and in vivo techniques. The aim of this study was to determine the association between CD44(+)/CD24(-/low) and ALDH1 expression with clinical-pathologic tumor characteristics, tumor molecular subtype, and survival in a well characterized collection of familial breast cancer cases. 364 familial breast cancers from the Ontario Familial Breast Cancer Registry (58 BRCA1-associated, 64 BRCA2-associated, and 242 familial non-BRCA1/2 cancers) were studied. Each tumor had a centralized pathology review performed. TMA sections of all tumors were analyzed for the expression of ER, PR, HER2, CK5, CK14, EGFR, CD44, CD24, and ALDH1. The Chi square test or Fisher's exact test was used to analyze the marker associations with clinical-pathologic tumor variables, molecular subtype and genetic subtype. Analyses of the association of overall survival (OS) with marker status were conducted using Kaplan-Meier plots and log-rank tests. The CD44(+)/CD24(-/low) and ALDH1+ phenotypes were identified in 16% and 15% of the familial breast cancer cases, respectively, and associated with high-tumor grade, a high-mitotic count, and component features of the medullary type of breast cancer. CD44(+)/CD24(-/low) and ALDH1 expression in this series were further associated with the basal-like molecular subtype and the CD44(+)/CD24(-/low) phenotype was independently associated with BRCA1 mutational status. The currently accepted breast CSCs markers are present in a minority of familial breast cancers. Whereas the presence of these markers is correlated with several poor prognostic features and the basal-like subtype of breast cancer, they do not predict OS.

Elevated expression of podocalyxin is associated with lymphatic invasion, basal-like phenotype, and clinical outcome in axillary lymph node-negative breast cancer.

Lymphatic invasion (LVI) is associated with disease recurrence in axillary node-negative (ANN) breast cancer. Using gene expression profiling of 105 ANN tumors, we found that podocalyxin (PODXL) was more highly expressed in tumors with LVI (LVI+) than in those without LVI (LVI-). Differences in PODXL expression were validated using real-time polymerase chain reaction as well as by immunohistochemistry in an independent set of 652 tumors on tissue microarrays. Disease-free survival (DFS) analyses were conducted for association of high PODXL protein expression with risk of distant recurrence overall and within breast cancer subtypes using both Cox and cure-rate models. High PODXL expression was associated with poor prognosis features including large tumor size, high histological grade, estrogen and progesterone receptor negativity, and with clinical alterations characteristic of the basal-like breast cancer phenotype. Surprisingly, despite having other poor prognosis characteristics, women with high PODXL expressing tumors had better long-term DFS in multivariate analysis with traditional clinicopathologic factors including LVI and HER2 status (P = 0.001). PODXL has the potential to be a useful biomarker for identifying good prognosis patients in characteristically poor prognosis breast cancer groups and may impact treatment of women with this disease.

Tumoral lymphocytic infiltration and expression of the chemokine CXCL10 in breast cancers from the Ontario Familial Breast Cancer Registry.

PURPOSE: Breast carcinomas, including basal and hereditary cases, often present with a prominent tumoral lymphocytic infiltrate. Chemokines could play a role in attracting these cells and contribute to tumor progression. We explored tumoral expression of CXCL10 and determined the relationship between CXCL10 and lymphocytic infiltrate in a cohort of breast cancers. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: Using tissue microarrays of 364 breast tumors, we evaluated expression of CXCL10 and its receptor, CXCR3, in relation to histopathologic features, biomarkers, and lymphocyte markers. In addition, we overexpressed CXCL10 and CXCR3 in MCF7 breast cancer cells and monitored T-lymphocyte migration and invasion. RESULTS: Forty-five percent of tumors expressed CXCL10, and a significant association was found with CXCR3 and lymphocytic infiltrate. Further characterization of the lymphocytic infiltrate revealed an association with CXCL10 expression for peritumoral CD4+ and CD8+ lymphocytes. CD8+ intratumoral lymphocytes, FOXP3+ regulatory T cells (Tregs), and T-BET+ T(H)1 cells were associated with BRCA1 and basal tumors. Conditioned media from MCF7 cells overexpressing both CXCL10 and CXCR3 increased T-lymphocyte migration and invasion. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that CXCL10 may act in a paracrine manner, affecting the tumor microenvironment, and in an autocrine manner, acting on the tumor cells themselves and may play a role in tumor invasiveness and progression. The CXCL10-CXCR3 axis can serve as a potential target in BRCA1 and basal breast cancers, which present with a prominent lymphocytic infiltrate and a poor prognosis. Clin Cancer Res; 19(2); 336-46. ©2012 AACR.

Improving work-up of the abnormal mammogram through organized assessment: results from the ontario breast screening program.

PURPOSE: Women with an abnormal screening mammogram should ideally undergo an organized assessment to attain a timely diagnosis. This study evaluated outcomes of women undergoing work-up after abnormal mammogram through a formal breast assessment affiliate (BAA) program with explicit care pathways compared with usual care (UC) using developed quality indicators for screening mammography programs. METHODS: Between January 1 and December 31, 2007, a total of 320,635 women underwent a screening mammogram through the Ontario Breast Screening Program (OBSP), of whom 25,543 had an abnormal result requiring further assessment. Established indicators assessing timeliness, appropriateness of follow-up, and biopsy rates were compared between women who were assessed through either a BAA or UC using χ(2) analysis. RESULTS: Work-up of the abnormal mammogram for patients screened through a BAA resulted in a greater proportion of women attaining a definitive diagnosis within the recommended time interval when a histologic diagnosis was required. In addition, use of other quality measures including specimen radiography for both core biopsies and surgical specimens and preoperative core needle biopsy was greater in BAA facilities. CONCLUSION: These findings support future efforts to increase the number of BAAs within the OBSP, because the pathways and reporting methods associated with them result in improvements in our ability to provide timely and appropriate care for women requiring work-up of an abnormal mammogram.

Prospective study of 2-[¹8F]fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography in the assessment of regional nodal spread of disease in patients with breast cancer: an Ontario clinical oncology group study.

PURPOSE: 2-[(18)F]fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) positron emission tomography (PET) is potentially useful in assessing lymph nodes and detecting distant metastases in women with primary breast cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Women diagnosed with operable breast cancer within 3 months underwent FDG-PET at one of five Ontario study centers followed by axillary lymph node assessment (ALNA) consisting of sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) alone if sentinel lymph nodes (SLNs) were negative, SLNB with axillary lymph node dissection (ALND) if SLNB or PET was positive, or ALND alone if SLNs were not identified. RESULTS: Between January 2005 and March 2007, 325 analyzable women entered this study. Sentinel nodes were found for 312 (96%) of 325 women and were positive for tumor in 90 (29%) of 312. ALND was positive in seven additional women. Using ALNA as the gold standard, sensitivity for PET was 23.7% (95% CI, 15.9% to 33.6%), specificity was 99.6% (95% CI, 97.2% to 99.9%), positive predictive value was 95.8% (95% CI, 76.9% to 99.8%), negative predictive value was 75.4% (95% CI, 70.1% to 80.1%), and prevalence was 29.8% (95% CI, 25.0% to 35.2%). Using logistic regression, tumor size was predictive for prevalence of tumor in the axilla and for PET sensitivity. PET scan was suspicious for distant metastases in 13 patients; three (0.9%) were confirmed as metastatic disease and 10 (3.0%) were false positive. CONCLUSION: FDG-PET is not sufficiently sensitive to detect positive axillary lymph nodes, nor is it sufficiently specific to appropriately identify distant metastases. However, the very high positive predictive value (96%) suggests that PET when positive is indicative of disease in axillary nodes, which may influence surgical care.

Papillary lesions of the breast: impact of breast pathology subspecialization on core biopsy and excision diagnoses.

BACKGROUND: Classifying papillary lesions of the breast on core biopsy (CB) is challenging. Although traditionally all such lesions were surgically excised, at present, conservative management of benign lesions is being advocated; therefore, accurately classifying papillary lesions on CB is all the more imperative. The extent to which subspecialty training in breast pathology might mitigate such difficulties in diagnosis has not yet been reported. We investigated change in diagnoses from CB to surgical excision according to subspecialist training in breast pathology and interobserver agreement between specialized breast pathologists (BPs) and nonbreast pathologists (NBPs) in classifying these lesions. DESIGN: CBs of 281 papillary lesions from 266 patients diagnosed between 2000 and 2010 were classified by both a BP and NBP into benign, atypical, ductal carcinoma in situ/encapsulated papillary carcinoma, or invasive carcinoma categories. Rates of change in diagnostic category in the surgical excision specimen were calculated on the basis of: (i) the original diagnosis, (ii) diagnosis made by the BP, and (iii) diagnosis made by the NBP. Comparisons were made using the χ test. Kappa values were calculated for interobserver agreement. RESULTS: Of 162 lesions with subsequent excision, 90 were originally diagnosed as benign, 38 as atypical, 25 as ductal carcinoma in situ/encapsulated papillary carcinoma, and 9 as invasive on CB. The upgrade rate for benign papillomas to an atypical or malignant lesion on surgical excision was 22.2% according to the original diagnosis. This rate fell to 16.3% when the BP diagnoses were considered, compared with 26.3% for the NBP diagnoses. There was no significant difference between BPs and NBPs in the rate of upgrade from a benign to an atypical/malignant diagnosis, although downgrades from atypical/malignant to benign papillomas were more commonly seen among NBPs (P=0.002). Overall, the BP diagnosis on CB was less likely to differ from the excision diagnosis (P=0.0001). Benign papillomas upgraded on excision were more likely to occur with larger radiologic mass size (P=0.033) compared with those that were not upgraded. Of 8 benign papillomas upgraded to a malignant lesion on excision, 7 were discordant on radiology. Interobserver agreement between BP and NBP diagnoses was in the "fair agreement" range (κ=0.38), with perfect agreement in 66.4% of cases. CONCLUSIONS: Correlation between CB and excision diagnoses for breast papillary lesions is significantly greater for BPs than for NBPs. This is largely because of a tendency to overcall atypia or malignancy on CB by NBPs. However, upgrades from benign to atypical or malignant did not significantly differ according to subspecialization. With accurate pathologic assessment and radiologic-pathologic correlation, the upgrade rate of benign papillomas to malignancy can be minimized significantly.

Chromosome 17 centromere (CEP17) duplication as a predictor of anthracycline response: evidence from the NCIC Clinical Trials Group (NCIC CTG) MA.5 Trial.

HER2 gene amplification and topoisomerase IIα gene (TOP2A) alteration have been associated with increased benefit from anthracycline compared to non-anthracycline containing adjuvant breast cancer chemotherapy in some but not other studies. Chromosome 17 centromere (CEP17) duplication was measured on TMAs from formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded specimens obtained from 639 of 716 premenopausal women with node positive breast cancer who received cyclophosphamide, epirubicin and fluorouracil (CEF) or cyclophosphamide, methotrexate and fluorouracil (CMF) in the randomized controlled mammary 5 (MA.5) adjuvant trial. The prognostic impact of CEP17 duplication and its interactions with treatment were studied for relapse-free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS). Overall, CEP17 duplication was not significantly associated with RFS or OS in multivariate analysis. For patients whose tumours had normal CEP17 copy number there were no apparent benefits for CEF compared to CMF for RFS (HR 0.98; 95% CI 0.68-1.42) or OS (HR 1.10; 95% CI 0.72-1.69). For patients whose tumours had CEP17 duplication, there was significant benefit for CEF compared to CMF for RFS (HR 0.54; CI 0.33-0.89) and a trend towards significance for OS (HR 0.64; CI 0.37-1.09). The adjusted P values for interaction between treatment and CEP17 duplication were 0.09 for RFS and 0.13 for OS. This study suggests that CEP17 duplication has a borderline association with clinical responsiveness to anthracycline containing chemotherapy similar to previous results seen with HER2 amplification and TOP2A alteration in MA.5. An appropriately powered meta-analysis is required to discriminate the predictive value of these three candidate markers.

TIMP-1 in combination with HER2 and TOP2A for prediction of benefit from adjuvant anthracyclines in high-risk breast cancer patients.

HER2 amplification, TOP2A aberrations, and absence of tissue inhibitor of metalloproteinase (TIMP-1) expression in breast carcinomas have been shown to be associated with incremental benefit from anthracycline-containing adjuvant chemotherapy, and this study was undertaken to validate these findings in a similar, but independent, randomized clinical trial. TIMP-1 was examined by immunohistochemistry in archival tumor tissue from 403 of 716 premenopausal high-risk patients with known HER2 and TOP2A status who were randomized to cyclophosphamide, epirubicin, and fluorouracil (CEF) or cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and fluorouracil (CMF) in the MA.5 trial. Ninety-eight (24%) patients had no TIMP-1 staining of tumor cells, 27% were HER2 amplified, and 18% were TOP2A aberrant. Forty-four percentage was classified as HT responsive (HER2 amplified and/or TIMP-1 negative) and 37% as 2T responsive (TOP2A aberrant and/or TIMP-1 negative). There was no heterogeneity in treatment effect of CEF versus CMF according to TIMP-1. In HT-responsive patients, CEF was superior to CMF with an improved RFS (adjusted HR, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.42-0.97), but this was not significant for OS (adjusted HR, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.42-1.04). A significant HT profile versus treatment interaction was detected for OS (P = 0.03). In 2T-responsive patients, CEF seemed to improve RFS compared to CMF (adjusted HR, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.43-1.03) and improved OS (adjusted HR, 0.58; 95% CI, 0.36-0.93). A significant 2T profile versus treatment interaction was detected for OS (P = 0.01). With this study, we validate a more substantial reduction in mortality by CEF compared to CMF in patients with an HT- or 2T-responsive profile; however, we could not show a similarly significant reduction in RFS events, where a benefit of CEF over CMF was found irrespective of TIMP-1 status. Further studies are necessary before the HT and 2T profiles may be used to direct the use of anthracyclines.

Breast cancer prognosis in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers: an International Prospective Breast Cancer Family Registry population-based cohort study.

PURPOSE: To compare breast cancer prognosis in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers with that in patients with sporadic disease. PATIENTS AND METHODS: An international population-based cohort study was conducted in Canada, the United States, and Australia of 3,220 women with incident breast cancer diagnosed between 1995 and 2000 and observed prospectively. Ninety-three had BRCA1 mutations; 71, BRCA2 mutations; one, both mutations; 1,550, sporadic breast cancer; and 1,505, familial breast cancer (without known BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation). Distant recurrence and death were analyzed. RESULTS: Mean age at diagnosis was 45.3 years; mean follow-up was 7.9 years. Risks of distant recurrence and death did not differ significantly between BRCA1 mutation carriers and those with sporadic disease in univariable and multivariable analyses. Risk of distant recurrence was higher for BRCA2 mutation carriers compared with those with sporadic disease in univariable analysis (hazard ratio [HR], 1.63; 95% CI, 1.02 to 2.60; P = .04). Risk of death was also higher in BRCA2 carriers in univariable analysis (HR, 1.81; 95% CI, 1.15 to 2.86; P = .01). After adjustment for age, tumor stage and grade, nodal status, hormone receptors, and year of diagnosis, no differences were observed for distant recurrence (HR, 1.00; 95% CI, 0.62 to 1.61; P = 1.00) or death (HR, 1.12; 95% CI, 0.70 to 1.79; P = .64). CONCLUSION: Outcomes of BRCA1 mutation carriers were similar to those of patients with sporadic breast cancer. Worse outcomes in BRCA2 mutation carriers in univariable analysis seem to reflect the presence of more adverse tumor characteristics in these carriers. Similar outcomes were identified in BRCA2 carriers and those with sporadic disease in multivariable analyses.