Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Early Breast Cancers

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Surgical Oncology

  • 3542 Accesses

Abstract

The management of patients with early breast cancer (EBC) has dramatically evolved over the past decades. The rapid pace of progress and the frequent shift in treatment paradigms have underscored the importance of a multidisciplinary approach. Given the accelerated rate of emerging new information, it is conceivable that a number of management principles mentioned in this chapter will become obsolete by the time the book is published. Regardless, the purpose of this chapter is to provide a comprehensive framework so that the readers will have a greater appreciation and better understanding of the complexities of managing patients with early breast cancer.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 109.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 139.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Desantis C, Ma J, Bryan L, Jemal A. Breast cancer statistics, 2013. CA Cancer J Clin. 2014;64(1):52–62.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Fisher B. Surgical adjuvant therapy for breast cancer. Cancer. 1972;30(6):1556–64.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Chu QD, McDonald JC, Li BD. Adjuvant therapy for patients who have node-positive breast cancer. Adv Surg. 2006;40:77–98.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Colditz GA. Estrogen, estrogen plus progestin therapy, and risk of breast cancer. Clin Cancer Res. 2005;11(2 Pt 2):909s–17.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Gail MH, Brinton LA, Byar DP, et al. Projecting individualized probabilities of developing breast cancer for white females who are being examined annually. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1989;81(24):1879–86.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Claus EB, Risch N, Thompson WD. Autosomal dominant inheritance of early-onset breast cancer. Implications for risk prediction. Cancer. 1994;73(3):643–51.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Tyrer J, Duffy SW, Cuzick J. A breast cancer prediction model incorporating familial and personal risk factors. Stat Med. 2004;23(7):1111–30.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Sastre-Garau X, Jouve M, Asselain B, et al. Infiltrating lobular carcinoma of the breast. Clinicopathologic analysis of 975 cases with reference to data on conservative therapy and metastatic patterns. Cancer. 1996;77(1):113–20.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Katz A, Saad ED, Porter P, Pusztai L. Primary systemic chemotherapy of invasive lobular carcinoma of the breast. Lancet Oncol. 2007;8(1):55–62.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Arpino G, Bardou VJ, Clark GM, Elledge RM. Infiltrating lobular carcinoma of the breast: tumor characteristics and clinical outcome. Breast Cancer Res. 2004;6(3):R149–56.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  11. Viale G, Rotmensz N, Maisonneuve P, et al. Lack of prognostic significance of “classic” lobular breast carcinoma: a matched, single institution series. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2009;117(1):211–4.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Horn PL, Thompson WD. Risk of contralateral breast cancer. Associations with histologic, clinical, and therapeutic factors. Cancer. 1988;62(2):412–24.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Ashikari R, Huvos AG, Urban JA, Robbins GF. Infiltrating lobular carcinoma of the breast. Cancer. 1973;31(1):110–6.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Gainer SM, Lodhi AK, Bhattacharyya A, Krishnamurthy S, Kuerer HM, Lucci A. Invasive lobular carcinoma predicts micrometastasis in breast cancer. J Surg Res. 2012;177(1):93–6.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  15. Edge SB, Compton CC. The American Joint Committee on Cancer: the 7th edition of the AJCC cancer staging manual and the future of TNM. Ann Surg Oncol. 2010;17(6):1471–4.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Compton C, Byrd D, Garcia-Aguilar J, et al. Breast. In: Compton C, Byrd D, Garcia-Aguilar J, Kurtzman S, Olawaiye A, Washington M, editors. AJCC cancer staging atlas. 2nd ed. New York: Springer; 2012. p. 419–40.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Plevritis SK, Kurian AW, Sigal BM, et al. Cost-effectiveness of screening BRCA1/2 mutation carriers with breast magnetic resonance imaging. JAMA. 2006;295(20):2374–84.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. McCabe C, Claxton K, Culyer AJ. The NICE cost-effectiveness threshold: what it is and what that means. Pharmacoeconomics. 2008;26(9):733–44.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Lee CH, Dershaw DD, Kopans D, et al. Breast cancer screening with imaging: recommendations from the Society of Breast Imaging and the ACR on the use of mammography, breast MRI, breast ultrasound, and other technologies for the detection of clinically occult breast cancer. J Am Coll Radiol. 2010;7(1):18–27.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Ward EM, Smith RA. Integrating tools for breast cancer risk assessment, risk reduction, and early detection. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2010;19(10):2428–9.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Saslow D, Boetes C, Burke W, et al. American Cancer Society guidelines for breast screening with MRI as an adjunct to mammography. CA Cancer J Clin. 2007;57(2):75–89.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Houssami N, Turner R, Macaskill P, et al. An individual person data meta-analysis of preoperative magnetic resonance imaging and breast cancer recurrence. J Clin Oncol. 2014;32:1–14.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Turnbull LW, Brown SR, Olivier C, et al. Multicentre randomised controlled trial examining the cost-effectiveness of contrast-enhanced high field magnetic resonance imaging in women with primary breast cancer scheduled for wide local excision (COMICE). Health Technol Assess. 2010;14(1):1–182.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Houssami N, Turner R, Morrow M. Preoperative magnetic resonance imaging in breast cancer: meta-analysis of surgical outcomes. Ann Surg. 2013;257(2):249–55.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Silverstein MJ, Lagios MD, Recht A, et al. Image-detected breast cancer: state of the art diagnosis and treatment. J Am Coll Surg. 2005;201(4):586–97.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Molina MA, Snell S, Franceschi D, et al. Breast specimen orientation. Ann Surg Oncol. 2009;16(2):285–8.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Fisher B, Montague E, Redmond C, et al. Comparison of radical mastectomy with alternative treatments for primary breast cancer. A first report of results from a prospective randomized clinical trial. Cancer. 1977;39(6 Suppl):2827–39.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Fisher B, Gebhardt MC. The evolution of breast cancer surgery: past, present, and future. Semin Oncol. 1978;5(4):385–94.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Fisher B, Redmond C, Fisher ER, et al. Ten-year results of a randomized clinical trial comparing radical mastectomy and total mastectomy with or without radiation. N Engl J Med. 1985;312(11):674–81.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Fisher B. A biological perspective of breast cancer: contributions of the National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project clinical trials. CA Cancer J Clin. 1991;41(2):97–111.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Fisher B, Jeong JH, Anderson S, Bryant J, Fisher ER, Wolmark N. Twenty-five-year follow-up of a randomized trial comparing radical mastectomy, total mastectomy, and total mastectomy followed by irradiation. N Engl J Med. 2002;347(8):567–75.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Fisher B, Bryant J, Dignam JJ, et al. Tamoxifen, radiation therapy, or both for prevention of ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence after lumpectomy in women with invasive breast cancers of one centimeter or less. J Clin Oncol. 2002;20(20):4141–9.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. Fisher B, Anderson S, Bryant J, et al. Twenty-year follow-up of a randomized trial comparing total mastectomy, lumpectomy, and lumpectomy plus irradiation for the treatment of invasive breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2002;347(16):1233–41.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Jacobson JA, Danforth DN, Cowan KH, et al. Ten-year results of a comparison of conservation with mastectomy in the treatment of stage I and II breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 1995;332(14):907–11.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. Veronesi U, Cascinelli N, Mariani L, et al. Twenty-year follow-up of a randomized study comparing breast-conserving surgery with radical mastectomy for early breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2002;347(16):1227–32.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Blichert-Toft M, Nielsen M, Düring M, et al. Long-term results of breast conserving surgery vs. mastectomy for early stage invasive breast cancer: 20-year follow-up of the Danish randomized DBCG-82TM protocol. Acta Oncol. 2008;47(4):672–81.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. van Dongen JA, Bartelink H, Fentiman IS, et al. Randomized clinical trial to assess the value of breast-conserving therapy in stage I and II breast cancer, EORTC 10801 trial. J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr. 1992;11:15–8.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Sarrazin D, Lê MG, Arriagada R, et al. Ten-year results of a randomized trial comparing a conservative treatment to mastectomy in early breast cancer. Radiother Oncol. 1989;14(3):177–84.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  39. Fisher B, Bauer M, Margolese R, et al. Five-year results of a randomized clinical trial comparing total mastectomy and segmental mastectomy with or without radiation in the treatment of breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 1985;312(11):665–73.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  40. Darby S, McGale P, Correa C, et al. Effect of radiotherapy after breast-conserving surgery on 10-year recurrence and 15-year breast cancer death: meta-analysis of individual patient data for 10,801 women in 17 randomised trials. Lancet. 2011;378(9804):1707–16.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  41. Liljegren G, Holmberg L, Bergh J, et al. 10-Year results after sector resection with or without postoperative radiotherapy for stage I breast cancer: a randomized trial. J Clin Oncol. 1999;17(8):2326–33.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  42. Veronesi U, Marubini E, Mariani L, et al. Radiotherapy after breast-conserving surgery in small breast carcinoma: long-term results of a randomized trial. Ann Oncol. 2001;12(7):997–1003.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  43. Shah C, Badiyan S, Ben Wilkinson J, et al. Treatment efficacy with accelerated partial breast irradiation (APBI): final analysis of the American Society of Breast Surgeons MammoSite(®) breast brachytherapy registry trial. Ann Surg Oncol. 2013;20(10):3279–85.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Shah C, Antonucci JV, Wilkinson JB, et al. Twelve-year clinical outcomes and patterns of failure with accelerated partial breast irradiation versus whole-breast irradiation: results of a matched-pair analysis. Radiother Oncol. 2011;100(2):210–4.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Polgár C, Fodor J, Major T, et al. Breast-conserving treatment with partial or whole breast irradiation for low-risk invasive breast carcinoma–5-year results of a randomized trial. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2007;69(3):694–702.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Hughes KS, Schnaper LA, Berry D, et al. Lumpectomy plus tamoxifen with or without irradiation in women 70 years of age or older with early breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2004;351(10):971–7.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  47. Smith GL, Xu Y, Buchholz TA, et al. Association between treatment with brachytherapy vs whole-breast irradiation and subsequent mastectomy, complications, and survival among older women with invasive breast cancer. JAMA. 2012;307(17):1827–37.

    PubMed  CAS  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  48. Smith BD, Arthur DW, Buchholz TA, et al. Accelerated partial breast irradiation consensus statement from the American Society for Radiation Oncology (ASTRO). Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2009;74(4):987–1001.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Houssami N, Macaskill P, Marinovich ML, et al. Meta-analysis of the impact of surgical margins on local recurrence in women with early-stage invasive breast cancer treated with breast-conserving therapy. Eur J Cancer. 2010;46(18):3219–32.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Moran M, Schnitt S, Giuliano A, et al. Society of Surgical Oncology-American Society for Radiation Oncology consensus guideline on margins for breast-conserving surgery with whole-breast irradiation in stages I and II invasive breast cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2014;88(3):553–64.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. Fisher B, Bauer M, Wickerham DL, et al. Relation of number of positive axillary nodes to the prognosis of patients with primary breast cancer. An NSABP update. Cancer. 1983;52(9):1551–7.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  52. Fleissig A, Fallowfield LJ, Langridge CI, et al. Post-operative arm morbidity and quality of life. Results of the ALMANAC randomised trial comparing sentinel node biopsy with standard axillary treatment in the management of patients with early breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2006;95(3):279–93.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Lucci A, McCall LM, Beitsch PD, et al. Surgical complications associated with sentinel lymph node dissection (SLND) plus axillary lymph node dissection compared with SLND alone in the American College of Surgeons Oncology Group Trial Z0011. J Clin Oncol. 2007;25(24):3657–63.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Veronesi U, Paganelli G, Viale G, et al. A randomized comparison of sentinel-node biopsy with routine axillary dissection in breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2003;349(6):546–53.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. Veronesi U, Viale G, Paganelli G, et al. Sentinel lymph node biopsy in breast cancer: ten-year results of a randomized controlled study. Ann Surg. 2010;251(4):595–600.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  56. Zavagno G, De Salvo GL, Scalco G, et al. A Randomized clinical trial on sentinel lymph node biopsy versus axillary lymph node dissection in breast cancer: results of the Sentinella/GIVOM trial. Ann Surg. 2008;247(2):207–13.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. Krag DN, Anderson SJ, Julian TB, et al. Sentinel-lymph-node resection compared with conventional axillary-lymph-node dissection in clinically node-negative patients with breast cancer: overall survival findings from the NSABP B-32 randomised phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol. 2010;11(10):927–33.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  58. Giuliano AE, Hunt KK, Ballman KV, et al. Axillary dissection vs no axillary dissection in women with invasive breast cancer and sentinel node metastasis: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA. 2011;305(6):569–75.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  59. Klimberg VS, Rubio IT, Henry R, Cowan C, Colvert M, Korourian S. Subareolar versus peritumoral injection for location of the sentinel lymph node. Ann Surg. 1999;229(6):860–4. discussion 864–865.

    PubMed  CAS  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  60. Krag DN, Anderson SJ, Julian TB, et al. Technical outcomes of sentinel-lymph-node resection and conventional axillary-lymph-node dissection in patients with clinically node-negative breast cancer: results from the NSABP B-32 randomised phase III trial. Lancet Oncol. 2007;8(10):881–8.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  61. Hunt KK, Ballman KV, McCall LM, et al. Factors associated with local-regional recurrence after a negative sentinel node dissection: results of the ACOSOG Z0010 trial. Ann Surg. 2012;256(3):428–36.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  62. Weaver DL, Ashikaga T, Krag DN, et al. Effect of occult metastases on survival in node-negative breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2011;364(5):412–21.

    PubMed  CAS  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  63. Surgeons ASoB. American Society of Breast Surgeons guidelines for performing sentinel lymph node biopsy in breast cancer. 2010. Accessed 2 Dec 2013.

    Google Scholar 

  64. Lyman GH, Giuliano AE, Somerfield MR, et al. American Society of Clinical Oncology guideline recommendations for sentinel lymph node biopsy in early-stage breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2005;23(30):7703–20.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  65. Kim T, Giuliano AE, Lyman GH. Lymphatic mapping and sentinel lymph node biopsy in early-stage breast carcinoma: a metaanalysis. Cancer. 2006;106(1):4–16.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  66. Katz A, Niemierko A, Gage I, et al. Can axillary dissection be avoided in patients with sentinel lymph node metastasis? J Surg Oncol. 2006;93(7):550–8.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  67. Mittendorf EA, Hunt KK, Boughey JC, et al. Incorporation of sentinel lymph node metastasis size into a nomogram predicting nonsentinel lymph node involvement in breast cancer patients with a positive sentinel lymph node. Ann Surg. 2012;255(1):109–15.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  68. Galimberti V, Cole BF, Zurrida S, et al. Axillary dissection versus no axillary dissection in patients with sentinel-node micrometastases (IBCSG 23–01): a phase 3 randomised controlled trial. Lancet Oncol. 2013;14(4):297–305.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  69. Diepstraten SC, Sever AR, Buckens CF, et al. Value of preoperative ultrasound-guided axillary lymph node biopsy for preventing completion axillary lymph node dissection in breast cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Ann Surg Oncol. 2014;21(1):51–9.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  70. van Deurzen CH, Vriens BE, Tjan-Heijnen VC, et al. Accuracy of sentinel node biopsy after neoadjuvant chemotherapy in breast cancer patients: a systematic review. Eur J Cancer. 2009;45(18):3124–30.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  71. Kuehn T, Bauerfeind I, Fehm T, et al. Sentinel-lymph-node biopsy in patients with breast cancer before and after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (SENTINA): a prospective, multicentre cohort study. Lancet Oncol. 2013;14(7):609–18.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  72. Boughey JC, Suman VJ, Mittendorf EA, et al. Sentinel lymph node surgery after neoadjuvant chemotherapy in patients with node-positive breast cancer: the ACOSOG Z1071 (Alliance) clinical trial. JAMA. 2013;310(14):1455–61.

    PubMed  CAS  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  73. Straver ME, Meijnen P, van Tienhoven G, et al. Role of axillary clearance after a tumor-positive sentinel node in the administration of adjuvant therapy in early breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2010;28(5):731–7.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  74. Rutgers E, Donker M, Straver M, et al. Radiotherapy or surgery of the axilla after a positive sentinel node in breast cancer patients. Final analysis of the EORTC AMAROS trial. J Clin Oncol. 2013;31 Suppl:abstr LBA1001.

    Google Scholar 

  75. Whelan T, Olivotto I, Ackerman I, et al. NCIC-CTG MA.20: an intergroup trial of regional nodal irradiation in early breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2011;29 Suppl:abstr LBA 1003.

    Google Scholar 

  76. Recht A, Edge SB, Solin LJ, et al. Postmastectomy radiotherapy: clinical practice guidelines of the American Society of Clinical Oncology. J Clin Oncol. 2001;19(5):1539–69.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  77. Taylor ME, Haffty BG, Rabinovitch R, et al. ACR appropriateness criteria on postmastectomy radiotherapy expert panel on radiation oncology-breast. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2009;73(4):997–1002.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  78. Moo TA, McMillan R, Lee M, et al. Selection criteria for postmastectomy radiotherapy in t1-t2 tumors with 1 to 3 positive lymph nodes. Ann Surg Oncol. 2013;20(10):3169–74.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  79. Truong PT, Olivotto IA, Kader HA, Panades M, Speers CH, Berthelet E. Selecting breast cancer patients with T1-T2 tumors and one to three positive axillary nodes at high postmastectomy locoregional recurrence risk for adjuvant radiotherapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2005;61(5):1337–47.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  80. Saphner T, Tormey DC, Gray R. Annual hazard rates of recurrence for breast cancer after primary therapy. J Clin Oncol. 1996;14(10):2738–46.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  81. Early Breast Cancer Trialists’ Collaborative Group. Effects of adjuvant tamoxifen and of cytotoxic therapy on mortality in early breast cancer. An overview of 61 randomized trials among 28,896 women. N Engl J Med. 1988;319(26):1681–92.

    Google Scholar 

  82. Early Breast Cancer Trialists’ Collaborative Group. Effects of radiotherapy and surgery in early breast cancer. An overview of the randomized trials. N Engl J Med. 1995;333(22):1444–55.

    Google Scholar 

  83. Fisher B, Ravdin RG, Ausman RK, Slack NH, Moore GE, Noer RJ. Surgical adjuvant chemotherapy in cancer of the breast: results of a decade of cooperative investigation. Ann Surg. 1968;168(3):337–56.

    PubMed  CAS  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  84. Fisher B, Slack N, Katrych D, Wolmark N. Ten year follow-up results of patients with carcinoma of the breast in a co-operative clinical trial evaluating surgical adjuvant chemotherapy. Surg Gynecol Obstet. 1975;140(4):528–34.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  85. Fisher B, Carbone P, Economou SG, et al. 1-Phenylalanine mustard (L-PAM) in the management of primary breast cancer. A report of early findings. N Engl J Med. 1975;292(3):117–22.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  86. Bonadonna G, Brusamolino E, Valagussa P, et al. Combination chemotherapy as an adjuvant treatment in operable breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 1976;294(8):405–10.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  87. Early Breast Cancer Trialists’ Collaborative Group. Polychemotherapy for early breast cancer: an overview of the randomised trials. Lancet. 1998;352(9132):930–42.

    Google Scholar 

  88. Peto R, Davies C, Godwin J, et al. Comparisons between different polychemotherapy regimens for early breast cancer: meta-analyses of long-term outcome among 100,000 women in 123 randomised trials. Lancet. 2012;379(9814):432–44.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  89. Eifel P, Axelson JA, Costa J, et al. National Institutes of Health Consensus Development Conference Statement: adjuvant therapy for breast cancer, November 1–3, 2000. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2001;93(13):979–89.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  90. Jacquin JP, Jones S, Magné N, et al. Docetaxel-containing adjuvant chemotherapy in patients with early stage breast cancer. Consistency of effect independent of nodal and biomarker status: a meta-analysis of 14 randomized clinical trials. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2012;134(3):903–13.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  91. Martín M, Seguí MA, Antón A, et al. Adjuvant docetaxel for high-risk, node-negative breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2010;363(23):2200–10.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  92. Gianni L, Baselga J, Eiermann W, et al. Phase III trial evaluating the addition of paclitaxel to doxorubicin followed by cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and fluorouracil, as adjuvant or primary systemic therapy: European Cooperative Trial in Operable Breast Cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2009;27(15):2474–81.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  93. Sparano JA, Wang M, Martino S, et al. Weekly paclitaxel in the adjuvant treatment of breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2008;358(16):1663–71.

    PubMed  CAS  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  94. Weidner N, Cady B, Goodson WH. Pathologic prognostic factors for patients with breast carcinoma. Which factors are important. Surg Oncol Clin N Am. 1997;6(3):415–62.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  95. Silverstein MJ, Skinner KA, Lomis TJ. Predicting axillary nodal positivity in 2282 patients with breast carcinoma. World J Surg. 2001;25(6):767–72.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  96. Perou CM, Sørlie T, Eisen MB, et al. Molecular portraits of human breast tumours. Nature. 2000;406(6797):747–52.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  97. Sørlie T, Perou CM, Tibshirani R, et al. Gene expression patterns of breast carcinomas distinguish tumor subclasses with clinical implications. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2001;98(19):10869–74.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  98. Isaacs C, Stearns V, Hayes DF. New prognostic factors for breast cancer recurrence. Semin Oncol. 2001;28(1):53–67.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  99. Tack DK, Palmieri FM, Perez EA. Anthracycline vs nonanthracycline adjuvant therapy for breast cancer. Oncology (Williston Park). 2004;18(11):1367–76. discussion 1378, 1381.

    Google Scholar 

  100. Todd JH, Dowle C, Williams MR, et al. Confirmation of a prognostic index in primary breast cancer. Br J Cancer. 1987;56(4):489–92.

    PubMed  CAS  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  101. Ravdin PM, Siminoff LA, Davis GJ, et al. Computer program to assist in making decisions about adjuvant therapy for women with early breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2001;19(4):980–91.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  102. Goldhirsch A, Wood WC, Gelber RD, et al. Progress and promise: highlights of the international expert consensus on the primary therapy of early breast cancer 2007. Ann Oncol. 2007;18(7):1133–44.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  103. Rouzier R, Perou CM, Symmans WF, et al. Breast cancer molecular subtypes respond differently to preoperative chemotherapy. Clin Cancer Res. 2005;11(16):5678–85.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  104. Mathieu MC, Rouzier R, Llombart-Cussac A, et al. The poor responsiveness of infiltrating lobular breast carcinomas to neoadjuvant chemotherapy can be explained by their biological profile. Eur J Cancer. 2004;40(3):342–51.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  105. von Minckwitz G, Untch M, Blohmer JU, et al. Definition and impact of pathologic complete response on prognosis after neoadjuvant chemotherapy in various intrinsic breast cancer subtypes. J Clin Oncol. 2012;30(15):1796–804.

    Google Scholar 

  106. Goldhirsch A, Wood WC, Coates AS, et al. Strategies for subtypes–dealing with the diversity of breast cancer: highlights of the St. Gallen International Expert Consensus on the Primary Therapy of Early Breast Cancer 2011. Ann Oncol. 2011;22(8):1736–47.

    PubMed  CAS  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  107. Cheang MC, Voduc D, Bajdik C, et al. Basal-like breast cancer defined by five biomarkers has superior prognostic value than triple-negative phenotype. Clin Cancer Res. 2008;14(5):1368–76.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  108. Beatson G. On the treatment of inoperable cases of carcinoma of the mamma: suggestions for a new method of treatment, with illustrative cases. Lancet. 1896;2:104–7.

    Google Scholar 

  109. Rugo HS. The breast cancer continuum in hormone-receptor-positive breast cancer in postmenopausal women: evolving management options focusing on aromatase inhibitors. Ann Oncol. 2008;19(1):16–27.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  110. Wolff AC, Dowsett M. Estrogen receptor: a never ending story? J Clin Oncol. 2011;29(22):2955–8.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  111. Goldhirsch A, Wood WC, Gelber RD, Coates AS, Thürlimann B, Senn HJ. Meeting highlights: updated international expert consensus on the primary therapy of early breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2003;21(17):3357–65.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  112. Fisher B, Dignam J, Bryant J, Wolmark N. Five versus more than five years of tamoxifen for lymph node-negative breast cancer: updated findings from the National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project B-14 randomized trial. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2001;93(9):684–90.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  113. (EBCTCG) EBCTCG. Relevance of breast cancer hormone receptors and other factors to the efficacy of adjuvant tamoxifen: patient-level meta-analysis of randomized trials. The Lancet. 2011;378:771–84.

    Google Scholar 

  114. (EBCTCG) EBCTCG. Effects of chemotherapy and hormonal therapy for early breast cancer on recurrence and 15-year survival: an overview of the randomised trials. Lancet. 2005;365(9472):1687–717.

    Google Scholar 

  115. Fisher B, Redmond C, Legault-Poisson S, et al. Postoperative chemotherapy and tamoxifen compared with tamoxifen alone in the treatment of positive-node breast cancer patients aged 50 years and older with tumors responsive to tamoxifen: results from the National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project B-16. J Clin Oncol. 1990;8(6):1005–18.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  116. Group ABCTC. Ovarian ablation or suppression in premenopausal early breast cancer: results from the international adjuvant breast cancer ovarian ablation or suppression randomized trial. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2007;99(7):516–25.

    Google Scholar 

  117. Pritchard KI. Aromatase inhibitors in adjuvant therapy of breast cancer: before, instead of, or beyond tamoxifen. J Clin Oncol. 2005;23(22):4850–2.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  118. Goss PE, Ingle JN, Martino S, et al. Randomized trial of letrozole following tamoxifen as extended adjuvant therapy in receptor-positive breast cancer: updated findings from NCIC CTG MA.17. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2005;97(17):1262–71.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  119. Fisher B, Dignam J, Bryant J, et al. Five versus more than five years of tamoxifen therapy for breast cancer patients with negative lymph nodes and estrogen receptor-positive tumors. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1996;88(21):1529–42.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  120. Tormey DC, Gray R, Falkson HC, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group. Postchemotherapy adjuvant tamoxifen therapy beyond five years in patients with lymph node-positive breast cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1996;88(24):1828–33.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  121. Stewart HJ, Forrest AP, Everington D, The Scottish Cancer Trials Breast Group, et al. Randomised comparison of 5 years of adjuvant tamoxifen with continuous therapy for operable breast cancer. Br J Cancer. 1996;74(2):297–9.

    PubMed  CAS  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  122. Goss PE, Strasser K. Aromatase inhibitors in the treatment and prevention of breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2001;19(3):881–94.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  123. Reid DM, Doughty J, Eastell R, et al. Guidance for the management of breast cancer treatment-induced bone loss: a consensus position statement from a UK Expert Group. Cancer Treat Rev. 2008;34 Suppl 1:S3–18.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  124. Gnant M, Mlineritsch B, Stoeger H, et al. Adjuvant endocrine therapy plus zoledronic acid in premenopausal women with early-stage breast cancer: 62-month follow-up from the ABCSG-12 randomised trial. Lancet Oncol. 2011;12(7):631–41.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  125. Burstein HJ, Prestrud AA, Seidenfeld J, et al. American Society of Clinical Oncology clinical practice guideline: update on adjuvant endocrine therapy for women with hormone receptor-positive breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2010;28(23):3784–96.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  126. Cuzick J, Sestak I, Baum M, et al. Effect of anastrozole and tamoxifen as adjuvant treatment for early-stage breast cancer: 10-year analysis of the ATAC trial. Lancet Oncol. 2010;11(12):1135–41.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  127. Boccardo F, Guglielmini P, Bordonaro R, et al. Switching to anastrozole versus continued tamoxifen treatment of early breast cancer: long term results of the Italian Tamoxifen Anastrozole trial. Eur J Cancer. 2013;49(7):1546–54.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  128. Bliss JM, Kilburn LS, Coleman RE, et al. Disease-related outcomes with long-term follow-up: an updated analysis of the intergroup exemestane study. J Clin Oncol. 2012;30(7):709–17.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  129. Jin H, Tu D, Zhao N, Shepherd LE, Goss PE. Longer-term outcomes of letrozole versus placebo after 5 years of tamoxifen in the NCIC CTG MA.17 trial: analyses adjusting for treatment crossover. J Clin Oncol. 2012;30(7):718–21.

    PubMed  CAS  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  130. Regan MM, Neven P, Giobbie-Hurder A, et al. Assessment of letrozole and tamoxifen alone and in sequence for postmenopausal women with steroid hormone receptor-positive breast cancer: the BIG 1–98 randomised clinical trial at 8 · 1 years median follow-up. Lancet Oncol. 2011;12(12):1101–8.

    PubMed  CAS  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  131. van de Velde CJ, Rea D, Seynaeve C, et al. Adjuvant tamoxifen and exemestane in early breast cancer (TEAM): a randomised phase 3 trial. Lancet. 2011;377(9762):321–31.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  132. Dubsky PC, Jakesz R, Mlineritsch B, et al. Tamoxifen and anastrozole as a sequencing strategy: a randomized controlled trial in postmenopausal patients with endocrine-responsive early breast cancer from the Austrian Breast and Colorectal Cancer Study Group. J Clin Oncol. 2012;30(7):722–8.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  133. Mamounas EP, Jeong JH, Wickerham DL, et al. Benefit from exemestane as extended adjuvant therapy after 5 years of adjuvant tamoxifen: intention-to-treat analysis of the National Surgical Adjuvant Breast And Bowel Project B-33 trial. J Clin Oncol. 2008;26(12):1965–71.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  134. Goss PE, Ingle JN, Pritchard KI, et al. Exemestane versus anastrozole in postmenopausal women with early breast cancer: NCIC CTG MA.27–a randomized controlled phase III trial. J Clin Oncol. 2013;31(11):1398–404.

    PubMed  CAS  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  135. Jakesz R, Greil R, Gnant M, et al. Extended adjuvant therapy with anastrozole among postmenopausal breast cancer patients: results from the randomized Austrian Breast and Colorectal Cancer Study Group Trial 6a. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2007;99(24):1845–53.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  136. Group AT. Anastrozole alone or in combination with tamoxifen versus tamoxifen alone for adjuvant treatment of postmenopausal women with early breast cancer: first results of the ATAC randomized trial. Lancet. 2002;359:2131–9.

    Google Scholar 

  137. Davies C, Pan H, Godwin J, et al. Long-term effects of continuing adjuvant tamoxifen to 10 years versus stopping at 5 years after diagnosis of oestrogen receptor-positive breast cancer: ATLAS, a randomised trial. Lancet. 2013;381(9869):805–16.

    PubMed  CAS  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  138. Gray RG, Rea D, Handley K, et al. aTTom: long-term effects of continuing adjuvant tamoxifen to 10 years versus stopping at 5 years in 6,953 women with early breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2013;Abstrt 5.

    Google Scholar 

  139. Mamounas EP, Tang G, Fisher B, et al. Association between the 21-gene recurrence score assay and risk of locoregional recurrence in node-negative, estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer: results from NSABP B-14 and NSABP B-20. J Clin Oncol. 2010;28(10):1677–83.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  140. Paik S, Tang G, Shak S, et al. Gene expression and benefit of chemotherapy in women with node-negative, estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2006;24(23):3726–34.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  141. Sparano JA. TAILORx: trial assigning individualized options for treatment (Rx). Clin Breast Cancer. 2006;7(4):347–50.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  142. Albain KS, Barlow WE, Shak S, et al. Prognostic and predictive value of the 21-gene recurrence score assay in postmenopausal women with node-positive, oestrogen-receptor-positive breast cancer on chemotherapy: a retrospective analysis of a randomised trial. Lancet Oncol. 2010;11(1):55–65.

    PubMed  CAS  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  143. Sgroi DC, Sestak I, Cuzick J, et al. Prediction of late distant recurrence in patients with oestrogen-receptor-positive breast cancer: a prospective comparison of the breast-cancer index (BCI) assay, 21-gene recurrence score, and IHC4 in the TransATAC study population. Lancet Oncol. 2013;14(11):1067–76.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  144. Harris L, Fritsche H, Mennel R, et al. American Society of Clinical Oncology 2007 update of recommendations for the use of tumor markers in breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2007;25(33):5287–312.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  145. National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guidelines. Available at: www.nccn.org. 2013. Accessed 23 May 2013.

  146. Bogaerts J, Cardoso F, Buyse M, et al. Gene signature evaluation as a prognostic tool: challenges in the design of the MINDACT trial. Nat Clin Pract Oncol. 2006;3(10):540–51.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  147. Drukker CA, Bueno-de-Mesquita JM, Retèl VP, et al. A prospective evaluation of a breast cancer prognosis signature in the observational RASTER study. Int J Cancer. 2013;133(4):929–36.

    PubMed  CAS  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  148. Ring BZ, Seitz RS, Beck R, et al. Novel prognostic immunohistochemical biomarker panel for estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2006;24(19):3039–47.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  149. Bartlett JM, Bloom KJ, Piper T, et al. Mammostrat as an immunohistochemical multigene assay for prediction of early relapse risk in the tamoxifen versus exemestane adjuvant multicenter trial pathology study. J Clin Oncol. 2012;30(36):4477–84.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  150. Ross DT, Kim CY, Tang G, et al. Chemosensitivity and stratification by a five monoclonal antibody immunohistochemistry test in the NSABP B14 and B20 trials. Clin Cancer Res. 2008;14(20):6602–9.

    PubMed  CAS  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  151. Mook S, Schmidt MK, Viale G, et al. The 70-gene prognosis-signature predicts disease outcome in breast cancer patients with 1–3 positive lymph nodes in an independent validation study. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2009;116(2):295–302.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  152. Yamauchi H, Stearns V, Hayes DF. When is a tumor marker ready for prime time? A case study of c-erbB-2 as a predictive factor in breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2001;19(8):2334–56.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  153. Slamon DJ, Clark GM, Wong SG, Levin WJ, Ullrich A, McGuire WL. Human breast cancer: correlation of relapse and survival with amplification of the HER-2/neu oncogene. Science. 1987;235(4785):177–82.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  154. Vogel C, Cobleigh MA, Tripathy D, et al. First-line, single-agent Herceptin(R) (trastuzumab) in metastatic breast cancer. A preliminary report. Eur J Cancer. 2001;37 Suppl 1:25–9.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  155. Slamon DJ, Leyland-Jones B, Shak S, et al. Use of chemotherapy plus a monoclonal antibody against HER2 for metastatic breast cancer that overexpresses HER2. N Engl J Med. 2001;344(11):783–92.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  156. Piccart-Gebhart MJ, Procter M, Leyland-Jones B, et al. Trastuzumab after adjuvant chemotherapy in HER2-positive breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2005;353(16):1659–72.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  157. Romond EH, Perez EA, Bryant J, et al. Trastuzumab plus adjuvant chemotherapy for operable HER2-positive breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2005;353(16):1673–84.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  158. Joensuu H, Kellokumpu-Lehtinen PL, Bono P, et al. Adjuvant docetaxel or vinorelbine with or without trastuzumab for breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2006;354(8):809–20.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  159. Spielmann M, Roché H, Delozier T, et al. Trastuzumab for patients with axillary-node-positive breast cancer: results of the FNCLCC-PACS 04 trial. J Clin Oncol. 2009;27(36):6129–34.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  160. Slamon D, Eiermann W, Robert N, et al. Adjuvant trastuzumab in HER2-positive breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2011;365(14):1273–83.

    PubMed  CAS  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  161. Moja L, Tagliabue L, Balduzzi S, et al. Trastuzumab containing regimens for early breast cancer. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2012;4, CD006243.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  162. Hortobagyi GN. Trastuzumab in the treatment of breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2005;353(16):1734–6.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  163. Goldhirsch A, Gelber RD, Piccart-Gebhart MJ, et al. 2 years versus 1 year of adjuvant trastuzumab for HER2-positive breast cancer (HERA): an open-label, randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2013;382(9897):1021–8.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  164. Pivot X, Romieu G, Debled M, et al. 6 months versus 12 months of adjuvant trastuzumab for patients with HER2-positive early breast cancer (PHARE): a randomised phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol. 2013;14(8):741–8.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  165. Gonzalez-Angulo AM, Litton JK, Broglio KR, et al. High risk of recurrence for patients with breast cancer who have human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive, node-negative tumors 1 cm or smaller. J Clin Oncol. 2009;27(34):5700–6.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  166. Bear HD, Anderson S, Brown A, et al. The effect on tumor response of adding sequential preoperative docetaxel to preoperative doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide: preliminary results from National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project Protocol B-27. J Clin Oncol. 2003;21(22):4165–74.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  167. van der Hage JA, van de Velde CJ, Julien JP, Tubiana-Hulin M, Vandervelden C, Duchateau L. Preoperative chemotherapy in primary operable breast cancer: results from the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer trial 10902. J Clin Oncol. 2001;19(22):4224–37.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  168. Fisher B, Brown A, Mamounas E, et al. Effect of preoperative chemotherapy on local-regional disease in women with operable breast cancer: findings from National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project B-18. J Clin Oncol. 1997;15(7):2483–93.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  169. Kaufmann M, Hortobagyi GN, Goldhirsch A, et al. Recommendations from an international expert panel on the use of neoadjuvant (primary) systemic treatment of operable breast cancer: an update. J Clin Oncol. 2006;24(12):1940–9.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  170. Kuerer HM, Newman LA, Smith TL, et al. Clinical course of breast cancer patients with complete pathologic primary tumor and axillary lymph node response to doxorubicin-based neoadjuvant chemotherapy. J Clin Oncol. 1999;17(2):460–9.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  171. Cardoso F, Loibl S, Pagani O, et al. The European Society of Breast Cancer Specialists recommendations for the management of young women with breast cancer. Eur J Cancer. 2012;48(18):3355–77.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  172. Earl HM, Vallier AL, Hiller L, et al. Effects of the addition of gemcitabine, and paclitaxel-first sequencing, in neoadjuvant sequential epirubicin, cyclophosphamide, and paclitaxel for women with high-risk early breast cancer (Neo-tAnGo): an open-label, 2 × 2 factorial randomised phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol. 2014;15(2):201–12.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  173. Nahta R, Esteva FJ. HER2 therapy: molecular mechanisms of trastuzumab resistance. Breast Cancer Res. 2006;8(6):215.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  174. Blackwell KL, Burstein HJ, Storniolo AM, et al. Randomized study of Lapatinib alone or in combination with trastuzumab in women with ErbB2-positive, trastuzumab-refractory metastatic breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2010;28(7):1124–30.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  175. Gianni L, Eiermann W, Semiglazov V, et al. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy with trastuzumab followed by adjuvant trastuzumab versus neoadjuvant chemotherapy alone, in patients with HER2-positive locally advanced breast cancer (the NOAH trial): a randomised controlled superiority trial with a parallel HER2-negative cohort. Lancet. 2010;375(9712):377–84.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  176. Gianni L, Pienkowski T, Im YH, et al. Efficacy and safety of neoadjuvant pertuzumab and trastuzumab in women with locally advanced, inflammatory, or early HER2-positive breast cancer (NeoSphere): a randomised multicentre, open-label, phase 2 trial. Lancet Oncol. 2012;13(1):25–32.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  177. Guarneri V, Frassoldati A, Bottini A, et al. Preoperative chemotherapy plus trastuzumab, lapatinib, or both in human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive operable breast cancer: results of the randomized phase II CHER-LOB study. J Clin Oncol. 2012;30(16):1989–95.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  178. Baselga J, Bradbury I, Eidtmann H, et al. Lapatinib with trastuzumab for HER2-positive early breast cancer (NeoALTTO): a randomised, open-label, multicentre, phase 3 trial. Lancet. 2012;379(9816):633–40.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  179. Untch M, Loibl S, Bischoff J, et al. Lapatinib versus trastuzumab in combination with neoadjuvant anthracycline-taxane-based chemotherapy (GeparQuinto, GBG 44): a randomised phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol. 2012;13(2):135–44.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  180. Schneeweiss A, Chia S, Hickish T, et al. Pertuzumab plus trastuzumab in combination with standard neoadjuvant anthracycline-containing and anthracycline-free chemotherapy regimens in patients with HER2-positive early breast cancer: a randomized phase II cardiac safety study (TRYPHAENA). Ann Oncol. 2013;24(9):2278–84.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  181. Guarneri V, Broglio K, Kau SW, et al. Prognostic value of pathologic complete response after primary chemotherapy in relation to hormone receptor status and other factors. J Clin Oncol. 2006;24(7):1037–44.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  182. Hughes KS, Schnaper LA, Bellon JR, et al. Lumpectomy plus tamoxifen with or without irradiation in women age 70 years or older with early breast cancer: long-term follow-up of CALGB 9343. J Clin Oncol. 2013;31(19):2382–7.

    PubMed  CAS  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  183. Pötter R, Gnant M, Kwasny W, et al. Lumpectomy plus tamoxifen or anastrozole with or without whole breast irradiation in women with favorable early breast cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2007;68(2):334–40.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  184. Winzer KJ, Sauerbrei W, Braun M, et al. Radiation therapy and tamoxifen after breast-conserving surgery: updated results of a 2 × 2 randomised clinical trial in patients with low risk of recurrence. Eur J Cancer. 2010;46(1):95–101.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  185. Tinterri C, Gatzemeier W, Zanini V, et al. Conservative surgery with and without radiotherapy in elderly patients with early-stage breast cancer: a prospective randomised multicentre trial. Breast. 2009;18(6):373–7.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  186. Yeatman TJ, Cantor AB, Smith TJ, et al. Tumor biology of infiltrating lobular carcinoma. Implications for management. Ann Surg. 1995;222(4):549–59. discussion 559–561.

    PubMed  CAS  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  187. Singletary SE, Patel-Parekh L, Bland KI. Treatment trends in early-stage invasive lobular carcinoma: a report from the National Cancer Data Base. Ann Surg. 2005;242(2):281–9.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  188. van’ t Veer LJ, Dai H, van de Vijver MJ, et al. Gene expression profiling predicts clinical outcome of breast cancer. Nature. 2002;415(6871):530–6.

    Google Scholar 

  189. Trivers KF, Lund MJ, Porter PL, et al. The epidemiology of triple-negative breast cancer, including race. Cancer Causes Control. 2009;20(7):1071–82.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  190. Chu QD, Henderson AE, Ampil F, Li BD. Outcome for patients with triple-negative breast cancer is not dependent on race/ethnicity. Int J Breast Cancer. 2012;2012:764570.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  191. Parker CC, Ampil F, Burton G, Li BD, Chu QD. Is breast conservation therapy a viable option for patients with triple-receptor negative breast cancer? Surgery. 2010;148(2):386–91.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  192. Carey LA, Dees EC, Sawyer L, et al. The triple negative paradox: primary tumor chemosensitivity of breast cancer subtypes. Clin Cancer Res. 2007;13(8):2329–34.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  193. Kennedy RD, Quinn JE, Mullan PB, Johnston PG, Harkin DP. The role of BRCA1 in the cellular response to chemotherapy. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2004;96(22):1659–68.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  194. Hiller DJ, Chu QD. Current status of poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitors as novel therapeutic agents for triple-negative breast cancer. Int J Breast Cancer. 2012;2012:829315.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  195. Iglehart JD, Silver DP. Synthetic lethality–a new direction in cancer-drug development. N Engl J Med. 2009;361(2):189–91.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  196. Tutt A, Robson M, Garber JE, et al. Oral poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitor olaparib in patients with BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations and advanced breast cancer: a proof-of-concept trial. Lancet. 2010;376(9737):235–44.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  197. Fong PC, Boss DS, Yap TA, et al. Inhibition of poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase in tumors from BRCA mutation carriers. N Engl J Med. 2009;361(2):123–34.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  198. Baron PL, Moore MP, Kinne DW, Candela FC, Osborne MP, Petrek JA. Occult breast cancer presenting with axillary metastases. Updated management. Arch Surg. 1990;125(2):210–4.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  199. Copeland EM, McBride CM. Axillary metastases from unknown primary sites. Ann Surg. 1973;178(1):25–7.

    PubMed  CAS  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  200. Kyokane T, Akashi-Tanaka S, Matsui T, Fukutomi T. Clinicopathological characteristics of non-palpable breast cancer presenting as axillary mass. Breast Cancer. 1995;2(2):105–12.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  201. Chen C, Orel SG, Harris E, Schnall MD, Czerniecki BJ, Solin LJ. Outcome after treatment of patients with mammographically occult, magnetic resonance imaging-detected breast cancer presenting with axillary lymphadenopathy. Clin Breast Cancer. 2004;5(1):72–7.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  202. Buchanan CL, Morris EA, Dorn PL, Borgen PI, Van Zee KJ. Utility of breast magnetic resonance imaging in patients with occult primary breast cancer. Ann Surg Oncol. 2005;12(12):1045–53.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  203. Rosen PP, Kimmel M. Occult breast carcinoma presenting with axillary lymph node metastases: a follow-up study of 48 patients. Hum Pathol. 1990;21(5):518–23.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  204. Ellerbroek N, Holmes F, Singletary E, Evans H, Oswald M, McNeese M. Treatment of patients with isolated axillary nodal metastases from an occult primary carcinoma consistent with breast origin. Cancer. 1990;66(7):1461–7.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  205. Vlastos G, Jean ME, Mirza AN, et al. Feasibility of breast preservation in the treatment of occult primary carcinoma presenting with axillary metastases. Ann Surg Oncol. 2001;8(5):425–31.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  206. Kothari AS, Beechey-Newman N, Hamed H, et al. Paget disease of the nipple: a multifocal manifestation of higher-risk disease. Cancer. 2002;95(1):1–7.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  207. Kollmorgen DR, Varanasi JS, Edge SB, Carson WE. Paget’s disease of the breast: a 33-year experience. J Am Coll Surg. 1998;187(2):171–7.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  208. Yim JH, Wick MR, Philpott GW, Norton JA, Doherty GM. Underlyingb pathology in mammary Paget’s disease. Ann Surg Oncol. 1997;4(4):287–92.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  209. Sakorafas GH, Blanchard K, Sarr MG, Farley DR. Paget’s disease of the breast. Cancer Treat Rev. 2001;27(1):9–18.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  210. Morrogh M, Morris EA, Liberman L, Van Zee K, Cody HS, King TA. MRI identifies otherwise occult disease in select patients with Paget disease of the nipple. J Am Coll Surg. 2008;206(2):316–21.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  211. Dixon AR, Galea MH, Ellis IO, Elston CW, Blamey RW. Paget’s disease of the nipple. Br J Surg. 1991;78(6):722–3.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  212. Ling H, Hu X, Xu XL, Liu ZB, Shao ZM. Patients with nipple-areola Paget’s disease and underlying invasive breast carcinoma have very poor survival: a matched cohort study. PLoS One. 2013;8(4):e61455.

    PubMed  CAS  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  213. Giordano SH, Cohen DS, Buzdar AU, Perkins G, Hortobagyi GN. Breast carcinoma in men: a population-based study. Cancer. 2004;101(1):51–7.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  214. Fentiman IS, Fourquet A, Hortobagyi GN. Male breast cancer. Lancet. 2006;367(9510):595–604.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  215. Nahleh ZA, Srikantiah R, Safa M, Jazieh AR, Muhleman A, Komrokji R. Male breast cancer in the veterans affairs population: a comparative analysis. Cancer. 2007;109(8):1471–7.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  216. Pemmaraju N, Munsell MF, Hortobagyi GN, Giordano SH. Retrospective review of male breast cancer patients: analysis of tamoxifen-related side-effects. Ann Oncol. 2012;23(6):1471–4.

    PubMed  CAS  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  217. Fisher B, Costantino JP, Wickerham DL, et al. Tamoxifen for the prevention of breast cancer: current status of the National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project P-1 study. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2005;97(22):1652–62.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  218. Vogel VG, Costantino JP, Wickerham DL, et al. Effects of tamoxifen vs raloxifene on the risk of developing invasive breast cancer and other disease outcomes: the NSABP Study of Tamoxifen and Raloxifene (STAR) P-2 trial. JAMA. 2006;295(23):2727–41.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  219. Goss PE, Ingle JN, Alés-Martínez JE, et al. Exemestane for breast-cancer prevention in postmenopausal women. N Engl J Med. 2011;364(25):2381–91.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  220. Cuzick J, Sestak I, Forbes J, et al. Anastrozole for prevention of breast cancer in high-risk postmenopausal women (IBIS-II): an international, double-blind, randomized placebo-controlled trial. The Lancet. 2013. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(13)62292-8.

  221. Vogel VG, Costantino JP, Wickerham DL, et al. Update of the National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project Study of Tamoxifen and Raloxifene (STAR) P-2 Trial: preventing breast cancer. Cancer Prev Res (Phila). 2010;3(6):696–706.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  222. Lippman SM. The dilemma and promise of cancer chemoprevention. Nat Clin Pract Oncol. 2006;3(10):523.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  223. Visvanathan K, Hurley P, Bantug E, et al. Use of pharmacologic interventions for breast cancer risk reduction: American Society of Clinical Oncology clinical practice guideline. J Clin Oncol. 2013;31(23):2942–62.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  224. Port ER, Montgomery LL, Heerdt AS, Borgen PI. Patient reluctance toward tamoxifen use for breast cancer primary prevention. Ann Surg Oncol. 2001;8(7):580–5.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Surgery, Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center – Shreveport, 1501 Kings Highway, 33932, Shreveport, LA, 71130-3392, USA

    Quyen D. Chu M.D., M.B.A, FACS

  2. Department of Surgery, Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center – Shreveport and the Feist-Weiller Cancer Center, 1501 Kings Highway, 33932, Shreveport, LA, 71130-3392, USA

    Roger H. Kim M.D.

Authors
  1. Quyen D. Chu M.D., M.B.A, FACS
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Roger H. Kim M.D.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Quyen D. Chu M.D., M.B.A, FACS .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Surgery, LSU Health Sciences Center-Shreveport, Shreveport, Louisiana, USA

    Quyen D. Chu

  2. Department of Surgery, Jersey Shore University Medical Center, Neptune, New Jersey, USA

    John F. Gibbs

  3. John C. McDonald Regional Transplant Center, Willis Knighton Health System, Shreveport, Louisiana, USA

    Gazi B. Zibari

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2015 Springer Science+Business Media New York

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Chu, Q.D., Kim, R.H. (2015). Early Breast Cancers. In: Chu, Q., Gibbs, J., Zibari, G. (eds) Surgical Oncology. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4939-1423-4_4

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4939-1423-4_4

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, New York, NY

  • Print ISBN: 978-1-4939-1422-7

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-4939-1423-4

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation