Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

A Review of Local and Systemic Therapy in Breast Cancer

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Breast Disease

  • 910 Accesses

Abstract

In breast cancer, the choice of treatment strategy is based on the features and biology of the tumor as well as on the age, general health status, and personal preferences of the patient. The clinical situations in which molecular tests have the greatest relevance for therapeutic decision-making are still being established; however, evidence is also increasing regarding the breast cancer types in which good predictions of prognosis can be obtained. One of the current challenges in treatment is the selection of the subset of patients who might preferentially benefit from therapy. Optimizing treatment to achieve the best clinical results while minimizing the side effects of treatment is also imperative.

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 119.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 159.99
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. Amin MB, Greene FL, Edge SB, Compton CC, Gershenwald JE, Brookland RK, et al. The eighth edition AJCC cancer staging manual: continuing to build a bridge from a population-based to a more “personalized” approach to cancer staging. CA Cancer J Clin. 2017;67(2):93–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Giuliano AE, Connolly JL, Edge SB, Mittendorf EA, Rugo HS, Solin LJ, et al. Breast cancer-major changes in the American Joint Committee on Cancer eighth edition cancer staging manual. CA Cancer J Clin. 2017;67(4):290–303.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Giuliano AE, Edge SB, Hortobagyi GN. Eighth edition of the AJCC cancer staging manual: breast cancer. Ann Surg Oncol. 2018;25(7):1783–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Hammond ME, Hayes DF, Dowsett M, Allred DC, Hagerty KL, Badve S, et al. American Society of Clinical Oncology/College of American Pathologists guideline recommendations for immunohistochemical testing of estrogen and progesterone receptors in breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2010;28(16):2784–95.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  5. Wolff AC, Hammond ME, Hicks DG, Dowsett M, McShane LM, Allison KH, et al. Recommendations for human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 testing in breast cancer: American Society of Clinical Oncology/College of American Pathologists clinical practice guideline update. J Clin Oncol. 2013;31(31):3997–4013.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Weiss A, Chavez-MacGregor M, Lichtensztajn DY, Yi M, Tadros A, Hortobagyi GN, et al. Validation study of the American Joint Committee on Cancer eighth edition prognostic stage compared with the anatomic stage in breast cancer. JAMA Oncol. 2018;4(2):203–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Mittendorf EA, Vila J, Tucker SL, Chavez-MacGregor M, Smith BD, Symmans WF, et al. The neo-bioscore update for staging breast cancer treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy: incorporation of prognostic biologic factors into staging after treatment. JAMA Oncol. 2016;2(7):929–36.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  8. Chavez-MacGregor M, Mittendorf EA, Clarke CA, Lichtensztajn DY, Hunt KK, Giordano SH. Incorporating tumor characteristics to the American Joint Committee on Cancer breast cancer staging system. Oncologist. 2017;22(11):1292–300.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  9. Mittendorf EA, Chavez-MacGregor M, Vila J, Yi M, Lichtensztajn DY, Clarke CA, et al. Bioscore: a staging system for breast cancer patients that reflects the prognostic significance of underlying tumor biology. Ann Surg Oncol. 2017;24(12):3502–9.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  10. O’Neil M, Madan R, Tawfik OW, Thomas PA, Fan F. Lobular carcinoma in situ/atypical lobular hyperplasia on breast needle biopsies: does it warrant surgical excisional biopsy? A study of 27 cases. Ann Diagn Pathol. 2010;14(4):251–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Anderson BO, Calhoun KE, Rosen EL. Evolving concepts in the management of lobular neoplasia. J Natl Compr Cancer Netw. 2006;4(5):511–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. National Comprehensive Cancer Network. Breast Cancer, version 1.2019. www.nccn.org.

  13. Forbes JF, Sestak I, Howell A, Bonanni B, Bundred N, Levy C, et al. Anastrozole versus tamoxifen for the prevention of locoregional and contralateral breast cancer in postmenopausal women with locally excised ductal carcinoma in situ (IBIS-II DCIS): a double-blind, randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2016;387(10021):866–73.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  14. Margolese RG, Cecchini RS, Julian TB, Ganz PA, Costantino JP, Vallow LA, et al. Anastrozole versus tamoxifen in postmenopausal women with ductal carcinoma in situ undergoing lumpectomy plus radiotherapy (NSABP B-35): a randomised, double-blind, phase 3 clinical trial. Lancet. 2016;387(10021):849–56.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Cody HS 3rd, Van Zee KJ. Point: sentinel lymph node biopsy is indicated for patients with DCIS. J Natl Compr Cancer Netw. 2003;1(2):199–206.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Silverstein MJ, Lagios MD, Groshen S, Waisman JR, Lewinsky BS, Martino S, et al. The influence of margin width on local control of ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast. N Engl J Med. 1999;340(19):1455–61.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Morrow M, Van Zee KJ, Solin LJ, Houssami N, Chavez-MacGregor M, Harris JR, et al. Society of Surgical Oncology-American Society for Radiation Oncology-American Society of Clinical Oncology consensus guideline on margins for breast-conserving surgery with whole-breast irradiation in ductal carcinoma in situ. Pract Radiat Oncol. 2016;6(5):287–95.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  18. Nilsson C, Valachis A. The role of boost and hypofractionation as adjuvant radiotherapy in patients with DCIS: a meta-analysis of observational studies. Radiother Oncol. 2015;114(1):50–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Smith BD. When is good enough really good enough? Defining the role of radiation in low-risk ductal carcinoma in situ. J Clin Oncol. 2015;33(7):686–91.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Julien JP, Bijker N, Fentiman IS, Peterse JL, Delledonne V, Rouanet P, et al. Radiotherapy in breast-conserving treatment for ductal carcinoma in situ: first results of the EORTC randomised phase III trial 10853. EORTC Breast Cancer Cooperative Group and EORTC Radiotherapy Group. Lancet. 2000;355(9203):528–33.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Houghton J, George WD, Cuzick J, Duggan C, Fentiman IS, Spittle M, et al. 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.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Fisher B, Land S, Mamounas E, Dignam J, Fisher ER, Wolmark N. Prevention of invasive breast cancer in women with ductal carcinoma in situ: an update of the National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project experience. Semin Oncol. 2001;28(4):400–18.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Harris JR, Halpin-Murphy P, McNeese M, Mendenhall NP, Morrow M, Robert NJ. Consensus statement on postmastectomy radiation therapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1999;44(5):989–90.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Overgaard M, Hansen PS, Overgaard J, Rose C, Andersson M, Bach F, et al. Postoperative radiotherapy in high-risk premenopausal women with breast cancer who receive adjuvant chemotherapy. Danish Breast Cancer Cooperative Group 82b trial. N Engl J Med. 1997;337(14):949–55.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Overgaard M, Jensen MB, Overgaard J, Hansen PS, Rose C, Andersson M, et al. Postoperative radiotherapy in high-risk postmenopausal breast-cancer patients given adjuvant tamoxifen: Danish Breast Cancer Cooperative Group DBCG 82c randomised trial. Lancet. 1999;353(9165):1641–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Wapnir IL, Dignam JJ, Fisher B, Mamounas EP, Anderson SJ, Julian TB, et al. Long-term outcomes of invasive ipsilateral breast tumor recurrences after lumpectomy in NSABP B-17 and B-24 randomized clinical trials for DCIS. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2011;103(6):478–88. https://doi.org/10.1093/jnci/djr027.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  27. EBCTCG, Mcgale P, Taylor C, Correa C, Cutter D, Duane F, et al. Effect of radiotherapy after mastectomy and axillary surgery on 10-year recurrence and 20-year breast cancer mortality: meta-analysis of individual patient data for 8135 women in 22 randomised trials. Lancet. 2014;383(9935):2127–35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Lai HW, Chen DR, Wu YC, Chen CJ, Lee CW, Kuo SJ, et al. Comparison of the diagnostic accuracy of magnetic resonance imaging with sonography in the prediction of breast cancer tumor size: a concordance analysis with histopathologically determined tumor size. Ann Surg Oncol. 2015;22(12):3816–23.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Ferguson NL, Bell J, Heidel R, Lee S, Vanmeter S, Duncan L, et al. Prognostic value of breast cancer subtypes, Ki-67 proliferation index, age, and pathologic tumor characteristics on breast cancer survival in Caucasian women. Breast J. 2013;19(1):22–30.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Wood WC. Close/positive margins after breast-conserving therapy: additional resection or no resection? Breast. 2013;22(Suppl 2):S115–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Maisonneuve P, Disalvatore D, Rotmensz N, Curigliano G, Colleoni M, Dellapasqua S, et al. Proposed new clinicopathological surrogate definitions of luminal A and luminal B (HER2-negative) intrinsic breast cancer subtypes. Breast Cancer Res. 2014;16(3):R65.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  32. Curigliano G, Burstein HJ, Winner E, Gnant M, Dubsky P, Loibl S, et al. De-escalating and escalating treatments for early-stage breast cancer: the St. Gallen International Expert Consensus Conference on the Primary Therapy of Early Breast Cancer 2017. Ann Oncol. 2017;28(8):1700–12.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  33. Guiu S, Michiels S, Andre F, Cortes J, Denkert C, Di Leo A, et al. Molecular subclasses of breast cancer: how do we define them? The IMPAKT 2012 Working Group Statement. Ann Oncol. 2012;23(12):2997–3006.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Balic M, Thomssen C, Würstlein R, Gnant M, Harbeck N. St. Gallen/Vienna 2019: a brief summary of the consensus discussion on the optimal primary breast cancer treatment. Breast Care. 2019:1–8. https://doi.org/10.1159/000499931.

  35. Fourquet A, Campana F, Zafrani B, Mosseri V, Vielh P, Durand JC, et al. Prognostic factors of breast recurrence in the conservative management of early breast cancer: a 25-year follow-up. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1989;17(4):719–25.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Komoike Y, Akiyama F, Iino Y, Ikeda T, Akashi-Tanaka S, Ohsumi S, et al. Ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence (IBTR) after breast-conserving treatment for early breast cancer: risk factors and impact on distant metastases. Cancer. 2006;106(1):35–41.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Zhou P, Gautam S, Recht A. Factors affecting outcome for young women with early stage invasive breast cancer treated with breast-conserving therapy. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2007;101(1):51–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Golshan M, Miron A, Nixon AJ, Garber JE, Cash EP, Iglehart JD, et al. The prevalence of germline BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations in young women with breast cancer undergoing breast-conservation therapy. Am J Surg. 2006;192(1):58–62.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Kroman N, Holtveg H, Wohlfahrt J, Jensen MB, Mouridsen HT, Blichert-Toft M, et al. Effect of breast-conserving therapy versus radical mastectomy on prognosis for young women with breast carcinoma. Cancer. 2004;100(4):688–93.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Cruz MR, Prestes JC, Gimenes DL, Fanelli MF. Fertility preservation in women with breast cancer undergoing adjuvant chemotherapy: a systematic review. Fertil Steril. 2010;94(1):138–43.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Dunn L, Fox KR. Techniques for fertility preservation in patients with breast cancer. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol. 2009;21(1):68–73.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Oktay K, Harvey BE, Partridge AH, Quinn GP, Reinecke J, Taylor HS, et al. Fertility preservation in patients with cancer: ASCO Clinical Practice Guideline Update. J Clin Oncol. 2018;36(19):1994–2001. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2018.78.1914.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Redig AJ, Brannigan R, Stryker SJ, Woodruff TK, Jeruss JS. Incorporating fertility preservation into the care of young oncology patients. Cancer. 2011;117(1):4–10.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Lee S, Ozkavukcu S, Heytens E, Moy F, Oktay K. Value of early referral to fertility preservation in young women with breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2010;28(31):4683–6.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  45. Arriagada R, Le MG, Rochard F, Contesso G. Conservative treatment versus mastectomy in early breast cancer: patterns of failure with 15 years of follow-up data. Institut Gustave-Roussy Breast Cancer Group. J Clin Oncol. 1996;14(5):1558–64.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Fisher B, Anderson S, Bryant J, Margolese RG, Deutsch M, Fisher ER, 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.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Veronesi U, Cascinelli N, Mariani L, Greco M, Saccozzi R, Luini A, 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.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Moran MS, Schnitt SJ, Giuliano AE, Harris JR, Khan SA, Horton J, 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. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrobp.2013.11.012.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  49. Recht A. Contralateral prophylactic mastectomy: caveat emptor. J Clin Oncol. 2009;27(9):1347–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Lyman GH, Somerfield MR, Bosserman LD, Perkins CL, Weaver DL, Giuliano AE. Sentinel lymph node biopsy for patients with early-stage breast cancer: American Society of Clinical Oncology clinical practice guideline update. J Clin Oncol. 2017;35(5):561–4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. Bass SS, Lyman GH, McCann CR, Ku NN, Berman C, Durand K, et al. Lymphatic mapping and sentinel lymph node biopsy. Breast J. 1999;5(5):288–95.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Cox CE, Nguyen K, Gray RJ, Salud C, Ku NN, Dupont E, et al. Importance of lymphatic mapping in ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS): why map DCIS? Am Surg. 2001;67(6):513–9; discussion 9–21.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Krag D, Weaver D, Ashikaga T, Moffat F, Klimberg VS, Shriver C, et al. The sentinel node in breast cancer--a multicenter validation study. N Engl J Med. 1998;339(14):941–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Krag DN, Anderson SJ, Julian TB, Brown AM, Harlow SP, Costantino JP, 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.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  55. Kuehn T, Vogl FD, Helms G, Pueckler SV, Schirrmeister H, Strueber R, et al. Sentinel-node biopsy for axillary staging in breast cancer: results from a large prospective German multi-institutional trial. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2004;30(3):252–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  56. Veronesi U, Paganelli G, Viale G, Luini A, Zurrida S, Galimberti V, 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.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. Mansel RE, Fallowfield L, Kissin M, Goyal A, Newcombe RG, Dixon JM, et al. Randomized multicenter trial of sentinel node biopsy versus standard axillary treatment in operable breast cancer: the ALMANAC trial. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2006;98(9):599–609.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  58. Cox CE, Salud CJ, Cantor A, Bass SS, Peltz ES, Ebert MD, et al. Learning curves for breast cancer sentinel lymph node mapping based on surgical volume analysis. J Am Coll Surg. 2001;193(6):593–600.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  59. Dupont E, Cox C, Shivers S, Salud C, Nguyen K, Cantor A, et al. Learning curves and breast cancer lymphatic mapping: institutional volume index. J Surg Res. 2001;97(1):92–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  60. Giuliano AE, Hawes D, Ballman KV, Whitworth PW, Blumencranz PW, Reintgen DS, et al. Association of occult metastases in sentinel lymph nodes and bone marrow with survival among women with early-stage invasive breast cancer. JAMA. 2011;306(4):385–93.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  61. Ozmen V, Karanlik H, Cabioglu N, Igci A, Kecer M, Asoglu O, et al. Factors predicting the sentinel and non-sentinel lymph node metastases in breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2006;95(1):1–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  62. Houvenaeghel G, Nos C, Giard S, Mignotte H, Esterni B, Jacquemier J, et al. A nomogram predictive of non-sentinel lymph node involvement in breast cancer patients with a sentinel lymph node micrometastasis. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2009;35(7):690–5.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  63. Katz A, Smith BL, Golshan M, Niemierko A, Kobayashi W, Raad RA, et al. Nomogram for the prediction of having four or more involved nodes for sentinel lymph node-positive breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2008;26(13):2093–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  64. Scow JS, Degnim AC, Hoskin TL, Reynolds C, Boughey JC. Assessment of the performance of the Stanford Online Calculator for the prediction of nonsentinel lymph node metastasis in sentinel lymph node-positive breast cancer patients. Cancer. 2009;115(18):4064–70.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  65. van la Parra RF, Ernst MF, Bevilacqua JL, Mol SJ, Van Zee KJ, Broekman JM, et al. Validation of a nomogram to predict the risk of nonsentinel lymph node metastases in breast cancer patients with a positive sentinel node biopsy: validation of the MSKCC breast nomogram. Ann Surg Oncol. 2009;16(5):1128–35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  66. Werkoff G, Lambaudie E, Fondrinier E, Leveque J, Marchal F, Uzan M, et al. Prospective multicenter comparison of models to predict four or more involved axillary lymph nodes in patients with breast cancer with one to three metastatic sentinel lymph nodes. J Clin Oncol. 2009;27(34):5707–12.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  67. Giuliano AE, Ballman KV, McCall L, Beitsch PD, Brennan MB, Kelemen PR, et al. Effect of axillary dissection vs no axillary dissection on 10-year overall survival among women with invasive breast cancer and sentinel node metastasis: the ACOSOG Z0011 (Alliance) randomized clinical trial. JAMA. 2017;318(10):918–26.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  68. Giuliano AE, Hunt KK, Ballman KV, Beitsch PD, Whitworth PW, Blumencranz PW, 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.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  69. Galimberti V, Cole BF, Zurrida S, Viale G, Luini A, Veronesi P, 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.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  70. Axelsson CK, Mouridsen HT, Zedeler K. Axillary dissection of level I and II lymph nodes is important in breast cancer classification. The Danish Breast Cancer Cooperative Group (DBCG). Eur J Cancer. 1992;28A(8–9):1415–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  71. Kiricuta CI, Tausch J. A mathematical model of axillary lymph node involvement based on 1446 complete axillary dissections in patients with breast carcinoma. Cancer. 1992;69(10):2496–501.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  72. Fisher B, Redmond C, Fisher ER, Bauer M, Wolmark N, Wickerham DL, 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.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  73. Alkuwari E, Auger M. Accuracy of fine-needle aspiration cytology of axillary lymph nodes in breast cancer patients: a study of 115 cases with cytologic-histologic correlation. Cancer. 2008;114(2):89–93.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  74. Classe JM, Bordes V, Campion L, Mignotte H, Dravet F, Leveque J, et al. Sentinel lymph node biopsy after neoadjuvant chemotherapy for advanced breast cancer: results of Ganglion Sentinelle et Chimiotherapie Neoadjuvante, a French prospective multicentric study. J Clin Oncol. 2009;27(5):726–32.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  75. Hunt KK, Yi M, Mittendorf EA, Guerrero C, Babiera GV, Bedrosian I, et al. Sentinel lymph node surgery after neoadjuvant chemotherapy is accurate and reduces the need for axillary dissection in breast cancer patients. Ann Surg. 2009;250(4):558–66.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  76. Kuehn T, Bauerfeind I, Fehm T, Fleige B, Hausschild M, Helms G, 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.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  77. Boughey JC, Suman VJ, Mittendorf EA, Ahrendt GM, Wilke LG, Taback B, 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.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  78. El Hage Chehade H, Headon H, El Tokhy O, Heeney J, Kasem A, Mokbel K. Is sentinel lymph node biopsy a viable alternative to complete axillary dissection following neoadjuvant chemotherapy in women with node-positive breast cancer at diagnosis? An updated meta-analysis involving 3,398 patients. Am J Surg. 2016;212(5):969–81.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  79. Fisher B, Bryant J, Wolmark N, Mamounas E, Brown A, Fisher ER, et al. Effect of preoperative chemotherapy on the outcome of women with operable breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 1998;16(8):2672–85.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  80. Bear HD, Anderson S, Smith RE, Geyer CE Jr, Mamounas EP, Fisher B, et al. Sequential preoperative or postoperative docetaxel added to preoperative doxorubicin plus cyclophosphamide for operable breast cancer: National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project Protocol B-27. J Clin Oncol. 2006;24(13):2019–27.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  81. Hudis C, Modi S. Preoperative chemotherapy for breast cancer: miracle or mirage? JAMA. 2007;298(22):2665–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  82. Dawood S, Cristofanilli M. What progress have we made in managing inflammatory breast cancer? Oncology (Williston Park). 2007;21(6):673–9; discussion 9–80, 86–7.

    Google Scholar 

  83. Kell MR, Morrow M. Surgical aspects of inflammatory breast cancer. Breast Dis. 2005;22:67–73.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  84. Stearns V, Ewing CA, Slack R, Penannen MF, Hayes DF, Tsangaris TN. Sentinel lymphadenectomy after neoadjuvant chemotherapy for breast cancer may reliably represent the axilla except for inflammatory breast cancer. Ann Surg Oncol. 2002;9(3):235–42.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  85. Motwani SB, Strom EA, Schechter NR, Butler CE, Lee GK, Langstein HN, et al. The impact of immediate breast reconstruction on the technical delivery of postmastectomy radiotherapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2006;66(1):76–82.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  86. Ahmed S, Snelling A, Bains M, Whitworth IH. Breast reconstruction. BMJ. 2005;330(7497):943–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  87. Edlich RF, Winters KL, Faulkner BC, Bill TJ, Lin KY. Advances in breast reconstruction after mastectomy. J Long-Term Eff Med Implants. 2005;15(2):197–207.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  88. Pennington DG. Breast reconstruction after mastectomy: current state of the art. ANZ J Surg. 2005;75(6):454–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  89. Garcia-Etienne CA, Cody Iii HS 3rd, Disa JJ, Cordeiro P, Sacchini V. Nipple-sparing mastectomy: initial experience at the Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center and a comprehensive review of literature. Breast J. 2009;15(4):440–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  90. Petit JY, Veronesi U, Orecchia R, Rey P, Martella S, Didier F, et al. Nipple sparing mastectomy with nipple areola intraoperative radiotherapy: one thousand and one cases of a five years experience at the European institute of oncology of Milan (EIO). Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2009;117(2):333–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  91. Yueh JH, Houlihan MJ, Slavin SA, Lee BT, Pories SE, Morris DJ. Nipple-sparing mastectomy: evaluation of patient satisfaction, aesthetic results, and sensation. Ann Plast Surg. 2009;62(5):586–90.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  92. Chung AP, Sacchini V. Nipple-sparing mastectomy: where are we now? Surg Oncol. 2008;17(4):261–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  93. Gerber B, Krause A, Dieterich M, Kundt G, Reimer T. The oncological safety of skin sparing mastectomy with conservation of the nipple-areola complex and autologous reconstruction: an extended follow-up study. Ann Surg. 2009;249(3):461–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  94. Piper M, Peled AW, Foster RD, Moore DH, Esserman LJ. Total skin-sparing mastectomy: a systematic review of oncologic outcomes and postoperative complications. Ann Plast Surg. 2013;70(4):435–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  95. Mallon P, Feron JG, Couturaud B, Fitoussi A, Lemasurier P, Guihard T, et al. The role of nipple-sparing mastectomy in breast cancer: a comprehensive review of the literature. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2013;131(5):969–84.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  96. De La Cruz L, Moody AM, Tappy EE, Blankenship SA, Hecht EM. Overall survival, disease-free survival, local recurrence, and nipple-areolar recurrence in the setting of nipple-sparing mastectomy: a meta-analysis and systematic review. Ann Surg Oncol. 2015;22(10):3241–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  97. Santoro S, Loreti A, Cavaliere F, Costarelli L, La Pinta M, Manna E, et al. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy is not a contraindication for nipple sparing mastectomy. Breast. 2015;24(5):661–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  98. Foster RD, Esserman LJ, Anthony JP, Hwang ES, Do H. Skin-sparing mastectomy and immediate breast reconstruction: a prospective cohort study for the treatment of advanced stages of breast carcinoma. Ann Surg Oncol. 2002;9(5):462–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  99. Downes KJ, Glatt BS, Kanchwala SK, Mick R, Fraker DL, Fox KR, et al. Skin-sparing mastectomy and immediate reconstruction is an acceptable treatment option for patients with high-risk breast carcinoma. Cancer. 2005;103(5):906–13.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  100. Carlson GW, Styblo TM, Lyles RH, Jones G, Murray DR, Staley CA, et al. The use of skin sparing mastectomy in the treatment of breast cancer: the emory experience. Surg Oncol. 2003;12(4):265–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  101. Newman LA, Kuerer HM, Hunt KK, Kroll SS, Ames FC, Ross MI, et al. Presentation, treatment, and outcome of local recurrence afterskin-sparing mastectomy and immediate breast reconstruction. Ann Surg Oncol. 1998;5(7):620–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  102. Medina-Franco H, Vasconez LO, Fix RJ, Heslin MJ, Beenken SW, Bland KI, et al. Factors associated with local recurrence after skin-sparing mastectomy and immediate breast reconstruction for invasive breast cancer. Ann Surg. 2002;235(6):814–9.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  103. Kronowitz SJ, Robb GL. Radiation therapy and breast reconstruction: a critical review of the literature. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2009;124(2):395–408.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  104. Tran NV, Chang DW, Gupta A, Kroll SS, Robb GL. Comparison of immediate and delayed free TRAM flap breast reconstruction in patients receiving postmastectomy radiation therapy. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2001;108(1):78–82.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  105. Mehta VK, Goffinet D. Postmastectomy radiation therapy after TRAM flap breast reconstruction. Breast J. 2004;10(2):118–22.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  106. Clough KB, Kaufman GJ, Nos C, Buccimazza I, Sarfati IM. Improving breast cancer surgery: a classification and quadrant per quadrant atlas for oncoplastic surgery. Ann Surg Oncol. 2010;17(5):1375–91.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  107. Anderson BO, Masetti R, Silverstein MJ. Oncoplastic approaches to partial mastectomy: an overview of volume-displacement techniques. Lancet Oncol. 2005;6(3):145–57.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  108. Weber WP, Soysal SD, El-Tamer M, Sacchini V, Knauer M, Tausch C, et al. First international consensus conference on standardization of oncoplastic breast conserving surgery. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2017;165(1):139–49.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  109. Kaur N, Petit JY, Rietjens M, Maffini F, Luini A, Gatti G, et al. Comparative study of surgical margins in oncoplastic surgery and quadrantectomy in breast cancer. Ann Surg Oncol. 2005;12(7):539–45.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  110. Early Breast Cancer Trialists’ Collaborative Group, Peto R, Davies C, Godwin J, Gray R, Pan HC, 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.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  111. Jones S, Holmes FA, O’Shaughnessy J, Blum JL, Vukelja SJ, McIntyre KJ, et al. Docetaxel with cyclophosphamide is associated with an overall survival benefit compared with doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide: 7-year follow-up of US oncology research trial 9735. J Clin Oncol. 2009;27(8):1177–83.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  112. Sparano JA, Gray RJ, Makower DF, Pritchard KI, Albain KS, Hayes DF, et al. Prospective validation of a 21-gene expression assay in breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2015;373(21):2005–14.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  113. Krop I, Ismaila N, Andre F, Bast RC, Barlow W, Collyar DE, et al. Use of biomarkers to guide decisions on adjuvant systemic therapy for women with early-stage invasive breast cancer: American Society of Clinical Oncology clinical practice guideline focused update. J Clin Oncol. 2017;35(24):2838–47.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  114. Cardoso F, van’t Veer LJ, Bogaerts J, Slaets L, Viale G, Delaloge S, et al. 70-gene signature as an aid to treatment decisions in early-stage breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2016;375(8):717–29.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  115. Early Breast Cancer Trialists’ Collaborative Group. 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.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  116. Blum JL, Flynn PJ, Yothers G, Asmar L, Geyer CE Jr, Jacobs SA, et al. Anthracyclines in early breast cancer: the ABC trials-USOR 06-090, NSABP B-46-I/USOR 07132, and NSABP B-49 (NRG Oncology). J Clin Oncol. 2017;35(23):2647–55.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  117. Del Mastro L, De Placido S, Bruzzi P, De Laurentiis M, Boni C, Cavazzini G, et al. Fluorouracil and dose-dense chemotherapy in adjuvant treatment of patients with early-stage breast cancer: an open-label, 2 × 2 factorial, randomised phase 3 trial. Lancet. 2015;385(9980):1863–72.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  118. Joensuu H, Kellokumpu-Lehtinen PL, Huovinen R, Jukkola-Vuorinen A, Tanner M, Kokko R, et al. Adjuvant capecitabine in combination with docetaxel, epirubicin, and cyclophosphamide for early breast cancer: the randomized clinical FinXX trial. JAMA Oncol. 2017;3(6):793–800.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  119. Masuda N, Lee SJ, Ohtani S, Im YH, Lee ES, Yokota I, et al. Adjuvant capecitabine for breast cancer after preoperative chemotherapy. N Engl J Med. 2017;376(22):2147–59.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  120. Denduluri N, Chavez-MacGregor M, Telli ML, Eisen A, Graff SL, Hassett MJ, et al. Selection of optimal adjuvant chemotherapy and targeted therapy for early breast cancer: ASCO clinical practice guideline focused update. J Clin Oncol. 2018;36(23):2433–43. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2018.78.8604.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  121. Bonilla L, Ben-Aharon I, Vidal L, Gafter-Gvili A, Leibovici L, Stemmer SM. Dose-dense chemotherapy in nonmetastatic breast cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2010;102(24):1845–54.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  122. Early Breast Cancer Trialists’ Collaborative Group. Long-term outcomes for neoadjuvant versus adjuvant chemotherapy in early breast cancer: meta-analysis of individual patient data from ten randomised trials. Lancet Oncol. 2018;19(1):27–39.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  123. von Minckwitz G, Procter M, de Azambuja E, Zardavas D, Benyunes M, Viale G, et al. Adjuvant pertuzumab and trastuzumab in early HER2-positive breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2017;377(2):122–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  124. Tolaney SM, Barry WT, Dang CT, Yardley DA, Moy B, Marcom PK, et al. Adjuvant paclitaxel and trastuzumab for node-negative, HER2-positive breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2015;372(2):134–41.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  125. Cameron D, Piccart-Gebhart MJ, Gelber RD, Procter M, Goldhirsch A, de Azambuja E, et al. 11 years’ follow-up of trastuzumab after adjuvant chemotherapy in HER2-positive early breast cancer: final analysis of the HERceptin Adjuvant (HERA) trial. Lancet. 2017;389(10075):1195–205.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  126. Gianni L, Pienkowski T, Im YH, Tseng LM, Liu MC, Lluch A, et al. 5-year analysis of neoadjuvant pertuzumab and trastuzumab in patients with locally advanced, inflammatory, or early-stage HER2-positive breast cancer (NeoSphere): a multicentre, open-label, phase 2 randomised trial. Lancet Oncol. 2016;17(6):791–800.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  127. Loi S, Dafni U, Karlis D, Polydoropoulou V, Young BM, Willis S, et al. Effects of estrogen receptor and human epidermal growth factor receptor-2 levels on the efficacy of trastuzumab: a secondary analysis of the HERA trial. JAMA Oncol. 2016;2(8):1040–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  128. Harbeck NGO, Christgen M, et al. Efficacy of 12-weeks of neoadjuvant TDM1 with or without endocrine therapy in HER2-positive hormone-receptor-positive early breast cancer: WSG-ADAPT HER2+/HR+ phase II trial. J Clin Oncol. 2015;33(15_suppl):abstr 506.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  129. Martin M, Holmes FA, Ejlertsen B, Delaloge S, Moy B, Iwata H, et al. Neratinib after trastuzumab-based adjuvant therapy in HER2-positive breast cancer (ExteNET): 5-year analysis of a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol. 2017;18(12):1688–700.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  130. Silver DP, Richardson AL, Eklund AC, Wang ZC, Szallasi Z, Li Q, et al. Efficacy of neoadjuvant cisplatin in triple-negative breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2010;28(7):1145–53.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  131. Moebus V, Jackisch C, Lueck HJ, du Bois A, Thomssen C, Kurbacher C, et al. Intense dose-dense sequential chemotherapy with epirubicin, paclitaxel, and cyclophosphamide compared with conventionally scheduled chemotherapy in high-risk primary breast cancer: mature results of an AGO phase III study. J Clin Oncol. 2010;28(17):2874–80.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  132. Bell R, Brown J, Parmar M, Toi M, Suter T, Steger GG, et al. Final efficacy and updated safety results of the randomized phase III BEATRICE trial evaluating adjuvant bevacizumab-containing therapy in triple-negative early breast cancer. Ann Oncol. 2017;28(4):754–60.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  133. Coates AS, Winer EP, Goldhirsch A, Gelber RD, Gnant M, Piccart-Gebhart M, et al. Tailoring therapies--improving the management of early breast cancer: St Gallen International Expert Consensus on the Primary Therapy of Early Breast Cancer 2015. Ann Oncol. 2015;26(8):1533–46.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  134. Davies C, Pan H, Godwin J, Gray R, Arriagada R, Raina V, 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.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  135. Sestak I, Cuzick J, Dowsett M, Lopez-Knowles E, Filipits M, Dubsky P, et al. Prediction of late distant recurrence after 5 years of endocrine treatment: a combined analysis of patients from the Austrian breast and colorectal cancer study group 8 and arimidex, tamoxifen alone or in combination randomized trials using the PAM50 risk of recurrence score. J Clin Oncol. 2015;33(8):916–22.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  136. Coates AS, Keshaviah A, Thurlimann B, Mouridsen H, Mauriac L, Forbes JF, et al. Five years of letrozole compared with tamoxifen as initial adjuvant therapy for postmenopausal women with endocrine-responsive early breast cancer: update of study BIG 1-98. J Clin Oncol. 2007;25(5):486–92.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  137. Howell A, Cuzick J, Baum M, Buzdar A, Dowsett M, Forbes JF, et al. Results of the ATAC (Arimidex, Tamoxifen, Alone or in Combination) trial after completion of 5 years’ adjuvant treatment for breast cancer. Lancet. 2005;365(9453):60–2.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  138. Burstein HJ, Lacchetti C, Anderson H, Buchholz TA, Davidson NE, Gelmon KA, et al. Adjuvant endocrine therapy for women with hormone receptor-positive breast cancer: ASCO Clinical Practice Guideline Focused Update. J Clin Oncol. 2019;37(5):423–38.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  139. Goss PE, Ingle JN, Pritchard KI, Robert NJ, Muss H, Gralow J, et al. Extending aromatase-inhibitor adjuvant therapy to 10 years. N Engl J Med. 2016;375(3):209–19.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  140. Schleicher SM, Dickler MN. Extended adjuvant aromatase inhibitor therapy in post-menopausal women. Curr Breast Cancer Rep. 2017;9(4):236–41. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12609-017-0260-9. Epub 2017 Oct 16.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  141. Tjan-Heijnen VCG, van Hellemond IEG, Peer PGM, Swinkels ACP, Smorenburg CH, van der Sangen MJC, Dutch Breast Cancer Research Group (BOOG) for the DATA Investigators, et al. Extended adjuvant aromatase inhibition after sequential endocrine therapy (DATA): a randomised, phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol. 2017 Nov;18(11):1502–11. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1470-2045(17)30600-9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  142. Blok EJ, Kroep JR, Meershoek-Klein Kranenbarg E, Duijm-de Carpentier M, Putter H, van den Bosch J, et al. Optimal duration of extended adjuvant endocrine therapy for early breast cancer; results of the IDEAL trial (BOOG 2006-05). J Natl Cancer Inst. 2018;110(1) https://doi.org/10.1093/jnci/djx134.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  143. Colleoni M, Luo W, Karlsson P, Chirgwin J, Aebi S, Jerusalem G, et al. Extended adjuvant intermittent letrozole versus continuous letrozole in postmenopausal women with breast cancer (SOLE): a multicentre, open-label, randomised, phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol. 2018;19(1):127–38.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  144. Sikov WM, Berry DA, Perou CM, Singh B, Cirrincione CT, Tolaney SM, et al. Impact of the addition of carboplatin and/or bevacizumab to neoadjuvant once-per-week paclitaxel followed by dose-dense doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide on pathologic complete response rates in stage II to III triple-negative breast cancer: CALGB 40603 (Alliance). J Clin Oncol. 2015;33(1):13–21.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  145. Rugo HS, Olopade OI, DeMichele A, Yau C, van’t Veer LJ, Buxton MB, et al. Adaptive randomization of veliparib-carboplatin treatment in breast cancer. N Engl J Med 2016;375(1):23–34.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  146. Hahnen E, Lederer B, Hauke J, Loibl S, Krober S, Schneeweiss A, et al. Germline mutation status, pathological complete response, and disease-free survival in triple-negative breast cancer: secondary analysis of the GeparSixto randomized clinical trial. JAMA Oncol. 2017;3(10):1378–85.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  147. Gluz O, Nitz U, Liedtke C, Christgen M, Grischke EM, Forstbauer H, et al. Comparison of neoadjuvant nab-paclitaxel+carboplatin vs nab-paclitaxel+gemcitabine in triple-negative breast cancer: randomized WSG-ADAPT-TN trial results. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2018;110(6):628–37.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  148. Telli ML, Timms KM, Reid J, Hennessy B, Mills GB, Jensen KC, et al. Homologous recombination deficiency (HRD) score predicts response to platinum-containing neoadjuvant chemotherapy in patients with triple-negative breast cancer. Clin Cancer Res. 2016;22(15):3764–73.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  149. Arun B, Bayraktar S, Liu DD, Gutierrez Barrera AM, Atchley D, Pusztai L, et al. Response to neoadjuvant systemic therapy for breast cancer in BRCA mutation carriers and noncarriers: a single-institution experience. J Clin Oncol. 2011;29:3739–46.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  150. Untch M, Jackisch C, Schneeweiss A, Conrad B, Aktas B, Denkert C, et al. Nab-paclitaxel versus solvent-based paclitaxel in neoadjuvant chemotherapy for early breast cancer (GeparSepto-GBG 69): a randomised, phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol. 2016;17(3):345–56.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  151. van Ramshorst MS, van Werkhoven E, Mandjes IAM, Schot M, Wesseling J, Vrancken Peeters M, et al. Trastuzumab in combination with weekly paclitaxel and carboplatin as neo-adjuvant treatment for HER2-positive breast cancer: the TRAIN-study. Eur J Cancer. 2017;74:47–54.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  152. Hurvitz SA, Martin M, Symmans WF, Jung KH, Huang CS, Thompson AM, et al. Neoadjuvant trastuzumab, pertuzumab, and chemotherapy versus trastuzumab emtansine plus pertuzumab in patients with HER2-positive breast cancer (KRISTINE): a randomised, open-label, multicentre, phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol. 2018;19(1):115–26.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  153. von Minckwitz G, Huang CS, Mano MS, Loibl S, Mamounas EP, Untch M, et al. KATHERINE. Trastuzumab Emtansine for residual invasive HER2-positive breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2019;380(7):617–28. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1814017.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  154. Recht A, Comen EA, Fine RE, Fleming GF, Hardenbergh PH, Ho AY, et al. Postmastectomy radiotherapy: an American Society of Clinical Oncology, American Society for Radiation Oncology, and Society of Surgical Oncology focused. Pract Radiat Oncol. 2016;6(6):e219–34.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  155. Whelan TJ, Olivotto IA, Parulekar WR, Ackerman I, Chua BH, Nabid A, et al. Regional nodal irradiation in early-stage breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2015;373(4):307–16.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  156. Veronesi U, Marubini E, Mariani L, Galimberti V, Luini A, Veronesi P, 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.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  157. Veronesi U, Saccozzi R, Del Vecchio M, Banfi A, Clemente C, De Lena M, et al. Comparing radical mastectomy with quadrantectomy, axillary dissection, and radiotherapy in patients with small cancers of the breast. N Engl J Med. 1981;305(1):6–11.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  158. Early Breast Cancer Trialists’ Collaborative Group, Darby S, McGale P, Correa C, Taylor C, Arriagada R, 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  159. Vaidya JS, Joseph DJ, Tobias JS, Bulsara M, Wenz F, Saunders C, et al. Targeted intraoperative radiotherapy versus whole breast radiotherapy for breast cancer (TARGIT-A trial): an international, prospective, randomised, non-inferiority phase 3 trial. Lancet. 2010;376(9735):91–102.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  160. Veronesi U, Orecchia R, Maisonneuve P, Viale G, Rotmensz N, Sangalli C, et al. Intraoperative radiotherapy versus external radiotherapy for early breast cancer (ELIOT): a randomised controlled equivalence trial. Lancet Oncol. 2013;14(13):1269–77.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  161. Smith GL, Xu Y, Buchholz TA, Giordano SH, Jiang J, Shih YC, 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.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  162. Olivotto IA, Whelan TJ, Parpia S, Kim DH, Berrang T, Truong PT, et al. Interim cosmetic and toxicity results from RAPID: a randomized trial of accelerated partial breast irradiation using three-dimensional conformal external beam radiation therapy. J Clin Oncol. 2013;31(32):4038–45.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  163. Shah C, Vicini F, Shaitelman SF, Hepel J, Keisch M, Arthur D, et al. The American Brachytherapy Society consensus statement for accelerated partial-breast irradiation. Brachytherapy. 2018;17(1):154–70.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  164. Kunkler IH, Williams LJ, Jack WJ, Cameron DA, Dixon JM, Investigators PI. Breast-conserving surgery with or without irradiation in women aged 65 years or older with early breast cancer (PRIME II): a randomised controlled trial. Lancet Oncol. 2015;16(3):266–73.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  165. Hughes KS, Schnaper LA, Berry D, Cirrincione C, McCormick B, Shank B, 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.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  166. Romestaing P, Lehingue Y, Carrie C, Coquard R, Montbarbon X, Ardiet JM, et al. Role of a 10-Gy boost in the conservative treatment of early breast cancer: results of a randomized clinical trial in Lyon, France. J Clin Oncol. 1997;15(3):963–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  167. Bartelink H, Horiot JC, Poortmans P, Struikmans H, Van den Bogaert W, Barillot I, et al. Recurrence rates after treatment of breast cancer with standard radiotherapy with or without additional radiation. N Engl J Med. 2001;345(19):1378–87.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  168. Poortmans P, Bartelink H, Horiot JC, Struikmans H, Van den Bogaert W, Fourquet A, et al. The influence of the boost technique on local control in breast conserving treatment in the EORTC “boost versus no boost” randomised trial. Radiother Oncol. 2004;72(1):25–33.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  169. Holland R, Veling SH, Mravunac M, Hendriks JH. Histologic multifocality of Tis, T1-2 breast carcinomas. Implications for clinical trials of breast-conserving surgery. Cancer. 1985;56(5):979–90.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  170. Vaidya JS, Vyas JJ, Chinoy RF, Merchant N, Sharma OP, Mittra I. Multicentricity of breast cancer: whole-organ analysis and clinical implications. Br J Cancer. 1996;74(5):820–4.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  171. Faverly DR, Hendriks JH, Holland R. Breast carcinomas of limited extent: frequency, radiologic-pathologic characteristics, and surgical margin requirements. Cancer. 2001;91(4):647–59.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  172. Frazier TG, Wong RW, Rose D. Implications of accurate pathologic margins in the treatment of primary breast cancer. Arch Surg. 1989;124(1):37–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  173. Khan AJ, Arthur DW, Dale RG, Haffty BG, Vicini FA. Ultra-short courses of adjuvant breast radiotherapy: promised land or primrose path? Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2012;82(2):499–501.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  174. Khan AJ, Arthur DW, Vicini FA. On the road to intraoperative radiotherapy: more “proceed with caution” signs. Oncology (Williston Park). 2013;27(2):113–4, 22.

    Google Scholar 

  175. Yarnold J, Ashton A, Bliss J, Homewood J, Harper C, Hanson J, et al. Fractionation sensitivity and dose response of late adverse effects in the breast after radiotherapy for early breast cancer: long-term results of a randomised trial. Radiother Oncol. 2005;75(1):9–17.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  176. Whelan TJ, Pignol JP, Levine MN, Julian JA, MacKenzie R, Parpia S, et al. Long-term results of hypofractionated radiation therapy for breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2010;362(6):513–20.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  177. START Trialists’ Group, Bentzen SM, Agrawal RK, Aird EG, Barrett JM, Barrett-Lee PJ, et al. The UK Standardisation of Breast Radiotherapy (START) Trial A of radiotherapy hypofractionation for treatment of early breast cancer: a randomised trial. Lancet Oncol. 2008;9(4):331–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  178. START Trialists’ Group, Bentzen SM, Agrawal RK, Aird EG, Barrett JM, Barrett-Lee PJ, et al. The UK Standardisation of Breast Radiotherapy (START) Trial B of radiotherapy hypofractionation for treatment of early breast cancer: a randomised trial. Lancet. 2008;371(9618):1098–107.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  179. FAST Trialists Group, Agrawal RK, Alhasso A, Barrett-Lee PJ, Bliss JM, Bliss P, et al. First results of the randomised UK FAST Trial of radiotherapy hypofractionation for treatment of early breast cancer (CRUKE/04/015). Radiother Oncol. 2011;100(1):93–100.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  180. Hickey BE, James ML, Lehman M, Hider PN, Jeffery M, Francis DP, et al. Fraction size in radiation therapy for breast conservation in early breast cancer. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016;7:CD003860.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  181. Zhou ZR, Mei X, Chen XX, Yang ZZ, Hou J, Zhang L, et al. Systematic review and meta-analysis comparing hypofractionated with conventional fraction radiotherapy in treatment of early breast cancer. Surg Oncol. 2015;24(3):200–11.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  182. Smith BD, Bellon JR, Blitzblau R, Freedman G, Haffty B, Hahn C, et al. Radiation therapy for the whole breast: executive summary of an American Society for Radiation Oncology (ASTRO) evidence-based guideline. Pract Radiat Oncol. 2018;8(3):145–52.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  183. 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.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  184. Galper S, Recht A, Silver B, Manola J, Gelman R, Schnitt SJ, et al. Factors associated with regional nodal failure in patients with early stage breast cancer with 0-3 positive axillary nodes following tangential irradiation alone. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1999;45(5):1157–66.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  185. Reddy SG, Kiel KD. Supraclavicular nodal failure in patients with one to three positive axillary lymph nodes treated with breast conserving surgery and breast irradiation, without supraclavicular node radiation. Breast J. 2007;13(1):12–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  186. Yates L, Kirby A, Crichton S, Gillett C, Cane P, Fentiman I, et al. Risk factors for regional nodal relapse in breast cancer patients with one to three positive axillary nodes. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2012;82(5):2093–103.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  187. Strom EA, Woodward WA, Katz A, Buchholz TA, Perkins GH, Jhingran A, et al. Clinical investigation: regional nodal failure patterns in breast cancer patients treated with mastectomy without radiotherapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2005;63(5):1508–13.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  188. Truong PT, Jones SO, Kader HA, Wai ES, Speers CH, Alexander AS, et al. Patients with t1 to t2 breast cancer with one to three positive nodes have higher local and regional recurrence risks compared with node-negative patients after breast-conserving surgery and whole-breast radiotherapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2009;73(2):357–64.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  189. Veronesi U, Arnone P, Veronesi P, Galimberti V, Luini A, Rotmensz N, et al. The value of radiotherapy on metastatic internal mammary nodes in breast cancer. Results on a large series. Ann Oncol. 2008;19(9):1553–60.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  190. Mamounas EP, Anderson SJ, Dignam JJ, Bear HD, Julian TB, Geyer CE Jr, et al. Predictors of locoregional recurrence after neoadjuvant chemotherapy: results from combined analysis of National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project B-18 and B-27. J Clin Oncol. 2012;30(32):3960–6.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  191. De Felice F, Osti MF, De Sanctis V, Musio D, Tombolini V. Critical decision-making in radiotherapy for early stage breast cancer in a neo-adjuvant treatment era. Expert Rev Anticancer Ther. 2017;17(5):481–5.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  192. Garg AK, Buchholz TA. Influence of neoadjuvant chemotherapy on radiotherapy for breast cancer. Ann Surg Oncol. 2015;22(5):1434–40.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  193. Chang HJ, Han SW, Oh DY, Im SA, Jeon YK, Park IA, et al. Discordant human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 and hormone receptor status in primary and metastatic breast cancer and response to trastuzumab. Jpn J Clin Oncol. 2011;41(5):593–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  194. Domschke C, Schuetz F. Side effects of bone-targeted therapies in advanced breast cancer. Breast Care (Basel). 2014;9(5):332–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  195. Klijn JG, Blamey RW, Boccardo F, Tominaga T, Duchateau L, Sylvester R, et al. Combined tamoxifen and luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone (LHRH) agonist versus LHRH agonist alone in premenopausal advanced breast cancer: a meta-analysis of four randomized trials. J Clin Oncol. 2001;19(2):343–53.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  196. Bonneterre J, Thurlimann B, Robertson JF, Krzakowski M, Mauriac L, Koralewski P, et al. Anastrozole versus tamoxifen as first-line therapy for advanced breast cancer in 668 postmenopausal women: results of the Tamoxifen or Arimidex Randomized Group Efficacy and Tolerability study. J Clin Oncol. 2000;18(22):3748–57.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  197. Buzdar A, Douma J, Davidson N, Elledge R, Morgan M, Smith R, et al. Phase III, multicenter, double-blind, randomized study of letrozole, an aromatase inhibitor, for advanced breast cancer versus megestrol acetate. J Clin Oncol. 2001;19(14):3357–66.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  198. Nabholtz JM, Buzdar A, Pollak M, Harwin W, Burton G, Mangalik A, et al. Anastrozole is superior to tamoxifen as first-line therapy for advanced breast cancer in postmenopausal women: results of a North American multicenter randomized trial. Arimidex Study Group. J Clin Oncol. 2000;18(22):3758–67.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  199. Paridaens RJ, Dirix LY, Beex LV, Nooij M, Cameron DA, Cufer T, et al. Phase III study comparing exemestane with tamoxifen as first-line hormonal treatment of metastatic breast cancer in postmenopausal women: the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Breast Cancer Cooperative Group. J Clin Oncol. 2008;26(30):4883–90.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  200. Mouridsen H, Gershanovich M, Sun Y, Perez-Carrion R, Boni C, Monnier A, et al. Phase III study of letrozole versus tamoxifen as first-line therapy of advanced breast cancer in postmenopausal women: analysis of survival and update of efficacy from the International Letrozole Breast Cancer Group. J Clin Oncol. 2003;21(11):2101–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  201. Steele N, Zekri J, Coleman R, Leonard R, Dunn K, Bowman A, et al. Exemestane in metastatic breast cancer: effective therapy after third-generation non-steroidal aromatase inhibitor failure. Breast. 2006;15(3):430–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  202. Bertelli G, Garrone O, Merlano M, Occelli M, Bertolotti L, Castiglione F, et al. Sequential treatment with exemestane and non-steroidal aromatase inhibitors in advanced breast cancer. Oncology. 2005;69(6):471–7.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  203. Robertson JFR, Bondarenko IM, Trishkina E, Dvorkin M, Panasci L, Manikhas A, et al. Fulvestrant 500 mg versus anastrozole 1 mg for hormone receptor-positive advanced breast cancer (FALCON): an international, randomised, double-blind, phase 3 trial. Lancet. 2016;388(10063):2997–3005.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  204. Robertson JFR, Cheung KL, Noguchi S, Shao Z, Degboe A, Lichfield J, et al. Health-related quality of life from the FALCON phase III randomised trial of fulvestrant 500 mg versus anastrozole for hormone receptor-positive advanced breast cancer. Eur J Cancer. 2018;94:206–15.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  205. Bergh J, Jonsson PE, Lidbrink EK, Trudeau M, Eiermann W, Brattstrom D, et al. FACT: an open-label randomized phase III study of fulvestrant and anastrozole in combination compared with anastrozole alone as first-line therapy for patients with receptor-positive postmenopausal breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2012;30(16):1919–25.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  206. Mehta RS, Barlow WE, Albain KS, Vandenberg TA, Dakhil SR, Tirumali NR, et al. Combination anastrozole and fulvestrant in metastatic breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2012;367(5):435–44.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  207. Tan PS, Haaland B, Montero AJ, Lopes G. A meta-analysis of anastrozole in combination with fulvestrant in the first line treatment of hormone receptor positive advanced breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2013;138(3):961–5.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  208. Mehta RS, Barlow WE, Albain KS, Vandenberg TA, Dakhil SR, Tirumali NR, et al. Overall survival with fulvestrant plus anastrozole in metastatic breast cancer. N Eng J Med. 2019;380(13):1226–34.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  209. Turner NC, Ro J, Andre F, Loi S, Verma S, Iwata H, et al. Palbociclib in hormone-receptor-positive advanced breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2015;373(3):209–19.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  210. Finn RS, Crown JP, Lang I, Boer K, Bondarenko IM, Kulyk SO, et al. The cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 inhibitor palbociclib in combination with letrozole versus letrozole alone as first-line treatment of oestrogen receptor-positive, HER2-negative, advanced breast cancer (PALOMA-1/TRIO-18): a randomised phase 2 study. Lancet Oncol. 2015;16(1):25–35.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  211. Beaver JA, Amiri-Kordestani L, Charlab R, Chen W, Palmby T, Tilley A, et al. FDA approval: palbociclib for the treatment of postmenopausal patients with estrogen receptor-positive, HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer. Clin Cancer Res. 2015;21(21):4760–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  212. Finn RS, Martin M, Rugo HS, Jones S, Im SA, Gelmon K, et al. Palbociclib and letrozole in advanced breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2016;375(20):1925–36.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  213. O’Shaughnessy J, Petrakova K, Sonke GS, Conte P, Arteaga CL, Cameron DA, et al. Ribociclib plus letrozole versus letrozole alone in patients with de novo HR+, HER2-advanced breast cancer in the randomized MONALEESA-2 trial. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2018;168(1):127–34.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  214. Tripathy D, Im SA, Colleoni M, Franke F, Bardia A, Harbeck N, et al. Ribociclib plus endocrine therapy for premenopausal women with hormonereceptor-positive, advanced breast cancer (MONALEESA-7): a randomised phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol. 2018;19(7):904–15. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1470-2045(18)30292-4.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  215. Goetz MP, Toi M, Campone M, Sohn J, Paluch-Shimon S, Huober J, et al. MONARCH 3: abemaciclib as initial therapy for advanced breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2017;35(32):3638–46.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  216. Giordano SH, Temin S, Chandarlapaty S, Crews JR, Esteva FJ, Kirshner JJ, et al. Systemic therapy for patients with advanced human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive breast cancer: ASCO Clinical Practice Guideline Update. J Clin Oncol. 2018;36(26):2736–40. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2018.79.2697.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  217. Paplomata E, O’Regan R. The PI3K/AKT/mTOR pathway in breast cancer: targets, trials and biomarkers. Ther Adv Med Oncol. 2014;6(4):154–66.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  218. Baselga J, Campone M, Piccart M, Burris HA 3rd, Rugo HS, Sahmoud T, et al. Everolimus in postmenopausal hormone-receptor-positive advanced breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2012;366(6):520–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  219. Wolff AC, Lazar AA, Bondarenko I, Garin AM, Brincat S, Chow L, et al. Randomized phase III placebo-controlled trial of letrozole plus oral temsirolimus as first-line endocrine therapy in postmenopausal women with locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2013;31(2):195–202.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  220. Maass N, Harbeck N, Mundhenke C, Lerchenmuller C, Barinoff J, Luck HJ, et al. Everolimus as treatment for breast cancer patients with bone metastases only: results of the phase II RADAR study. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol. 2013;139(12):2047–56.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  221. Fleming GF, Ma CX, Huo D, Sattar H, Tretiakova M, Lin L, et al. Phase II trial of temsirolimus in patients with metastatic breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2012;136(2):355–63.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  222. Ma CX, Luo J, Naughton M, Ademuyiwa F, Suresh R, Griffith M, et al. A phase I trial of BKM120 (buparlisib) in combination with fulvestrant in postmenopausal women with estrogen receptor-positive metastatic breast cancer. Clin Cancer Res. 2016;22(7):1583–91.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  223. Baselga J, Im SA, Iwata H, editors. PIK3CA status in circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) predicts efficacy of buparlisib (BUP) plus fulvestrant (FULV) in postmenopausal women with endocrine-resistant HR+/HER2– advanced breast cancer (BC): first results from the randomized, phase III BELLE-2 trial. San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium. San Antonio, TX; 2015.

    Google Scholar 

  224. Baselga J, Im SA, Iwata H, Cortes J, De Laurentiis M, Jiang Z, et al. Buparlisib plus fulvestrant versus placebo plus fulvestrant in postmenopausal, hormone receptor-positive, HER2-negative, advanced breast cancer (BELLE-2): a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol. 2017;18(7):904–16.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  225. Di Leo A, Seok Lee K, Ciruelos E, editors. BELLE-3: a phase III study of buparlisib + fulvestrant in postmenopausal women with HR+, HER2−, aromatase inhibitor-treated, locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer, who progressed on or after mTOR inhibitor-based treatment. San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium. San Antonio, TX; 2016.

    Google Scholar 

  226. Finn RS, Dering J, Conklin D, Kalous O, Cohen DJ, Desai AJ, et al. PD 0332991, a selective cyclin D kinase 4/6 inhibitor, preferentially inhibits proliferation of luminal estrogen receptor-positive human breast cancer cell lines in vitro. Breast Cancer Res. 2009;11(5):R77.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  227. Cristofanilli M, Turner NC, Bondarenko I, Ro J, Im SA, Masuda N, et al. Fulvestrant plus palbociclib versus fulvestrant plus placebo for treatment of hormone-receptor-positive, HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer that progressed on previous endocrine therapy (PALOMA-3): final analysis of the multicentre, double-blind, phase 3 randomised controlled trial. Lancet Oncol. 2016;17(4):425–39.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  228. Sledge GW Jr, Toi M, Neven P, Sohn J, Inoue K, Pivot X, et al. MONARCH 2: abemaciclib in combination with fulvestrant in women with HR+/HER2- advanced breast cancer who had progressed while receiving endocrine therapy. J Clin Oncol. 2017;35(25):2875–84.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  229. Dickler MN, Tolaney SM, Rugo HS, Cortes J, Dieras V, Patt D, et al. MONARCH 1, a phase II study of abemaciclib, a CDK4 and CDK6 inhibitor, as a single agent, in patients with refractory HR(+)/HER2(−) metastatic breast cancer. Clin Cancer Res. 2017;23(17):5218–24.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  230. Swain SM, Baselga J, Kim SB, Ro J, Semiglazov V, Campone M, et al. Pertuzumab, trastuzumab, and docetaxel in HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2015;372(8):724–34.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  231. Perez EA, Barrios C, Eiermann W, Toi M, Im YH, Conte P, et al. Trastuzumab emtansine with or without pertuzumab versus trastuzumab plus taxane for human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive, advanced breast cancer: primary results from the phase III MARIANNE study. J Clin Oncol. 2017;35(2):141–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  232. Geyer CE, Forster J, Lindquist D, Chan S, Romieu CG, Pienkowski T, et al. Lapatinib plus capecitabine for HER2-positive advanced breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2006;355(26):2733–43.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  233. Dieras V, Miles D, Verma S, Pegram M, Welslau M, Baselga J, et al. Trastuzumab emtansine versus capecitabine plus lapatinib in patients with previously treated HER2-positive advanced breast cancer (EMILIA): a descriptive analysis of final overall survival results from a randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol. 2017;18(6):732–42.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  234. Verma S, Miles D, Gianni L, Krop IE, Welslau M, Baselga J, et al. Trastuzumab emtansine for HER2-positive advanced breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2012;367(19):1783–91.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  235. Urruticoechea A, Rizwanullah M, Im SA, Ruiz ACS, Lang I, Tomasello G, et al. Randomized phase III trial of trastuzumab plus capecitabine with or without pertuzumab in patients with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive metastatic breast cancer who experienced disease progression during or after trastuzumab-based therapy. J Clin Oncol. 2017;35(26):3030–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  236. Krop IE, Kim SB, Martin AG, LoRusso PM, Ferrero JM, Badovinac-Crnjevic T, et al. Trastuzumab emtansine versus treatment of physician’s choice in patients with previously treated HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer (TH3RESA): final overall survival results from a randomised open-label phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol. 2017;18(6):743–54.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  237. Pivot X, Manikhas A, Zurawski B, Chmielowska E, Karaszewska B, Allerton R, et al. CEREBEL (EGF111438): a phase III, randomized, open-label study of lapatinib plus capecitabine versus trastuzumab plus capecitabine in patients with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive metastatic breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2015;33(14):1564–73.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  238. Krop IE, Lin NU, Blackwell K, Guardino E, Huober J, Lu M, et al. Trastuzumab emtansine (T-DM1) versus lapatinib plus capecitabine in patients with HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer and central nervous system metastases: a retrospective, exploratory analysis in EMILIA. Ann Oncol. 2015;26(1):113–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  239. Ramakrishna N, Temin S, Chandarlapaty S, Crews JR, Davidson NE, Esteva FJ, et al. Recommendations on disease management for patients with advanced human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive breast cancer and brain metastases: ASCO clinical practice guideline update. J Clin Oncol. 2018;36(27):2804–7. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2018.79.2713.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  240. Robson M, Im SA, Senkus E, Xu B, Domchek SM, Masuda N, et al. Olaparib for metastatic breast cancer in patients with a germline BRCA mutation. N Engl J Med. 2017;377:523–33.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  241. Traina TA, Miller K, Yardley DA, Eakle J, Schwartzberg LS, O’Shaughnessy J, et al. Enzalutamide for the treatment of androgen receptor-expressing triple-negative breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2018;36(9):884–90.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  242. Williams AD, Payne KK, Posey AD Jr, Hill C, Conejo-Garcia J, June CH, et al. Immunotherapy for breast cancer: current and future strategies. Curr Surg Rep. 2017;5:pii: 31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  243. Schmid P, Adams S, Rugo HS, Schneeweiss A, Barrios CH, Iwata H, et al. Atezolizumab and nab-paclitaxel in advanced triple-negative breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2018;379:2108–21. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1809615.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  244. Hortobagyi GN. Multidisciplinary management of advanced primary and metastatic breast cancer. Cancer. 1994;74(1 Suppl):416–23.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  245. Babiera GV, Rao R, Feng L, Meric-Bernstam F, Kuerer HM, Singletary SE, et al. Effect of primary tumor extirpation in breast cancer patients who present with stage IV disease and an intact primary tumor. Ann Surg Oncol. 2006;13(6):776–82.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  246. Khan SA, Stewart AK, Morrow M. Does aggressive local therapy improve survival in metastatic breast cancer? Surgery. 2002;132(4):620–6; discussion 6–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  247. Rao R, Feng L, Kuerer HM, Singletary SE, Bedrosian I, Hunt KK, et al. Timing of surgical intervention for the intact primary in stage IV breast cancer patients. Ann Surg Oncol. 2008;15(6):1696–702.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  248. Rapiti E, Verkooijen HM, Vlastos G, Fioretta G, Neyroud-Caspar I, Sappino AP, et al. Complete excision of primary breast tumor improves survival of patients with metastatic breast cancer at diagnosis. J Clin Oncol. 2006;24(18):2743–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  249. Morrow M, Goldstein L. Surgery of the primary tumor in metastatic breast cancer: closing the barn door after the horse has bolted? J Clin Oncol. 2006;24(18):2694–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  250. Olson JA Jr, Marcom PK. Benefit or bias? The role of surgery to remove the primary tumor in patients with metastatic breast cancer. Ann Surg. 2008;247(5):739–40.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  251. Badwe R, Hawaldar R, Nair N, Kaushik R, Parmar V, Siddique S, et al. Locoregional treatment versus no treatment of the primary tumour in metastatic breast cancer: an open-label randomised controlled trial. Lancet Oncol. 2015;16(13):1380–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  252. Soran A, Ozmen V, Ozbas S, Karanlik H, Muslumanoglu M, Igci A, et al. Randomized trial comparing resection of primary tumor with no surgery in stage IV breast cancer at presentation: protocol MF07-01. Ann Surg Oncol. 2018;25(11):3141–9. https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-018-6494-6. [Epub ahead of print].

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Oncology Institute, Istanbul Medical Faculty, Istanbul University, Istanbul, Turkey

    Adnan Aydiner

  2. Department of Medical Oncology, Memorial Hospital, Istanbul, Turkey

    Soley Bayraktar

  3. Department of Pathology, Istanbul Faculty of Medicine, University of Istanbul, Istanbul, Turkey

    Ekrem Yavuz

  4. Department of Medical Oncology, Avrasya Hospital, Istanbul, Turkey

    Fatma Sen

  5. Department of Radiation Oncology, Istanbul University, Istanbul Medical Faculty, Institute of Oncology, Istanbul, Turkey

    Kamuran Arslan Ibis

  6. Department of Radiation Oncology, Florence Nightingale Hospital, Istanbul, Turkey

    Maktav Dincer

  7. Department of Radiation Oncology, Acibadem Hospital, Istanbul, Turkey

    Isık Aslay

  8. Department of General Surgery, Istanbul Medical Faculty, Istanbul University, Istanbul, Turkey

    Neslihan Cabioğlu

  9. Department of Surgery, Istanbul University, Institute of Oncology, Istanbul, Turkey

    Hasan Karanlik

  10. Istanbul Medical Faculty, Istanbul University, Istanbul, Turkey

    Abdullah Igci

Authors
  1. Adnan Aydiner
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Soley Bayraktar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Ekrem Yavuz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Fatma Sen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Kamuran Arslan Ibis
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Maktav Dincer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Isık Aslay
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Neslihan Cabioğlu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Hasan Karanlik
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  10. Abdullah Igci
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Oncology Institute, Istanbul Medical Faculty, Istanbul University, Istanbul, Turkey

    Adnan Aydiner

  2. Istanbul Medical Faculty, Istanbul University, Istanbul, Turkey

    Abdullah Igci

  3. Division of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Magee-Women’s Hospital of UPMC, Pittsburgh, PA, USA

    Atilla Soran

Drugs and Regimens

Drugs and Regimens

Adjuvant and Neoadjuvant Regimens

Table 44.1 Endocrine therapy in hormone receptor-positive, HER2-negative advanced breast cancer (CDK: cyclin-dependent kinase)
Full size table
Table 44.2 Adjuvant or neoadjuvant systemic treatment in HER2-negative breast cancer – preferred
Full size table
Table 44.3 Adjuvant or neoadjuvant anthracycline-based systemic treatment in HER2-negative breast cancer – others
Full size table
Table 44.4 Adjuvant or neoadjuvant anthracycline plus taxane-based systemic treatment in HER2-negative breast cancer – others
Full size table
Table 44.5 Adjuvant or neoadjuvant systemic treatment with trastuzumab in HER2-positive breast cancer – preferred
Full size table
Table 44.6 Adjuvant or neoadjuvant systemic treatment with trastuzumab plus pertuzumab in HER2-positive breast cancer – preferred
Full size table
Table 44.7 Adjuvant or neoadjuvant cytotoxic therapy with trastuzumab in HER2-positive breast cancer – others
Full size table
Table 44.8 Adjuvant or neoadjuvant cytotoxic therapy with trastuzumab plus pertuzumab in HER2-positive breast cancer – others
Full size table

Metastatic Regimens

Table 44.9 Combined usage of cytotoxic drugs with dual anti-HER2 inhibition for HER2-positive advanced breast cancer
Full size table
Table 44.10 Combined usage of cytotoxic drugs with trastuzumab for HER2-positive advanced breast cancer
Full size table
Table 44.11 Systemic therapy for previously trastuzumab-treated HER2-positive advanced breast cancer patients
Full size table
Table 44.12 First-line single cytotoxic drugs for advanced breast cancer
Full size table
Table 44.13 Combined usage of cytotoxic drugs for advanced breast cancer
Full size table

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Aydiner, A. et al. (2019). A Review of Local and Systemic Therapy in Breast Cancer. In: Aydiner, A., Igci, A., Soran, A. (eds) Breast Disease. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-16792-9_44

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-16792-9_44

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-16791-2

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-16792-9

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation