Faculty Bibliography

Introduction: The treatment of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) remains controversial, and treatment approaches include surgery, post-lumpectomy radiation therapy (RT), and/or hormonal therapy for prevention of recurrent disease. These decisions may be particularly difficult for patients with minimal disease. There is a dearth of information regarding patients who have been diagnosed with DCIS on core-needle biopsy (CNB) who have no residual disease in the area at surgery. The purpose of this study was to explore the frequency of this presentation and short-term outcomes in these patients. Methods: Our institutional Breast Cancer Database was queried for all women who were diagnosed with pure DCIS from 2010-2016. Variables included age, method of presentation, risk factors, tumor characteristics and outcomes. Statistical analyses included Pearson's Chi Square and Fisher's Exact Tests. Results: Out of a total of 548 patients with pure DCIS, 55 (10%) had DCIS on CNB alone with no residual in the surgical specimen. The median age was 55 years (range 36-83). Of the patients with DCIS on CNB alone, 6 (11%) were treated with mastectomies. 14 (25%) had lumpectomy and RT, while 35 (64%) had lumpectomy without RT. The median follow up was 4 years. There were three ipsilateral recurrences in women who were treated by lumpectomy alone. One of these recurrences was invasive carcinoma, and the other two were recurrent pure DCIS. None of the patients who recurred had taken hormonal therapy. There were no contralateral second primaries detected in the study period in this cohort. Conclusions: Despite the minimal extent of disease exhibited in these cases, 3 of 35 patients with DCIS on CNB with no residual disease at surgery and no RT had ipsilateral recurrence at a median follow up of 4 years. These data suggest that even minimal DCIS represents a significant risk of recurrence to the patient. Additional information provided by genomic analysis may better stratify the risk for recurrence in this group and help identify the population that would most benefit from post-lumpectomy RT

Background: To examine the trends in clinicopathologic features, treatment, and survival of male breast cancer (MBC), utilizing the National Cancer Data Base (NC

Background/Objective: In a time when clinicians are attempting to identify a cohort of patients with ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) who will benefit most from post-lumpectomy radiation therapy (RT), tools have been developed to quantify patients' risk for in-breast recurrence. These tools have not yet been integrated into standard use. At our institution, the recommendation for RT after lumpectomy for DCIS is guided by established clinicopathologic factors and reviewed by a multi-disciplinary group. The purpose of this study was to compare the clinicopathologic characteristics and outcomes of postlumpectomy DCIS patients with and without RT at our institution. Methods: The Institutional Breast Cancer Database was queried for all women who were diagnosed with DCIS from 2010-2016. Variables included age, method of presentation, risk factors, tumor and treatment characteristics, and ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence (IBTR). Statistical analyses included Pearson's Chi Square and Fisher's Exact Tests. Results: Of 480 women with pure DCIS and no prior history of breast cancer, 350 (73%) underwent lumpectomy. The median follow-up was 4 years, and median age was 60 years. Two hundred thirty-six (67%) women underwent RT following lumpectomy. Compared to women who did not undergo RT, these women were younger (p=0.003), had larger tumor size (p=0.0008), higher grade (p=0.0006), and comedo features (p=0.03). Women who underwent post-lumpectomy RT had an IBTR rate of 2% vs. 4% (p=0.32) with no RT. The 10 patients with early IBTR in both groups were younger (median age 54 years), and all had intermediate- or high-grade DCIS. Of the 114 patients who did not undergo adjuvant RT, 70 (61%) met the RTOG 9804 criteria for omission of adjuvant RT. Of the 44 patients who did not receive adjuvant RT and did not meet RTOG 9804 criteria, 20 declined RT, and 24 were not referred. Conclusions: Within a relatively short follow-up period, we found a very low overall rate (3%) of IBTR for our patients who underwent lumpectomy for DCIS. These results are consistent with previously published trials on post-lumpectomy RT in DCIS. RT at our institution is recommended based on wellestablished clinicopathologic factors and multidisciplinary care. Considering the low recurrence rates, we recommend continuing the current trend of using published criteria and multidisciplinary review. It remains to be seen to what extent the newly developed recurrence tools, such as Oncotype DX Breast DCIS ScoreTM, will improve upon these short-term recurrence rates

INTRODUCTION: We performed the present study to better understand the practices and preferences of women with an elevated risk of breast cancer by merging the registries from 2 separate institutions and comparing the clinical characteristics and outcomes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The data from women enrolled in institutional review board-approved registries from 2003 to 2015 at the New York University Langone Medical Center and University of Vermont Medical Center were evaluated. We compared patient characteristics, risk factors, uptake of prevention methods, and cancer rates between the 2 registries. RESULTS: A total of 1035 women were included in the present analysis. We found a 99% concordance of variables collected between the 2 registries. Significant differences were found in age, risk characteristics, uptake of prevention methods, and cancer rates between the 2 registries. The uptake of chemoprevention was low (8% for all women), with greater uptake among women with atypia found on biopsy examination (66%) than among those with a strong family history or BRCA mutations. Women with BRCA mutations accounted for 76% of those undergoing risk-reducing surgery. Of the 1035 women, 43 (4%) developed breast cancer. Of these, 86% were diagnosed with American Joint Committee on Cancer stage 0 or 1 disease, 95% with tumors < 2 cm, and 70% with poor to moderately differentiated pathologic features. Only 1 of the women who developed breast cancer had been undergoing chemoprevention, and none had undergone previous prophylactic surgery. CONCLUSION: We found a high degree of concordance between registries, suggesting no barriers exist to multi-institutional collaboration. Overall, a low uptake of prevention opportunities was found in this high-risk population. Women developing breast cancer had predominantly low-stage but higher grade disease, which might suggest a benefit to participation in surveillance (or high-risk) programs.

Oncotype DX recurrence score (ODX) can predict risk of invasive breast cancer recurrence and benefit of chemotherapy. Literature is limited on the relationship of ODX and race in women with hormone receptor positive and node negative/positive disease. Our study examines the relationship between race and clinical characteristics within a population of highly screened women with newly diagnosed breast cancer. The institutional Breast Cancer Database was queried for patients with newly diagnosed breast cancer between January2010 and March2015. We analyzed clinical and tumor characteristics including ODX. Statistical analyses included Pearson's Chi-Square and Fisher's Exact Tests. There were 2,092 women in our study cohort. The majority had college-level education (84%), regular screening (78%), and clinical breast exams (88%). The majority had invasive ductal carcinoma (IDC) (62%), early stage (0, I, II) tumors (93%), ER+ (84%), PR+ (71%), Her2 negative (86%), and node negative disease (83%). There was a significantly higher proportion of later stage disease among African-Americans (p = 0.001) and Asians (p = 0.006) and more triple negative breast cancers among African-Americans (p < 0.0001). A majority of patients had a low ODX (56%). While ODX was not different among the race categories (p = 0.97), there were significant racial differences in Ki-67 (p < 0.0001). In a population of highly screened women, differences were found between races regarding tumor histology. No statistical difference between race and ODX was noted, but there were racial differences in Ki67. Therefore we recommend that further research be focused on refining management algorithms by ethnicity.

Objective: The standard technique for localization of nonpalpable breast lesions is wire localization (WL), which has been found to have several procedural and workflow-related pitfalls. Radioactive seed localization (RSL) and intraoperative ultrasound (IOUS) have been shown to result in lower margin positivity, fewer reexcisions, increased patient satisfaction, and better patient care coordination, but they too have challenges that have adversely impacted their adoption. The SAVI SCOUT surgical guidance system is a new FDA-cleared medical device that utilizes nonradioactive, electromagnetic wave and infrared light technology to provide real-time guidance during excisional breast procedures. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the performance of SCOUT in guiding the removal of nonpalpable breast lesions across multiple sites and physicians. Methods: Institutional Review Board approval was granted for all institutions to enroll women with a nonpalpable breast lesion requiring preoperative localization for excision. Participating patients underwent localization and excision with SCOUT, which consists of an infrared-activated electromagnetic wave reflective device (reflector), handpiece, and console. Using mammographic or ultrasound guidance, the reflector was implanted into the target tissue up to 7 days prior to the scheduled excisional procedure. Before making an incision, the surgeon used the handpiece, which emits infrared light and electromagnetic waves, to detect the location of the reflector and subsequently plan the surgical incision. During the procedure, the surgeon used the handpiece to guide the localization and removal of the reflector along with the surrounding breast tissue. The console provides audible feedback on handpiece-to-reflector proximity. Primary endpoints included successful reflector placement, localization, and retrieval. Results: To date, 128 pts have participated in the study, along with 17 surgeons and 23 radiologists from 11 institutions. The reflectors were successfully placed in 127 (99%) pts under either radiographic (mammography or stereotactic) or ultrasound guidance, either on the day of surgery or up to 7 days (avg, 2.6 days) before surgery. Thirty-seven pts underwent excisional biopsy and 85 pts had a lumpectomy. The intended lesion and reflector were successfully removed in all pts. No adverse events occurred. For 83 pts with in situ and/or invasive cancer and complete data, 13 (15.7%) had positive margins and 12 (14.5%) were recommended for reexcision. Conclusion: The preliminary data show that real-time surgical guidance with SCOUT is an accurate technique for directing the removal of nonpalpable breast lesions and reproducible at multiple sites. The study has yielded 100% surgical success with a re-excision rate comparable to that of RSL and IOUS. Ongoing accrual to this study will validate these findings with planned enrollment of 150 pts from 11 sites

Purpose. This study identifies women with breast cancer who utilized chemoprevention agents prior to diagnosis and describes their patterns of disease. Methods. Our database was queried retrospectively for patients with breast cancer who reported prior use of chemoprevention. Patients were divided into primary (no history of breast cancer) and secondary (previous history of breast cancer) groups and compared to patients who never took chemoprevention. Results. 135 (6%) of 2430 women used chemoprevention. In the primary chemoprevention group (n = 18, 1%), 39% had completed >5 years of treatment, and fully 50% were on treatment at time of diagnosis. These patients were overwhelmingly diagnosed with ER/PR positive cancers (88%/65%) and were diagnosed with equal percentages (44%) of IDC and DCIS. 117 (87%) used secondary chemoprevention. Patients in this group were diagnosed with earlier stage disease and had lower rates of ER/PR-positivity (73%/65%) than the nonchemoprevention group (84%/72%). In the secondary group, 24% were on chemoprevention at time of diagnosis; 73% had completed >5 years of treatment. Conclusions. The majority of patients who used primary chemoprevention had not completed treatment prior to diagnosis, suggesting that the timing of initiation and compliance to prevention strategies are important in defining the pattern of disease in these patients.