Explore the vast range of titles available.

The combined efficacy analysis of the TEXT and SOFT trials showed a significant disease-free survival benefit with exemestane plus ovarian function suppression (OFS) compared with tamoxifen plus OFS. We present patient-reported outcomes from these trials. Between Nov 7, 2003, and April 7, 2011, 4717 premenopausal women with hormone-receptor positive breast cancer were enrolled in TEXT or SOFT to receive unmasked adjuvant treatment with 5 years of exemestane plus OFS or tamoxifen plus OFS. Gonadotropin-releasing hormone analogue triptorelin, bilateral oophorectomy, or bilateral ovarian irradiation were used to achieve OFS. Chemotherapy use was optional. Randomisation with permuted blocks was done with the International Breast Cancer Study Group's internet-based system and was stratified by chemotherapy use and status of lymph nodes. Patients completed a quality of life (QoL) form comprising several global and symptom indicators at baseline, every 6 months for 24 months, and then every year during years 3 to 6. Differences in the change of QoL from baseline between the two treatments were tested at 6 months, 24 months, and 60 months with mixed-models for repeated measures for each trial with and without chemotherapy and overall. The analysis was by intention to treat. At the time of analysis, the median follow-up was 5·7 years (IQR 3·7–6·9); treatment and follow-up of patients continue. The trials are registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, as NCT00066703 (TEXT) and NCT00066690 (SOFT). Patients on tamoxifen plus OFS were more affected by hot flushes and sweats over 5 years than were those on exemestane plus OFS, although these symptoms improved. Patients on exemestane plus OFS reported more vaginal dryness, greater loss of sexual interest, and difficulties becoming aroused than did patients on tamoxifen plus OFS; these differences persisted over time. An increase in bone or joint pain was more pronounced, particularly in the short term, in patients on exemestane plus OFS than patients on tamoxifen plus OFS. Changes in global QoL indicators from baseline were small and similar between treatments over the 5 years. Overall, from a QoL perspective, there is no strong indication to favour either exemestane plus OFS or tamoxifen plus OFS. The distinct effects of the two treatments on the burden of endocrine symptoms need to be addressed with patients individually. Pfizer, International Breast Cancer Study Group, and US National Cancer Institute.

Despite breast cancer being uncommon in young women, it is still the most frequent cancer diagnosed in women aged 15–39 years, and the leading cause of death in this age group in high-income countries, after accidents and self-injury. The present review summarizes the most recent guidelines and offers an expert perspective on the many challenges associated with treatment of young women with breast cancer. We will especially focus on early breast cancer, exploring the specificities of the diagnostic process, imaging techniques, locoregional and systemic treatments, and the added value of dedicated multidisciplinary teams. Specific differences in adjuvant treatment between premenopausal and postmenopausal women, especially regarding endocrine therapy, will be addressed in detail. Research questions and current gaps in important fields, such as the paucity of age-specific data regarding antihuman epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (anti-HER2) therapy and gene panels such as OncotypeDX or MAMMAPRINT will be highlighted. A consistent part of this review is dedicated to the issues defining ‘young women’, such as fertility preservation, managing long-term side effects of oncological treatments and genetic counselling, by detailing current strategies and future perspectives.

Background Breast Cancer (BC) specialists need to acquire comprehensive knowledge, covering their own specialty and principles of related disciplines. Blended learning, the integration of online and face-to-face learning, is becoming more and more important in academic education and has added value during pandemics which limit face-to-face learning and residential training. In this context, the ESO-ULM Certificate of Competence in Breast Cancer (CCB) provides postgraduate multidisciplinary education and delivers an academic postgraduate title. The aim of this work is to investigate the degree of satisfaction of 42 participants to the first two editions of the programme and to assess if attending the programme entailed any professional gain. Methods An ad-hoc questionnaire was developed exploring 4 areas: participants’ characteristics, administrative aspects, CCB Program syllabus and design, professional impact. Results The program was attractive for specialists of different disciplines from all over the world: > 90% of responders appreciated the curriculum set up and the quality of the teaching. Despite 64% of responders changed their clinical practice, only 33% could implement institutional changes. One third of the participants activated a collaboration with other colleagues and 64% used the CCB as a trigger to take part in other educational activities. Only 12% of the participants had the opportunity, after CCB, to visit other BC Units or to be involved in international research projects. More than half of the attendees profited from attending CCB in terms of promotions (16.7%), change of working institution (9.5%) or development of a more structured educational program at their home institutions (28.6%). Conclusions Results provide interesting and stimulating considerations on the expectations and needs of training physicians and on what modern educational tools and formats can achieve. This paper can provide useful information to navigate through what the post-graduate training market is currently offering to develop a specific curriculum in modern multidisciplinary BC care but might not be applicable to other fields of multidisciplinary oncology.

BRCA1/2 genetic testing offers tremendous opportunities for prevention, diagnosis and treatment of breast and ovarian cancer. Women acquire valuable information that can help them to make informed decisions about their health. However, knowing one's susceptibility to developing cancer may be burdensome for several women, as this risk needs to be managed over time through a continuous dialogue with multiple healthcare professionals. We explored how communication between physicians and unaffected women carrying BRCA1/2 germline pathogenic variants was experienced by women in relation to their genetic risk. Data came from qualitative interviews conducted in Switzerland with 32 unaffected women carrying BRCA1/2 pathogenic variants and aware of their genetic status for at least 3 years. We identified three different types of message as conveyed by physicians to women: (1) a normative message, (2) an over-empowering message, and (3) a minimizing message. On one hand, we found that women are exposed to contradictory messages, often simultaneously, in their interactions with healthcare professionals during their post-genetic testing journey. On the other hand, women's reports highlighted the absence of shared decision-making in such interactions. The combination of these two findings resulted in a strong sense of disorientation, frustration, and powerlessness among participants. Healthcare professionals interacting with high cancer risk women are urged to align in favor of a both concerted and shared decision-making approach when discussing options for managing genetic risk.

Background The HER2 extracellular domain shed in blood (HER2 ECD ) is reported to rise and fall in parallel with HER2+ breast cancer behavior. In this study, we evaluated the clinical relevance of plasma HER2 ECD values in patients with metastatic breast cancer treated in the SAKK22/99 trial comparing trastuzumab monotherapy followed by trastuzumab-chemotherapy combination at progression versus upfront combination therapy. Methods Quantitative assessment of plasma HER2 ECD was performed in 133 patients at baseline; after 2–24 h; at 3 weeks; at first response evaluation (8–9 weeks); and at tumor progression. Associations with tumor characteristics, disease course and trial treatment were evaluated. Results Baseline HER2 ECD levels were stable within 24 h after the first trastuzumab injection. These plasma values correlated positively with the HER2 gene ratio (r s  = 0.39, P  < 0.001) and HER2 protein expression levels (r s  = 0.36, P  < 0.001) but not with ER/PR status of the primary tumor. HER2 ECD baseline levels were positively associated with the presence of visceral disease ( P  = 0.05) and poor patients’ outcome (Cox-regression: P  = 0.009). Patients with high baseline levels ( >  35 ng/ml) had the worst overall survival ( P  = 0.03) if treated with upfront combination therapy. Conversely, patients with low HER2 ECD baseline values (< 15 ng/ml) had longer time to progression on combined trastuzumab-chemotherapy when first treated with trastuzumab monotherapy ( P  = 0.02). Monitoring HER2 ECD levels during the course of the trial revealed significant time ( P  = 0.001) and time-treatment arm interactions ( P  = 0.0007). Under upfront trastuzumab alone, the HER2 ECD levels remained stable until just before disease progression. In patients responding to combination treatment HER2 ECD levels decreased to >  20%. Conclusions Plasma HER2 ECD levels in patients with metastatic breast cancer reflect HER2 disease status. This robust biomarker might help identifying patients without visceral disease profiting from a sequential treatment’s modality. Monitoring HER2 ECD levels during trastuzumab monotherapy could help defining the optimal time to introduce chemotherapy. Trial registration Registration Number by ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT00004935 , Trial number: SAKK22/99. Registered on 27 January 2003.

Background The impact of HER2-targeted therapy alone followed by the addition of chemotherapy at disease progression (PD) versus upfront combination was investigated by the SAKK 22/99 trial. The aim of this exploratory analysis of the SAKK 22/99 trial was to characterize the specific subset of patients deriving long-term benefit from trastuzumab monotherapy alone and to identify potential predictive factors of long-term response. Methods This is an unplanned post-hoc analysis of patients randomized to Arm A (trastuzumab monotherapy). Patients were divided in two groups: patients with durable clinical benefit from trastuzumab monotherapy and short-term responders without durable clinical benefit from trastuzumab monotherapy Univariate and multivariate analyses of clinical characteristics correlating with response duration was performed. Results Eighty six patients were randomized in arm A, 24 patients (28%) were long-term responders and 62 (72%) were short-term responders with a 5y-overall survival (OS) of 54% (95% CI 31–72) and of 18% (95%CI 10–30), respectively. Absence of ER expression, absence of PgR expression and presence of visceral disease emerged as possible negative predictive factors for durable clinical benefit. Conclusion Durable clinical benefit can be achieved with trastuzumab monotherapy in a subgroup of HER2-positive patients with advanced disease and it is predictive for longer OS. Further investigations of predictive biomarkers are necessary to better characterize this subgroup of patients and develop further de-escalating strategies. Trial registration NCT00004935 ; first posted 27.01.2003, retrospectively registered.

Objective:In early 2020, the spread of coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) led the World Health Organization to declare this disease a pandemic. Initial epidemiological data showed that patients with cancer were at high risk of developing severe forms of COVID-19. National scientific societies published recommendations modifying the patients’ breast cancer (BC) management to preserve, in theory, quality oncologic care, avoiding the increased risk of contamination. The Senology International Society (SIS) decided to take an inventory of the actions taken worldwide. This study investigates COVID-19-related changes concerning BC management and analyzes the will to maintain them after the pandemic, evaluating their oncological safety consequences.Materials and Methods:SIS network members participated in an online survey using a questionnaire (Microsoft® Forms) from June 15th to July 31st, 2020.Results:Forty-five responses from 24 countries showed that screening programs had been suspended (68%); magnetic resonance imagines were postponed (73%); telemedicine was preferred when possible (71%). Surgeries were postponed: reconstructive (77%), for benign diseases (84%), and in patients with significant comorbidities (66%). Chemotherapy and radiotherapy protocols had been adapted in 28% of patients in both. Exception for telemedicine (34%), these changes in practice should not be continued.Conclusion:The SIS survey showed significant changes in BC’s diagnosis and treatment during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic, but most of these changes should not be maintained. Indeed, women have fewer severe forms of COVID-19 and are less likely to die than men. The risk of dying from COVID-19 is more related to the presence of comorbidities and age than to BC. Stopping screening and delaying treatment leads to more advanced stages of BC. Only women aged over 65 with BC under treatment and comorbidities require adaptation of their cancer management.

The current therapeutic strategy in breast cancer is to identify a target, such as estrogen receptor (ER) status, for tailoring treatments. We investigated the patterns of recurrence with respect to ER status for patients treated in two randomized trials with 25 years' median follow-up. In the ER-negative subpopulations most breast cancer events occurred within the first 5-7 years after randomization, while in the ER-positive subpopulations breast cancer events were spread through 10 years. In the ER-positive subpopulation, 1 year endocrine treatment alone significantly prolonged disease-free survival (DFS) with no additional benefit observed by adding 1 year of chemotherapy. In the small ER-negative subpopulation chemo-endocrine therapy had a significantly better DFS than endocrine alone or no treatment. Despite small numbers of patients, “old-fashioned” treatments, and competing causes of treatment failure, the value of ER status as a target for response to adjuvant treatment is evident through prolonged follow-up.

Opinion statement In the last few years, new adjuvant endocrine treatment options have become available in young women with early breast cancer, such as the addition of ovarian function suppression to tamoxifen or aromatase inhibitors. Treatment duration has been also adapted in the latest guidelines based on the individual risk of recurrence. The oncologist is therefore challenged to precisely assess the risk of recurrence according to currently available predictive and prognostic factors in order to offer the most appropriate therapeutic option to the individual patient, considering also potential side effects, quality of life, pregnancy planning and patients’ preferences. The adjuvant treatment planning should always be discussed and agreed in a multidisciplinary context. Tamoxifen remains the standard of care in low-risk patients or in case of intolerance to combined treatment with pharmacological ovarian function suppression or aromatase inhibitors. Combination treatment is indicated in intermediate high-risk disease. The patient should always be considered an active partner in the treatment decision process, to improve treatment motivation and adherence. Finally, the therapeutic choice should take into account drug availability and pharmacoeconomic issues, which unfortunately may prevent, in many low-income countries, the provision of such effective treatments.

In women with previous breast cancer who temporarily discontinued adjuvant endocrine therapy to attempt pregnancy, the frequency of breast cancer events was below the prespecified safety threshold and similar to that in controls.