Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Breast Surgery after Primary Systemic Treatment

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Breast Cancer Management for Surgeons

  • 2506 Accesses

Abstract

Primary systemic treatment (PST) is increasingly established in the treatment of early breast cancer. PST can downstage the T- and N-stage and allow less radical surgery to the breast and the axilla. Furthermore, tumour response to PST is a clinically useful surrogate parameter for disease-free and overall survival at least for certain intrinsic subtypes of breast cancer. Complete histopathologic response (pCR) is an established endpoint of clinical trials and allows the accelerated approval of new drugs. PST requires close interdisciplinary cooperation. This relates especially to the preoperative assessment of primary tumour stage, the continuous evaluation of the response to systemic treatment, the definition and localization of the post-PST surgical resection volume and a standardized histopathologic workup that provides adequate information on the response to PST in the breast and the lymph nodes.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Killela BK, Yang VQ, Mougalian S, Horowitz NR, Pusztai L, Chapar AB, et al. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy for breast cancer increases the rate of breast conservation: results from the National Cancer Database. J Am Coll Surg. 2015;220(6):1063–9. Epub 2015/04/15

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. 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;16:2672–85.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Scholl SM, Fourquet A, Asselain B, Pierga JY, Vilcoq JR, Durand JC, et al. Neoadjuvant versus adjuvant chemotherapy in premenopausal patients with tumours considered too large for breast conservation surgery: preliminary results of a randomised trial. Eur J Cancer. 1994;30A:645–52.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Kuerer HM, Sahin A, Hunt K, et al. Incidence and impact of documented eradication of breast cancer axillary lymph node metastases before surgery treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Ann Surg. 1999;230(1):72.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  5. Baselga J, Bradburi I, Eidtmann H, et al. Lapatinib with trastuzumab for HER2 positive breast cancer (NeoALLTO): a randomised, open label multicentre phase III trial. Lancet. 2012;18(379):633–40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Rastogi P, Anderson SJ, Bear HD, Geyer CE, Kahlenberg MS, Robidoux A, et al. Preoperative chemotherapy: updates of National Surgical Adjuvant and Bowel Project Protocols B-18 and B-27. J Clin Oncol. 2008;26(5):778–85.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Guidance for industry: pathological complete response in neoadjuvant treatment of high-risk early-stage breast cancer:use as an endpoint to support accelerated approval. 2014. http://www.fda.gov/downloads/Drugs GuidanceRegulatoryInformation/Guidance/UCM305501.pdf.

  9. Cortazar P, Zhang L, Untch M, et al. Pathologic complete response and long-term clinical benefit in breast cancer: the CTNeoBC pooled analysis. Lancet. 2014;384:164–72.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. US Food and Drug Administration News Release. FDA approves Perjeta for neoadjuvant breast cancer treatment: first drug approved for the use in preoperative breast cancer. 2013. http://www.fda.gov/newsevents/newsroom/pressannoVuncements/ucm370393

  11. Von Minckwitz G, Schneeweiss A, Loibl S, Salat C, Denkert C, Rezai M, et al. Neoadjuvant carboplatin in patients with triple-negative and HER2-positive early breast cancer (Geparsixto;GBG 66). A randomized phase 2 trial. Lancet Oncol. 2014;15(7):747–56.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Untch M, Jackisch C, Schneeweiss A, Conrad B, Aktas B, Denkert C, et al. Nab-paclitaxel versus solvent-base paclitaxel in neoadjuvant treatment of breast cancer (GeparSepto GBG 69): a randomized phase III trial. Lancet Oncol. 2016;17(3):345–56.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Gianni L, Pienkowski T, Im YH, Roman L, Tseng LM, et al. Efficacy and safety of neoadjuvant pertuzumab and trastuzumab in women with locally advanced inflammatory, or early HER2-positive breast cancer (NeoSphere): a randomised multicentre, open-label, phase 2 trial. Lancet Oncol. 2012;13(12):25–32.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Von Minckwitz G, Schneewiess A, Loibl S, Salat C, Denkert C, Rezai M, et al. Neoadjuvant carboplatin in patients with triple-negative and HER2-positive early breast cancer (Geparsixto;GBG 66): a randomised phase 2 trial. Lancet Oncol. 2014;15(7):747–56.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Marinovich ML, Houssami N, Macaskill P, von Minckwitz G, Blohmer JU, Irwig L. Accuracy of ultrasound for predicting pathologic response during neoadjuvant therapy for breast cancer. Int J Cancer. 2015;136(11):2730–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Schott AF, Roubidoux MA, Helvie MA, Hayes DF, Kleer CG, Newman LA, et al. Clinical and radiological assement s to predict breast cancer pathologic complete response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2005;92(3):231–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Peintinger F, Kuerer HM, Anderson K, Boughey JC, Meric-Bernstan F, Singleterry SE, et al. Accuracy of the combination of mammography and sonography in predicting tumor response in breast cancer patients after neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Ann Surg Oncol. 2006;13(11):1443–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Chen JH, Feig B, Agrawal G, Yu H, Carpenter PM, Mehta RS, et al. MRI evaluation of pathologically complete response and residual tumor in breast cancer after neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Cancer. 2008;112(1):17–26.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Mauri D, Pavlidis N, Ioannidis JP. Neoadjuvant versus adjuvant systemic treatment in breast cancer: a metaanalysis. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2005;97:188–94.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Wager J, Boughey JC, Garret B, Babiera G, Kuerer H, Meric-Bernstam F, et al. Margin assessment after neoadjuvant chemotherapy in invasive lobular cancer. Am J Surg. 2009;198:387–91.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Souci G, Belanger J, Leblanc G, Sideris L, Drolet P, Mitchell A, et al. Surgical margins in breast conserving operations for invasive carcinoma:does neoadjuvant chemotherapy have an impact ? J Am Coll Surg. 2008;206:1116–4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Bossuyt V, Provenzano E, Symmans WF, Boughey J, Coles C, et al. Recommendations for standardized pathological characterisation of residual disease for neoadjuvant clinical trials of breast cancer by the BIG-NABCG collaboration. Ann Oncol. 2015;26(7):1280–91.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  23. Ataseven B, Lederer B, Blohmer JU, Denkert C, Gerber B, Heil J, Kühn T, et al. Impact of multifocal or multicentric disease on surgery and locoregional, distant and overall survival of 6134 breast cancer patients treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Ann Surg Oncol. 2015;22(4):1118–27.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Sataloff DM, Mason BA, Prestipino AJ, et al. Pathologic response to induction chemotherapy in locally advanced carcinoma of the breast: a determinant of outcome. J Am Coll Surg. 1995;180:297–306.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Pinder SE, Provenzano E, Earl H, Ellis IO. Laboratory handling and histology reporting of breast specimens from patients who have recieved neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Histopathology. 2007;50:409–17.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Ogston KN, Miller ID, Payne S, et al. A new histological grading system to assess response of breast cancers to primary chemotherapy: prognostic significance and survival. Breast. 2003;12:320–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Residual Cancer Burden calculator and associated documents (Guide for Measuring Cancer Cellularity, Examples of Gross and Microscopic Evaluation, Pathology Protocol for Macroscopic and Microscopic Assessment of RCB). Houston, Texas: MD Andersons Cancer Center. http://www3.mdanderson.org/app/medcalc/index.cfm ?pagename=jsconvert3 Assessed 30 Oct 2014.

  28. Symmans WF, Peintinger F, Hatzis C, et al. Measurement of residual breast cancer burden to predict survival after neoadjuvant chemotherapy. J Clin Oncol. 2007;25:4414–22.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Arbeitsgemeinschaft Gynäkologische Onkologie (AGO). Guidelines of the AGO Breast Committee. http://www.ago-online.de/en/guidelines mamma, 2016.

  30. Guarneri V, Frassoldati A, Bottini A, Cagossi K, Bisagni G, Sarti S, et al. Preoperative chemotherapy plus trastuzumab, lapatinib or both in human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive operable breastcancer: results of the randomized phase II CHER-LOB study. J Clin Oncol. 2012;30:1989–95.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Semiglazov V, Eiermann W, Zambetti M, Manikas A, Bozhok A, Lluch A, et al. Surgery following neoadjuvant therapy in patients with HER2-positive locally advanced or inflammatory breast cancer participating in the NeOadjuvant Herceptin (NOAH) study. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2011;37:856–63.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Chen AM, Meric-Bernstam F, Hunt KK, et al. Breast conservation after neoadjuvant chemotherapy: the MD Anderson Cancer Center Experience. J Clin Oncol. 2004;22:2303–12.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Chen AM, Meric Bernstam F, Hunt KK, Thames HD, Outlaw ED, Strom EA, et al. Breast conservation after neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Cancer. 2005;103:689–95.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Decker MR, Greenplatt DY, Havlena J, Wilke LG, Greenberg CC, Neuman HB. Impact of neoadjuvant chemotherapy on wound complications after breast surgery. Surgery. 2012;152:382–8.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  36. Schott AF, Roubidoux MA, Helvie MA, Hayes DF, Kleer CG, Newman LA, Pierce LJ, Griffith KA, Murray S, Hunt KA, Paramagul C, Baker LH. Clinical and radiologic assessments to predict breast cancer pathologic complete response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2005;92(3):231–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Shin HJ, Kim HH, Ahn JH, Kim SB, Jung KH, Gong G, et al. Comparison of mammography, sonography, MRI and clinical examination in patients with locally advanced or inflammatory breast cancer who underwent neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Br J Radiol. 2011;84(1003):612–20.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  38. Heil J, Kümmel S, Schaeffgen B, Paepke S, Thomssen C, Rauch G, et al. Diagnosis of pathological complete response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in breast cancer by minimal invasive biopsy techniques. Br J Cancer. 2015;113(11):1565–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Gynecology, Klinikum Esslingen Hospital, Hirschland Str 97, Esslingen, 73730, Germany

    Thorsten Kuehn MD

Authors
  1. Thorsten Kuehn MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Thorsten Kuehn MD .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. The Medical School Department of Oncology, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, United Kingdom

    Lynda Wyld

  2. Athens University Medical School, Athens, Greece

    Christos Markopoulos

  3. Helsinki University Hospital, Helsinki, Finland

    Marjut Leidenius

  4. Department of Oncology & Radiotherapy, Gdańsk Medical University Department of Oncology & Radiotherapy, Gdańsk, Poland

    Elżbieta Senkus-Konefka

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 Springer International Publishing AG

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Kuehn, T. (2018). Breast Surgery after Primary Systemic Treatment. In: Wyld, L., Markopoulos, C., Leidenius, M., Senkus-Konefka, E. (eds) Breast Cancer Management for Surgeons. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-56673-3_21

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-56673-3_21

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-56671-9

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-56673-3

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation