Rosenberger, Laura H.

Importance Limited granular data exist on breast cancer in transgender, nonbinary, and/or gender-diverse (TGD) individuals. Objective To describe patient demographic and tumor clinicopathological variables, clinically relevant risk factors, method of breast cancer detection, treatment characteristics, and locoregional outcomes and to estimate a 5-year breast cancer–specific survival (BCSS). Design, Setting, and Participants This cohort study obtained data on patients treated from 1990 to 2023 from 22 US academic medical centers using institutional databases, electronic medical records, and tumor registries. Included participants were TGD individuals 18 years or older with stage 0 to IV breast cancer. A comparative breast cancer cohort was selected from the 2016 to 2021 Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program (SEER) breast cancer dataset. Data were analyzed from January to October 2025. Exposure Breast cancer. Main Outcomes and Measures Estimated 5-year BCSS and locoregional recurrence rates. Wilcoxon rank sum and χ 2 tests were used to compare continuous and categorical variables. Kaplan-Meier analysis was used to estimate 5-year BCSS. Results A total of 112 TGD persons (median [IQR] age at diagnosis, 42.5 [36.5-51.0] years; 104 individuals [92.9%] were assigned female at birth) with breast cancer and 1 with bilateral disease were included in the analysis. Forty-three patients (38.4%) used gender-affirming hormone therapy before diagnosis. Among the entire cohort, 58 patients (51.8%) detected their own breast cancer, 68 (60.7%) had a familial breast cancer history, and 16 (14.3%) had a pathogenic germline variant. Tumors were predominantly hormone receptor positive (96 [85.7%]) and early stage (29 [25.7%] ductal carcinoma in situ [DCIS]; 51 [45.1%] stage I). The TGD cohort, compared with patients with breast cancer in the SEER dataset (N = 480 915), was younger (median [IQR] age, 42.5 [36.5-51.0] years vs 62.0 [52.0-72.0] years), had a higher proportion of persons assigned male at birth (8 [7.1%] vs 3522 [0.7%]), more often had progesterone receptor–positive disease (89 [79.5%] vs 335 491 [69.8%]), and presented with earlier-stage disease (eg, DCIS: 29 [25.9%] vs 79 604 [16.6%]). With a median (IQR) follow-up time for the TGD cohort of 38 (24-74) months, 5-year BCSS was favorable at 96.2% (95% CI, 85.3%-99.0%). Conclusions and Relevance This cohort study of TGD patients with breast cancer found that this population was young and often detected their own tumors via self-examination, suggesting opportunities to improve early detection through screening for individuals at elevated risk. Although short-term BCSS appeared favorable, prospective research is essential to define evidence-based guidelines and elucidate long-term outcomes.

The NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines for Breast Cancer include recommendations for clinical management of patients with carcinoma in situ, invasive breast cancer, Paget’s disease, Phyllodes tumor, inflammatory breast cancer, and management of breast cancer during pregnancy. The panel convenes annually to update recommendations based on a review of recently published clinical trials. This selection from the NCCN Guidelines for Breast Cancer focuses on the recommendations for the management of recurrent or stage IV (M1) metastatic breast cancer. It summarizes the treatment strategies stratified by tumor biology, including hormone receptor status and HER2 expression, as well as clinical factors such as prior therapy and disease-free interval. Throughout all treatment lines, supportive care, quality of life preservation, toxicity minimization, and clinical trial participation are emphasized as integral components of patient care.

The treatment landscape of invasive early-stage and metastatic breast cancer is evolving constantly. These NCCN Guidelines Insights focus on recent updates included in the most recent version (version 5.2025) of the NCCN Guidelines for Breast Cancer specific to workup, locoregional therapy, surveillance, and systemic neoadjuvant/adjuvant therapy recommendations for invasive, nonmetastatic breast cancer.

Importance Many patients are diagnosed with benign breast lesions; however, evidence- and consensus-based guidelines for the management of benign breast disease (BBD) are limited. Observations The American Society of Breast Surgeons (ASBrS) and the Society of Breast Imaging (SBI) developed guidelines for the management of benign fibroepithelial lesions (FELs) using a modified Delphi consensus methodology and public comment. There was strong consensus that core biopsy–proven concordant fibroadenomas without atypia only require excision if they were symptomatic, patient preferred, attained a certain size, or demonstrated substantive growth over time on clinical examination. There was strong consensus that when removing a fibroadenoma, complete excision without transection of the mass is recommended and surgeons should consider aesthetics, sensation, and other factors when selecting incision placement. Patients with core biopsy–proven concordant fibroadenomas do not require imaging follow-up and may return to age-appropriate screening. Many benign phyllodes tumors (BPTs) present as an FEL on core biopsy, and these lesions along with any lesions with suspicion of or concern for phyllodes tumors (PTs) require surgical excisional biopsy with complete excision of the mass. Re-excision of a BPT is not required for patients with a positive margin for BPT, but a margin re-excision may be considered if the mass was transected or there is concern of residual disease after excisional biopsy. Patients with BPT who have undergone excision do not require follow-up imaging and may return to age-appropriate screening. Conclusions and Relevance Evidence-informed, consensus and expert opinion-based guidelines for the management of benign FELs of the breast were developed. These guidelines provide clarification on the controversial management of benign FELs of the breast. Any practicing clinicians who treat patients with benign FELs should integrate these guidelines into treatment of their patients.

Breast cancer is treated with a multidisciplinary approach involving surgical oncology, radiation oncology, and medical oncology. The NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology (NCCN Guidelines) for Breast Cancer include recommendations for clinical management of patients with carcinoma in situ, invasive breast cancer, Paget’s disease, Phyllodes tumor, inflammatory breast cancer, and management of breast cancer during pregnancy. The content featured in this issue focuses on the recommendations for overall management of systemic therapy (preoperative and adjuvant) options for nonmetastatic breast cancer. For the full version of the NCCN Guidelines for Breast Cancer, visit NCCN.org .

Abstract Background Current American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) breast cancer staging considers contralateral axillary metastasis (CAM) stage IV disease (M1). Retrospective studies suggest that women with CAM have improved overall survival (OS) compared to those with distant metastasis (M1) and/or comparable OS to locally advanced breast cancer (LABC). These studies support consideration of curative intent treatment; however, they contain heterogeneous cohorts with highly variable treatment strategies. We sought to evaluate treatment and outcomes in a well-defined CAM cohort treated with contemporary systemic and locoregional therapy. Methods We performed a retrospective multi-institution cohort study to compare OS of patients with CAM matched 1:3 on age +/- 5 years to LABC (defined as cN2-3 and/or pN2-3), and to non-CAM M1. CAM patients classified as type 1) de novo CAM, synchronous with the contralateral primary, 2) metachronous isolated CAM in the setting of prior surgical and/or radiation treatment to primary index cancer, 3) synchronous with, or 4) metachronous after an in-breast or axillary nodal recurrence of the primary index cancer. The M1 cohort included de novo and recurrent metastasis with varied sites and number of metastasis. OS was defined as time from CAM diagnosis to death or last follow-up for CAM patients; time from primary diagnosis to death or last follow-up for LABC; and time from metastatic diagnosis to death or last follow-up for M1. Unadjusted OS was estimated with the Kaplan-Meier method, and Cox proportional hazards models were used to estimate the association of group with OS after adjustment for covariates Results We identified 57 CAM and 155 LABC from 8 institutions (2016-2022), and 632 M1 from a single institution. The median age was similar between groups (CAM=59 years, LABC=58, M1=57, p=0.44), and there were no statistically significant differences in hormone receptor status (p=0.25). There were more Non-Hispanic Black patients in the M1 cohort compared to CAM or LABC (p< 0.001). The majority of CAM cases were delayed metachronous from the index cancer (type 2, 35.1%), or synchronous with a recurrence (type 3, 33.3%). Type 1 (de novo, 14%) and type 4 (delayed metachronous after breast cancer recurrence, 17.5%) were less frequent. Among CAM patients, 49.1% were hormone receptor positive (HR+)/HER2-negative (HER2-), 22.8% HR-/HER2-, 10.5% HR+/HER2+, and 5.3% HR-/HER2+. Comparing CAM versus LABC, invasive ductal carcinoma (IDC) was more commonly seen in CAM (82.5% vs 66.5%), as was grade 3 (45.6% vs 35.5%), and triple negative (22.8% vs 13.5%). Conversely, in LABC, treatment of the primary index cancer more frequently included chemotherapy (CAM=71.9%, LABC=92.3%), mastectomy (CAM=54.4%, LABC 74.2%), and adjuvant radiation (CAM=73.7%, LABC=90.3%). On multivariable analysis adjusting for age, race/ethnicity, and hormone receptor status, both CAM and M1 had inferior survival to LABC (Table 1), but with a 2.4-fold difference for CAM (95% CI 1.42-4.07, p=0.001) versus a 6.3-fold difference for M1 (95% CI 4.29-9.23, p=< 0.001). Discussion In this contemporary, multi-institution study, we demonstrated that CAM patients selected for presumed curative intent treatment experienced improved OS when compared to stage IV (M1) patients. Our data adds additional support for re-evaluating the current stage IV designation, in favor of N3, and consideration of curative intent treatment in this disease. Table. Adjusted* Overall Survival Comparing Patients with Breast Cancer Contralateral Axillary Metastasis (CAM) to those with Locally Advanced Breast Cancer (LABC) and Metastatic Disease (M1) *Adjusted for age, race/ethnicity, hormone receptors. Citation Format: Meghan R. Flanagan, Stephanie Downs-Canner, Samantha Thomas, Astrid Botty van de bruele, Margaret Lillie, Kristalyn Gallagher, Tammeza Gibson, James Jakub, Alexandra Verosky, Sarah Tevis, Malia Brennan, Francys Verdial, Jennifer Q. Zhang, Leisha Elmore, Jennifer Plichta, Laura Rosenberger. A Multi-Institutional Review of Contralateral Axillary Metastases: Time for Reclassification as Local-Regional Event? [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2023 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2023 Dec 5-9; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2024;84(9 Suppl):Abstract nr PO3-05-13.

ImportanceData on oncological outcomes after omission of axillary lymph node dissection (ALND) in patients with breast cancer that downstages from node positive to negative with neoadjuvant chemotherapy are sparse. Additionally, the best axillary surgical staging technique in this scenario is unknown.ObjectiveTo investigate oncological outcomes after sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) with dual-tracer mapping or targeted axillary dissection (TAD), which combines SLNB with localization and retrieval of the clipped lymph node.Design, Setting, and ParticipantsIn this multicenter retrospective cohort study that was conducted at 25 centers in 11 countries, 1144 patients with consecutive stage II to III biopsy-proven node-positive breast cancer were included between April 2013 and December 2020. The cumulative incidence rates of axillary, locoregional, and any invasive (locoregional or distant) recurrence were determined by competing risk analysis.ExposureOmission of ALND after SLNB or TAD.Main Outcomes and MeasuresThe primary end points were the 3-year and 5-year rates of any axillary recurrence. Secondary end points included locoregional recurrence, any invasive (locoregional and distant) recurrence, and the number of lymph nodes removed.ResultsA total of 1144 patients (median [IQR] age, 50 [41-59] years; 78 [6.8%] Asian, 105 [9.2%] Black, 102 [8.9%] Hispanic, and 816 [71.0%] White individuals; 666 SLNB [58.2%] and 478 TAD [41.8%]) were included. A total of 1060 patients (93%) had N1 disease, 619 (54%) had ERBB2 (formerly HER2)–positive illness, and 758 (66%) had a breast pathologic complete response. TAD patients were more likely to receive nodal radiation therapy (85% vs 78%; P = .01). The clipped node was successfully retrieved in 97% of TAD cases and 86% of SLNB cases (without localization). The mean (SD) number of sentinel lymph nodes retrieved was 3 (2) vs 4 (2) (P < .001), and the mean (SD) number of total lymph nodes removed was 3.95 (1.97) vs 4.44 (2.04) (P < .001) in the TAD and SLNB groups, respectively. The 5-year rates of any axillary, locoregional, and any invasive recurrence in the entire cohort were 1.0% (95% CI, 0.49%-2.0%), 2.7% (95% CI, 1.6%-4.1%), and 10% (95% CI, 8.3%-13%), respectively. The 3-year cumulative incidence of axillary recurrence did not differ between TAD and SLNB (0.5% vs 0.8%; P = .55).Conclusions and RelevanceThe results of this cohort study showed that axillary recurrence was rare in this setting and was not significantly lower after TAD vs SLNB. These results support omission of ALND in this population.

The NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology (NCCN Guidelines) for Breast Cancer address all aspects of management for breast cancer. The treatment landscape of metastatic breast cancer is evolving constantly. The therapeutic strategy takes into consideration tumor biology, biomarkers, and other clinical factors. Due to the growing number of treatment options, if one option fails, there is usually another line of therapy available, providing meaningful improvements in survival. This NCCN Guidelines Insights report focuses on recent updates specific to systemic therapy recommendations for patients with stage IV (M1) disease.

Abstract Background: Data on the oncologic safety of omission of axillary lymph node dissection (ALND) in node positive (N+) patients who downstage to ypN0 with neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) is sparse. Additionally, there is no consensus on which axillary staging procedure should be used in this setting, sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) alone or in combination with localization and retrieval of the clipped positive node, also known as targeted axillary dissection (TAD). Whether the reduction in the false negative rate observed with TAD translates into a significant reduction in the rate of axillary recurrence is unknown. We sought to evaluate oncologic outcomes after omission of ALND in a large, real-world cohort of breast cancer (BC) patients and to compare rates of axillary recurrence after SLNB with dual tracer mapping vs. TAD. Methods: Data were collected from 19 centers in the Oncoplastic Breast Consortium (OPBC) and EUBREAST networks. Patients with T1-4 biopsy-proven N1-3 BC who underwent NAC followed by axillary staging with either SLNB with dual tracer mapping or TAD and who were pathologically node negative (ypN0) were included. ypN0 was defined as the absence of any tumor or isolated tumor cells. Competing risk analysis was performed to assess the cumulative incidence rates of axillary recurrence, locoregional recurrence, and any invasive (locoregional or distant) recurrence. Two-year cumulative incidence rates were compared between TAD and SLNB using the Gray’s test. Type I error rate was set to 0.05 (α). Results: We included 785 patients (565 treated with SLNB and 220 with TAD) treated with NAC followed by surgery from 01/2014-12/2020. Median patient age was 50 years. The majority (57%) of patients had clinical T2 tumors, and 95% had N1 disease. Most (55%) were HER2+, and 21% were triple negative. Most patients (81%) received anthracycline and taxane-based chemotherapy regimens, but NAC regimens differed between patients treated with TAD and those treated with SLNB (Table 1). All patients with HER2+ tumors received anti HER2 therapy. Nodal radiotherapy was administered to 76% of patients, and was more common in patients who underwent TAD (82% TAD vs 74% SLNB, p=0.017). Breast pathologic complete response (ypT0/is) was more frequent among those patients that had TAD (80% TAD vs. 66% SLNB, p< 0.001). TAD localization was with wire in 46%, radioactive seed in 40%, ultrasound in 5%, tattoo in 2%, and with a combination of these techniques in 7%. The clipped node was successfully retrieved in 94% of TAD cases. The median number of lymph nodes removed was lower in the TAD group compared to the SLNB group [3 (IQR 3-5) vs 4 IQR 3-5), p< 0.001], as was the median number of sentinel lymph nodes [3 (IQR 2-4) vs 4 IQR 3-5), p< 0.001] (Table 1). The 5-year rates of any axillary recurrence, locoregional recurrence, and any invasive recurrence in the entire cohort were 1.1% (95%CI 0.39-2.4%), 3.1% (95%CI 1.6-5.3%) and 10% (95%CI 7.6-13%), respectively. The two-year cumulative incidence of axillary recurrence did not differ between patients treated with TAD compared to SLNB (0% vs 0.9%, p=0.19). Conclusion: Early axillary recurrence after omission of ALND in patients who successfully downstage from N+ to ypN0 with NAC is a rare event following both SLNB or TAD, and was not significantly lower in TAD than SLNB. Although longer follow-up is needed to confirm these findings, the main advantage of TAD seems to be a reduction in the number of lymph nodes removed. Overall, these results support omission of ALND in patients who successfully downstage to node negative disease after NAC. Table 1: Clinicopathological Features of the Study Cohort, Stratified by Axillary Staging Technique Citation Format: Giacomo Montagna, Mary Mrdutt, Astrid Botty, Andrea V. Barrio, Varadan Sevilimedu, Judy C. Boughey, Tanya L. Hoskin, Laura H. Rosenberger, E Shelley Hwang, Abigail Ingham, Bärbel Papassotiropoulos, Bich Doan Nguyen-Sträuli, Christian Kurzeder, Danilo Diaz Aybar, Denise Vorburger, Dieter Michael Matlac, Edvin Ostapenko, Fabian Riedel, Florian Fitzal, Francesco Meani, Franziska Fick, Jacqueline Sagasser, Jörg Heil, Konstantin J. Dedes, Laszlo Romics, Maggie Banys-Paluchowski, Maria Del Rosario Cueva Perez, Marcelo Chavez Diaz, Martin Heidinger, Mathias K. Fehr, Mattea Reinisch, Nadia Maggi, Nicola Rocco, Nina Ditsch, Oreste Davide Gentilini, Regis Resende Paulinelli, Sebastian Sole Zarhi, Sherko Küemmel, Simona Bruzas, Simona Di Lascio, Tamara Parissenti, Uwe Güth, Valentina Ovalle, Christoph Tausch, Monica Morrow, Thorsten Kühn, Walter P. Weber. Oncological Outcomes Following Omission of Axillary Lymph Node Dissection in Node Positive Patients Downstaging To Node Negative with Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy: the OPBC-04/EUBREAST-06/OMA study [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2022 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2022 Dec 6-10; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2023;83(5 Suppl):Abstract nr GS4-02.

AbstractBackground and objectivesPrevious studies have identified racial‐ethnic differences in the diagnostic patterns and recurrence outcomes of women with phyllodes tumors (PT). However, these studies are generally limited in size and generalizability. We therefore sought to explore racial‐ethnic differences in age, tumor size, subtype, and recurrence in a large US cohort of women with PT.MethodsWe performed an 11‐institution retrospective review of women with PT from 2007 to 2017. Differences in age at diagnosis, tumor size and subtype, and recurrence‐free survival according to race‐ethnicity.ResultsWomen of non‐White race or Hispanic ethnicity were younger at the time of diagnosis with phyllodes tumor. Non‐Hispanic Other women had a larger proportion of malignant PT. There were no differences in recurrence‐free survival in our cohort.ConclusionsDifferences in age, tumor size, and subtype were small. Therefore, the workup of young women with breast masses and the treatment of women with PT should not differ according to race‐ethnicity. These conclusions are supported by our finding that there were no differences in recurrence‐free survival.