Breast Cancer

, Volume 23, Issue 3, pp 329–342 | Cite as

The Japanese Breast Cancer Society Clinical Practice Guideline for systemic treatment of breast cancer, 2015 edition

  • Tomohiko AiharaEmail author
  • Tatsuya Toyama
  • Masato Takahashi
  • Yutaka Yamamoto
  • Fumikata Hara
  • Hiromitsu Akabane
  • Tomomi Fujisawa
  • Takashi Ishikawa
  • Shigenori Nagai
  • Rikiya Nakamura
  • Junji Tsurutani
  • Yoshinori Ito
  • Hirofumi Mukai
Special Feature Japanese Breast Cancer Society Guidelines 2015


Here we present the English version of “The Japanese Breast Cancer Society Clinical Practice Guidelines for systemic treatment of breast cancer, 2015 edition.” which was revised in July, 2015. Differences from the most recent previous version include the following newly added clinical questions: CQ19, CQ21, CQ26 and CQ35.

Recommendation grades were changed according to newly reported evidence or on reconsideration of the existing data as follows: CQ4 and CQ8, recommendation for tamoxifen administration for 10 years; CQ5, the recommendation for adjuvant use of exemestane in combination with a luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone (LH-RH) agonist in premenopausal primary breast cancer patients was changed to grade C1; CQ11, the recommendation for adjuvant use of anthracycline and taxane in node-positive primary breast cancer patients was down-graded from A to B; CQ37, the recommendation for multigene signatures as predictive factors for the efficacy of adjuvant chemotherapy...


Breast Cancer Tamoxifen Aromatase Inhibitor Adenoid Cystic Carcinoma Invasive Lobular Carcinoma 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Conflict of interest

TT received research funding from Takeda, Daiichi-Sankyo and Novartis Pharma. MT received honoraria from AstraZeneca. YY received honoraria from Chugai pharmaceutical and Novartis Pharma, and research funding from Taiho Pharmaceutical. FH received honoraria from Chugai pharmaceutical, and received research funding from Eisai. JT received honoraria from Eisai. YI received manuscript fees paid from Chugai, Eisai and Novartis, and research funding from Novartis, Chugai, Parexel, Eisai, Sanofi, Taiho, EPS, Daiichi-Sankyo and Boehringer Ingelheim. HM received honoraria from Chugai pharmaceutical, AstraZeneca, Eisai, Novartis Pharma, Daiichi-Sankyo, Taiho Pharmaceutical, Boehringer Ingelheim Japan and Ono Pharmaceutical and received research funding from Chugai pharmaceutical, Daiichi-Sankyo, Eisai, Nippon Kayaku, Novartis Pharma, Pfeizer Japan and Sanofi.


  1. 1.
    Early Breast Cancer Trialists’ Collaborative Group (EBCTCG), Davies C, Godwin J, Gray R, Clarke M, Cutter D, Darby S, et al. Relevance of breast cancer hormone receptors and other factors to the efficacy of adjuvant tamoxifen: patient-level meta-analysis of randomized tirals. Lancet. 2011;378(9793):771–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Davies C, Pan H, Godwin J, Gray R, Arriagada R, Raina V, for the Adjuvant Tamoxifen: Longer Against Shorter (ATLAS) Collaborative Group, 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. 2012;381(9869):805–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Francis PA, Regan MM, Fleming GF, Láng I, Ciruelos E, Bellet M, et al. Adjuvant ovarian suppression in premenopausal breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2015;372(5):436–46.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Goss PE, Ingle JN, Martino S, Robert NJ, Muss HB, Piccart MJ, 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.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Gnant M, Mlineritsch B, Stoeger H, Luschin-Ebengreuth G, Heck D, Menzel C, Austrian Breast and Colorectal Cancer Study Group, Vienna, Austria, 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.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Pagani O, Regan MM, Walley BA, Fleming GF, Colleoni M, Láng I, et al. Adjuvant exemestane with ovarian suppression in premenopausal breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2014;371(2):107–18.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Fisher B, Dignam J, Wolmark N, Wickerham DL, Fisher ER, Mamounas E, et al. Tamoxifen in treatment of intraductal breast cancer: National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project B-24 randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 1999;353(9169):1993–2000.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Houghton J, George WD, Cuzick J, Duggan C, Fentiman IS, Spittle M, UK Coordinating Committee on Cancer Research; Ductal Carcinoma in situ Working Party; DCIS trialists in the UK, Australia, and New Zealand. Radiotherapy and tamoxifen in women with completely excised ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast in the UK, Australia, and New Zealand: randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2003;362(9378):95–102.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Goodwin A, Parker S, Ghersi D, Wilcken N. Post-operative radiotherapy for ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013;11:CD000563.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Noguchi S, Koyama H, Uchino J, Abe R, Miura S, Sugimachi K, et al. Postoperative adjuvant therapy with tamoxifen, tegafur plus uracil, or both in women with node-negative breast cancer: a pooled analysis of six randomized controlled trials. J Clin Oncol. 2005;23(10):2172–84.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Park Y, Okamura K, Mitsuyama S, Saito T, Koh J, Kyono S, et al. Uracil-tegafur and tamoxifen vs cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, fluorouracil, and tamoxifen in post-operative adjuvant therapy for stage I, II, or III A lymph node-positive breast cancer: a comparative study. Br J Cancer. 2009;101(4):598–604.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Watanabe T, Sano M, Takashima S, Kitaya T, Tokuda Y, Yoshimoto M, et al. Oral uracil and tegafur compared with classic cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, fluorouracil as postoperative chemotherapy in patients with node-negative, high-risk breast cancer: National Surgical Adjuvant Study for Breast Cancer 01 trial. J Clin Oncol. 2009;27(9):1368–74.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Ohashi Y, Watanabe T, Sano M, Koyama H, Inaji H, Suzuki T. Efficacy of oral tegafur-uracil (UFT) as adjuvant therapy as compared with classical cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and 5-fluorouracil (CMF) in early breast cancer: a pooled analysis of two randomized controlled trials (N.SAS-BC 01 trial and CUBC trial). Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2010;119(3):633–41.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Muss HB, Berry DA, Cirrincione CT, Theodoulou M, Mauer AM, Kornblith AB, CALGB investigators, et al. Adjuvant chemotherapy in older women with early-stage breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2009;360(20):2055–65.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Fossati R, Confalonieri C, Torri V, Ghislandi E, Penna A, Pistotti V, et al. Cytotoxic and hormonal treatment for metastatic breast cancer: a systematic review of published randomized trials involving 31,510 women. J Clin Oncol. 1998;16(10):3439–60.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Ghersi D, Wilcken N, Simes RJ. A systematic review of taxane-containing regimens for metastatic breast cancer. Br J Cancer. 2005;93(3):293–301.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Sledge GW, Neuberg D, Bernardo P, Ingle JN, Martino S, Rowinsky EK, et al. Phase III trial of doxorubicin, paclitaxel, and the combination of doxorubicin and paclitaxel as front-line chemotherapy for metastatic breast cancer:an intergroup trial (E1193). J Clin Oncol. 2003;21(4):588–92.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Takashima T, Mukai H, Hara F, Matsubara N, Saito T, Takano T, et al. Taxanes versus S-1 as the first-line chemotherapy for metastatic breast cancer (SELECT BC): an open-label, non-inferiority, randomised phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol. 2016;17(1):90–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Cardoso F, Costa A, Norton L, Cameron D, Cufer T, Fallowfield L, et al. 1st International consensus guidelines for advanced breast cancer (ABC 1). Breast. 2012;21:242–52.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Balduzzi S, Mantarro S, Guarneri V, et al. Trastuzumab-containing regimens for metastatic breast cancer. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2014;6:CD006242.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Kaufman B, Mackey JR, Clemens MR, Bapsy PP, Vaid A, Wardley A, et al. Trastuzumab plus anastrozole versus anastrozole alone for the treatment of postmenopausal women with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive, hormone receptor-positive metastatic breast cancer: results from the randomized phase III TAnDEM study. J Clin Oncol. 2009;27(33):5529–37.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Johnston S, Pippen J Jr, Pivot X, Lichinitser M, Sadeghi S, Dieras V, et al. Lapatinib combined with letrozole versus letrozole and placebo as first-line therapy for postmenopausal hormone receptor-positive metastatic breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2009;27(33):5538–46.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Wapnir IL, Aebi S, Geyer CE, et al. A randomized clinical trial of adjuvant chemotherapy for radically resected locoregional relapse of breast cancer: IBCSG. 27-02, BIG 1-02, and NSABP B-37. Clin Breast Cancer. 2008;8:287–92.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Wapnir IL, Anderson SJ, Mamounas EP, et al. Prognosis after ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence and locoregional recurrences in five National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project node-positive adjuvant breast cancer trials. J Clin Oncol. 2006;24:2028–37.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Anderson SJ, Wapnir I, Dignam JJ, et al. Prognosis after ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence and locoregional recurrences in patients treated by breast-conserving therapy in five National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project protocols of node-negative breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2009;27:2466–73.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Waeber M, Castiglione-Gertsch M, Dietrich D, et al. Adjuvant therapy after excision and radiation of isolated postmastectomy locoregional breast cancer recurrence: definitive results of a phase III randomized trial (SAKK 23/82) comparing tamoxifen with observation. Ann Oncol. 2003;14:1215–21.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Aebi S, Gelber S, Anderson SJ, Lang I, Robidoux A, Martin M, et al. Chemotherapy for isolated locoregional recurrence of breast cancer (CALOR): a randomised trial. Lancet Oncol. 2014;15:156–63.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Di Saverio S, Gutierrez J, Avisar E. A retrospective review with long term follow up of 11,400 cases of pure mucinous breast carcinoma. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2008;111(3):541–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Diab SG, Clark GM, Osborne CK, Libby A, Allred DC, Elledge RM. Tumor characteristics and clinical outcome of tubular and mucinous breast carcinomas. J Clin Oncol. 1999;17(5):1442–8.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Ghabach B, Anderson WF, Curtis RE, Huycke MM, Lavigne JA, Dores GM. Adenoid cystic carcinoma of the breast in the United States (1977–2006): a population-based cohort study. Breast Cancer Res. 2010;12(4):R54.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Vranic S, Bender R, Palazzo J, Gatalica Z. A review of adenoid cystic carcinoma of the breast with emphasis on its molecular and genetic characteristics. Hum Pathol. 2013;44(3):301–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Ridolfi RL, Rosen PP, Port A, Kinne D, Mike V. Medullary carcinoma of the breast: a clinicopathologic study with 10 year follow-up. Cancer. 1977;40(4):1365–85.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Huober J, Gelber S, Goldhirsch A, Coates AS, Viale G, Ohlschlegel C, et al. Prognosis of medullary breast cancer: analysis of 13 International Breast Cancer Study Group (IBCSG) trials. Ann Oncol. 2012;23(11):2843–5.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Vranic S, Schmitt F, Sapino A, Costa JL, Reddy S, Castro M, et al. Apocrine carcinoma of the breast: a comprehensive review. Histol Histopathol. 2013;28(11):1393–409.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Orvieto E, Maiorano E, Bottiglieri L, Maisonneuve P, Rotmensz N, Galimberti V, et al. Clinicopathologic characteristics of invasive lobular carcinoma of the breast: results of an analysis of 530 cases from a single institution. Cancer. 2008;113(7):1511–20.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Pestalozzi BC, Zahrieh D, Mallon E, Gusterson BA, Price KN, Gelber RD, et al. Distinct clinical and prognostic features of infiltrating lobular carcinoma of the breast: combined results of 15 International Breast Cancer Study Group clinical trials. J Clin Oncol. 2008;26(18):3006–14.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Paik S, Shak S, Tang G, Kim C, Baker J, Cronin M, et al. A multigene assay to predict recurrence of tamoxifen-treated, node-negative breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2004;351(27):2817–26.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Paik S, Tang G, Shak S, Kim C, Baker J, Kim W, 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.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Albain KS, Barlow WE, Shak S, Hortobagyi GN, Livingston RB, Yeh IT, 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.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Yamauchi H, Nakagawa C, Yamashige S. Societal cost-effectiveness analysis of the 21-gene assay in estrogen-receptor-positive, lymph-node-negative early-stage breast cancer in Japan. BMC Health Serv Res. 2014;14:372.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    van’t Veer H, Dai LJ, van de Vijver MJ, He YD, Hart AA, Mao M, et al. Gene expression profiling predicts clinical outcome of breast cancer. Nature. 2002;415(6871):530–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Parker JS, Mullins M, Cheang MC, Leung S, Voduc D, Vickery T, et al. Supervised risk predictor of breast cancer based on intrinsic subtypes. J Clin Oncol. 2009;27(8):1160–7.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Naoi Y, Kishi K, Tanei T, Tsunashima R, Tominaga N, Baba Y, et al. Development of 95-gene classifier as a powerful predictor of recurrences in node-negative and ER-positive breast cancer patients. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2011;128(3):633–41.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Naoi Y, Kishi K, Tsunashima R, Shimazu K, Shimomura A, Maruyama N, et al. Comparison of efficacy of 95-gene and 21-gene classifier (Oncotype DX) for prediction of recurrence in ER-positive and node-negative breast cancer patients. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2013;140(2):299–306.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Goetz MP, Rae JM, Suman VJ, Safgren SL, Ames MM, Visscher DW, et al. Pharmacogenetics of tamoxifen biotransformation is associated with clinical outcomes of efficacy and hot flashes. J Clin Oncol. 2005;23(36):9312–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Lim HS, Ju Lee H, Seok Lee K, Sook Lee E, Jang IJ, Ro J. Clinical implications of CYP2D6 genotypes predictive of tamoxifen pharmacokinetics in metastatic breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2007;25(25):3837–45.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Kiyotani K, Mushiroda T, Imamura CK, Hosono N, Tsunoda T, Kubo M, et al. Significant effect of polymorphisms in CYP2D6 and ABCC2 on clinical outcomes of adjuvant tamoxifen therapy for breast cancer patients. J Clin Oncol. 2010;28(8):1287–93.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Okishiro M, Taguchi T, Jin Kim S, Shimazu K, Tamaki Y, Noguchi S. Genetic polymorphisms of CYP2D6 10 and CYP2C19 2, 3 are not associated with prognosis, endometrial thickness, or bone mineral density in Japanese breast cancer patients treated with adjuvant tamoxifen. Cancer. 2009;115(5):952–61.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Xu Y, Sun Y, Yao L, Shi L, Wu Y, Ouyang T, et al. Association between CYP2D6 10 genotype and survival of breast cancer patients receiving tamoxifen treatment. Ann Oncol. 2008;19(8):1423–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Toyama T, Yamashita H, Sugiura H, Kondo N, Iwase H, Fujii Y. No association between CYP2D6 10 genotype and survival of node-negative Japanese breast cancer patients receiving adjuvant tamoxifen treatment. Jpn J Clin Oncol. 2009;39(10):651–6.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Dezentjéé VO, van Schaik RH, Vletter-Bogaartz JM, van der Straaten T, Wessels JA, Kranenbarg EM, et al. CYP2D6 genotype in relation to tamoxifen efficacy in a Dutch cohort of the tamoxifen exemestane adjuvant multinational (TEAM) trial. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2013;140(2):363–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Rae JM, Drury S, Hayes DF, Stearns V, Thibert JN, Haynes BP, et al. CYP2D6 and UGT2B7 genotype and risk of recurrence in tamoxifen-treated breast cancer patients. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2012;104(6):452–60.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Regan MM, Leyland-Jones B, Bouzyk M, Pagani O, Tang W, Kammler R, et al. CYP2D6 genotype and tamoxifen response in postmenopausal women with endocrine-responsive breast cancer: the breast international group 1-98 trial. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2012;104(6):441–51.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Goetz MP, Sun JX, Suman VJ, Silva GO, Perou CM, Nakamura Y, et al. Loss of Heterozygosity at the CYP2D6 Locus in Breast Cancer: implications for germline pharmacogenetic studies. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2014;107(2). doi: 10.1093/jnci/dju401.
  55. 55.
    Ratain MJ, Nakamura Y, Cox NJ. CYP2D6 genotype and tamoxifen activity: understanding interstudy variability in methodological quality. Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2013;94(2):185–7.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Province MA, Goetz MP, Brauch H, Flockhart DA, Hebert JM, Whaley R, International Tamoxifen Pharmacogenomics Consortium, et al. CYP2D6 genotype and adjuvant tamoxifen: meta-analysis of heterogeneous study populations. Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2014;95(2):216–27.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Berry D. CYP2D6 genotyping and the use of tamoxifen in breast cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2013;105(17):1267–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Bines J, Oleske DM, Cobleigh MA. Ovarian function in premenopausal women treated with adjuvant chemotherapy for breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 1996;14:1718–29.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Blumenfeld Z, Avivi I, Linn S, et al. Prevention of irreversible chemotherapy-induced ovarian damage in young women with lymphoma by a gonadotrophin-releasing hormone agonist in parallel to chemotherapy. Hum Reprod. 1996;11:1620–6.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Del Mastro L, Boni L, Michelotti A, et al. Effect of the gonadotropin-releasing hormone analogue triptorelin on the occurrence of chemotherapy-induced early menopause in premenopausal women with breast cancer: a randomized trial. JAMA. 2011;306:269–76.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Badawy A, Elnashar A, El-Ashry M, et al. Gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonists for prevention of chemotherapy-induced ovarian damage: prospective randomized study. Fertil Steril. 2009;91:694–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Japanese Breast Cancer Society 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Tomohiko Aihara
    • 1
    Email author
  • Tatsuya Toyama
    • 2
  • Masato Takahashi
    • 3
  • Yutaka Yamamoto
    • 4
  • Fumikata Hara
    • 5
  • Hiromitsu Akabane
    • 6
  • Tomomi Fujisawa
    • 7
  • Takashi Ishikawa
    • 8
  • Shigenori Nagai
    • 9
  • Rikiya Nakamura
    • 10
  • Junji Tsurutani
    • 11
  • Yoshinori Ito
    • 12
  • Hirofumi Mukai
    • 13
  1. 1.Breast CenterAihara HospitalOsakaJapan
  2. 2.Department of Breast and Endocrine SurgeryNagoya City University HospitalNagoyaJapan
  3. 3.Department of Breast SurgeryNational Hospital Organization Hokkaido Cancer CenterSapporoJapan
  4. 4.Department of Breast and Endocrine Surgery, Graduate School of Medical SciencesKumamoto UniversityKumamotoJapan
  5. 5.Department of Breast OncologyNational Hospital Organization Shikoku Cancer CenterMatsuyamaJapan
  6. 6.Department of Breast SurgeryAsahikawa-Kosei General HospitalAsahikawaJapan
  7. 7.Department of Breast OncologyGunma Prefectural Cancer CenterOtaJapan
  8. 8.Department of Breast SurgeryTokyo Medical University HospitalTokyoJapan
  9. 9.Division of Breast OncologySaitama Cancer CenterInamachiJapan
  10. 10.Division of Breast SurgeryChiba Cancer CenterChibaJapan
  11. 11.Department of Medical OncologyKinki University Faculty of MedicineOsakasayamaJapan
  12. 12.Department of Breast Medical OncologyThe Cancer Institute Hospital of Japanese Foundation for Cancer ResearchTokyoJapan
  13. 13.Division of Breast and Medical OncologyNational Cancer Center Hospital EastKashiwaJapan

Personalised recommendations