Clinical Outcomes of Breast-Conserving Surgery with Synchronous 50-kV X-ray Intraoperative Partial Breast Irradiation in Patients Aged 64 Years or Older with Low-Risk Breast Cancer.

Background: Breast-conserving surgery with synchronous 50-kV X-ray intraoperative radiation therapy (TARGIT-IORT) is a convenient form of partial breast irradiation; however, the existing literature supports a wide range of local control rates. Objectives: We investigated the treatment effectiveness and toxic effects of TARGIT-IORT in a patient cohort aged 64 years or older with low-risk breast cancer. Design: Retrospective analysis. Methods: Patients who received breast-conserving surgery with synchronous TARGIT-IORT at a single institution from 2016 to 2019 were reviewed. Additional whole breast irradiation was recommended at the discretion of the treating radiation oncologist. Baseline patient demographics and treatment details were recorded. Acute and chronic toxicities, measured using the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 3.0 or 4.0 and breast cosmetic outcomes, using the Harvard Cosmesis score, were recorded. Locoregional recurrence, distant metastasis, and overall survival were recorded, and 5-year rates were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Results: 61 patients were included with a median follow-up of 3.5 years and median age of 72 years. Eight (13%) patients received additional whole breast irradiation, and fifty-four (89%) received adjuvant hormone therapy. There were no local, regional, or distance recurrences. One patient died of complications from COVID-19 infection. Grade 2 + acute and chronic toxicities were observed in 6 (12%) and 7 (14%) patients, respectively. One patient experienced a grade 3 acute toxicity. Cosmetic outcome was "excellent" or "good" in 45 (92%) patients. Conclusions: Breast TARGIT-IORT was well tolerated and conferred excellent disease control in this cohort of patients with low-risk breast cancer. While continued follow-up is required, TARGIT-IORT may be an appropriate treatment option for this population.

Breast Conserving Therapy for Patients With Prior Cosmetic Implant-Based Breast Augmentation: Outcomes and Comparison Against a Matched Cohort.

INTRODUCTION: Controversy exists regarding potential increased toxic effects in patients with cosmetic implant-based augmentation (CIBA) who receive radiation therapy. We evaluated acute and chronic toxic effects associated with radiation therapy in women with prior CIBA treated with whole-breast irradiation (WBI) as part of breast conserving therapy (BCT) and compared these results against a cohort of patients without prior breast augmentation who received similar therapy. METHODS: A retrospective review was performed to identify patients with a prior history of CIBA who subsequently underwent BCT with WBI. The control group consisted of consecutively treated patients without prior CIBA who also underwent BCT with WBI. Analyses included a comparison of baseline and treatment-associated factors between the augmentation and control groups, evaluation of toxic effects between both groups, and multivariable analysis of factors associated with the receipt of additional surgery following radiation. RESULTS: Thirty-six patients with prior CIBA and 135 consecutively treated patients without CIBA were identified. Patients with prior CIBA were treated from 2006 through 2019, and patients without CIBA were treated from 2016 through 2019, though treatment characteristics and median follow-up time were similar between the two groups. Patients with prior CIBA were significantly less likely to experience acute moist desquamation (0% vs. 18%; P = .005). There were otherwise no statistically significant differences in acute (≤ 6 months) or chronic (> 6 months) toxic effects between the two groups. Rates of excellent/good chronic cosmetic outcome were 89% for the CIBA group and 97% in the control group (P = .094). On multivariable analysis, patients without prior CIBA (OR = 0.04; CI = 0.01-0.13; P < .001) and patients treated with moderately hypofractionated irradiation (OR = 0.08; CI = 0.02-0.23; P < .001) were significantly less likely to undergo additional surgery following receipt of WBI. Two patients experienced implant loss following radiation therapy. CONCLUSIONS: WBI as part of BCT in patients with prior implant-based breast augmentation appears safe and is associated with favorable cosmetic outcomes. There was an increased need for additional surgery in patients with prior CIBA, but rates of acute and chronic toxic effects appeared similar to those in nonaugmented patients.

Near-Surface Dose Correlates With Moist Desquamation and Unplanned Reconstructive Surgery in Patients With Implant-Based Reconstruction Receiving Postmastectomy Radiation Therapy.

Purpose: Postmastectomy radiation therapy (PMRT) reduces disease recurrence in appropriately selected patients but may compromise implant-based reconstruction. We investigated whether near-surface dose correlates with radiation-related toxic effects in these patients. Methods and Materials: Patients receiving PMRT at a single institution from 2016 to 2019 were retrospectively reviewed. Patient demographics and treatment information were collected. Three near-surface structures were retrospectively generated, bound by the chest wall tangent beam as well as the skin surface and the skin-3 mm contour (SR3), skin surface and skin-5 mm contour (SR5), or skin-5 and skin-10 mm contours. Dosimetric analysis of these near-surface contours was performed in 2 Gy intervals. Univariate and multivariate analyses were used to identify predictors of moist desquamation, grade 2+ chest wall pain, use of opiate pain medication, unplanned reconstructive surgery, and implant failure. Logistic regression for each outcome and near-surface contour was performed for receiver-operator area under the curve (AUC) analysis and the Youden J Statistic was used to determine the optimal threshold for each dosimetric parameter. Results: Of 126 patients reviewed, 109 met the study's eligibility criteria. Median follow-up was 2.3 years. Twenty-five patients (23%) underwent unplanned reconstructive surgery, and 10 (9.2%) experienced implant failure. Among clinical variables, low body mass index and history of smoking predicted unplanned surgery on univariate and multivariate analyses, and moist desquamation predicted grade 2+ chest wall pain. The top dosimetric parameters by AUC for moist desquamation, grade 2+ chest wall pain, use of opiates, unplanned reconstructive surgery, and implant failure were SR5 D10 cc (AUC = 0.701, optimal threshold 57.8 Gy, P < .001), SR3 D10 cc (AUC = 0.600, optimal threshold 56.8 Gy, P = .079), SR5 D10 cc (AUC = 0.642, optimal threshold 57.3 Gy, P = .041), SR3 V44 Gy (AUC = 0.711, optimal threshold 81%, P = .001), and SR3 V44 Gy (AUC = 0.688, optimal threshold 82%, P = .052), respectively. Conclusions: Near-surface dose correlates with moist desquamation and unplanned reconstructive surgery after PMRT. Further evaluation of prospective optimization of dosimetric parameters related to SR3 and SR5 should be considered.

Intraoperative Fluorescence Guidance for Breast Cancer Lumpectomy Surgery.

BACKGROUND: Although lumpectomy and mastectomy provide equivalent survival for patients with breast cancer, local recurrence after lumpectomy increases breast cancer mortality. Positive lumpectomy margins, which imply incomplete tumor removal, are the strongest predictor of local recurrence and are identified days after surgery, necessitating a second surgery. METHODS: In this prospective trial, we assessed margin status with or without pegulicianine fluorescence-guided surgery (pFGS) for stages 0 to 3 breast cancers. To prevent surgeons from performing smaller than standard lumpectomies in anticipation of pFGS assistance, patients were randomly assigned 10:1 to pFGS or control groups, thus randomization was not designed to provide a control group for evaluating device performance. In patients undergoing pFGS, additional pFGS-guided cavity margins were excised at sites of pegulicianine signal. We evaluated three coprimary end points: the percentage of patients for whom pFGS-guided margins contained cancer, sensitivity, and specificity. RESULTS: Overall, 406 patients received 1.0 mg/kg intravenous pegulicianine followed by lumpectomy. Among 392 patients randomly assigned, 316 had invasive cancers, and 76 had in situ cancers. In 27 of 357 patients undergoing pFGS, pFGS-guided margins removed tumor left behind after standard lumpectomy, 22 from cavity orientations deemed negative on standard margin evaluation. Second surgeries were avoided by pFGS in 9 of 62 patients with positive margins. On per-margin analysis, pFGS specificity was 85.2%, and sensitivity was 49.3%. Pegulicianine administration was stopped for adverse events in six patients. Two patients had grade 3 serious adverse events related to pegulicianine. CONCLUSIONS: The use of pFGS in breast cancer surgery met prespecified thresholds for removal of residual tumor and specificity but did not meet the prespecified threshold for sensitivity. (Funded by Lumicell, Inc. and the National Institutes of Health; Clinicaltrials.gov number, NCT03686215.)

Clinical Impact of Intraoperative Margin Assessment in Breast-Conserving Surgery With a Novel Pegulicianine Fluorescence-Guided System: A Nonrandomized Controlled Trial.

Importance: Positive margins following breast-conserving surgery (BCS) are often identified on standard pathology evaluation. Intraoperative assessment of the lumpectomy cavity has the potential to reduce residual disease or reexcision rate following standard of care BCS in real time. Objective: To collect safety and initial efficacy data on the novel pegulicianine fluorescence-guided system (pFGS) when used to identify residual cancer in the tumor bed of female patients undergoing BCS. Design, Setting, and Participants: This prospective single-arm open-label study was conducted as a nonrandomized multicenter controlled trial at 16 academic or community breast centers across the US. Female patients 18 years and older with newly diagnosed primary invasive breast cancer or ductal carcinoma in situ DCIS undergoing BCS were included, excluding those with previous breast cancer surgery and a history of dye allergies. Of 283 consecutive eligible patients recruited, 234 received a pegulicianine injection and were included in the safety analysis; of these, 230 were included in the efficacy analysis. Patients were enrolled between February 6, 2018, and April 10, 2020, and monitored for a 30-day follow-up period. Data were analyzed from April 10, 2020, to August 5, 2021. Interventions: Participants received an injection of a novel imaging agent (pegulicianine) a mean (SD) of 3.2 (0.9) hours prior to surgery at a dose of 1 mg/kg. After completing standard of care (SOC) excision, pFGS was used to scan the lumpectomy cavity to guide the removal of additional shave margins. Main Outcomes and Measures: Adverse events and sensitivity, specificity, and reexcision rate. Results: Of 234 female patients enrolled (median [IQR] age, 62.0 [55.0-69.0] years), 230 completed the trial and 1 patient with a history of allergy to contrast agents had an anaphylactic reaction and recovered without sequelae. Correlation of pFGS with final margin status on a per-margin analysis showed a marked improvement in sensitivity over standard pathology assessment of the main lumpectomy specimen (69.4% vs 38.2%, respectively). On a per-patient level, the false-negative rate of pFGS was 23.7% (9 of 38), and sensitivity was 76.3% (29 of 38). Among 32 patients who underwent excision of pFGS-guided shaves, pFGS averted the need for reexcision in 6 (19%). Conclusions and Relevance: In this pilot feasibility study, the safety profile of pegulicianine was consistent with other imaging agents used in BCS, and was associated with a reduced need for second surgery in patients who underwent intraoperative additional excision of pFGS-guided shaves. These findings support further development and clinical performance assessment of pFGS in a prospective randomized trial. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03321929.

Trends, survival outcomes, and predictors of nonadherence to mastectomy guidelines for nonmetastatic inflammatory breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: The Current National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines recommend modified radical mastectomy (MRM) as the surgical treatment of choice for nonmetastatic inflammatory breast cancer (IBC). Limited studies have looked into the outcomes of breast conserving surgery (BCS) vs. MRM for IBC. METHODS: National Cancer Database (NCDB) data from 2004 to 2014 were retrospectively analyzed. Patients' demographics, tumor characteristics, and overall survival (OS) trends were compared for BCS and MRM cases of nonmetastatic IBC. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed. RESULTS: A total of 413 (3.89%) BCS and 10,197 (96.11%) MRM cases were identified. Median follow-up was 58.45 months. Compared to MRM, BCS patients were more likely to be older, be African American, have Medicare/Medicaid or be uninsured, live in lower education ZIP codes, and live in a metropolitan area (all p < 0.05). BCS rates significantly decreased from 5.84% in 2004 to 3.19% in 2014 (p < 0.001). BCS patients also were more likely to have less than 50% of the breast involved (51.57% vs. 43.88%; p = 0.0081) and were less likely to receive trimodal therapy (50.85% vs. 74.62%; p = <0.0001). The OS was significantly higher in the mastectomy group over 9 years at 62.02% vs. 54.47% in the BCS group. Additionally, in the adjusted multivariate model, BCS cases were associated with 23% higher hazards of overall mortality (p = 0.0091). CONCLUSION: BCS was performed in a limited number of cases, which decreased over the study period. The analysis identified both demographic predictors of receiving BCS and significantly lower OS for IBC patients undergoing a BCS.

A Three-Dimensional Bioabsorbable Tissue Marker for Volume Replacement and Radiation Planning: A Multicenter Study of Surgical and Patient-Reported Outcomes for 818 Patients with Breast Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Accurate identification of the tumor bed after breast-conserving surgery (BCS) ensures appropriate radiation to the tumor bed while minimizing normal tissue exposure. The BioZorb® three-dimensional (3D) bioabsorbable tissue marker provides a reliable target for radiation therapy (RT) planning and follow-up evaluation while serving as a scaffold to maintain breast contour. METHODS: After informed consent, 818 patients (826 breasts) implanted with the BioZorb® at 14 U.S. sites were enrolled in a national registry. All the patients were prospectively followed with the BioZorb® implant after BCS. The data collected at 3, 6, 12, and 24 months included all demographics, treatment parameters, and provider/patient-assessed cosmesis. RESULTS: The median follow-up period was 18.2 months (range, 0.2-53.4 months). The 30-day breast infection rate was 0.5 % of the patients (n = 4), and re-excision was performed for 8.1 % of the patients (n = 66), whereas 2.6 % of the patients (n = 21) underwent mastectomy. Two patients (0.2 %) had local recurrence. The patient-reported cosmetic outcomes at 6, 12, and 24 months were rated as good-to-excellent by 92.4 %, 90.6 %, and 87.3 % of the patients, respectively and similarly by the surgeons. The radiation oncologists reported planning of target volume (PTV) reduction for 46.2 % of the patients receiving radiation boost, with PTV reduction most commonly estimated at 30 %. CONCLUSIONS: This report describes the first large multicenter study of 818 patients implanted with the BioZorb® tissue marker during BCS. Radiation oncologists found that the device yielded reduced PTVs and that both the patients and the surgeons reported good-to-excellent long-term cosmetic outcomes, with low adverse effects. The BioZorb® 3D tissue marker is a safe adjunct to BCS and may add benefits for both surgeons and radiation oncologists.

Omission of Axillary Lymph Node Dissection is Associated with Inferior Survival in Breast Cancer Patients with Residual N1 Nodal Disease Following Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy.

BACKGROUND: The appropriateness of substituting sentinel lymph node dissection (SLND) and regional nodal irradiation (RNI) for axillary lymph node dissection (ALND) in patients with residual lymph node (LN) disease following neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) is unknown. We used the National Cancer Database (NCDB) to compare survival following SLND and ALND in breast cancer patients with residual LN disease. METHODS: We analyzed NCDB patients, treated between 2006 and 2014, with cT1-3, cN1, cM0 breast cancer and residual disease in 1-3 axillary LNs (ypN1) following NAC. Patients were grouped into those who received SLND (defined as removal of ≤ 4 LNs) and RNI, or ALND and RNI. Patients were matched for all patient, tumor, and treatment characteristics. RESULTS: We identified 1313 eligible patients in the ALND group and 304 patients in the SLND group. For the matched cohorts, SLND was associated with significantly lower survival in both univariate and doubly robust multivariable analyses (MVA) (HR 1.7, 95% CI 1.3-2.2, P < 0.001 for MVA), with estimated 5-year OS of 71%, compared with 77% in the ALND group (P = 0.01). Exploratory subgroup analyses showed that SLND was comparable with ALND in patients with luminal A or B tumors with a single metastatic LN (HR 1.03, 95% CI 0.59-1.8, (P = 0.91). CONCLUSIONS: Our analysis suggests that, while an ALND may not be needed for patients with limited residual nodal burden and biologically favorable tumors, SLND should not be routinely substituted for ALND in patients with ypN1 disease following NAC until its efficacy is confirmed by prospective trials.

Mutational landscape of radiation-associated angiosarcoma of the breast.

PURPOSE: Radiation-associated breast angiosarcomas are a rare complication of radiation therapy for breast carcinoma. With relatively little is known about the genetic abnormalities present in these secondary tumors, we examined genomic variation in biospecimens from radiation-associated breast angiosarcomas. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: Patients were identified that had a previous breast cancer diagnosis, received radiation therapy, and developed angiosarcoma in the ipsilateral breast as the earlier cancer. Tumor regions were isolated from archival blocks using subsequent laser capture microdissection. Next generation sequencing was performed using a targeted panel of 160 cancer-related genes. Genomic variants were identified for mutation and trinucleotide-based mutational signature analysis. RESULTS: 44 variants in 34 genes were found in more than two thirds of the cases; this included 12 variants identified as potentially deleterious. Of particular note, the BRCA1 DNA damage response pathway was highly enriched with genetic variation. In a comparison to local recurrences, 14 variants in 11 genes were present in both the primary and recurrent lesions including variants in genes associated with the DNA damage response machinery. Furthermore, the mutational signature analysis shows that a previously defined IR signature is present in almost all of the current samples characterized by predominantly C→T substitutions. CONCLUSIONS: While radiation-associated breast angiosarcomas are relatively uncommon, their prognosis is very poor. These data demonstrate a mutational pattern associated with genes involved in DNA repair. While important in revealing the biology behind these tumors, it may also suggest new treatment strategies that will prove successful.

Sentinel lymph node biopsy in contralateral prophylactic mastectomy: are we overtreating? Experience at a tertiary care hospital.

OBJECTIVE: Use of routine sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) in contralateral prophylactic mastectomy (CPM) is controversial. This retrospective study was undertaken to determine the frequency of SLNB in CPM at a community hospital and its utility as a guide to patient decision making. METHODS: Between 2007 and 2009, 170 patients underwent CPM at a suburban, tertiary care facility. The CPM was either immediate or delayed, or was for ipsilateral recurrent breast cancer. Thirty-seven (21.8%) of 170 patients had SLNB performed with CPM. The mastectomy specimens underwent standard pathologic evaluation by using intraoperative touch preparation cytology and postoperative hematoxylin and eosin staining and immunohistochemistry. RESULTS: No patients who underwent SLNB had positive nodes on touch preparation or final hematoxylin and eosin staining (0/37 [0%]). Fourteen (8.2%) of 37 patients had additional nodes identified in the specimens. These were either axillary tail or intramammary nodes. The median number of SLNs removed was 2 (range, 1-5), none of these were positive. There were 3 incidental cancers diagnosed on final pathology. Two invasive cancers (T1a and grade I) and 1 ductal carcinoma in situ were identified. SLNB was only performed on the patient with DCIS. Neither SLNB nor subsequent axillary lymph node dissection was performed in the invasive cancers. CONCLUSIONS: SLNB was performed in 37 (21.8%) of patients who underwent CPM in a community hospital. Only 3 (1.76%) of 170 patients who underwent CPM had findings on final pathology that would have justified axillary staging. This correlates with other published data regarding SLNB in CPM. Because SLNB is associated with significant morbidity, guidelines for SLNB in prophylactic mastectomy need to be established so to avoid overtreatment.

Comparison of lymphedema in patients with axillary lymph node dissections to those with sentinel lymph node biopsy followed by immediate and delayed ALND.

PURPOSE: The purpose of the study was to show that delayed axillary lymph node dissection (ALND) has higher rates of lymphedema compared with immediate ALND, using data from NSABP-B32 at Beaumont Hospital. METHOD: NSABP B-32 at Beaumont had 207 patients with follow-up data on 199 patients, randomizing clinically negative axilla to sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB)+ALND (GrA N=98), and SLNB+cytology±ALND (GrB N=101). All patients had preoperative volumetric arm measurements and only node negatives had routine postoperative measurements assessing lymphedema for 36 months. We contacted node-positive patients for postoperative measurements for this study. Twenty-four and 15 cytology-positive patients had SLNB+ALND in GrA and GrB, respectively (SubGrA1 N=24; SubGrB1 N=15). Fourteen hematoxylin and eosin-positive patients had delayed ALND (SubGrB2a N=14). RESULTS: Lymphedema rate for node-positive SLNB+ALND was 10.3% [SubGrA1 (3/24)+SubGrB1 (1/15)=4/39] and node-negative SLNB+ALND was 6.8% (SubGrA2=5/74). Lymphedema was 14.3% for delayed ALND in SubGrB2a (2 of 14) and 0% for 72 SLNBs in SubGrB2b. Our study comparing immediate and delayed ALND lymphedema was not statistically significant (10.3% vs. 14.3%, P=0.65). Comparing node-negative ALND (SubGrA2= 5/74=6.8%) to node-positive ALND (A1+B1+B2a=6/53=11.3%) was not statistically significant (P=0.52). Comparing lymphedema for node-negative ALND (SubGrA2) to SLNB (SubGrB2b) only approached significance (6.8% vs. 0%, P=0.058). CONCLUSIONS: The rate of lymphedema was higher in delayed ALND but not statistically significant. Comparison, however, is difficult, given the limited sample size. We urge the other centers of NSABP-B32 to validate this, by contacting the node-positive patients for measurements. The lymphedema rate for SLNB alone was 0% and approached statistical significance when compared with node-negative ALND.

Failure rate and cosmesis of immediate tissue expander/implant breast reconstruction after postmastectomy irradiation.

BACKGROUND: This study reports the rate of breast reconstruction failure and cosmetic outcomes after postmastectomy radiation therapy (PMRT) with temporary tissue expanders (TEs) or implants in place. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Ninety-four patients underwent mastectomy (93 unilateral, 1 bilateral; 95 cases total) and immediate TE reconstruction followed by PMRT. Ninety TEs and 5 permanent implants were irradiated. All patients received a dose of 5400 cGy given in 180-cGy fractions to the reconstructed breast. Twenty-one patients (22%) received tangents alone and 74 patients (78%) were treated with tangents and a supraclavicular field using a monoisocentric technique. Bolus was used in 91 patients (96%). Eighty-eight patients (93%) received chemotherapy and 78 patients (82%) received endocrine therapy. RESULTS: With a median follow-up of 24.1 months, 19 patients (20%) experienced failure of reconstruction. The 1-, 2-, and 3-year actuarial rate of reconstruction failure was 9.7%, 19.3%, and 25.5%, respectively. Infection was the most common cause of failure. Of the 19 failures, 8 patients underwent salvage procedures with flap reconstruction. Univariate analysis was performed examining age, chemotherapy use, hormone therapy use, use of a supraclavicular field, smoking status, diabetes, hypertension, and menopausal status. No risk factors were found to be associated with reconstruction failure. In patients who did not experience reconstruction failure, good/excellent cosmesis was observed in 75% of patients. CONCLUSION: In the current series of women with a high risk of locoregional recurrence, PMRT with a TE/implant in place provides good cosmesis in the majority of women, with an acceptable risk of expander or implant loss.

Implementation and outcomes of a multidisciplinary high-risk breast cancer program: the William Beaumont Hospital experience.

UNLABELLED: Limited data are available on the implementation of a high-risk assessment program in the construct of a community clinical oncology program. The development of a high-risk breast cancer screening program at our institution identified 15%-20% of patients screened as high risk, with limited increases in structural or personnel requirements. Identification of patients as high risk could potentially improve outcomes by allowing for individualized prevention strategies and more appropriate high-risk surveillance. PURPOSE: The implementation of a program that incorporates a risk assessment questionnaire (RAQ) to identify high-risk patients in a community-based health system was evaluated. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Women with no history of breast cancer or ductal carcinoma in situ who were undergoing annual screening mammography were offered an RAQ. Cases determined to be high risk (Gail lifetime risk ≥20% or as indicated through personal and/or family history) were offered referral to our High-risk Breast Cancer Program. A retrospective data review was conducted on completed questionnaires. RESULTS: A total of 5878 women underwent evaluation with the RAQ between September 2009 and August 2010. The mean age of the cohort was 55 years old, with 84.9% (4990) of participants being white, and 6.8% (400) African American. In the entire population, 45.7% (2446) had at least 1 first-degree relative with breast cancer (BC), and 923 (17.2%) women were found to be high risk by the Gail model. Beyond the Gail model, 53 (0.9%) women had undergone prior chest radiation, 34 (0.6%) had a male relative with BC, 200 (3.4%), had 3 or more relatives with BC on one side of their family, 308 (5.2%) had a relative with breast and ovarian cancer on one side of the family, and 105 (1.8%) noted 2 relatives with BC with onset under age 50 years on the same side of the family. CONCLUSIONS: Our experience indicates that the identification of women at high risk for BC can be easily incorporated into an annual screening mammography visit. Identification of these patients as high risk can allow for individualized, more-appropriate surveillance and prevention.

Impact of lymph node status on clinical outcomes after accelerated partial breast irradiation.

PURPOSE: To compare outcomes after accelerated partial breast irradiation (APBI) between node-negative and node-positive patients. METHODS AND MATERIALS: A total of 534 patients with early-stage breast cancer received APBI including 39 node-positive (N+) cases. Clinical, pathologic, and treatment-related factors were compared between node-negative (N-) and N+ cohorts. Local recurrence (LR), regional recurrence (RR), axillary failure (AF), distant metastases (DM), disease-free survival (DFS), cause-specific survival (CSS), and overall survival (OS) were analyzed. RESULTS: N+ patients were younger (p = 0.04), had larger tumors (p < 0.001), and were more likely to receive chemotherapy (p < 0.001). Mean follow-up was 7.8 years for N+ patients and 6.3 years for N- patients (p = 0.06). No differences were seen in 5-year actuarial rates of LR (2.2% vs. 2.6%, p = 0.86), AF (0% vs. 0%, p = 0.69), DFS (90.0% vs. 88.0%, p = 0.79), or OS (91.0 vs. 84.0%, p = 0.65) between the two groups, whereas higher rates of RR (0% vs. 6.1%, p < 0.001) and DM (2.2% vs. 8.9%, p = 0.005) were noted in N+ patients. A trend for improved CSS (p = 0.06), was seen in N- patients. Age, tumor size, receptor status, T-stage, chemotherapy, APBI technique, and nodal status (p = 0.86) were not associated with LR, while a trend for an association with LR was noted with close/positive margins, (p = 0.07), and failure to receive adjuvant hormonal therapy (p = 0.06). CONCLUSIONS: No differences were seen in the rates of LR or AF between N- and N+ patients after APBI. These results support the continued enrollment of node-positive patients in Phase III trials evaluating the efficacy of APBI including the National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project-B39/Radiation Therapy Oncology Group 0413.

Axillary lymph node failure in patients treated with accelerated partial breast irradiation.

BACKGROUND: Data on the risk of axillary failure (AF) after accelerated partial breast irradiation (APBI) are limited. In this study, the authors determined the rate of AF and regional lymph node failure (RNF) in patients who received various forms of APBI and identified factors that were associated with its occurrence. METHODS: In total, 534 patients with early stage breast cancer were treated at William Beaumont Hospital with APBI, including 466 patients (87%) with invasive breast cancer and 68 patients (13%) with ductal carcinoma in situ. Clinical variables (patient age, tumor location), pathologic variables (tumor size, grade, estrogen receptor status, margin status, lymph node status), and treatment-related variables (receipt of hormone and systemic chemotherapy) were analyzed to determine which factors were associated with AF and RNF. The median length of follow-up was 63 months (range, 1-201 months). RESULTS: The 5-year actuarial AF rate was 0.19%. Three patients (0.56%) developed RNF (all patients initially had invasive breast cancer) with a 5-year actuarial rate of 0.37%. Two of the regional recurrences were in the supraclavicular fossa, and 1 was in the axilla. No variables were associated with AF. However, patient numbers were very small. The median survival after RNF was 0.8 years (range, 0.3-1.7 years), and 2 of the 3 patients died of disease. CONCLUSIONS: The rate of AF and RNF after APBI was low and appeared to be similar to the rate observed with whole-breast irradiation. No variables were associated with a higher rate of AF after APBI.

Factors associated with the development of breast cancer-related lymphedema after whole-breast irradiation.

PURPOSE: To determine the rates of breast cancer-related lymphedema (BCRL) in patients undergoing whole-breast irradiation as part of breast-conserving therapy (BCT) and to identify clinical, pathologic, and treatment factors associated with its development. METHODS AND MATERIALS: A total of 1,861 patients with breast cancer were treated at William Beaumont Hospital with whole-breast irradiation as part of their BCT from January 1980 to February 2006, with 1,497 patients available for analysis. Determination of BCRL was based on clinical assessment. Differences in clinical, pathologic, and treatment characteristics between patients with BCRL and those without BCRL were evaluated, and the actuarial rates of BCRL by regional irradiation technique were determined. RESULTS: The actuarial rate of any BCRL was 7.4% for the entire cohort and 9.9%, 14.7%, and 8.3% for patients receiving a supraclavicular field, posterior axillary boost, and internal mammary irradiation, respectively. BCRL was more likely to develop in patients with advanced nodal status (11.4% vs. 6.3%, p = 0.001), those who had a greater number of lymph nodes removed (14 nodes) (9.5% vs. 6.0%, p = 0.01), those who had extracapsular extension (13.4% vs. 6.9%, p = 0.009), those with Grade II/III disease (10.8% vs. 2.9%, p < 0.001), and those who received adjuvant chemotherapy (10.5% vs. 6.7%, p = 0.02). Regional irradiation showed small increases in the rates of BCRL (p = not significant). CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that clinically detectable BCRL will develop after traditional BCT in up to 10% of patients. High-risk subgroups include patients with advanced nodal status, those with more nodes removed, and those who receive chemotherapy, with patients receiving regional irradiation showing a trend toward increased rates.

Differences in disease presentation, management techniques, treatment outcome, and toxicities in African-American women with early stage breast cancer treated with breast-conserving therapy.

BACKGROUND: Data on patients who received breast-conserving therapy (BCT) for early stage breast cancer were examined to detect differences in disease presentation, management techniques, long-term treatment outcomes, and toxicities based on race. METHODS: Six hundred ninety-nine women with breast cancer (39 African-American [AA] women and 660 Caucasian [C] women) who received BCT were analyzed on race, clinical and pathologic characteristics at presentation, management techniques, treatment-related toxicities, recurrence, and survival. The median follow-up was 12.2 years. RESULTS: At diagnosis, AA women were younger (aged<50 years, 49% vs 29%; P=.002), had larger tumors (mean, 17.0 mm vs 13.9 mm; P=.032), had more estrogen receptor-negative tumors (56% vs 18%; P<.001), and higher nuclear grade tumors (grade 3, 52% vs 29%; P=.006). Compared with C women, AA women more frequently received adjuvant chemotherapy (59% vs 19%; P<.001) and lymph node irradiation (26% vs 13%; P=.033). No other significant treatment differences were observed. After treatment, AA women experienced more breast pain (P=.001), more arm edema (P=.046), and less excellent cosmetic results (P=.008), but there were no statistically significant differences in local recurrence (P=.232), distant metastasis (P=.263), overall survival (P=.131), or cause-specific survival (P=.092) based on race. CONCLUSIONS: The current results suggested that AA women present with larger and more aggressive breast tumors and, as a result, more frequently received adjuvant chemotherapy and lymph node irradiation. Small differences in treatment-related toxicities and cosmesis were observed, but no differences in efficacy were identified.