No abstract

The College does not permit reproduction of any substantial portion of these protocols without its written authorization. The College hereby authorizes use of these protocols by physicians and other health care providers in reporting on surgical specimens, in teaching, and in carrying out medical research for nonprofit purposes. This authorization does not extend to reproduction or other use of any substantial portion of these protocols for commercial purposes without the written consent of the College.The CAP also authorizes physicians and other health care practitioners to make modified versions of the Protocols solely for their individual use in reporting on surgical specimens for individual patients, teaching, and carrying out medical research for non-profit purposes.The CAP further authorizes the following uses by physicians and other health care practitioners, in reporting on surgical specimens for individual patients, in teaching, and in carrying out medical research for non-profit purposes: (1) Dictation from the original or modified protocols for the purposes of creating a text-based patient record on paper, or in a word processing document; (2) Copying from the original or modified protocols into a text-based patient record on paper, or in a word processing document; (3) The use of a computerized system for items (1) and (2), provided that the Protocol data is stored intact as a single text-based document, and is not stored as multiple discrete data fields.Other than uses (1), (2), and (3) above, the CAP does not authorize any use of the Protocols in electronic medical records systems, pathology informatics systems, cancer registry computer systems, computerized databases, mappings between coding works, or any computerized system without a written license from CAP. Applications for such a license should be addressed to the SNOMED Terminology Solutions division of the CAP.Any public dissemination of the original or modified Protocols is prohibited without a written license from the CAP.The College of American Pathologists offers these protocols to assist pathologists in providing clinically useful and relevant information when reporting results of surgical specimen examinations of surgical specimens. The College regards the reporting elements in the "Surgical Pathology Cancer Case Summary" portion of the protocols as essential elements of the pathology report. However, the manner in which these elements are reported is at the discretion of each specific pathologist, taking into account clinician preferences, institutional policies, and individual practice.The College developed these protocols as an educational tool to assist pathologists in the useful reporting of relevant information. It did not issue the protocols for use in litigation, reimbursement, or other contexts. Nevertheless, the College recognizes that the protocols might be used by hospitals, attorneys, payers, and others. Indeed, effective January 1, 2004, the Commission on Cancer of the American College of Surgeons mandated the use of the ...

Shoulder-arm morbidity following axillary dissection is a frustrating polysymptomatic disease that seems to be relatively unaffected by therapeutic measures. The surgical trauma necessary for adequate tumor staging (removal of 10 lymph nodes) seems decisive for the postsurgery syndrome following axillary dissection. For node-positive patients complete axillary clearing may improve tumor control without worsening long-termmorbidity. New techniques, such as the sentinel-node-biopsy, that selects patients with negative axillary status while preserving the integrity of axillary structures, may improve the overall morbidity.

Neoadjuvant systemic therapy (NAST) provides the unique opportunity to assess response to treatment after months rather than years of follow-up. However, significant variability exists in methods of pathologic assessment of response to NAST, and thus its interpretation for subsequent clinical decisions. Our international multidisciplinary working group was convened by the Breast International Group-North American Breast Cancer Group (BIG-NABCG) collaboration and tasked to recommend practical methods for standardized evaluation of the post-NAST surgical breast cancer specimen for clinical trials that promote accurate and reliable designation of pathologic complete response ( pCR) and meaningful characterization of residual disease. Recommendations include multidisciplinary communication; clinical marking of the tumor site (clips); and radiologic, photographic, or pictorial imaging of the sliced specimen, to map the tissue sections and reconcile macroscopic and microscopic findings. The information required to define pCR (ypT0/is ypN0 or ypT0 yp N0), residual ypT and ypN stage using the current AJCC/UICC system, and the Residual Cancer Burden system were recommended for quantification of residual disease in clinical trials.

Objective: This study aimed to investigate the feasibility and accuracy of non-radioactive TLN biopsy and TAD in routine clinical practice. Background Data: TAD involves TLN biopsy (TLNB) and sentinel lymph node biopsy and was recently introduced as a new standard for less invasive axillary staging in BC patients undergoing neoadjuvant systemic therapy (NST); however, clinical evidence is limited. Methods: The SenTa study is a prospective registry study conducted at 50 centers. Patients with invasive BC who nderwent clip insertion into the most suspicious axillary lymph node were eligible. Axillary surgery was performed with or without sentinel lymph node biopsy, TLNB, and/or axillary lymph node dissection (ALND). Main endpoints were the detection rate and FNR of TLNB and TAD after NST. Results: Between 2017 and 2018, 548 consecutive BC patients underwent clip placement into biopsy-confirmed positive lymph nodes. After NST (n = 473), the clipped TLN was intraoperatively resected in 329 of 423 patients [77.8%, 95% confidence interval (CI): 74.0–82.0]. TAD was successful in 199 of 229 patients (detection rate: 86.9%, 95% CI: 81.8–91.0), the SLN and TLN were identical in 129 patient (64.8%). FNRs were 7.2% (8 of 111, 95% CI: 3.1–13.6) for TLNB followed by ALND (n = 203) and 4.3% (2 of 46, 95% CI: 0.5–14.8) for TAD followed by ALND (n = 77). Conclusions: The SenTa study demonstrates the feasibility of TAD in a real-world cohort of BC patients. Our findings are of great importance for de-escalation of surgical strategies.

Background: Corona Virus Disease 19 (COVID-19) had a worldwide negative impact on healthcare systems, which were not used to coping with such pandemic. Adaptation strategies prioritizing COVID-19 patients included triage of patients and reduction or re-allocation of other services. The aim of our survey was to provide a real time international snapshot of modifications of breast cancer management during the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: A survey was developed by a multidisciplinary group on behalf of European Breast Cancer Research Association of Surgical Trialists and distributed via breast cancer societies. One reply per breast unit was requested. Results: In ten days, 377 breast centres from 41 countries completed the questionnaire. RT-PCR testing for SARS-CoV-2 prior to treatment was reported by 44.8% of the institutions. The estimated time interval between diagnosis and treatment initiation increased for about 20% of institutions. Indications for primary systemic therapy were modified in 56% (211/377), with upfront surgery increasing from 39.8% to 50.7% (p < 0.002) and from 33.7% to 42.2% (p < 0.016) in T1cN0 triple-negative and ER-negative/HER2positive cases, respectively. Sixty-seven percent considered that chemotherapy increases risks for developing COVID-19 complications. Fifty-one percent of the responders reported modifications in chemotherapy protocols. Gene-expression profile used to evaluate the need for adjuvant chemotherapy increased in 18.8%. In luminal-A tumours, a large majority (68%) recommended endocrine treatment to postpone surgery. Postoperative radiation therapy was postponed in 20% of the cases. Conclusions: Breast cancer management was considerably modified during the COVID-19 pandemic. Our data provide a base to investigate whether these changes impact oncologic outcomes.

No abstract

No abstract