Breast Neoplasms: Hortobagyi GN

El Saghir NS, Eniu A, Carlson RW, Aziz Z, Vorobiof D, Hortobagyi GN, Anonymous00023. · Division of Hematology-Oncology, Department of Internal Medicine, American University of Beirut Medical Center, Beirut, Lebanon. nagi.saghir@ aub.edu.lb · Cancer. · Pubmed #18837023 No free full text.

Abstract: The management of locally advanced breast cancer (LABC) is guided by scientific advances but is limited by local resources and expertise. LABC remains very common in low-resource countries. The Systemic Therapy Focus Group met as part of the Breast Health Global Initiative (BHGI) Summit in Budapest, Hungary, in October 2007 to discuss management and implementation of primary systemic therapy (PST) for LABC. PST is standard treatment for large operable breast cancer in enhanced-resource settings and, in all resource settings, should be standard treatment for inoperable breast cancer and for LABC. Standard PST includes anthracycline-based chemotherapy. The addition of sequential taxanes after anthracycline improves pathologic responses and breast-conservation rates and is appropriate at enhanced-resource levels; however, costs and lack of clear survival benefit do not justify their use at limited-resource levels. It remains to define better the role of endocrine therapy as PST, but it is acceptable in elderly women. Aromatase inhibitors have produced better results than tamoxifen in postmenopausal patients and are used in enhanced-resource settings. The less expensive tamoxifen remains useful in low-resource countries. Trastuzumab combined with chemotherapy yields high pathologic response rates in patients with HER2/neu-overexpressing tumors; its use in low-resource countries is limited by high costs. Most studies on PST of LABC were conducted in countries with enhanced resources. BHGI encourages conducting clinical trials in countries with limited resources.

Kaufmann M, Hortobagyi GN, Goldhirsch A, Scholl S, Makris A, Valagussa P, Blohmer JU, Eiermann W, Jackesz R, Jonat W, Lebeau A, Loibl S, Miller W, Seeber S, Semiglazov V, Smith R, Souchon R, Stearns V, Untch M, von Minckwitz G. · Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, J.W. Goethe-University Hospital, Frankfurt, Germany. · J Clin Oncol. · Pubmed #16622270 No free full text.

Abstract: Neoadjuvant (primary systemic) treatment is the standard treatment for locally advanced breast cancer and a standard option for primary operable disease. Because of new treatments and new understandings of breast cancer, however, recommendations published in 2003 regarding neoadjuvant treatment for operable disease required updating. Therefore, a second international panel of representatives of a number of breast cancer clinical research groups was convened in September 2004 to update these recommendations. As part of this effort, data published to date were reviewed critically and indications for neoadjuvant treatment were newly defined.

Andreopoulou E, Hortobagyi GN. · No affiliation provided · J Clin Oncol. · Pubmed #18669447 No free full text.

This publication has no abstract.

Esteva FJ, Hortobagyi GN. · No affiliation provided · J Natl Cancer Inst. · Pubmed #18398093 links to  free full text

This publication has no abstract.

Symmans WF, Hortobagyi GN. · No affiliation provided · Ann Surg Oncol. · Pubmed #18340490 links to  free full text

This publication has no abstract.

Giordano SH, Hortobagyi GN. · No affiliation provided · J Natl Cancer Inst. · Pubmed #18270334 links to  free full text

This publication has no abstract.

Giordano SH, Hortobagyi GN. · No affiliation provided · J Natl Cancer Inst. · Pubmed #17341720 links to  free full text

This publication has no abstract.

Hortobagyi GN. · No affiliation provided · N Engl J Med. · Pubmed #16236745 No free full text.

This publication has no abstract.

Hunt KK, Buchholz TA, Hortobagyi GN. · No affiliation provided · Ann Surg Oncol. · Pubmed #16041472 No free full text.

This publication has no abstract.

Bast RC, Hortobagyi GN. · No affiliation provided · N Engl J Med. · Pubmed #15591336 No free full text.

This publication has no abstract.

Hortobagyi GN. · No affiliation provided · J Clin Oncol. · Pubmed #15111620 No free full text.

This publication has no abstract.

Valero V, Hortobagyi GN. · No affiliation provided · J Clin Oncol. · Pubmed #12637456 No free full text.

This publication has no abstract.

Hortobagyi GN. · No affiliation provided · J Natl Cancer Inst. · Pubmed #11983746 links to  free full text

This publication has no abstract.

Hortobagyi GN. · No affiliation provided · J Clin Oncol. · Pubmed #11821439 No free full text.

This publication has no abstract.

Costelloe CM, Rohren EM, Madewell JE, Hamaoka T, Theriault RL, Yu TK, Lewis VO, Ma J, Stafford RJ, Tari AM, Hortobagyi GN, Ueno NT. · Breast Cancer Bone Working Group and Department of Diagnostic Radiology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX 77030, USA. · Lancet Oncol. · Pubmed #19482249 No free full text.

Abstract: Bone is the most common site of distant metastases from breast carcinoma. The presence of bone metastases affects a patient's prognosis, quality of life, and the planning of their treatment. We discuss recent innovations in bone imaging and present algorithms, based on the strengths and weaknesses of each technique, to facilitate the most successful and cost-effective choice of imaging studies for the detection of osseous metastases. Skeletal scintigraphy (bone scan) is very sensitive in the detection of osseous metastases and is recommended as the first imaging study in patients who are asymptomatic. Radiographs are recommended for the assessment of abnormal radionuclide uptake or the risk of pathological fracture and as initial imaging studies in patients with bone pain. MRI or PET-CT can be considered for cases of abnormal radionuclide uptake that are not addressed by radiography. Osseous metastases can lead to emergent situations, such as spinal-cord compression or impending fracture of a weight-bearing bone, and imaging guidelines are essential for early detection and initiation of appropriate therapy. The imaging method used in non-emergent situations, such as assessment of the ribs, sternum, pelvis, hips, and joints, should be guided by the strengths and limitations of each technique.

Ross JS, Slodkowska EA, Symmans WF, Pusztai L, Ravdin PM, Hortobagyi GN. · Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Albany Medical College, Albany, NY 12208, USA. · Oncologist. · Pubmed #19346299 links to  free full text

Abstract: The human epidermal growth factor receptor (HER-2) oncogene encodes a transmembrane tyrosine kinase receptor that has evolved as a major classifier of invasive breast cancer and target of therapy for the disease. The validation of the general prognostic significance of HER-2 gene amplification and protein overexpression in the absence of anti-HER-2 targeted therapy is discussed in a study of 107 published studies involving 39,730 patients, which produced an overall HER-2-positive rate of 22.2% and a mean relative risk for overall survival (OS) of 2.74. The issue of HER-2 status in primary versus metastatic breast cancer is considered along with a section on the features of metastatic HER-2-positive disease. The major marketed slide-based HER-2 testing approaches, immunohistochemistry, fluorescence in situ hybridization, and chromogenic in situ hybridization, are presented and contrasted in detail against the background of the published American Society of Clinical Oncology-College of American Pathologists guidelines for HER-2 testing. Testing issues, such as the impact of chromosome 17 polysomy and local versus central HER-2 testing, are also discussed. Emerging novel HER-2 testing techniques, including mRNA-based testing by real-time polymerase chain reaction and DNA microarray methods, HER-2 receptor dimerization, phosphorylated HER-2 receptors, and HER-2 status in circulating tumor cells, are also considered. A series of biomarkers potentially associated with resistance to trastuzumab is discussed with emphasis on the phosphatase and tensin homologue deleted on chromosome ten/Akt and insulin-like growth factor receptor pathways. The efficacy results for the more recently approved small molecule HER-1/HER-2 kinase inhibitor lapatinib are also presented along with a more limited review of markers of resistance for this agent. Additional topics in this section include combinations of both anti-HER-2 targeted therapies together as well as with novel agents including bevacizumab, everolimus, and tenespimycin. A series of novel HER-2-targeting agents is also presented, including pertuzumab, ertumaxomab, HER-2 vaccines, and recently discovered tyrosine kinase inhibitors. Biomarkers predictive of HER-2 targeted therapy toxicity are included, and the review concludes with a consideration of HER-2 status in the prediction of response to non-HER-2 targeted treatments including hormonal therapy, anthracyclines, and taxanes.

Kuerer HM, Albarracin CT, Yang WT, Cardiff RD, Brewster AM, Symmans WF, Hylton NM, Middleton LP, Krishnamurthy S, Perkins GH, Babiera G, Edgerton ME, Czerniecki BJ, Arun BK, Hortobagyi GN. · The University of Texas M D Anderson Cancer Center, DCIS Discovery Program and Department of Surgical Oncology, 1515 Holcombe Blvd, Unit 444, Houston, TX 77030, USA. · J Clin Oncol. · Pubmed #19064970 No free full text.

Abstract: PURPOSE: Ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) is the fourth leading cancer for women in the United States. Understanding of the biology and clinical behavior of DCIS is imperfect. This article highlights the current knowledge base and the scientific roadmap needed to advance the field. METHODS: This article is based on work done by and consultations obtained from leading experts in the field over a 6-month period that culminated in a full-day symposium designed to systematically review the most pertinent MEDLINE published reports and develop a roadmap to elucidate the molecular steps of carcinogenesis, reduce the extent or prevent the need for therapies, eliminate recurrences, and reduce morbidity. RESULTS: Expression profiling of pure DCIS will help elucidate the molecular characteristics that distinguish high-risk lesions from clinically irrelevant lesions. The development of new methods of extracting RNA from processed tissues may provide opportunities for research. Mammography often underestimates the pathologic extent of DCIS; other imaging methods need to be investigated for detection and monitoring of disease stability or progression. Novel biologic agents are being delivered in neoadjuvant clinical trials, and alternative methods for breast irradiation are being studied. Future trials of treatment versus no treatment for biologically selected cases of DCIS should be developed. CONCLUSION: There is a critical need for a concerted international effort among patients with DCIS, clinicians, and basic scientists to conduct the research necessary to improve fundamental understanding of the biology and clinical behavior of DCIS and prevent development of invasive breast cancer.

Jeruss JS, Mittendorf EA, Tucker SL, Gonzalez-Angulo AM, Buchholz TA, Sahin AA, Cormier JN, Buzdar AU, Hortobagyi GN, Hunt KK. · Department of Surgery, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine and Robert H. Lurie Comprehensive Cancer Center, Chicago, Illinois 60611, USA. · Cancer Res. · Pubmed #18701468 No free full text.

Abstract: The use of neoadjuvant chemotherapy has become more prevalent in the treatment of breast cancer patients. The finding of a pathologic complete response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy (no evidence of residual invasive cancer in the breast and lymph nodes at the time of surgical resection) has been shown to correlate with improved survival. The current version of the American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) staging for breast cancer has a pretreatment clinical stage designation that is determined by clinical and radiographic examination of the patient and a postoperative pathologic stage classification based on the findings in the breast and regional lymph nodes removed at surgery. Pathologic staging has not been validated for patients receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy; thus, prognosis is determined for these patients based on the pretreatment clinical stage. We hypothesized that clinical and pathologic staging variables could be combined with biological tumor markers to provide a novel means of determining prognosis for patients treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Two scoring systems, based on summing binary indicators for clinical and pathologic substages, negative estrogen receptor status, and grade 3 tumor pathology, were devised to predict 5-year patient outcomes. These scoring systems facilitated separation of the study population into more refined subgroups by outcome than the current AJCC staging system for breast cancer, and provide a novel means for evaluating prognosis after neoadjuvant therapy.

Moulder SL, Craft BS, Hortobagyi GN. · Department of Breast Medical Oncology and Phase I Program, The University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Center, 1155 Pressler Street, P.O. Box 301438, Houston, TX 77030, USA. · Anticancer Agents Med Chem. · Pubmed #18537531 No free full text.

Abstract: Although significant advances have been made in the treatment of breast cancer using chemotherapy, less than half of the patients treated for localized breast cancer benefit from adjuvant chemotherapy and most patients with metastatic cancer eventually develop disease that is chemotherapy resistant. Targeted agents, such as inhibitors of tyrosine kinases, offer the opportunity to reverse chemotherapy resistance and enhance response in patients with localized and advanced breast cancer. Such combined approaches have been established for the treatment of advanced breast cancer and are now demonstrating benefit in the adjuvant arena. This review summarizes the results of several trials involving the use of tyrosine kinase inhibition in combination with chemotherapy for the treatment of breast cancer and discusses future directions for breast cancer biotherapy.

Gralow JR, Burstein HJ, Wood W, Hortobagyi GN, Gianni L, von Minckwitz G, Buzdar AU, Smith IE, Symmans WF, Singh B, Winer EP. · Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, Department of Medicine, 825 Eastlake Ave, EMS G3-200, Seattle, WA 98109-1023, USA. · J Clin Oncol. · Pubmed #18258991 No free full text.

Abstract: PURPOSE: To review the state of the science with respect to preoperative systemic therapy and pathologic assessment in operable breast cancer. METHODS: This article reviews data presented at the National Cancer Institute State of the Science Conference on Preoperative Therapy in Invasive Breast Cancer as well as supporting published data. RESULTS: Preoperative chemotherapy in operable breast cancer has been shown to improve breast conservation rates as a result of tumor response to therapy. When patients are given preoperative systemic therapy, regimens should be the same as those established as safe and active in the adjuvant setting. At present, there are no data to suggest that systemic treatment should be tailored based on initial tumor response, or based on the extent of residual disease. In operable breast cancer, there seems to be no survival advantage from initiation of systemic therapy before surgery. A variety of clinical, imaging, and pathologic measurements are available to gauge tumor response to treatment. There is a clear correlation between tumor response in the breast and lymph nodes and both disease-free and overall survival. Pathologic complete response and other pathologic measures may be useful as surrogate end points in evaluating and understanding new therapies. CONCLUSION: In operable breast cancer, preoperative systemic therapy is effective and can improve breast conservation rates. Unless the tumor is large or the patient is in a clinical trial, postoperative adjuvant systemic therapy is the standard of care. To achieve optimal outcomes, preoperative systemic therapy must be administered as part of a coordinated, multimodality treatment program. The preoperative setting provides a unique opportunity to study the impact of systemic therapies on breast cancer biology.

Moulder S, Hortobagyi GN. · Department of Breast Medical Oncology and Phase I Program, The University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas, USA. · Clin Pharmacol Ther. · Pubmed #18091763 No free full text.

Abstract: Breast cancer is the most commonly diagnosed cancer in American women and is the second leading cause of cancer-related deaths in this population. This review highlights how the use of a multidisciplinary approach to the management of diseases of the breast and the introduction of novel systemic therapies have improved the quality of life and survival in patients with breast cancer.

Gonzalez-Angulo AM, Morales-Vasquez F, Hortobagyi GN. · Department of Breast Medical Oncology, Unit 424, The University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Center, 1515 Holcombe Blvd., Houston, Texas 77030, USA. · Adv Exp Med Biol. · Pubmed #17993229 No free full text.

Abstract: Breast cancer is the most common cancer and the second leading cause of cancer death in American women. It was the second most common cancer in the world in 2002, with more than 1 million new cases. Despite advances in early detection and the understanding of the molecular bases of breast cancer biology, about 30% of patients with early-stage breast cancer have recurrent disease. To offer more effective and less toxic treatment, selecting therapies requires considering the patient and the clinical and molecular characteristics of the tumor. Systemic treatment of breast cancer includes cytotoxic, hormonal, and immunotherapeutic agents. These medications are used in the adjuvant, neoadjuvant, and metastatic settings. In general, systemic agents are active at the beginning of therapy in 90% of primary breast cancers and 50% of metastases. However, after a variable period of time, progression occurs. At that point, resistance to therapy is not only common but expected. Herein we review general mechanisms of drug resistance, including multidrug resistance by P-glycoprotein and the multidrug resistance protein family in association with specific agents and their metabolism, emergence of refractory tumors associated with multiple resistance mechanisms, and resistance factors unique to host-tumor-drug interactions. Important anticancer agents specific to breast cancer are described. Breast cancer is the most common type of cancer and the second leading cause of cancer death in American women. In 2002, 209,995 new cases of breast cancer were registered, and 42,913 patients died of it. In 5 years, the annual prevalence of breast cancer will reach 968,731 cases in the United States. World wide, the problem is just as significant, as breast cancer is the most frequent cancer after nonmelanoma skin cancer, with more than 1 million new cases in 2002 and an expected annual prevalence of more than 4.4 million in 5 years. Breast cancer treatment currently requires the joint efforts of a multidisciplinary team. The alternatives for treatment are constantly expanding. With the use of new effective chemotherapy, hormone therapy, and biological agents and with information regarding more effective ways to integrate systemic therapy, surgery, and radiation therapy, elaborating an appropriate treatment plan is becoming more complex. Developing such a plan should be based on knowledge of the benefits and potential acute and late toxic effects of each of the therapy regimens. Despite advances in early detection and understanding of the molecular bases of breast cancer biology, approximately 30% of all patients with early-stage breast cancer have recurrent disease, which is metastatic in most cases. The rates of local and systemic recurrence vary within different series, but in general, distant recurrences are dominant, strengthening the hypothesis that breast cancer is a systemic disease from presentation. On the other hand, local recurrence may signal a posterior systemic relapse in a considerable number of patients within 2 to 5 years after completion of treatment. To offer better treatment with increased efficacy and low toxicity, selecting therapies based on the patient and the clinical and molecular characteristics of the tumor is necessary. Consideration of these factors should be incorporated in clinical practice after appropriate validation studies are performed to avoid confounding results, making them true prognostic and predictive factors. A prognostic factor is a measurable clinical or biological characteristic associated with a disease-free or overall survival period in the absence of adjuvant therapy, whereas a predictive factor is any measurable characteristic associated with a response or lack of a response to a specific treatment. The main prognostic factors associated with breast cancer are the number of lymph nodes involved, tumor size, histological grade, and hormone receptor status, the first two of which are the basis for the AJCC staging system. The sixth edition of the American Joint Committee on Cancer staging system allows better prediction of prognosis by stage. However, after determining the stage, histological grade, and hormone receptor status, the tumor can behave in an unexpected manner, and the prognosis can vary. Other prognostic and predictive factors have been studied in an effort to explain this phenomenon, some of which are more relevant than others: HER-2/neu gene amplification and protein expression, expression of other members of the epithelial growth factor receptor family, S phase fraction, DNA ploidy, p53 gene mutations, cyclin E, p27 dysregulation, the presence of tumor cells in the circulation or bone marrow, and perineural and lymphovascular space invasion. Systemic treatment of breast cancer includes the use of cytotoxic, hormonal, and immunotherapeutic agents. All of these agents are used in the adjuvant, neoadjuvant, and metastatic setting. Adjuvant systemic therapy is used in patients after they undergo primary surgical resection of their breast tumor and axillary nodes and who have a significant risk of systemic recurrence. Multiple studies have demonstrated that adjuvant therapy for early-stage breast cancer produces a 23% or greater improvement in disease-free survival and a 15% or greater increase in overall survival rates. Recommendations for the use of adjuvant therapy are based on the individual patient's risk and the balance between absolute benefit and toxicity. Anthracycline-based regimens are preferred, and the addition of taxanes increases the survival rate in patients with lymph node-positive disease. Adjuvant hormone therapy accounts for almost two thirds of the benefit of adjuvant therapy overall in patients with hormone-receptor-positive breast cancer. Tamoxifen is considered the standard of care in premenopausal patients. In comparison, the aromatase inhibitor anastrozole has been proven to be superior to tamoxifen in postmenopausal patients with early-stage breast cancer. The adjuvant use of monoclonal antibodies and targeted therapies other than hormone therapy is being studied. Interestingly, some patients have an early recurrence even though they have a tumor with good prognostic features and at a favorable stage. These recurrences have been explained by the existence of certain cellular characteristics at the molecular level that make the tumor cells resistant to therapy. Selection of resistant cell clones of micrometastatic disease has also been proposed as an explanation for these events. Neoadjuvant systemic therapy, which is the standard of care for patients with locally advanced and inflammatory breast cancer, is becoming more popular. It reduces the tumor volume, thus increasing the possibility of breast conservation, and at the same time allows identification of in vivo tumor sensitivity to different agents. The pathological response to neoadj uvant systemic therapy in the breast and lymph nodes correlates with patient survival. Use of this treatment modality produces survival rates identical to those obtained with the standard adjuvant approach. The rates of pathological complete response (pCR) to neoadjuvant systemic therapy vary according to the regimen used, ranging from 6% to 15% with anthracycline-based regimens to almost 30% with the addition of a noncross-resistant agent such as a taxane. In one study, the addition of neoadjuvant trastuzumab in patients with HER-2-positive breast tumors increased the pCR rate to 65%. Primary hormone therapy has also been used in the neoadjuvant systemic setting. Although the pCR rates with this therapy are low, it significantly increases breast conservation. Currently, neoadjuvant systemic therapy is an important tool in not only assessing tumor response to an agent but also studying the mechanisms of action of the agent and its effects at the cellular level. However, no tumor response is observed in some cases despite the use of appropriate therapy. The tumor continues growing during treatment in such cases, a phenomenon called primary resistance to therapy. The use of palliative systemic therapy for metastatic breast cancer is challenging. Five percent of newly diagnosed cases of breast cancer are metastatic, and 30% of treated patients have a systemic recurrence. Once metastatic disease develops, the possibility of a cure is very limited or practically nonexistent. In this heterogeneous group of patients, the 5-year survival rate is 20%, and the median survival duration varies from 12 to 24 months. In this setting, breast cancer has multiple clinical presentations, and the therapy for it should be chosen according to the patient's tumor characteristics, previous treatment, and performance status with the goal of improving survival without compromising quality of life. Treatment resistance is most commonly seen in such patients. They initially may have a response to different agents, but the responses are not sustained, and, in general, the rates of response to subsequent agents are lower. Table 1 summarizes metastatic breast cancer response rates to single-agent systemic therapy.

Aapro M, Abrahamsson PA, Body JJ, Coleman RE, Colomer R, Costa L, Crinò L, Dirix L, Gnant M, Gralow J, Hadji P, Hortobagyi GN, Jonat W, Lipton A, Monnier A, Paterson AH, Rizzoli R, Saad F, Thürlimann B. · Institut Multidisciplinaire d'Oncologie, Clinique de Genolier, Genolier, Switzerland. · Ann Oncol. · Pubmed #17906299 links to  free full text

Abstract: Bisphosphonates (BP) prevent, reduce, and delay cancer-related skeletal complications in patients, and have substantially decreased the prevalence of such events since their introduction. Today, a broad range of BP with differences in potency, efficacy, dosing, and administration as well as approved indications is available. In addition, results of clinical trials investigating the efficacy of BP in cancer treatment-induced bone loss (CTIBL) have been recently published. The purpose of this paper is to review the current evidence on the use of BP in solid tumours and provide clinical recommendations. An interdisciplinary expert panel of clinical oncologists and of specialists in metabolic bone diseases assessed the widespread evidence and information on the efficacy of BP in the metastatic and nonmetastatic setting, as well as ongoing research on the adjuvant use of BP. Based on available evidence, the panel recommends amino-bisphosphonates for patients with metastatic bone disease from breast cancer and zoledronic acid for patients with other solid tumours as primary disease. Dosing of BP should follow approved indications with adjustments if necessary. While i.v. administration is most often preferable, oral administration (clodronate, IBA) may be considered for breast cancer patients who cannot or do not need to attend regular hospital care. Early-stage cancer patients at risk of developing CTIBL should be considered for preventative BP treatment. The strongest evidence in this setting is now available for ZOL. Overall, BP are well-tolerated, and most common adverse events are influenza-like syndrome, arthralgia, and when used orally, gastrointestinal symptoms. The dose of BP may need to be adapted to renal function and initial creatinine clearance calculation is mandatory according to the panel for use of any BP. Subsequent monitoring is recommended for ZOL and PAM, as described by the regulatory authority guidelines. Patients scheduled to receive BP (mainly every 3-4 weeks i.v.) should have a dental examination and be advised on appropriate measures for reducing the risk of jaw osteonecrosis. BP are well established as supportive therapy to reduce the frequency and severity of skeletal complications in patients with bone metastases from different cancers.

Yang WT, Le-Petross HT, Macapinlac H, Carkaci S, Gonzalez-Angulo AM, Dawood S, Resetkova E, Hortobagyi GN, Cristofanilli M. · The University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Center, 1515 Holcombe Blvd., Unit 1350, Houston, TX, 77030, USA. · Breast Cancer Res Treat. · Pubmed #17653852 No free full text.

Abstract: PURPOSE: To describe the role of Positron Emission Tomography/Computed Tomography (PET/CT), Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI), sonography, and mammography in patients with inflammatory breast cancer (IBC). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients who had been newly diagnosed with IBC and who had undergone mammography, sonography, MRI, PET/CT, or a combination of these were included in this study. The visibility of breast parenchymal lesion (BPLs), skin abnormalities, regional (axillary, supraclavicular, or internal mammary) nodal disease, and distant metastatic disease was documented with the imaging techniques. RESULTS: Eighty patients (median age, 51 years, [range, 25-78 years]) were included in this study: 75 (94%) had undergone mammography, 76 (95%) sonography, 33 (41%) MRI, and 24 (30%) PET/CT. A primary BPL was found in 60 patients (80%) on mammography (mass or calcifications), 72 (95%) on sonography (mass or architectural distortion), 23 (96%) on PET/CT (hypermetabolic BPL), and 33 (100%) on MRI (enhancing BPL). Regional axillary nodal disease was found in 74 patients (93%) by histologic or cytologic examination, in 71 patients (93%) on sonography, in 21 (88%) on PET/CT, in 29 (88%) on MRI, and in 34 (45%) on mammography. Distant metastases in the bone, liver, and contralateral lymph nodes were diagnosed in nine patients (38%) on PET/CT. CONCLUSION: MRI was the most accurate imaging technique in detecting a primary BPL in IBC patients. Sonography can be useful in diagnosing regional nodal disease. PET/CT provides additional information on distant metastasis, and it should be considered in the initial staging of IBC.

Craft BS, Hortobagyi GN, Moulder SL. · Division of Hematology and Oncology, University of Mississippi Medical Center, Jackson, MS, USA. · Cancer J. · Pubmed #17620764 No free full text.

Abstract: Breast cancer continues to be a major health problem despite a decrease in mortality rates over the past 2 decades. Although many advances have been made in the treatment of breast cancer, drug therapy for the disease continues to evolve as more is learned about cell biology and cellular signaling pathways. The development of targeted agents offers the hope of new therapies with better efficacy and tolerability. Biologic therapy has been a cornerstone of targeted therapy for the treatment of advanced breast cancer and is now entering the adjuvant arena. This review summarizes the results of several adjuvant studies and discusses future directions for breast cancer biotherapy.