No abstract

Background To prove the efficacy of contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) in determining the extent of resection, more evidence about B-mode and CEUS as opposed to pathology is required. We compared maximum tumor width measured on B-mode/CEUS images with that determined pathologically. Methods In this retrospective multicenter study, 152 operable breast cancer patients who had undergone both B-mode and CEUS were analyzed. Maximum tumor width on B-mode and CEUS, and on the postoperative pathological examination (P), was measured by the participating investigators. In addition, maximum width was assessed in B-mode and CEUS image sets by independent reviewers blinded to all patient information. We analyzed differences in maximum width between CEUS, B-mode and P. Results The mean widths as measured by the participating investigators were 15 ± 7 mm (B-mode), 19 ± 8 mm (CEUS), and 17 ± 9 mm (P). The difference subtracted P from B-mode was − 3 ± 7 mm (p < 0.0001), and that from CEUS was 1 ± 6 mm (p = 0.0163). The mean widths as measured by the independent reviewers were 16 ± 7 mm (B-mode) and 18 ± 7 mm (CEUS). The difference subtracted P from B-mode was − 2 ± 8 mm (p = 0.0114), while that from CEUS was 1 ± 7 mm (p = 0.1921). Conclusions Maximum lesion width measurement showed a tendency to increase in the order of B-mode, to P and CEUS. The difference in measurement between P and B-mode was significant, but there was no significant between CEUS and P. These results provide additional information of tendency patterns in measuring the maximum lesion width through enhancement on CEUS.

Although immunotherapy has been demonstrated to be promising in triple-negative (TN) breast cancer (BC), most BC cases are classified as non-TN. To enrich the responders for immunotherapy regardless of their subtypes, classification based on tumor-infiltrating lymphocyte (TIL) levels and programmed death ligand-1 (PD-L1) status may be useful. However, this classification has not been fully applied to BC. Furthermore, suppressive subsets in the local tumor microenvironment, such as tumor-associated macrophages (TAMs), which promote tumor progression, cannot be ignored to overcome immunotherapy resistance. The aims of the present study were to classify primary BC cases based on the TIL levels and PD-L1 status, and to identify suppressive immune subsets in each categorized group. A retrospective analysis of 73 patients with invasive BC was performed. The frequency of TILs was evaluated in HE-stained slides (10% cutoff), and PD-L1 levels (SP142; 1% cutoff), as well as immune subsets (CD3 + , CD8 + , FOXP3 + , CD20 + , CD68 + and CD204 + cells) were assessed using immunohistochemistry. It was revealed that 22% (16/73) of the tumors were categorized as TIL + PD-L1 + , of which 69% (11/16) were TN type. By contrast, 66% (48/73) of the tumors were categorized as TIL − PD-L1 − , of which 77% (37/48) were HR + and HER2 − types. The number of CD204 + M2-type macrophages was significantly associated with high histological grade (P=0.0246) and high Ki-67 (P=0.0152), whereas CD68 + macrophages were not associated with these factors. Furthermore, CD204 + macrophages and FOXP3 + Tregs accumulated in 88% (14/16) and 63% (10/16) of TIL + PD-L1 + tumors, respectively, compared with 20.8% (10/48) and 27.1% (13/48) of TIL − PD-L1 − tumors. In conclusion, 22% of BC tumors were classified as TIL + PD-L1 + (69% were TN), which were enriched with suppressive immune subsets. These cell types may serve as potential novel immunotherapeutic targets.

PurposeAlthough various strategies have been reported, there are no defined criteria for cosmetic evaluation methods after breast-conserving surgery (BCS). Since Asians tend to have smaller breasts, indistinct inframammary folds, and conspicuous scars, differences in the cosmetic results are expected. So we examined two subjective methods and one objective method to determine the differences, and elements necessary for a cosmetic evaluation after BCS.MethodsFrontal photographs of 190 Japanese were evaluated using the Harris scale (Harris) and the evaluation method proposed by the Japanese Breast Cancer Society Sawai group (Sawai group) as the subjective methods, and the Breast Cancer Conservation Treatment cosmetic results (BCCT.core) as the objective method, respectively. In order to examine the necessary elements for developing a new ideal method, 100 out of 190 were selected and assessed separately by six raters using both the Harris and modified Sawai group methods in the observer assessment. The correlation between the two methods was examined using the Spearman rank-correlation coefficient.ResultsThe results of the BCCT.core and the other two methods were clearly different. In the observer assessment, the consensuses of the six raters were evaluated as follows: 27, 27, 26, and 20 cases were evaluated as "excellent," "good," "fair," and "poor," respectively. For the Spearman rank-correlation coefficient, values higher than 0.7 indicated a strong correlation, as seen by the values of 0.909 for the breast shape and 0.345 for the scar. The breast shape accounted for the most significant part of the evaluation, and the scar had very little correlation.ConclusionIn this study, we recognized a clear difference between the subjective and objective evaluation methods, and identified the necessary elements for cosmetic evaluation. We would like to continue developing an ideal cosmetic evaluation that is similar to subjective one and is independent from raters.

Although we can pick up LNs that are likely to have metastasis on CT/US, it was impossible to accurately predict the number of metastases on CT/US. However, bedside-FNAC of suspicious LNs could accurately predict the number of metastases.