The most recent version of the European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) Clinical Practice Guidelines for the diagnosis, staging and treatment of patients with metastatic breast cancer (MBC) was published in 2021. A special, hybrid guidelines meeting was convened by ESMO and the Korean Society of Medical Oncology (KSMO) in collaboration with nine other Asian national oncology societies in May 2022 in order to adapt the ESMO 2021 guidelines to take into account the differences associated with the treatment of MBC in Asia. These guidelines represent the consensus opinions reached by a panel of Asian experts in the treatment of patients with MBC representing the oncological societies of China (CSCO), India (ISMPO), Indonesia (ISHMO), Japan (JSMO), Korea (KSMO), Malaysia (MOS), the Philippines (PSMO), Singapore (SSO), Taiwan (TOS) and Thailand (TSCO). The voting was based on the best available scientific evidence and was independent of drug access or practice restrictions in the different Asian countries. The latter were discussed when appropriate. The aim of these guidelines is to provide guidance for the harmonisation of the management of patients with MBC across the different regions of Asia, drawing from data provided by global and Asian trials whilst at the same time integrating the differences in genetics, demographics and scientific evidence, together with restricted access to certain therapeutic strategies.

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.3389/pore.2022.1610383.].

Triple-negative (TN) metastatic breast cancer (mBC) represents the most challenging scenario withing mBC framework, and it has been only slightly affected by the tremendous advancements in terms of drug availability and survival prolongation we have witnessed in the last years for advanced disease. However, although chemotherapy still represents the mainstay of TN mBC management, in the past years, several novel effective agents have been developed and made available in the clinical practice setting. Within this framework, a panel composed of a scientific board of 17 internationally recognized breast oncologists and 42 oncologists working within local spoke centers, addressed 26 high-priority statements, including grey areas, regarding the management of TN mBC. A structured methodology based on a modified Delphi approach to administer the survey and the Nominal Group Technique to capture perceptions and preferences on the management of TN mBC within the Italian Oncology community were adopted. The Panel produced a set of prioritized considerations/consensus statements reflecting the Panel position on diagnostic and staging approach, first-line and second-line treatments of PD-L1-positive/germline BRCA (gBRCA) wild-type, PD-L1-positive/gBRCA mutated, PD-L1-negative/gBRCA wild-type and PD-L1-negative/gBRCA mutated TN mBC. The Panel critically and comprehensively discussed the most relevant and/or unexpected results and put forward possible interpretations for statements not reaching the consensus threshold.

This text is based on the recommendations accepted by the 4th Hungarian Consensus Conference on Breast Cancer, modified based on the international consultation and conference within the frames of the Central-Eastern European Academy of Oncology. The professional guideline primarily reflects the resolutions and recommendations of the current ESMO, NCCN and ABC5, as well as that of the St. Gallen Consensus Conference statements. The recommendations cover classical prognostic factors and certain multigene tests, which play an important role in therapeutic decision-making. From a didactic point of view, the text first addresses early and then locally advanced breast cancer, followed by locoregionally recurrent and metastatic breast cancer. Within these, we discuss each group according to the available therapeutic options. At the end of the recommendations, we summarize the criteria for treatment in certain rare clinical situations.

暂无摘要。

We examined guideline-concordant initial systemic treatment among women with metastatic breast cancer, its predictors, and if guideline-concordant treatment was associated with mortality, healthcare utilization and Medicare expenditures.
This retrospective observational cohort study was conducted using the Surveillance, Epidemiology, End Results-Medicare linked database. Women aged 66-90 years diagnosed with metastatic breast cancer during 2010-2013 (N = 1282) were included. The National Comprehensive Cancer Network treatment guidelines were used to determine the guideline-concordant initial systemic treatment following cancer diagnosis. A logistic regression analysis was conducted to examine significant predictors of guideline-concordant treatment. Generalized linear regressions were used to examine the association between guideline-concordant treatment and healthcare utilization and average monthly Medicare expenditures.
About 74% of the study cohort received guideline-concordant initial systemic treatment. Women who received guideline-concordant treatment were significantly more likely to be comparatively younger (p < 0.05), were married/partnered (p = 0.0038), had HER2 positive tumors, and had good performance status. Adjusted hazards ratios for all-cause (2.364, p < 0.0001) and breast-cancer specific mortality (2.179, p < 0.0001) were higher for women who did not receive guideline-concordant treatment. Rates of healthcare utilization were also higher for women not receiving guideline-concordant treatment. Average monthly Medicare expenditures were 100.4% higher (95% confidence interval: $77.3%-126.5%) for women who did not receive guideline-concordant treatment compared to those who received guideline-concordant treatment (p < 0.0001).
One fourth of the study cohort did not receive guideline-concordant initial systemic treatment. Guideline-concordant initial treatment was associated with reduced mortality, and lower healthcare utilization and Medicare expenditures in women with metastatic breast cancer.

Objective: The aim of this survey conducted by 20 leading Spanish oncologists was to analyze the concurrence between Spanish clinical practice and the recently published definition of the optimal sequence for the systemic treatment of metastatic breast cancer (MBC) according to patient profiles. Methods: A self-administered questionnaire was developed, divided into five sections comprising 34 specific questions related to sequential treatments, plus three additional general questions. Respondents were asked to justify negative answers. Participants were recruited randomly by invitation out of a total of 619 oncologists. The questionnaire was sent and collected via e-mail between October 2015 and May 2016. A total of 191 completed questionnaires were received. Results: Overall, 70% of oncologists would keep the three patient profiles exactly as proposed (hormone receptor-positive and HER2-negative, HER2-positive, and triple negative breast cancer). Affirmative answers to questions regarding treatment sequences for these patient profiles (1-34) ranged from 77.8-99.5%, with an average of 90.9% of oncologists being in agreement with the recommended sequential treatments. The lowest degree of consensus was observed for endocrine treatments in pre-menopausal women and for chemotherapy options in hormone-resistant patients, whilst the highest degree of consensus was reached for targeted therapies in HER2-positive patients and for endocrine therapy in post-menopausal women. In their comments, participants revealed a number of economic constraints that prevented them from implementing some of the best treatment options. Conclusions: In conclusion, despite the complexity of MBC treatment, there is general agreement on the optimal treatment sequences.

BACKGROUND: The heterogeneity of metastatic breast cancer (MBC) necessitates novel biomarkers allowing stratification of patients for treatment selection and drug development. We propose to use the prognostic utility of circulating tumor cells (CTCs) for stratification of patients with stage IV disease.
METHODS: In a retrospective, pooled analysis of individual patient data from 18 cohorts, including 2436 MBC patients, a CTC threshold of 5 cells per 7.5 ml was used for stratification based on molecular subtypes, disease location, and prior treatments. Patients with ≥ 5 CTCs were classified as Stage IVaggressive, those with < 5 CTCs as Stage IVindolent. Survival was analyzed using Kaplan-Meier curves and the log rank test.
RESULTS: For all patients, Stage IVindolent patients had longer median overall survival than those with Stage IVaggressive (36.3 months vs. 16.0 months, P < 0.0001) and similarly for de novo MBC patients (41.4 months Stage IVindolent vs. 18.7 months Stage IVaggressive, p < 0.0001). Moreover, patients with Stage IVindolent disease had significantly longer overall survival across all disease subtypes compared to the aggressive cohort: hormone receptor-positive (44 months vs. 17.3 months, P < 0.0001), HER2-positive (36.7 months vs. 20.4 months, P < 0.0001), and triple negative (23.8 months vs. 9.0 months, P < 0.0001). Similar results were obtained regardless of prior treatment or disease location.
CONCLUSIONS: We confirm the identification of two subgroups of MBC, Stage IVindolent and Stage IVaggressive, independent of clinical and molecular variables. Thus, CTC count should be considered an important tool for staging of advanced disease and for disease stratification in prospective clinical trials.

BACKGROUND: In this study, we observe the patterns initial palliative treatment for premenopausal patients with HR-positive/HER2-negative MBC and determine if nonadherence to clinical guidelines are associated with worse clinical outcomes in terms of progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) in the South Korean population.
METHODS: A retrospective review was performed for premenopausal patients diagnosed with HR-positive/HER2-negative MBC between October 1997 and May 2016 who received palliative systemic treatments at a large tertiary medical center. Survival outcomes were analyzed according to the palliative treatment received prior to disease progression.
RESULTS: The review identified a total of 272 premenopausal patients meeting study criteria, whose median age was 39 years. Endocrine therapy was the initial treatment in 137 patients (Group 1) with chemotherapy as initial treatment in 135 patients. In the latter group, chemotherapy was continued in 78 patients (Group 2), whereas chemotherapy was switched to endocrine treatment in 57 patients prior to any disease progression (Group 3). Both PFS and OS were significantly longer for chemotherapy-endocrine therapy (median PFS 18.2 months and OS 85.2 months) than for chemotherapy-alone (median PFS 12.6 months and OS 45.5 months) or endocrine therapy-alone (median PFS 7.0 months and OS 57.3 months) (all p values < 0.01). In multivariate analysis, chemotherapy-endocrine therapy was an independent predictive value for improved PFS and OS (hazard ratio [HR] 0.33, 95% CI 0.20-0.52, p <  0.001; HR 0.38, 95% CI 0.19-0.73, p = 0.004).
CONCLUSIONS: In our study population, chemotherapy alone was not objectively inferior to endocrine therapy as the initial palliative treatment. In addition, chemotherapy followed by endocrine therapy was associated with objective higher response rate than endocrine therapy alone. Further studies should explore the relationship between non-adherent treatment patterns and patient outcomes across the largely premenopausal breast cancer populations across Asian countries.

Purpose The aim of this official guideline coordinated and published by the German Society for Gynecology and Obstetrics (DGGG) and the German Cancer Society (DKG) was to optimize the screening, diagnosis, therapy and follow-up care of breast cancer. Method The process of updating the S3 guideline published in 2012 was based on the adaptation of identified source guidelines. They were combined with reviews of evidence compiled using PICO (Patients/Interventions/Control/Outcome) questions and with the results of a systematic search of literature databases followed by the selection and evaluation of the identified literature. The interdisciplinary working groups took the identified materials as their starting point and used them to develop suggestions for recommendations and statements, which were then modified and graded in a structured consensus process procedure. Recommendations Part 2 of this short version of the guideline presents recommendations for the therapy of primary, recurrent and metastatic breast cancer. Loco-regional therapies are de-escalated in the current guideline. In addition to reducing the safety margins for surgical procedures, the guideline also recommends reducing the radicality of axillary surgery. The choice and extent of systemic therapy depends on the respective tumor biology. New substances are becoming available, particularly to treat metastatic breast cancer.
Ziele Das Ziel dieser offiziellen Leitlinie, die von der Deutschen Gesellschaft für Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe (DGGG) und der Deutschen Krebsgesellschaft (DKG) publiziert und koordiniert wurde, ist es, die Früherkennung, Diagnostik, Therapie und Nachsorge des Mammakarzinoms zu optimieren. Methode Der Aktualisierungsprozess der S3-Leitlinie aus 2012 basierte zum einen auf der Adaptation identifizierter Quellleitlinien und zum anderen auf Evidenzübersichten, die nach Entwicklung von PICO-Fragen (PICO: Patients/Interventions/Control/Outcome), systematischer Recherche in Literaturdatenbanken sowie Selektion und Bewertung der gefundenen Literatur angefertigt wurden. In den interdisziplinären Arbeitsgruppen wurden auf dieser Grundlage Vorschläge für Empfehlungen – und Statements erarbeitet, die im Rahmen von strukturierten Konsensusverfahren modifiziert und graduiert wurden. Empfehlungen Teil 2 dieser Kurzversion der Leitlinie zeigt Empfehlungen zur Therapie des primären, rezidivierten und metastasierten Mammakarzinoms: Die lokoregionären Therapien erfahren in der aktuellen Leitlinie eine Deeskalation. Neben einer Verringerung des Sicherheitsabstandes bei den operativen Verfahren gibt die Leitlinie auch Empfehlungen zu einer reduzierten Radikalität bei axillären Interventionen. Die Systemtherapie richtet sich nach den tumorbiologischen Eigenschaften, neue Substanzen stehen insbesondere beim metastatierten Mammakarzinom zur Verfügung.