Explore the vast range of titles available.

Triple-negative breast cancers are defined by a lack of expression of oestrogen, progesterone, and ERBB2 receptors. This subgroup accounts for 15% of all types of breast cancer and for a higher percentage of breast cancer arising in African and African-American women who are premenopausal. Because of the absence of specific treatment guidelines for this subgroup, triple-negative breast cancers are managed with standard treatment; however, such treatment leaves them associated with a high rate of local and systemic relapse. Histologically, such cancers are poorly differentiated, and most fall into the basal subgroup of breast cancers, characterised by staining for basal markers (ie, cytokeratin 5/6). Analyses of microarray gene-expression profiling data show that they form a homogeneous group (or so-called cluster) in transcriptional terms and, increasingly, research studies are identifying basal cancers on the basis of exhibiting this distinctive transcriptional profile. Histologically and transcriptionally, triple-negative breast cancers have many similarities to BRCA1-associated breast cancers, which suggests that dysfunction in BRCA1 or related pathways occurs in this subset of sporadic cancers. In this review, we discuss the molecular features of triple-negative breast cancers and consider how the use of existing cytotoxic agents can be optimised for this patient group. We discuss the implications of a possible underlying BRCA1-pathway dysfunction in this subgroup in terms of treatment and we also investigate the predominant proliferative signals and the on-going research addressing the suitability of these signals as therapeutic targets.

Radiotherapy before mastectomy and autologous free-flap breast reconstruction can avoid adverse radiation effects on healthy donor tissues and delays to adjuvant radiotherapy. However, evidence for this treatment sequence is sparse. We aimed to explore the feasibility of preoperative radiotherapy followed by skin-sparing mastectomy and deep inferior epigastric perforator (DIEP) flap reconstruction in patients with breast cancer requiring mastectomy. We conducted a prospective, non-randomised, feasibility study at two National Health Service trusts in the UK. Eligible patients were women aged older than 18 years with a laboratory diagnosis of primary breast cancer requiring mastectomy and post-mastectomy radiotherapy, who were suitable for DIEP flap reconstruction. Preoperative radiotherapy started 3–4 weeks after neoadjuvant chemotherapy and was delivered to the breast, plus regional nodes as required, at 40 Gy in 15 fractions (over 3 weeks) or 42·72 Gy in 16 fractions (over 3·2 weeks). Adverse skin radiation toxicity was assessed preoperatively using the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group toxicity grading system. Skin-sparing mastectomy and DIEP flap reconstruction were planned for 2–6 weeks after completion of preoperative radiotherapy. The primary endpoint was the proportion of open breast wounds greater than 1 cm width requiring a dressing at 4 weeks after surgery, assessed in all participants. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02771938, and is closed to recruitment. Between Jan 25, 2016, and Dec 11, 2017, 33 patients were enrolled. At 4 weeks after surgery, four (12·1%, 95% CI 3·4–28·2) of 33 patients had an open breast wound greater than 1 cm. One (3%) patient had confluent moist desquamation (grade 3). There were no serious treatment-related adverse events and no treatment-related deaths. Preoperative radiotherapy followed by skin-sparing mastectomy and immediate DIEP flap reconstruction is feasible and technically safe, with rates of breast open wounds similar to those reported with post-mastectomy radiotherapy. A randomised trial comparing preoperative radiotherapy with post-mastectomy radiotherapy is required to precisely determine and compare surgical, oncological, and breast reconstruction outcomes, including quality of life. Cancer Research UK, National Institute for Health Research.

PurposeChanges occur in the expression of oestrogen-regulated and proliferation-associated genes in oestrogen receptor (ER)-positive breast tumours during the menstrual cycle. We investigated if Oncotype® DX recurrence score (RS), Prosigna® (ROR) and EndoPredict® (EP/EPclin) prognostic tests, which include some of these genes, vary according to the time in the menstrual cycle when they are measured.MethodsPairs of test scores were derived from 30 ER-positive/human epidermal growth factor receptor-2-negative tumours sampled at two different points of the menstrual cycle. Menstrual cycle windows were prospectively defined as either W1 (days 1–6 and 27–35; low oestrogen and low progesterone) or W2 (days 7–26; high oestrogen and high or low progesterone).ResultsThe invasion module score of RS was lower (− 10.9%; p = 0.098), whereas the ER (+ 16.6%; p = 0.046) and proliferation (+ 7.3%; p = 0.13) module scores were higher in W2. PGR expression was significantly increased in W2 (+ 81.4%; p = 0.0029). Despite this, mean scores were not significantly different between W1 and W2 for any of the tests and the two measurements showed high correlation (r = 0.72–0.93). However, variability between the two measurements led to tumours being assigned to different risk categories in the following proportion of cases: RS 22.7%, ROR 27.3%, EP 13.6% and EPclin 13.6%.ConclusionThere are significant changes during the menstrual cycle in the expression of some of the genes and gene module scores comprising the RS, ROR and EP/EPclin scores. These did not affect any of the prognostic scores in a systematic fashion, but there was substantial variability in paired measurements.

Background Two-stage liver resection (2-SLR) is used clinically in conjunction with portal vein embolization for bilobar disease to increase the number of patients suitable for liver resection. The long-term outcomes after 2-SLR for multiple bilobar colorectal liver metastases (CLM) was examined. Methods Patients who sought care between November 2003 and April 2006 with multiple CLM considered suitable for 2-SLR were prospectively followed. Clinicopathological data were collected. Surgical outcomes were defined as complete clearance of tumor (R0/R1/R2), postoperative morbidity (within 3 months), 30 day mortality, disease-free survival (DFS), and overall survival (OS). Results A total of 131 patients with CLM underwent liver resection during the study period, 38 of whom were planned for a 2-SLR for multiple bilobar disease. Only 33 (87%) completed the 2-SLR with a curative intent. Five patients did not undergo stage II resection because of disease progression . The postoperative morbidity was 11 and 33% after stage I and stage II liver resections, respectively. Five patients (13%) encountered postoperative complications specific to liver surgery. The median interval from stage II resection to disease recurrence in the R0 group was 18 months versus 3 months in the R1/R2 group ( P  < 0.001). R0 resection with curative intent versus R1/R2 noncurative resection has a significantly longer period of DFS ( P  < 0.001) and OS ( P  = 0.04). Conclusions The 2-SLR combined with portal vein embolization is an effective and safe method for resecting previously unresectable multiple bilobar CLM. However, a positive resection margin leads to poor DFS and OS.

We aimed to identify a five-fraction schedule of adjuvant radiotherapy (radiation therapy) delivered in 1 week that is non-inferior in terms of local cancer control and is as safe as an international standard 15-fraction regimen after primary surgery for early breast cancer. Here, we present 5-year results of the FAST-Forward trial. FAST-Forward is a multicentre, phase 3, randomised, non-inferiority trial done at 97 hospitals (47 radiotherapy centres and 50 referring hospitals) in the UK. Patients aged at least 18 years with invasive carcinoma of the breast (pT1–3, pN0–1, M0) after breast conservation surgery or mastectomy were eligible. We randomly allocated patients to either 40 Gy in 15 fractions (over 3 weeks), 27 Gy in five fractions (over 1 week), or 26 Gy in five fractions (over 1 week) to the whole breast or chest wall. Allocation was not masked because of the nature of the intervention. The primary endpoint was ipsilateral breast tumour relapse; assuming a 2% 5-year incidence for 40 Gy, non-inferiority was predefined as ≤1·6% excess for five-fraction schedules (critical hazard ratio [HR] of 1·81). Normal tissue effects were assessed by clinicians, patients, and from photographs. This trial is registered at isrctn.com, ISRCTN19906132. Between Nov 24, 2011, and June 19, 2014, we recruited and obtained consent from 4096 patients from 97 UK centres, of whom 1361 were assigned to the 40 Gy schedule, 1367 to the 27 Gy schedule, and 1368 to the 26 Gy schedule. At a median follow-up of 71·5 months (IQR 71·3 to 71·7), the primary endpoint event occurred in 79 patients (31 in the 40 Gy group, 27 in the 27 Gy group, and 21 in the 26 Gy group); HRs versus 40 Gy in 15 fractions were 0·86 (95% CI 0·51 to 1·44) for 27 Gy in five fractions and 0·67 (0·38 to 1·16) for 26 Gy in five fractions. 5-year incidence of ipsilateral breast tumour relapse after 40 Gy was 2·1% (1·4 to 3·1); estimated absolute differences versus 40 Gy in 15 fractions were −0·3% (−1·0 to 0·9) for 27 Gy in five fractions (probability of incorrectly accepting an inferior five-fraction schedule: p=0·0022 vs 40 Gy in 15 fractions) and −0·7% (−1·3 to 0·3) for 26 Gy in five fractions (p=0·00019 vs 40 Gy in 15 fractions). At 5 years, any moderate or marked clinician-assessed normal tissue effects in the breast or chest wall was reported for 98 of 986 (9·9%) 40 Gy patients, 155 (15·4%) of 1005 27 Gy patients, and 121 of 1020 (11·9%) 26 Gy patients. Across all clinician assessments from 1–5 years, odds ratios versus 40 Gy in 15 fractions were 1·55 (95% CI 1·32 to 1·83, p<0·0001) for 27 Gy in five fractions and 1·12 (0·94 to 1·34, p=0·20) for 26 Gy in five fractions. Patient and photographic assessments showed higher normal tissue effect risk for 27 Gy versus 40 Gy but not for 26 Gy versus 40 Gy. 26 Gy in five fractions over 1 week is non-inferior to the standard of 40 Gy in 15 fractions over 3 weeks for local tumour control, and is as safe in terms of normal tissue effects up to 5 years for patients prescribed adjuvant local radiotherapy after primary surgery for early-stage breast cancer. National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment Programme.

The role of postmastectomy chest-wall irradiation in patients with breast cancer classified as pN1 (with involvement of one to three axillary nodes) or pN0 (pathologically node negative) with additional risk factors is uncertain. In this international, phase 3, randomized trial, we evaluated the omission of chest-wall irradiation in women with \"intermediate-risk\" breast cancer - defined as cancer that was stage pT1N1, pT2N1, or pT3N0 or stage pT2N0 with a histologic grade of 3, lymphovascular invasion, or both (tumor size: T1, ≤2 cm; T2, >2 cm to 5 cm; or T3, >5 cm) - that was treated with mastectomy, an axillary procedure, and systemic therapy. Patients were assigned to undergo chest-wall irradiation (40 to 50 Gy; the irradiation group) or not to undergo chest-wall irradiation (the no-irradiation group). The primary end point was overall survival, with 10 years of follow-up. Chest-wall recurrence, regional recurrence, disease-free survival, distant metastasis-free survival, causes of death, and radiation-related adverse events were also assessed. The intention-to-treat population included 808 patients in the irradiation group and 799 in the no-irradiation group. The median follow up was 9.6 years. Overall survival was 81.4% with chest-wall irradiation and 81.9% with no chest-wall irradiation according to 10-year Kaplan-Meier estimates (hazard ratio for death, 1.04; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.82 to 1.30; P = 0.80). A total of 29 patients had a chest-wall recurrence - 9 (1.1%) in the irradiation group and 20 (2.5%) in the no-irradiation group (between-group difference, <2 percentage points; hazard ratio, 0.45; 95% CI, 0.20 to 0.99). Disease-free survival was 76.2% in the irradiation group and 75.5% in the no-irradiation group (hazard ratio for recurrence or death, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.79 to 1.18), and distant metastasis-free survival was 78.2% and 79.2%, respectively (hazard ratio for distant metastasis or death, 1.06; 95% CI, 0.86 to 1.31). In this trial, chest-wall irradiation did not result in higher overall survival than no chest-wall irradiation among patients with intermediate-risk, early breast cancer treated with mastectomy and contemporary adjuvant systemic therapy. (Funded by the Medical Research Council and others; SUPREMO ISRCTN Clinical Study Registry number, 61145589.).

Afatinib is an oral, ErbB family blocker, which covalently binds and irreversibly blocks all kinase-competent ErbB family members. This phase II, open-label, single-arm study explored afatinib activity in human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-positive breast cancer patients progressing after trastuzumab treatment. Patients had stage IIIB/IV HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer, with progression following trastuzumab or trastuzumab intolerance and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status of 0–2. Patients received 50 mg afatinib once-daily until disease progression. Primary endpoint was objective response rate (Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors 1.0), with tumor assessments every 8 weeks. Forty-one patients were treated. Patients had received a median of three prior chemotherapy lines (range, 0–15) and 68.3% had received trastuzumab for >1 year. Four patients (10% of 41 treated; 11% of evaluable patients) had partial response. Fifteen patients (37% of 41) had stable disease as best response and 19 (46% of 41) achieved clinical benefit. Median progression-free survival was 15.1 weeks (95% confidence interval [CI]: 8.1–16.7); median overall survival was 61.0 weeks (95% CI: 56.7–not evaluable). Most frequent common terminology criteria for adverse events grade 3 treatment-related adverse events were diarrhea (24.4%) and rash (9.8%). Afatinib monotherapy was associated with promising clinical activity in extensively pretreated HER2-positive breast cancer patients who had progressed following trastuzumab treatment.

We developed, applied, and prospectively evaluated a novel deep-inspiration breath-hold (DIBH) screening and delivery technique to optimize cardiac sparing in left-breast radiotherapy (RT) at our clinic. The impact of set-up and dose variables upon organs at risk (OAR) dose in DIBH RT was investigated. All patients with left-breast cancer referred between 2011 and 2014 - of all disease stages, set-up variations, and dose prescriptions - were included. Radiographers used simple screening criteria at CT simulation, to systematically assess patients for obvious DIBH benefit and capability. Selected patients received forward-planned intensity-modulated RT (IMRT) based on a DIBH CT scan. A 3D-surface monitoring system with visual feedback assured reproducible DIBH positioning during gated radiation delivery. Patient, target set-up, and OAR dose information were collected at treatment. Of 272 patients who were screened, 4 withdrew, 56 showed no obvious advantage, and 56 showed benefit but had suitability issues; 156 patients were selected and successfully completed DIBH treatment. The technique was compatible with complex set-up and optimal target coverage was maintained. Comparison of free-breathing (FB) and DIBH treatment plans in the first five patients enrolled confirmed DIBH reduced heart radiation by ~80% ( = 0.032). Low OAR doses were achieved overall: the mean (95% confidence interval [CI]) heart dose was 1.17 (1.12-1.22) Gy, and the mean ipsilateral lung dose was 5.26 (5.01-5.52) Gy. Patients who underwent a standard radiation schedule (40 Gy/15#) after breast-conserving surgery had the lowest OAR doses: post-mastectomy treatment, simultaneous supraclavicular (SCV) node coverage, and alternative dose schedule (50 Gy/25#) were interrelated variables associated with increased OAR risk and compromised ipsilateral lung dose constraints. The DIBH technique was successfully implemented and resulted in optimally low heart radiation. All patients who demonstrate sufficient DIBH technique at planning CT are now offered DIBH RT at our clinic. Patients with more advanced disease, particularly those with additional pulmonary risk factors, warrant additional focus to improve lung sparing.

Adjuvant treatment with anthracycline–taxane combination therapy in high-risk early-stage breast cancer has raised the important question of how to manage patients who relapse. In the metastatic setting, one option is rechallenging with the same agent, or class of agent, that has been used in the adjuvant setting. This Review comprehensively examines the evidence from clinical trials for rechallenging with both anthracyclines and taxanes, and highlights issues to be examined in the context of future clinical trials. Adjuvant use of anthracycline–taxane combination therapy is an accepted strategy in the management of high-risk early-stage breast cancer. However, the introduction of this regimen raises the question of how best to manage those patients who relapse following adjuvant therapy, and whether there is a role for rechallenging in the metastatic setting with the same agent, or class of agent, that has been utilized in the adjuvant setting. This Review examines the evidence for rechallenging with both anthracyclines and taxanes, and highlights the issues that need to be examined in the context of future clinical trials. Key Points Rechallenge is not a new concept in oncology, and has been used to good effect in other tumors A systematic review in breast cancer has revealed a body of literature relating to rechallenging with anthracyclines and taxanes Current evidence to support rechallenge in the metastatic setting is limited Some taxane studies that are actively recruiting allow inclusion of patients with previous taxane exposure; this could potentially have a deleterious effect on any efficacy analysis Prospective, randomized trials are required to address the clinical utility of rechallenge, and to determine whether it is an appropriate strategy in the metastatic setting

PurposeThere is growing interest in the application of circulating tumour DNA (ctDNA) as a sensitive tool for monitoring tumour evolution and guiding targeted therapy in patients with cancer. However, robust comparisons of different platform technologies are still required. Here we compared the InVisionSeq™ ctDNA Assay with the Oncomine™ Breast cfDNA Assay to assess their concordance and feasibility for the detection of mutations in plasma at low (< 0.5%) variant allele fraction (VAF).MethodsNinety-six plasma samples from 50 patients with estrogen receptor (ER)-positive metastatic breast cancer (mBC) were profiled using the InVision Assay. Results were compared to the Oncomine assay in 30 samples from 26 patients, where there was sufficient material and variants were covered by both assays. Longitudinal samples were analysed for 8 patients with endocrine resistance.ResultsWe detected alterations in 59/96 samples from 34/50 patients analysed with the InVision assay, most frequently affecting ESR1, PIK3CA and TP53. Complete or partial concordance was found in 28/30 samples analysed by both assays, and VAF values were highly correlated. Excellent concordance was found for most genes, and most discordant calls occurred at VAF < 1%. In longitudinal samples from progressing patients with endocrine resistance, we detected consistent alterations in sequential samples, most commonly in ESR1 and PIK3CA.ConclusionThis study shows that both ultra-deep next-generation sequencing (NGS) technologies can detect genomic alternations even at low VAFs in plasma samples of mBC patients. The strong agreement of the technologies indicates sufficient reproducibility for clinical use as prognosic and predictive biomarker.