Explore the vast range of titles available.

Retrospective clinical studies have used immune-based biomarkers, alone or in combination, to predict survival outcomes for women with breast cancer (BC); however, the limitations inherent to immunohistochemical analyses prevent comprehensive descriptions of leukocytic infiltrates, as well as evaluation of the functional state of leukocytes in BC stroma. To more fully evaluate this complexity, and to gain insight into immune responses after chemotherapy (CTX), we prospectively evaluated tumor and nonadjacent normal breast tissue from women with BC, who either had or had not received neoadjuvant CTX before surgery. Tissues were evaluated by polychromatic flow cytometry in combination with confocal immunofluorescence and immunohistochemical analysis of tissue sections. These studies revealed that activated T lymphocytes predominate in tumor tissue, whereas myeloid lineage cells are more prominant in \"normal\" breast tissue. Notably, residual tumors from an unselected group of BC patients treated with neoadjuvant CTX contained increased percentages of infiltrating myeloid cells, accompanied by an increased CD8/CD4 T-cell ratio and higher numbers of granzyme B-expressing cells, compared with tumors removed from patients treated primarily by surgery alone. These data provide an initial evaluation of differences in the immune microenvironment of BC compared with nonadjacent normal tissue and reveal the degree to which CTX may alter the complexity and presence of selective subsets of immune cells in tumors previously treated in the neoadjuvant setting.

Scientific and medical conferences should not be held in states that ban abortion, as such bans put the lives of women at risk.

Laura J Esserman argues that patients are unnecessarily alarmed by calling low risk tumours cancer, but Murali Varma argues that alternative names can also be confusing and better education is the answer

There are few medical issues that have generated as much controversy as screening for breast cancer. In science, controversy often stimulates innovation; however, the intensely divisive debate over mammographic screening has had the opposite effect and has stifled progress. The same two questions—whether it is better to screen annually or bi-annually, and whether women are best served by beginning screening at 40 or some later age—have been debated for 20 years, based on data generated three to four decades ago. The controversy has continued largely because our current approach to screening assumes all women have the same risk for the same type of breast cancer. In fact, we now know that cancers vary tremendously in terms of timing of onset, rate of growth, and probability of metastasis. In an era of personalized medicine, we have the opportunity to investigate tailored screening based on a woman’s specific risk for a specific tumor type, generating new data that can inform best practices rather than to continue the rancorous debate. It is time to move from debate to wisdom by asking new questions and generating new knowledge. The WISDOM Study (Women Informed to Screen Depending On Measures of risk) is a pragmatic, adaptive, randomized clinical trial comparing a comprehensive risk-based, or personalized approach to traditional annual breast cancer screening. The multicenter trial will enroll 100,000 women, powered for a primary endpoint of non-inferiority with respect to the number of late stage cancers detected. The trial will determine whether screening based on personalized risk is as safe, less morbid, preferred by women, will facilitate prevention for those most likely to benefit, and adapt as we learn who is at risk for what kind of cancer. Funded by the Patient Centered Outcomes Research Institute, WISDOM is the product of a multi-year stakeholder engagement process that has brought together consumers, advocates, primary care physicians, specialists, policy makers, technology companies and payers to help break the deadlock in this debate and advance towards a new, dynamic approach to breast cancer screening.

Few patients with triple negative breast cancer (TNBC) benefit from immune checkpoint inhibitors with complete and durable remissions being quite rare. Oncogenes can regulate tumor immune infiltration, however whether oncogenes dictate diminished response to immunotherapy and whether these effects are reversible remains poorly understood. Here, we report that TNBCs with elevated MYC expression are resistant to immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy. Using mouse models and patient data, we show that MYC signaling is associated with low tumor cell PD-L1, low overall immune cell infiltration, and low tumor cell MHC-I expression. Restoring interferon signaling in the tumor increases MHC-I expression. By combining a TLR9 agonist and an agonistic antibody against OX40 with anti-PD-L1, mice experience tumor regression and are protected from new TNBC tumor outgrowth. Our findings demonstrate that MYC-dependent immune evasion is reversible and druggable, and when strategically targeted, may improve outcomes for patients treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors. The oncoprotein c-Myc is often overexpressed in triple negative breast cancer and has a role in tumor progression and resistance to therapy. Here the authors show that elevated MYC expression is correlated with low immune infiltration, diminished MHC-I pathway expression and that CpG/aOX40 treatment could overcome resistance to PD-L1 blockade in MYC-high breast tumors.

Key Points Tumours within any organ site can have a spectrum of biological phenotypes, ranging from indolent to highly aggressive Screening for cancer is most likely to be beneficial when the target tumour type has a relatively uniform biology and a slower rate of progression Not all precursor lesions are on an obligate pathway towards invasive-cancer development Strategies for early detection of cancer must balance the benefits of mortality reduction (and reduction in invasive-disease incidence with screening for precancers) with the heterogeneity of the target disease and the consequent risk of overdiagnosis Screening can be viewed as a 'cascade' involving multiple steps, such as selection of individuals to be screened, administration of the screening test, workup of positive findings, and, ultimately, treatment Efforts are underway to individualize decision-making surrounding risk stratification, the modality and frequency of screening, and diagnostic and therapeutic interventions tailored to the biology of the detected tumour Considerable hope, as well as a substantial degree of hype, has surrounded cancer-screening programmes, but current practices are suboptimal and are the subject of continued improvement efforts. In this Review, the authors discuss the experiences to date in screening for breast, cervical, colorectal, lung and prostate cancers, outline the lessons we have learned, and describe how this knowledge is informing improvements in cancer screening, with the hope they will eventually live up to the hype. Several important lessons have been learnt from our experiences in screening for various cancers. Screening programmes for cervical and colorectal cancers have had the greatest success, probably because these cancers are relatively homogenous, slow-growing, and have identifiable precursors that can be detected and removed; however, identifying the true obligate precursors of invasive disease remains a challenge. With regard to screening for breast cancer and for prostate cancer, which focus on early detection of invasive cancer, preferential detection of slower-growing, localized cancers has occurred, which has led to concerns about overdiagnosis and overtreatment; programmes for early detection of invasive lung cancers are emerging, and have faced similar challenges. A crucial consideration in screening for breast, prostate, and lung cancers is their remarkable phenotypic heterogeneity, ranging from indolent to highly aggressive. Efforts have been made to address the limitations of cancer-screening programmes, providing an opportunity for cross-disciplinary learning and further advancement of the science. Current innovations are aimed at identifying the individuals who are most likely to benefit from screening, increasing the yield of consequential cancers on screening and biopsy, and using molecular tests to improve our understanding of disease biology and to tailor treatment. We discuss each of these concepts and outline a dynamic framework for continuous improvements in the field of cancer screening.

Several principles have been proposed to improve use of artificial intelligence (AI) in healthcare, but the need for AI to improve longstanding healthcare challenges has not been sufficiently emphasized. We propose that AI should be designed to alleviate health disparities, report clinically meaningful outcomes, reduce overdiagnosis and overtreatment, have high healthcare value, consider biographical drivers of health, be easily tailored to the local population, promote a learning healthcare system, and facilitate shared decision-making. These principles are illustrated by examples from breast cancer research and we provide questions that can be used by AI developers when applying each principle to their work. Badal et al. outline principles that should be adopted during the development of artificial intelligence-based healthcare tools. These principles expand upon principles proposed by several organizations by emphasizing that AI be developed to improve longstanding health care challenges.

Background Invasive lobular carcinoma (ILC) of the breast is known for high risk of late recurrence, yet some patients still recur within 5 years of diagnosis. Determining factors associated with early/late recurrence could help tailor treatment and surveillance strategies. Methods Using an institutional database, we evaluated patients with ILC and ≥ 5 years of follow-up or recurrence within 5 years. We used multivariate logistic regression and the Kaplan-Meier method to evaluate which clinicopathologic features and treatment strategies were associated with recurrence < 5 years since diagnosis versus recurrence ≥ 5 years since diagnosis. Additionally, we explored the association between Clinical Treatment Score 5 (CTS5) with early versus late recurrence. Results Among 513 cases of stage I–III ILC, there were 75 early and 54 late recurrences during a median follow-up period of 9.4 years. Early recurrence was associated with larger tumors (mean 4.2 cm vs. 2.9 cm, p  < 0.0001), higher incidence of > 3 positive nodes (32.4% vs. 9.11%, p > 0.0001), and more aggressive tumor biology (low/negative progesterone receptor expression, higher grade, and higher Ki67). Late recurrence was associated with younger age (mean 55.6 vs. 59.2 years, p  = 0.037) and elevated body mass index (BMI > 25 kg/m 2 in 60.1.0% vs. 45.4%, p  = 0.021). Omission of adjuvant endocrine therapy or radiotherapy after lumpectomy conferred increased risk of early rather than late recurrence. Conclusion Factors related to tumor aggressiveness and treatment were associated with early recurrence, whereas patient related factors were related to late recurrence. These data may help guide treatment strategies and surveillance approaches for patients with ILC.

Background Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) pathways have been shown in multiple surgical disciplines to improve outcomes, including reduced opioid consumption, length of stay, and post-operative nausea and vomiting (PONV). However, very few studies describe the application of ERAS to breast surgery and even fewer describe ERAS for outpatient surgery. We describe the implementation and efficacy of an Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) pathway for total skin-sparing mastectomy with immediate reconstruction in an outpatient setting. Methods We implemented an evidence-based, multimodal ERAS pathway for all patients undergoing total skin-sparing mastectomy surgery with immediate reconstruction at a single 23-h stay surgery center. Highlights of the ERAS pathway included: preoperative acetaminophen, gabapentin, and scopolamine; regional anesthesia for the breast (Pectoral blocks type 1 and 2 or paravertebral block); and intraoperative dexamethasone and ondansetron. This retrospective study included all American Society of Anesthesiology (ASA) Class 1–3 patients undergoing total skin-sparing mastectomy surgery with immediate reconstruction between July 2013 and April 2016. We compared 96 patients who were in the ERAS pathway (ERAS group) to a retrospective cohort of 276 patients (Pre group). The primary outcome was total perioperative opioid consumption. Secondary outcomes were highest postoperative pain scores, incidence of PONV, and length of stay. Results Patients in the ERAS group had significantly lower total perioperative opioid consumption compared to the Pre group (mean (SD): 111.4 mg (46.0) vs. 163.8 mg (73.2) oral morphine equivalents, p  < 0.001). Patients in the ERAS group also had a lower incidence of PONV (28% vs. 50%, p  < 0.001). Patients in the ERAS group reported less pain in the recovery room, with a two-point decrease in highest pain score (median [interquartile range (IQR)]: 4 [2,6] in ERAS group vs. 6 [4,7] in Pre group, p  < 0.001). There was no clinically significant difference in length of stay (median [IQR]: 1144 min [992, 1259] in ERAS group vs. 1188 [1058, 1344] in Pre group, p  = 0.006). Conclusion Implementation of an ERAS pathway for total skin-sparing mastectomy with reconstruction that incorporates regional anesthesia is feasible in a 23-h-stay hospital. Patients in the ERAS pathway had improved post-operative analgesia and reduced post-operative nausea and vomiting.

The TARGIT-A trial compared risk-adapted radiotherapy using single-dose targeted intraoperative radiotherapy (TARGIT) versus fractionated external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) for breast cancer. We report 5-year results for local recurrence and the first analysis of overall survival. TARGIT-A was a randomised, non-inferiority trial. Women aged 45 years and older with invasive ductal carcinoma were enrolled and randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive TARGIT or whole-breast EBRT, with blocks stratified by centre and by timing of delivery of targeted intraoperative radiotherapy: randomisation occurred either before lumpectomy (prepathology stratum, TARGIT concurrent with lumpectomy) or after lumpectomy (postpathology stratum, TARGIT given subsequently by reopening the wound). Patients in the TARGIT group received supplemental EBRT (excluding a boost) if unforeseen adverse features were detected on final pathology, thus radiotherapy was risk-adapted. The primary outcome was absolute difference in local recurrence in the conserved breast, with a prespecified non-inferiority margin of 2·5% at 5 years; prespecified analyses included outcomes as per timing of randomisation in relation to lumpectomy. Secondary outcomes included complications and mortality. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00983684. Patients were enrolled at 33 centres in 11 countries, between March 24, 2000, and June 25, 2012. 1721 patients were randomised to TARGIT and 1730 to EBRT. Supplemental EBRT after TARGIT was necessary in 15·2% [239 of 1571] of patients who received TARGIT (21·6% prepathology, 3·6% postpathology). 3451 patients had a median follow-up of 2 years and 5 months (IQR 12–52 months), 2020 of 4 years, and 1222 of 5 years. The 5-year risk for local recurrence in the conserved breast was 3·3% (95% CI 2·1–5·1) for TARGIT versus 1·3% (0·7–2·5) for EBRT (p=0·042). TARGIT concurrently with lumpectomy (prepathology, n=2298) had much the same results as EBRT: 2·1% (1·1–4·2) versus 1·1% (0·5–2·5; p=0·31). With delayed TARGIT (postpathology, n=1153) the between-group difference was larger than 2·5% (TARGIT 5·4% [3·0–9·7] vs EBRT 1·7% [0·6–4·9]; p=0·069). Overall, breast cancer mortality was much the same between groups (2·6% [1·5–4·3] for TARGIT vs 1·9% [1·1–3·2] for EBRT; p=0·56) but there were significantly fewer non-breast-cancer deaths with TARGIT (1·4% [0·8–2·5] vs 3·5% [2·3–5·2]; p=0·0086), attributable to fewer deaths from cardiovascular causes and other cancers. Overall mortality was 3·9% (2·7–5·8) for TARGIT versus 5·3% (3·9–7·3) for EBRT (p=0·099). Wound-related complications were much the same between groups but grade 3 or 4 skin complications were significantly reduced with TARGIT (four of 1720 vs 13 of 1731, p=0·029). TARGIT concurrent with lumpectomy within a risk-adapted approach should be considered as an option for eligible patients with breast cancer carefully selected as per the TARGIT-A trial protocol, as an alternative to postoperative EBRT. University College London Hospitals (UCLH)/UCL Comprehensive Biomedical Research Centre, UCLH Charities, National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme, Ninewells Cancer Campaign, National Health and Medical Research Council, and German Federal Ministry of Education and Research.