Explore the vast range of titles available.

The sub-study of the INSEMA trial (randomization-2) compares completion axillary lymph node dissection (cALND) with sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) alone in cN0 patients with T1/T2 invasive breast cancer and one to three sentinel node macrometastases undergoing upfront breast-conserving surgery. The key secondary objective is to assess whether the SLNB-alone arm is non-inferior to cALND in terms of invasive disease-free survival (iDFS). Finally, 485 patients were recruited, and 386 patients (cALND: N  = 169, SLNB alone: N  = 217) were included in the per-protocol set. The median follow-up is 74.2 months. The 5-year iDFS analysis in the per-protocol set demonstrates a non-significant difference between study arms, with a hazard ratio (HR) of 1.69 (95% CI: 0.98-2.94) for SLNB alone compared to cALND. The 5-year iDFS rates are 86.6% (81.0%-90.7%) in the SLNB-alone arm and 93.8% (88.7%-96.6%) in the cALND arm ( P  = 0.058). The 5-year overall survival rates are 94.9% (90.6%-97.2%) in the SLNB-alone arm and 96.2% (91.7%-98.3%) in the cALND arm ( P  = 0.663). Locoregional recurrences (LRR) were infrequent, with 5-year incidence rates of 1.1% versus 0.0% ( P  = 0.405) in the SLNB-alone arm compared to cALND. In summary, no significant differences were observed between SLNB alone versus cALND for iDFS, overall survival, and LRR. Trial registration number: NCT02466737

Paclitaxel and trastuzumab have been associated with adverse effects including chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy (CIPN) or ocular complications. In vivo confocal laser scanning microscopy (CLSM) of the cornea could be suitable for assessing side effects since the cornea is susceptible to, i.e., neurotoxic stimuli. The study represents a one-year follow-up of a breast cancer patient including large-area in vivo CLSM of the subbasal nerve plexus (SNP), nerve function testing, and questionnaires during paclitaxel and trastuzumab therapy. Six monitoring sessions (one baseline, four during, and one after therapy) over 58 weeks were carried out. Large-area mosaics of the SNP were generated, and identical regions within all sessions were assigned. While corneal nerve morphology did not cause alterations, the number of dendritic cells (DCs) showed dynamic changes with a local burst at 11 weeks after baseline. Simultaneously, paclitaxel treatment was terminated due to side effects, which, together with DCs, returned to normal levels as the therapy progressed. Longitudinal in vivo CLSM of the SNP could complement routine examinations and be helpful to generate a comprehensive clinical picture. The applied techniques, with corneal structures acting as biomarkers could represent a diagnostic tool for the objective assessment of the severity of adverse events and the outcome.

During breast cancer therapy, paclitaxel and trastuzumab are both associated with adverse effects such as chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy and other systemic side effects including ocular complications. Corneal nerves are considered part of the peripheral nervous system and can be imaged non-invasively by confocal laser scanning microscopy (CLSM) on the cellular level. Thus, in vivo CLSM imaging of structures of the corneal subbasal nerve plexus (SNP) such as sensory nerves or dendritic cells (DCs) can be a powerful tool for the assessment of corneal complications during cancer treatment. During the present study, the SNP of a breast cancer patient was analyzed over time by using large-scale in vivo CLSM in the course of paclitaxel and trastuzumab therapy. The same corneal regions could be re-identified over time. While the subbasal nerve morphology did not alter significantly, a change in dendritic cell density and an additional local burst within the first 11 weeks of therapy was detected, indicating treatment-mediated corneal inflammatory processes. Ocular structures such as nerves and dendritic cells could represent useful biomarkers for the assessment of ocular adverse effects during cancer therapy and their management, leading to a better visual prognosis.

Whether surgical axillary staging as part of breast-conserving therapy can be omitted without compromising survival has remained unclear. In this prospective, randomized, noninferiority trial, we investigated the omission of axillary surgery as compared with sentinel-lymph-node biopsy in patients with clinically node-negative invasive breast cancer staged as T1 or T2 (tumor size, ≤5 cm) who were scheduled to undergo breast-conserving surgery. We report here the per-protocol analysis of invasive disease-free survival (the primary efficacy outcome). To show the noninferiority of the omission of axillary surgery, the 5-year invasive disease-free survival rate had to be at least 85%, and the upper limit of the confidence interval for the hazard ratio for invasive disease or death had to be below 1.271. A total of 5502 eligible patients (90% with clinical T1 cancer and 79% with pathological T1 cancer) underwent randomization in a 1:4 ratio. The per-protocol population included 4858 patients; 962 were assigned to undergo treatment without axillary surgery (the surgery-omission group), and 3896 to undergo sentinel-lymph-node biopsy (the surgery group). The median follow-up was 73.6 months. The estimated 5-year invasive disease-free survival rate was 91.9% (95% confidence interval [CI], 89.9 to 93.5) among patients in the surgery-omission group and 91.7% (95% CI, 90.8 to 92.6) among patients in the surgery group, with a hazard ratio of 0.91 (95% CI, 0.73 to 1.14), which was below the prespecified noninferiority margin. The analysis of the first primary-outcome events (occurrence or recurrence of invasive disease or death from any cause), which occurred in a total of 525 patients (10.8%), showed apparent differences between the surgery-omission group and the surgery group in the incidence of axillary recurrence (1.0% vs. 0.3%) and death (1.4% vs. 2.4%). The safety analysis indicates that patients in the surgery-omission group had a lower incidence of lymphedema, greater arm mobility, and less pain with movement of the arm or shoulder than patients who underwent sentinel-lymph-node biopsy. In this trial involving patients with clinically node-negative, T1 or T2 invasive breast cancer (90% with clinical T1 cancer and 79% with pathological T1 cancer), omission of surgical axillary staging was noninferior to sentinel-lymph-node biopsy after a median follow-up of 6 years. (Funded by the German Cancer Aid; INSEMA ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02466737.).

Purpose: To assess the impact of the removal of the target lymph node (TLN) on therapy after the completion of primary systemic therapy (PST) in initially node-positive breast cancer patients. Methods: Pooled data analysis of participants of the prospective CLIP- and TATTOO-study at the University of Rostock was performed. Results: A total of 75 patients were included; 63 of them (84.0%) converted to clinically node-negative after PST. Both TLN and sentinel lymph node (SLN) were identified in 41 patients (51.2%). In five out of 63 patients (7.9%), the TLN was metastatic after PST and the SLN was either tumor-free or not detected. Axillary lymph node dissection (ALND) was conducted in all five patients. In one patient, systemic therapy recommendation was influenced by the TLN; adjuvant radiotherapy was influenced by the TLN in zero patients. For patients with fewer than three removed SLNs, the FNR was 28.6% for the SLN biopsy alone and 7.1% for targeted axillary dissection (TAD). Conclusions: Removal of the TLN in addition to the SLN after PST has only minimal impact on the type of adjuvant systemic therapy and radiotherapy. However, the extent of axillary surgery was relevantly affected and FNR was improved by TAD.

Background: Radiological underestimation of the actual tumor size is a relevant problem in reaching negative margins in ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) associated with microcalcifications in breast-conserving therapy (BCT). The aim of this study is to evaluate whether the radiological underestimation of tumor size has an influence on the histopathological margin status. Methods: Patients who underwent BCT with preoperatively diagnosed pure DCIS were included (pooled analysis of two trials). Multiple factors were analysed regarding radiological underestimation ≥10 mm. Radiological underestimation was defined as mammographic minus histological tumor size in mm. Results: Positive margins occurred in 75 of 189 patients. Radiological underestimation ≥10 mm was an independent influencing factor (OR 5.80; 95%CI 2.55–13.17; p < 0.001). A radiological underestimation was seen in 70 patients. The following parameters were statistically significant associated with underestimation: pleomorphic microcalcifications (OR 3.77; 95%CI 1.27–11.18), clustered distribution patterns (OR 4.26; 95%CI 2.25–8.07), and mammographic tumor sizes ≤20 mm (OR 7.47; 95%CI 3.49–15.99). Only a mammographic tumor size ≤20 mm was an independent risk factor (OR 6.49; 95%CI 2.30–18.26; p < 0.001). Grading, estrogen receptor status, and comedo necrosis did not influence the size estimation. Conclusion: Radiological underestimation is an independent risk factor for positive margins in BCT of DCIS associated with microcalcifications predominantly occurring in mammographic small tumors.

A common severe neurotoxic side effect of breast cancer (BC) therapy is chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy (CIPN) and intervention is highly needed for the detection, prevention, and treatment of CIPN at an early stage. As the eye is susceptible to neurotoxic stimuli, the present study aims to determine whether CIPN signs in paclitaxel-treated BC patients correlate with ocular changes by applying advanced non-invasive biophotonic in vivo imaging. Patients (n = 14, 10 controls) underwent monitoring sessions after diagnosis, during, and after therapy (T0-T3). Monitoring sessions included general anamnesis, assessment of their quality of life, neurological scores, ophthalmological status, macular optical coherence tomography (OCT), and imaging of their subbasal nerve plexus (SNP) by large-area confocal laser-scanning microscopy (CLSM). At T0, no significant differences were detected between patients and controls. During treatment, patients’ scores significantly changed while the greatest differences were found between T0 and T3. None of the patients developed severe CIPN but retinal thickenings could be detected. CLSM revealed large SNP mosaics with identical areas while corneal nerves remained stable. The study represents the first longitudinal study combining oncological examinations with advanced biophotonic imaging techniques, demonstrating a powerful tool for the objective assessment of the severity of neurotoxic events with ocular structures acting as potential biomarkers.

Evaluation of axillary lymph node status by sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) and complete axillary lymph node dissection (ALND) are an inherent part of breast cancer treatment. Increased understanding of tumor biology has changed the prognostic and therapeutic impact of lymph node status. Non-invasive imaging techniques like axillary ultrasound, FDG-PET, or MRI revealed moderate sensitivity and high specificity in evaluation of lymph node status. Therefore, they are not sufficient for lymph node staging. Otherwise, the impact of remaining micrometastases and even macrometastases for prognosis and treatment decisions is overestimated. Considering tumor biology, the distinction of axillary metastases in isolated tumor cells (ITC, pN0(i+)); micrometastases (pN1mi), and macrometastases (pN1a) is not comprehensible. Increasing data support the thesis that remaining axillary metastases neither increase the axillary recurrence rate nor decrease overall survival. It is doubtful that axillary tumor cells are capable to complete the complex multistep metastatic process. If applied, axillary metastases are sensitive to systemic treatment and are targeted by postoperative tangential breast irradiation. Therefore, the controversy about the clinical relevance of tumor cell clusters or micrometastases in SLN is a sophisticated but not contemporary discussion. Currently, there is no indication for axillary surgery in elderly patients with favorable tumors and clinically tumor-free lymph nodes. Nonetheless, a rational and evidence-based approach to the management of clinically and sonographically N0 patients with planned breast-conserving surgery and limited tumor size is needed now.