Le‐Petross, Huong T.

205 Background: Central review is an important trial management and validation tool. Multisite trials require data systems to accommodate diverse image acquisition and review. Breast cancer is challenging as its imaging objects are not always easily shared across departments. Quality Assurance Review Center (QARC) has a diverse portfolio of facile data acquisition and powerful informatics support that meets these needs. We report on the role of QARC in three of the current breast cancer trials from the American College of Surgeons Oncology Group. Methods: QARC data management system includes secure network infrastructure and a validated relational operating database (MAX). QARC has data acquisition/imaging re-distribution expertise for real time response reviews, response measuring tools and corresponding data archive for secondary reviews. MAX includes query ability; records link to digital information. QARC underwent systematic information systems validation process for 21 CFR Part 11. DICOM/non-DICOM files are stored in the QARC PACS. On-site/remote reviewers use MAX to retrieve, view, annotate and save images. Data extracted is securely sent to partner statistical centers. Results: In Z1031, a neoadjuvant endocrine therapy trial, all of the mammographic exams are archived at QARC. For Z1071, a sentinel lymph node trial, pre- and post-treatment ultrasound (US) images of 321 patients were remotely reviewed. For Z1072, the cryoablation US, pre and post-cryoablation MRI for 40 of 47 cases were remotely archived, retrieved and transferred to investigator workstation for post-processing and review. The other 7 patients did not have evaluable imaging studies. In all three trials, the costs of shipping hardcopies of exams and travel to QARC for central review functions were eliminated. Conclusions: QARC data management systems provide diverse informatics supports for multi-institutional trials, ranging from archives of images, provide remote access and download of data, and central review. The vibrant informatics supports meet the growing needs of clinical trials. Future directions include radiation field review for breast cancer trials and the incorporation of pathology microarray analysis as DICOM objects.

Purpose The American College of Surgeons Oncology Group Z1071 trial reported a 12.6% false-negative rate (FNR) for sentinel lymph node (SLN) surgery after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) in cN1 disease. Patients were not selected for surgery based on response, but a secondary end point was to determine whether axillary ultrasound (AUS) after NAC after fine-needle aspiration cytology can identify abnormal nodes and guide patient selection for SLN surgery. Patients and Methods Patients with T0-4, N1-2, M0 breast cancer underwent AUS after neoadjuvant chemotherapy. AUS images were centrally reviewed and classified as normal or suspicious lymph nodes. AUS findings were tested for association with pathologic nodal status and SLN FNR. The impact of AUS results to select patients for SLN surgery to reduce the FNR was assessed. Results Postchemotherapy AUS images were reviewed for 611 patients. One hundred thirty (71.8%) of 181 AUS-suspicious patients were node positive at surgery compared with 243 (56.5%) of 430 AUS-normal patients (P < .001). Patients with AUS-suspicious nodes had a greater number of positive nodes and greater metastasis size (P < .001). The SLN FNR was not different based on AUS results; however, using a strategy where only patients with normal AUS undergo SLN surgery would potentially reduce the FNR in Z1071 patients with ≥ two SLNs removed from 12.6% to 9.8% when preoperative AUS results are considered as part of SLN surgery. Conclusion AUS is recommended after chemotherapy to guide axillary surgery. An FNR of 9.8% with the combination of AUS and SLN surgery would be acceptable for the adoption of SLN surgery for women with node-positive breast cancer treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy.