Fertility Preservation for the Young Breast Cancer Patient.

BACKGROUND: The American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) guidelines include incorporation of fertility preservation guidelines in the care of breast oncology patients. This study aimed to examine the baseline knowledge and preferences concerning fertility preservation among women of childbearing age with newly diagnosed breast cancer at the time of their initial visit to Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center (MSKCC). METHODS: A questionnaire on reproductive history, fertility knowledge, and preservation options was administered to women 18-45 years of age with newly diagnosed breast cancer at MSKCC between May and September 2011. RESULTS: The inclusion criteria were met by 60 women eligible for analysis who had a median age of 40 years (range 20-45 years). The findings showed that 50 % of the women either desired children in the future or were unsure whether they wanted children, with 9 % reporting that they received information about fertility preservation options before their MSKCC visit. Women who had never been pregnant were more likely than those with prior pregnancies to consider having children in the future (p = 0.001) and to contemplate fertility preservation options both before (p = 0.001) and after (p = 0.0002) cancer treatment. CONCLUSION: Early referral allows patients to take advantage of fertility preservation options while preventing delay in the initiation of systemic therapy. Referral by the breast surgical oncologist at the time of the initial visit has the potential to increase fertility knowledge because it appears that many women have not yet received fertility information at this early treatment stage.

Axillary dissection can be avoided in the majority of clinically node-negative patients undergoing breast-conserving therapy.

BACKGROUND: The extent to which ACOSOG Z0011 findings are applicable to patients undergoing breast-conserving therapy (BCT) is uncertain. We prospectively assessed how often axillary dissection (ALND) was avoided in an unselected, consecutive patient cohort meeting Z0011 eligibility criteria and whether subgroups requiring ALND could be identified preoperatively. METHODS: Patients with cT1,2cN0 breast cancer undergoing BCT were managed without ALND for metastases in <3 sentinel nodes (SNs) and no gross extracapsular extension (ECE). Patients with and without indications for ALND were compared using Fisher's exact and Wilcoxon rank sum tests. RESULTS: From August 2010 to November 2012, 2,157 invasive cancer patients had BCT. A total of 380 had histologic nodal metastasis; 93 did not meet Z0011 criteria. Of 287 with ≥1 H&E-positive SN (209 macrometastases), 242 (84 %) had indications for SN only. ALND was indicated in 45 for ≥3 positive SNs (n = 29) or ECE (n = 16). The median number of SNs removed in the SN group was 3 versus 5 in the ALND group (p < 0.0001). Age, hormone receptor and HER2 status, and grade did not differ between groups; tumors were larger in the ALND group (p < 0.0001). Of ALND patients, 72 % had additional positive nodes (median = 1; range 1-19). No axillary recurrences have occurred (median follow-up, 13 months). CONCLUSIONS: ALND was avoided in 84 % of a consecutive series of patients having BCT, suggesting that most patients meeting ACOSOG Z0011 eligibility have a low axillary tumor burden. Age, ER, and HER2 status were not predictive of ALND, and the criteria used for ALND (≥3 SNs, ECE) reliably identified patients at high risk for residual axillary disease.

A 10-year trend analysis of sentinel lymph node frozen section and completion axillary dissection for breast cancer: are these procedures becoming obsolete?

BACKGROUND: Recent results from the ACOSOG Z0011 trial question the use of intraoperative frozen section (FS) during sentinel lymph node (SLN) biopsy and the role of axillary dissection (ALND) for SLN-positive breast cancer patients. Here we present a 10-year trend analysis of SLN-FS and ALND in our practice. METHODS: We reviewed our prospective SLN database over 10 years (1997-2006, 7509 SLN procedures) for time trends and variation between surgeons in the use of SLN-FS and ALND in patients with cN0 invasive breast cancer. RESULTS: Use of SLN-FS decreased from 100% to 62% (P < 0.0001) and varied widely by surgeon (66% to 95%). There were no statistically significant trends in the performance of ALND for patients with SLN metastases detected by FS (n = 1370, 99-99%) or routine hematoxylin and eosin (H&E) (n = 333; 69-77%), but only for those detected by serial section H&E with or without immunohistochemistry (n = 438; 73-48%; P = 0.0054) or immunohistochemistry only (n = 294; 48-28%; P < 0.0001). These trends coincided with an increase in the proportion of completion versus immediate ALND (30-40%; P = 0.0710). CONCLUSIONS: Over 10 years, we have observed a diminishing rate of SLN-FS and, for patients with low-volume SLN metastases, fewer ALND, trends that suggest a more nuanced approach to axillary management. If the Z0011 selection criteria had been applied to our cohort, 66% of SLN-FS (4159 of 6327) and 48% of ALND (939 of 1953) would have been avoided, sparing 13% of all patients the morbidity of ALND.