Hieken, Tina J

Abstract Objective To evaluate the clinical value of breast MRI in radiation-associated angiosarcoma of the breast (RAASB) for assessing disease extent at diagnosis and after neoadjuvant therapy compared with clinical examination and surgical pathology. Methods This IRB-approved retrospective study included 25 patients with breast MRIs between1995 and 2020. MRI estimated disease extent was compared to clinical exam and surgical pathology. MRI findings were evaluated for additional disease and impact on clinical management. Agreement between MRI and clinical assessment of disease was evaluated using Cohen’s kappa statistic. Results Baseline MRI demonstrated moderate agreement with clinical disease extent (Cohen’s κ = 0.44; 95% CI, 0.14-0.75). Thirteen of 24 (54%) of MRIs reflected clinical exam, 4/24 (17%) MRIs underestimated disease, and 5/24 (21%) MRIs overestimated disease. Baseline MRI changed surgical management in 4/24 (17%). In 8 patients who proceeded directly to surgery, MRI reflected pathology in 6/8 (75%). In 10 patients with post-neoadjuvant MRI, 4/10 (40%) pathology and MRI extent were similar, 5/10 (50%) MRI overestimated disease, and 1/10 (10%) MRI underestimated disease. Conclusion MRI has clinical value in assessing RAASB with the potential for significantly altering surgical management. In this small cohort, post-neoadjuvant MRI demonstrated limited additional clinical value. Larger studies are needed to define the optimal role and timing of post-neoadjuvant MRI. Advances in knowledge Baseline MRI detected additional disease not identified on initial clinical exam in 5/24 (21%) and changed surgical management in 4/24 (17%). Although baseline MRI demonstrated moderate agreement with clinical examination, post-neoadjuvant MRI frequently overestimated residual disease when compared with final pathology.

ASCO Guidelines provide recommendations with comprehensive review and analyses of the relevant literature for each recommendation, following the guideline development process as outlined in the https://www.asco.org/practice-patients/guidelines/guideline-methodology . ASCO Guidelines follow the https://www.asco.org/about-asco/legal/conflict-interest-coi . Clinical Practice Guidelines and other guidance (“Guidance”) provided by ASCO is not a comprehensive or definitive guide to treatment options. It is intended for voluntary use by clinicians and should be used in conjunction with independent professional judgment. Guidance may not be applicable to all patients, interventions, diseases or stages of diseases. Guidance is based on review and analysis of relevant literature, and is not intended as a statement of the standard of care. ASCO does not endorse third-party drugs, devices, services, or therapies and assumes no responsibility for any harm arising from or related to the use of this information. See complete disclaimer in Appendix 1 and Appendix 2 (online only) for more . PURPOSE To offer clinicians recommendations concerning breast cancer follow-up and surveillance after primary treatment. METHODS ASCO convened an Expert Panel to develop recommendations based on a systematic review and a formal consensus process. RESULTS One randomized controlled trial (RCT) was identified and formed the evidentiary basis for the surveillance mammography guideline recommendation. No RCTs were identified that evaluated different follow-up approaches by risk of relapse in patients treated for early-stage breast cancer. Given the dearth of evidence identified in the systematic review of the literature, formal modified Delphi consensus-based recommendations were generated. RECOMMENDATIONS The guideline offers recommendations on the role of a risk-based approach to the frequency and intensity of follow-up among patients with breast cancer in the adjuvant setting. Regular history, physical examination, and mammography are recommended for breast cancer follow-up. Either virtual or in-person visits can be offered. Certain patients at a high risk of cancer recurrence warrant closer surveillance, such as those patients with locally advanced disease or residual disease following neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Recommendations on the use of blood-based biomarkers and supplemental imaging are provided. Guideline recommendations will be updated once additional evidence-based tools become available to better individualize surveillance. Additional information is available at www.ascopubs.org/topics/asco-guidelines/breast-cancer .

(1) Background: Mammographic breast density (MBD) is a well-established predictor of breast cancer risk, yet the biological mechanisms underlying this association remain incompletely understood. MBD is characterized by alterations in breast stromal architecture, including increased collagen deposition and changes in immune cell composition. Given emerging evidence that the breast harbors a resident microbiome, we investigated whether the breast tissue microbiome correlates with MBD. (2) Methods: Adjacent normal breast tissue was collected under sterile conditions from 33 women undergoing surgery for benign or malignant breast disease. DNA was extracted and subjected to 16S rRNA gene sequencing (Illumina MiSeq). (3) Results: We observed a non-significant trend toward lower α-diversity in high-MBD samples compared to low-MBD samples, p = 0.13. β-Diversity analyses identified a modest association between MBD and microbial community composition (MiRKAT p = 0.049). A random forest-based model incorporating genus-level relative abundances improved prediction of MBD over clinical characteristics alone, identifying Corynebacterium (Actinobacteria) and other genera as key predictors. (4) Conclusions: Breast tissue microbial features vary with mammographic breast density, suggesting a potential association with density-associated breast cancer risk. These exploratory findings warrant validation in larger cohorts to better elucidate biological mechanisms and clinical relevance.

Background: Circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) is predictive of recurrence in resected stage III melanoma, yet its role in the neoadjuvant setting for clinical stage III (cSIII) is unclear. Objective: Assess the association between ctDNA and outcomes following neoadjuvant immunotherapy (IO) + targeted therapy (TT) in cSIII melanoma. Design: Patients in the NeoACTIVATE study were treated with neoadjuvant IO + TT, underwent lymphadenectomy, and received adjuvant immunotherapy. Methods: Patients with ctDNA testing performed at baseline, pre- and post-operation were analyzed. Baseline positron emission tomography–computed tomography volumetrics and surgical, major pathological responses (MPR) were assessed. Results: Thirteen patients had serial ctDNA, 10 (77%) were detectable at baseline, and 9/10 (90%) had ctDNA clearance. Seven (54%) achieved MPR, all with undetectable preoperative ctDNA, yet 3/7 (43%) had disease recurrence. Conclusion: ctDNA and MPR are poor predictors of recurrence following neoadjuvant IO + TT for cSIII melanoma patients. Further studies are warranted to define the role of ctDNA in this setting.

Abstract Background Partial breast irradiation (PBI) is an effective treatment for early-stage breast cancer. However, evidence comparing different PBI modalities is limited. Methods This trial emulation uses electronic health records from a multi-state large tertiary health system. Three PBI modalities were compared: proton radiation therapy, photon radiation therapy, and applicator-based brachytherapy. Inverse probability weighting (IPW) was used to balance confounders. The primary outcome was ipsilateral breast recurrence (IBR). Results Between 2013 and 2023, 1041 women with early-stage breast cancer were treated with PBI. Of these, 1026 patients were included in the analyses. The median age was 66 years; 22.51% had ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS), and 97.56% were estrogen receptor positive. With median follow-up of 38.2 months, the rate of IBR in the overall group was 3.05% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.99% to 4.65%) at 3 years. After IPW, compared with photon PBI, the hazard ratio for IBR for proton PBI was 2.11 (95% CI = 0.70 to 6.33) and for brachytherapy, 3.86 (95% CI = 1.39 to 10.69). Compared with proton PBI, the hazard ratio for IBR for brachytherapy was 1.83 (95% CI = 0.88 to 3.81). IBR risk was similar across PBI modalities for patients with tumor size ≤ 10 mm and in patients treated for DCIS. Among patients with tumor size >10 mm, the hazard ratio for IBR for brachytherapy was 7.64 (95% CI = 1.64 to 35.58) and 3.59 (95% CI = 1.22 to 10.56) relative to photons and protons, respectively. Conclusion PBI with applicator-based brachytherapy was associated with higher IBR than photon or proton PBI in patients with tumor size > 10 mm, suggesting the need for more careful PBI patient selection for this modality.

Neuroendocrine carcinomas of the breast are a rare subtype of invasive breast carcinomas, and those with morphologic and immunophenotypic features supporting Merkel cell carcinoma (MCC) are even more rare. Accurate diagnosis of these entities is important for clinical decision-making regarding the selection of optimal treatments. We report a patient withMCC in the deep breast parenchyma of a 52-year-old woman, without evidence of a cutaneous component. This tumor exhibited characteristic morphologic and immunophenotypic features of MCC, including sheets of high grade, hyperchromatic tumor cells, with perinuclear dot-like staining of keratin 20. To our knowledge, this is the sixth report of parenchymal breast MCC, and due to its rarity and aggressive course, we reviewed the literature, including prior experience on its diagnosis and management.

ABSTRACT Background and Objectives Neoadjuvant chemoimmunotherapy (NACI) for node‐positive breast cancer may induce immune cell activation in regional lymph nodes (LN), confounding post‐NACI imaging. Here we evaluated RECIST 1.1 criteria to predict post‐NACI pathologic LN status. Methods We studied patients with biopsy‐proven cN+ non‐distant metastatic breast cancer receiving NACI operated on 03/2020–09/2024 with both pre‐ and post‐NACI cross‐sectional imaging. Per RECIST 1.1, LN short axis diameter (SAD) was measured in target (defined as SAD ≥ 15 mm) and nontarget (SAD 10–14.9 mm) LNs. Groups were compared using Fisher′s exact test. Results 75 patients, median age 53 years, were studied: 61% cN1, 12% cN2, and 27% cN3. Baseline median number of imaging‐suspicious LN was 4 (IQR 2‐5). Post‐NACI, 64% had a nodal pathologic complete response (pCR/ypN0). 55% met RECIST 1.1 LN assessment criteria. 21 of 32 (66%) with an imaging CR (iCR) were ypN0, while 8 of 9 (89%) without an iCR were ypN0. Neither target ( p = 0.24) nor combined target/nontarget LN iCR ( p = 0.76) predicted ypN status. Nodal pCR rates were higher in those with ≤ 1 versus > 1 suspicious LN post‐NACI (71% vs. 42%, p = 0.03). Conclusions RECIST 1.1 criteria did not predict nodal pCR for NACI‐treated node‐positive breast cancer patients. Other post‐NACI imaging assessment strategies are needed.

Background Neoadjuvant treatment has become standard for patients with high-risk operable stage III melanoma, but the optimal regimen is unknown. Targeted therapy approaches yield high pathological response rates, while immunotherapy regimens show favorable recurrence-free survival (RFS). NeoACTIVATE was designed to address whether a neoadjuvant combination of both targeted therapy and immunotherapy might leverage the benefits of each. Methods We tested neoadjuvant treatment with 12 weeks of vemurafenib, cobimetinib, and atezolizumab for patients with BRAF-mutated (BRAFm) melanoma (cohort A) and cobimetinib and atezolizumab for patients with BRAF-wild-type (BRAFwt) melanoma (cohort B), regimens which we have shown generate a substantial major pathological response. After therapeutic lymph node dissection, patients received 24 weeks of adjuvant atezolizumab. Here, we report survival outcomes and their association with biomarkers assayed among the gut microbiome and peripheral blood immune subsets. Results With 49 months median follow-up, the median RFS was not reached for cohort A and was 40.8 months for cohort B. At 24 months after operation, 2 of 14 cohort A patients and 4 of 13 cohort B patients had experienced distant relapse. Key findings from correlative analyses included diversity, taxonomic and functional metagenomic gut microbiome signals associated with distant metastasis-free survival at 2 years. Notably, we observed a strong correlation between low microbial arginine biosynthesis (required for T-cell activation and effector function) and early distant recurrence (p=0.0005), which correlated with taxonomic differential abundance findings. Peripheral blood immune monitoring revealed increased double-positive (CD4+CD8+) T cells in patients with early recurrence. Conclusions Neoadjuvant treatment with cobimetinib and atezolizumab±vemurafenib was associated with a low rate of distant metastasis in patients with high-risk stage III melanoma. Freedom from early distant metastasis was highly associated with taxonomic differences in gut microbiome structure and with functional pathway alterations known to modulate T cell immunity. Identification of predictive biomarkers will permit optimization of neoadjuvant therapy regimens for individual patients. Trial registration number NCT03554083.

AbstractBackgroundIsolated limb infusion and perfusion (ILI/ILP) has been a mainstay treatment for unresectable melanoma in‐transit metastases (ITM), but increased use of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) and intralesional therapy (talimogene laherparepvec [TVEC]) introduced several different management options. This study compares first‐line ILI/ILP, ICI, and TVEC.MethodsRetrospective review from 12 international institutions included patients treated from 1990 to 2022 with first‐line ILI/ILP, ICI, or TVEC for unresectable melanoma ITM.ResultsA total of 551 patients were treated, with ILI/ILP (n = 356), ICI (n = 125), and TVEC (n = 70) with median follow‐up of 5.5 years. Tumor burden was highest with ILI/ILP and lowest with TVEC (p = .002). Breslow thickness was lowest with TVEC (p = .007). TVEC was mostly used in stage IIIB disease versus IIIC for ILI/ILP and ICI (p = .01). Using ICI as the reference category, TVEC had the highest odds of a complete response (CR) (odds ratio, 1.96; p = .029) and a longer local progression‐free survival (PFS) (hazard ratio [HR], 0.40; p = .003). ILI/ILP had shorter local PFS (HR, 1.72; p = .012), PFS (HR, 1.79; p < .001), distant metastasis‐free survival (DMFS) (HR, 1.75; p = .014), overall survival (HR, 1.82; p = .009), and melanoma‐specific survival (HR, 2.29; p = .004). Stage IIIB disease had longer DMFS (HR, 0.24; p < .001) compared to IIIC/D.ConclusionsTVEC as first‐line therapy for unresectable melanoma ITM was associated with superior CR rates and local PFS. Notably, TVEC was used in patients with a lower Breslow thickness, disease stage, and tumor burden. Therefore, when compared to ILI/ILP and ICI, TVEC should be considered as first‐line therapy for unresectable stage IIIB melanoma ITM with minimal tumor burden and lower Breslow thickness.

AbstractAmong inflammatory breast cancer (IBC) patients, over one‐third have HER2‐overexpressing (HER2+) tumors. Pathologic complete response (pCR) rates to neoadjuvant targeted and chemotherapy for patients with HER2+ non‐metastatic IBC now apporach 60% and favorable long‐term survival rates are being reported for those with a pCR. Immune mechanisms contributing to this phenomenon include antibody‐mediated immune activation and induction of memory T‐cell reponses which may explain the sustained antitumor response seen after discontinuation of targeted therapies.