What is the best systemic treatment for newly diagnosed inflammatory breast cancer?-a narrative review.

OBJECTIVE: The propose of this review to discuss of the systemic treatment options for newly diagnosed inflammatory breast cancer (IBC) including the recent data of immune checkpoint inhibitor, CDK4/6 inhibitor and anti-HER2 therapy. Aim to provide a pragmatic treatment in a gray area or concerning issues of real-world practice. BACKGROUND: IBC is a rare and aggressive disease. Upfront systemic treatment followed by surgery and radiation therapy or "Tri-modality" treatment is a standard of care for newly diagnosed IBC. Due to its rarity, the data of systemic treatment for IBC has been extrapolated mostly from non-IBC clinical trials. METHODS: We summarized the recent data of systemic treatment stratified by concerning topics and breast cancer subtypes. Some topics are less likely to have strong data from IBC clinical trial to supports. Therefore, we interpolate the non-IBC data to support our review. CONCLUSIONS: IBC is challenging in the clinical management. The development of novel systemic treatment is urgently needed, especially for IBC-specific clinical trials.

Update on systemic treatment for newly diagnosed inflammatory breast cancer.

Background: Inflammatory breast cancer (IBC) is a rare and aggressive disease, accounting for 2-4% of new cases of breast cancer. Owing to its aggressive nature, IBC represent approximately 8-10% of breast cancer deaths. Management of IBC requires a multidisciplinary team for decision-making involving a composite of systemic treatment, surgery, and radiation, or "Trimodality Treatment." Because of the rarity of the disease, systemic therapy of IBC traditionally has been extrapolated from non-IBC clinical trials. Aim of Review: The purpose of this review is to provide an overview of the development of systemic treatment of IBC from the past to the present by focusing on IBC clinical trials, including chemotherapy and targeted therapies. Key Scientific Concepts of Review: We discuss their effects on pathologic complete response (pCR) and survival outcomes, the predictive markers, and the adverse events of these therapies. Further, we summarized the current standard treatment stratified by molecular subtypes based on clinical data. Finally, we discuss the future trend of systemic therapy, including immunotherapy and ongoing IBC clinical trials.

Pathological complete response of adding targeted therapy to neoadjuvant chemotherapy for inflammatory breast cancer: A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: The current use of targeted therapy plus neoadjuvant chemotherapy for inflammatory breast cancer (IBC) is based on data extrapolated from studies in non-IBC. We conducted a systematic review to determine whether neoadjuvant chemotherapy plus targeted therapy results in a higher pathologic complete response (pCR) rate than neoadjuvant chemotherapy alone in patients with IBC. METHOD AND FINDINGS: This systematic review was registered in the PROSPERO register with registration number CRD42018089465. We searched MEDLINE & PubMed, EMBASE, and EBSCO from December 1998 through July 2020. All English-language clinical studies, both randomized and non-randomized, that evaluated neoadjuvant systemic treatment with or without targeted therapy before definitive surgery and reported the pCR results of IBC patients. First reviewer extracted data and assessed the risk of bias using the Risk of Bias In Non-randomized Studies of Interventions tool. Second reviewer confirmed the accuracy. Studies were divided into 3 groups according to systemic treatment: chemotherapy with targeted therapy, chemotherapy alone, and high-dose chemotherapy with hematopoietic stem cell support (HSCS). Of 995 screened studies, 23 with 1,269 IBC patients met the inclusion criteria. For each of the 3 groups of studies, we computed a weighted average of the pCR rates across all studies with confidence interval (CI). The weighted averages (95% CIs) were as follows: chemotherapy with targeted therapy, 31.6% (26.4%-37.3%), chemotherapy alone, 13.0% (10.3%-16.2%), and high-dose chemotherapy with HSCS, 23.0% (18.7%-27.7%). The high pCR by targeted therapy group came from anti-HER2 therapy, 54.4% (44.3%-64.0%). Key limitations of this study included no randomized clinical studies that included only IBC patients. CONCLUSION: Neoadjuvant chemotherapy plus targeted therapy is more effective than neoadjuvant chemotherapy alone for IBC patients. These findings support current IBC standard practice in particular the use of anti-HER2 targeted therapy.

Bone Metastases: Mechanisms of the Metastatic Process, Imaging and Therapy.

The mechanisms by which tumors metastasize to bone are complex. Upon the successful establishment of metastatic deposits in the skeleton, detection of the disease becomes essential for therapeutic planning. The roles of CT, skeletal scintigraphy, SPECT/CT, MRI, PET/CT and PET/MRI will be reviewed. Therapeutic response criteria specifically designed to evaluate bone metastases (MD Anderson/MDA criteria) can guide image interpretation. Knowledge of therapeutic strategies such as systemic therapy with bisphosphonates or radiopharmaceuticals, radiation therapy, surgery, and percutaneous interventions such as vertebroplasty and radiofrequency ablation can help the radiologist produce reports that will provide maximum benefit to clinicians and patients.

The Prognostic Impact of Body Composition for Locally Advanced Breast Cancer Patients Who Received Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy.

Our previous study indicated that a high amount of visceral adipose tissue was associated with poor survival outcomes in patients with early breast cancer who received neoadjuvant chemotherapy. However, inconsistency was observed in the prognostic role of body composition in breast cancer treatment outcomes. In the present study, we aimed to validate our previous research by performing a comprehensive body composition analysis in patients with a standardized clinical background. We included 198 patients with stage III breast cancer who underwent neoadjuvant chemotherapy between January 2007 and June 2015. The impact of body composition on pathologic complete response and survival outcomes was determined. Body composition measurements had no significant effect on pathologic complete response. Survival analysis showed a low ratio of total visceral adipose tissue to subcutaneous adipose tissue (V/S ratio ≤ 34) was associated with shorter overall survival. A changepoint method determined that a V/S ratio cutoff of 34 maximized the difference in overall survival. Our study indicated the prognostic effect of body composition measurements in patients with locally advanced breast cancer compared to those with early breast cancer. Further investigation will be needed to clarify the biological mechanism underlying the association of V/S ratio with prognosis in locally advanced breast cancer.

Validation of Prognostic Stage and Anatomic Stage in the American Joint Committee on Cancer 8th Edition for Inflammatory Breast Cancer.

The AJCC updated its breast cancer staging system to incorporate biological factors in the "prognostic stage". We undertook this study to validate the prognostic and anatomic stages for inflammatory breast cancer (IBC). We established two cohorts of IBC diagnosed without distant metastasis: (1) patients treated at The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center between 1991 and 2017 (MDA cohort) and (2) patients registered in the national Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database between 2010 and 2015 (SEER cohort). For prognostic staging, estrogen receptor (ER)+/progesterone receptor (PR)+/ human epidermal growth factor receptor-2 (HER2)+/grade 1-2 was staged as IIIA; ER+/PR-/HER2-/grade 3, ER-/PR+/HER2-/grade 3, and triple-negative cancers as IIIC; and all others as IIIB. Endpoints were breast cancer-specific survival (BCSS), overall survival (OS), and disease-free survival (DFS). We studied 885 patients in the MDA cohort and 338 in the SEER cohort. In the MDA cohort, the prognostic stage showed significant predictive power for BCSS, OS, and DFS (all p < 0.0001), although the anatomic stage did not. In both cohorts, the Harrell concordance index (C index) was significantly higher in the prognostic stage than the anatomic stage for all endpoints. In conclusion, the prognostic stage provided more accurate prognostication for IBC than the anatomic stage. Our results show that the prognostic staging is applicable in IBC.

Targeting Signaling Pathways in Inflammatory Breast Cancer.

Inflammatory breast cancer (IBC), although rare, is the most aggressive type of breast cancer. Only 2-4% of breast cancer cases are classified as IBC, but-owing to its high rate of metastasis and poor prognosis-8% to 10% of breast cancer-related mortality occur in patients with IBC. Currently, IBC-specific targeted therapies are not available, and there is a critical need for novel therapies derived via understanding novel targets. In this review, we summarize the biological functions of critical signaling pathways in the progression of IBC and the preclinical and clinical studies of targeting these pathways in IBC. We also discuss studies of crosstalk between several signaling pathways and the IBC tumor microenvironment.

The efficacy of first-line chemotherapy in endocrine-resistant hormone receptor-positive (HR+), human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HER2-) metastatic breast cancer.

PURPOSE: Combinations of endocrine therapy (ET) and targeted therapy (CDK4/6 or mTOR inhibitors) are standard of care for HR+/HER2- metastatic breast cancer (MBC). When ET is not effective, chemotherapy is commonly used. However, clinical outcomes of chemotherapy in the endocrine-resistant setting are limited. The purpose of this study was to identify predictive factors and the compare efficacies of chemotherapy agents in endocrine-resistant MBC. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective study of patients with HR+/HER2- MBC who received chemotherapy after progression on ET with or without targeted therapy at MD Anderson Cancer Center from 1999 to 2017. We collected baseline clinicopathological and all treatment data. Primary endpoint was time to treatment failure (TTF) of first-line chemotherapy for MBC. RESULTS: For the 1258 patients analyzed, mean age was 55.3 years (range 21-91). Previous treatment with targeted therapy was recorded for 390 patients (31%): 264 with CDK4/6 inhibitor, 205 with mTOR inhibitor, and 79 treated with both. The most frequent chemotherapy agents were capecitabine (48.9%) and taxanes (28.6%). After adjustment for all factors in a multivariate model, previous treatment with a CDK4/6 inhibitor had the strongest negative effect on TTF regardless of ET duration (hazard ratio [HR] 1.84; 95%CI 1.49-2.27; p < 0.001). Conversely, capecitabine had significantly longer median TTF than taxanes regardless of whether patients had prior exposure to taxanes in primary setting (6.1 vs 4.9 months; HR 0.64; 95%CI 0.55-0.75; p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Previous exposure to CDK4/6 inhibitor had a negative predictive effect for the efficacy of chemotherapy. Capecitabine had the best efficacy against endocrine-resistant breast cancer.