Background Obesity has been associated with an adverse prognosis and reduced efficacy of endocrine therapy in patients with hormone receptor-positive (HR+) breast cancer (BC). This study determines... Show moreBackground Obesity has been associated with an adverse prognosis and reduced efficacy of endocrine therapy in patients with hormone receptor-positive (HR+) breast cancer (BC). This study determines the prognostic and predictive effect of body mass index (BMI) on the disease-free survival (DFS) of postmenopausal HR+ BC patients.Methods Patients were identified from the DATA study (NCT00301457), a randomized controlled trial evaluating the efficacy of 6 vs 3 years of anastrozole after 2 to 3 years of adjuvant tamoxifen in postmenopausal women with HR+ BC. Patients were classified as normal weight (BMI: 18.5-24.9 kg/m2), overweight (25.0-29.9 kg/m2), or obese (>= 30.0 kg/m2). The primary endpoint was DFS, evaluated from randomization (prognostic analyses) or 3 years after randomization onwards (predictive analyses; aDFS) using multivariable Cox regression analyses. P-values were 2-sided.Results This study included 678 normal weight, 712 overweight, and 391 obese patients. After a median follow-up of 13.1 years, overweight and obesity were identified as negative prognostic factors for DFS (hazard ratio (HR) = 1.16; 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.97 to 1.38 and HR = 1.26; 95% CI = 1.03 to 1.54, respectively). The adverse prognostic effect of BMI was observed in women aged younger than 60 years, but not in women aged 60 years or older (P-interaction = .009). The effect of extended anastrozole on aDFS was similar in normal weight (HR = 1.00; 95% CI = 0.74 to 1.35), overweight (HR = 0.74; 95% CI = 0.56 to 0.98), and obese patients (HR = 0.97; 95% CI = 0.69 to 1.36) (P-interaction = .24).Conclusion In this study among 1781 HR+ BC patients, overweight and obesity were adverse prognostic factors for DFS. BMI did not impact the efficacy of extended anastrozole. Show less
Background The onset of the COVID-19 pandemic forced the Dutch national screening program to a halt and increased the burden on health care services, necessitating the introduction of specific... Show moreBackground The onset of the COVID-19 pandemic forced the Dutch national screening program to a halt and increased the burden on health care services, necessitating the introduction of specific breast cancer treatment recommendations from week 12 of 2020. We aimed to investigate the impact of COVID-19 on the diagnosis, stage and initial treatment of breast cancer. Methods Women included in the Netherlands Cancer Registry and diagnosed during four periods in weeks 2-17 of 2020 were compared with reference data from 2018/2019 (averaged). Weekly incidence was calculated by age group and tumor stage. The number of women receiving initial treatment within 3 months of diagnosis was calculated by period, initial treatment, age, and stage. Initial treatment, stratified by tumor behavior (ductal carcinoma in situ [DCIS] or invasive), was analyzed by logistic regression and adjusted for age, socioeconomic status, stage, subtype, and region. Factors influencing time to treatment were analyzed by Cox regression. Results Incidence declined across all age groups and tumor stages (except stage IV) from 2018/2019 to 2020, particularly for DCIS and stage I disease (p < 0.05). DCIS was less likely to be treated within 3 months (odds ratio [OR](wks2-8): 2.04, ORwks9-11: 2.18). Invasive tumors were less likely to be treated initially by mastectomy with immediate reconstruction (ORwks12-13: 0.52) or by breast conserving surgery (ORwks14-17: 0.75). Chemotherapy was less likely for tumors diagnosed in the beginning of the study period (ORwks9-11: 0.59, ORwks12-13: 0.66), but more likely for those diagnosed at the end (ORwks14-17: 1.31). Primary hormonal treatment was more common (ORwks2-8: 1.23, ORwks9-11: 1.92, ORwks12-13: 3.01). Only women diagnosed in weeks 2-8 of 2020 experienced treatment delays. Conclusion The incidence of breast cancer fell in early 2020, and treatment approaches adapted rapidly. Clarification is needed on how this has affected stage migration and outcomes. Show less
Introduction: Various options for axillary staging after neoadjuvant systemic therapy (NST) are available for breast cancer patients with a clinically positive axillary node (cN+). This survey... Show moreIntroduction: Various options for axillary staging after neoadjuvant systemic therapy (NST) are available for breast cancer patients with a clinically positive axillary node (cN+). This survey assessed current practices amongst breast cancer specialists.Materials and methods: A survey was performed amongst members of the European Society of Surgical Oncology and two UK-based Associations: the Association of Breast Surgery and the British Association of Surgical Oncology. The survey included 3 parts: 1. general information, 2, diagnostic work-up and 3. axillary staging after NST.Results: A total of 310 responses were collected: parts 1, 2 and 3 were fully completed by 282 (91%), 270 (87.1%) and 225 (72.6%) respondents respectively. After NST, 153/267 (57.3%) respondents currently perform ALND routinely and 114 (42.7%) respondents perform less invasive restaging of the axilla with possible omission of ALND. In the latter group, 85% does and 15% does not use nodal response seen on imaging to guide the axillary restaging procedure. Regarding respondents that do use imaging: 95% would perform a less invasive staging procedure in case of complete nodal response on imaging (63% sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB), excision of a previously marked positive node with SLNB (21%) and without SLNB (11%)). In case of no nodal response on imaging 77% would perform ALND.Conclusion: Current axillary staging and management practices in cN + patients after NST vary widely. To determine optimal axillary staging and management in terms of quality of life and oncologic safety, breast specialists are encouraged to include patients in clinical trials prospective registries. (C) 2019 Elsevier Ltd, BASO - The Association for Cancer Surgery, and the European Society of Surgical Oncology. All rights reserved. Show less
Background: Marking the axilla with radioactive iodine seed and sentinel lymph node (SLN) biopsy have been proposed for axillary staging after neoadjuvant systemic therapy in clinically node... Show moreBackground: Marking the axilla with radioactive iodine seed and sentinel lymph node (SLN) biopsy have been proposed for axillary staging after neoadjuvant systemic therapy in clinically node-positive breast cancer. This study evaluated the identification rate and detection of residual disease with combined excision of pretreatment-positive marked lymph nodes (MLNs) together with SLNs.Methods: This was a multicentre retrospective analysis of patients with clinically node-positive breast cancer undergoing neoadjuvant systemic therapy and the combination procedure (with or without axillary lymph node dissection). The identification rate and detection of axillary residual disease were calculated for the combination procedure, and for MLNs and SLNs separately.Results: At least one MLN and/or SLN(s) were identified by the combination procedure in 138 of 139 patients (identification rate 99.3 per cent). The identification rate was 92.8 per cent for MLNs alone and 87.8 per cent for SLNs alone. In 88 of 139 patients (63.3 per cent) residual axillary disease was detected by the combination procedure. Residual disease was shown only in the MLN in 20 of 88 patients (23 per cent) and only in the SLN in ten of 88 (11 per cent), whereas both the MLN and SLN contained residual disease in the remainder (58 of 88, 66 per cent).Conclusion: Excision of the pretreatment-positive MLN together with SLNs after neoadjuvant systemic therapy in patients with clinically node-positive disease resulted in a higher identification rate and improved detection of residual axillary disease. Show less
