Show
National Cancer Institute at the National Institutes of HealthFOLLOW US
CONTACT INFORMATION
MORE INFORMATION
POLICIES
NIH ... Turning Discovery Into Health ®TOP Perou, C. M. et al. Molecular portraits of human breast tumours. Nature 406, 747–752 (2000). CAS Article PubMed Google Scholar Cardoso, F. et al. European Breast Cancer Conference manifesto on breast centres/units. Eur. J. Cancer 72, 244–250 (2017). PubMed Article Google Scholar Bray, F. et al. Global cancer statistics 2018: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. CA Cancer J. Clin. 68, 394–424 (2018). PubMed Article Google Scholar Bray, F. et al. Cancer Incidence in Five Continents: inclusion criteria, highlights from Volume X and the global status of cancer registration. Int. J. Cancer 137, 2060–2071 (2015). CAS PubMed Article Google Scholar Mariotto, A. B., Etzioni, R., Hurlbert, M., Penberthy, L. & Mayer, M. Estimation of the number of women living with metastatic breast cancer in the United States. Cancer Epidemiol. Biomark. Prev. 26, 809–815 (2017). Article Google Scholar Ren, J.-X., Gong, Y., Ling, H., Hu, X. & Shao, Z.-M. Racial/ethnic differences in the outcomes of patients with metastatic breast cancer: contributions of demographic, socioeconomic, tumor and metastatic characteristics. Breast Cancer Res. Treat. 173, 225–237 (2019). PubMed Article Google Scholar Torre, L. A., Siegel, R. L., Ward, E. M. & Jemal, A. Global cancer incidence and mortality rates and trends — an update. Cancer Epidemiol. Biomark. Prev. 25, 16–27 (2016). Article Google Scholar Ginsburg, O. et al. The global burden of women’s cancers: a grand challenge in global health. Lancet 389, 847–860 (2017). PubMed Article Google Scholar Allemani, C. et al. Global surveillance of cancer survival 1995–2009: analysis of individual data for 25 676 887 patients from 279 population-based registries in 67 countries (CONCORD-2). Lancet 385, 977–1010 (2015). PubMed Article Google Scholar Winters, S., Martin, C., Murphy, D. & Shokar, N. K. Breast cancer epidemiology, prevention, and screening. Prog. Mol. Biol. Transl Sci. 151, 1–32 (2017). PubMed Article Google Scholar Hossain, M. S., Ferdous, S. & Karim-Kos, H. E. Breast cancer in South. Asia: a Bangladeshi perspective. Cancer Epidemiol. 38, 465–470 (2014). PubMed Google Scholar Leong, S. P. L. et al. Is breast cancer the same disease in Asian and western countries? World J. Surg. 34, 2308–2324 (2010). PubMed PubMed Central Article Google Scholar Bhoo Pathy, N. et al. Breast cancer in a multi-ethnic Asian setting: results from the Singapore–Malaysia hospital-based breast cancer registry. Breast 20, S75–S80 (2011). Article Google Scholar Raina, V. et al. Clinical features and prognostic factors of early breast cancer at a major cancer center in North India. Indian J. Cancer 42, 40 (2005). PubMed Article Google Scholar Agarwal, G., Pradeep, P. V., Aggarwal, V., Yip, C.-H. & Cheung, P. S. Y. Spectrum of breast cancer in Asian women. World J. Surg. 31, 1031–1040 (2007). PubMed Article Google Scholar Li, C. I., Malone, K. E. & Daling, J. R. Differences in breast cancer hormone receptor status and histology by race and ethnicity among women 50 years of age and older. Cancer Epidemiol. Biomark. Prev. 11, 601–607 (2002). Google Scholar Wong, F. Y., Tham, W. Y., Nei, W. L., Lim, C. & Miao, H. Age exerts a continuous effect in the outcomes of Asian breast cancer patients treated with breast-conserving therapy. Cancer Commun. 38, 39 (2018). Article Google Scholar Kohler, B. A. et al. Annual report to the nation on the status of cancer, 1975–2011, featuring incidence of breast cancer subtypes by race/ethnicity, poverty, and state. J. Natl Cancer Inst. 107, https://doi.org/10.1093/jnci/djv048 (2015). DeSantis, C. E. et al. Breast cancer statistics, 2015: Convergence of incidence rates between black and white women: Breast Cancer Statistics, 2015. CA Cancer J. Clin. 66, 31–42 (2016). PubMed Article Google Scholar DeSantis, C. E., Ma, J., Goding Sauer, A., Newman, L. A. & Jemal, A. Breast cancer statistics, 2017, racial disparity in mortality by state: Breast Cancer Statistics, 2017. CA Cancer J. Clin. 67, 439–448 (2017). PubMed Article Google Scholar Shiovitz, S. & Korde, L. A. Genetics of breast cancer: a topic in evolution. Ann. Oncol. 26, 1291–1299 (2015). CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar Collaborative Group on Hormonal Factors in Breast Cancer. Familial breast cancer: collaborative reanalysis of individual data from 52 epidemiological studies including 58 209 women with breast cancer and 101 986 women without the disease. Lancet 358, 1389–1399 (2001). Article Google Scholar Brewer, H. R., Jones, M. E., Schoemaker, M. J., Ashworth, A. & Swerdlow, A. J. Family history and risk of breast cancer: an analysis accounting for family structure. Breast Cancer Res. Treat. 165, 193–200 (2017). PubMed PubMed Central Article Google Scholar Huen, M. S. Y., Sy, S. M. H. & Chen, J. BRCA1 and its toolbox for the maintenance of genome integrity. Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell Biol. 11, 138–148 (2010). CAS PubMed Article Google Scholar Kuchenbaecker, K. B. et al. Risks of breast, ovarian, and contralateral breast cancer for BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers. JAMA 317, 2402 (2017). CAS Article PubMed Google Scholar Balmana, J., Diez, O., Rubio, I. T. & Cardoso, F., On behalf of the ESMO Guidelines Working Group. BRCA in breast cancer: ESMO clinical practice guidelines. Ann. Oncol. 22, vi31–vi34 (2011). PubMed Article Google Scholar Paluch-Shimon, S. et al. Prevention and screening in BRCA mutation carriers and other breast/ovarian hereditary cancer syndromes: ESMO Clinical Practice Guidelines for cancer prevention and screening. Ann. Oncol. 27, v103–v110 (2016). CAS PubMed Article Google Scholar Daly, M. B. et al. Genetic/familial high-risk assessment: breast and ovarian, version 2.2015. J. Natl Compr. Cancer Netw. 14, 153–162 (2016). Article Google Scholar Forbes, C., Fayter, D., de Kock, S. & Quek, R. G. W. A systematic review of international guidelines and recommendations for the genetic screening, diagnosis, GENETIC COUNSELING and treatment of BRCA-mutated breast cancer. Cancer Manag. Res. 2019, 2321–2337 (2019). Article Google Scholar Robson, M. et al. Olaparib for metastatic breast cancer in patients with a germline BRCA mutation. N. Engl. J. Med. 377, 523–533 (2017). CAS PubMed Article Google Scholar Litton, J. K. et al. Talazoparib in patients with advanced breast cancer and a germline BRCA mutation. N. Engl. J. Med. 379, 753–763 (2018). CAS PubMed Article Google Scholar FDA. FDA approves olaparib germline BRCA-mutated metastatic breast cancer. Fda.gov https://www.fda.gov/drugs/resources-information-approved-drugs/fda-approves-olaparib-germline-brca-mutated-metastatic-breast-cancer (2018). FDA. FDA approves talazoparib for gBRCAm HER2-negative locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer. Fda.gov https://www.fda.gov/drugs/drug-approvals-and-databases/fda-approves-talazoparib-gbrcam-her2-negative-locally-advanced-or-metastatic-breast-cancer (2018). Pasche, B. Recent advances in breast cancer genetics. Cancer Treat. Res. 141, 1–10 (2008). PubMed PubMed Central Article Google Scholar Cobain, E. F., Milliron, K. J. & Merajver, S. D. Updates on breast cancer genetics: clinical implications of detecting syndromes of inherited increased susceptibility to breast cancer. Semin. Oncol. 43, 528–535 (2016). PubMed Article Google Scholar Crawford, B. et al. Multi-gene panel testing for hereditary cancer predisposition in unsolved high-risk breast and ovarian cancer patients. Breast Cancer Res. Treat. 163, 383–390 (2017). CAS PubMed PubMed Central Article Google Scholar Taylor, A. et al. Consensus for genes to be included on cancer panel tests offered by UK genetics services: guidelines of the UK Cancer Genetics Group. J. Med. Genet. 55, 372–377 (2018). PubMed Google Scholar Althuis, M. D., Dozier, J. M., Anderson, W. F., Devesa, S. S. & Brinton, L. A. Global trends in breast cancer incidence and mortality 1973–1997. Int. J. Epidemiol. 34, 405–412 (2005). PubMed Article Google Scholar Colditz, G. A., Sellers, T. A. & Trapido, E. Epidemiology — identifying the causes and preventability of cancer? Nat. Rev. Cancer 6, 75–83 (2006). CAS PubMed Article Google Scholar Britt, K., Ashworth, A. & Smalley, M. Pregnancy and the risk of breast cancer. Endocr. Relat. Cancer 14, 907–933 (2007). CAS PubMed Article Google Scholar Siwko, S. K. et al. Evidence that an early pregnancy causes a persistent decrease in the number of functional mammary epithelial stem cells — implications for pregnancy-induced protection against breast cancer. Stem Cells 26, 3205–3209 (2008). PubMed PubMed Central Article Google Scholar Hilakivi-Clarke, L., de Assis, S. & Warri, A. Exposures to synthetic estrogens at different times during the life, and their effect on breast cancer risk. J. Mammary Gland. Biol. Neoplasia 18, 25–42 (2013). PubMed PubMed Central Article Google Scholar Danaei, G., Vander Hoorn, S., Lopez, A. D., Murray, C. J. & Ezzati, M. Causes of cancer in the world: comparative risk assessment of nine behavioural and environmental risk factors. Lancet 366, 1784–1793 (2005). PubMed Article Google Scholar Chen, W. Y., Rosner, B., Hankinson, S. E., Colditz, G. A. & Willett, W. C. Moderate alcohol consumption during adult life, drinking patterns, and breast cancer risk. JAMA 306, 1884 (2011). CAS PubMed PubMed Central Article Google Scholar Singletary, K. W. & Gapstur, S. M. Alcohol and breast cancer: review of epidemiologic and experimental evidence and potential mechanisms. JAMA 286, 2143 (2001). CAS PubMed Article Google Scholar Smith-Warner, S. A. et al. Alcohol and breast cancer in women: a pooled analysis of cohort studies. JAMA 279, 535 (1998). CAS PubMed Article Google Scholar Bandera, E. V., Maskarinec, G., Romieu, I. & John, E. M. Racial and ethnic disparities in the impact of obesity on breast cancer risk and survival: a global perspective. Adv. Nutr. 6, 803–819 (2015). CAS PubMed PubMed Central Article Google Scholar Picon-Ruiz, M., Morata-Tarifa, C., Valle-Goffin, J. J., Friedman, E. R. & Slingerland, J. M. Obesity and adverse breast cancer risk and outcome: mechanistic insights and strategies for intervention: breast cancer, inflammation, and obesity. CA Cancer J. Clin. 67, 378–397 (2017). PubMed PubMed Central Article Google Scholar Shieh, Y. et al. Body mass index, mammographic density, and breast cancer risk by estrogen receptor subtype. Breast Cancer Res. 21, 48 (2019). PubMed PubMed Central Article Google Scholar Suzuki, Y., Tsunoda, H., Kimura, T. & Yamauchi, H. BMI change and abdominal circumference are risk factors for breast cancer, even in Asian women. Breast Cancer Res. Treat. 166, 919–925 (2017). PubMed Article Google Scholar Del Pup, L., Codacci-Pisanelli, G. & Peccatori, F. Breast cancer risk of hormonal contraception: counselling considering new evidence. Crit. Rev. Oncol. Hematol. 137, 123–130 (2019). PubMed Article Google Scholar Busund, M. et al. Progestin-only and combined oral contraceptives and receptor-defined premenopausal breast cancer risk: the Norwegian Women and Cancer Study. Int. J. Cancer 142, 2293–2302 (2018). CAS PubMed PubMed Central Article Google Scholar Mørch, L. S. et al. Contemporary hormonal contraception and the risk of breast cancer. N. Engl. J. Med. 377, 2228–2239 (2017). PubMed Article Google Scholar Ganz, P. A. et al. Supportive care after curative treatment for breast cancer (survivorship care): resource allocations in low- and middle-income countries. A Breast Health Global Initiative 2013 consensus statement. Breast 22, 606–615 (2013). PubMed Article Google Scholar Burris, J. L., Armeson, K. & Sterba, K. R. A closer look at unmet needs at the end of primary treatment for breast cancer: a longitudinal pilot study. Behav. Med. 41, 69–76 (2015). PubMed Article Google Scholar Coughlin, S. S., Yoo, W., Whitehead, M. S. & Smith, S. A. Advancing breast cancer survivorship among African-American women. Breast Cancer Res. Treat. 153, 253–261 (2015). PubMed PubMed Central Article Google Scholar Bodai, B. Breast cancer survivorship: a comprehensive review of long-term medical issues and lifestyle recommendations. Perm. J. 19, 48–79 (2015). PubMed PubMed Central Article Google Scholar Ho, P. J., Gernaat, S. A. M., Hartman, M. & Verkooijen, H. M. Health-related quality of life in Asian patients with breast cancer: a systematic review. BMJ Open 8, e020512 (2018). PubMed PubMed Central Article Google Scholar Miyashita, M. et al. Unmet information needs and quality of life in young breast cancer survivors in japan. Cancer Nurs. 38, E1–E11 (2015). PubMed PubMed Central Article Google Scholar Bombonati, A. & Sgroi, D. C. The molecular pathology of breast cancer progression. J. Pathol. 223, 307–317 (2011). CAS PubMed Article Google Scholar Ellis, M. J. et al. Whole-genome analysis informs breast cancer response to aromatase inhibition. Nature 486, 353–360 (2012). CAS PubMed PubMed Central Article Google Scholar Lopez-Garcia, M. A., Geyer, F. C., Lacroix-Triki, M., Marchió, C. & Reis-Filho, J. S. Breast cancer precursors revisited: molecular features and progression pathways: molecular evolution of breast cancer. Histopathology 57, 171–192 (2010). PubMed Article Google Scholar Nik-Zainal, S. et al. Landscape of somatic mutations in 560 breast cancer whole-genome sequences. Nature 534, 47–54 (2016). CAS PubMed PubMed Central Article Google Scholar Yates, L. R. & Desmedt, C. Translational genomics: practical applications of the genomic revolution in breast cancer. Clin. Cancer Res. 23, 2630–2639 (2017). PubMed Article Google Scholar Heitzer, E., Haque, I. S., Roberts, C. E. S. & Speicher, M. R. Current and future perspectives of liquid biopsies in genomics-driven oncology. Nat. Rev. Genet. 20, 71–88 (2019). CAS Article PubMed Google Scholar Ediriweera, M. K., Tennekoon, K. H. & Samarakoon, S. R. Emerging role of histone deacetylase inhibitors as anti-breast-cancer agents. Drug Discov. Today 24, 685–702 (2019). CAS PubMed Article Google Scholar Munster, P. N. et al. A phase II study of the histone deacetylase inhibitor vorinostat combined with tamoxifen for the treatment of patients with hormone therapy-resistant breast cancer. Br. J. Cancer 104, 1828–1835 (2011). CAS PubMed PubMed Central Article Google Scholar Zhou, Y., Wang, Y., Zhang, K., Zhu, J. & Ning, Z. Reverse effect of chidamide on endocrine resistance in estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer. J. Shenzhen Univ. Sci. Eng. 35, 339 (2018). Article Google Scholar Jiang, Z. et al. Phase III trial of chidamide, a subtype-selective histone deacetylase (HDAC) inhibitor, in combination with exemestane in patients with hormone receptor-positive advanced breast cancer [abstract]. Ann. Oncol. 29, 283O_PR (2018). Article Google Scholar Williams, C. & Lin, C.-Y. Oestrogen receptors in breast cancer: basic mechanisms and clinical implications. Ecancermedicalscience 7, 370 (2013). PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar Levin, E. R. & Pietras, R. J. Estrogen receptors outside the nucleus in breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res. Treat. 108, 351–361 (2008). CAS PubMed Article Google Scholar Santen, R. J. Clinical review: effect of endocrine therapies on bone in breast cancer patients. J. Clin. Endocrinol. Metab. 96, 308–319 (2011). CAS PubMed Article Google Scholar Ruffell, B. et al. Leukocyte composition of human breast cancer. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 109, 2796–2801 (2012). CAS PubMed Article Google Scholar Solinas, C., Carbognin, L., De Silva, P., Criscitiello, C. & Lambertini, M. Tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes in breast cancer according to tumor subtype: current state of the art. Breast 35, 142–150 (2017). PubMed Article Google Scholar Nagarajan, D. & McArdle, S. Immune landscape of breast cancers. Biomedicines 6, 20 (2018). PubMed Central Article CAS Google Scholar Savas, P. et al. Clinical relevance of host immunity in breast cancer: from TILs to the clinic. Nat. Rev. Clin. Oncol. 13, 228–241 (2016). CAS PubMed Article Google Scholar Dieci, M. V. et al. Update on tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) in breast cancer, including recommendations to assess TILs in residual disease after neoadjuvant therapy and in carcinoma in situ: a report of the International Immuno-Oncology Biomarker Working Group on Breast Cancer. Semin. Cancer Biol. 52, 16–25 (2018). PubMed Article Google Scholar Boudreau, A., van’t Veer, L. J. & Bissell, M. J. An ‘elite hacker’: breast tumors exploit the normal microenvironment program to instruct their progression and biological diversity. Cell Adhes. Migr. 6, 236–248 (2012). Article Google Scholar Smyth, M. J., Dunn, G. P. & Schreiber, R. D. Cancer immunosurveillance and immunoediting: the roles of immunity in suppressing tumor development and shaping tumor immunogenicity. Adv. Immunol. 90, 1–50 (2006). CAS PubMed Article Google Scholar Schreiber, R. D., Old, L. J. & Smyth, M. J. Cancer immunoediting: integrating immunity’s roles in cancer suppression and promotion. Science 331, 1565–1570 (2011). CAS Article PubMed Google Scholar Buonomo, O. C. et al. New insights into the metastatic behavior after breast cancer surgery, according to well-established clinicopathological variables and molecular subtypes. PLOS ONE 12, e0184680 (2017). PubMed PubMed Central Article CAS Google Scholar Gobbini, E. et al. Time trends of overall survival among metastatic breast cancer patients in the real-life ESME cohort. Eur. J. Cancer 96, 17–24 (2018). PubMed Article Google Scholar Santé Publique France. Breast cancer [French]. Santepubliquefrance.fr https://www.santepubliquefrance.fr/maladies-et-traumatismes/cancers/cancer-du-sein (2019). Zhang, K. et al. Clinical value of circulating ESR1 mutations for patients with metastatic breast cancer: a meta-analysis. Cancer Manag. Res. 10, 2573–2580 (2018). CAS PubMed PubMed Central Article Google Scholar Yates, L. R. et al. Genomic evolution of breast cancer metastasis and relapse. Cancer Cell 32, 169–184.e7 (2017). CAS PubMed PubMed Central Article Google Scholar Gingras, I., Salgado, R. & Ignatiadis, M. Liquid biopsy: will it be the ‘magic tool’ for monitoring response of solid tumors to anticancer therapies? Curr. Opin. Oncol. 27, 560–567 (2015). CAS PubMed Article Google Scholar Aurilio, G. et al. A meta-analysis of oestrogen receptor, progesterone receptor and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 discordance between primary breast cancer and metastases. Eur. J. Cancer 50, 277–289 (2014). CAS PubMed Article Google Scholar Independent, U. K. Panel on breast cancer screening. the benefits and harms of breast cancer screening: an independent review. Lancet 380, 1778–1786 (2012). Article Google Scholar Nelson, H. D. et al. Effectiveness of breast cancer screening: systematic review and meta-analysis to update the 2009 U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommendation. Ann. Intern. Med. 164, 244–255 (2016). PubMed Article Google Scholar Lauby-Secretan, B. et al. Breast-cancer screening — viewpoint of the IARC Working Group. N. Engl. J. Med. 372, 2353–2358 (2015). CAS PubMed Article Google Scholar Houssami, N. Overdiagnosis of breast cancer in population screening: does it make breast screening worthless? Cancer Biol. Med. 14, 1–8 (2017). PubMed PubMed Central Article Google Scholar Suhrke, P. et al. Effect of mammography screening on surgical treatment for breast cancer in Norway: comparative analysis of cancer registry data. BMJ 343, d4692–d4692 (2011). PubMed PubMed Central Article Google Scholar Stang, A., Kääb-Sanyal, V., Hense, H.-W., Becker, N. & Kuss, O. Effect of mammography screening on surgical treatment for breast cancer: a nationwide analysis of hospitalization rates in Germany 2005–2009. Eur. J. Epidemiol. 28, 689–696 (2013). PubMed Article Google Scholar IARC Handbooks of Cancer Prevention. Breast Cancer Screening (Volume 15). Iarc.fr http://publications.iarc.fr/Book-And-Report-Series/Iarc-Handbooks-Of-Cancer-Prevention/Breast-Cancer-Screening-2016 (2016). Nelson, H. D. et al. Harms of breast cancer screening: systematic review to update the 2009 U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommendation. Ann. Intern. Med. 164, 256–267 (2016). PubMed Article Google Scholar Carter, J. L., Coletti, R. J. & Harris, R. P. Quantifying and monitoring overdiagnosis in cancer screening: a systematic review of methods. BMJ 350, g7773 (2015). PubMed PubMed Central Article Google Scholar Saslow, D. et al. American Cancer Society guidelines for breast screening with MRI as an adjunct to mammography. CA Cancer J. Clin. 57, 75–89 (2007). PubMed Article Google Scholar Phi, X.-A. et al. Magnetic resonance imaging improves breast screening sensitivity in BRCA mutation carriers age ≥ 50 years: evidence from an individual patient data meta-analysis. J. Clin. Oncol. 33, 349–356 (2015). PubMed Article Google Scholar Sardanelli, F. et al. Magnetic resonance imaging of the breast: recommendations from the EUSOMA working group. Eur. J. Cancer 46, 1296–1316 (2010). PubMed Article Google Scholar Melnikow, J. et al. Supplemental screening for breast cancer in women with dense breasts: a systematic review for the U.S. preventive services task force. Ann. Intern. Med. 164, 268–278 (2016). PubMed PubMed Central Article Google Scholar Houssami, N. & Lee, C. I. The impact of legislation mandating breast density notification — review of the evidence. Breast 42, 102–112 (2018). PubMed Article Google Scholar Marinovich, M. L., Hunter, K. E., Macaskill, P. & Houssami, N. Breast cancer screening using tomosynthesis or mammography: a meta-analysis of cancer detection and recall. J. Natl Cancer Inst. 110, 942–949 (2018). PubMed Article Google Scholar Irwig, L., Macaskill, P. & Houssami, N. Evidence relevant to the investigation of breast symptoms: the triple test. Breast 11, 215–220 (2002). CAS PubMed Article Google Scholar Houssami, N., Ciatto, S., Turner, R. M., Cody, H. S. & Macaskill, P. Preoperative ultrasound-guided needle biopsy of axillary nodes in invasive breast cancer: meta-analysis of its accuracy and utility in staging the axilla. Ann. Surg. 254, 243–251 (2011). PubMed Article Google Scholar Morrow, M., Waters, J. & Morris, E. MRI for breast cancer screening, diagnosis, and treatment. Lancet 378, 1804–1811 (2011). PubMed Article Google Scholar Srigley, J. R. et al. Standardized synoptic cancer pathology reporting: a population-based approach. J. Surg. Oncol. 99, 517–524 (2009). PubMed Article Google Scholar World Heath Organisation. WHO Classification of Tumours of the Breast, Fourth Edition. (World Health Organization, 2012). Elston, C. W. & Ellis, I. O. Pathological prognostic factors in breast cancer. I. The value of histological grade in breast cancer: experience from a large study with long-term follow-up. Histopathology 19, 403–410 (1991). CAS PubMed Article Google Scholar National Comprehensive Cancer Network. NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology: Breast Cancer. Nccn.org https://www.nccn.org/professionals/physician_gls/pdf/breast.pdf (2018). Curigliano, G. 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. 28, 1700–1712 (2017). CAS PubMed PubMed Central Article Google Scholar Senkus, E. et al. Primary breast cancer: ESMO Clinical Practice Guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. Ann. Oncol. 24 (Suppl. 6), vi7-vi23 (2013). PubMed Google Scholar Hammond, M. E. H. 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. 28, 2784–2795 (2010). PubMed PubMed Central Article Google Scholar Wolff, A. C. et al. Human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 testing in breast cancer: American Society of Clinical Oncology/College of American Pathologists clinical practice guideline focused update. J. Clin. Oncol. 36, 2105–2122 (2018). CAS PubMed Article Google Scholar Dowsett, M. et al. Assessment of Ki67 in breast cancer: recommendations from the International Ki67 in Breast Cancer working group. J. Natl Cancer Inst. 103, 1656–1664 (2011). CAS PubMed PubMed Central Article Google Scholar Rakha, E. A. et al. The prognostic significance of lymphovascular invasion in invasive breast carcinoma. Cancer 118, 3670–3680 (2012). PubMed Article Google Scholar Barrio, A. V. & Morrow, M. Appropriate margin for lumpectomy excision of invasive breast cancer. Chin. Clin. Oncol. 5, 35–35 (2016). PubMed PubMed Central Article Google Scholar Chung, A. et al. Impact of consensus guidelines by the Society of Surgical Oncology and the American Society for Radiation Oncology on margins for breast-conserving surgery in stages 1 and 2 invasive breast cancer. Ann. Surg. Oncol. 22, 422–427 (2015). Article Google Scholar Schulman, A. M. et al. Reexcision surgery for breast cancer: an analysis of the American Society of Breast Surgeons (ASBrS) MasterySM database following the SSO-ASTRO “no ink on tumor” guidelines. Ann. Surg. Oncol. 24, 52–58 (2017). PubMed Article Google Scholar Morrow, M. 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. 6, 287–295 (2016). PubMed PubMed Central Article Google Scholar Morrow, M. 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. J. Clin. Oncol. 34, 4040–4046 (2016). PubMed PubMed Central Article Google Scholar Moran, M. S. 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. 88, 553–564 (2014). PubMed PubMed Central Article Google Scholar Amin, M. B. 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. 67, 93–99 (2017). PubMed Article Google Scholar Tao, L. et al. Breast cancer mortality in older and younger breast cancer patients in California. Cancer Epidemiol. Biomark. Prev. 28, 303–310 (2018). Article Google Scholar Salgado, R. et al. The evaluation of tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) in breast cancer: recommendations by an International TILs Working Group 2014. Ann. Oncol. 26, 259–271 (2015). CAS PubMed Article Google Scholar Green, A. R. et al. Nottingham Prognostic Index Plus: validation of a clinical decision making tool in breast cancer in an independent series. J. Pathol. Clin. Res. 2, 32–40 (2016). CAS PubMed PubMed Central Article Google Scholar Candido dos Reis, F. J. et al. An updated PREDICT breast cancer prognostication and treatment benefit prediction model with independent validation. Breast Cancer Res. 19, 58 (2017). PubMed PubMed Central Article Google Scholar Phung, M. T., Tin Tin, S. & Elwood, J. M. Prognostic models for breast cancer: a systematic review. BMC Cancer 19, 230 (2019). PubMed PubMed Central Article Google Scholar Senkus, E. et al. Primary breast cancer: ESMO Clinical Practice Guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. Ann. Oncol. 26 (Suppl. 5), v8-v30 (2015). PubMed Article Google Scholar Cortazar, P. et al. Pathological complete response and long-term clinical benefit in breast cancer: the CTNeoBC pooled analysis. Lancet 384, 164–172 (2014). Article PubMed Google Scholar Cardoso, F. et al. 70-Gene signature as an aid to treatment decisions in early-stage breast cancer. N. Engl. J. Med. 375, 717–729 (2016). CAS PubMed Article Google Scholar Sparano, J. A. et al. Prospective validation of a 21-gene expression assay in breast cancer. N. Engl. J. Med. 373, 2005–2014 (2015). CAS PubMed PubMed Central Article Google Scholar Sparano, J. A. et al. Adjuvant chemotherapy guided by a 21-gene expression assay in breast cancer. N. Engl. J. Med. 379, 111–121 (2018). CAS PubMed PubMed Central Article Google Scholar Harris, L. N. 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. J. Clin. Oncol. 34, 1134–1150 (2016). CAS PubMed PubMed Central Article Google Scholar Krop, I. 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. 35, 2838–2847 (2017). PubMed Article Google Scholar Nitz, U. et al. West German Study PlanB trial: adjuvant four cycles of epirubicin and cyclophosphamide plus docetaxel versus six cycles of docetaxel and cyclophosphamide in HER2-negative early breast cancer. J. Clin. Oncol. 37, 799–808 (2019). CAS PubMed Article Google Scholar Sestak, I. Risk stratification in early breast cancer in premenopausal and postmenopausal women: integrating genomic assays with clinicopathological features. Curr. Opin. Oncol. 1, 29–34 (2018). Article Google Scholar McLaughlin, S. A. Surgical management of the breast: breast conservation therapy and mastectomy. Surg. Clin. North Am. 93, 411–428 (2013). PubMed Article Google Scholar Margenthaler, J. A. & Ollila, D. W. Breast conservation therapy versus mastectomy: shared decision-making strategies and overcoming decisional conflicts in your patients. Ann. Surg. Oncol. 23, 3133–3137 (2016). PubMed Article Google Scholar Buchholz, T. A., Mittendorf, E. A. & Hunt, K. K. Surgical considerations after neoadjuvant chemotherapy: breast conservation therapy. J. Natl Cancer Inst. Monogr. 2015, 11–14 (2015). PubMed PubMed Central Article CAS Google Scholar Houssami, N., Macaskill, P., Luke Marinovich, M. & Morrow, M. The association of surgical margins and local recurrence in women with early-stage invasive breast cancer treated with breast-conserving therapy: a meta-analysis. Ann. Surg. Oncol. 21, 717–730 (2014). PubMed PubMed Central Article Google Scholar Morrow, M., Harris, J. R. & Schnitt, S. J. Surgical margins in lumpectomy for breast cancer — bigger is not better. N. Engl. J. Med. 367, 79–82 (2012). This commentary and the meta-analysis by Houssami et al. (2014) settled the decade-long discussions about surgical resection margins and are, therefore, landmark contributions. PubMed Article Google Scholar Tan, M. P., Sitoh, N. Y. & Sim, A. S. The value of intraoperative frozen section analysis for margin status in breast conservation surgery in a nontertiary institution. Int. J. Breast Cancer https://doi.org/10.1155/2014/715404 (2014). Article Google Scholar Boughey, J. C. et al. Impact of analysis of frozen-section margin on reoperation rates in women undergoing lumpectomy for breast cancer: evaluation of the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program data. Surgery 156, 190–197 (2014). PubMed Article Google Scholar Haloua, M. H. et al. A systematic review of oncoplastic breast-conserving surgery: current weaknesses and future prospects. Ann. Surg. 257, 609–620 (2013). PubMed Article Google Scholar Benelli, L. A new periareolar mammaplasty: the ‘round block’ technique. Aesthetic Plast. Surg. 14, 93–100 (1990). CAS PubMed Article Google Scholar Clough, K. B., Kaufman, G. J., Nos, C., Buccimazza, I. & Sarfati, I. M. Improving breast cancer surgery: a classification and quadrant per quadrant atlas for oncoplastic surgery. Ann. Surg. Oncol. 17, 1375–1391 (2010). PubMed Article Google Scholar Yao, K., Winchester, D. J., Czechura, T. & Huo, D. Contralateral prophylactic mastectomy and survival: report from the national cancer data base, 1998–2002. Breast Cancer Res. Treat. 142, 465–476 (2013). PubMed Article Google Scholar Vila, J., Gandini, S. & Gentilini, O. Overall survival according to type of surgery in young (≤40 years) early breast cancer patients: a systematic meta-analysis comparing breast-conserving surgery versus mastectomy. Breast 24, 175–181 (2015). PubMed Article Google Scholar Lucci, A. et al. Surgical complications associated with sentinel lymph node dissection (SLND) plus axillary lymph node dissection compared with SLND alone in the American College of Surgeons Oncology Group trial Z0011. J. Clin. Oncol. 25, 3657–3663 (2007). PubMed Article Google Scholar Krag, D. N. 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. 11, 927–933 (2010). This large clinical trial confirms that there is no overall survival difference between sentinel lymph node biopsy and axillary lymph node dissection. PubMed PubMed Central Article Google Scholar Veronesi, U. et al. A randomized comparison of sentinel-node biopsy with routine axillary dissection in breast cancer. N. Engl. J. Med. 349, 546–553 (2003). PubMed Article Google Scholar Giuliano, A. E. et al. Locoregional recurrence after sentinel lymph node dissection with or without axillary dissection in patients with sentinel lymph node metastases: long-term follow-up from the American College of Surgeons Oncology Group (Alliance) ACOSOG Z0011 randomized trial. Ann. Surg. 264, 413–420 (2016). PubMed Article Google Scholar 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 14, 1–8 (2019). Kaidar-Person, O., Meattini, I. & Poortmans, P. M. P. Between uncertainties and overtreatment. Int. J. Radiat. Oncol. 104, 15–16 (2019). Article Google Scholar Kuehn, T. et al. Sentinel-lymph-node biopsy in patients with breast cancer before and after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (SENTINA): a prospective, multicentre cohort study. Lancet Oncol. 14, 609–618 (2013). Article PubMed Google Scholar King, T. A. & Morrow, M. Surgical issues in patients with breast cancer receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Nat. Rev. Clin. Oncol. 12, 335–343 (2015). PubMed Article Google Scholar Giuliano, A. E. et al. Axillary dissection vs no axillary dissection in women with invasive breast cancer and sentinel node metastasis: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA 305, 569–575 (2011). CAS PubMed PubMed Central Article Google Scholar Early Breast Cancer Trialists’ Collaborative Group (EBCTCG). 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 378, 1707–1716 (2011). This meta-analysis underlines that the contribution of radiation therapy should always be the standard approach for breast-conserving therapy. Article CAS Google Scholar EBCTCG (Early Breast Cancer Trialists’ Collaborative Group). 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 383, 2127–2135 (2014). This meta-analysis helps us to better identify those patients who would benefit most from radiation therapy after mastectomy. Article Google Scholar Jatoi, I., Benson, J. R. & Kunkler, I. Hypothesis: can the abscopal effect explain the impact of adjuvant radiotherapy on breast cancer mortality? NPJ Breast Cancer 4, 8 (2018). PubMed PubMed Central Article CAS Google Scholar Bartelink, H. et al. Whole-breast irradiation with or without a boost for patients treated with breast-conserving surgery for early breast cancer: 20-year follow-up of a randomised phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol. 16, 47–56 (2015). PubMed Article Google Scholar Poortmans, P. Postmastectomy radiation in breast cancer with one to three involved lymph nodes: ending the debate. Lancet 383, 2104–2106 (2014). Article PubMed Google Scholar Poortmans, P. M. et al. Internal mammary and medial supraclavicular irradiation in breast cancer. N. Engl. J. Med. 373, 317–327 (2015). CAS PubMed Article Google Scholar Whelan, T. J. et al. Regional nodal irradiation in early-stage breast cancer. N. Engl. J. Med. 373, 307–316 (2015). CAS PubMed PubMed Central Article Google Scholar Thorsen, L. B. J. et al. DBCG-IMN: a population-based cohort study on the effect of internal mammary node irradiation in early node-positive breast cancer. J. Clin. Oncol. 34, 314–320 (2016). PubMed Article Google Scholar Curigliano, G. 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. 29, 2153–2153 (2018). CAS PubMed Article PubMed Central Google Scholar Oliai, C. & Hurvitz, S. A. The debate over post-mastectomy radiotherapy should continue: breast cancer. Nat. Rev. Clin. Oncol. 12, 567–568 (2015). PubMed Article Google Scholar Recht, A. et al. Postmastectomy radiotherapy: an American Society of Clinical Oncology, American Society for Radiation Oncology, and Society of Surgical Oncology focused guideline update. Ann. Surg. Oncol. 24, 38–51 (2017). PubMed Article Google Scholar Dodwell, D. et al. Abstract GS4-02: regional lymph node irradiation in early stage breast cancer: an EBCTCG meta-analysis of 13,000 women in 14 trials. in General Session Abstracts GS4-02-GS4-02 https://doi.org/10.1158/1538-7445.SABCS18-GS4-02 (American Association for Cancer Research, 2019). Kunkler, I. H., Canney, P., van Tienhoven, G. & Russell, N. S. MRC/EORTC (BIG 2-04) SUPREMO Trial Management Group. Elucidating the role of chest wall irradiation in ‘intermediate-risk’. breast cancer: The MRC/EORTC SUPREMO trial. Clin. Oncol. R. Coll. Radiol. 20, 31–34 (2008). CAS PubMed Google Scholar Poortmans, P., Aznar, M. & Bartelink, H. Quality indicators for breast cancer: revisiting historical evidence in the context of technology changes. Semin. Radiat. Oncol. 22, 29–39 (2012). PubMed Article Google Scholar Osman, S. O. S., Hol, S., Poortmans, P. M. & Essers, M. Volumetric modulated arc therapy and breath-hold in image-guided locoregional left-sided breast irradiation. Radiother. Oncol. 112, 17–22 (2014). PubMed Article Google Scholar Essers, M., Poortmans, P. M., Verschueren, K., Hol, S. & Cobben, D. C. P. Should breathing adapted radiotherapy also be applied for right-sided breast irradiation? Acta Oncol. 55, 460–465 (2016). PubMed Article Google Scholar Poortmans, P. M. P., Arenas, M. & Livi, L. Over-irradiation. Breast 31, 295–302 (2017). PubMed Article Google Scholar Blamey, R. W. et al. Radiotherapy or tamoxifen after conserving surgery for breast cancers of excellent prognosis: British Association of Surgical Oncology (BASO) II trial. Eur. J. Cancer 49, 2294–2302 (2013). CAS PubMed Article Google Scholar McGuire, S. E. et al. Postmastectomy radiation improves the outcome of patients with locally advanced breast cancer who achieve a pathologic complete response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Int. J. Radiat. Oncol. Biol. Phys. 68, 1004–1009 (2007). PubMed PubMed Central Article Google Scholar Mamounas, E. P. 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. 30, 3960–3966 (2012). PubMed PubMed Central Article Google Scholar Krug, D. et al. Individualization of post-mastectomy radiotherapy and regional nodal irradiation based on treatment response after neoadjuvant chemotherapy for breast cancer: a systematic review. Strahlenther. Onkol. 194, 607–618 (2018). PubMed Article Google Scholar Amoroso, V. et al. International Expert Consensus on Primary Systemic Therapy in the Management of Early Breast Cancer: Highlights of the Fifth Symposium on Primary Systemic Therapy in the Management of Operable Breast Cancer, Cremona, Italy (2013). J. Natl Cancer Inst. Monogr. 2015, 90–96 (2015). PubMed PubMed Central Article Google Scholar Offersen, B. V. et al. ESTRO consensus guideline on target volume delineation for elective radiation therapy of early stage breast cancer, version 1.1. Radiother. Oncol. 118, 205–208 (2016). PubMed Article Google Scholar Haviland, J. S. et al. The UK Standardisation of Breast Radiotherapy (START) trials of radiotherapy hypofractionation for treatment of early breast cancer: 10-year follow-up results of two randomised controlled trials. Lancet Oncol. 14, 1086–1094 (2013). PubMed Article Google Scholar Whelan, T. J. et al. Long-term results of hypofractionated radiation therapy for breast cancer. N. Engl. J. Med. 362, 513–520 (2010). CAS PubMed Article Google Scholar Wang, S.-L. et al. Hypofractionated versus conventional fractionated postmastectomy radiotherapy for patients with high-risk breast cancer: a randomised, non-inferiority, open-label, phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol. 20, 352–360 (2019). PubMed Article Google Scholar Brouwers, P. J. A. M. et al. Predictors for poor cosmetic outcome in patients with early stage breast cancer treated with breast conserving therapy: results of the Young Boost trial. Radiother. Oncol. 128, 434–441 (2018). PubMed Article Google Scholar Polgár, C. et al. Patient selection for accelerated partial-breast irradiation (APBI) after breast-conserving surgery: recommendations of the groupe européen de curiethérapie-european society for therapeutic radiology and oncology (GEC-ESTRO) breast cancer working group based on clinical evidence (2009). Radiother. Oncol. 94, 264–273 (2010). PubMed Article Google Scholar Correa, C. et al. Accelerated partial breast irradiation: executive summary for the update of an ASTRO Evidence-Based. Consensus Statement. Pract. Radiat. Oncol. 7, 73–79 (2017). PubMed Article Google Scholar Miranda, F. A. et al. Accelerated partial breast irradiation: current status with a focus on clinical practice. Breast J. https://doi.org/10.1111/tbj.13164 (2018). Article PubMed Google Scholar Marta, G. N. et al. Effectiveness of different accelerated partial breast irradiation techniques for the treatment of breast cancer patients: systematic review using indirect comparisons of randomized clinical trials. Rep. Pract. Oncol. Radiother. 24, 165–174 (2019). PubMed Article PubMed Central Google Scholar Veronesi, U. et al. Intraoperative radiotherapy versus external radiotherapy for early breast cancer (ELIOT): a randomised controlled equivalence trial. Lancet Oncol. 14, 1269–1277 (2013). PubMed Article Google Scholar Vaidya, J. S. et al. Risk-adapted targeted intraoperative radiotherapy versus whole-breast radiotherapy for breast cancer: 5-year results for local control and overall survival from the TARGIT-A randomised trial. Lancet 383, 603–613 (2014). Article PubMed Google Scholar Early Breast Cancer Trialists’ Collaborative Group (EBCTCG). et al. Relevance of breast cancer hormone receptors and other factors to the efficacy of adjuvant tamoxifen: patient-level meta-analysis of randomised trials. Lancet 378, 771–784 (2011). Article CAS Google Scholar Early Breast Cancer Trialists’ Collaborative Group (EBCTCG) et al. Comparisons between different polychemotherapy regimens for early breast cancer: meta-analyses of long-term outcome among 100,000 women in 123 randomized trials. Lancet 379, 432–444 (2012). This meta-analysis demonstrates the benefits of adjuvant chemotherapy in early breast cancer. Rastogi, P. et al. Preoperative chemotherapy: updates of national surgical adjuvant breast and bowel project protocols B-18 and B-27. J. Clin. Oncol. 26, 778–785 (2008). PubMed Article Google Scholar Francis, P. A. et al. Tailoring adjuvant endocrine therapy for premenopausal breast cancer. N. Engl. J. Med. 379, 122–137 (2018). CAS PubMed PubMed Central Article Google Scholar Gnant, M. et al. Zoledronic acid combined with adjuvant endocrine therapy of tamoxifen versus anastrozol plus ovarian function suppression in premenopausal early breast cancer: final analysis of the Austrian Breast and Colorectal Cancer Study Group Trial 12. Ann. Oncol. 26, 313–320 (2015). CAS PubMed Article Google Scholar Early Breast Cancer Trialists’ Collaborative Group (EBCTCG). Aromatase inhibitors versus tamoxifen in early breast cancer: patient-level meta-analysis of the randomised trials. Lancet 386, 1341–1352 (2015). This meta-analysis demonstrates the benefit of the two individual options for adjuvant endocrine therapy in postmenopausal patients with early breast cancer. Article CAS Google Scholar Pan, H. et al. 20-Year risks of breast-cancer recurrence after stopping endocrine therapy at 5 years. N. Engl. J. Med. 377, 1836–1846 (2017). PubMed PubMed Central Article Google Scholar Gray, R. et al. Increasing the dose density of adjuvant chemotherapy by shortening intervals between courses or by sequential drug administration significantly reduces both disease recurrence and breast cancer mortality: an EBCTCG meta-analysis of 21,000 women in 16 randomised trials [abstract]. SABCS GS1-GS01 (2018). Finn, R. S. et al. Palbociclib and letrozole in advanced breast cancer. N. Engl. J. Med. 375, 1925–1936 (2016). CAS PubMed Article Google Scholar Hortobagyi, G. N. et al. Ribociclib as first-line therapy for HR-positive, advanced breast cancer. N. Engl. J. Med. 375, 1738–1748 (2016). CAS PubMed Article Google Scholar Goetz, M. P. et al. MONARCH 3: abemaciclib as initial therapy for advanced breast cancer. J. Clin. Oncol. 35, 3638–3646 (2017). CAS PubMed Article Google Scholar Mackey, J. R. et al. Long-term outcomes after adjuvant treatment of sequential versus combination docetaxel with doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide in node-positive breast cancer: BCIRG-005 randomized trial. Ann. Oncol. 27, 1041–1047 (2016). CAS PubMed Article Google Scholar Del Mastro, L. 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 385, 1863–1872 (2015). PubMed Article CAS Google Scholar Blum, J. L. 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. 35, 2647–2655 (2017). CAS PubMed PubMed Central Article Google Scholar Gray, R. et al. Increasing the dose intensity of chemotherapy by more frequent administration or sequential scheduling: a patient-level meta-analysis of 37 298 women with early breast cancer in 26 randomised trials. Lancet 393, 1440–1452 (2019). Article Google Scholar Gianni, L. 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. 17, 791–800 (2016). CAS Article PubMed Google Scholar von Minckwitz, G. et al. Trastuzumab emtansine for residual invasive HER2-positive breast cancer. N. Engl. J. Med. 380, 617–628 (2018). Article Google Scholar von Minckwitz, G. et al. Adjuvant pertuzumab and trastuzumab in early HER2-positive breast cancer. N. Engl. J. Med. 377, 122–131 (2017). Article Google Scholar Martin, M. 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. 18, 1688–1700 (2017). CAS PubMed Article Google Scholar Tolaney, S. M. et al. Adjuvant paclitaxel and trastuzumab for node-negative, HER2-positive breast cancer. N. Engl. J. Med. 372, 134–141 (2015). PubMed PubMed Central Article CAS Google Scholar Tolaney, S. M. et al. Seven-year (yr) follow-up of adjuvant paclitaxel (T) and trastuzumab (H) (APT trial) for node-negative, HER2-positive breast cancer (BC). J. Clin. Oncol. 35, 511–511 (2017). Article Google Scholar Earl, H. M. et al. 6 versus 12 months of adjuvant trastuzumab for HER2-positive early breast cancer (PERSEPHONE): 4-year disease-free survival results of a randomised phase 3 non-inferiority trial. Lancet 393, 2599–2612 (2019). CAS PubMed PubMed Central Article Google Scholar Pivot, X. et al. Either 6 months versus 12 months of adjuvant trastuzumab for patients with HER2-positive early breast cancer (PHARE): a randomised phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol. 14, 741–748 (2013). CAS PubMed Article Google Scholar Joensuu, H. et al. Effect of adjuvant trastuzumab for a duration of 9 weeks vs 1 year with concomitant chemotherapy for early human epidermal growth factor receptor 2–positive breast cancer: the SOLD randomized clinical trial. JAMA Oncol. 4, 1199 (2018). PubMed PubMed Central Article Google Scholar Piccart-Gebhart, M. J. et al. Trastuzumab after adjuvant chemotherapy in HER2-positive breast cancer. N. Engl. J. Med. 353, 1659–1672 (2005). CAS PubMed Article Google Scholar Goldhirsch, A. et al. 2 years versus 1 year of adjuvant trastuzumab for HER2-positive breast cancer (HERA): an open-label, randomised controlled trial. Lancet 382, 1021–1028 (2013). CAS PubMed Article Google Scholar Hahnen, E. 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. 3, 1378–1385 (2017). PubMed PubMed Central Article Google Scholar Sikov, W. M. 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. 33, 13–21 (2015). CAS PubMed Article Google Scholar Masuda, N. et al. Adjuvant capecitabine for breast cancer after preoperative chemotherapy. N. Engl. J. Med. 376, 2147–2159 (2017). CAS PubMed Article Google Scholar Gnant, M. et al. Adjuvant denosumab in breast cancer (ABCSG-18): a multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Lancet 386, 433–443 (2015). CAS PubMed Article Google Scholar Gnant, M. et al. Adjuvant denosumab in postmenopausal patients with hormone receptor-positive breast cancer (ABCSG-18): disease-free survival results from a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol. 20, 339–351 (2019). CAS PubMed Article Google Scholar Coleman, R. E. et al. Adjuvant denosumab in early breast cancer: first results from the international multicenter randomized phase III placebo controlled D-CARE study [abstract]. J. Clin. Oncol. 36 (Suppl.), a501 (2018). Article Google Scholar Early Breast Cancer Trialists’ Collaborative Group (EBCTCG). Adjuvant bisphosphonate treatment in early breast cancer: meta-analyses of individual patient data from randomised trials. Lancet 386, 1353–1361 (2015). Article CAS Google Scholar Coleman, R. E. et al. Benefits and risks of adjuvant treatment with zoledronic acid in stage II/III breast cancer. 10 years follow-up of the AZURE randomized clinical trial (BIG 01/04). J. Bone Oncol. 13, 123–135 (2018). CAS PubMed PubMed Central Article Google Scholar Cardoso, F. et al. 4th ESO–ESMO international consensus guidelines for advanced breast cancer (ABC 4)†. Ann. Oncol. 29, 1634–1657 (2018). CAS PubMed Article Google Scholar Golse, N. & Adam, R. Liver metastases from breast cancer: what role for surgery? Indications and results. Clin. Breast Cancer 17, 256–265 (2017). PubMed Article Google Scholar Xie, Y. et al. Surgery of the primary tumor improves survival in women with stage IV breast cancer in southwest China: a retrospective analysis. Medicine 96, e7048 (2017). PubMed PubMed Central Article Google Scholar Shien, T. & Doihara, H. Resection of the primary tumor in stage IV breast cancer. World J. Clin. Oncol. 5, 82–85 (2014). PubMed PubMed Central Article Google Scholar Badwe, R. et al. Locoregional treatment versus no treatment of the primary tumour in metastatic breast cancer: an open-label randomised controlled trial. Lancet Oncol. 16, 1380–1388 (2015). PubMed Article Google Scholar Soran, A., Ozbas, S., Kelsey, S. F. & Gulluoglu, B. M. Randomized trial comparing locoregional resection of primary tumor with no surgery in stage IV breast cancer at the presentation (Protocol MF07-01): a study of Turkish Federation of the National Societies for Breast Diseases. Breast J. 15, 399–403 (2009). PubMed Article Google Scholar Fitzal, F. et al. Impact of breast surgery in primary metastasized breast cancer: outcomes of the prospective randomized phase III ABCSG-28 POSYTIVE Trial. Ann. Surg. https://doi.org/10.1097/SLA.0000000000002771 (2018). PubMed Article Google Scholar Barinoff, J. et al. Primary metastatic breast cancer in the era of targeted therapy — prognostic impact and the role of breast tumour surgery. Eur. J. Cancer 83, 116–124 (2017). PubMed Article Google Scholar Shien, T. et al. A randomized controlled trial comparing primary tumor resection plus systemic therapy with systemic therapy alone in metastatic breast cancer (JCOG1017 PRIM-BC). J. Clin. Oncol. 35, TPS588–TPS588 (2017). Article Google Scholar Cameron, D. Removing the primary tumour in metastatic breast cancer. Lancet Oncol. 16, 1284–1285 (2015). PubMed Article Google Scholar Dare, A. J. et al. Surgical Services for Cancer Care. in Cancer: Disease Control Priorities, Third Edition (Volume 3) (eds. Gelband, H., Jha, P., Sankaranarayanan, R. & Horton, S.) (The International Bank for Reconstruction and Development/The World Bank, 2015). Phillips, C., Jeffree, R. & Khasraw, M. Management of breast cancer brain metastases: a practical review. Breast 31, 90–98 (2017). PubMed Article Google Scholar Thavarajah, N. et al. Continued success in providing timely palliative radiation therapy at the rapid response radiotherapy program: a review of 2008–2012. Curr. Oncol. 20, e206–e211 (2013). CAS PubMed PubMed Central Article Google Scholar Chow, E. et al. Single versus multiple fractions of repeat radiation for painful bone metastases: a randomised, controlled, non-inferiority trial. Lancet Oncol. 15, 164–171 (2014). PubMed Article Google Scholar Sologuren, I., Rodríguez-Gallego, C. & Lara, P. C. Immune effects of high dose radiation treatment: implications of ionizing radiation on the development of bystander and abscopal effects. Transl Cancer Res. 3, 18-31–31 (2014). Google Scholar Morgan, S. C. & Parker, C. C. Local treatment of metastatic cancer — killing the seed or disturbing the soil? Nat. Rev. Clin. Oncol. 8, 504–506 (2011). PubMed Article Google Scholar Morgan, S., Caudrelier, J.-M. & Clemons, M. Radiotherapy to the primary tumor is associated with improved survival in stage IV breast cancer [abstract]. SABCS P4, 16–06 (2012). Google Scholar Bernier, J. Immuno-oncology: allying forces of radio- and immuno-therapy to enhance cancer cell killing. Crit. Rev. Oncol. Hematol. 108, 97–108 (2016). PubMed Article Google Scholar Fietz, T. et al. Palliative systemic therapy and overall survival of 1,395 patients with advanced breast cancer — rResults from the prospective German TMK cohort study. Breast. 34, 122–130 (2017). PubMed Article Google Scholar Rugo, H. S. et al. Endocrine therapy for hormone receptor-positive metastatic breast cancer: American Society of Clinical Oncology guideline. J. Clin. Oncol. 34, 3069–3103 (2016). CAS PubMed Article Google Scholar Turner, N. C. et al. Overall survival with palbociclib and fulvestrant in advanced breast cancer. N. Engl. J. Med. 379, 1926–1936 (2018). CAS PubMed Article Google Scholar Miles, D. W. et al. First-line bevacizumab in combination with chemotherapy for HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer: pooled and subgroup analyses of data from 2447 patients. Ann. Oncol. 24, 2773–2780 (2013). CAS PubMed Article Google Scholar Giordano, S. H. et al. Systemic therapy for patients with advanced human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive breast cancer: American Society of Clinical Oncology clinical practice guideline. J. Clin. Oncol. 32, 2078–2099 (2014). CAS PubMed PubMed Central Article Google Scholar Partridge, A. H. et al. Chemotherapy and targeted therapy for women with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (or unknown) advanced breast cancer: American Society of Clinical Oncology clinical practice guideline. J. Clin. Oncol. 32, 3307–3329 (2014). PubMed PubMed Central Article Google Scholar Schmid, P. et al. Atezolizumab and nab-paclitaxel in advanced triple-negative breast cancer. N. Engl. J. Med. 379, 2108–2121 (2018). CAS PubMed Article Google Scholar Marinovich, M. L. et al. Early prediction of pathologic response to neoadjuvant therapy in breast cancer: systematic review of the accuracy of MRI. Breast 21, 669–677 (2012). CAS PubMed Article Google Scholar Avril, S. et al. 18F-FDG PET/CT for monitoring of treatment response in breast cancer. J. Nucl. Med. 57, 34S–39SS (2016). CAS PubMed Article Google Scholar Marinovich, M. L. et al. Meta-analysis of magnetic resonance imaging in detecting residual breast cancer after neoadjuvant therapy. J. Natl Cancer Inst. 105, 321–333 (2013). CAS PubMed Article Google Scholar Marinovich, M. L. et al. Agreement between MRI and pathologic breast tumor size after neoadjuvant chemotherapy, and comparison with alternative tests: individual patient data meta-analysis. BMC Cancer 15, 662 (2015). PubMed PubMed Central Article CAS Google Scholar Humbert, O. et al. Role of positron emission tomography for the monitoring of response to therapy in breast cancer. Oncologist 20, 94–104 (2015). PubMed PubMed Central Article Google Scholar Pennant, M. et al. A systematic review of positron emission tomography (PET) and positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) for the diagnosis of breast cancer recurrence. Health Technol. Assess. 14, 1–103 (2010). CAS PubMed Article Google Scholar Shachar, S. S. Assessing treatment response in metastatic breast cancer. Am. J. Hematol. Oncol. 12, (2016). Lee, C. I. et al. Comparative effectiveness of imaging modalities to determine metastatic breast cancer treatment response. Breast 24, 3–11 (2015). PubMed Article Google Scholar Pagani, O. et al. Adjuvant exemestane with ovarian suppression in premenopausal breast cancer. N. Engl. J. Med. 371, 107–118 (2014). PubMed PubMed Central Article CAS Google Scholar Francis, P., Regan, M. & Fleming, G. Adjuvant ovarian suppression in premenopausal breast cancer. N. Engl. J. Med. 372, 1672–1673 (2015). Article CAS Google Scholar Mao, J. J. et al. Electroacupuncture versus gabapentin for hot flashes among breast cancer survivors: a randomized placebo-controlled trial. J. Clin. Oncol. 33, 3615–3620 (2015). CAS PubMed PubMed Central Article Google Scholar Elkins, G. et al. Randomized trial of a hypnosis intervention for treatment of hot flashes among breast cancer survivors. J. Clin. Oncol. 26, 5022–5026 (2008). PubMed PubMed Central Article Google Scholar Loprinzi, C. L. et al. Venlafaxine in management of hot flashes in survivors of breast cancer: a randomised controlled trial. Lancet 356, 2059–2063 (2000). CAS PubMed Article Google Scholar Niravath, P. Aromatase inhibitor-induced arthralgia: a review. Ann. Oncol. 24, 1443–1449 (2013). CAS PubMed Article Google Scholar Barton, D. L. et al. Impact of vaginal dehydroepiandosterone (DHEA) on vaginal symptoms in female cancer survivors: Trial N10C1 (Alliance). J. Clin. Oncol. 32, 9507–9507 (2014). Article Google Scholar Razvi, Y. et al. ASCO, NCCN, MASCC/ESMO: a comparison of antiemetic guidelines for the treatment of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting in adult patients. Support. Care Cancer 27, 87–95 (2019). PubMed Article Google Scholar Gulati, G. et al. Prevention of Cardiac Dysfunction During Adjuvant Breast Cancer Therapy (PRADA): a 2×2 factorial, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind clinical trial of candesartan and metoprolol. Eur. Heart J. 37, 1671–1680 (2016). CAS PubMed PubMed Central Article Google Scholar Smith, E. M. L. et al. Effect of duloxetine on pain, function, and quality of life among patients with chemotherapy-induced painful peripheral neuropathy: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA 309, 1359–1367 (2013). CAS PubMed PubMed Central Article Google Scholar Hershman, D. L. et al. Prevention and management of chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy in survivors of adult cancers: American Society of Clinical Oncology clinical practice guideline. J. Clin. Oncol. 32, 1941–1967 (2014). CAS PubMed Article Google Scholar Hanai, A. et al. Effects of cryotherapy on objective and subjective symptoms of paclitaxel-induced neuropathy: prospective self-controlled trial. J. Natl Cancer Inst. 110, 141–148 (2018). CAS PubMed Article Google Scholar Kadakia, K. C., Rozell, S. A., Butala, A. A. & Loprinzi, C. L. Supportive cryotherapy: a review from head to toe. J. Pain Symptom Manage. 47, 1100–1115 (2014). PubMed Article Google Scholar Hou, S., Huh, B., Kim, H. K., Kim, K.-H. & Abdi, S. Treatment of chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy: systematic review and recommendations. Pain Physician 21, 571–592 (2018). PubMed Google Scholar Ahmed, R. L., Schmitz, K. H., Prizment, A. E. & Folsom, A. R. Risk factors for lymphedema in breast cancer survivors, the Iowa Women’s Health Study. Breast Cancer Res. Treat. 130, 981–991 (2011). PubMed PubMed Central Article Google Scholar Gillespie, T. C., Sayegh, H. E., Brunelle, C. L., Daniell, K. M. & Taghian, A. G. Breast cancer-related lymphedema: risk factors, precautionary measures, and treatments. Gland. Surg. 7, 379–403 (2018). PubMed PubMed Central Article Google Scholar Runowicz, C. D. et al. American Cancer Society/American Society of Clinical Oncology breast cancer survivorship care guideline. J. Clin. Oncol. 34, 611–635 (2016). CAS PubMed Article Google Scholar Velikova, G. et al. Quality of life after postmastectomy radiotherapy in patients with intermediate-risk breast cancer (SUPREMO): 2-year follow-up results of a randomised controlled trial. Lancet Oncol. 19, 1516–1529 (2018). PubMed Article Google Scholar Hofmann, D. et al. WSG ADAPT — adjuvant dynamic marker-adjusted personalized therapy trial optimizing risk assessment and therapy response prediction in early breast cancer: study protocol for a prospective, multi-center, controlled, non-blinded, randomized, investigator initiated phase II/III trial. Trials 14, 261 (2013). PubMed PubMed Central Article Google Scholar Robertson, J. F. R., Dowsett, M. & Bliss, J. M. Peri-operative aromatase inhibitor treatment in determining or predicting long-term outcome in early breast cancer — the POETIC Trial (CRUK/07/015) [abstract]. SABCS GS1-03 (2017). Ellis, M. J. et al. Ki67 Proliferation index as a tool for chemotherapy decisions during and after neoadjuvant aromatase inhibitor treatment of breast cancer: results from the American College of Surgeons Oncology Group Z1031 trial (Alliance). J. Clin. Oncol. 35, 1061–1069 (2017). CAS PubMed PubMed Central Article Google Scholar Hölzel, D. et al. Improved systemic treatment for early breast cancer improves cure rates, modifies metastatic pattern and shortens post-metastatic survival: 35-year results from the munich cancer registry. J. Cancer Res. Clin. Oncol. 143, 1701–1712 (2017). PubMed Article Google Scholar Hölzel, D. et al. Survival of de novo stage IV breast cancer patients over three decades. J. Cancer Res. Clin. Oncol. 143, 509–519 (2017). PubMed Article Google Scholar Angus, L. et al. The genomic landscape of 501 metastatic breast cancer patients [abstract]. SABCS GS1-07 (2018). Desmedt, C. et al. Unraveling lobular breast cancer progression and endocrine resistance mechanisms through genomic and immune characterization of matched primary and metastatic samples [abstract]. SABCS GS1–06 (2018). Google Scholar Baselga, J. 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. 18, 904–916 (2017). CAS PubMed PubMed Central Article Google Scholar André, F. et al. Alpelisib for PIK3CA-mutated, hormone receptor-positive advanced breast cancer. N. Engl. J. Med. 380, 1929–1940 (2019). PubMed Article Google Scholar Baselga, J. et al. Phase III study of taselisib (GDC-0032) + fulvestrant (FULV) v FULV in patients (pts) with estrogen receptor (ER)-positive, PIK3CA-mutant (MUT), locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer (MBC): primary analysis from SANDPIPER. J. Clin. Oncol. 36, LBA1006–LBA1006 (2018). Article Google Scholar Kim, S.-B. et al. Ipatasertib plus paclitaxel versus placebo plus paclitaxel as first-line therapy for metastatic triple-negative breast cancer (LOTUS): a multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 2 trial. Lancet Oncol. 18, 1360–1372 (2017). CAS PubMed PubMed Central Article Google Scholar Schmid, P. et al. AZD5363 plus paclitaxel versus placebo plus paclitaxel as first-line therapy for metastatic triple-negative breast cancer (PAKT): a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase II trial. J. Clin. Oncol. 36 (15 Suppl.), 1007 (2018). Article Google Scholar Jones, R. H. et al. Capivasertib (AZD5363) plus fulvestrant versus placebo plus fulvestrant after relapse or progression on an aromatase inhibitor in metastatic ER-positive breast cancer (FAKTION): a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase II trial [abstract]. J. Clin. Oncol. 37 (no. 15_suppl), 1005–1005 (2019). Article Google Scholar Yardley, D. A. et al. Randomized phase II, double-blind, placebo-controlled study of exemestane with or without entinostat in postmenopausal women with locally recurrent or metastatic estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer progressing on treatment with a nonsteroidal aromatase inhibitor. J. Clin. Oncol. 31, 2128–2135 (2013). CAS PubMed PubMed Central Article Google Scholar Ogitani, Y. et al. DS-8201a, a novel HER2-targeting ADC with a novel DNA Topoisomerase I inhibitor, demonstrates a promising antitumor efficacy with differentiation from T-DM1. Clin. Cancer Res. 22, 5097–5108 (2016). CAS PubMed Article Google Scholar Tamura, K. et al. Trastuzumab deruxtecan (DS-8201a) in patients with advanced HER2-positive breast cancer previously treated with trastuzumab emtansine: a dose-expansion, phase 1 study. Lancet Oncol. 20, 816–826 (2019). CAS PubMed Article Google Scholar Burris III, H. A., Giaccone, G. & Im, S. A. Updated findings of a first-in-human phase 1 study of margetuximab, an Fc-optimized chimeric monoclonal antibody, in patients with HER2-positive advanced solid tumors [abstract]. Am. Soc. Clin. Oncol. Meet. 33 (no. 15_suppl), A523 (2015). Article Google Scholar Rugo, H. S. et al. SOPHIA primary analysis: a phase 3 (P3) study of margetuximab (M) + chemotherapy (C) versus trastuzumab (T) + C in patients (pts) with HER2+ metastatic (met) breast cancer (MBC) after prior anti-HER2 therapies (Tx) [abstract]. J. Clin. Oncol. 37 (Suppl.), Abstr 1000 (2019). Article Google Scholar Hyman, D. M., Piha-Paul, S. & Rodon, J. Neratinib in HER2- or HER3-mutant solid tumors: SUMMIT, a global, multi-histology, open-label, phase 2 ‘basket’ study [abstract]. Am. Assoc. Cancer Res. Meet. CT001 (2017). Saura, C. et al. Neratinib + capecitabine versus lapatinib + capecitabine in patients with HER2+ metastatic breast cancer previously treated with ≥2 HER2-directed regimens: findings from the multinational, randomized, phase III NALA trial [abstract]. J. Clin. Oncol. 37 (Suppl.), Abstract 1002 (2019). Article Google Scholar Gucalp, A. et al. Phase II trial of bicalutamide in patients with androgen receptor-positive, estrogen receptor-negative metastatic breast cancer. Clin. Cancer Res. 19, 5505–5512 (2013). CAS PubMed PubMed Central Article Google Scholar Cortes, J., Crown, J. & Awada, A. Overall survival (OS) from the phase 2 study of enzalutamide (ENZA), an androgen receptor (AR) signaling inhibitor, in AR+ advanced triple-negative breast cancer (aTNBC) [abstract]. Eur. Cancer Congr. 51 (Suppl. 3), 1802 (2015). Google Scholar Gelmon, K. A. et al. Olaparib in patients with recurrent high-grade serous or poorly differentiated ovarian carcinoma or triple-negative breast cancer: a phase 2, multicentre, open-label, non-randomised study. Lancet Oncol. 12, 852–861 (2011). CAS PubMed Article Google Scholar Nanda, R. et al. Pembrolizumab in patients with advanced triple-negative breast cancer: phase Ib KEYNOTE-012 Study. J. Clin. Oncol. 34, 2460–2467 (2016). CAS PubMed Article PubMed Central Google Scholar Schmid, P., Cruz, C. & Braiteh, F. S. Atezolizumab in metastatic triple-negative breast cancer: long-term clinical outcomes and biomarker analyses [abstract]. Am. Assoc. Cancer Res. 77, A2986 (2017). Google Scholar André, F. et al. Alpelisib (ALP) + fulvestrant (FUL) for advanced breast cancer (ABC): results of the phase 3 SOLAR-1 trial [abstract]. ESMO LBA3 PR (2018). Hyman, D. M. et al. HER kinase inhibition in patients with HER2- and HER3-mutant cancers. Nature 554, 189–194 (2018). CAS PubMed PubMed Central Article Google Scholar Hartley, R. L., Stone, J. P. & Temple-Oberle, C. Breast cancer in transgender patients: a systematic review. Part 1: male to female. Eur. J. Surg. Oncol. 44, 1455–1462 (2018). PubMed Article Google Scholar Cardoso, F. et al. Characterization of male breast cancer: results of the EORTC 10085/TBCRC/BIG/NABCG International Male Breast Cancer Program. Ann. Oncol. 29, 405–417 (2017). PubMed Central Google Scholar Di Oto, E. et al. X chromosome gain is related to increased androgen receptor expression in male breast cancer. Virchows Arch. 473, 155–163 (2018). PubMed Article CAS Google Scholar Severson, T. M. & Zwart, W. A review of estrogen receptor/androgen receptor genomics in male breast cancer. Endocr. Relat. Cancer 24, R27–R34 (2017). CAS PubMed Article Google Scholar Deb, S. et al. PIK3CA mutations are frequently observed in BRCAX but not BRCA2-associated male breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res. 15, R69 (2013). PubMed PubMed Central Article Google Scholar Gucalp, A. et al. Male breast cancer: a disease distinct from female breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res. Treat. 173, 37–48 (2019). PubMed Article Google Scholar Korde, L. A. et al. Multidisciplinary meeting on male breast cancer: summary and research recommendations. J. Clin. Oncol. 28, 2114–2122 (2010). PubMed PubMed Central Article Google Scholar Cardoso, F. et al. Early breast cancer: ESMO clinical practice guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. Ann. Oncol. 30, 1194–1220 (2019). Article PubMed Google Scholar Bareche, Y. et al. Unravelling triple-negative breast cancer molecular heterogeneity using an integrative multiomic analysis. Ann. Oncol. 29, 895–902 (2018). CAS PubMed PubMed Central Article Google Scholar Lehmann, B. D. & Pietenpol, J. A. Clinical implications of molecular heterogeneity in triple negative breast cancer. Breast 24, S36–S40 (2015). PubMed Article Google Scholar Lehmann, B. D. et al. Refinement of triple-negative breast cancer molecular subtypes: implications for neoadjuvant chemotherapy selection. PLOS ONE 11, e0157368 (2016). PubMed PubMed Central Article CAS Google Scholar Burstein, M. D. et al. Comprehensive genomic analysis identifies novel subtypes and targets of triple-negative breast cancer. Clin. Cancer Res. 21, 1688–1698 (2015). CAS PubMed Article Google Scholar Siu, A. L. & on behalf of the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. Screening for breast cancer: U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommendation statement. Ann. Intern. Med. 164, 279 (2016). PubMed Article Google Scholar Klarenbach, S. et al. Recommendations on screening for breast cancer in women aged 40–74 years who are not at increased risk for breast cancer. Can. Med. Assoc. J. 190, E1441–E1451 (2018). Article Google Scholar Oeffinger, K. C. et al. Breast cancer screening for women at average risk: 2015 guideline update from the American Cancer Society. JAMA 314, 1599 (2015). CAS PubMed PubMed Central Article Google Scholar European Commission Initiative on Breast Cancer. Recommendations from European Breast Guidelines Europa.eu https://ecibc.jrc.ec.europa.eu/recommendations/list/Professional (2019). Dawood, S. et al. International expert panel on inflammatory breast cancer: consensus statement for standardized diagnosis and treatment. Ann. Oncol. 22, 515–523 (2011). CAS PubMed Article Google Scholar Cserni, G., Charafe-Jauffret, E. & van Diest, P. J. Inflammatory breast cancer: the pathologists’ perspective. Eur. J. Surg. Oncol. 44, 1128–1134 (2018). CAS PubMed Article Google Scholar Cheang, M. C. U. et al. Defining breast cancer intrinsic subtypes by quantitative receptor expression. Oncologist 20, 474–482 (2015). CAS PubMed PubMed Central Article Google Scholar Cancer Genome Atlas Network. Comprehensive molecular portraits of human breast tumours. Nature 490, 61–70 (2012). This research establishes the contemporary method of classifying breast cancer into clinically relevant molecular subtypes. Article CAS Google Scholar Hoadley, K. A., Andre, F., Ellis, M. J. & Perou, C. M. Breast cancer intrinsic subtypes (Poster). Nat. Rev. Clin. Oncol. https://www.nature.com/documents/nrclinonc_posters_breastcancer.pdf (2014). Desmedt, C. et al. Genomic characterization of primary invasive lobular breast cancer. J. Clin. Oncol. 34, 1872–1881 (2016). CAS PubMed Article Google Scholar Ciriello, G. et al. Comprehensive molecular portraits of invasive lobular breast cancer. Cell 163, 506–519 (2015). CAS PubMed PubMed Central Article Google Scholar Vasudev, P. & Onuma, K. Secretory breast carcinoma: unique, triple-negative carcinoma with a favorable prognosis and characteristic molecular expression. Arch. Pathol. Lab. Med. 135, 1606–1610 (2011). PubMed Article Google Scholar Martelotto, L. G. et al. Genomic landscape of adenoid cystic carcinoma of the breast. J. Pathol. 237, 179–189 (2015). CAS PubMed PubMed Central Article Google Scholar Goss, P. E. et al. Extending aromatase-inhibitor adjuvant therapy to 10 years. N. Engl. J. Med. 375, 209–219 (2016). CAS PubMed PubMed Central Article Google Scholar Liang, M. et al. Association between CHEK2*1100delC and breast cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Mol. Diagn. Ther. 22, 397–407 (2018). CAS PubMed Article Google Scholar Wang, X. et al. Breast cancer risk and germline genomic profiling of women with neurofibromatosis type 1 who developed breast cancer. Genes. Chromosomes Cancer 57, 19–27 (2018). CAS PubMed Article Google Scholar McCart Reed, A. E. et al. Phenotypic and molecular dissection of metaplastic breast cancer and the prognostic implications: prognostic features of metaplastic breast cancer. J. Pathol. 247, 214–227 (2019). CAS PubMed Article Google Scholar Wendt, C. & Margolin, S. Identifying breast cancer susceptibility genes — a review of the genetic background in familial breast cancer. Acta Oncol. 58, 135–146 (2019). CAS PubMed Article Google Scholar Couch, F. J. et al. Associations between cancer predisposition testing panel genes and breast cancer. JAMA Oncol. 3, 1190 (2017). PubMed PubMed Central Article Google Scholar Nguyen, J. et al. EORTC QLQ-BR23 and FACT-B for the assessment of quality of life in patients with breast cancer: a literature review. J. Comp. Eff. Res. 4, 157–166 (2015). PubMed Article Google Scholar McLachlan, S. A., Devins, G. M. & Goodwin, P. J. Factor analysis of the psychosocial items of the EORTC QLQ-C30 in metastatic breast cancer patients participating in a psychosocial intervention study. Qual. Life Res. 8, 311–317 (1999). CAS PubMed Article Google Scholar Bjelic-Radisic, V. et al. An international update of the EORTC questionnaire for assessing quality of life in breast cancer patients (EORTC QLQ-BC23) — EORTC QLQ-BR45. Ann. Oncol. 29, viii58–viii86 (2018). Article Google Scholar Ganz, P. A., Kwan, L., Stanton, A. L., Bower, J. E. & Belin, T. R. Physical and psychosocial recovery in the year after primary treatment of breast cancer. J. Clin. Oncol. 29, 1101–1109 (2011). PubMed PubMed Central Article Google Scholar Revicki, D. A. et al. Predicting EuroQol (EQ-5D) scores from the patient-reported outcomes measurement information system (PROMIS) global items and domain item banks in a United States sample. Qual. Life Res. 18, 783–791 (2009). PubMed PubMed Central Article Google Scholar Hays, R. D., Bjorner, J. B., Revicki, D. A., Spritzer, K. L. & Cella, D. Development of physical and mental health summary scores from the patient-reported outcomes measurement information system (PROMIS) global items. Qual. Life Res. 18, 873–880 (2009). PubMed PubMed Central Article Google Scholar Bevans, M., Ross, A. & Cella, D. Patient-reported outcomes measurement information system (PROMIS): efficient, standardized tools to measure self-reported health and quality of life. Nurs. Outlook 62, 339–345 (2014). PubMed PubMed Central Article Google Scholar Which element is described when the researcher provides complete information about the purpose of the study and gives patients?The process of informed consent includes providing research subjects full disclosure about the study and provides the subject the opportunity to participate or not to participate in the study.
Which Picot element is contained in the question how do patients with cervical cancer rate their quality of life quizlet?Patients with cervical cancer represent the population of interest, and rating the quality of life represents the outcome. The question does not contain the other three elements: intervention of interest, comparison of interest, and time. The nursing student has posed a PICOT clinical question for a research study.
What are the 6 steps of evidence based practice?Steps of evidence-based practice. Ask a question. The evidence-based practice process begins by asking questions about the patient and their health issues. ... . Look for evidence. ... . Analyze the evidence. ... . Integrate your finding. ... . Evaluate the outcome. ... . Share the information.. Which are the steps of evidence based practice in order?5 steps of Evidence Based Practice. Ask a question. ... . Find information/evidence to answer question. ... . Critically appraise the information/evidence. ... . Integrate appraised evidence with own clinical expertise and patient's preferences. ... . Evaluate.. |