Breast

Breast breast breast manuals 92e6fb9859634b9ea4ec71deed4f31e2 development tpassets.devicebits.com 3:

2016-06-20

: Pdf Breast breast manuals 21a8a708c03541f4871a3842da3e267a development

Open the PDF directly: View PDF .
Page Count: 202 [warning: Documents this large are best viewed by clicking the View PDF Link!]

NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology (NCCN Guidelines®)

Breast Cancer

Version 2.2016

Continue

NCCN.org

NCCN Guidelines for Patients® available at www.nccn.org/patients

Version2.2016 05/06/16© National Comprehensive Cancer Network, Inc. 2016, All rights reserved. The NCCN Guidelines® and this illustration may not be reproduced in any form without the express written permission of NCCN®.

NCCN Guidelines Index

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Breast Cancer Panel Members

* William J. Gradishar, MD/Chair ‡ †

Robert H. Lurie Comprehensive Cancer

Center of Northwestern University

Benjamin O. Anderson, MD/Vice-Chair ¶

Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research

Center/Seattle Cancer Care Alliance

Ron Balassanian, MD ≠

UCSF Helen Diller Family

Comprehensive Cancer Center

Sarah L. Blair, MD ¶

UC San Diego Moores Cancer Center

Harold J. Burstein, MD, PhD †

Dana-Farber/Brigham and Women’s

Cancer Center

Amy Cyr, MD ¶

Siteman Cancer Center at Barnes-

Jewish Hospital and Washington

University School of Medicine

Anthony D. Elias, MD †

University of Colorado Cancer Center

William B. Farrar, MD ¶

The Ohio State University Comprehensive

Cancer Center - James Cancer Hospital

and Solove Research Institute

Andres Forero, MD ‡ †

University of Alabama at Birmingham

Comprehensive Cancer Center

Sharon Hermes Giordano, MD, MPH †

The University of Texas

MD Anderson Cancer Center

Matthew Goetz, MD ‡ †

Mayo Clinic Cancer Center

Lori J. Goldstein, MD †

Fox Chase Cancer Center

Clifford A. Hudis, MD †

Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center

Steven J. Isakoff, MD, PhD †

Massachusetts General Hospital

Cancer Center

P. Kelly Marcom, MD †

Duke Cancer Institute

Ingrid A. Mayer, MD †

Vanderbilt-Ingram Cancer Center

Beryl McCormick, MD §

Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center

Meena Moran, MD §

Yale Cancer Center/

Smilow Cancer Hospital

Sameer A. Patel, MD Ÿ

Fox Chase Cancer Center

Lori J. Pierce, MD §

University of Michigan

Comprehensive Cancer Center

Elizabeth C. Reed, MD † ξ

Fred & Pamela Buffett Cancer Center

Kilian E. Salerno, MD §

Roswell Park Cancer Institute

Lee S. Schwartzberg, MD ‡ †

St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital/

The University of Tennessee

Health Science Center

Karen Lisa Smith, MD, MPH †

The Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive

Cancer Center at Johns Hopkins

Mary Lou Smith, JD, MBA ¥

Research Advocacy Network

Hatem Soliman, MD †

Moftt Cancer Center

George Somlo, MD ‡ ξ †

City of Hope Comprehensive Cancer Center

Melinda Telli, MD †

Stanford Cancer Institute

John H. Ward, MD ‡ †

Huntsman Cancer Institute

at the University of Utah

NCCN Staff

Rashmi Kumar, PhD

Dorothy A. Shead, MS

Continue

NCCN Guidelines Panel Disclosures

† Medical oncology

‡ Hematology/Oncology

¶ Surgical oncology

≠ Pathology

Ÿ Reconstructive surgery

§ Radiation oncology

ξ Bone marrow transplantation

¥ Patient advocacy

* Discussion section writing

committee

Version 2.2016 05/06/16© National Comprehensive Cancer Network, Inc. 2016, All rights reserved. The NCCN Guidelines® and this illustration may not be reproduced in any form without the express written permission of NCCN®.

Clinical Trials: NCCN believes that

the best management for any cancer

patient is in a clinical trial.

Participation in clinical trials is

especially encouraged.

To nd clinical trials online at NCCN

Member Institutions, click here:

nccn.org/clinical_trials/physician.html.

NCCN Categories of Evidence and

Consensus: All recommendations

are category 2A unless otherwise

specied.

See NCCN Categories of Evidence

and Consensus.

NCCN Breast Cancer Panel Members

Summary of Guidelines Updates

Noninvasive Breast Cancer:

Lobular Carcinoma In Situ (LCIS-1)

Ductal Carcinoma In Situ (DCIS) Workup and Primary Treatment (DCIS-1)

DCIS Postsurgical Treatment and Surveillance/Follow-up (DCIS-2)

Margin Status in DCIS (DCIS-A)

Invasive Breast Cancer:

Clinical Stage, Workup (BINV-1)

Locoregional Treatment of Clinical Stage l, llA, or llB Disease or T3,N1, M0 (BINV-2)

Systemic Adjuvant Treatment

Hormone Receptor-Positive HER2-Positive Disease (BINV-5)

Hormone Receptor-Positive HER2-Negative Disease (BINV-6)

Hormone Receptor-Negative HER2-Positive Disease (BINV-7)

Hormone Receptor-Negative HER2-Negative Disease (BINV-8)

Favorable Histologies (BINV-9)

Preoperative Systemic Therapy for Operable Breast Cancer: Workup (BINV-10)

Preoperative Systemic Therapy: Breast and Axillary Evaluation (BINV-11)

Preoperative Systemic Therapy: Surgical Treatment (BINV-12)

Preoperative Systemic Therapy: Adjuvant Therapy (BINV-13)

Preoperative Systemic Therapy for Inoperable or Locally Advanced Breast Cancer (Non-Inammatory): Workup (BINV-14)

Preoperative Systemic Therapy for Inoperable or Locally Advanced Breast Cancer (Non-Inammatory) (BINV-15)

Surveillance/Follow-Up (BINV-16)

Recurrent/Stage IV Disease (BINV-17)

Treatment of Recurrence (BINV-18)

Treatment of Stage IV Disease (BINV-19)

ER and/or PR Positive; HER2 Negative or Positive (BINV-20)

ER and PR Negative; or ER and/or PR Positive and Endocrine Refractory; HER2 Negative (BINV-21)

ER and PR Negative; or ER and/or PR Positive and Endocrine Refractory; HER2 Positive (BINV-22)

Follow-Up Therapy for Endocrine Treatment of Recurrent or Stage IV Disease (BINV-23)

Principles of HER2 Testing (BINV-A)

Principles of Dedicated Breast MRI Testing (BINV-B)

Fertility and Birth Control (BINV-C)

Surgical Axillary Staging - Stage l, llA, llB, and IIIA T3, N1, M0 (BINV-D)

Axillary Lymph Node Staging (BINV-E)

Margin Status in Inltrating Carcinoma (BINV-F)

Special Considerations to Breast-Conserving Therapy Requiring Radiation Therapy (BINV-G)

The NCCN Guidelines® are a statement of evidence and consensus of the authors regarding their views of currently accepted approaches to treatment. Any clinician

seeking to apply or consult the NCCN Guidelines is expected to use independent medical judgment in the context of individual clinical circumstances to determine any

patient’s care or treatment. The National Comprehensive Cancer Network® (NCCN®) makes no representations or warranties of any kind regarding their content, use or

application and disclaims any responsibility for their application or use in any way. The NCCN Guidelines are copyrighted by National Comprehensive Cancer Network®.

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

NCCN Guidelines Index

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

Principles of Breast Reconstruction Following Surgery (BINV-H)

Principles of Radiation Therapy (BINV-I)

Adjuvant Endocrine Therapy (BINV-J)

Preoperative/Adjuvant Therapy Regimens (BINV-K)

Principles of Preoperative Systemic Therapy (BINV-L)

Denition of Menopause (BINV-M)

Endocrine Therapy for Recurrent or Stage IV Disease (BINV-N)

Chemotherapy Regimens for Recurrent or Metastatic Breast Cancer (BINV-O)

Principles of Monitoring Metastatic Disease (BINV-P)

Special Considerations:

Phyllodes Tumor (PHYLL-1)

Paget’s Disease (PAGET-1)

Breast Cancer During Pregnancy (PREG-1)

Inammatory Breast Cancer (IBC-1)

Staging (ST-1)

Version 2.2016 05/06/16© National Comprehensive Cancer Network, Inc. 2016, All rights reserved. The NCCN Guidelines® and this illustration may not be reproduced in any form without the express written permission of NCCN®.

NCCN Guidelines Index

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

UPDATES-1

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Breast Cancer Updates

Updates in Version 2.2016 of the NCCN Guidelines for Breast Cancer from Version 1.2016 include:

DCIS-1

Modied the rst sentence in footnote "h": "Complete axillary lymph node

dissection should not be performed in the absence of evidence of invasive

cancer or proven axillary metastatic disease in women with apparent pure DCIS

or mammographically detected DCIS with microcalcications."

DCIS-2

• Under "Risk reduction therapy for ipsilateral breast following breast-

conserving surgery" replaced "tamoxifen" with "endocrine therapy" in the

following bullets:

Consider endocrine therapy for 5 years for:

◊Patients treated with breast-conserving therapy (lumpectomy) and

radiation therapyp (category 1), especially for those with ER-positive

DCIS.

◊The benet of endocrine therapy for ER-negative DCIS is uncertain

Version 2.2016 05/06/16© National Comprehensive Cancer Network, Inc. 2016, All rights reserved. The NCCN Guidelines® and this illustration may not be reproduced in any form without the express written permission of NCCN®.

Updates in Version 1.2016 of the NCCN Guidelines for Breast Cancer from Version 2.2015 include:

Discussion

The discussion section has been updated to reect changes in the

algorithm.

BINV-1

• Workup, changed "Fertility counseling if premenopausal" to "Counseling

for fertility concerns if premenopausal."

BINV-2

• Claried imaging for systemic staging, removed "or MRI."

BINV-5

• Systemic adjuvant treatment - hormone receptor-positive - HER2-

positive disease, removed footnote "y" stating "Evidence supports that

the magnitude of benet from surgical or radiation ovarian ablation in

premenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive breast cancer

is similar to that achieved with CMF alone. See Adjuvant Endocrine

Therapy (BINV-J) and Preoperative/Adjuvant Therapy Regimens

(BINV-K).

BINV-9

• Moved the following footnote to the algorithm: "If ER-positive, consider

endocrine therapy for risk reduction and to diminish the small risk of

disease recurrence."

BINV-11

• Claried imaging by adding "with ultrasound."

Added new bullets for "Endocrine therapy:"

◊Tamoxifeno for premenopausal patients

◊Tamoxifeno or aromatase inhibitor for postmenopausal patients with some

advantage for aromatase inhibitor therapy in patients <60 years old or with

concerns for thromboembolism

• Modied footnote "o" for consistency with NCCN Guidelines for Breast

Cancer Risk Reduction. The footnote states "CYP2D6 genotype testing is not

recommended in women who are considering tamoxifen."

Footnote "p", changed "tamoxifen" to "endocrine therapy."

BINV-1

• CBC includes platelets, deleted "platelets"

• "Assess for distress" - moved the link to the NCCN Guidelines for Distress

Management from the algorithm to a footnote.

• Listed CBC, liver function tests and alkaline phosphatase as optional based on

signs and symptoms and clinical stage I-IIB, and IIIA (T3,N1,M0).

• Footnote "k" is new, "See NCCN Guidelines for Older Adult Oncology for special

treatment considerations."

BINV-12

• Removed the statement "Endocrine therapy alone with an aromatase inhibitor

(preferred option for postmenopausal women; given along with ovarian

suppression for premenopausal women) or tamoxifen may be considered for

patients with hormone-receptor positive disease]" and linked to BINV-L (also

applies to BINV-15)

• Footnote "jj" claried "imaging studies" by adding (mammogram and/or breast

MRI).

BINV-22

• Changed trastuzumab containing chemotherapy to HER2-targeted

chemotherapy.

BINV-N

• Added "Selective ER modulators."

IBC-1

• Added a new footnote, "The accurate assessment of in-breast tumor or

regional lymph node response to preoperative systemic therapy is difcult,

and should include physical examination and performance of imaging studies

(mammogram and/or breast MRI) that were abnormal at the time of initial

tumor staging. Selection of imaging methods prior to surgery should be

determined by the multidisciplinary team."

NCCN Guidelines Index

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

UPDATES-2

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Breast Cancer Updates

BINV-10

• Modied the workup for consistency with BINV-1.

• CBC includes platelets, deleted "platelets"

• "Assess for distress" - moved the link to the NCCN Guidelines for Distress

Management from the algorithm to a footnote.

• Additional studies consider: CBC, liver function tests and alkaline

phosphatase as optional based on signs and symptoms and clinical stage

I-IIB, and IIIA (T3,N1,M0).

• If lymph node FNA or core biopsy positive, axilla may be restaged after

preoperative systemic therapy, added

(category 2B)."

• Removed bottom branch for "Surgical resection."

BINV-11

• Clinically negative axillary lymph node, changed "should have" to

"consider."

• Clinically positive axillary lymph node, added (category 2B) to "SLNB or

ALND can be performed if axilla is clinically negative."

BINV-12

• Preoperative systemic therapy, modied the statement " [Endocrine therapy

alone with an aromatase inhibitor (preferred option for postmenopausal

women; given along with ovarian suppression for premenopausal

women) or tamoxifen may be considered for patients with hormone-

receptor positive disease]."

• Added a footnote "See Principles of Preoperative Systemic Therapy (BINV-L)."

BINV-13

• Mastectomy and surgical axillary staging ± reconstruction - Added

a footnote. "See Principles of Breast Reconstruction Following Surgery

(BINV-H)."

• Revised footnote "qq": "Axilla may be restaged after preoperative

systemic therapy (category 2B); ALND should be performed if axilla is

clinically positive; SLNB or ALND can be performed if axilla is clinically

negative."

Updates in Version 1.2016 of the NCCN Guidelines for Breast Cancer from Version 2.2015 include:

Version 2.2016 05/06/16© National Comprehensive Cancer Network, Inc. 2016, All rights reserved. The NCCN Guidelines® and this illustration may not be reproduced in any form without the express written permission of NCCN®.

BINV-2

• Following ≥4 positive axillary nodes, added "internal mammary nodes, and

any part of the axillary bed at risk (category 1). Removed "Strongly consider

radiation therapy to internal mammary nodes (category 2B)

• Footnote "q" was deleted. "Radiation therapy should be given to the internal

mammary lymph nodes that are clinically or pathologically positive; otherwise

the treatment to the internal mammary nodes is at the discretion of the treating

radiation oncologist. CT treatment planning should be utilized in all cases where

radiation therapy is delivered to the internal mammary lymph nodes."

• Following 1-3 positive axillary nodes, removed category 2B from radiation

therapy to internal mammary nodes. "Strongly consider radiation therapy to

infraclavicular, supraclavicular area, internal mammary nodes" added "and any

part of the axillary bed at risk."

BINV-3

• Following ≥4 positive axillary nodes, "Postchemotherapy radiation therapy

to chest wall + infraclavicular region, supraclavicular area" added "internal

mammary nodes, and any part of the axillary bed at risk (category 1)." Removed

"Strongly consider radiation therapy to internal mammary nodes (category 2B)

• Following 1-3 positive axillary nodes, "Strongly consider postchemotherapy

radiation therapy to chest wall + infraclavicular region, supraclavicular area,

internal mammary nodes" added "and any part of the axillary bed at risk."

Removed "if radiation therapy is given, strongly consider internal mammary

node radiation therapy (category 2B)."

• Following Negative axillary nodes and tumor >5 cm or margins positive,

"Consider postchemotherapy radiation therapy to chest wall ± infraclavicular

region, ± supraclavicular area" added "± internal mammary nodes, and

any part of the axillary bed at risk.". Removed "Strongly consider radiation

therapy to internal mammary nodes (category 2B)."

BINV-6

• Added a footnote to "Consider 21-gene RT-PCR assay" stating "Other prognostic

multigene assays may be considered to help assess risk of recurrence but have

not been validated to predict response to chemotherapy."

NCCN Guidelines Index

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

Version 2.2016 05/06/16 © National Comprehensive Cancer Network, Inc. 2016, All rights reserved. The NCCN Guidelines® and this illustration may not be reproduced in any form without the express written permission of NCCN®.

Note: All recommendations are category 2A unless otherwise indicated.

Clinical Trials: NCCN believes that the best management of any cancer patient is in a clinical trial. Participation in clinical trials is especially encouraged.

BINV-16

• Added a new bullet; "Periodic screening for changes in family history and

referral to genetic counseling as necessary."

• Added a footnote to "Mammography every 12 mo." The new footnote

states "Studies indicate that annual mammograms are the appropriate

frequency for surveillance of breast cancer patients who have had breast-

conserving surgery and radiation therapy with no clear advantage to shorter

interval imaging. Patients should wait 6 to 12 months after the completion

of radiation therapy to begin their annual mammogram surveillance.

Suspicious ndings on physical examination or surveillance imaging might

warrant a shorter interval between mammograms."

• Added a new bullet "Routine imaging of reconstructed breast is not

indicated."

• Added a new bullet "In the absence of clinical signs and symptoms

suggestive of recurrent disease, there is no indication for laboratory or

imaging studies for metastases screening."

• Added healthy diet and limited alcohol intake to the following bullet

"Evidence suggests that active lifestyle, healthy diet, limited alcohol intake,

and achieving and maintaining an ideal body weight (20–25 BMI) may lead to

optimal breast cancer outcomes."

• Revised footnote "tt": "The use of estrogen, progesterone, or selective

estrogen receptor modulators to treat osteoporosis or osteopenia in women

with breast cancer is discouraged. The

use of a bisphosphonate or denosumab is acceptable to maintain or to

improve bone mineral density. Optimal duration of either therapy has not

been established. Duration beyond 3 y is not known. Factors to consider

for duration of anti-osteoporosis therapy include bone mineral density,

response to therapy, and risk factors for continued bone loss or fracture.

Women treated with a bisphosphonate or denosumab should undergo a

dental examination with preventive dentistry prior to the initiation of therapy,

and should take supplemental calcium and vitamin D."

Updates in Version 1.2016 of the NCCN Guidelines for Breast Cancer from Version 2.201 include:

UPDATES-3

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Breast Cancer Updates

BINV-14

• Listed CBC, liver function tests and alkaline phosphatase under Additional

studies.

• CBC includes platelets, deleted "platelets"

"Assess for distress" - moved the link to the NCCN Guidelines for Distress

Management from the algorithm to a footnote.

BINV-15

• "Preoperative systemic therapy, modied the statement [Endocrine therapy

alone with an aromatase inhibitor (preferred option for postmenopausal

women; given along with ovarian suppression for premenopausal women)

or tamoxifen may be considered for patients with hormone-receptor

positive disease]."

• Added a footnote "See Principles of Preoperative Systemic Therapy (BINV-L)."

• Removed the following footnotes from page BINV-12 and BINV-15, they have been

incorporated into Principles of Preoperative Systemic Therapy (BINV-L):

A number of chemotherapy regimens have activity in the preoperative

setting. In general, those chemotherapy regimens recommended in the

adjuvant setting may be considered in the preoperative setting. See

Preoperative/Adjuvant Chemotherapy (BINV-K). If treated with endocrine

therapy, an aromatase inhibitor is preferred for postmenopausal women.

Patients with HER2-positive tumors should be treated with preoperative

systemic incorporating trastuzumab for at least 9 weeks of preoperative

therapy

See Preoperative/Adjuvant Chemotherapy (BINV-K).

A pertuzumab-containing regimen may be administered preoperatively to

patients with greater than or equal to T2 or greater than or equal to N1,

HER2-positive breast cancer.

Administration of all chemotherapy prior to surgery is preferred.

• Removed "(plus internal mammary nodes if involved, strongly consider

internal mammary nodes if not clinically involved (category 2B)."

• Removed "delayed" from breast reconstruction.

• Removed "consider" from the mastectomy/lumpectomy choice.

• Added "and internal mammary nodes and any part of the axillary bed at

risk."

NCCN Guidelines Index

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

UPDATES-4

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Breast Cancer Updates

BINV-17

• CBC includes platelets, deleted "platelets"

BINV-18

• Changed page header to "Treatment of Recurrence."

• Simplied the recommendations for "Radiation therapy", by removing

the following text: "to chest wall and supraclavicular and infraclavicular

nodes."

• Added the following footnote " Multidisciplinary approach is especially

important in the management of breast cancer recurrence to consider all

potential treatment options for optimal outcomes."

BINV-19

Changed page header to "Treatment of Stage IV Disease."

BINV-C

• Fertility and birth control, modied the rst bullet: "All premenopausal

patients should be informed about the potential impact of chemotherapy

on fertility and asked about their desire for potential future pregnancies.

Patients who may desire future pregnancies should be referred to

fertility specialists before chemotherapy and/or endocrine therapy,

to discuss the options based on patient specics, disease stage

and biology, (which determine the urgency and type and sequence

of treatment). Timing and duration allowed for fertility preservation,

options inclusive of oocyte and embryo cryopreservation as well as

evolving technologies, and the probability of successful pregnancies

subsequent to completion of breast cancer therapy are also to be

discussed."

BINV-D

• Footnote 2: Removed the last sentence "However, only peritumoral

injections map to the internal mammary lymph node(s).

BINV-E

• Replaced "Sentinel lymph node biopsy is the preferred method of

axillary lymph node staging if there is an experienced sentinel node

team and the patient is an appropriate sentinel lymph node biopsy

candidate (See BINV-D)." with "Sentinel lymph node biopsy should be

performed and is the preferred method of axillary lymph node staging if

the patient is an appropriate sentinel lymph node biopsy candidate."

Updates in Version 1.2016 of the NCCN Guidelines for Breast Cancer from Version 2.2016 include:

BINV-F

Second paragraph, modied the last sentence "A boost to the tumor bed is

recommended in patients at higher risk for recurrence."

BINV-G

• Absolute contraindications: added "Diffusely positive pathologic margins"

and removed "Positive pathologic margin."

• Relative contraindications: added "Positive pathologic margin" and removed

"Diffusely positive pathologic margins."

• Added a link to NCCN Guidelines for Genetic/Familial High-Risk Assessment

Breast and Ovarian.

BINV-H (1 of 2)

• First paragraph, added the following "However, breast reconstruction should

not interfere with the appropriate surgical management of the cancer or

the scope of appropriate surgical treatment for this disease. Coordinating

consultation and surgical treatment with a reconstructive surgeon should be

executed within a reasonable time frame."

• Modied "Oncoplastic techniques for breast conservation can extend breast-

conserving surgical options in situations where the resection by itself would

likely yield an unacceptable cosmetic outcome."

BINV-H (2 of 2)

• Modied the statement "Evidence of nipple involvement such as Paget’s

disease or other nipple discharge associated with malignancy, and/

or imaging ndings suggesting malignant involvment of the nipple or

subareolar tissues is a contraindicates nipple preservation."

BINV-I

• This page has been reorganized and updated.

BINV-J

• Changed tamoxifen for 5 y (category 1) ± ovarian suppression or ablation

(category 2B) to a (category 1).

• Adjuvant endocrine therapy - premenopausal at diagnosis, added "or aromatase

inhibitor for 5y + ovarian suppression or ablation (category 1)." With a new

footnote " Aromatase inhibitor or tamoxifen for 5 y plus ovarian suppression

should be considered, based on SOFT and TEXT clinical trial outcomes, for

premenopausal women at higher risk of recurrence (i.e. young age, high grade

tumor, lymph node involvement, Pagani, NEJM 2014, Prudence, NEJM 2014).

Survival data still pending."

Note: All recommendations are category 2A unless otherwise indicated.

Clinical Trials: NCCN believes that the best management of any cancer patient is in a clinical trial. Participation in clinical trials is especially encouraged.

Version 2.2016 05/06/16© National Comprehensive Cancer Network, Inc. 2016, All rights reserved. The NCCN Guidelines® and this illustration may not be reproduced in any form without the express written permission of NCCN®.

NCCN Guidelines Index

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

Version 2.2016 05/06/16 © National Comprehensive Cancer Network, Inc. 2016, All rights reserved. The NCCN Guidelines® and this illustration may not be reproduced in any form without the express written permission of NCCN®.

Note: All recommendations are category 2A unless otherwise indicated.

Clinical Trials: NCCN believes that the best management of any cancer patient is in a clinical trial. Participation in clinical trials is especially encouraged.

NCCN Guidelines Index

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

Footnote 4 is new to the page. "A single study (S0226) in women with

hormone receptor-positive breast cancer and no prior chemotherapy,

biological therapy, or endocrine therapy for metastatic disease

demonstrated that the addition of fulvestrant to anastrozole resulted

in prolongation of time to progression. Subset analysis suggested that

patients without prior adjuvant tamoxifen and more than 10 years since

diagnosis experienced the greatest benet. Two studies with similar

design (FACT and SOFEA) demonstrated no advantage in time to

progression with the addition of fulvestrant to anastrozole."

BINV-O

• Other rst-line agents for HER2-positive disease: Trastuzumab alone has

been removed.

• Footnote 4 is new to the page: Trastuzumab may be safely combined

with all non-anthracycline containing preferred and other single agents

listed above for recurrent or metastatic breast cancer.

• Updated reference list.

BINV-P (3 of 3)

• Suggested intervals of follow-up for patients with metastatic disease,

changed the interval for endocrine therapy follow-up from "2-3 mo" to

"1-3 mo."

PHYLL-1

• Revised footnote "a": "FNA or core biopsy may not distinguish a

broadenoma from a phyllodes tumor in some cases. The sensitivity

of core biopsy for the diagnosis of phyllodes tumor is greater than

that of FNA biopsy, but neither core biopsy or FNA biopsy can always

differentiate phyllodes tumors from broadenomas. In cases with

clinical suspicion for phyllodes tumor, excision of the lesion may be

needed for denitive pathologic classication."

PHYLL-2

• Added footnote "a" to "Tissue sampling"

PREG-1

• Changed: Pregnant patient with conrmed breast cancer diagnosis (core

biopsy preferred) To: Pregnant patient with conrmed breast cancer

diagnosis by FNA or core biopsy; No distant metastases on staging.

BINV-I

• This page has been reorganized and updated.

BINV-J

• Changed tamoxifen for 5 y (category 1) ± ovarian suppression or ablation

(category 2B) to a (category 1).

Adjuvant endocrine therapy - premenopausal at diagnosis, added "or aromatase

inhibitor for 5y + ovarian suppression or ablation (category 1)." With a new footnote

" Aromatase inhibitor or tamoxifen for 5 y plus ovarian suppression should be

considered, based on SOFT and TEXT clinical trial outcomes, for premenopausal

women at higher risk of recurrence (i.e. young age, high grade tumor, lymph

node involvement, Pagani, NEJM 2014, Prudence, NEJM 2014).Survival data still

pending."BINV-K (1 of 7)

• Footnote 5 is new to the page. "The regimens listed for HER2-negative disease are all

category 1 (except where indicated) when used in the adjuvant setting."

• Removed FAC/CAF (uorouracil/doxorubicin/cyclophosphamide) and FEC/CEF

(cyclophosphamide/ epirubicin/uorouracil) from the list of regimens for preoperative/

adjuvant chemotherapy.

BINV-K (3 of 7)

• Under the regimen "FAC followed by weekly paclitaxel, changed 6 to 4 cycles.

BINV-K (4, 5, and 6 of 7)

• Replaced cardiac monitoring at baseline, 3, 6, and 9 mo with "Evaluate left ventricular

ejection fraction (LVEF) prior to and during treatment."

• Added the following footnote " The optimal frequency of LVEF assessment during

adjuvant trastuzumab therapy is not known. The FDA label recommends LVEF

measurements prior to initiation of trastuzumab and every 3 mo during therapy."

BINV-L

• New page - Principles of Preoperative Systemic Therapy.

BINV-N

• Modied rst statement, "Premenopausal patients with

hormone receptor- positive

disease should have ovarian ablation/suppression and follow

• Endocrine therapy for recurrent or stage IV disease, added Palbociclib +

fulvestrant (category 1) with the following footnote: "For postmenopausal women

or for premenopausal women receiving ovarian suppression with an LHRH

agonist, with hormone-receptor positive and HER2-negative metastatic breast

cancer that has progressed on endocrine therapy."

UPDATES-5

Updates in Version 1.2016 of the NCCN Guidelines for Breast Cancer from Version 2.2016 include:

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Breast Cancer Updates

NCCN Guidelines Index

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

Version 2.2016 05/06/16 © National Comprehensive Cancer Network, Inc. 2016, All rights reserved. The NCCN Guidelines® and this illustration may not be reproduced in any form without the express written permission of NCCN®.

Note: All recommendations are category 2A unless otherwise indicated.

Clinical Trials: NCCN believes that the best management of any cancer patient is in a clinical trial. Participation in clinical trials is especially encouraged.

LCIS-1

aLCIS is present on initial biopsy (needle or surgical) or on final excision with or without other proliferative changes (atypical ductal or lobular hyperplasia).

bSome variants of LCIS (pleomorphic LCIS) may have a similar biological behavior to that of DCIS. Clinicians may consider complete excision with negative margins

for pleomorphic LCIS, but outcomes data regarding the efficacy of surgical excision to negative margins are lacking. There are no data to support using radiotherapy

in this setting.

cMultifocal/extensive LCIS involving >4 terminal ductal lobular units on a core biopsy may be associated with increased risk for invasive cancer on surgical excision.

DIAGNOSIS WORKUP RISK REDUCTION SURVEILLANCE

LCIS

identied on

breast biopsy

Stage 0

Tis, N0, M0

• History and

physical

• Diagnostic

bilateral

mammogram

• Pathology

review

Biopsy was core

needle biopsy

(less than surgical

biopsy)a,b

Initial biopsy was

surgical biopsya,b,c

Perform

surgical

excision

LCIS without

other cancer

Ductal carcinoma

in situ (DCIS)

Invasive

breast cancer

Surveillance as per

• NCCN Guidelines

for Breast Cancer

Risk Reduction

• NCCN Guidelines

for Breast Cancer

Screening and

Diagnosis

Counseling regarding

risk reduction,

see NCCN Guidelines

for Breast Cancer

Risk Reduction

See NCCN Guidelines for DCIS

(DCIS-1)

See NCCN Guidelines for

Invasive Breast Cancer (BINV-1)

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Lobular Carcinoma in Situ (LCIS)

NCCN Guidelines Index

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

Version 2.2016 05/06/16 © National Comprehensive Cancer Network, Inc. 2016, All rights reserved. The NCCN Guidelines® and this illustration may not be reproduced in any form without the express written permission of NCCN®.

Note: All recommendations are category 2A unless otherwise indicated.

Clinical Trials: NCCN believes that the best management of any cancer patient is in a clinical trial. Participation in clinical trials is especially encouraged.

DCIS-1

aSee NCCN Guidelines for Breast Cancer Screening and Diagnosis.

bThe panel endorses the College of American Pathologists Protocol for pathology reporting for all invasive and noninvasive carcinomas of the breast. http://www.cap.org.

cSee NCCN Guidelines for Genetic/Familial High-Risk Assessment: Breast and Ovarian.

dSee Principles of Dedicated Breast MRI Testing (BINV-B).

eThe use of MRI has not been shown to increase likelihood of negative margins or decrease conversion to mastectomy. Data to support improved long-term outcomes are lacking.

fRe-resection(s) may be performed in an effort to obtain negative margins in patients desiring breast-conserving therapy. Patients not amenable to margin-free

lumpectomy should have total mastectomy.

gSee Margin Status in DCIS (DCIS-A).

hComplete axillary lymph node dissection should not be performed in the absence of evidence of invasive cancer or proven axillary metastatic disease in women with

apparent pure DCIS or mammographically detected DCIS with microcalcifications. However, a small proportion of patients with apparent pure DCIS will be found to

have invasive cancer at the time of their definitive surgical procedure. Therefore, the performance of a sentinel lymph node procedure should be strongly considered if

the patient with apparent pure DCIS is to be treated with mastectomy or with excision in an anatomic location compromising the performance of a future sentinel lymph

node procedure.

iSee Principles of Radiation Therapy (BINV-I).

jComplete resection should be documented by analysis of margins and specimen radiography. Post-excision mammography could also be performed whenever

uncertainty about adequacy of excision remains.

kPatients found to have invasive disease at total mastectomy or re-excision should be managed as having stage l or stage ll disease, including lymph node staging.

lSee Special Considerations to Breast-Conserving Therapy Requiring Radiation Therapy (BINV-G).

mWhole-breast radiation therapy following lumpectomy reduces recurrence rates in DCIS by about 50%. Approximately half of the recurrences are invasive and half are DCIS. A

number of factors determine local recurrence risk: palpable mass, larger size, higher grade, close or involved margins, and age <50 years. If the patient and physician view the

individual risk as “low,” some patients may be treated by excision alone. Data evaluating the three local treatments show no differences in patient survival.

nSee Principles of Breast Reconstruction Following Surgery (BINV-H).

DIAGNOSIS WORKUP PRIMARY TREATMENT

DCIS

Stage 0

Tis, N0, M0a

• History and physical exam

• Diagnostic bilateral mammogram

• Pathology reviewb

• Determination of tumor estrogen

receptor (ER) status

• Genetic counseling if patient is

high-risk for hereditary breast

cancerc

• Breast MRId,e (optional)

Lumpectomyf,g without lymph node

surgeryh + whole breast radiation

therapyi,j,k,l,m (category 1)

Total mastectomy with or without

sentinel node biopsyh,k ±

reconstructionn

Lumpectomyf,g without lymph node

surgeryh without radiation therapyi,k,l,m

(category 2B)

See

Postsurgical

Treatment

(DCIS-2)

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Ductal Carcinoma in Situ (DCIS)

NCCN Guidelines Index

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

Version 2.2016 05/06/16 © National Comprehensive Cancer Network, Inc. 2016, All rights reserved. The NCCN Guidelines® and this illustration may not be reproduced in any form without the express written permission of NCCN®.

Note: All recommendations are category 2A unless otherwise indicated.

Clinical Trials: NCCN believes that the best management of any cancer patient is in a clinical trial. Participation in clinical trials is especially encouraged.

DCIS-2

oCYP2D6 genotype testing is not recommended in women who are considering tamoxifen.

pAvailable data suggest endocrine therapy provides risk reduction in the ipsilateral breast treated with breast conservation and in the contralateral breast in patients

with mastectomy or breast conservation with ER-positive primary tumors. Since a survival advantage has not been demonstrated, individual consideration of risks and

benefits is important (See also NCCN Guidelines for Breast Cancer Risk Reduction).

Risk reduction therapy for ipsilateral breast following

breast-conserving surgery:

• Consider endocrine therapy for 5 years for:

Patients treated with breast-conserving therapy

(lumpectomy) and radiation therapyp (category 1),

especially for those with ER-positive DCIS.

The benet of endocrine therapy for ER-negative DCIS

is uncertain

Patients treated with excision alonep

• Endocrine therapy:

Tamoxifeno for premenopausal patients

Tamoxifeno or aromatase inhibitor for postmenopausal

patients with some advantage for aromatase inhibitor

therapy in patients <60 years old or with concerns for

thromboembolism

Risk reduction therapy for contralateral breast:

• Counseling regarding risk reduction

See NCCN Guidelines for Breast Cancer Risk Reduction

DCIS POSTSURGICAL TREATMENT SURVEILLANCE/FOLLOW-UP

• Interval history and physical exam every 6–12 mo for 5 y,

then annually

• Mammogram every 12 mo (and 6–12 mo postradiation

therapy if breast conserved [category 2B])

• If treated with endocrine therapy, monitor per NCCN

Guidelines for Breast Cancer Risk Reduction

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Ductal Carcinoma in Situ (DCIS)

NCCN Guidelines Index

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

Version 2.2016 05/06/16 © National Comprehensive Cancer Network, Inc. 2016, All rights reserved. The NCCN Guidelines® and this illustration may not be reproduced in any form without the express written permission of NCCN®.

Note: All recommendations are category 2A unless otherwise indicated.

Clinical Trials: NCCN believes that the best management of any cancer patient is in a clinical trial. Participation in clinical trials is especially encouraged.

DCIS-A

MARGIN STATUS IN DCIS

Substantial controversy exists regarding the denition of a negative pathologic margin in DCIS. Controversy arises out of the heterogeneity of

the disease, difculties in distinguishing the spectrum of hyperplastic conditions, anatomic considerations of the location of the margin, and

inadequate prospective data on prognostic factors in DCIS.

Margins greater than 10 mm are widely accepted as negative (but may be excessive and may lead to a less optimal cosmetic outcome).

Margins less than 1 mm are considered inadequate.

With pathologic margins between 1–10 mm, wider margins are generally associated with lower local recurrence rates. However, close surgical

margins (<1 mm) at the broglandular boundary of the breast (chest wall or skin) do not mandate surgical re-excision but can be an indication

for higher boost dose radiation to the involved lumpectomy site (category 2B).

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Ductal Carcinoma in Situ (DCIS)

NCCN Guidelines Index

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

Version 2.2016 05/06/16 © National Comprehensive Cancer Network, Inc. 2016, All rights reserved. The NCCN Guidelines® and this illustration may not be reproduced in any form without the express written permission of NCCN®.

Note: All recommendations are category 2A unless otherwise indicated.

Clinical Trials: NCCN believes that the best management of any cancer patient is in a clinical trial. Participation in clinical trials is especially encouraged.

BINV-1

aThe panel endorses the College of American Pathologists Protocol for pathology reporting for all

invasive and noninvasive carcinomas of the breast. http://www.cap.org.

bSee Principles of HER2 Testing (BINV-A).

cSee NCCN Guidelines for Genetic/Familial High-Risk Assessment: Breast and Ovarian.

dSee Principles of Dedicated Breast MRI Testing (BINV-B).

eSee Fertility and Birth Control (BINV-C).

fSee NCCN Guidelines for Distress Management.

gRoutine systemic staging is not indicated for early breast cancer in the absence of symptoms.

hIf FDG PET/CT is performed and clearly indicates bone metastasis, on both the PET and CT

component, bone scan or sodium fluoride PET/CT may not be needed.

CLINICAL

STAGE

WORKUP

Stage I

T1, N0, M0

Stage IIA

T0, N1, M0

T1, N1, M0

T2, N0, M0

Stage IIB

T2, N1, M0

T3, N0, M0

Stage IIIA

T3, N1, M0

• History and physical exam

• Diagnostic bilateral mammogram; ultrasound as necessary

• Pathology reviewa

• Determination of tumor estrogen/progesterone receptor (ER/PR) status and HER2 statusb

• Genetic counseling if patient is high risk for hereditary breast cancerc

• Breast MRId (optional), with special consideration for mammographically occult tumors

• Counseling for fertility concerns if premenopausale

• Assess for distressf

For clinical stage I-IIB, consider additional studies only if directed by signs or symptoms:g

• CBC

• Liver function tests and alkaline phosphatase

• Bone scan indicated if localized bone pain or elevated alkaline phosphatase

• Abdominal ± pelvic diagnostic CT or MRI indicated if elevated alkaline phosphatase, abnormal liver function

tests, abdominal symptoms, or abnormal physical examination of the abdomen or pelvis

• Chest diagnostic CT (if pulmonary symptoms present)

If clinical stage lllA (T3, N1, M0) consider:

• CBC

• Liver function tests and alkaline phosphatase

• Chest diagnostic CT

• Abdominal ± pelvic diagnostic CT or MRI

• Bone scan or sodium uoride PET/CTh (category 2B)

• FDG PET/CTi,j (optional, category 2B)

See

Locoregional

Treatmentk

(BINV-2)

iFDG PET/CT can be performed at the same time as diagnostic CT. The use of PET

or PET/CT scanning is not indicated in the staging of clinical stage I, II, or operable

stage III breast cancer. FDG PET/CT is most helpful in situations where standard

staging studies are equivocal or suspicious, especially in the setting of locally

advanced or metastatic disease.

jFDG PET/CT may also be helpful in identifying unsuspected regional nodal disease

and/or distant metastases in locally advanced breast cancer when used in addition

to standard staging studies.

kSee NCCN Guidelines for Older Adult Oncology for special treatment considerations.

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Invasive Breast Cancer

NCCN Guidelines Index

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

Version 2.2016 05/06/16 © National Comprehensive Cancer Network, Inc. 2016, All rights reserved. The NCCN Guidelines® and this illustration may not be reproduced in any form without the express written permission of NCCN®.

Note: All recommendations are category 2A unless otherwise indicated.

Clinical Trials: NCCN believes that the best management of any cancer patient is in a clinical trial. Participation in clinical trials is especially encouraged.

BINV-2

kSee NCCN Guidelines for Older Adult Oncology for special treatment considerations.

lSee Surgical Axillary Staging (BINV-D).

mSee Axillary Lymph Node Staging (BINV-E) and Margin Status in Infiltrating Carcinoma (BINV-F).

nSee Special Considerations to Breast-Conserving Therapy Requiring Radiation Therapy (BINV-G).

oExcept as outlined in the NCCN Guidelines for Genetic/Familial High-Risk Assessment: Breast and Ovarian and the NCCN Guidelines for Breast Cancer Risk Reduction,

prophylactic mastectomy of a breast contralateral to a known unilateral breast cancer is discouraged. When considered, the small benefits from contralateral prophylactic

mastectomy for women with unilateral breast cancer must be balanced with the risk of recurrent disease from the known ipsilateral breast cancer, psychological and social issues

of bilateral mastectomy, and the risks of contralateral mastectomy. The use of a prophylactic mastectomy contralateral to a breast treated with breast-conserving therapy is very

strongly discouraged.

pSee Principles of Breast Reconstruction Following Surgery (BINV-H).

qConsider imaging for systemic staging, including diagnostic CT, bone scan, and optional FDG PET/CT (category 2B) (See BINV-1).

rSee Principles of Radiation Therapy (BINV-I).

sPBI may be administered prior to chemotherapy.

tBreast irradiation may be omitted in patients ≥70 y of age with estrogen-receptor positive, clinically node-negative, T1 tumors who receive adjuvant endocrine therapy

(category 1).

LOCOREGIONAL TREATMENT OF CLINICAL STAGE I, IIA, OR IIB DISEASE OR T3, N1, M0k

Lumpectomy with

surgical axillary staging

(category 1)l,m,n

Total mastectomy with surgical axillary

stagingl,m,o (category 1) ± reconstructionp

If T2 or T3 and fullls criteria for breast-

conserving therapy except for sizen

≥4 positiveq

axillary nodes

1–3 positive

axillary nodes

Negative

axillary nodes

Radiation therapy to whole breast with or without boostr to tumor bed

(category 1), infraclavicular region, supraclavicular area, internal mammary

nodes, and any part of the axillary bed at risk (category 1). It is common for

radiation therapy to follow chemotherapy when chemotherapy is indicated.

Radiation therapy to whole breast with or without boostr to tumor bed

(category 1). Strongly consider radiation therapy to infraclavicular region,

supraclavicular area, internal mammary nodes, and any part of the axillary

bed at risk. It is common for radiation therapy to follow chemotherapy when

chemotherapy is indicated.

Radiation therapy to whole breast with or without boostr to tumor bed or

consideration of partial breast irradiation (PBI) in selected patients.r,s

It is common for radiation therapy to follow chemotherapy when

chemotherapy is indicated.t

See Locoregional Treatment (BINV-3)

Consider Preoperative Systemic Therapy Guideline (BINV-10)

See

BINV-4

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Invasive Breast Cancer

NCCN Guidelines Index

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

Version 2.2016 05/06/16 © National Comprehensive Cancer Network, Inc. 2016, All rights reserved. The NCCN Guidelines® and this illustration may not be reproduced in any form without the express written permission of NCCN®.

Note: All recommendations are category 2A unless otherwise indicated.

Clinical Trials: NCCN believes that the best management of any cancer patient is in a clinical trial. Participation in clinical trials is especially encouraged.

BINV-3

LOCOREGIONAL TREATMENT OF CLINICAL STAGE I, IIA, OR IIB DISEASE OR T3, N1, M0k

kSee NCCN Guidelines for Older Adult Oncology for special treatment considerations.

lSee Surgical Axillary Staging (BINV-D).

mSee Axillary Lymph Node Staging (BINV-E) and Margin Status in Infiltrating Carcinoma (BINV-F).

pSee Principles of Breast Reconstruction Following Surgery (BINV-H).

qConsider imaging for systemic staging, including diagnostic CT, bone scan, and optional FDG PET/CT (category 2B) (See BINV-1).

rSee Principles of Radiation Therapy (BINV-I).

uPostmastectomy radiation therapy may be considered for patients with multiple high-risk recurrence factors.

Total mastectomy

with surgical axillary

stagingl,m (category 1)

± reconstructionp

≥4 positive

axillary nodesq

1–3 positive

axillary nodes

Negative axillary nodes

and tumor >5 cm

margins positive

Negative axillary nodes and

tumor ≤5 cm and negative

margins but <1 mm

Negative axillary nodes

and tumor ≤5 cm and

margins ≥1 mm

Radiation therapyr to chest wall + infraclavicular region,

supraclavicular area, internal mammary nodes, and any

part of the axillary bed at risk. (category 1) It is common

for radiation therapy to follow chemotherapy when

chemotherapy is indicated.

Strongly consider radiation therapyr to chest wall +

infraclavicular region, supraclavicular area, internal

mammary nodes, and any part of the axillary bed at risk. It

is common for radiation therapy to follow chemotherapy

when chemotherapy is indicated.

Consider radiation therapyr to chest wall ± infraclavicular

region, ± supraclavicular area, ± internal mammary nodes

and any part of the axillary bed at risk. It is common

for radiation therapy to follow chemotherapy when

chemotherapy is indicated.

Consider radiation therapyr to chest wall. It is common

for radiation therapy to follow chemotherapy when

chemotherapy is indicated.

No radiation therapyu

See

BINV-4

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Invasive Breast Cancer

NCCN Guidelines Index

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

Version 2.2016 05/06/16 © National Comprehensive Cancer Network, Inc. 2016, All rights reserved. The NCCN Guidelines® and this illustration may not be reproduced in any form without the express written permission of NCCN®.

Note: All recommendations are category 2A unless otherwise indicated.

Clinical Trials: NCCN believes that the best management of any cancer patient is in a clinical trial. Participation in clinical trials is especially encouraged.

BINV-4

bSee Principles of HER2 Testing (BINV-A).

vThis includes medullary and micropapillary subtypes.

HISTOLOGY HORMONE

RECEPTOR STATUS

HER2 STATUS SYSTEMIC ADJUVANT TREATMENT

• Ductalv

• Lobular

• Mixed

• Metaplastic

• Tubular

• Mucinous

ER positive

and/or

PR positive

ER negative

and

PR negative

ER positive

and/or

PR positive

ER negative

and

PR negative

HER2-positiveb

HER2-negativeb

HER2-positiveb

HER2-negativeb

See Systemic Adjuvant Treatment -

Favorable Histologies (BINV-9)

See Systemic Adjuvant Treatment - Hormone Receptor

Positive - HER2-Positive Disease (BINV-5)

See Systemic Adjuvant Treatment - Hormone

Receptor Positive - HER2-Negative Disease (BINV-6)

See Systemic Adjuvant Treatment - Hormone

Receptor Negative - HER2-Positive Disease (BINV-7)

See Systemic Adjuvant Treatment - Hormone

Receptor Negative - HER2-Negative Disease (BINV-8)

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Invasive Breast Cancer

NCCN Guidelines Index

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

Version 2.2016 05/06/16 © National Comprehensive Cancer Network, Inc. 2016, All rights reserved. The NCCN Guidelines® and this illustration may not be reproduced in any form without the express written permission of NCCN®.

Note: All recommendations are category 2A unless otherwise indicated.

Clinical Trials: NCCN believes that the best management of any cancer patient is in a clinical trial. Participation in clinical trials is especially encouraged.

BINV-5

bSee Principles of HER2 Testing (BINV-A).

wMixed lobular and ductal carcinoma as well as metaplastic carcinoma should be graded based on the ductal component and treated based on this grading. The metaplastic

or mixed component does not alter prognosis.

xThe prognosis of patients with T1a and T1b tumors that are node negative is uncertain even when HER2 is amplified or overexpressed. This is a population of breast cancer

patients that was not studied in the available randomized trials. The decision for use of trastuzumab therapy in this cohort of patients must balance the known toxicities of

trastuzumab, such as cardiac toxicity, and the uncertain, absolute benefits that may exist with trastuzumab therapy.

zChemotherapy and endocrine therapy used as adjuvant therapy should be given sequentially with endocrine therapy following chemotherapy. Available data suggest that

sequential or concurrent endocrine therapy with radiation therapy is acceptable. See Adjuvant Endocrine Therapy (BINV-J) and Preoperative/Adjuvant Therapy Regimens

(BINV-K).

aaThere are limited data to make chemotherapy recommendations for those >70 y of age. See NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines for Older Adult Oncology.

bbA pertuzumab-containing regimen can be administered to patients with ≥T2 or ≥N1, HER2-positive, early-stage breast cancer.

SYSTEMIC ADJUVANT TREATMENT - HORMONE RECEPTOR-POSITIVE - HER2-POSITIVE DISEASEb

Histology:w

• Ductal

• Lobular

• Mixed

• Metaplastic

pT1, pT2, or pT3;

and pN0 or pN1mi

(≤2 mm axillary

node metastasis)

Node positive (one or more

metastases >2 mm to one or more

ipsilateral axillary lymph nodes)

Tumor ≤0.5 cm

including

microinvasive

Tumor 0.6–1.0 cm

Tumor >1 cm

pN0

pN1mi Adjuvant endocrine therapy or

Adjuvant chemotherapyz,aa

with trastuzumabx followed by

endocrine therapy See Follow-Up

(BINV-16)

Consider adjuvant endocrine therapy

± adjuvant chemotherapyz,aa with

trastuzumabx (category 2B)

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Invasive Breast Cancer

Adjuvant chemotherapyz,aa,bb

with trastuzumabx followed by

endocrine therapy (category 1)

NCCN Guidelines Index

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

Version 2.2016 05/06/16 © National Comprehensive Cancer Network, Inc. 2016, All rights reserved. The NCCN Guidelines® and this illustration may not be reproduced in any form without the express written permission of NCCN®.

Note: All recommendations are category 2A unless otherwise indicated.

Clinical Trials: NCCN believes that the best management of any cancer patient is in a clinical trial. Participation in clinical trials is especially encouraged.

BINV-6

SYSTEMIC ADJUVANT TREATMENT - HORMONE RECEPTOR-POSITIVE - HER2-NEGATIVE DISEASEb

Histology:w

• Ductal

• Lobular

• Mixed

• Metaplastic

pT1, pT2, or pT3;

and pN0 or pN1mi

(≤2 mm axillary

node metastasis)

Node positive (one or more

metastases >2 mm to one or more

ipsilateral axillary lymph nodes)cc

• Tumor >0.5 cm

pN0

pN1mi

Consider adjuvant endocrine therapyy (category 2B)

Consider

21-gene

RT-PCR

assaydd

Not done

Low

recurrence

score (<18)

Intermediate

recurrence

score (18-30)

High

recurrence

score (≥31)

Adjuvant endocrine therapyy + adjuvant chemotherapyz,aa (category 1)

See

Follow-Up

(BINV-16)

Adjuvant endocrine therapyy

+ adjuvant chemotherapyz,aa

bSee Principles of HER2 Testing (BINV-A).

wMixed lobular and ductal carcinoma as well as metaplastic carcinoma should be graded based on the ductal component and treated based on this grading. The metaplastic or

mixed component does not alter prognosis.

yEvidence supports that the magnitude of benefit from surgical or radiation ovarian ablation in premenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive breast cancer is similar to

that achieved with CMF alone. See Adjuvant Endocrine Therapy (BINV-J) and Preoperative/Adjuvant Therapy Regimens (BINV-K).

zChemotherapy and endocrine therapy used as adjuvant therapy should be given sequentially with endocrine therapy following chemotherapy. Available data suggest that

sequential or concurrent endocrine therapy with radiation therapy is acceptable. See Adjuvant Endocrine Therapy (BINV-J) and Preoperative/AdjuvantTherapy Regimens

(BINV-K).

aaThere are limited data to make chemotherapy recommendations for those >70 y of age. See NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines for Older Adult Oncology.

ccThe 21-gene RT-PCR assay recurrence score can be considered in select patients with 1–3 involved ipsilateral axillary lymph nodes to guide the addition of combination

chemotherapy to standard hormone therapy. A retrospective analysis of a prospective randomized trial suggests that the test is predictive in this group similar to its

performance in node-negative disease.

ddOther prognostic multigene assays may be considered to help assess risk of recurrence but have not been validated to predict response to chemotherapy.

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Invasive Breast Cancer

Adjuvant endocrine therapyy (category 2B) or

Adjuvant chemotherapyz,aa followed by endocrine

therapyy (category 2B)

Tumor ≤0.5 cm

including

microinvasive

Adjuvant endocrine therapy or

Adjuvant chemotherapyz,aa followed

by endocrine therapyy (category 1)

Adjuvant endocrine therapy or

Adjuvant chemotherapyz,aa

followed by endocrine therapyy

NCCN Guidelines Index

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

Version 2.2016 05/06/16 © National Comprehensive Cancer Network, Inc. 2016, All rights reserved. The NCCN Guidelines® and this illustration may not be reproduced in any form without the express written permission of NCCN®.

Note: All recommendations are category 2A unless otherwise indicated.

Clinical Trials: NCCN believes that the best management of any cancer patient is in a clinical trial. Participation in clinical trials is especially encouraged.

BINV-7

bSee Principles of HER2 Testing (BINV-A).

wMixed lobular and ductal carcinoma as well as metaplastic carcinoma should be graded based on the ductal component and treated based on this grading. The

metaplastic or mixed component does not alter prognosis.

xThe prognosis of patients with T1a and T1b tumors that are node negative is uncertain even when HER2 is amplified or overexpressed. This is a population of breast

cancer patients that was not studied in the available randomized trials. The decision for use of trastuzumab therapy in this cohort of patients must balance the known

toxicities of trastuzumab, such as cardiac toxicity, and the uncertain, absolute benefits that may exist with trastuzumab therapy.

aaThere are limited data to make chemotherapy recommendations for those >70 y of age. See NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines for Older Adult Oncology.

bbA pertuzumab-containing regimen can be administered to patients with ≥T2 or ≥N1, HER2-positive, early-stage breast cancer.

eeSee Preoperative/Adjuvant Therapy Regimens (BINV-K).

SYSTEMIC ADJUVANT TREATMENT - HORMONE RECEPTOR-NEGATIVE - HER2-POSITIVE DISEASEb

Histology:w

• Ductal

• Lobular

• Mixed

• Metaplastic

pT1, pT2, or pT3; and

pN0 or pN1mi (≤2 mm

axillary node metastasis)

Node positive (one or more

metastases >2 mm to one or more

ipsilateral axillary lymph nodes)

Tumor 0.6–1.0 cm

Tumor >1 cm

Adjuvant chemotherapyaa,bb,ee

with trastuzumab (category 1)

pN0

pN1mi

Consider adjuvant chemotherapyaa,ee

with trastuzumabx (category 2B)

Consider adjuvant chemotherapyaa,ee

with trastuzumabx

Consider adjuvant chemotherapyaa,ee

with trastuzumabx

Adjuvant chemotherapy

aa,bb,ee

with trastuzumab (category 1)

See

Follow-Up

(BINV-16)

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Invasive Breast Cancer

Tumor ≤0.5 cm

including

microinvasive

NCCN Guidelines Index

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

Version 2.2016 05/06/16 © National Comprehensive Cancer Network, Inc. 2016, All rights reserved. The NCCN Guidelines® and this illustration may not be reproduced in any form without the express written permission of NCCN®.

Note: All recommendations are category 2A unless otherwise indicated.

Clinical Trials: NCCN believes that the best management of any cancer patient is in a clinical trial. Participation in clinical trials is especially encouraged.

BINV-8

bSee Principles of HER2 Testing (BINV-A).

wMixed lobular and ductal carcinoma as well as metaplastic carcinoma should be graded based on the ductal component and treated based on this grading. The

metaplastic or mixed component does not alter prognosis.

aaThere are limited data to make chemotherapy recommendations for those >70 y of age. See NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines for Older Adult Oncology.

eeSee Preoperative/Adjuvant Therapy Regimens (BINV-K).

SYSTEMIC ADJUVANT TREATMENT - HORMONE RECEPTOR-NEGATIVE - HER2-NEGATIVE DISEASEb

Histology:w

• Ductal

• Lobular

• Mixed

• Metaplastic

pT1, pT2, or pT3; and pN0

or pN1mi (≤2 mm axillary

node metastasis)

Node positive (one or more

metastases >2 mm to one or more

ipsilateral axillary lymph nodes)

Tumor 0.6–1.0 cm

Tumor >1 cm

pN0

pN1mi

No adjuvant therapy

Consider adjuvant

chemotherapyaa,ee

Consider adjuvant

chemotherapyaa,ee

Adjuvant chemotherapyaa,ee

(category 1)

Adjuvant chemotherapyaa,ee

(category 1)

See Follow-Up

(BINV-16)

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Invasive Breast Cancer

Tumor ≤0.5 cm

including

microinvasive

NCCN Guidelines Index

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

Version 2.2016 05/06/16 © National Comprehensive Cancer Network, Inc. 2016, All rights reserved. The NCCN Guidelines® and this illustration may not be reproduced in any form without the express written permission of NCCN®.

Note: All recommendations are category 2A unless otherwise indicated.

Clinical Trials: NCCN believes that the best management of any cancer patient is in a clinical trial. Participation in clinical trials is especially encouraged.

BINV-9

SYSTEMIC ADJUVANT TREATMENT - FAVORABLE HISTOLOGIES

yEvidence supports that the magnitude of benefit from surgical or radiation ovarian ablation in premenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive breast cancer is similar to

that achieved with CMF alone. See Adjuvant Endocrine Therapy (BINV-J) and Preoperative/Adjuvant Therapy Regimens (BINV-K).

zChemotherapy and endocrine therapy used as adjuvant therapy should be given sequentially with endocrine therapy following chemotherapy. Available data suggest

that sequential or concurrent endocrine therapy with radiation therapy is acceptable. See Adjuvant Endocrine Therapy (BINV-J) and Preoperative/Adjuvant Therapy

Regimens (BINV-K).

aaThere are limited data to make chemotherapy recommendations for those >70 y of age. See NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines for Older Adult Oncology.

Histology:

• Tubular

• Mucinous

ER-positive

and/or

PR-positive

ER-negative

and

PR-negative

pT1, pT2, or pT3;

and pN0 or pN1mi

(≤2 mm axillary

node metastasis)

Node positive (one or more

metastases >2 mm to one or more

ipsilateral axillary lymph nodes)

Repeat determination

of ER/PR status

<1 cm

1–2.9 cm

≥3 cm

ER-positive

and/or

PR-positive

ER-negative

and

PR-negative

Consider adjuvant endocrine

therapy for risk reduction

Consider adjuvant endocrine

therapyy

Adjuvant endocrine therapyy

± adjuvant chemotherapyz,aa

Follow appropriate

pathway above

Treat as usual breast cancer

histology

(See BINV-7 and BINV-8)

See Follow-Up

(BINV-16)

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Invasive Breast Cancer

NCCN Guidelines Index

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

Version 2.2016 05/06/16 © National Comprehensive Cancer Network, Inc. 2016, All rights reserved. The NCCN Guidelines® and this illustration may not be reproduced in any form without the express written permission of NCCN®.

Note: All recommendations are category 2A unless otherwise indicated.

Clinical Trials: NCCN believes that the best management of any cancer patient is in a clinical trial. Participation in clinical trials is especially encouraged.

BINV-10

PREOPERATIVE SYSTEMIC THERAPY FOR OPERABLE BREAST CANCER: WORKUP

aThe panel endorses the College of American Pathologists Protocol for pathology reporting for

all invasive and noninvasive carcinomas of the breast. http://www.cap.org.

bSee Principles of HER2 Testing (BINV-A).

cSee NCCN Guidelines for Genetic/Familial High-Risk Assessment: Breast and Ovarian.

dSee Principles of Dedicated Breast MRI Testing (BINV-B).

eSee Fertility and Birth Control (BINV-C).

fSee NCCN Guidelines for Distress Management

gRoutine systemic staging is not indicated for early breast cancer in the absence of symptoms.

hIf FDG PET/CT is performed and clearly indicates bone metastasis, on both the PET and CT

component, bone scan or sodium fluoride PET/CT may not be needed.

iFDG PET/CT can be performed at the same time as diagnostic CT. The

use of PET or PET/CT scanning is not indicated in the staging of clinical

stage I, II, or operable III breast cancer. FDG PET/CT is most helpful in

situations where standard staging studies are equivocal or suspicious,

especially in the setting of locally advanced or metastatic disease.

jFDG PET/CT may also be helpful in identifying unsuspected regional nodal

disease and/or distant metastases in locally advanced breast cancer when

used in addition to standard staging studies.

ffIn cases where breast-conserving surgery may not be possible but

patient will need chemotherapy, preoperative systemic treatment

remains an acceptable option.

CLINICAL

STAGE

WORKUP

Stage IIA

T2, N0, M0

Stage IIB

T2, N1, M0

T3, N0, M0

Stage lllA

T3, N1, M0

and

Fullls criteria for

breast-conserving

surgery except for

tumor sizeff

• History and physical exam

• Diagnostic bilateral mammogram; ultrasound as necessary

• Pathology reviewa

• Determination of tumor ER/PR status and HER2 statusb

• Genetic counseling if patient is high risk for hereditary breast cancerc

Breast MRId (optional), with special consideration for mammographically occult tumors

• Fertility counseling if premenopausale

• Assess for distressf

Additional studies consider:g

• CBC

• Liver function tests and alkaline phosphatase

• Chest diagnostic CT

• Abdominal ± pelvic diagnostic CT or MRI

• Bone scan or sodium uoride PET/CTh (category 2B)

• FDG PET/CTi,j (optional, category 2B)

See Preoperative

Systemic Therapy:

Breast and Axillary

Evaluation (BINV-11)

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Invasive Breast Cancer

NCCN Guidelines Index

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

Version 2.2016 05/06/16 © National Comprehensive Cancer Network, Inc. 2016, All rights reserved. The NCCN Guidelines® and this illustration may not be reproduced in any form without the express written permission of NCCN®.

Note: All recommendations are category 2A unless otherwise indicated.

Clinical Trials: NCCN believes that the best management of any cancer patient is in a clinical trial. Participation in clinical trials is especially encouraged.

BINV-11

PREOPERATIVE SYSTEMIC THERAPY: BREAST AND AXILLARY EVALUATION

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Invasive Breast Cancer

Core biopsy with placement

of image-detectable

marker(s), if not previously

performed, must be done to

demarcate the tumor bed for

post-chemotherapy surgical

management

Clinically negative axillary

lymph node(s) consider

axillary imaging with

ultrasound; suspicious

nodes should be sampled

by FNA or core biopsy

prior to preoperative

systemic therapygg

Clinically positive axillary

lymph node(s) should

be sampled by FNA or

core biopsy prior to

preoperative systemic

therapygg

See Preoperative

Systemic Therapy:

Surgical Treatment

(BINV-12)

Preoperative

systemic

therapy

ggMarking of sampled axillary nodes with a tattoo or clip should be considered to permit verification that the biopsy-positive lymph node has been removed at the time of

definitive surgery.

hhAmong patients shown to be node-positive prior to preoperative systemic therapy, SLNB has a >10% false-negative rate when performed after preoperative systemic

therapy. This rate can be improved by marking biopsied lymph nodes to document their removal, using dual tracer, and by removing more than 2 sentinel nodes.

If lymph node FNA or core

biopsy negative, sentinel

lymph node biopsy (SLNB)

can be performed before or

after preoperative systemic

therapy

If lymph node FNA or core

biopsy positive, axilla

may be restaged after

preoperative systemic

therapy; axillary lymph node

dissection (ALND) should

be performed if axilla is

clinically positive; SLNB or

ALND can be performed if

axilla is clinically negative

(category 2B)hh

NCCN Guidelines Index

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

Version 2.2016 05/06/16 © National Comprehensive Cancer Network, Inc. 2016, All rights reserved. The NCCN Guidelines® and this illustration may not be reproduced in any form without the express written permission of NCCN®.

Note: All recommendations are category 2A unless otherwise indicated.

Clinical Trials: NCCN believes that the best management of any cancer patient is in a clinical trial. Participation in clinical trials is especially encouraged.

BINV-12

SURGICAL TREATMENT

RESPONSEjj

Conrmed progressive disease at any time

Partial response, lumpectomy not possible

Partial response, lumpectomy possible

Complete response

Preoperative systemic therapyii

See Mastectomy (BINV-13)

See Lumpectomy (BINV-13)

PREOPERATIVE SYSTEMIC THERAPY: SURGICAL TREATMENT

iiSee Principles of Preoperative Systemic Therapy (BINV-L).

jjThe accurate assessment of in-breast tumor or regional lymph node response to preoperative systemic therapy is difficult, and should include physical examination and

performance of imaging studies (mammogram and/or breast MRI) that were abnormal at the time of initial tumor staging. Selection of imaging methods prior to surgery

should be determined by the multidisciplinary team.

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Invasive Breast Cancer

NCCN Guidelines Index

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

Version 2.2016 05/06/16 © National Comprehensive Cancer Network, Inc. 2016, All rights reserved. The NCCN Guidelines® and this illustration may not be reproduced in any form without the express written permission of NCCN®.

Note: All recommendations are category 2A unless otherwise indicated.

Clinical Trials: NCCN believes that the best management of any cancer patient is in a clinical trial. Participation in clinical trials is especially encouraged.

BINV-13

SURGICAL TREATMENT ADJUVANT TREATMENT

Mastectomy and surgical axillary

stagingl,kk ± reconstruction.p If

SLNB performed prechemotherapy

and negative ndings, omit axillary

lymph node staging. See BINV-11

Lumpectomy with surgical axillary

staging.l,kk If SLNB performed

prechemotherapy and negative

ndings, omit axillary lymph node

staging. See BINV-11

• Complete planned chemotherapy regimen course if not completed

preoperatively plus endocrine treatment if ER-positive and/or PR-positive

(sequential chemotherapy followed by endocrine therapy).

• Adjuvant radiation therapyr post-mastectomy is based on tumor

characteristics at diagnosis as per BINV-3

and

Endocrine therapy if ER-positive and/or PR-positivez (category 1)

• Complete up to one year of trastuzumab therapy if HER2-positive

(category 1). May be administered concurrently with radiation therapyr

and with endocrine therapy if indicated.

• Complete planned chemotherapy regimen course if not completed

preoperatively plus endocrine treatment if ER-positive and/or PR-positive

(sequential chemotherapy followed by endocrine therapy).

• Adjuvant radiation therapyr post-lumpectomy based on tumor

characteristics at diagnosis as per BINV-2

and

Endocrine therapy if ER-positive and/or PR-positivez (category 1)

• Complete up to one year of trastuzumab therapy if HER2-positive

(category 1). May be administered concurrently with radiation therapyr

and with endocrine therapy if indicated.

See

Surveillance/

Follow-up

(BINV-16)

PREOPERATIVE SYSTEMIC THERAPY: ADJUVANT THERAPY

lSee Surgical Axillary Staging (BINV-D).

pSee Principles of Breast Reconstruction Following Surgery (BINV-H).

rSee Principles of Radiation Therapy (BINV-I).

zChemotherapy and endocrine therapy used as adjuvant therapy should be given sequentially with endocrine therapy following chemotherapy. Available data suggest

that sequential or concurrent endocrine therapy with radiation therapy is acceptable.

See Adjuvant Endocrine Therapy (BINV-J) and Preoperative/Adjuvant Therapy Regimens (BINV-K).

kkAxilla may be restaged after preoperative systemic therapy; ALND should be performed if axilla is clinically positive; SLNB or ALND can be performed if axilla is

clinically negative (category 2B). Kuehn T, Bauerfeind I, Fehm 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 2013;14(7):609-18. Epub 2013/05/21. Boughey JC, Suman VJ, Mittendorf EA, et

al. Sentinel lymph node surgery after neoadjuvant chemotherapy in patients with node-positive breast cancer: the ACOSOG Z1071 (Alliance) clinical trial. JAMA

2013;310(14):1455-61. Epub 2013/10/09.

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Invasive Breast Cancer

NCCN Guidelines Index

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

Version 2.2016 05/06/16 © National Comprehensive Cancer Network, Inc. 2016, All rights reserved. The NCCN Guidelines® and this illustration may not be reproduced in any form without the express written permission of NCCN®.

Note: All recommendations are category 2A unless otherwise indicated.

Clinical Trials: NCCN believes that the best management of any cancer patient is in a clinical trial. Participation in clinical trials is especially encouraged.

BINV-14

CLINICAL STAGE WORKUP

aThe panel endorses the College of American Pathologists Protocol for pathology reporting

for all invasive and noninvasive carcinomas of the breast. http://www.cap.org.

bSee Principles of HER2 Testing (BINV-A).

cSee NCCN Guidelines for Genetic/Familial High-Risk Assessment: Breast and Ovarian.

dSee Principles of Dedicated Breast MRI Testing (BINV-B).

eSee Fertility and Birth Control (BINV-C).

fSee NCCN Guidelines for Distress Management.

hIf FDG PET/CT is performed and clearly indicates bone metastasis, on both the PET

and CT component, bone scan or sodium fluoride PET/CT may not be needed.

iFDG PET/CT can be performed at the same time as diagnostic CT. The use of

PET or PET/CT scanning is not indicated in the staging of clinical stage I, II,

or operable III breast cancer. FDG PET/CT is most helpful in situations where

standard staging studies are equivocal or suspicious, especially in the setting

of locally advanced or metastatic disease.

jFDG PET/CT may also be helpful in identifying unsuspected regional nodal

disease and/or distant metastases in locally advanced breast cancer when

used in addition to standard staging studies.

Stage IIIA

T0, N2, M0

T1, N2, M0

T2, N2, M0

T3, N2, M0

Stage IIIA patients

with T3, N1, M0

disease, see BINV-1

Stage IIIB

T4, N0, M0

T4, N1, M0

T4, N2, M0

Stage lllC

Any T, N3, M0

See Preoperative

Systemic Therapy

For Inoperable or

Locally Advanced

Breast Cancer

(Non-Inammatory)

(BINV-15)

• History and physical exam

• Diagnostic bilateral mammogram; ultrasound as necessary

• Pathology reviewa

• Determination of tumor ER/PR status and HER2 statusb

• Genetic counseling if patient is high risk for hereditary breast cancerc

• Breast MRId (optional), with special consideration for mammographically occult tumors

• Fertility counseling if premenopausale

• Assess for distressf

Additional studies consider:

• CBC

• Liver function tests and alkaline phosphatase

• Chest diagnostic CT

• Abdominal ± pelvic diagnostic CT or MRI

• Bone scan or sodium uoride PET/CTh (category 2B)

• FDG PET/CTi,j (optional, category 2B)

PREOPERATIVE SYSTEMIC THERAPY FOR INOPERABLE OR LOCALLY ADVANCED BREAST CANCER (NON-INFLAMMATORY): WORKUP

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Invasive Breast Cancer

NCCN Guidelines Index

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

Version 2.2016 05/06/16 © National Comprehensive Cancer Network, Inc. 2016, All rights reserved. The NCCN Guidelines® and this illustration may not be reproduced in any form without the express written permission of NCCN®.

Note: All recommendations are category 2A unless otherwise indicated.

Clinical Trials: NCCN believes that the best management of any cancer patient is in a clinical trial. Participation in clinical trials is especially encouraged.

BINV-15

LOCOREGIONAL TREATMENT ADJUVANT TREATMENT

Total mastectomy + level l/ll axillary

dissection + radiation therapyr to chest

wall, infraclavicular region,

supraclavicular area, internal mammary

nodes, and any part of the axillary bed at

risk ±

breast reconstructionp

Lumpectomyll + level l/ll

axillary dissection + radiation therapyr

to whole breast with or without boost

to tumor bed, infraclavicular region,

supraclavicular area, internal mammary

nodes, and any part of the axillary bed at

risk.

Responsejj

No responsejj

Consider additional systemic

chemotherapy and/or preoperative

radiation

• Complete planned

chemotherapy regimen course

if not completed preoperatively

plus endocrine treatment if

ER-positive and/or PR-positive

(sequential chemotherapy

followed by endocrine therapy).

• Complete up to one year of

trastuzumab therapy if HER2-

positive (category 1). May be

administered concurrently with

radiation therapyr and with

endocrine therapy if indicated.

Responsejj - See above pathway

No responsejj Individualized

treatment

See

Surveillance/

Follow-up

(BINV-16)

PREOPERATIVE SYSTEMIC THERAPY FOR INOPERABLE OR LOCALLY ADVANCED BREAST CANCER (NON-INFLAMMATORY)

pSee Principles of Breast Reconstruction Following Surgery (BINV-H).

rSee Principles of Radiation Therapy (BINV-I).

iiSee Principles of Preoperative Systemic Therapy (BINV-L).

jjThe accurate assessment of in-breast tumor or regional lymph node response to preoperative systemic therapy is difficult, and should include physical examination and

performance of imaging studies (mammogram and/or breast MRI) that were abnormal at the time of initial tumor staging. Selection of imaging methods prior to surgery

should be determined by the multidisciplinary team.

llFor patients with skin and/or chest wall involvement (T4 non-inflammatory) prior to preoperative systemic therapy, breast conservation may be performed in carefully

selected patients based on a multidisciplinary assessment of local recurrence risk. In addition to standard contraindications to breast conservation (see BINV-G), exclusion

criteria for breast conservation include: inflammatory (T4d) disease before preoperative systemic therapy and incomplete resolution of skin involvement after preoperative

systemic therapy.

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Invasive Breast Cancer

Preoperative

systemic therapyii

NCCN Guidelines Index

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

Version 2.2016 05/06/16 © National Comprehensive Cancer Network, Inc. 2016, All rights reserved. The NCCN Guidelines® and this illustration may not be reproduced in any form without the express written permission of NCCN®.

Note: All recommendations are category 2A unless otherwise indicated.

Clinical Trials: NCCN believes that the best management of any cancer patient is in a clinical trial. Participation in clinical trials is especially encouraged.

BINV-16

mmStudies indicate that annual mammograms are the appropriate frequency for surveillance of breast cancer patients who have had breast-conserving surgery and

radiation therapy with no clear advantage to shorter interval imaging. Patients should wait 6 to 12 months after the completion of radiation therapy to begin their annual

mammogram surveillance. Suspicious findings on physical examination or surveillance imaging might warrant a shorter interval between mammograms.

nnThe use of estrogen, progesterone, or selective estrogen receptor modulators to treat osteoporosis or osteopenia in women with breast cancer is discouraged. The

use of a bisphosphonate or denosumab is acceptable to maintain or to improve bone mineral density. Optimal duration of either therapy has not been established.

Duration beyond 3 y is not known. Factors to consider for duration of anti-osteoporosis therapy include bone mineral density, response to therapy, and risk factors

for continued bone loss or fracture. Women treated with a bisphosphonate or denosumab should undergo a dental examination with preventive dentistry prior to the

initiation of therapy, and should take supplemental calcium and vitamin D.

SURVEILLANCE/FOLLOW-UP

• History and physical exam 1–4 times per year as clinically appropriate for 5 y, then annually

• Periodic screening for changes in family history and referral to genetic counseling as indicated

• Educate, monitor, and refer for lymphedema management

• Mammography every 12 momm

• Routine imaging of reconstructed breast is not indicated

• In the absence of clinical signs and symptoms suggestive of recurrent disease, there is no indication for

laboratory or imaging studies for metastases screening

• Women on tamoxifen: annual gynecologic assessment every 12 mo if uterus present

• Women on an aromatase inhibitor or who experience ovarian failure secondary to treatment should have

monitoring of bone health with a bone mineral density determination at baseline and periodically thereafternn

• Assess and encourage adherence to adjuvant endocrine therapy

• Evidence suggests that active lifestyle, healthy diet, limited alcohol intake, and achieving and maintaining an

ideal body weight (20–25 BMI) may lead to optimal breast cancer outcomes

• See NCCN Guidelines for Survivorship

See Recurrent

Disease

(BINV-17)

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Invasive Breast Cancer

NCCN Guidelines Index

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

Version 2.2016 05/06/16 © National Comprehensive Cancer Network, Inc. 2016, All rights reserved. The NCCN Guidelines® and this illustration may not be reproduced in any form without the express written permission of NCCN®.

Note: All recommendations are category 2A unless otherwise indicated.

Clinical Trials: NCCN believes that the best management of any cancer patient is in a clinical trial. Participation in clinical trials is especially encouraged.

BINV-17

bSee Principles of HER2 Testing (BINV-A).

cSee NCCN Guidelines for Genetic/Familial High-Risk Assessment: Breast and Ovarian.

hIf FDG PET/CT is performed and clearly indicates bone metastasis, on both the PET and CT component, bone scan or sodium fluoride PET/CT may not be needed.

jFDG PET/CT may also be helpful in identifying unsuspected regional nodal disease and/or distant metastases in locally advanced breast cancer when used in addition

to standard staging studies.

ooFDG PET/CT can be performed at the same time as diagnostic CT. FDG PET/CT is most helpful in situations where standard staging studies are equivocal or

suspicious, especially in the setting of locally advanced or metastatic disease.

ppFalse-negative ER and/or PR determinations occur, and there may be discordance between the ER and/or PR determination between the primary and metastatic

tumor(s). Therefore, endocrine therapy may be considered in patients with non-visceral or asymptomatic visceral tumors, especially in patients with clinical

characteristics predicting for a hormone receptor-positive tumor (eg, long disease-free interval, limited sites of recurrence, indolent disease, older age).

qqIn clinical situations where a biopsy cannot safely be obtained but the clinical evidence is strongly supportive of recurrence, treatment may commence based on the

ER/PR/HER2 status of the primary tumor.

RECURRENT/STAGE IV DISEASE

CLINICAL STAGE WORKUP

Recurrent or

Stage IV disease

• History and physical exam

• CBC

• Liver function tests and alkaline phosphatase

• Chest diagnostic CT

• Abdominal ± pelvic diagnostic CT or MRI

• Brain MRI if suspicious CNS symptoms

• Bone scan or sodium uoride PET/CTh (category 2B)

• FDG PET/CTj,oo (optional, category 2B)

• X-rays of symptomatic bones and long and weight-bearing bones

abnormal on bone scan

• First recurrence of disease should be biopsied

• Determination of tumor ER/PR and HER2 status on metastatic siteb,pp,qq

• Genetic counseling if patient is high risk for hereditary breast cancerc

See Treatment

of Recurrence (BINV-18)

See Treatment of

Stage IV Disease

(BINV-19)

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Invasive Breast Cancer

NCCN Guidelines Index

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

Version 2.2016 05/06/16 © National Comprehensive Cancer Network, Inc. 2016, All rights reserved. The NCCN Guidelines® and this illustration may not be reproduced in any form without the express written permission of NCCN®.

Note: All recommendations are category 2A unless otherwise indicated.

Clinical Trials: NCCN believes that the best management of any cancer patient is in a clinical trial. Participation in clinical trials is especially encouraged.

BINV-18

rSee Principles of Radiation Therapy (BINV-I).

rrMultidisciplinary approach is especially important in the management of breast cancer recurrence to consider all potential treatment options for optimal outcomes.

ssIn women with a local breast recurrence after breast-conserving surgery who had a prior sentinel node biopsy (SNB), a repeat SNB may be technically possible. The

accuracy of repeat SNB is unproven, and the prognostic significance of repeat SNB after mastectomy is unknown and its use is discouraged.

ttIf not technically resectable, consider systemic therapy to best response, then resect if possible.

uuThe decision to use radiation therapy to treat locoregional recurrence must factor in any prior radiation to the area and the risk of late normal tissue toxicity from the sum of

the prior and planned radiation courses.

vvFor additional information see the Discussion section.

TREATMENT OF RECURRENCE

Local only

recurrencerr

Regional only

Local and

regional

recurrencerr

Initial treatment with lumpectomy

+ radiation therapy

Initial treatment with mastectomy + level l/ll

axillary dissection and prior radiation therapy

Initial treatment with mastectomy

and no prior radiation therapy

Axillary recurrence

Supraclavicular recurrence

Internal mammary node recurrence

Total mastectomy

+ axillary lymph node staging if level l/ll

axillary dissection not previously doness

Surgical resection if possiblett

Surgical resection if possiblett +

radiation therapyr

Surgical resection if possiblett

+ radiation therapy if possibler,uu

Radiation therapy if possibler,uu

Consider systemic

therapyvv

See

Adjuvant Endocrine

Therapy (BINV-J)

Preoperative/Adjuvant

Chemotherapy (BINV-K)

Endocrine Therapy for

Recurrent or Stage IV

Disease (BINV-N)

Chemotherapy

Regimens for Recurrent

or Metastatic Breast

Cancer (BINV-O)

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Invasive Breast Cancer

NCCN Guidelines Index

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

Version 2.2016 05/06/16 © National Comprehensive Cancer Network, Inc. 2016, All rights reserved. The NCCN Guidelines® and this illustration may not be reproduced in any form without the express written permission of NCCN®.

Note: All recommendations are category 2A unless otherwise indicated.

Clinical Trials: NCCN believes that the best management of any cancer patient is in a clinical trial. Participation in clinical trials is especially encouraged.

Systemic

disease or

de novo

stage IVww

Bone disease present

Bone disease not present

Add denosumab,

zoledronic acid, or

pamidronatxx ER and/or PR positive; HER2 negativeb

ER and/or PR positive; HER2 positiveb

ER and PR negative, or ER and/or PR positive

and endocrine refractory; HER2 negativeb

ER/PR negative or ER and/or PR positive

and endocrine refractory; HER2 positiveb

See BINV-20

See BINV-21

See BINV-22

TREATMENT OF STAGE IV DISEASE

bSee Principles of HER2 Testing (BINV-A).

wwThe role and timing of surgical removal of the primary in patients presenting with de novo stage IV disease is the subject of ongoing investigations.

xxDenosumab, zoledronic acid, or pamidronate (all with calcium and vitamin D supplementation) should be given (category 1) in addition to chemotherapy or endocrine

therapy if bone metastasis is present, expected survival is ≥3 months, and renal function is adequate. Patients should undergo a dental examination with preventive

dentistry prior to initiation of this therapy. The optimal schedule for zoledronic acid is monthly x 12, then quarterly.

BINV-19

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Invasive Breast Cancer

NCCN Guidelines Index

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

Version 2.2016 05/03/16© National Comprehensive Cancer Network, Inc. 2016, All rights reserved. The NCCN Guidelines® and this illustration may not be reproduced in any form without the express written permission of NCCN®.

Note: All recommendations are category 2A unless otherwise indicated.

Clinical Trials: NCCN believes that the best management of any cancer patient is in a clinical trial. Participation in clinical trials is especially encouraged.

BINV-20

bSee Principles of HER2 Testing (BINV-A).

yySee Definition of Menopause (BINV-M).

zzLimited studies document a progression-free survival advantage of adding

trastuzumab or lapatinib to aromatase inhibition in postmenopausal patients with

ER-positive, HER2-positive disease. However, no overall survival advantage has

been demonstrated.

aaaSee Endocrine Therapy for Recurrent or Stage IV Disease (BINV-N).

bbbIt is unclear that women presenting at time of initial diagnosis with metastatic

disease will benefit from the performance of palliative local breast surgery and/or

radiation therapy. Generally this palliative local therapy should be considered only

after response to initial systemic therapy.

cccSee Chemotherapy Regimens for Recurrent or Metastatic Breast Cancer (BINV-O).

dddA single study (S0226) in women with hormone receptor-positive breast

cancer and no prior chemotherapy, biological therapy, or endocrine therapy for

metastatic disease demonstrated that the addition of fulvestrant to anastrozole

resulted in prolongation of time to progression. Subset analysis suggested

that patients without prior adjuvant tamoxifen and more than 10 years since

diagnosis experienced the greatest benefit. Two studies with similar design

(FACT and SOFEA) demonstrated no advantage in time to progression with

the addition of fulvestrant to anastrozole.

SYSTEMIC TREATMENT OF RECURRENT OR STAGE IV DISEASE

ER and/or PR POSITIVE; HER2 NEGATIVE OR POSITIVE

ER and/or PR positive;

HER2 negativeb

ER and/or PR positive;

HER2 positiveb,zz

Prior endocrine

therapy within 1 y

No prior endocrine

therapy within 1 y

Premenopausalyy

Postmenopausalyy,zz

Visceral crisis

Premenopausalyy

Postmenopausalyy,zz

Visceral crisis

Ovarian ablation or suppression,

plus endocrine therapy as for

postmenopausal womenaaa,bbb

Consider initial chemotherapyccc

(See BINV-21 and BINV-22)

Ovarian ablation or suppression,

plus endocrine therapy as for

postmenopausal womenaaa,bbb

Selective ER modulatorsaaa,bbb

Aromatase inhibitoraaa,bbb,ddd

Selective ER modulators or selective

ER down-regulatoraaa

Consider initial chemotherapyccc

(See BINV-21 and BINV-22)

See Follow-up

Therapy For

Endocrine

Treatment of

Recurrent/Stage IV

Disease (BINV-23)

See Follow-up

Therapy For

Endocrine

Treatment of

Recurrent/Stage IV

Disease (BINV-23)

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Invasive Breast Cancer

NCCN Guidelines Index

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

Version 2.2016 05/06/16 © National Comprehensive Cancer Network, Inc. 2016, All rights reserved. The NCCN Guidelines® and this illustration may not be reproduced in any form without the express written permission of NCCN®.

Note: All recommendations are category 2A unless otherwise indicated.

Clinical Trials: NCCN believes that the best management of any cancer patient is in a clinical trial. Participation in clinical trials is especially encouraged.

BINV-21

bSee Principles of HER2 Testing (BINV-A).

ppFalse-negative ER and/or PR determinations occur, and there may be discordance between the ER and/or PR determination between the primary and metastatic

tumor(s). Therefore, endocrine therapy may be considered in patients with non-visceral or asymptomatic visceral tumors, especially in patients with clinical characteristics

predicting for a hormone receptor-positive tumor (eg, long disease-free interval, limited sites of recurrence, indolent disease, older age).

aaaSee Endocrine Therapy for Recurrent or Stage IV Disease (BINV-N).

cccSee Chemotherapy Regimens for Recurrent or Metastatic Breast Cancer (BINV-O).

eeeSee Principles of Monitoring Metastatic Disease (BINV-P).

SYSTEMIC TREATMENT OF RECURRENT OR STAGE IV DISEASE

ER and PR NEGATIVE; or ER and/or PR POSITIVE and ENDOCRINE REFRACTORY; HER2 NEGATIVE

ER and PR

negative; or ER

and/or PR

positive and

endocrine

refractory; and

HER2 negativeb

Bone or soft

tissue only

Asymptomatic

visceral

Yes

Consider additional line

of endocrine therapy, if

not endocrine

refractorypp,aaa,eee

Chemotherapyccc,eee

No benet after 3

sequential lines of

chemotherapy

ECOG performance

status ≥3

Consider no further

cytotoxic therapy; transition

to palliative care

See NCCN Guidelines for

Palliative Care

and NCCN Guidelines for

Supportive Care

See Endocrine

Therapy (BINV-20)

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Invasive Breast Cancer

NCCN Guidelines Index

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

Version 2.2016 05/06/16 © National Comprehensive Cancer Network, Inc. 2016, All rights reserved. The NCCN Guidelines® and this illustration may not be reproduced in any form without the express written permission of NCCN®.

Note: All recommendations are category 2A unless otherwise indicated.

Clinical Trials: NCCN believes that the best management of any cancer patient is in a clinical trial. Participation in clinical trials is especially encouraged.

BINV-22

SYSTEMIC TREATMENT OF RECURRENT OR STAGE IV DISEASE

ER and PR NEGATIVE; or ER and/or PR POSITIVE and ENDOCRINE REFRACTORY; and HER2 POSITIVE

ER and PR

negative; or ER

and/or PR

positive and

endocrine

refractory; and

HER2 positiveb

Bone or soft

tissue only

Asymptomatic

visceral

Yes

Consider endocrine

therapy, if not endocrine

refractorypp,aaa,eee

± HER2-targeted chemotherapy

Pertuzumab +

trastuzumab + taxane

(preferred)ccc,eee

Ado-trastuzumab emtansine

(T-DM1) ccc,eee

Trastuzumab +

chemotherapy ccc,eee,ggg

See Endocrine Therapy (BINV-20)

HER2-targeted

therapyccc,fff,ggg,hhh

No benet after

3 sequential

lines of targeted

therapy

ECOG

performance

status ≥3

Consider no

further

cytotoxic

therapy;

transition to

palliative care

(See NCCN

Guidelines for

Palliative Care)

bSee Principles of HER2 Testing (BINV-A).

ppFalse-negative ER and/or PR determinations occur, and there may be discordance between the ER and/or PR determination between the primary and metastatic

tumor(s). Therefore, endocrine therapy with its low attendant toxicity may be considered in patients with non-visceral or asymptomatic visceral tumors, especially in

patients with clinical characteristics predicting for a hormone receptor-positive tumor (eg, long disease-free interval, limited sites of recurrence, indolent disease, older

age).

aaaSee Endocrine Therapy for Recurrent or Stage IV Disease (BINV-N).

cccSee Chemotherapy Regimens for Recurrent or Metastatic Breast Cancer (BINV-O).

eeeSee Principles of Monitoring Metastatic Disease (BINV-P).

fffContinue HER2-targeted therapy following progression on first-line HER2-targeted chemotherapy for metastatic breast cancer. The optimal duration of trastuzumab in

patients with long-term control of disease is unknown.

gggTrastuzumab given in combination with an anthracycline is associated with significant cardiac toxicity. Concurrent use of trastuzumab and pertuzumab with an

anthracycline should be avoided.

hhhPatients previously treated with chemotherapy plus trastuzumab in the absence of pertuzumab may be considered for one line of therapy including both trastuzumab

plus pertuzumab in combination with or without cytotoxic therapy (such as vinorelbine or taxane). Further research is needed to determine the ideal sequencing

strategy for anti-HER2 therapy.

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Invasive Breast Cancer

NCCN Guidelines Index

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

Version 2.2016 05/06/16 © National Comprehensive Cancer Network, Inc. 2016, All rights reserved. The NCCN Guidelines® and this illustration may not be reproduced in any form without the express written permission of NCCN®.

Note: All recommendations are category 2A unless otherwise indicated.

Clinical Trials: NCCN believes that the best management of any cancer patient is in a clinical trial. Participation in clinical trials is especially encouraged.

BINV-23

aaaSee Endocrine Therapy for Recurrent or Stage IV Disease (BINV-N).

cccSee Chemotherapy Regimens for Recurrent or Metastatic Breast Cancer (BINV-O).

eeeSee Principles of Monitoring Metastatic Disease (BINV-P).

FOLLOW-UP THERAPY FOR ENDOCRINE TREATMENT OF RECURRENT OR STAGE IV DISEASE

Continue endocrine

therapy until

progressionfff or

unacceptable toxicity

Progressionfff

No clinical benet after 3

sequential endocrine

therapy regimens

Symptomatic visceral

disease

Yes

Chemotherapyddd

New line of endocrine

therapybbb

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Invasive Breast Cancer

NCCN Guidelines Index

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

Version 2.2016 05/06/16 © National Comprehensive Cancer Network, Inc. 2016, All rights reserved. The NCCN Guidelines® and this illustration may not be reproduced in any form without the express written permission of NCCN®.

Note: All recommendations are category 2A unless otherwise indicated.

Clinical Trials: NCCN believes that the best management of any cancer patient is in a clinical trial. Participation in clinical trials is especially encouraged.

BINV-A

PRINCIPLES OF HER2 TESTING1,2

1NCCN Endorses the ASCO/CAP HER2 testing guideline. “Principles of HER2 Testing” modified with permission from Wolff AC, Hammond EH, Hicks DG, et al. Recommendations for

human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 testing in breast cancer: American Society of Clinical Oncology/College of American Pathologists Clinical Practice Guideline Update.

J Clin Oncol 2013;31:3997-4013.For additional information, see http://jco.ascopubs.org/content/31/31/3997.full.pdf.

2Laboratory must participate in a quality assurance accreditation program for HER2 testing. Otherwise, tissue specimen should be sent to an accredited laboratory for testing. Health care

systems and providers must cooperate to ensure the highest quality testing.

3Evidence from trastuzumab adjuvant trials show that HER2 testing by ISH or IHC have similar utility to predict clinical benefit from HER2-targeted therapy.

4See ASCO/CAP HER2 Guideline Data Supplement 2E (available at http://www.asco.org/sites/www.asco.org/files/final_her2_testing_ds_10-3-13.pdf) for more information on these rare scenarios.

HER2 testing by

validated IHC assay2,3

HER2 testing by validated

single-probe ISH assay2,3

HER2 testing by

validated dual-probe

ISH assay2,3

HER2/CEP17

ratio ≥2.0

HER2/CEP17

ratio <2.0

IHC 0,1+

IHC 2+

IHC 3+

Average HER2 copy

number <4.0 signals/cell

Average HER2 copy number

≥4.0 and <6.0 signals/cell

Average HER2 copy

number ≥6.0 signals/cell

Average HER2 copy

number <4.0 signals/cell

Average HER2 copy

number ≥4.0 signals/cell

Average HER2 copy

number <4.0 signals/cell

Average HER2 copy number

≥4.0 and <6.0 signals/cell

Average HER2 copy

number ≥6.0 signals/cell

HER2 (-)

Equivocal

result

HER2 (+)

Must reex test with ISH (if same

specimen), or order new test

with IHC or ISH (if new specimen

available).

ISH (-)

Equivocal

result

ISH (+)

ISH (+)4

ISH (+)

ISH (-)

Equivocal

result

ISH (+)

Must reex test with IHC (if same

specimen), test with alternative

ISH chromosome 17 probe, or

order a new test with ISH or IHC

(if new specimen available).

Must reex test with dual-probe

ISH or with IHC (if same specimen),

or order new test with ISH or IHC

(if new specimen available).

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Invasive Breast Cancer

NCCN Guidelines Index

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

Version 2.2016 05/06/16 © National Comprehensive Cancer Network, Inc. 2016, All rights reserved. The NCCN Guidelines® and this illustration may not be reproduced in any form without the express written permission of NCCN®.

Note: All recommendations are category 2A unless otherwise indicated.

Clinical Trials: NCCN believes that the best management of any cancer patient is in a clinical trial. Participation in clinical trials is especially encouraged.

BINV-B

1Houssami N, Ciatto S, Macaskill P, et al. Accuracy and surgical impact of magnetic resonance imaging in breast cancer staging: systematic review and meta-analysis in

detection of multifocal and multicentric cancer. J Clin Oncol 2008;26:3248-3258.

PRINCIPLES OF DEDICATED BREAST MRI TESTING

See NCCN Guidelines for Breast Cancer Screening and Diagnosis for indications for screening MRI in women at increased breast cancer risk.

Personnel, Facility, and Equipment

• Breast MRI examinations are performed with IV contrast and should be performed and interpreted by an expert breast imaging team working

in concert with the multidisciplinary treatment team.

• Breast MRI examinations require a dedicated breast coil and breast imaging radiologists familiar with the optimal timing sequences and

other technical details for image interpretation. The imaging center should have the ability to perform MRI-guided needle sampling and/or

image-guided localization of MRI-detected ndings.

Clinical Indications and Applications

• May be used for staging evaluation to dene extent of cancer or presence of multifocal or multicentric cancer in the ipsilateral breast, or as

screening of the contralateral breast cancer at time of initial diagnosis (category 2B). There are no high-level data to demonstrate that the

use of MRI to facilitate local therapy decision-making improves local recurrence or survival.1

• May be helpful for breast cancer evaluation before and after preoperative systemic therapy to dene extent of disease, response to

treatment, and potential for breast-conserving therapy.

• May be useful for identifying primary cancer in women with axillary nodal adenocarcinoma or with Paget’s disease of the nipple with breast

primary not identied on mammography, ultrasound, or physical examination.

• False-positive ndings on breast MRI are common. Surgical decisions should not be based solely on the MRI ndings. Additional tissue

sampling of areas of concern identied by breast MRI is recommended.

• The utility of MRI in follow-up screening of women with prior breast cancer is undened. It should generally be considered only in those

whose lifetime risk of a second primary breast cancer is greater than 20% based on models largely dependent on family history, such as in

those with the risk associated with inherited susceptibility to breast cancer.

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Invasive Breast Cancer

NCCN Guidelines Index

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

Version 2.2016 05/06/16 © National Comprehensive Cancer Network, Inc. 2016, All rights reserved. The NCCN Guidelines® and this illustration may not be reproduced in any form without the express written permission of NCCN®.

Note: All recommendations are category 2A unless otherwise indicated.

Clinical Trials: NCCN believes that the best management of any cancer patient is in a clinical trial. Participation in clinical trials is especially encouraged.

BINV-C

FERTILITY AND BIRTH CONTROL

See NCCN Guidelines for Adolescent and Young Adult Oncology

• All premenopausal patients should be informed about the potential impact of chemotherapy on fertility and asked about their desire for

potential future pregnancies. Patients who may desire future pregnancies should be referred to fertility specialists before chemotherapy and/

or endocrine therapy to discuss the options based on patient specics, disease stage, and biology (which determine the urgency and type

and sequence of treatment). Timing and duration allowed for fertility preservation, options inclusive of oocyte and embryo cryopreservation

as well as evolving technologies, and the probability of successful pregnancies subsequent to completion of breast cancer therapy are also

to be discussed.

• Although amenorrhea frequently occurs during or after chemotherapy, it appears that the majority of women younger than 35 y resume

menses within 2 y of nishing adjuvant chemotherapy.

• Menses and fertility are not necessarily linked. Absence of regular menses, particularly if the patient is taking tamoxifen, does not

necessarily imply lack of fertility. Conversely, the presence of menses does not guarantee fertility. There are limited data regarding continued

fertility after chemotherapy.

• Patients should not become pregnant during treatment with radiation therapy, chemotherapy, or endocrine therapy.

• Although data are limited, hormone-based birth control is discouraged regardless of the hormone receptor status of the patient's cancer.

• Alternative methods of birth control include intrauterine devices (IUDs), barrier methods, or, for patients with no intent of future pregnancies,

tubal ligation or vasectomy for the partner.

• Randomized trials have shown that ovarian suppression with GnRH agonist therapy administered during adjuvant chemotherapy in

premenopausal women with ER-negative tumors may preserve ovarian function and diminish the likelihood of chemotherapy-induced

amenorrhea.

• Breast feeding following breast-conserving cancer treatment is not contraindicated. However, the quantity and quality of breast milk

produced by the breast conserved may not be sufcient or may be lacking some of the nutrients needed. Breast feeding during active

treatment with chemotherapy and endocrine therapy is not recommended.

• Smaller historical experiences in patients with ER-positive disease have reported conicting results with regard to the protective effect of

GnRH agonist therapy on fertility.

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Invasive Breast Cancer

NCCN Guidelines Index

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

Version 2.2016 05/06/16 © National Comprehensive Cancer Network, Inc. 2016, All rights reserved. The NCCN Guidelines® and this illustration may not be reproduced in any form without the express written permission of NCCN®.

Note: All recommendations are category 2A unless otherwise indicated.

Clinical Trials: NCCN believes that the best management of any cancer patient is in a clinical trial. Participation in clinical trials is especially encouraged.

BINV-D

1Consider pathologic confirmation of malignancy in clinically positive nodes using ultrasound-guided FNA or core biopsy in determining if a patient needs axillary lymph

node dissection.

2Sentinel lymph node mapping injections may be peritumoral, subareolar, or subdermal.

3Sentinel node involvement is defined by multilevel node sectioning with hematoxylin and eosin (H&E) staining. Cytokeratin immunohistochemistry (IHC) may be used

for equivocal cases on H&E. Routine cytokeratin IHC to define node involvement is not recommended in clinical decision making.

4For patients with clinically negative axillae who are undergoing mastectomy and for whom radiation therapy is planned, axillary radiation may replace axillary dissection

level I/II for regional control of disease.

SURGICAL AXILLARY STAGING - STAGE I, IIA, IIB and lllA T3, N1, M0

Clinical

Stage I, IIA,

IIB and lllA

T3, N1, M0

Clinically node

positive at time

of diagnosis1

Clinically node

negative at time

of diagnosis

Sentinel node

mapping and

excision2,3

Sentinel node

negative3

Sentinel node

positive3

Sentinel node

not identied

Axillary dissection level I/II

See Axillary Lymph Node Staging (BINV-E)

No further axillary surgery (category 1)

Meets ALL of the following criteria:

• T1 or T2 tumor

• 1 or 2 positive sentinel lymph nodes

• Breast-conserving therapy

• Whole-breast RT planned

• No preoperative chemotherapy

Axillary dissection

level I/II4

See Axillary Lymph

Node

Staging (BINV-E)

Yes to all

No further axillary

surgery

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Invasive Breast Cancer

FNA or core

biopsy positive

FNA or core

biopsy negative

NCCN Guidelines Index

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

Version 2.2016 05/06/16 © National Comprehensive Cancer Network, Inc. 2016, All rights reserved. The NCCN Guidelines® and this illustration may not be reproduced in any form without the express written permission of NCCN®.

Note: All recommendations are category 2A unless otherwise indicated.

Clinical Trials: NCCN believes that the best management of any cancer patient is in a clinical trial. Participation in clinical trials is especially encouraged.

BINV-E

AXILLARY LYMPH NODE STAGING

SLNB should be performed and is the preferred method of axillary lymph node staging if the patient is an appropriate SLNB candidate

(See BINV-D).

In the absence of denitive data demonstrating superior survival, the performance of axillary staging may be considered optional

in patients who have particularly favorable tumors, patients for whom the selection of adjuvant systemic and/or radiation therapy is

unlikely to be affected, the elderly, or those with serious comorbid conditions.

Level III dissection to the thoracic inlet should be performed only in cases with gross disease in level II and/or lll.

In the absence of gross disease in level II nodes, lymph node dissection should include tissue inferior to the axillary vein from the

latissimus dorsi muscle laterally to the medial border of the pectoralis minor muscle (Level I/II).

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Invasive Breast Cancer

NCCN Guidelines Index

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

Version 2.2016 05/06/16 © National Comprehensive Cancer Network, Inc. 2016, All rights reserved. The NCCN Guidelines® and this illustration may not be reproduced in any form without the express written permission of NCCN®.

Note: All recommendations are category 2A unless otherwise indicated.

Clinical Trials: NCCN believes that the best management of any cancer patient is in a clinical trial. Participation in clinical trials is especially encouraged.

BINV-F

MARGIN STATUS IN INFILTRATING CARCINOMA

The use of breast-conserving therapy is predicated on achieving a pathologically negative margin of resection. The NCCN Panel accepts the

denition of a negative margin as "No ink on the tumor," from the 2014 Society of Surgical Oncology-American Society for Radiation Oncology

Consensus Guidelines on Margins.1 Cases where there is a positive margin should generally undergo further surgery, either a re-excision to

achieve a negative margin or a mastectomy. If re-excision is technically feasible to allow for breast-conserving therapy, this can be done with

resection of the involved margin guided by the orientation of the initial resection specimen or re-excision of the entire original excision cavity.

It may be reasonable to treat selected cases with breast-conserving therapy with a microscopically focally positive margin in the absence of an

extensive intraductal component (EIC).2 For these patients, the use of a higher radiation boost dose to the tumor bed should be considered.

A boost to the tumor bed is recommended in patients at higher risk for recurrence. Typical doses are 10–16 Gy at 2 Gy/fx.

Margins should be evaluated on all surgical specimens from breast-conserving surgery. Requirements for optimal margin evaluation include:

• Orientation of the surgical specimens

• Description of the gross and microscopic margin status

• Reporting of the distance, orientation, and type of tumor (invasive or DCIS) in relation to the closest margin

1Moran MS, Schnitt SJ, Giuliano AE, 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. J Clin Oncol. 2014 May 10;32(14):1507-15.

2An extensive intraductal component is defined as an infiltrating ductal cancer where greater than 25% of the tumor volume is DCIS and DCIS extends beyond the

invasive cancer into surrounding normal breast parenchyma.

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Invasive Breast Cancer

NCCN Guidelines Index

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

Version 2.2016 05/06/16 © National Comprehensive Cancer Network, Inc. 2016, All rights reserved. The NCCN Guidelines® and this illustration may not be reproduced in any form without the express written permission of NCCN®.

Note: All recommendations are category 2A unless otherwise indicated.

Clinical Trials: NCCN believes that the best management of any cancer patient is in a clinical trial. Participation in clinical trials is especially encouraged.

BINV-G

1See Margin Status in Infiltrating Carcinoma (BINV-F).

SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS TO BREAST-CONSERVING THERAPY REQUIRING RADIATION THERAPY

Contraindications for breast-conserving therapy requiring radiation therapy include:

Absolute:

• Radiation therapy during pregnancy

• Diffuse suspicious or malignant-appearing microcalcications

• Widespread disease that cannot be incorporated by local excision through a single incision that achieves negative margins with a

satisfactory cosmetic result

• Diffusely positive pathologic margins1

Relative:

• Prior radiation therapy to the chest wall or breast; knowledge of doses and volumes prescribed is essential.

• Active connective tissue disease involving the skin (especially scleroderma and lupus)

• Tumors >5 cm (category 2B)

• Positive pathologic margin1

• Women with a known or suspected genetic predisposition to breast cancer:

May have an increased risk of ipsilateral breast recurrence or contralateral breast cancer with breast-conserving therapy

Prophylactic bilateral mastectomy for risk reduction may be considered.

(See NCCN Guidelines for Genetic/Familial High-Risk Assessment Breast and Ovarian).

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Invasive Breast Cancer

NCCN Guidelines Index

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

Version 2.2016 05/06/16 © National Comprehensive Cancer Network, Inc. 2016, All rights reserved. The NCCN Guidelines® and this illustration may not be reproduced in any form without the express written permission of NCCN®.

Note: All recommendations are category 2A unless otherwise indicated.

Clinical Trials: NCCN believes that the best management of any cancer patient is in a clinical trial. Participation in clinical trials is especially encouraged. BINV-H

(1 OF 2)

PRINCIPLES OF BREAST RECONSTRUCTION FOLLOWING SURGERY

• Breast reconstruction may be an option for any woman receiving surgical treatment for breast cancer. All women undergoing breast cancer treatment

should be educated about breast reconstructive options as adapted to their individual clinical situation. However, breast reconstruction should not

interfere with the appropriate surgical management of the cancer or the scope of appropriate surgical treatment for this disease. Coordinating consultation

and surgical treatment with a reconstructive surgeon should be executed within a reasonable time frame. The process of breast reconstruction should not

govern the timing or the scope of appropriate surgical treatment for this disease. The availability of or the practicality of breast reconstruction should not

result in the delay or refusal of appropriate surgical intervention.

• An evaluation of the likely cosmetic outcome of lumpectomy should be performed prior to surgery. Oncoplastic techniques for breast conservation can

extend breast-conserving surgical options in situations where the resection by itself would likely yield an unacceptable cosmetic outcome. Application of

these procedures may reduce the need for mastectomy and reduce the chances of secondary surgery for re-excision while minimizing breast deformity.

Patients should be informed of the possibility of positive margins and potential need for secondary surgery, which could include re-excision segmental

resection, or could require mastectomy with or without loss of the nipple. Oncoplastic procedures can be combined with surgery on the contralateral

unaffected breast to minimize long-term asymmetry.

• For mastectomy, the possibility of reconstruction should be discussed and a preoperative evaluation of reconstructive options should be considered.

Surgical options for breast reconstruction following mastectomy include:

Procedures that incorporate breast implants (ie, tissue expander placement followed by implant placement, immediate implant placement)

Procedures that incorporate autologous tissue transplantation (ie, pedicled TRAM ap, fat grafting, various microsurgical aps from the abdomen, back,

buttocks, and thigh)

Procedures that incorporate both breast implants and autologous tissue transplantation (eg, latissimus dorsi aps)

• Breast reconstruction following mastectomy can commence at the same time as mastectomy (“immediate”) or at some time following the completion of

cancer treatment (“delayed”). In many cases, breast reconstruction involves a staged approach requiring more than one procedure such as:

Surgery on the contralateral breast to improve symmetry

Revision surgery involving the breast and/or donor site

Nipple and areola reconstruction and tattoo pigmentation

• As with any mastectomy, there is a risk of local and regional cancer recurrence, and evidence suggests skin-sparing mastectomy is probably equivalent to

standard mastectomy in this regard. Skin-sparing mastectomy should be performed by an experienced breast surgery team that works in a coordinated,

multidisciplinary fashion to guide proper patient selection for skin-sparing mastectomy, determine optimal sequencing of the reconstructive procedure(s)

in relation to adjuvant therapies, and perform a resection that achieves appropriate surgical margins. Post-mastectomy radiation should still be applied in

cases treated by skin-sparing mastectomy following the same selection criteria as for standard mastectomy.

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Invasive Breast Cancer

NCCN Guidelines Index

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

Version 2.2016 05/06/16 © National Comprehensive Cancer Network, Inc. 2016, All rights reserved. The NCCN Guidelines® and this illustration may not be reproduced in any form without the express written permission of NCCN®.

Note: All recommendations are category 2A unless otherwise indicated.

Clinical Trials: NCCN believes that the best management of any cancer patient is in a clinical trial. Participation in clinical trials is especially encouraged. BINV-H

(2 OF 2)

PRINCIPLES OF BREAST RECONSTRUCTION FOLLOWING SURGERY

• Immediate reconstruction is contraindicated in the setting of mastectomy for inammatory breast cancer (IBC) due to the high risk of recurrence,

aggressive nature of the disease, and consequent need to proceed expeditiously to postoperative radiotherapy for local control without any potential

delay. As skin-sparing mastectomy has not yet been demonstrated to be safe for IBC there is also a need to resect currently or previously involved skin at

the time of mastectomy. Thus, there is no advantage to immediate reconstruction in this setting.

• In general, the nipple-areolar complex (NAC) is sacriced with skin-sparing mastectomy for cancer therapy. However, NAC-sparing procedures may

be an option in cancer patients who are carefully selected by experienced multidisciplinary teams. Retrospective data support the use of NAC-sparing

procedures for breast cancer therapy with low nipple-involvement rates and low local-recurrence rates for early-stage, biologically favorable (eg,

Nottingham grade 1 or 2, node-negative, HER2/neu negative, no lymphovascular invasion), invasive cancers and/or DCIS that is peripherally located in the

breast (>2 cm from nipple). Nipple margin assessment is mandatory, and the nipple margin should be clearly designated. Evidence of nipple involvement

such as Paget’s disease or other nipple discharge associated with malignancy, and/or imaging ndings suggesting malignant involvement of the nipple or

subareolar tissues contraindicates nipple preservation.

• In the previously radiated patients, the use of tissue expanders/implants is relatively contraindicated. Tissue expansion of irradiated skin can result in a

signicantly increased risk of capsular contracture, malposition, poor cosmesis, implant exposure, and failed reconstruction. In the setting of previous

radiation, autologous tissue reconstruction is the preferred method of breast reconstruction.

• While noninammatory, locally advanced breast cancer is not an absolute contraindication to immediate reconstruction, post-mastectomy radiation should

still be applied regardless of the reconstruction approach:

When post-mastectomy radiation is required and autologous tissue reconstruction is planned, reconstruction is either delayed until after the completion

of radiation therapy, or it can be initiated at the time of mastectomy with tissue expander placement followed by autologous tissue reconstruction.

While some experienced breast cancer teams have employed protocols in which immediate tissue reconstructions are followed by radiation therapy, it

is generally preferred that the radiation therapy precede the placement of the autologous tissue, because of reported loss in reconstruction cosmesis

(category 2B).

When implant reconstruction is planned in a patient requiring radiation therapy, a staged approach with immediate tissue expander placement followed

by implant placement is preferred. Surgery to exchange the tissue expanders with permanent implants can be performed prior to radiation or after

completion of radiation therapy. Immediate placement of an implant in patients requiring postoperative radiation has an increased rate of capsular

contracture, malposition, poor cosmesis, and implant exposure.

• Reconstruction selection is based on an assessment of cancer treatment, patient body habitus, obesity, smoking history, comorbidities, and patient

concerns. Smoking and obesity increase the risk of complications for all types of breast reconstruction whether with implant or ap. Smoking and obesity

are therefore considered a relative contraindication to breast reconstruction and patients should be made aware of increased rates of wound healing

complications and partial or complete ap failure among smokers and obese patients.

• Women who are not satised with the cosmetic outcome following completion of breast cancer treatment should be offered a plastic surgery consultation.

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Invasive Breast Cancer

NCCN Guidelines Index

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

Version 2.2016 05/06/16 © National Comprehensive Cancer Network, Inc. 2016, All rights reserved. The NCCN Guidelines® and this illustration may not be reproduced in any form without the express written permission of NCCN®.

Note: All recommendations are category 2A unless otherwise indicated.

Clinical Trials: NCCN believes that the best management of any cancer patient is in a clinical trial. Participation in clinical trials is especially encouraged.

Optimizing Delivery of Individual Therapy:

It is important to individualize radiation therapy planning and delivery. CT-

based treatment planning is encouraged to delineate target volumes and

adjacent organs at risk. Greater target dose homogeneity and sparing of

normal tissues can be accomplished using compensators such as wedges,

forward planning using segments, and intensity-modulated radiation

therapy (IMRT).

Respiratory control techniques including deep inspiration breath-hold and

prone positioning may be used to try to further reduce dose to adjacent

normal tissues, in particular heart and lung. Boost treatment in the setting

of breast conservation can be delivered using enface electrons, photons,

or brachytherapy. Chest wall scar boost when indicated is typically treated

with electrons or photons.

Verication of daily setup consistency is done with weekly imaging. In

certain circumstances, more frequent imaging may be appropriate. Routine

use of daily imaging is not recommended.

Whole Breast Radiation:

Target denition is the breast tissue in entirety. The whole breast should

receive a dose of 46–50 Gy in 23–25 fractions or 40–42.5 Gy in 15–16

fractions (hypofractionation is preferred). All dose schedules are given

5 days per week. A boost to the tumor bed is recommended in patients

at higher risk for recurrence. Typical boost doses are 10–16 Gy in 4–8

fractions.

Chest Wall Radiation (including breast reconstruction):

The target includes the ipsilateral chest wall, mastectomy scar, and drain

sites when indicated. Depending on whether the patient has had breast

reconstruction or not, several techniques using photons and/or electrons

are appropriate. CT-based treatment planning is encouraged in order to

identify lung and heart volumes and minimize exposure of these organs.

Dose is 46–50 Gy in 23–25 fractions to the chest wall +/- scar boost at 2 Gy

per fraction to a total dose of approximately 60 Gy. All dose schedules are

given 5 days per week. Special consideration should be given to the use of

bolus material to ensure that the skin dose is adequate.

Regional Nodal Radiation:

Target delineation is best achieved by the use of CT-based treatment

planning. For the paraclavicular and axillary nodes, prescription depth varies

based on the patient anatomy. For internal mammary node identication,

the internal mammary artery and vein can be used as a surrogate for the

nodal location (as the nodes themselves are not usually visible on planning

imaging). Based on the post-mastectomy radiation randomized studies

and recent trials, radiation therapy of the internal mammary lymph nodes

should be strongly considered when delivering regional nodal irradiation. CT

treatment planning should be utilized when treating the internal mammary

lymph nodal volume to evaluate dose to normal tissues, especially the

heart and lung, and dose constraints respected. Dose is 46–50 Gy in 23–25

fractions to the regional nodal elds. All dose schedules are given 5 days

per week.

Accelerated Partial Breast Irradiation (APBI):

Preliminary studies of APBI suggest that rates of local control in selected

patients with early-stage breast cancer may be comparable to those treated

with standard whole breast RT. However, compared to standard whole

breast radiation, several recent studies document an inferior cosmetic

outcome with APBI. Follow-up is limited and studies are ongoing. Patients

are encouraged to participate in clinical trials. If not trial eligible, per the

consensus statement from the American Society for Radiation Oncology

(ASTRO), patients who may be suitable for APBI are women 60 y and older

who are not carriers of BRCA 1/2 mutation treated with primary surgery for a

unifocal T1N0 ER-positive cancer. Histology should be inltrating ductal or a

favorable ductal subtype and not associated with EIC or LCIS, and margins

should be negative.

34 Gy in 10 fractions delivered twice per day with brachytherapy or 38.5 Gy

in 10 fractions delivered twice per day with external beam photon therapy

is prescribed to the tumor bed. Other fractionation schemes are currently

under investigation.

Preoperative Systemic Therapy:

In patients treated with preoperative systemic therapy, indications for

radiation therapy and treatment elds should be based on the maximum

stage from the pre-therapy clinical stage, pathologic stage, and tumor

characteristics.

BINV-I

PRINCIPLES OF RADIATION THERAPY

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Invasive Breast Cancer

NCCN Guidelines Index

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

Version 2.2016 05/06/16 © National Comprehensive Cancer Network, Inc. 2016, All rights reserved. The NCCN Guidelines® and this illustration may not be reproduced in any form without the express written permission of NCCN®.

Note: All recommendations are category 2A unless otherwise indicated.

Clinical Trials: NCCN believes that the best management of any cancer patient is in a clinical trial. Participation in clinical trials is especially encouraged.

BINV-J

ADJUVANT ENDOCRINE THERAPY

1See Definition of Menopause (BINV-M).

2Aromatase inhibitor or tamoxifen for 5 y plus ovarian suppression should be considered, based on SOFT and TEXT clinical trial outcomes, for premenopausal women

at higher risk of recurrence (ie, young age, high-grade tumor, lymph node involvement, Pagani, NEJM 2014, Prudence, NEJM 2014).Survival data still pending.

3The panel believes the three selective aromatase inhibitors (ie, anastrozole, letrozole, exemestane) have shown similar anti-tumor efficacy and toxicity profiles in

randomized studies in the adjuvant and preoperative settings. The optimal duration of aromatase inhibitors in adjuvant therapy is uncertain.

4Some SSRIs like fluoxetine and paroxetine decrease the formation of endoxifen, 4-OH tamoxifen, and active metabolites of tamoxifen, and may impact its efficacy.

Caution is advised about coadministration of these drugs with tamoxifen. However, citalopram and venlafaxine appear to have minimal impact on tamoxifen

metabolism. At this time, based on current data the panel recommends against CYP2D6 gene testing for women being considered for tamoxifen therapy.

Coadministration of strong inhibitors of CYP2D6 should be used with caution.

Premenopausal1

at diagnosis

Postmenopausal1

at diagnosis

Tamoxifen4 for 5 y (category 1)

± ovarian suppression or ablation

(category 1)2

Aromatase inhibitor3 for 5 y +

ovarian suppression or ablation

(category 1)2

Postmenopausal1

Premenopausal1

Aromatase inhibitor for 5 y3 (category 1)

Consider tamoxifen4 for an additional 5 y to

complete 10 y

Consider tamoxifen4 for an additional 5 y to

complete 10 y

No further endocrine therapy

Aromatase inhibitor3 for 5 y (category 1)

Tamoxifen4 for 2–3 y

Aromatase inhibitor3 for 2–3 y (category 1)

Tamoxifen4 for 4.5–6 y

Women with a contraindication to aromatase

inhibitors, who decline aromatase inhibitors, or

who are intolerant of the aromatase inhibitors

Aromatase inhibitor to complete 5 y3 of endocrine

therapy (category 1)

Up to 5 y of an aromatase inhibitor3 (category 2B)

Aromatase inhibitor for 5 y3 (category 1)

Consider tamoxifen4 for an additional 5 y to

complete 10 y

Tamoxifen4 for 5 y (category 1)

Consider tamoxifen4 for up to 10 y

Tamoxifen4 to complete 5 y of endocrine therapy

(category 1)

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Invasive Breast Cancer

NCCN Guidelines Index

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

Version 2.2016 05/06/16 © National Comprehensive Cancer Network, Inc. 2016, All rights reserved. The NCCN Guidelines® and this illustration may not be reproduced in any form without the express written permission of NCCN®.

Note: All recommendations are category 2A unless otherwise indicated.

Clinical Trials: NCCN believes that the best management of any cancer patient is in a clinical trial. Participation in clinical trials is especially encouraged. BINV-K

1 OF 7

PREOPERATIVE/ADJUVANT THERAPY REGIMENS 1,2,3,4

Regimens for HER2-negative disease5

6In patients with HER2-positive and axillary node-positive breast cancer,

trastuzumab should be incorporated into the adjuvant therapy (category 1).

Trastuzumab should also be considered for patients with HER2-positive node-

negative tumors ≥1 cm (category 1).

7Trastuzumab should optimally be given concurrently with paclitaxel as part of

the AC followed by paclitaxel regimen, and should be given for one year total

duration.

8A pertuzumab-containing regimen can be administered to patients with ≥T2 or

≥N1, HER2-positive, early-stage breast cancer preoperatively. Patients who have

not received a pertuzumab-containing regimen can receive adjuvant pertuzumab.

9Trastuzumab given in combination with an anthracycline is associated with

significant cardiac toxicity. Concurrent use of trastuzumab and pertuzumab with

an anthracycline should be avoided.

10Paclitaxel + trastuzumab may be considered for patients with low-risk stage l,

HER2-positive disease, particularly those not eligible for other standard adjuvant

regimens due to comorbidities.

1Retrospective evidence suggests that anthracycline-based chemotherapy

regimens may be superior to non-anthracycline-based regimens in patients with

HER2-positive tumors.

2Randomized clinical trials demonstrate that the addition of a taxane to

anthracycline-based chemotherapy provides an improved outcome.

3CMF and radiation therapy may be given concurrently, or the CMF may be given

first. All other chemotherapy regimens should be given prior to radiotherapy.

4Chemotherapy and endocrine therapy used as adjuvant therapy should be given

sequentially with endocrine therapy following chemotherapy.

5The regimens listed for HER2-negative disease are all category 1 (except where

indicated) when used in the adjuvant setting.

Preferred regimens:

• Dose-dense AC (doxorubicin/cyclophosphamide) followed by

paclitaxel every 2 weeks

• Dose-dense AC (doxorubicin/cyclophosphamide) followed by

weekly paclitaxel

• TC (docetaxel and cyclophosphamide)

Other regimens:

• Dose-dense AC (doxorubicin/cyclophosphamide)

• AC (doxorubicin/cyclophosphamide) every 3 weeks (category 2B)

• CMF (cyclophosphamide/methotrexate/uorouracil)

• AC followed by docetaxel every 3 weeks

• AC followed by weekly paclitaxel

• EC (epirubicin/cyclophosphamide)

• FEC/CEF followed by T

(uorouracil/epirubicin/cyclophosphamide followed by docetaxel) or

(uorouracil/epirubicin/cyclophosphamide followed by weekly paclitaxel)

• FAC followed by T

(uorouracil/doxorubicin/cyclophosphamide followed by weekly paclitaxel)

• TAC (docetaxel/doxorubicin/cyclophosphamide)

Regimens for HER2-positive disease6,7,8

Preferred regimens:

• AC followed by T + trastuzumab ± pertuzumab9

(doxorubicin/cyclophosphamide followed by paclitaxel plus trastuzumab ±

pertuzumab, various schedules)

• TCH (docetaxel/carboplatin/trastuzumab) ± pertuzumab

Other regimens:

• AC followed by docetaxel + trastuzumab ± pertuzumab9

• Docetaxel + cyclophosphamide + trastuzumab

• FEC followed by docetaxel + trastuzumab + pertuzumab9

• FEC followed by paclitaxel + trastuzumab + pertuzumab9

• Paclitaxel + trastuzumab10

• Pertuzumab + trastuzumab + docetaxel followed by FEC9

• Pertuzumab + trastuzumab + paclitaxel followed by FEC9

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Invasive Breast Cancer

NCCN Guidelines Index

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

Version 2.2016 05/06/16 © National Comprehensive Cancer Network, Inc. 2016, All rights reserved. The NCCN Guidelines® and this illustration may not be reproduced in any form without the express written permission of NCCN®.

Note: All recommendations are category 2A unless otherwise indicated.

Clinical Trials: NCCN believes that the best management of any cancer patient is in a clinical trial. Participation in clinical trials is especially encouraged. BINV-K

2 OF 7

DOSING SCHEDULES FOR COMBINATIONS FOR HER2-NEGATIVE DISEASE: PREFERRED REGIMENS

Dose-dense AC followed by paclitaxel chemotherapy1

• Doxorubicin 60 mg/m2 IV day 1

• Cyclophosphamide 600 mg/m2 IV day 1

Cycled every 14 days for 4 cycles.

(All cycles are with myeloid growth factor support)

Followed by:

• Paclitaxel 175 mg/m2 by 3 h IV infusion day 1

Cycled every 14 days for 4 cycles.

(All cycles are with myeloid growth factor support)

Dose-dense AC followed by weekly paclitaxel chemotherapy1

• Doxorubicin 60 mg/m2 IV day 1

• Cyclophosphamide 600 mg/m2 IV day 1

Cycled every 14 days for 4 cycles.

(All cycles are with myeloid growth factor support)

Followed by:

• Paclitaxel 80 mg/m2 by 1 h IV infusion weekly for 12 wks.

TC chemotherapy2

• Docetaxel 75 mg/m2 IV day 1

• Cyclophosphamide 600 mg/m2 IV day 1

Cycled every 21 days for 4 cycles.

(All cycles are with myeloid growth factor support)

OTHER REGIMENS LISTED ON NEXT PAGE

The selection, dosing, and administration of anti-cancer agents and the management of associated toxicities are complex. Modifications of drug dose and schedule and initiation of supportive care interventions are often

necessary because of expected toxicities and individual patient variability, prior treatment, and comorbidity. The optimal delivery of anti-cancer agents therefore requires a health care delivery team experienced in the use

of anti-cancer agents and the management of associated toxicities in patients with cancer.

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Invasive Breast Cancer

NCCN Guidelines Index

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

Version 2.2016 05/06/16 © National Comprehensive Cancer Network, Inc. 2016, All rights reserved. The NCCN Guidelines® and this illustration may not be reproduced in any form without the express written permission of NCCN®.

Note: All recommendations are category 2A unless otherwise indicated.

Clinical Trials: NCCN believes that the best management of any cancer patient is in a clinical trial. Participation in clinical trials is especially encouraged. BINV-K

3 OF 7

DOSING SCHEDULES FOR COMBINATIONS FOR HER2-NEGATIVE DISEASE: OTHER REGIMENS

Dose-dense AC chemotherapy1

• Doxorubicin 60 mg/m2 IV day 1

• Cyclophosphamide 600 mg/m2 IV day 1

Cycled every 14 days for 4 cycles.

(All cycles are with myeloid growth factor support)

AC chemotherapy3

• Doxorubicin 60 mg/m2 IV on day 1

• Cyclophosphamide 600 mg/m2 IV day 1

Cycled every 21 days for 4 cycles.

TAC chemotherapy4

• Docetaxel 75 mg/m2 IV day 1

• Doxorubicin 50 mg/m2 IV day 1

• Cyclophosphamide 500 mg/m2 IV day 1

Cycled every 21 days for 6 cycles.

(All cycles are with myeloid growth factor support)

CMF chemotherapy5

• Cyclophosphamide 100 mg/m2 PO days 1–14

• Methotrexate 40 mg/m2 IV days 1 & 8

• 5-uorouracil 600 mg/m2 IV days 1 & 8

Cycled every 28 days for 6 cycles.

AC followed by docetaxel chemotherapy6

• Doxorubicin 60 mg/m2 IV on day 1

• Cyclophosphamide 600 mg/m2 IV day 1

Cycled every 21 days for 4 cycles.

Followed by:

• Docetaxel 100 mg/m2 IV on day 1

Cycled every 21 days for 4 cycles.

AC followed by weekly paclitaxel7

• Doxorubicin 60 mg/m2 IV day 1

• Cyclophosphamide 600 mg/m2 IV day 1

Cycled every 21 days for 4 cycles.

Followed by:

• Paclitaxel 80 mg/m2 by 1 h IV infusion weekly

for 12 wks.

EC chemotherapy8

• Epirubicin 100 mg/m2 IV day 1

• Cyclophosphamide 830 mg/m2 IV day 1

Cycled every 21 days for 8 cycles.

FEC followed by docetaxel chemotherapy9

• 5-uorouracil 500 mg/m2 IV day 1

• Epirubicin 100 mg/m2 IV day 1

• Cyclophosphamide 500 mg/m2 IV day 1

Cycled every 21 days for 3 cycles.

Followed by:

• Docetaxel 100 mg/m2 IV day 1

Cycled every 21 days for 3 cycles.

FEC followed by weekly paclitaxel10

• 5-uorouracil 600 mg/m2 IV day 1

• Epirubicin 90 mg/m2 IV day 1

• Cyclophosphamide 600 mg/m2 IV day 1

Cycled every 21 days for 4 cycles.

Followed by:

Paclitaxel 100 mg/m2 IV infusion weekly for 8 wks.

FAC followed by weekly paclitaxel

• 5-uorouracil 500 mg/m2 IV days 1 & 8 or days 1 & 4

• Doxorubicin 50 mg/m2 IV day 1

(or by 72-h continuous infusion)

• Cyclophosphamide 500 mg/m2 IV day 1

Cycled every 21 days for 4 cycles.

Followed by:

• Paclitaxel 80 mg/m2 by 1 h IV infusion weekly for

12 wks.

of anti-cancer agents and the management of associated toxicities in patients with cancer.

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Invasive Breast Cancer

NCCN Guidelines Index

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

Version 2.2016 05/06/16 © National Comprehensive Cancer Network, Inc. 2016, All rights reserved. The NCCN Guidelines® and this illustration may not be reproduced in any form without the express written permission of NCCN®.

Note: All recommendations are category 2A unless otherwise indicated.

Clinical Trials: NCCN believes that the best management of any cancer patient is in a clinical trial. Participation in clinical trials is especially encouraged. BINV-K

4 OF 7

DOSING SCHEDULE FOR COMBINATIONS FOR HER2-POSITIVE DISEASE: PREFERRED REGIMENS

AC followed by T chemotherapy with trastuzumab11

• Doxorubicin 60 mg/m2 IV day 1

• Cyclophosphamide 600 mg/m2 IV day 1

Cycled every 21 days for 4 cycles.

Followed by:

Paclitaxel 80 mg/m2 by 1 h IV weekly for 12 wks

With:

• Trastuzumab 4 mg/kg IV with rst dose of paclitaxel

Followed by:

• Trastuzumab 2 mg/kg IV weekly to complete 1 y of treatment. As an

alternative, trastuzumab 6 mg/kg IV every 21 days may be used following

the completion of paclitaxel, and given to complete 1 y of trastuzumab

treatment.

Evaluate left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) prior to and during

treatment.*

AC followed by T chemotherapy with trastuzumab + pertuzumab

• Doxorubicin 60 mg/m2 IV day 1

• Cyclophosphamide 600 mg/m2 IV day 1

Cycled every 21 days for 4 cycles.

Followed by:

• Pertuzumab 840 mg IV day 1 followed by 420 mg IV

• Trastuzumab 8 mg/kg IV day 1 followed by 6 mg/kg IV

• Paclitaxel 80 mg/m2 IV days 1, 8, and 15

Cycled every 21 days for 4 cycles

• Trastuzumab 6 mg/kg IV day 1

Cycled every 21 days to complete 1 y of trastuzumab therapy

Evaluate LVEF prior to and during treatment.*

Dose-dense AC followed by paclitaxel chemotherapy with trastuzumab12

• Doxorubicin 60 mg/m2 IV day 1

• Cyclophosphamide 600 mg/m2 IV day 1

Cycled every 14 days for 4 cycles.

Followed by:

• Paclitaxel 175 mg/m2 by 3 h IV infusion day 1

Cycled every 14 days for 4 cycles.

With:

• Trastuzumab 4 mg/kg IV with rst dose of paclitaxel

Followed by:

• Trastuzumab 2 mg/kg IV weekly to complete 1 y of treatment. As an alternative,

trastuzumab 6 mg/kg IV every 21 days may be used following the completion of

paclitaxel, and given to complete 1 y of trastuzumab treatment.

Evaluate LVEF prior to and during treatment.*

TCH chemotherapy13

• Docetaxel 75 mg/m2 IV day 1

• Carboplatin AUC 6 IV day 1

Cycled every 21 days for 6 cycles

With:

• Trastuzumab 4 mg/kg IV wk 1

Followed by:

• Trastuzumab 2 mg/kg IV for 17 wks

Followed by:

• Trastuzumab 6 mg/kg IV every 21 days to complete 1 y of trastuzumab therapy

• Trastuzumab 8 mg/kg IV wk 1

Followed by:

• Trastuzumab 6 mg/kg IV every 21 days to complete 1 y of trastuzumab therapy

Evaluate LVEF prior to and during treatment.*

TCH chemotherapy + pertuzumab14

• Trastuzumab 8 mg/kg IV day 1 followed by 6 mg/kg IV

• Pertuzumab 840 mg IV day 1 followed by 420 mg IV

• Docetaxel 75 mg/m2 IV day 1

• Carboplatin AUC 6 IV day 1

Cycled every 21 days for 6 cycles

Followed by:

• Trastuzumab 6 mg/kg IV every 21 days to complete 1 y of trastuzumab therapy

Evaluate LVEF prior to and during treatment.*

*The optimal frequency of LVEF assessment during adjuvant trastuzumab

therapy is not known. The FDA label recommends LVEF measurements

prior to initiation of trastuzumab and every 3 mo during therapy.

The selection, dosing, and administration of anti-cancer agents and the management of

associated toxicities are complex. Modifications of drug dose and schedule and initiation of

supportive care interventions are often necessary because of expected toxicities and individual

patient variability, prior treatment, and comorbidity. The optimal delivery of anti-cancer agents

therefore requires a health care delivery team experienced in the use of anti-cancer agents and

the management of associated toxicities in patients with cancer.

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Invasive Breast Cancer

NCCN Guidelines Index

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

Version 2.2016 05/06/16 © National Comprehensive Cancer Network, Inc. 2016, All rights reserved. The NCCN Guidelines® and this illustration may not be reproduced in any form without the express written permission of NCCN®.

Note: All recommendations are category 2A unless otherwise indicated.

Clinical Trials: NCCN believes that the best management of any cancer patient is in a clinical trial. Participation in clinical trials is especially encouraged. BINV-K

5 OF 7

DOSING SCHEDULE FOR COMBINATIONS FOR HER2-POSITIVE DISEASE: OTHER REGIMENS

AC followed by docetaxel chemotherapy with trastuzumab13

• Doxorubicin 60 mg/m2 IV day 1

• Cyclophosphamide 600 mg/m2 IV day 1

Cycled every 21 days for 4 cycles

Followed by:

• Docetaxel 100 mg/m2 IV day 1

Cycled every 21 days for 4 cycles

With:

• Trastuzumab 4 mg/kg IV wk 1

Followed by:

• Trastuzumab 2 mg/kg IV weekly for 11 wks

Followed by:

• Trastuzumab 6 mg/kg IV every 21 days to complete 1 y of

trastuzumab therapy

Evaluate LVEF prior to and during treatment.*

AC followed by docetaxel chemotherapy with trastuzumab and pertuzumab

• Doxorubicin 60 mg/m2 IV day 1

• Cyclophosphamide 600 mg/m2 IV day 1

Cycled every 21 days for 4 cycles

Followed by:

• Pertuzumab 840 mg IV day 1 followed by 420 mg IV

• Trastuzumab 8 mg/kg IV day 1 followed by 6 mg/kg IV

• Docetaxel 75–100 mg/m2 IV day 1

Cycled every 21 days for 4 cycles

Followed by:

• Trastuzumab 6 mg/kg IV every 21 days to complete 1 y of

trastuzumab therapy

Evaluate LVEF prior to and during treatment.*

Docetaxel/cyclophosphamide chemotherapy with trastuzumab15

• Docetaxel 75 mg/m2 IV day 1

• Cyclophosphamide 600 mg/m2 IV day 1

Cycled every 21 days for 4 cycles

With:

Trastuzumab 4 mg/kg IV wk 1

Followed by

Trastuzumab 2 mg/kg IV weekly for 11 wks

Followed by

Trastuzumab 6 mg/kg IV every 21 days to complete 1 y of trastuzumab

therapy

• Trastuzumab 8 mg/kg IV wk 1

Followed by:

• Trastuzumab 6 mg/kg IV every 21 days to complete 1 y of trastuzumab

therapy

Evaluate LVEF prior to and during treatment.*

FEC chemotherapy followed by pertuzumab + trastuzumab + docetaxel14

• Fluorouracil 500 mg/m2 IV day 1

• Epirubicin 100 mg/m2 IV day 1

• Cyclophosphamide 600 mg/m2 IV day 1

Cycled every 21 days for 3 cycles

Followed by:

• Pertuzumab 840 mg IV day 1 followed by 420 mg IV

• Trastuzumab 8 mg/kg IV day 1 followed by 6 mg/kg IV

• Docetaxel 75–100 mg/m2 IV day 1

Cycled every 21 days for 3 cycles

Followed by:

• Trastuzumab 6 mg/kg IV every 21 days to complete 1 y of

trastuzumab therapy

Evaluate LVEF prior to and during treatment.*

of anti-cancer agents and the management of associated toxicities in patients with cancer.

*The optimal frequency of LVEF assessment during adjuvant trastuzumab

therapy is not known. The FDA label recommends LVEF measurements

prior to initiation of trastuzumab and every 3 mo during therapy.

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Invasive Breast Cancer

NCCN Guidelines Index

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

Version 2.2016 05/06/16 © National Comprehensive Cancer Network, Inc. 2016, All rights reserved. The NCCN Guidelines® and this illustration may not be reproduced in any form without the express written permission of NCCN®.

Note: All recommendations are category 2A unless otherwise indicated.

Clinical Trials: NCCN believes that the best management of any cancer patient is in a clinical trial. Participation in clinical trials is especially encouraged. BINV-K

6 OF 7

DOSING SCHEDULE FOR COMBINATIONS FOR HER2-POSITIVE DISEASE: OTHER REGIMENS (continued)

FEC chemotherapy followed by pertuzumab + trastuzumab + paclitaxel

• Fluorouracil 500 mg/m2 IV day 1

• Epirubicin 100 mg/m2 IV day 1

• Cyclophosphamide 600 mg/m2 IV day 1

Cycled every 21 days for 3 cycles

Followed by:

• Pertuzumab 840 mg IV day 1 followed by 420 mg IV

• Trastuzumab 8 mg/kg IV day 1 followed by 6 mg/kg IV

• Paclitaxel 80 mg/m2 IV days 1, 8, and 15

Cycled every 21 days for 3 cycles

Followed by:

• Trastuzumab 6 mg/kg IV every 21 days to complete 1 y of trastuzumab

therapy

Evaluate LVEF prior to and during treatment.*

Paclitaxel + trastuzumab16

• Paclitaxel 80 mg/m2 IV weekly for 12 weeks

With:

• Trastuzumab 4 mg/kg IV with rst dose of paclitaxel

Followed by:

• Trastuzumab 2 mg/kg IV weekly to complete 1 y of treatment. As an

alternative, trastuzumab 6 mg/kg IV every 21 days may be used following

the completion of paclitaxel, and given to complete 1 y of trastuzumab

treatment.

Evaluate LVEF prior to and during treatment.*

Pertuzumab + trastuzumab + docetaxel followed by FEC chemotherapy17

Neoadjuvant therapy:

• Pertuzumab 840 mg IV day 1 followed by 420 mg IV

• Trastuzumab 8 mg/kg IV day 1 followed by 6 mg/kg IV

• Docetaxel 75–100 mg/m2 IV day 1

Cycled every 21 days for 4 cycles

Followed by adjuvant therapy

• Fluorouracil 600 mg/m2 IV day 1

• Epirubicin 90 mg/m2 IV day 1

• Cyclophosphamide 600 mg/m2 IV day 1

Cycled every 21 days for 3 cycles

Followed by:

• Trastuzumab 6 mg/kg IV every 21 days to complete 1 y of trastuzumab

therapy

Evaluate LVEF prior to and during treatment.*

Pertuzumab + trastuzumab + paclitaxel followed by FEC chemotherapy

Neoadjuvant therapy:

• Pertuzumab 840 mg IV day 1 followed by 420 mg IV

• Trastuzumab 8 mg/kg IV day 1 followed by 6 mg/kg IV

• Paclitaxel 80 mg/m2 IV days 1, 8, and 15

Cycled every 21 days for 4 cycles

Followed by adjuvant therapy

• Fluorouracil 600 mg/m2 IV day 1

• Epirubicin 90 mg/m2 IV day 1

• Cyclophosphamide 600 mg/m2 IV day 1

Cycled every 21 days for 3 cycles

Followed by:

• Trastuzumab 6 mg/kg IV every 21 days to complete 1 y of trastuzumab

therapy

Evaluate LVEF prior to and during treatment.*

of anti-cancer agents and the management of associated toxicities in patients with cancer.

*The optimal frequency of LVEF assessment during adjuvant trastuzumab

therapy is not known. The FDA label recommends LVEF measurements

prior to initiation of trastuzumab and every 3 mo during therapy.

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Invasive Breast Cancer

NCCN Guidelines Index

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

Version 2.2016 05/06/16 © National Comprehensive Cancer Network, Inc. 2016, All rights reserved. The NCCN Guidelines® and this illustration may not be reproduced in any form without the express written permission of NCCN®.

Note: All recommendations are category 2A unless otherwise indicated.

Clinical Trials: NCCN believes that the best management of any cancer patient is in a clinical trial. Participation in clinical trials is especially encouraged. BINV-K

7 OF 7

REFERENCES FOR PREOPERATIVE/ADJUVANT THERAPY REGIMENS

1Citron ML, Berry DA, Cirrincione C, et al: Randomized trial of dose-dense versus conventionally scheduled and sequential versus concurrent combination

chemotherapy as postoperative adjuvant treatment of node-positive primary breast cancer: First report of intergroup trial C9741/cancer and leukemia group B trial

9741. J Clin Oncol 2003;21:1431-1439.

2Jones S, Holmes F, O’Shaughnessey J, et al. Docetaxel with cyclophosphamide is associated with an overall survival benet compared with doxorubicin and

cyclophosphamide: 7-year follow-up of US Oncology Research trial 9735. J Clin Oncol 2009;27:1177-1183.

3Fisher B, Brown AM, Dimitrov NV, et al. Two months of doxorubicin-cyclophosphamide with and without interval reinduction therapy compared with 6 months of

cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and uorouracil in positive-node breast cancer patients with tamoxifen-nonresponsive tumors: results from the National Surgical

Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project B-15. J Clin Oncol 1990;8:1483-1496.

4Martin, Pienkowski T, Mackey J, et al: Adjuvant docetaxel for node-positive breast cancer. N Engl J Med 2005;352:22.

5Goldhirsch A, Colleoni M, Coates AS, et al: Adding adjuvant CMF chemotherapy to either radiotherapy or tamoxifen: are all CMFs alike? The International Breast

Cancer Study Group (IBCSG). Ann Oncol 1998;9:489-93.

6von Minckwitz G1, Raab G, Caputo A, et al. Doxorubicin with cyclophosphamide followed by docetaxel every 21 days compared with doxorubicin and docetaxel every

14 days as preoperative treatment in operable breast cancer: the GEPARDUO study of the German Breast Group. J Clin Oncol 2005;23(12):2676-85.

7Sparano JA, Wang M, Martino S, et al. Weekly paclitaxel in adjuvant treatment of breast cancer. N Engl J Med 2008;258:1663-1671.

8Piccart MJ, Di Leo A, Beauduin M, et al: Phase III trial comparing two dose levels of epirubicin combined with cyclophosphamide with cyclophosphamide, methotrexate,

and uorouracil in node-positive breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 2001;19:3103-3110.

9Roche H, Fumoleau P, Spielmann M, et al. Sequential adjuvant epirubicin-based and docetaxel chemotherapy for node-positive breast cancer patients: The FNCLCC

PACS 001 trial. J Clin Oncol 2006; 24:5664-5671.

10Martin M, Rodriguez-Lescure A, Ruiz A, et al: Randomized phase 3 trial of uorouracil, epirubicin, and cyclophosphamide alone or followed by paclitaxel for early

breast cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst 2008;100:805-814.

11Romond EH, Perez EZ, Bryant J, et al. Trastuzumab plus adjuvant chemotherapy for operable HER2 positive breast cancer. N Engl J Med 2005;353:1673-1684.

12Dang C, Fornier M, Sugarman S, et al: The safety of dose-dense doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide followed by paclitaxel with trastuzumab in HER-2/neu over-

expressed/amplied breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 2008;26(8):1216-22.

13Slamon D, Eiermann W, Robert N, et al. Adjuvant trastuzumab in HER2-positive breast cancer. N Engl J Med 2011;365:1273-1283.

14Schneeweiss A, Chia S, Hickish T, et al. Pertuzumab plus trastuzumab in combination with standard neoadjuvant anthracycline-containing and anthracycline-free

chemotherapy regimens in patients with HER2-positive early breast cancer: a randomized phase II cardiac safety study (TRYPHAENA). Ann Oncol 2013;24:2278-2284.

15Jones SE, Collea R, Paul D, et al. Adjuvant docetaxel and cyclophosphamide plus trastuzumab in patients with HER2-amplied early stage breast cancer: a single-

group, open-label, phase 2 study. Lancet Oncol 2013;14:1121-8.

16Tolaney S, Barry W, Dang C, et al. Adjuvant paclitaxel and trastuzumab for node-negative HER2-positive breast cancer. N Engl J Med 2016;372:134-141.

17Gianni L, Pienkowski T, Im YH, et al. Efcacy and safety of neoadjuvant pertuzumab and trastuzumab in women with locally advanced, inammatory, or early HER2-

positive breast cancer (NeoSphere): a randomised multicentre, open-label, phase 2 trial. Lancet Oncol 2012;13:25-32.

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Invasive Breast Cancer

NCCN Guidelines Index

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

Version 2.2016 05/06/16 © National Comprehensive Cancer Network, Inc. 2016, All rights reserved. The NCCN Guidelines® and this illustration may not be reproduced in any form without the express written permission of NCCN®.

Note: All recommendations are category 2A unless otherwise indicated.

Clinical Trials: NCCN believes that the best management of any cancer patient is in a clinical trial. Participation in clinical trials is especially encouraged. BINV-L

1 OF 2

PRINCIPLES OF PREOPERATIVE SYSTEMIC THERAPY

• Randomized trials demonstrate similar long-term outcomes when

patients are given the same treatment preoperatively compared with

postoperatively.1

• Preoperative systemic therapy can render surgically inoperable tumors

operable and offers potential benets for patients with operable breast

cancer. Importantly, preoperative systemic therapy can improve rates

of breast conservation therapy eligibility and provides an opportunity

to observe clinical and pathologic response to systemic therapy in an

individual patient.

• Pathologic complete response (pCR) to preoperative systemic therapy is

associated with an extremely favorable disease-free and overall survival,

particularly in situations in which all treatment is given preoperatively.

The correlation between pathologic response and long-term outcome is

strongest for triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC), somewhat less so for

HER2+ disease, and least for ER+ disease.2,3

• A number of chemotherapy regimens have activity in the preoperative

setting. In general, those chemotherapy regimens recommended in the

adjuvant setting may be considered in the preoperative setting. See

Preoperative/Adjuvant Therapy Regimens (BINV-K).

• Endocrine therapy alone (aromatase inhibitor [preferred for

postmenopausal women; given with ovarian suppression for

premenopausal women] or tamoxifen) may be considered for patients with

hormone-receptor positive disease.

• Patients with HER2-positive tumors should be treated with preoperative

systemic therapy incorporating trastuzumab for at least 9 weeks

of preoperative therapy. A pertuzumab-containing regimen may be

administered preoperatively to patients with greater than or equal to T2 or

greater than or equal to N1, HER2-positive early stage breast cancer. See

Preoperative/Adjuvant Therapy Regimens (BINV-K)

• Some studies have reported an increased risk of locoregional

recurrence in patients receiving preoperative systemic

therapy compared with those receiving postoperative adjuvant

systemic therapy.4 This increased risk of locoregional relapse

has been attributed to suboptimal delivery of denitive local

therapy in patients treated in the preoperative setting.

• Not all patients are appropriate candidates for preoperative

systemic therapy. Accurate clinical staging at baseline prior

to initiation of preoperative systemic therapy is critical. See

Preoperative Systemic Therapy: Breast and Axillary Evaluation

(BINV-11)

• When electing preoperative therapy, all treatment should be

given prior to surgery. Tumor response should be routinely

assessed by clinical exam during delivery of preoperative

therapy. Patients with operable breast cancer experiencing

progression of disease during preoperative systemic therapy

should be taken promptly to surgery. Locoregional therapy

principles should be applied in the same manner as in patients

treated with adjuvant systemic therapy.

1Rastogi P, Anderson SJ, Bear HD, et al. Preoperative chemotherapy: updates of National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project Protocols B-18 and B-27. J Clin Oncol 2008 Feb 10;26(5):778-85.

2von Minckwitz G, Untch M, Blohmer JU, et al. Definition and impact of pathologic complete response on prognosis after neoadjuvant chemotherapy in various intrinsic breast cancer subtypes. J Clin Oncol 2012

May 20;30(15):1796-804.

3Cortazar P, Zhang L, Untch M, et al.Pathological complete response and long-term clinical benefit in breast cancer: the CTNeoBC pooled analysis. Lancet 2014 Jul 12;384(9938):164-72.

4Mauri D, Pavlidis N, Ioannidis JP. Neoadjuvant versus adjuvant systemic treatment in breast cancer: a meta-analysis. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2005 Feb 2;97(3):188-94.

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Invasive Breast Cancer

NCCN Guidelines Index

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

Version 2.2016 05/06/16 © National Comprehensive Cancer Network, Inc. 2016, All rights reserved. The NCCN Guidelines® and this illustration may not be reproduced in any form without the express written permission of NCCN®.

Note: All recommendations are category 2A unless otherwise indicated.

Clinical Trials: NCCN believes that the best management of any cancer patient is in a clinical trial. Participation in clinical trials is especially encouraged. BINV-L

2 OF 2

Cautions:

• Possible overtreatment with systemic therapy if clinical stage is

overestimated

• Possible undertreatment locoregionally with radiotherapy if

clinical stage is underestimated

• Possibility of disease progression during preoperative systemic

therapy

Candidates for preoperative systemic therapy

• Patients with inoperable breast cancer:

Inammatory breast cancer

Bulky or matted N2 axillary nodes

N3 nodal disease

T4 tumors

• Patients with operable breast cancer:

Large primary tumor relative to breast size in a patient who

desires breast conservation

Non-candidates for preoperative systemic therapy

• Patients with extensive in situ disease when extent of invasive

carcinoma is not well dened

• Patients with a poorly delineated extent of tumor preoperatively

• Patients whose tumors are not palpable or clinically assessable

PRINCIPLES OF PREOPERATIVE SYSTEMIC THERAPY

Known benets of preoperative systemic therapy:

• Facilitates breast conservation

• Can render inoperable tumors operable

• Provides important prognostic information at an individual patient

level based on response to therapy, particularly in patients with triple-

negative and HER2-positive breast cancer

• Allows time for genetic testing

• Allows time to plan breast reconstruction in patients electing

mastectomy

Opportunities:

• May allow sentinel lymph node biopsy alone if a positive axilla is

cleared with therapy

• May provide an opportunity to modify systemic treatment if no

preoperative therapy response or progression of disease

• Might allow for the addition of adjuvant treatments in patients with poor

response

• May allow for smaller radiotherapy ports or less radiotherapy if axillary

nodal disease cleared

• Excellent research platform to test novel therapies and predictive

biomarkers

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Invasive Breast Cancer

NCCN Guidelines Index

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

Version 2.2016 05/06/16 © National Comprehensive Cancer Network, Inc. 2016, All rights reserved. The NCCN Guidelines® and this illustration may not be reproduced in any form without the express written permission of NCCN®.

Note: All recommendations are category 2A unless otherwise indicated.

Clinical Trials: NCCN believes that the best management of any cancer patient is in a clinical trial. Participation in clinical trials is especially encouraged.

BINV-M

DEFINITION OF MENOPAUSE

Clinical trials in breast cancer have utilized a variety of denitions of menopause. Menopause is generally the permanent cessation of menses,

and as the term is utilized in breast cancer management includes a profound and permanent decrease in ovarian estrogen synthesis. Reasonable

criteria for determining menopause include any of the following:

• Prior bilateral oophorectomy

• Age ≥60 y

• Age <60 y and amenorrheic for 12 or more months in the absence of chemotherapy, tamoxifen, toremifene, or ovarian suppression and

follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH) and estradiol in the postmenopausal range

• If taking tamoxifen or toremifene, and age <60 y, then FSH and plasma estradiol level in postmenopausal ranges

It is not possible to assign menopausal status to women who are receiving an LHRH agonist or antagonist. In women premenopausal at the

beginning of adjuvant chemotherapy, amenorrhea is not a reliable indicator of menopausal status as ovarian function may still be intact or

resume despite anovulation/amenorrhea after chemotherapy. For these women with therapy-induced amenorrhea, oophorectomy or serial

measurement of FSH and/or estradiol are needed to ensure postmenopausal status if the use of aromatase inhibitors is considered as a

component of endocrine therapy.

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Invasive Breast Cancer

NCCN Guidelines Index

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

Version 2.2016 05/06/16 © National Comprehensive Cancer Network, Inc. 2016, All rights reserved. The NCCN Guidelines® and this illustration may not be reproduced in any form without the express written permission of NCCN®.

Note: All recommendations are category 2A unless otherwise indicated.

Clinical Trials: NCCN believes that the best management of any cancer patient is in a clinical trial. Participation in clinical trials is especially encouraged.

BINV-N

1A combination of exemestane with everolimus can be considered for patients who meet the eligibility criteria for BOLERO-2 (progressed within 12 mo or on non-

steroidal AI, or any time on tamoxifen).

2Palbociclib in combination with letrozole may be considered as a treatment option for first-line therapy for postmenopausal patients with hormone-receptor positive,

HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer.

3For postmenopausal women or for premenopausal women receiving ovarian suppression with an LHRH agonist, with hormone-receptor positive and HER2-negative

metastatic breast cancer that has progressed on endocrine therapy.

4A single study (S0226) in women with hormone receptor-positive breast cancer and no prior chemotherapy, biological therapy, or endocrine therapy for metastatic

disease demonstrated that the addition of fulvestrant to anastrozole resulted in prolongation of time to progression. Subset analysis suggested that patients without

prior adjuvant tamoxifen and more than 10 years since diagnosis experienced the greatest benefit. Two studies with similar design (FACT and SOFEA) demonstrated

no advantage in time to progression with the addition of fulvestrant to anastrozole.

ENDOCRINE THERAPY FOR RECURRENT OR STAGE IV DISEASE

Premenopausal Patients

• Selective ER modulators or ovarian ablation/suppression plus endocrine therapy as for postmenopausal women.

Postmenopausal Patients

• Non-steroidal aromatase inhibitor (anastrozole, letrozole)

• Steroidal aromatase inactivator (exemestane)

• Exemestane + everolimus1

• Palbociclib + letrozole2

• Palbociclib + fulvestrant (category 1)3

• Fulvestrant4

• Tamoxifen or toremifene

• Megestrol acetate

• Fluoxymesterone

• Ethinyl estradiol

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Invasive Breast Cancer

NCCN Guidelines Index

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

Version 2.2016 05/06/16 © National Comprehensive Cancer Network, Inc. 2016, All rights reserved. The NCCN Guidelines® and this illustration may not be reproduced in any form without the express written permission of NCCN®.

Note: All recommendations are category 2A unless otherwise indicated.

Clinical Trials: NCCN believes that the best management of any cancer patient is in a clinical trial. Participation in clinical trials is especially encouraged. BINV-O

1 OF 7

3Trastuzumab given in combination with an anthracycline is associated with significant cardiac

toxicity. Concurrent use of trastuzumab and pertuzumab with an anthracycline should be avoided.

4Trastuzumab may be safely combined with all non-anthracycline containing preferred and other

single agents listed above for recurrent or metastatic breast cancer.

5Patients previously treated with chemotherapy plus trastuzumab in the absence of pertuzumab

in the metastatic setting may be considered for one line of therapy including both trastuzumab

plus pertuzumab in combination with or without cytotoxic therapy (such as vinorelbine or taxane).

Further research is needed to determine the ideal sequencing strategy for anti-HER2 therapy.

CHEMOTHERAPY REGIMENS FOR RECURRENT OR METASTATIC BREAST CANCER1

Preferred single agents:

Anthracyclines

• Doxorubicin

• Pegylated liposomal doxorubicin

Taxanes

• Paclitaxel

Anti-metabolites

• Capecitabine

• Gemcitabine

Other microtubule inhibitors

• Vinorelbine

• Eribulin

Other single agents:

• Cyclophosphamide

• Carboplatin

• Docetaxel

• Albumin-bound paclitaxel

• Cisplatin

• Epirubicin

• Ixabepilone

Chemotherapy combinations:

• CAF/FAC (cyclophosphamide/doxorubicin/uorouracil)

• FEC (uorouracil/epirubicin/cyclophosphamide)

• AC (doxorubicin/cyclophosphamide)

• EC (epirubicin/cyclophosphamide)

• CMF (cyclophosphamide/methotrexate/uorouracil)

• Docetaxel/capecitabine

• GT (gemcitabine/paclitaxel)

• Gemcitabine/carboplatin

• Paclitaxel/bevacizumab2

Preferred rst-line agents for HER2-positive disease:

• Pertuzumab + trastuzumab + docetaxel (category 1)5

• Pertuzumab + trastuzumab + paclitaxel5

Other agents for HER2-positive disease:

• Ado-trastuzumab emtansine (T-DM1)

• Trastuzumab + paclitaxel ± carboplatin

• Trastuzumab + docetaxel

• Trastuzumab + vinorelbine

• Trastuzumab + capecitabine

Agents for trastuzumab-exposed HER2-positive disease:

• Lapatinib + capecitabine

• Trastuzumab + capecitabine

• Trastuzumab + lapatinib (without cytotoxic therapy)

• Trastuzumab + other agents3,4,5

1There is no compelling evidence that combination regimens are

superior to sequential single agents.

2Randomized clinical trials in metastatic breast cancer document

that the addition of bevacizumab to some first- or second-line

chemotherapy agents modestly improves time to progression and

response rates but does not improve overall survival. The time-to-

progression impact may vary among cytotoxic agents and appears

greatest with bevacizumab in combination with weekly paclitaxel.

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Invasive Breast Cancer

NCCN Guidelines Index

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

Version 2.2016 05/06/16 © National Comprehensive Cancer Network, Inc. 2016, All rights reserved. The NCCN Guidelines® and this illustration may not be reproduced in any form without the express written permission of NCCN®.

Note: All recommendations are category 2A unless otherwise indicated.

Clinical Trials: NCCN believes that the best management of any cancer patient is in a clinical trial. Participation in clinical trials is especially encouraged. BINV-O

2 OF 7

DOSING SCHEDULES FOR CHEMOTHERAPY REGIMENS FOR RECURRENT OR METASTATIC BREAST CANCER

Preferred single agents:

Anthracyclines:

Doxorubicin

• 60–75 mg/m2 IV day 1, cycled every 21 days1

• 20 mg/m2 IV day 1 weekly2

Pegylated liposomal encapsulated doxorubicin3

• 50 mg/m2 IV day 1

Cycled every 28 days.

Taxanes:

Paclitaxel

• 175 mg/m2 IV day 1

Cycled every 21 days.4

• 80 mg/m2 IV day 1 weekly5

Antimetabolites:

Capecitabine6

• 1000–1250 mg/m2 PO twice daily days 1–14

Cycled every 21 days.

Gemcitabine7

• 800–1200 mg/m2 IV days 1, 8, and 15

Cycled every 28 days.

Other microtubule inhibitors:

Vinorelbine8

• 25 mg/m2 IV day 1 weekly

Eribulin9

• 1.4 mg/m2 IV days 1 and 8

Cycled every 21 days.

Other single agents:

Cyclophosphamide10

• 50 mg PO daily on days 1–21

Cycled every 28 days.

Carboplatin11

• AUC 6 IV on day 1

Cycled every 21–28 days.

Docetaxel12,13

• 60–100 mg/m2 IV day 1

Cycled every 21 days.

• 35 mg/m2 IV weekly for 6 wks followed by a 2-week rest, then repeat14

Albumin-bound paclitaxel

• 100 mg/m2 or 125 mg/m2 IV days 1, 8, and 15

Cycled every 28 days.15,16

• 260 mg/m2 IV

Cycled every 21 days.15

Cisplatin17

• 75 mg/m2 IV on day 1

Cycled every 21 days.

Epirubicin18

• 60–90 mg/m2 IV day 1

Cycled every 21 days.

Ixabepilone19

• 40 mg/m2 IV day 1

Cycled every 21 days.

of anti-cancer agents and the management of associated toxicities in patients with cancer.

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Invasive Breast Cancer

NCCN Guidelines Index

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

Version 2.2016 05/06/16 © National Comprehensive Cancer Network, Inc. 2016, All rights reserved. The NCCN Guidelines® and this illustration may not be reproduced in any form without the express written permission of NCCN®.

Note: All recommendations are category 2A unless otherwise indicated.

Clinical Trials: NCCN believes that the best management of any cancer patient is in a clinical trial. Participation in clinical trials is especially encouraged. BINV-O

3 OF 7

DOSING SCHEDULES FOR CHEMOTHERAPY REGIMENS FOR RECURRENT OR METASTATIC BREAST CANCER

Chemotherapy combinations:

CAF chemotherapy20

• Cyclophosphamide 100 mg/m2 PO days 1–14

• Doxorubicin 30 mg/m2 IV days 1 & 8

• 5-uorouracil 500 mg/m2 IV days 1 & 8

Cycled every 28 days.

FAC chemotherapy21

• 5-uorouracil 500 mg/m2 IV days 1 & 8 or days 1 & 4

• Doxorubicin 50 mg/m2 IV day 1

(or by 72-h continuous infusion)

• Cyclophosphamide 500 mg/m2 IV day 1

Cycled every 21 days.

FEC chemotherapy22

• Cyclophosphamide 400 mg/m2 IV days 1 & 8

• Epirubicin 50 mg/m2 IV days 1 & 8

• 5-uorouracil 500 mg/m2 IV days 1 & 8

Cycled every 28 days.

AC chemotherapy23

• Doxorubicin 60 mg/m2 IV day 1

• Cyclophosphamide 600 mg/m2 IV day 1

Cycled every 21 days.

EC chemotherapy24

• Epirubicin 75 mg/m2 IV day 1

• Cyclophosphamide 600 mg/m2 IV day 1

Cycled every 21 days.

CMF chemotherapy25

• Cyclophosphamide 100 mg/m2 PO days 1–14

• Methotrexate 40 mg/m2 IV days 1 & 8

• 5-uorouracil 600 mg/m2 IV days 1 & 8

Cycled every 28 days.

Docetaxel/capecitabine chemotherapy26

• Docetaxel 75 mg/m2 IV day 1

• Capecitabine 950 mg/m2 PO twice daily days 1–14

Cycled every 21 days.

GT chemotherapy27

• Paclitaxel 175 mg/m2 IV day 1

• Gemcitabine 1250 mg/m2 IV days 1 & 8 (following paclitaxel on day 1)

Cycled every 21 days.

Gemcitabine/carboplatin28

• Gemcitabine 1000 mg/m2 on days 1 & 8

• Carboplatin AUC 2 IV on days 1 & 8

Cycled every 21 days.

Paclitaxel plus bevacizumab29

• Paclitaxel 90 mg/m2 by 1 h IV days 1, 8, & 15

• Bevacizumab 10 mg/kg IV days 1 & 15

Cycled every 28 days.

of anti-cancer agents and the management of associated toxicities in patients with cancer.

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Invasive Breast Cancer

NCCN Guidelines Index

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

Version 2.2016 05/06/16 © National Comprehensive Cancer Network, Inc. 2016, All rights reserved. The NCCN Guidelines® and this illustration may not be reproduced in any form without the express written permission of NCCN®.

Note: All recommendations are category 2A unless otherwise indicated.

Clinical Trials: NCCN believes that the best management of any cancer patient is in a clinical trial. Participation in clinical trials is especially encouraged. BINV-O

4 OF 7

DOSING SCHEDULES FOR CHEMOTHERAPY REGIMENS FOR HER2-POSITIVE RECURRENT OR METASTATIC BREAST CANCER

Preferred rst-line agents for HER2-positive disease:

Pertuzumab + trastuzumab + docetaxel30

• Pertuzumab 840 mg IV day 1 followed by 420 mg IV

• Trastuzumab 8 mg/kg IV day 1 followed by 6 mg/kg IV

• Docetaxel 75–100 mg/m2 IV day 1

Cycled every 21 days.

Pertuzumab + trastuzumab + paclitaxel31

• Pertuzumab 840 mg IV day 1 followed by 420 mg IV cycled every 21 days

• Trastuzumab

4 mg/kg IV day 1 followed by 2 mg/kg IV weekly

8 mg/kg IV day 1 followed by 6 mg/kg IV cycled every 21 days33

• Paclitaxel 80 mg/m2 IV day 1 weekly31

• Paclitaxel 175 mg/m2 day 1 cycled every 21 days

Other agents for HER2-positive disease:

Ado-trastuzumab emtansine (T-DM1)43

• 3.6 mg/kg IV day 1

Cycled every 21 days.

Paclitaxel/carboplatin + trastuzumab32

• Carboplatin AUC 6 IV day 1

• Paclitaxel 175 mg/m2 IV day 1

Cycled every 21 days.

• Trastuzumab

4 mg/kg IV day 1 followed by 2 mg/kg IV weekly

8 mg/kg IV day 1 followed by 6 mg/kg IV every 21 days33

Weekly paclitaxel/carboplatin + trastuzumab34

• Paclitaxel 80 mg/m2 IV days 1, 8, & 15

• Carboplatin AUC 2 IV days 1, 8, & 15

Cycled every 28 days.

• Trastuzumab

4 mg/kg IV day 1 followed by 2 mg/kg IV weekly

8 mg/kg IV day 1 followed by 6 mg/kg IV every 21 days33

Trastuzumab + paclitaxel

• Paclitaxel

175 mg/m2 IV day 1 cycled every 21 days35

80–90 mg/m2 IV day 1 weekly36

• Trastuzumab

4 mg/kg IV day 1 followed by 2 mg/kg IV weekly

8 mg/kg IV day 1 followed by 6 mg/kg IV every 21 days33

Trastuzumab + docetaxel

• Docetaxel

80–100 mg/m2 IV day 1 cycled every 21 days37

35 mg/m2 IV days 1, 8, and 15 weekly38

• Trastuzumab

4 mg/kg IV day 1 followed by 2 mg/kg IV weekly

8 mg/kg IV day 1 followed by 6 mg/kg IV every 21 days33

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Invasive Breast Cancer

NCCN Guidelines Index

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

Version 2.2016 05/06/16 © National Comprehensive Cancer Network, Inc. 2016, All rights reserved. The NCCN Guidelines® and this illustration may not be reproduced in any form without the express written permission of NCCN®.

Note: All recommendations are category 2A unless otherwise indicated.

Clinical Trials: NCCN believes that the best management of any cancer patient is in a clinical trial. Participation in clinical trials is especially encouraged. BINV-O

5 OF 7

DOSING SCHEDULES FOR CHEMOTHERAPY REGIMENS FOR HER-2 POSITIVE RECURRENT OR METASTATIC BREAST CANCER

Trastuzumab + vinorelbine39

• Vinorelbine

25 mg/m2 IV day 1 weekly

30–35 mg/m2 IV days 1 and 8

Cycled every 21 days.

• Trastuzumab

4 mg/kg IV day 1 followed by 2 mg/kg IV weekly

8 mg/kg IV day 1 followed by 6 mg/kg IV every 21 days33

Trastuzumab + capecitabine41

• Capecitabine 1000–1250 mg/m2 PO twice daily days 1–14

cycled every 21 days

• Trastuzumab

4 mg/kg IV day 1 followed by 2 mg/kg IV weekly35,42

8 mg/kg IV day 1 followed by 6 mg/kg IV every 21 days33

Agents for trastuzumab-exposed HER2-positive disease:

Lapatinib + capecitabine44

• Lapatinib 1250 mg PO daily days 1–21

• Capecitabine 1000 mg/m2 PO twice daily days 1–14

Cycled every 21 days.

Trastuzumab + capecitabine45

• Capecitabine 1000–1250 mg/m2 PO twice daily days 1–14

Cycled every 21 days.

• Trastuzumab

4 mg/kg IV day 1 followed by 2 mg/kg IV weekly35,42

8 mg/kg IV day 1 followed by 6 mg/kg IV every 21 days33

Trastuzumab + lapatinib46

• Lapatinib 1000 mg PO daily

• Trastuzumab

4 mg/kg IV day 1 followed by 2 mg/kg IV weekly

8 mg/kg IV day 1 followed by 6 mg/kg IV every 21 days33

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Invasive Breast Cancer

NCCN Guidelines Index

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

Version 2.2016 05/06/16 © National Comprehensive Cancer Network, Inc. 2016, All rights reserved. The NCCN Guidelines® and this illustration may not be reproduced in any form without the express written permission of NCCN®.

Note: All recommendations are category 2A unless otherwise indicated.

Clinical Trials: NCCN believes that the best management of any cancer patient is in a clinical trial. Participation in clinical trials is especially encouraged. BINV-O

6 OF 7

1Chan S, Friedrichs K, Noel D, et al. Prospective randomized trial of docetaxel versus doxorubicin in patients with metastatic breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 1999;17:2341-

2354.

2Gasparini G, Dal Fior S, Panizzoni GA, et al. Weekly epirubicin versus doxorubicin as second line therapy in advanced breast cancer. A randomized clinical trial. Am J

Clin Oncol 1991;14:38-44.

3O'Brien ME, Wigler N, Inbar M, et al. Reduced cardiotoxicity and comparable efficacy in a phase III trial of pegylated liposomal doxorubicin HCl (CAELYX/Doxil) versus

conventional doxorubicin for first-line treatment of metastatic breast cancer. Ann Oncol 2004;15:440-449.

4Seidman AD, Tiersten A, Hudis C, et al. Phase II trial of paclitaxel by 3-hour infusion as initial and salvage chemotherapy for metastatic breast cancer. J Clin Oncol

1995;13:2575-2581.

5Perez EA, Vogel CL, Irwin DH, et al. Multicenter phase II trial of weekly paclitaxel in women with metastatic breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 2001;19:4216-4223.

6Bajetta E, Procopio G, Celio L, et al. Safety and efficacy of two different doses of capecitabine in the treatment of advanced breast cancer in older women. J Clin Oncol

2005;23:2155-2161.

7Seidman AD. Gemcitabine as single-agent therapy in the management of advanced breast cancer. Oncology (Williston Park) 2001;15:11-14.

8Zelek L, Barthier S, Riofrio M, et al. Weekly vinorelbine is an effective palliative regimen after failure with anthracyclines and taxanes in metastatic breast carcinoma.

Cancer 2001;92:2267-2272.

9Cortes J, O'Shaughnessy J, Loesch D, et al. Eribulin monotherapy versus treatment of physician's choice in patients with metastatic breast cancer (EMBRACE): a

phase 3 open-label randomised study. Lancet 2011;377:914-923.

10Licchetta A, Correale P, Migali C, et al. Oral metronomic chemo-hormonal-therapy of metastatic breast cancer with cyclophosphamide and megestrol acetate. J

Chemother 2010;22(3):201-4.

11Isakoff SJ, Mayer EL, He L, et al. TBCRC009: A multicenter phase II clinical trial of platinum monotherapy with biomarker assessment in metastatic triple-negative

breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 2016 June 10;33(17):1902-9 doi:10.1200/JCO.2014.57.6660.Epub 2016 Apr 6.

12Burris HA, 3rd. Single-agent docetaxel (Taxotere) in randomized phase III trials. Semin Oncol 1999;26:1-6.

13Harvey V, Mouridsen H, Semiglazov V, et al: Phase III trial comparing three doses of docetaxel for second-line treatment of advanced breast cancer. J Clin Oncol

2006;24(31):4963-70.

14Rivera E, Mejia JA, Arun BJ, et al. Phase 3 study comparing the use of docetaxel on an every-3-week versus weekly schedule in the treatment of metastatic breast

cancer. Cancer 2008 Apr 1;112(7):1455-61.

15Gradishar WJ, Tjulandin S, Davidson N, et al. Phase III trial of nanoparticle albumin-bound paclitaxel compared with polyethylated castor oil-based paclitaxel in

women with breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 2005;23:7794-7803.

16Gradishar W, Dimitry K, Sergey C, et al: Significantly longer progression-free survival with nab-paclitaxel compared with docetaxel as first-line therapy for metastatic

breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 2009;27(22):3611-9.

17Silver DP, Richardson AL, Eklund AC, et al. Efficacy of neoadjuvant cisplatin in triple-negative breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 2010;28(7):1145-53.

18Bastholt L, Dalmark M, Gjedde SB, et al. Dose-response relationship of epirubicin in the treatment of postmenopausal patients with metastatic breast cancer: a

randomized study of epirubicin at four different dose levels performed by the Danish Breast Cancer Cooperative Group. J Clin Oncol 1996;14:1146-1155.

19Perez E, Lerzo G, Pivot X, et al. Efficacy and safety of ixabepilone (BMS-247550) in a phase II study of patients with advanced breast cancer resistant to an

anthracycline, a taxane, and capecitabine. J Clin Oncol 2007;25(23):3407-14.

20Bull JM, Tormey DC, Li SH, et al. A randomized comparative trial of adriamycin versus methotrexate in combination drug therapy. Cancer 1978;41:1649-1657.

21Hortobagyi GN, Gutterman JU, Blumenschein GR, et al: Combination chemoimmunotherapy of metastatic breast cancer with 5-fluorouracil, adriamycin,

cyclophosphamide, and BCG. Cancer 1979;43:1225-33.

22Ackland SP, Anton A, Breitbach GP, et al. Dose-intensive epirubicin-based chemotherapy is superior to an intensive intravenous cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and

fluorouracil regimen in metastatic breast cancer: a randomized multinational study. J Clin Oncol 2001;19:943-953.

23Nabholtz JM, Falkson C, Campos D, et al: Docetaxel and doxorubicin compared with doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide as first-line chemotherapy for metastatic

breast cancer: results of a randomized, multicenter, phase III trial. J Clin Oncol 2003; 21(6): 968-75.

REFERENCES

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Invasive Breast Cancer

NCCN Guidelines Index

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

Version 2.2016 05/06/16 © National Comprehensive Cancer Network, Inc. 2016, All rights reserved. The NCCN Guidelines® and this illustration may not be reproduced in any form without the express written permission of NCCN®.

Note: All recommendations are category 2A unless otherwise indicated.

Clinical Trials: NCCN believes that the best management of any cancer patient is in a clinical trial. Participation in clinical trials is especially encouraged. BINV-O

7 OF 7

24Langley RE, Carmichel J, Jones AL, et al. Phase III trial of epirubicin plus paclitaxel compared with epirubicin plus cyclphosphamide as first-line chemotherapy for

metastatic breast cancer: United Kingdom Cancer Research Institute. J Clin Oncol 2005;23:8322-8330.

25Bonadonna G, Brusamolino E, Valagussa P, et al. Combination chemotherapy as an adjuvant treatment in operable breast cancer. N Engl J Med 1976;294:405-410.

26Mavroudis D, Papakotoulas P, Ardavanis A, et al. Randomized phase III trial comparing docetaxel plus epirubicin versus docetaxel plus capecitabine as first-line

treatment in women with advanced breast cancer. Ann Oncol 21:48(2010).

27Albain KS, Nag S, Calderillo-Ruiz G, et al. Gemcitabine plus paclitaxel versus paclitaxel monotherapy in patients with metastatic breast cancer and prior anthracycline

treatment. J Clin Oncol 2008;26(24):3950-7.

28O’Shaughnessy J, Schwartzberg LS, Danso MA, et al. A randomized phase III study of iniparib (BSI-201) in combination with gemcitabine/carboplatin (G/C) in

metastatic triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC). [abstract]. J Clin Oncol 2011;29 (Suppl_15):Abstract 1007.

29Miller K, Wang M, Gralow J, et al. Paclitaxel plus bevacizumab versus paclitaxel alone for metastatic breast cancer. N Engl J Med 2007;357:2666-2676.

30Baselga J, Cortes J, Kim SB, et al. Pertuzumab plus trastuzumab plus docetaxel for metastatic breast cancer. N Engl J Med 2012;366:109-119.

31Datko F, D'Andrea G, Dickler M, et al. Phase II study of pertuzumab, trastuzumab, and weekly paclitaxel in patients with metastatic HER2-overexpressing metastatic

breast cancer [abstract]. Cancer Research 2012;72:Abstract P5-18-20.

32Robert N, Leyland-Jones B, Asmar L, et al. Randomized phase III study of trastuzumab, paclitaxel, and carboplatin compared with trastuzumab and paclitaxel in

women with HER-2-overexpressing metastatic breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 2006;24:2786-2792.

33Leyland-Jones B, Gelmon K, Ayoub JP, et al. Pharmacokinetics, safety, and efficacy of trastuzumab administered every three weeks in combination with paclitaxel.

J Clin Oncol 2003;21:3965-3971.

34Perez EA, Suman VJ, Rowland KM, et al. Two concurrent phase II trials of paclitaxel/carboplatin/trastuzumab (weekly or every-3-week schedule) as first-line therapy

in women with HER2-overexpressing metastatic breast cancer: NCCTG study 983252. Clin Breast Cancer 2005;6:425-432.

35Slamon DJ, Leyland-Jones B, Shak S, et al. Use of chemotherapy plus a monoclonal antibody against HER2 for metastatic breast cancer that overexpresses HER2.

N Engl J Med 2001;344:783-792.

36Seidman A, Berry DA, Cirrincione C, et al. Randomized phase III trial of weekly compared with every-3-weeks paclitaxel for metastatic breast cancer, with trastuzumab

for all HER-2 overexpressors and random assignment to trastuzumab or not in HER-2 nonoverexpressors: final results of Cancer and Leukemia Group B protocol

9840. J Clin Oncol 2008;26:1642-1649.

37Marty M, Cognetti F, Maraninchi D, et al. Randomized phase II trial of the efficacy and safety of trastuzumab combined with docetaxel in patients with human

epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive metastatic breast cancer administered as first-line treatment: the M77001 study group. J Clin Oncol 2005;23:4265-4274.

38Esteva FJ, Valero V, Booser D, et al. Phase II study of weekly docetaxel and trastuzumab for patients with HER-2-overexpressing metastatic breast cancer. J Clin

Oncol 2002;20:1800-1808.

39Burstein HJ, Keshaviah A, Baron AD, et al. Trastuzumab plus vinorelbine or taxane chemotherapy for HER2-overexpressing metastatic breast cancer: the trastuzumab

and vinorelbine or taxane study. Cancer 2007;110:965-972.

40Andersson M, Lidbrink E, Bjerre K, et al. Phase III randomized study comparing docetaxel plus trastuzumab with vinorelbine plus trastuzumab as first-line therapy of

metastatic or locally advanced human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive breast cancer: the HERNATA study. J Clin Oncol 2011;29:264-271.

41von Minckwitz G, du Bois A, Schmidt M, et al. Trastuzumab beyond progression in human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive advanced breast cancer: a

german breast group 26/breast international group 03-05 study. J Clin Oncol 2009;27:1999-2006.

42Cobleigh MA, Vogel CL, Tripathy D, et al. Multinational study of the efficacy and safety of humanized anti-HER2 monoclonal antibody in women who have HER2-

overexpressing metastatic breast cancer that has progressed after chemotherapy for metastatic disease. J Clin Oncol 1999;17:2639-2648.

43Verma S, Miles D, Gianni L, et al. Trastuzumab emtansine for HER2-positive advanced breast cancer [supplementary appendix available online]. N Engl J Med

2012;367:1783-1791.

44Geyer C, Forster J, Lindquist D, et al. Lapatinib plus capecitabine for HER2-positive advanced breast cancer. N Engl J Med 2006;355:2733-2743.

45Bartsch R, Wenzel C, Altorjai G, et al. Capecitabine and trastuzumab in heavily pretreated metastatic breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 2007;25:3853-3858.

46Blackwell KL, Burstein H, et al. Randomized study of lapatinib alone or in combination with trastuzumab in women with ErbB2-positive, trastuzumab-refractory

metastatic breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 2010;28(7):1124-30.

REFERENCES

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Invasive Breast Cancer

NCCN Guidelines Index

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

Version 2.2016 05/06/16 © National Comprehensive Cancer Network, Inc. 2016, All rights reserved. The NCCN Guidelines® and this illustration may not be reproduced in any form without the express written permission of NCCN®.

Note: All recommendations are category 2A unless otherwise indicated.

Clinical Trials: NCCN believes that the best management of any cancer patient is in a clinical trial. Participation in clinical trials is especially encouraged. BINV-P

1 OF 3

1Rising tumor markers (eg, CEA, CA15-3, CA27.29) are concerning for tumor progression, but may also be seen in the setting of responding disease. An isolated

increase in tumor markers should rarely be used to declare progression of disease. Changes in bone lesions are often difficult to assess on plain or cross-sectional

radiology or on bone scan. For these reasons, patient symptoms and serum tumor markers may be more helpful in patients with bone-dominant metastatic disease.

PRINCIPLES OF MONITORING METASTATIC DISEASE

Monitoring of patient symptoms and cancer burden during treatment of metastatic breast cancer is important to determine whether the treatment

is providing benet and that the patient does not have toxicity from an ineffective therapy.

Components of Monitoring:

Monitoring includes periodic assessment of varied combinations of symptoms, physical examination, routine laboratory tests, imaging studies,

and blood biomarkers where appropriate. Results of monitoring are classied as response/continued response to treatment, stable disease,

uncertainty regarding disease status, or progression of disease. The clinician typically must assess and balance multiple different forms of

information to make a determination regarding whether disease is being controlled and the toxicity of treatment is acceptable. Sometimes, this

information may be contradictory.

Denition of Disease Progression:

Unequivocal evidence of progression of disease by one or more of these factors is required to establish progression of disease, either because

of ineffective therapy or acquired resistance of disease to an applied therapy. Progression of disease may be identied through evidence of

growth or worsening of disease at previously known sites of disease and/or of the occurrence of new sites of metastatic disease.

• Findings concerning for progression of disease include:

Worsening symptoms such as pain or dyspnea

Evidence of worsening or new disease on physical examination

Declining performance status

Unexplained weight loss

Increasing alkaline phosphatase, ALT, AST, or bilirubin

Hypercalcemia

New radiographic abnormality or increase in the size of pre-existing radiographic abnormality

New areas of abnormality on functional imaging (eg, bone scan, PET/CT scan)

Increasing tumor markers (eg, CEA, CA15-3, CA27.29)1

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Invasive Breast Cancer

NCCN Guidelines Index

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

Version 2.2016 05/06/16 © National Comprehensive Cancer Network, Inc. 2016, All rights reserved. The NCCN Guidelines® and this illustration may not be reproduced in any form without the express written permission of NCCN®.

Note: All recommendations are category 2A unless otherwise indicated.

Clinical Trials: NCCN believes that the best management of any cancer patient is in a clinical trial. Participation in clinical trials is especially encouraged. BINV-P

2 OF 3

Continued on next page

PRINCIPLES OF MONITORING METASTATIC DISEASE

Use of Objective Criteria for Response/Stability/Progression:

• The most accurate assessments of disease activity typically occur when previously abnormal studies are repeated on a serial and regular

basis. Generally, the same method of assessment should be used over time (eg, an abnormality found on chest CT scan should generally be

monitored with repeat chest CT scans).

• Some non-clinically important variation in measurement of abnormalities by all serial studies is common and expected. Therefore, the use

of objective and widely accepted criteria for response, stability, and progression of disease are encouraged. Such systems include the

Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors (RECIST) guidelines (Eisenhauer EA, Therasse P, Bogaerts J, et al. New response evaluation

criteria in solid tumours: revised RECIST guideline (version 1.1). Eur J Cancer 2009;45:228-247) and the WHO criteria (Miller AB, Hoogstraten

B, Staquet M, and Winkler A. Reporting results of cancer treatment. Cancer 1981;47:207-214).

• Studies of functional imaging, such as radionuclide bone scans and PET imaging, are particularly challenging when used to assess

response. In the case of bone scans, responding disease may result in a are or increased activity on the scan that may be misinterpreted

as disease progression, especially on the rst follow-up bone scan after initiating a new therapy. PET imaging is challenging because of the

absence of a reproducible, validated, and widely accepted set of standards for disease activity assessment.

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Invasive Breast Cancer

NCCN Guidelines Index

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

Version 2.2016 05/06/16 © National Comprehensive Cancer Network, Inc. 2016, All rights reserved. The NCCN Guidelines® and this illustration may not be reproduced in any form without the express written permission of NCCN®.

Note: All recommendations are category 2A unless otherwise indicated.

Clinical Trials: NCCN believes that the best management of any cancer patient is in a clinical trial. Participation in clinical trials is especially encouraged. BINV-P

3 OF 3

1In patients who have long-term stable disease, the frequency of monitoring can be reduced.

PRINCIPLES OF MONITORING METASTATIC DISEASE

Suggested intervals of follow-up for patients with metastatic disease1

Baseline prior to new

therapy

Chemotherapy Endocrine therapy Restaging if concern for

progression of disease

Symptom assessment Yes Prior to each cycle Every 1–3 months Yes

Physical examination Yes Prior to each cycle Every 1–3 months Yes

Performance status Yes Prior to each cycle Every 1–3 months Yes

Weight Yes Prior to each cycle Every 1–3 months Yes

LFTs, CBC Yes Prior to each cycle Every 1–3 months Yes

CT scan

chest/abd/pelvis

Yes Every 2–4 cycles Every 2–6 months Yes

Bone scan Yes Every 4 cycles Every 4–6 months Yes

PET/CT Optional Unknown Unknown Optional

Tumor markers Optional Optional Optional Optional

Frequency of Monitoring:

The optimal frequency of repeat testing is uncertain, and is primarily based on the monitoring strategies utilized in breast cancer clinical

trials. The frequency of monitoring must balance the need to detect progressive disease, avoid unnecessary toxicity of any ineffective

therapy, resource utilization, and determine cost. The following table is to provide guidance, and should be modied for the individual patient

based on sites of disease, biology of disease, and length of time on treatment. Reassessment of disease activity should be performed in

patients with new or worsening signs or symptoms of disease, regardless of the time interval from previous studies.

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Invasive Breast Cancer

NCCN Guidelines Index

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

Version 2.2016 05/06/16 © National Comprehensive Cancer Network, Inc. 2016, All rights reserved. The NCCN Guidelines® and this illustration may not be reproduced in any form without the express written permission of NCCN®.

Note: All recommendations are category 2A unless otherwise indicated.

Clinical Trials: NCCN believes that the best management of any cancer patient is in a clinical trial. Participation in clinical trials is especially encouraged.

PHYLL-1

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Phyllodes Tumor

CLINICAL PRESENTATION WORKUP FINDINGS TREATMENT

aFNA or core biopsy may not distinguish a fibroadenoma from a phyllodes tumor in some cases. The sensitivity of core biopsy for the diagnosis of phyllodes tumor is

greater than that of FNA biopsy, but neither core biopsy nor FNA biopsy can always differentiate phyllodes tumors from fibroadenomas. In cases with clinical suspicion

for phyllodes tumor, excision of the lesion may be needed for definitive pathologic classification.

bExcisional biopsy includes complete mass removal, but without the intent of obtaining surgical margins.

cWide excision means excision with the intention of obtaining surgical margins ≥1 cm. Narrow surgical margins are associated with heightened local recurrence risk, but

are not an absolute indication for mastectomy when partial mastectomy fails to achieve margin width ≥1 cm.

dThere are no prospective randomized data supporting the use of radiation treatment with phyllodes tumors. However, in the setting where additional recurrence would

create significant morbidity (eg, chest wall recurrence following mastectomy), radiation therapy may be considered following the same principles that are applied to the

treatment of soft tissue sarcoma.

Clinical suspicion of phyllodes

tumor:

• Palpable mass

• Rapid growth

• Large size (>3 cm)

• Imaging with ultrasound

suggestive of broadenoma except

for size and/or history of growth

• History and

physical exam

• Ultrasound

• Mammogram for

women ≥30 y

Excisional

biopsyb

Core needle

biopsya

Phyllodes tumor

includes benign,

borderline, and

malignant

Fibroadenoma

Invasive or

in situ cancer

Fibroadenoma

or indeterminate

Phyllodes tumor

includes benign,

borderline, and

malignant

Invasive or

in situ cancer

Observe

Wide excisionc

without axillary stagingd

See appropriate

guidelines

Excisional

biopsyb

See ndings

above

Wide excisionc

without axillary stagingd

See appropriate

guidelines

NCCN Guidelines Index

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

Version 2.2016 05/06/16 © National Comprehensive Cancer Network, Inc. 2016, All rights reserved. The NCCN Guidelines® and this illustration may not be reproduced in any form without the express written permission of NCCN®.

Note: All recommendations are category 2A unless otherwise indicated.

Clinical Trials: NCCN believes that the best management of any cancer patient is in a clinical trial. Participation in clinical trials is especially encouraged.

PHYLL-2

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Phyllodes Tumor

aFNA or core biopsy may not distinguish a fibroadenoma from a phyllodes tumor in some cases. The sensitivity of core biopsy for the diagnosis of phyllodes tumor is

greater than that of FNA biopsy, but neither core biopsy nor FNA biopsy can always differentiate phyllodes tumors from fibroadenomas. In cases with clinical suspicion

for phyllodes tumor, excision of the lesion may be needed for definitive pathologic classification.

eThere are no prospective randomized data supporting the use of radiation treatment with phyllodes tumors. However, in the setting where additional recurrence would

create significant morbidity (eg, chest wall recurrence following mastectomy), radiation therapy may be considered following the same principles that are applied to the

treatment of soft tissue sarcoma.

PHYLLODES TUMOR RECURRENCE

CLINICAL PRESENTATION WORKUP FINDINGS TREATMENT

Locally recurrent breast

mass following excision

of phyllodes tumor

• History and physical

exam

• Ultrasound

• Mammogram

• Tissue samplinga

(histology preferred)

• Consider chest imaging

No metastatic

disease

Metastatic

disease

Re-excision with wide

margins without axillary

staging

Metastatic disease management following

principles of soft tissue sarcoma

(See NCCN Guidelines for Soft Tissue Sarcoma)

Consider post-

operative radiation

(category 2B)e

NCCN Guidelines Index

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

Version 2.2016 05/06/16 © National Comprehensive Cancer Network, Inc. 2016, All rights reserved. The NCCN Guidelines® and this illustration may not be reproduced in any form without the express written permission of NCCN®.

Note: All recommendations are category 2A unless otherwise indicated.

Clinical Trials: NCCN believes that the best management of any cancer patient is in a clinical trial. Participation in clinical trials is especially encouraged.

PAGET-1

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Paget’s Disease

aNipple or areolar eczema, ulceration, bleeding, or itching.

CLINICAL

PRESENTATION

WORKUP

Clinical suspicion

of Paget’s diseasea

• Clinical breast exam

• Diagnostic bilateral mammogram,

ultrasound as necessary

Examination or imaging

positive for breast lesion

Examination and imaging

negative for breast lesion

See PAGET-2

NCCN Guidelines Index

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

Version 2.2016 05/06/16 © National Comprehensive Cancer Network, Inc. 2016, All rights reserved. The NCCN Guidelines® and this illustration may not be reproduced in any form without the express written permission of NCCN®.

Note: All recommendations are category 2A unless otherwise indicated.

Clinical Trials: NCCN believes that the best management of any cancer patient is in a clinical trial. Participation in clinical trials is especially encouraged.

PAGET-2

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Paget’s Disease

bTo assess the extent of disease or to confirm additional disease, consider MRI. See Principles of Dedicated Breast MRI Testing (BINV-B).

cMastectomy is always an option with any manifestation of Paget’s disease (See Discussion section).

WORKUP TREATMENT

Examination

or imaging

positive for

breast lesion

Examination

and imaging

negative for

breast lesion

Core biopsy of

breast lesion and

full-thickness skin

biopsy of involved

NAC

Full-thickness

skin biopsy of

involved NAC

Breast and NAC

biopsy negative

Clinical follow-up

Re-biopsy if not healing

Breast DCISb

and NAC Paget’s

Breast invasive cancer

and NAC Paget’sb

Breast negative for

cancer and positive

NAC Paget’sb

NAC biopsy positive

for Paget’sb

NAC biopsy

negative for Paget’s

See NCCN Guidelines for Noninvasive Breast

Cancer for DCIS (DCIS-1)

See NCCN Guidelines for Invasive Breast

Cancer (BINV-1)

Clinical follow-up

Re-biopsy if not healing

Appropriate

systemic

adjuvant therapy

as clinically

indicated

See NCCN

Guidelines for

DCIS or Invasive

Breast Cancer

Consider

MRI and

tissue

sampling

Central lumpectomy including NAC

with whole breast radiation therapy

Total mastectomyc ± sentinel node

biopsy with or without breast

reconstruction

Central lumpectomy including NAC

± sentinel node biopsy without

radiation therapy (category 2B)

NCCN Guidelines Index

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

Version 2.2016 05/06/16 © National Comprehensive Cancer Network, Inc. 2016, All rights reserved. The NCCN Guidelines® and this illustration may not be reproduced in any form without the express written permission of NCCN®.

Note: All recommendations are category 2A unless otherwise indicated.

Clinical Trials: NCCN believes that the best management of any cancer patient is in a clinical trial. Participation in clinical trials is especially encouraged.

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Breast Cancer During Pregnancy

PREG-1

aConsiderations and selection of optimal local therapy and systemic therapy are similar to that recommended in non-pregnancy-associated breast cancer; see other

sections of this guideline. However, the selection and timing of chemotherapy, endocrine therapy, and radiation therapy is different in the pregnant versus non-pregnant

patient (See Discussion section). Chemotherapy should not be administered during the first trimester of pregnancy, and radiation therapy should not be administered

during any trimester of pregnancy. Most experience with chemotherapy during pregnancy for breast cancer is from regimens that utilize various combinations of

doxorubicin, cyclophosphamide, and fluorouracil. Considerations for postpartum chemotherapy are the same as for non-pregnancy-associated breast cancer.

bUse of blue dye is contraindicated in pregnancy; radiolabeled sulfur colloid appears to be safe for sentinel node biopsy in pregnancy.

See Surgical Axillary Staging (BINV-D).

cThere are insufficient safety data to recommend general use of taxanes during pregnancy. However, the use of paclitaxel weekly administration after the first trimester

is acceptable if clinically indicated by disease status. The use of anti-HER2 therapy is contraindicated during pregancy.

CLINICAL PRESENTATION PRIMARY TREATMENTa,b ADJUVANT TREATMENTa,c

Pregnant patient with

conrmed breast

cancer diagnosis by

FNA or core biopsy;

No distant metastases

on staging

1st

trimester

2nd trimester/

Early 3rd trimester

Late 3rd

trimester

Discuss

termination:

Non-

therapeutic

Continuing

pregnancy

Preoperative chemotherapy,a,c

mastectomy, or breast-

conserving surgery + axillary

staginga,b,c postpartum

Begin adjuvant chemotherapy

in 2nd trimestera,c

± Adjuvant radiation therapy

postpartuma

± Adjuvant endocrine therapy

postpartuma

Mastectomy +

axillary staginga,b

Mastectomya or breast-

conserving surgery +

axillary staginga,b

Adjuvant chemotherapya,c

± Adjuvant radiation therapy

postpartuma

± Adjuvant endocrine therapy

postpartuma

± Adjuvant radiation therapy

postpartuma

± Adjuvant endocrine therapy

postpartuma

Adjuvant chemotherapya,c

± Adjuvant radiation therapy

postpartuma

± Adjuvant endocrine therapy

postpartuma

Mastectomya or breast-

conserving surgery + axillary

staginga,b,c

NCCN Guidelines Index

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

Version 2.2016 05/06/16 © National Comprehensive Cancer Network, Inc. 2016, All rights reserved. The NCCN Guidelines® and this illustration may not be reproduced in any form without the express written permission of NCCN®.

Note: All recommendations are category 2A unless otherwise indicated.

Clinical Trials: NCCN believes that the best management of any cancer patient is in a clinical trial. Participation in clinical trials is especially encouraged.

IBC-1

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Inammatory Breast Cancer

CLINICAL PRESENTATIONaWORKUP

Clinical

pathologic

diagnosis of

inammatory

breast cancer

(IBC)

Stage T4d, N0-

N3, M0

• History and physical exam by multidisciplinary team

• CBC

• Liver function tests

• Pathology reviewb

• Determination of tumor ER/PR status and

HER2 statusc

• Bilateral diagnostic mammogram, ultrasound as

necessary

• Breast MRI (optional)

• Fertility counseling if premenopausald

• Bone scan or sodium uoride PET/CT (category 2B)e

• Chest/abdominal/pelvic diagnostic CT (category 2B)

• Chest diagnostic CT (if pulmonary symptoms are

present)

• Genetic counseling if patient is high risk for

hereditary breast cancerf

• FDG PET/CT scang,h (category 2B)

Preoperative systemic

therapy,i anthracycline +

taxane (preferred).i If tumor

HER2 positive, HER2-

targeted therapyj

Responsek

responsek

aInflammatory breast cancer is a clinical syndrome in women with invasive breast

cancer that is characterized by erythema and edema (peau d'orange) of a third

or more of the skin of the breast. The differential diagnosis includes cellulitis of

the breast or mastitis. Pathologically, a tumor is typically present in the dermal

lymphatics of the involved skin, but dermal lymphatic involvement is neither

required, nor sufficient by itself for a diagnosis of inflammatory breast cancer.

bThe panel endorses the College of American Pathologists Protocol for pathology

reporting for all invasive and noninvasive carcinomas of the breast.

http://www.cap.org.

cSee Principles of HER2 Testing (BINV-A).

dSee Fertility and Birth Control (BINV-C).

eIf FDG PET/CT is performed and clearly indicates bone metastasis on both the PET

and CT component, bone scan or sodium fluoride PET/CT may not be needed.

fSee NCCN Guidelines for Genetic/Familial High-Risk Assessment: Breast and

Ovarian.

gFDG PET/CT can be performed at the same time as diagnostic CT. FDG PET/CT

is most helpful in situations where standard staging studies are equivocal or

suspicious, especially in the setting of locally advanced or metastatic disease.

hFDG PET/CT may also be helpful in identifying unsuspected regional nodal

disease and/or distant metastases in locally advanced breast cancer when

used in addition to standard staging studies.

iSee Preoperative Systemic Therapy/Adjuvant Chemotherapy (BINV-K).

jA pertuzumab-containing regimen may be administered preoperatively to

patients with HER2-positive IBC.

kThe accurate assessment of in-breast tumor or regional lymph node response

to preoperative systemic therapy is difficult, and should include physical

examination and performance of imaging studies (mammogram and/or breast

MRI) that were abnormal at the time of initial tumor staging. Selection of

imaging methods prior to surgery should be determined by the multidisciplinary

team.

NCCN Guidelines Index

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

Version 2.2016 05/06/16 © National Comprehensive Cancer Network, Inc. 2016, All rights reserved. The NCCN Guidelines® and this illustration may not be reproduced in any form without the express written permission of NCCN®.

Note: All recommendations are category 2A unless otherwise indicated.

Clinical Trials: NCCN believes that the best management of any cancer patient is in a clinical trial. Participation in clinical trials is especially encouraged.

IBC-2

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Inammatory Breast Cancer

kThe accurate assessment of in-breast tumor or regional lymph node response to preoperative systemic therapy is difficult, and should include physical examination and

performance of imaging studies (mammogram and/or breast MRI) that were abnormal at the time of initial tumor staging. Selection of imaging methods prior to surgery

should be determined by the multidisciplinary team.

lPatients with stage IV or recurrent IBC should be treated according to the guideline for recurrence/stage IV disease (BINV-17 to BINV-22).

mSee Principles of Breast Reconstruction Following Surgery (BINV-H).

nSee Chemotherapy Regimens for Recurrent or Metastatic Breast Cancer (BINV-O).

oSee Principles of Radiation Therapy (BINV-I).

TREATMENTl

Response

response

Total mastectomy + level l/ll axillary dissection +

radiation therapy to chest wall and supraclavicular

area (plus internal mammary nodes if involved,

consider internal mammary nodes if not clinically

involved [category 3]) ± delayed breast

reconstructionm

Consider additional systemic

chemotherapyn and/or

preoperative radiation

• Complete planned chemotherapy regimen course

if not completed preoperatively plus endocrine

treatment if ER-positive and/or PR-positive (sequential

chemotherapy followed by endocrine therapy).

• Complete up to one year of HER2-targeted therapy

if HER2 positive (category 1). May be administered

concurrently with radiation therapyo and with

endocrine therapy if indicated.

Responsek

No responsek

See above pathway

Individualized treatment

NCCN Guidelines Index

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

Version 2.2016 05/06/16 © National Comprehensive Cancer Network, Inc. 2016, All rights reserved. The NCCN Guidelines® and this illustration may not be reproduced in any form without the express written permission of NCCN®.

Note: All recommendations are category 2A unless otherwise indicated.

Clinical Trials: NCCN believes that the best management of any cancer patient is in a clinical trial. Participation in clinical trials is especially encouraged.

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Breast Cancer

ST-1

Staging

Table 1

American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC)

TNM Staging System For Breast Cancer

Primary Tumor (T) The T classication of the primary tumor is the same

regardless of whether it is based on clinical or pathologic criteria, or both.

Size should be measured to the nearest millimeter. If the tumor size is slightly

less than or greater than a cutoff for a given T classication, it is recommended

that the size be rounded to the millimeter reading that is closest to the cutoff. For

example, a reported size of 1.1 mm is reported as 1 mm, or a size of 2.01 cm

is reported as 2.0 cm. Designation should be made with the subscript “c” or “p”

modier to indicate whether the T classication was determined by clinical (physical

examination or radiologic) or pathologic measurements, respectively. In general,

pathologic determination should take precedence over clinical determination of

T size.

TX Primary tumor cannot be assessed

T0 No evidence of primary tumor

Tis Carcinoma in situ

Tis (DCIS) Ductal carcinoma in situ

Tis (LCIS) Lobular carcinoma in situ

Tis (Paget's) Paget’s disease of the nipple NOT associated with invasive

carcinoma and/or carcinoma in situ (DCIS and/or LCIS) in

the underlying breast parenchyma. Carcinomas in the breast

parenchyma associated with Paget’s disease are categorized

based on the size and characteristics of the parenchymal disease,

although the presence of Paget’s disease should still be noted

T1 Tumor ≤20 mm or less in greatest dimension

T1mi Tumor ≤1 mm in greatest dimension

T1a Tumor >1 mm but ≤5 mm in greatest dimension

T1b Tumor >5 mm but ≤10 mm in greatest dimension

T1c Tumor >10 mm but ≤20 mm in greatest dimension

T2 Tumor >20 mm but ≤50 mm in greatest dimension

T3 Tumor >50 mm in greatest dimension

T4 Tumor of any size with direct extension to the chest wall and/or to

the skin (ulceration or skin nodules).

Note: Invasion of the dermis alone does not qualify as T4

T4a Extension to the chest wall, not including only pectoralis muscle

adherence/invasion

T4b Ulceration and/or ipsilateral satellite nodules and/or edema

(including peau d’orange) of the skin, which do not meet the

criteria for inammatory carcinoma

T4c Both T4a and T4b

T4d Inammatory carcinoma

NCCN Guidelines Index

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

Version 2.2016 05/06/16 © National Comprehensive Cancer Network, Inc. 2016, All rights reserved. The NCCN Guidelines® and this illustration may not be reproduced in any form without the express written permission of NCCN®.

Note: All recommendations are category 2A unless otherwise indicated.

Clinical Trials: NCCN believes that the best management of any cancer patient is in a clinical trial. Participation in clinical trials is especially encouraged.

ST-2

Table 1 (continued)

Regional Lymph Nodes (N)

Clinical

NX Regional lymph nodes cannot be assessed (e.g., previously

removed)

N0 No regional lymph node metastasis

N1 Metastases to movable ipsilateral level I, II axillary lymph node(s)

N2 Metastases in ipsilateral level I, II axillary lymph nodes that are

clinically xed or matted; or in clinically detected* ipsilateral

internal mammary nodes in the absence of clinically evident

axillary lymph node metastases

N2a Metastases in ipsilateral level I, II axillary lymph nodes xed to

one another (matted) or to other structures

N2b Metastases only in clinically detected* ipsilateral internal

mammary nodes and in the absence of clinically evident level I, II

axillary lymph node metastases

N3 Metastases in ipsilateral infraclavicular (level III axillary) lymph

node(s) with or without level I, II axillary lymph node involvement;

or in clinically detected* ipsilateral internal mammary lymph

node(s) with clinically evident level I, II axillary lymph node

metastases; or metastases in ipsilateral supraclavicular lymph

node(s) with or without axillary or internal mammary lymph node

involvement

N3a Metastasis in ipsilateral infraclavicular lymph node(s)

N3b Metastasis in ipsilateral internal mammary lymph node(s) and

axillary lymph node(s)

N3c Metastasis in ipsilateral supraclavicular lymph node(s)

*Note: Clinically detected is dened as detected by imaging studies (excluding

lymphoscintigraphy) or by clinical examination and having characteristics highly

suspicious for malignancy or a presumed pathologic macrometastasis based on

ne needle aspiration.

Pathologic (pN)*

pNX Regional lymph nodes cannot be assessed (e.g., previously

removed, or not removed for pathologic study)

pN0 No regional lymph node metastasis histologically

Note: Isolated tumor cell clusters (ITC) are dened as small clusters of cells not

greater than 0.2 mm, or single tumor cells, or a cluster of fewer than 200 cells in

a single histologic cross-section. ITCs may be detected by routine histology or by

immunohistochemical (IHC) methods. Nodes containing only ITCs are excluded

from the total positive node count for purposes of N classication but should be

included in the total number of nodes evaluated.

pN0(i-) No regional lymph node metastasis histologically, negative IHC

pN0(I+) Malignant cells in regional lymph node(s) no greater than 0.2 mm

(detected by H&E or IHC including ITC)

pN0(mol-) No regional lymph node metastases histologically, negative

molecular ndings (RT-PCR)

pN0(mol+) Positive molecular ndings (RT-PCR),** but no regional lymph

node metastases detected by histology or IHC

* Classication is based on axillary lymph node dissection with or without sentinel

lymph node biopsy. Classication based solely on sentinel lymph node biopsy

without subsequent axillary lymph node dissection is designated (sn) for “sentinel

node,” for example, pN0(sn).

** RT-PCR: reverse transcriptase/polymerase chain reaction.

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Breast Cancer Staging

NCCN Guidelines Index

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

Version 2.2016 05/06/16 © National Comprehensive Cancer Network, Inc. 2016, All rights reserved. The NCCN Guidelines® and this illustration may not be reproduced in any form without the express written permission of NCCN®.

Note: All recommendations are category 2A unless otherwise indicated.

Clinical Trials: NCCN believes that the best management of any cancer patient is in a clinical trial. Participation in clinical trials is especially encouraged.

ST-3

Table 1 (continued)

Pathologic (pN) (continued)

pN1 Micrometastases; or metastases in 1–3 axillary lymph nodes;

and/or in internal mammary nodes with metastases detected by

sentinel lymph node biopsy but not clinically detected***

pN1mi Micrometastases (greater than 0.2 mm and/or more than 200 cells,

but none greater than 2.0 mm)

pN1a Metastases in 1–3 axillary lymph nodes, at least one metastasis

greater than 2.0 mm

pN1b Metastases in internal mammary nodes with micrometastases or

macrometastases detected by sentinel lymph node biopsy but

not clinically detected***

pN1c Metastases in 1–3 axillary lymph nodes and in internal mammary

lymph nodes with micrometastases or macrometastases

detected by sentinel lymph node biopsy but not clinically

detected

pN2 Metastases in 4–9 axillary lymph nodes; or in clinically

detected**** internal mammary lymph nodes in the absence

of axillary lymph node metastases

pN2a Metastases in 4–9 axillary lymph nodes (at least one tumor

deposit greater than 2.0 mm)

pN2b Metastases in clinically detected**** internal mammary lymph

nodes in the absence of axillary lymph node metastases

pN3 Metastases in ten or more axillary lymph nodes; or in

infraclavicular (level III axillary) lymph nodes; or in clinically

detected**** ipsilateral internal mammary lymph nodes in the

presence of one or more positive level I, II axillary lymph nodes;

or in more than three axillary lymph nodes and in internal mammary

lymph nodes with micrometastases or macrometastases detected

by sentinel lymph node biopsy but not clinically detected*** ; or in

ipsilateral supraclavicular lymph nodes

pN3a Metastases in ten or more axillary lymph nodes (at least one

tumor deposit greater than 2.0 mm); or metastases to the

infraclavicular (level III axillary lymph) nodes

pN3b Metastases in clinically detected**** ipsilateral internal mammary

lymph nodes in the presence of one or more positive axillary

lymph nodes; or in more than three axillary lymph nodes and

in internal mammary lymph nodes with micrometastases or

macrometastases detected by sentinel lymph node biopsy but

not clinically detected***

pN3c Metastasis in ipsilateral supraclavicular lymph nodes

*** “Not clinically detected” is dened as not detected by imaging studies

(excluding lymphoscintigraphy) or not detected by clinical examination.

**** “Clinically detected” is dened as detected by imaging studies (excluding

lymphoscintigraphy) or by clinical examination and having characteristics

highly suspicious for malignancy or a presumed pathologic macrometastasis

based on ne needle aspiration biopsy with cytologic examination.

Distant Metastasis (M)

M0 No clinical or radiographic evidence of distant metastases

cM0(I+) No clinical or radiographic evidence of distant metastases, but deposits

of molecularly or microscopically detected tumor cells in circulating

blood, bone marrow, or other nonregional nodal tissue that are no larger

than 0.2 mm in a patient without symptoms or signs of metastases

M1 Distant detectable metastases as determined by classic clinical and

radiographic means and/or histologically proven larger than 0.2 mm

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Breast Cancer Staging

NCCN Guidelines Index

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

Version 2.2016 05/06/16 © National Comprehensive Cancer Network, Inc. 2016, All rights reserved. The NCCN Guidelines® and this illustration may not be reproduced in any form without the express written permission of NCCN®.

Note: All recommendations are category 2A unless otherwise indicated.

Clinical Trials: NCCN believes that the best management of any cancer patient is in a clinical trial. Participation in clinical trials is especially encouraged.

ST-4

Table 1 (continued)

ANATOMIC STAGE/PROGNOSTIC GROUPS

Stage 0 Tis N0 M0

Stage IA T1* N0 M0

Stage IB T0 N1mi M0

T1* N1mi M0

Stage IIA T0 N1** M0

T1* N1** M0

T2 N0 M0

Stage IIB T2 N1 M0

T3 N0 M0

* T1 includes T1mi

** T0 and T1 tumors with nodal micrometastases only are excluded from

Stage IIA and are classied Stage IB.

• M0 includes M0(i+).

• The designation pM0 is not valid; any M0 should be clinical.

• If a patient presents with M1 prior to neoadjuvant systemic therapy, the

stage is considered Stage IV and remains Stage IV regardless of response

to neoadjuvant therapy.

• Stage designation may be changed if postsurgical imaging studies reveal

the presence of distant metastases, provided that the studies are carried

out within 4 months of diagnosis in the absence of disease progression and

provided that the patient has not received neoadjuvant therapy.

• Postneoadjuvant therapy is designated with “yc” or “yp” prex. Of note, no

stage group is assigned if there is a complete pathologic response (CR) to

neoadjuvant therapy, for example, ypT0ypN0cM0.

HISTOLOGIC GRADE (G)

All invasive breast carcinomas should be graded. The Nottingham combined

histologic grade (Elston-Ellis modication of Scarff–Bloom–Richardson

grading system) is recommended.1,2 The grade for a tumor is determined by

assessing morphologic features (tubule formation, nuclear pleomorphism, and

mitotic count), assigning a value of 1 (favorable) to 3 (unfavorable) for each

feature, and adding together the scores for all three categories. A combined

score of 3–5 points is designated as grade 1; a combined score of 6–7 points

is grade 2; a combined score of 8–9 points is grade 3.

HISTOLOGIC GRADE (NOTTINGHAM COMBINED HISTOLOGIC

GRADE IS RECOMMENDED)

GX Grade cannot be assessed

G1 Low combined histologic grade (favorable)

G2 Intermediate combined histologic grade (moderately favorable)

G3 High combined histologic grade (unfavorable)

HISTOPATHOLOGIC TYPE

The histopathologic types are the following:

In situ Carcinomas

NOS (not otherwise specied)

Intraductal

Paget's disease and intraductal

Invasive Carcinomas

NOS

Ductal

Inammatory

Medullary, NOS

Medullary with lymphoid stroma

Mucinous

1Harris L, Fritsche H, Mennel R, et al. American Society of Clinical Oncology 2007

update of recommendations for the use of tumor markers in breast cancer. J Clin

Oncol 2007;25:5287–312.

2Singletary SE, Allred C, Ashley P, et al. Revision of the American Joint Committee

on Cancer staging system for breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 2002;20:3628–36.

Used with the permission of the American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC),

Chicago Illinois. The original and primary source for this information is the

AJCC Cancer Staging Manual, Seventh Edition (2010) published by Springer

Science+Business Media, LLC (SBM). (For complete information and data

supporting the staging tables, visit www.cancerstaging.net.) Any citation or quotation

of this material must be credited to the AJCC as its primary source. The inclusion of

this information herein does not authorize any reuse or further distribution without

the expressed, written permission of Springer SBM, on behalf of the AJCC.

Stage IIIA T0 N2 M0

T1* N2 M0

T2 N2 M0

T3 N1 M0

T3 N2 M0

Stage IIIB T4 N0 M0

T4 N1 M0

T4 N2 M0

Stage IIIC Any T N3 M0

Stage IV Any T Any N M1

Papillary (predominantly micropapillary

pattern)

Tubular

Lobular

Paget's disease and inltrating

Undifferentiated

Squamous cell

Adenoid cystic

Secretory

Cribriform

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Breast Cancer Staging

Version 2.2016, 05/06/16 © National Comprehensive Cancer Network, Inc. 2016, All rights reserved. The NCCN Guidelines® and this illustration may not be reproduced in any form without the express written permission of NCCN ® MS-1

NCCN Guidelines Inde

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Breast Cancer

Discussion

NCCN Categories of Evidence and Consensus

Category 1: Based upon high-level evidence, there is uniform NCCN

consensus that the intervention is appropriate.

Category 2A: Based upon lower-level evidence, there is uniform

NCCN consensus that the intervention is appropriate.

Category 2B: Based upon lower-level evidence, there is NCCN

consensus that the intervention is appropriate.

Category 3: Based upon any level of evidence, there is major NCCN

disagreement that the intervention is appropriate.

All recommendations are category 2A unless otherwise noted.

Table of Contents

Overview ............................................................................................. 2

Literature Search Criteria and Guidelines Update Methodology .......... 2

Staging ............................................................................................... 3

Pathology Assessment ....................................................................... 3

Treatment Approach ........................................................................... 5

Pure Noninvasive Carcinomas (Stage 0) ............................................ 6

Lobular Carcinoma in Situ ............................................................... 6

Ductal Carcinoma in Situ ................................................................. 7

Invasive Breast Cancer ..................................................................... 13

Stage I, IIA, IIB, or III A (T3, N1, M0) ................................................ 13

Workup .......................................................................................... 13

Locoregional Treatment ................................................................ 15

Breast Reconstruction ................................................................... 22

Systemic Therapies (Preoperative and Adjuvant) .......................... 26

Post-Therapy Surveillance and Follow-up ..................................... 45

Stage III Invasive Breast Cancer ....................................................... 45

Staging and Workup ...................................................................... 45

Operable Locally Advanced Breast Cancer ................................... 47

Inoperable Locally Advanced Breast Cancer ................................. 47

Post-Therapy Surveillance and Follow-up for Stage I-III ................ 48

Stage IV Metastatic or Recurrent Breast Cancer .............................. 50

Staging and Workup ...................................................................... 50

Management of Local Disease Only .............................................. 51

Management of Stage IV or Recurrent Metastatic Disease ........... 52

Surgery for Stage IV or Recurrent Metastatic Disease .................. 63

Monitoring Metastatic Disease ...................................................... 64

Special Situations ............................................................................. 65

Paget’s Disease ............................................................................ 65

Phyllodes Tumors of the Breast..................................................... 66

Breast Cancer During Pregnancy .................................................. 67

Inflammatory Breast Cancer .......................................................... 69

Axillary Breast Cancer ................................................................... 72

Summary .......................................................................................... 73

References ....................................................................................... 74

NCCN Guidelines Inde

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Breast Cancer

Overview

Breast cancer is the most frequently diagnosed cancer globally and is

the leading cause of cancer-related death in women.1 The American

Cancer Society estimates that 249,260 Americans will be diagnosed

with invasive breast cancer and 40,890will die of the disease in the

United States in 2016.2

Historically, white women have had the highest breast cancer incidence

rates among women aged 40 years and older; however, incidence rates

are converging among white and African American women, particularly

among women aged 50 to 59 years.3 Since 1991, breast cancer

mortality has been declining,4,5 suggesting a benefit from the

combination of early detection and more effective treatment.6

The etiology of the vast majority of breast cancer cases is unknown.

However, numerous risk factors for the disease have been established.

These risk factors include: female gender; increasing patient age; family

history of breast cancer at a young age; early menarche; late

menopause; older age at first live childbirth; prolonged hormone

replacement therapy; previous exposure to therapeutic chest wall

irradiation; benign proliferative breast disease; increased

mammographic breast density; and genetic mutations such as of the

BRCA1/2 genes. However, except for female gender and increasing

patient age, these risk factors are associated with only a minority of

breast cancers. Women with a strong family history of breast cancer

should be evaluated according to the NCCN Guidelines for

Genetic/Familial High-Risk Assessment: Breast and Ovarian. Women at

increased risk for breast cancer (generally those with ≥1.7% 5-year risk

for breast cancer using the Gail model of risk assessment7) may

consider risk reduction strategies (see NCCN Guidelines for Breast

Cancer Risk Reduction).

Proliferative abnormalities of the breast are limited to the lobular and

ductal epithelium. In both the lobular and ductal epithelium, a spectrum

of proliferative abnormalities may be seen, including hyperplasia,

atypical hyperplasia, in situ carcinoma, and invasive carcinoma.8

Approximately 85% to 90% of invasive carcinomas are ductal in origin.9

The invasive ductal carcinomas include unusual variants of breast

cancer, such as mucinous, adenoid cystic, and tubular carcinomas,

which have especially favorable natural histories.

Literature Search Criteria and Guidelines Update

Methodology

Prior to the update of this version of the NCCN Guidelines® for Breast

Cancer, an electronic search of the PubMed database was performed

to obtain key literature in Breast Cancer, published between 06/19/14

and 06/29/15, using the following search terms: Breast Cancer OR

DCIS OR Inflammatory Breast Cancer OR Phyllodes. The PubMed

database was chosen as it remains the most widely used resource for

medical literature and indexes only peer-reviewed biomedical

literature.10

The search results were narrowed by selecting studies in humans

published in English. Results were confined to the following article

types: Clinical Trial, Phase III; Clinical Trial, Phase IV; Guideline;

Randomized Controlled Trial; Meta-Analysis; Systematic Reviews; and

Validation Studies.

The potential relevance of the PubMed search was examined. The data

from key PubMed articles selected by the panel for review during the

NCCN Guidelines Inde

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Breast Cancer

Guidelines update meeting as well as articles from additional sources

deemed as relevant to these Guidelines and discussed by the panel

have been included in this version of the Discussion section.

Recommendations for which high-level evidence is lacking are based

on the panel’s review of lower-level evidence and expert opinion.

The complete details of the Development and Update of the NCCN

Guidelines are available on the NCCN webpage.

Staging

All patients with breast cancer should be assigned a clinical stage of

disease, and, if appropriate evaluation is available, a pathologic stage

of disease. The routine use of staging allows for efficient identification of

local treatment options, assists in identifying systemic treatment

options, allows for the comparison of outcome results across institutions

and clinical trials, and provides baseline prognostic information.

Effective January 2010, the AJCC implemented a revision of the 7th

edition of the AJCC Cancer Staging Manual containing important

changes and additions to the TNM staging system for breast cancer.11

This revision differs from the 2003 edition of the AJCC staging manual

by providing more direction relating to the specific methods of clinical

and pathologic tumor measurement; recommending that all invasive

cancers should be assigned a combined histologic tumor grade using

the Elston-Ellis modification of the Scarff-Bloom-Richardson grading

system; providing clarification of the classification of isolated tumor cells

in axillary lymph node (ALN) staging; subdividing stage I into stage IA

and IB based upon the presence or absence of nodal micrometastases

(N0 versus N0mi+); and defining a new category of M0(i+) disease

referring to tumor cells microscopically detectable in bone marrow or

circulating blood or found incidentally in other tissues not exceeding 0.2

mm in patients who have no signs or symptoms of metastasis. This

version of the AJCC staging manual also recommends the collection of

biomarkers such as hormone receptor status (estrogen receptor [ER]

and progesterone receptor [PR]) and human epidermal growth factor

receptor 2 [HER2] status, although these characteristics do not

specifically influence assigned stage of disease.

Pathology Assessment

A central component of the treatment of breast cancer is full knowledge

of extent of disease and biologic features. These factors contribute to

the determination of the stage of disease, assist in the estimation of the

risk that the cancer will recur, and provide information that predicts

response to therapy (eg, ER, PR, HER2). These factors are determined

by examination of excised tissue and are provided in a written pathology

report. Accurate pathology reporting requires communication between

the clinician and the pathologist relating to relevant patient history, prior

breast biopsies, prior irradiation to the chest, pregnancy status,

characteristics of the abnormality biopsied (eg, palpable,

mammographically detected microcalcifications), clinical state of lymph

nodes, presence of inflammatory change or other skin abnormality, and

any prior treatment administered (eg, chemotherapy, radiation therapy).

The specimens should be oriented for the pathologist, and specific

requests for determination of biomarkers should be stated (eg, ER, PR,

and HER2 status). The use of consistent, unambiguous standards for

reporting is strongly encouraged. Data from both national and local

surveys show that as many as 50% of pathology reports for breast

cancer are missing some elements critical to patient management.12,13

Significant omissions include failure to orient and report surgical

margins and failure to report tumor grade consistently.

The College of American Pathologists (CAP) has developed pathology

reporting protocols to promote complete and standardized reporting of

NCCN Guidelines Inde

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Breast Cancer

malignant specimens. CAP provides a protocol for each disease site

that includes cancer case summaries (checklists) along with

background documentation. These checklists form the basis for a

synoptic, standardized reporting of pathologic findings. The checklists

are available without charge through the CAP website at www.cap.org.

Consistent, unambiguous, and complete pathology reporting is a

cornerstone of quality breast cancer care, and the NCCN Breast Cancer

Panel endorses the use of the CAP protocols for reporting the

pathologic analysis of all breast cancer specimens.

ER status should be determined for all samples of ductal carcinoma in

situ (DCIS), and ER and PR tumor status should be determined for all

samples of invasive breast cancer. ER and PR tumor status is normally

determined by immunohistochemistry (IHC) testing. Although this

method is considered reliable when performed by experienced

pathology personnel, there have been several reports indicating that the

reliability of ER and PR determinations can vary widely from one

laboratory to another.14-16 These inter-laboratory differences may be

attributable to the diverse methodologies and diverse interpretation

schema used to evaluate tumor hormonal status. An NCCN Task Force

and a panel of ASCO and CAP members have reviewed this topic and

issued recommendations on ER and PR testing in breast cancer.17,18

Breast cancers that have at least 1% of cells staining positive for ER

should be considered ER-positive.17-19

Principles of HER2 Testing

Along with ER and PR, the determination of HER2 tumor status is

recommended for all newly diagnosed invasive breast cancers and for

first recurrences of breast cancer whenever possible. The NCCN Breast

Cancer Panel endorses CAP accreditation for anatomic pathology

laboratories performing HER2 testing.

HER2 status can be assessed by measuring the number of HER2 gene

copies using in situ hybridization (ISH) techniques, or by a

complementary method in which the quantity of HER2 cell surface

receptors is assessed by IHC.20 Assignment of HER2 status based on

mRNA assays or multigene arrays is not recommended. The accuracy

of HER2 assays used in clinical practice is a major concern, and results

from several studies have shown that false-positive21-24 as well as

false-negative21,25 HER2 test results are common. A joint panel from

ASCO and CAP has issued updated HER2 testing guidelines to avoid

such false-positive or false-negative results. These updated guidelines

have been published in the Archives of Pathology & Laboratory

Medicine and ASCO's Journal of Clinical Oncology.26,27 The NCCN

Panel endorses these updated ASCO/CAP recommendations for quality

HER2 testing and has outlined these recommendations in Principles of

HER2 Testing in the NCCN Guidelines for Breast Cancer.

HER2 testing should be performed in laboratories accredited by CAP or

another equivalent authority to carry out such testing. Further, these

laboratories should have standardized HER2 testing procedures in

place, as well as programs to periodically evaluate the proficiency of

personnel performing HER2 testing. HER2 test reports should also

include information on site of tumor, specimen type, histologic type,

fixation method and time, block examined, and details on the HER2

testing method(s) used. Clinicians should be familiar with the

significance of these criteria when making clinical recommendations for

an individual patient.

HER2-Positive Result

Consistent with the ASCO/CAP guidelines, the NCCN Panel considers

either IHC or ISH with either a single or dual probe as an acceptable

method for making an initial determination of HER2 tumor status. Breast

cancer tumors are classified as HER2-positive if they are scored as 3+

NCCN Guidelines Inde

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Breast Cancer

by an IHC method defined as uniform membrane staining for HER2 in

10% or more of tumor cells or demonstrate HER2 gene amplification by

an ISH method (single probe, average HER2 copy number ≥6.0

signals/cell; dual probe HER2/CEP17 ratio ≥2.0 with an average HER2

copy number ≥4.0 signals/cell; dual probe HER2/chromosome

enumeration probe (CEP)17 ratio ≥2.0 with an average HER2 copy

number <4.0 signals/cell; and HER2/CEP17 ratio <2.0 with an average

HER2 copy number ≥6.0 signals/cell).

High average copy number of HER2 (≥6.0 signals/cell) is considered

positive regardless of the HER2/CEP17 ratio. The rationale cited by the

joint committee for including rare scenarios such as HER2 positivity

when dual probe HER2/CEP17 ratio is greater than or equal to 2.0 and

average HER2 copy number is less than 4.0 signals/cell is that the first-

generation trials of adjuvant trastuzumab included a small number of

patients with a HER2/CEP17 ratio greater than or equal to 2.0 and

an average HER2 copy number less than 4.0 signals/cell. There is

no trend in these data, suggesting that these patients were not

responsive to trastuzumab and the trastuzumab has a favorable

safety profile.

Equivocal Result

The NCCN Panel agrees with the ASCO/CAP HER2 committee that

results of IHC are equivocal if scored as IHC 2+ “based on

circumferential membrane staining that is incomplete and/or

weak/moderate and within greater than 10% of the invasive tumor cells

or complete and circumferential membrane staining that is intense and

within less than or equal to 10% of the invasive tumor cells.” In such

cases, the panel recommends reflex testing using the ISH method on

the same specimen or repeating tests if a new specimen is available.

Similarly, samples with equivocal results by an ISH assay (for example,

single probe ISH average HER2 copy number ≥4.0 and <6.0

signals/cell; and dual probe HER/CEP17 ratio <2.0 with an average

HER2 copy number ≥4.0 signals/cell) must be confirmed by reflex

testing using the IHC method on the same specimen or repeating tests

if a new specimen is available.

Treatment Approach

The treatment of breast cancer includes the treatment of local disease

with surgery, radiation therapy, or both, and systemic treatment with

chemotherapy, endocrine therapy, biologic therapy, or combinations of

these. The need for and selection of various local or systemic therapies

are based on several prognostic and predictive factors. These factors

include tumor histology, clinical and pathologic characteristics of the

primary tumor, ALN status, tumor hormone receptor (ER/PR) content,

tumor HER2 status, multi-gene testing, presence or absence of

detectable metastatic disease, patient comorbid conditions, patient age,

and menopausal status. One percent of breast cancers occur in men,5

and men with breast cancer should be treated similarly to

postmenopausal women, except that the use of aromatase inhibitors is

ineffective without concomitant suppression of testicular

steroidogenesis.28,29 Patient preference is a major component of the

decision-making process, especially in situations in which survival rates

are equivalent among the available treatment options.

In terms of treatment, breast cancer may be divided into: 1) the pure

noninvasive carcinomas, which include lobular carcinoma in situ (LCIS)

and DCIS (stage 0); 2) operable, locoregional invasive carcinoma with

or without associated noninvasive carcinoma (clinical stage I, stage II,

and some stage IIIA tumors); 3) inoperable locoregional invasive

carcinoma with or without associated noninvasive carcinoma (clinical

NCCN Guidelines Inde

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Breast Cancer

stage IIIB, stage IIIC, and some stage IIIA tumors); and 4) metastatic

(stage IV) or recurrent carcinoma.

Pure Noninvasive Carcinomas (Stage 0)

Both LCIS and DCIS may be difficult to distinguish from atypical

hyperplasia or from invasive carcinomas with early invasion.30,31

Therefore, pathology review of all cases is recommended.

Bilateral diagnostic mammography should be performed to identify the

presence of multiple primary tumors and to estimate the extent of the

noninvasive lesion. Genetic counseling is recommended if the patient is

considered to be at high risk for hereditary breast cancer as defined by

the NCCN Guidelines for Genetic/Familial High-Risk Assessment:

Breast and Ovarian. Testing for genetic mutations without formal

genetic counseling is discouraged.

The goal of treatment of pure in situ carcinoma is either preventing the

occurrence of invasive disease or diagnosing the development of an

invasive component when still localized to the breast. Patients with

invasive disease, even if microinvasive, on pathology review or during

re-excision, mastectomy, or ALN staging should be treated according to

the stage-appropriate guideline for invasive carcinoma.

Lobular Carcinoma in Situ

(Stage 0, Tis, N0, M0)

Workup

Recommended workup includes history and physical examination,

diagnostic bilateral mammography, and pathology review.

Controversy exists regarding whether an open surgical excision should

be performed of the region of LCIS diagnosed by core biopsy and that is

not associated with a mammographic structural abnormality or residual

mammographic calcifications. Small retrospective studies have

concluded that excision following the diagnosis of LCIS on core needle

biopsy is not necessary.32-34 Other studies have shown that 17% to 27%

of patients with LCIS diagnosed by core needle biopsy are upgraded to

having invasive cancer or DCIS after larger excisional biopsy.35-39 Based

on core needle biopsies, it may be possible to identify subsets of

patients with LCIS who can be safely spared a surgical excision.34

There are some data of small groups of patients suggesting that LCIS

subtypes, including pleomorphic LCIS and LCIS associated with

necrosis, carry a risk for associated invasive carcinoma similar to DCIS.

Therefore, according to the NCCN Panel, it is reasonable to perform

surgical excision of LCIS found in a core biopsy to exclude an

associated invasive cancer or DCIS. More than 4 foci of LCIS may also

increase the risk for upstaging on surgical biopsy.40 The NCCN Panel

recommends that LCIS of the usual type (involving <4 terminal ductal

lobular units in a single core) found on core biopsy, as a result of routine

screening for calcifications and without imaging discordance, may be

managed by imaging follow-up.

Primary Treatment

Classic LCIS does not require surgical treatment. There is evidence to

support the existence of histologically aggressive variants of LCIS (eg,

“pleomorphic” LCIS), which may have a greater potential than classic

LCIS to develop into invasive lobular carcinoma.41 Clinicians may

consider complete excision with negative margins for pleomorphic LCIS.

However, outcomes data regarding treatment of patients with

pleomorphic LCIS are lacking, due in part to a paucity of histologic

categorization of variants of LCIS. Therefore, recommendations on the

treatment of pleomorphic LCIS as a distinct entity of LCIS have not

been made by the panel (see NCCN Guidelines for Breast Screening

and Diagnosis).

NCCN Guidelines Inde

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Breast Cancer

Patients with a confirmed diagnosis of LCIS should be counseled

regarding reducing the risk of developing invasive cancer (see NCCN

Guidelines for Breast Cancer Risk Reduction).

Surveillance

Follow-up of patients with LCIS includes interval history and physical

examinations every 6 to 12 months. Annual diagnostic mammography is

recommended in patients being followed with clinical observation; see

also the NCCN Guidelines for Breast Cancer Screening and Diagnosis.

Patients receiving a risk reduction agent should be monitored as

described in the NCCN Guidelines for Breast Cancer Risk Reduction.

Ductal Carcinoma in Situ

(Stage 0, Tis, N0, M0)

Workup

The recommended workup and staging of DCIS includes: history and

physical examination; bilateral diagnostic mammography; pathology

review; and tumor ER determination. Genetic counseling is

recommended if the patient is considered to be at high risk for

hereditary breast cancer as defined by the NCCN Guidelines for

Genetic/Familial High-Risk Assessment: Breast and Ovarian.

Although HER2 status is of prognostic significance in invasive cancer,

its importance in DCIS has not been elucidated. To date, studies have

either found unclear or weak evidence of HER2 status as a prognostic

indicator in DCIS.42-45 The NCCN Panel concluded that knowing the

HER2 status of DCIS does not alter the management strategy and

routinely should not be determined.

MRI has been prospectively shown to have a sensitivity of up to 98% for

high-grade DCIS.46 In a prospective, observational study, 193 women

with pure DCIS underwent both mammography and MRI imaging

preoperatively; 93 (56%) women were diagnosed by mammography

and 153 (92%) were diagnosed by MRI (P < .0001). Of the 89 women

with high-grade DCIS, 43 (48%) who were not diagnosed by

mammography were diagnosed by MRI alone. Another study evaluated

the role of MRI in determining appropriate candidacy for partial breast

irradiation for women with DCIS. Twenty percent of women with DCIS

were identified as ineligible for partial breast irradiation after a bilateral

breast MRI.47 However, large prospective clinical trials will be necessary

to further investigate the clinical role of MRI for diagnosing DCIS and to

investigate its effect on recurrence rates or mortality. The NCCN Panel

has included breast MRI as optional during the initial workup of DCIS,

noting that the use of MRI has not been shown to increase likelihood of

negative margins or decrease conversion to mastectomy with DCIS.

Primary Treatment

Seemingly pure DCIS on core needle biopsy will be found to be

associated with an invasive cancer on surgical excision in about 25% of

patients.48

For the vast majority of patients with limited disease where negative

margins are achieved with the initial excision or with re-excision,

lumpectomy or total mastectomy are appropriate treatment options.

Patients with DCIS and evidence of widespread disease (ie, disease in

two or more quadrants) on mammography or other imaging, physical

examination, or biopsy require a total mastectomy without lymph node

dissection.

Complete ALN dissection is not recommended in the absence of

evidence of invasive cancer or proven axillary metastatic disease in

patients with apparent pure DCIS, or mammographically detected DCIS

with microcalcifications. However, a small proportion of women with

NCCN Guidelines Inde

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Breast Cancer

seemingly pure DCIS on initial biopsy will have invasive breast cancer

at the time of the definitive surgical procedure and thus will ultimately

require ALN staging. In patients with seemingly pure DCIS to be treated

with mastectomy or with excision in an anatomic location (eg, tail of the

breast), which could compromise the performance of a future sentinel

lymph node biopsy (SLNB), an SLNB procedure may be considered.49-52

Reducing Risk of Recurrence:

Many factors impact recurrence risk, including patient age, tumor size,

tumor grade, and margin width. The definition of a negative margin has

not been firmly established in DCIS. There appears to be a consensus

that margins greater than 10 mm are accepted as negative (but may be

excessive and may compromise cosmetic outcome) and margins less

than 1 mm are inadequate, but no uniform consensus exists for margin

status between these values. With pathologic margins between 1 and

10 mm, wider margins are generally associated with lower local

recurrence rates. However, close surgical margins (<1 mm) at the

fibroglandular boundary of the breast (chest wall or skin) do not

mandate surgical re-excision but can be an indication for higher boost

dose radiation to the involved lumpectomy site.

The choice of local treatment does not impact overall disease-related

survival; therefore, the individual patient’s acceptance of the potential

for an increased risk of local recurrence must be considered.

An analysis of specimen margins and specimen radiographs should be

performed to ensure that all mammographically detectable DCIS has

been excised. In addition, a post-excision mammogram should be

considered where appropriate (eg, the mass and/or microcalcifications

are not clearly within the specimen).53

Prospective randomized trials have shown that the addition of whole

breast radiation to a margin-free excision of pure DCIS decreases the

rate of in-breast disease recurrence, but does not affect survival54-60 or

distant metastasis-free survival.61 Whole breast irradiation after

breast-conserving surgery reduces the relative risk of a local failure by

approximately one half.

There is retrospective evidence suggesting that selected patients have

a low risk of in-breast recurrence with excision alone without radiation

therapy to the breast.62-65 For example, in a retrospective review,

10-year disease-free survival (DFS) rates of 186 patients with DCIS

treated with lumpectomy alone were 94% for patients with low-risk DCIS

and 83% for patients with both intermediate- and high-risk DCIS.62

In another retrospective study of 215 patients with DCIS treated with

lumpectomy without radiation therapy, endocrine therapy, or

chemotherapy, the recurrence rate over 8 years was 0%, 21.5%, and

32.1% in patients with low-, intermediate- or high-risk DCIS,

respectively.63

A multi-institutional, nonrandomized, prospective study of selected

patients with low-risk DCIS treated without radiation has also provided

some support for the use of excision without radiation in the treatment

of DCIS.66 At a median follow-up of 6.2 years, the 5-year risk of

ipsilateral breast recurrence was 6.1% (95% confidence interval [CI],

4.1%–8.2%) in the subset of patients with low-/intermediate-grade DCIS

and median tumor size of 6 mm. Margin widths were greater than or

equal to 5 mm in 69.2% and 82.9% of patients in the

low-/intermediate-risk and high-risk arms, respectively, with margin

widths of greater than or equal to 10 mm or no tumor on re-excision

observed in 48.5% and 53.3% of patients in the respective groups.66

Although an acceptably low ipsilateral recurrence rate was observed in

NCCN Guidelines Inde

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Breast Cancer

the low-/intermediate-grade arm of the study at 5 years, the 7-year

ipsilateral recurrence rate in this group of patients was considerably

higher (10.5%; 95% CI, 7.5%–13.6%), suggesting that these events

may be delayed but not prevented in this population. Ipsilateral breast

recurrences were approximately equally divided between invasive

breast cancer and DCIS in the low-/intermediate-risk group but only

about one-third of patients with an in-breast recurrence in the high-risk

group had invasive disease.

Another retrospective study reviewed 220 patients with DCIS treated

with breast conservation surgery and radiation. Thirty-six percent

received a radiation boost. At 46 months, none of the 79 patients who

received a radiation boost experienced a local recurrence, whereas 8 of

141 patients who did not receive a boost experienced a local

recurrence.67

More recently, a prospective phase II study followed women with low-

risk DCIS who underwent wide excision alone (without adjuvant

treatment with radiation or tamoxifen). Low-risk criteria for this study

included mammographically detected DCIS, measuring ≤2.5 cm, with a

predominant nuclear grade of 1 or 2, and a margin of ≥1 cm or a

negative re-excision. The cumulative incidence of local recurrence at 10

years was estimated at 15.5%.68

Prospective randomized trials have not been carried out to analyze

whether wider margins can replace the need for radiation therapy for

DCIS. A retrospective series demonstrated that for margin width of 10

mm, radiation had no additional benefit in reducing the already low local

recurrence rate of 4% at the end of 8 years.65 Also, if margin width was

between 1 mm and less than 10 mm, the addition of radiation therapy

led to a non-statistically significant reduction in local recurrence.

However, when margins were less than 1 mm a significant benefit was

seen.65

A meta-analysis of four large multicenter randomized trials confirmed

the results of the individual trials that adding radiation therapy to breast-

conserving surgery for DCIS provides a statistically and clinically

significant reduction in ipsilateral breast events (HR [hazard ratio], 0.49;

95% CI; 0.41–0.58, P < .0000).69

Results from a retrospective study of 445 patients with pure DCIS

treated by excision alone indicated that margin width was the most

important independent predictor of local recurrence, although the trend

for decreasing local recurrence risk with increasing margin width was

most apparent with margins less than 1 mm and greater than or equal

to 10 mm.70

In a meta-analysis of 4660 patients with DCIS treated with

breast-conserving surgery and radiation, a surgical margin of less than

2 mm was associated with increased rates of ipsilateral breast tumor

recurrence compared with margins of 2 mm, although no significant

differences were observed when margins of greater than 2 mm to 5 mm

or greater than 5 mm were compared with 2-mm margins.71 The results

of this study suggest that wide margins (≥2 mm), which can

compromise cosmetic outcome, do not provide additional benefit in the

population of patients with DCIS receiving radiation therapy following

breast-conserving therapy.

A study retrospectively reviewed a database of 2996 patients with DCIS

who underwent breast-conserving surgery to investigate the association

between margin width and recurrence, controlling all other

characteristics.72 Wider margins were significantly associated with a

NCCN Guidelines Inde

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Breast Cancer

lower rate of recurrence only in women who did not receive radiation

therapy (P < .0001), but not in those treated with radiation (P = .95).72

After 20 years of follow-up, the SweDCIS trial reported 12% (95% CI,

6.5–17.7) reduction in absolute risk of local recurrence and 37.5%

reduction in relative risk in women who received radiation therapy.73

A recent prospective randomized trial (RTOG 9804) compared radiation

therapy with observation after breast=conserving surgery in a subset of

women with defined, mammographically detected low- or intermediate-

grade DCIS, measuring less than 2.5 cm with margins ≥3 mm.74 At 7

years, the local recurrence rate was 0.9% (95% CI, 0.0%–2.2%) in the

radiation therapy arm versus 6.7% (95% CI, 3.2%–9.6%) in the

observation arm (HR, 0.11; 95% CI, 0.03–0.47; P < .001). In the subset

of patients with good-risk disease features, the local recurrence rate

was low with observation but was decreased significantly with the

addition of radiation therapy.74

The long-term follow-up of the NSABP B-17 showed that at 15 years,

radiation therapy resulted in a 52% reduction of ipsilateral invasive

recurrence compared with excision alone (HR, 0.48; 95% CI, 0.33–0.69,

P < .001).60 However, overall survival (OS) and cumulative all-cause

mortality rate through 15 years was similar between the two groups (HR

for death, 1.08; 95% CI, 0.79–1.48). 60

Similar findings were reported by a large observational study of the

SEER database that included 108,196 patients with DCIS.75 In a

subgroup analysis at 10 years, of 60,000 women treated with breast-

conserving therapy, with or without radiation therapy, although radiation

therapy was associated with a 50% reduction in the risk of ipsilateral

recurrence (adjusted HR, 0.47 [95% CI, 0.42–0.53]; P < .001), breast

cancer-specific mortality was found to be similar (HR, 0.86 [95% CI,

0.67–1.10]; P = .22).75

NCCN Recommendations for Primary Treatment of DCIS

According to the NCCN Panel, primary treatment options for women

with DCIS along with their respective categories of consensus are:

lumpectomy plus whole breast radiation therapy (category 1) as

decreased rates of local recurrence following lumpectomy have been

observed in randomized trials with the addition of whole breast

radiation; total mastectomy, with or without SLNB with or without

reconstruction (category 2A); or lumpectomy alone followed by clinical

observation (category 2B). The option of lumpectomy alone should be

considered only in cases where the patient and the physician view the

individual as having a low risk of disease recurrence. There is no

evidence that OS differs between the three treatment options.

According to the NCCN Panel, complete resection should be

documented by analysis of margins and specimen radiography.

Post-excision mammography should also be performed whenever

uncertainty about adequacy of excision remains. Clips are used to

demarcate the biopsy area because DCIS may be clinically occult and

further surgery may be required pending the margin status review by

pathology.

Women treated with mastectomy are appropriate candidates for breast

reconstruction (see Principles of Breast Reconstruction Following

Surgery in the NCCN Guidelines for Breast Cancer). Contraindications

to breast-conserving therapy with radiation therapy are listed in the

algorithm (see Special Considerations to Breast-Conserving Therapy

Requiring Radiation Therapy in the NCCN Guidelines for Breast

Cancer).

NCCN Guidelines Inde

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Breast Cancer

Management of DCIS after Primary Treatment

DCIS falls between atypical ductal hyperplasia and invasive ductal

carcinoma within the spectrum of breast proliferative abnormalities. The

Breast Cancer Prevention Trial performed by National Surgical Adjuvant

Breast and Bowel Project (NSABP) showed a 75% reduction in the

occurrence of invasive breast cancer in patients with atypical ductal

hyperplasia treated with tamoxifen.76,77 These data also showed that

tamoxifen led to a substantial reduction in the risk of developing benign

breast disease.78 The Early Breast Cancer Trialists’ Collaborative

Group (EBCTCG) overview analysis showed that, with 5 years of

tamoxifen therapy, women with ER-positive or receptor-unknown

invasive tumors had a 39% reduction in the annual odds of recurrence

of invasive breast cancer.4

Similarly, the NSABP B-24 trial found a benefit from tamoxifen for

women with DCIS after treatment with breast conservation surgery and

radiation therapy. In that study, women with DCIS who were treated

with breast-conserving therapy were randomized to receive placebo or

tamoxifen. With 13.6 years median follow-up, the women treated with

tamoxifen had a 3.4% absolute reduction in ipsilateral in-breast tumor

recurrence risk (HR, 0.30; 95% CI, 0.21–0.42; P < .001) and a 3.2%

absolute reduction in contralateral breast cancers (HR, 0.68; 95% CI,

0.48–0.95; P = .023).60 The women receiving tamoxifen had a 10-year

cumulative rate of 4.6% for invasive and 5.6% for noninvasive breast

cancers in the ipsilateral breast compared with 7.3% for invasive and

7.2% for noninvasive breast cancers in placebo-treated women. The

cumulative 10-year frequency of invasive and noninvasive breast

cancer in the contralateral breast was 6.9% and 4.7% in the placebo

and tamoxifen groups, respectively. No differences in OS were noted. A

retrospective analysis of ER expression in NSABP B-24 suggests that

increased levels of ER expression predict for tamoxifen benefit in terms

of risk reduction for ipsilateral and contralateral breast cancer

development following breast-conserving therapy.79

A phase III trial for women with excised DCIS randomized subjects in a

2 x 2 fashion to tamoxifen or not and whole breast radiation therapy or

not.59 With 12.7 years of median follow-up, the use of tamoxifen

decreased all new breast events (HR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.58–0.88; P =

.002). The use of tamoxifen decreased ipsilateral and contralateral

breast events in the subjects not given whole breast radiotherapy

(ipsilateral HR, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.59–0.98; contralateral HR, 0.27; 95%

CI, 0.12–0.59), but not in those receiving whole breast radiotherapy

(ipsilateral HR, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.50–1.75; P = .80; contralateral HR,

0.99; 95% CI, 0.39–2.49; P = 1.0).

In women with ER- and/or PR-positive DCIS treated by wide local

excision with or without breast radiotherapy, a large, randomized,

double-blind, placebo-controlled trial (IBIS-II) compared anastrozole (n

= 1471) with tamoxifen (n = 1509). The results demonstrated non-

inferiority of anastrozole to tamoxifen.80 After a median follow-up of 7.2

years, 67 recurrences were reported with anastrozole versus 77 for

tamoxifen; HR 0.89 [95% CI, 0.64–1.23]. A total 33 deaths were

recorded for anastrozole and 36 for tamoxifen; HR 0.9393 [95% CI,

0.58–1.50, P = .78).80 Although the number of women reporting any

adverse event was similar between anastrozole (1323 women, 91%)

and tamoxifen (1379 women, 93%); the side-effect profiles of the two

drugs were different. There were more fractures, musculoskeletal

events, hypercholesterolemia, and strokes reported with anastrozole

and more muscle spasms, gynecological cancers and symptoms,

vasomotor symptoms, and deep vein thromboses reported with

tamoxifen.

NCCN Guidelines Inde

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Breast Cancer

The NSABP B-35 study randomly assigned 3,104 postmenopausal

patients to tamoxifen or anastrozole for 5 years. All patients received

breast radiotherapy. Prior to being randomly assigned, patients were

stratified by age—younger or older than age 60. The primary endpoint

was breast cancer–free interval.81 Anastrozole treatment resulted in an

overall statistically significant decrease in breast cancer-free interval

events compared with tamoxifen (HR, 0.73 [95% CI, 0.56–0.96], P =

.0234). The significant difference in breast cancer-free interval between

the two treatments was apparent in the study only after 5 years of

follow-up. The estimated percentage of patients with a 10-year breast

cancer-free interval was 89.1% in the tamoxifen group and 93.1% in the

anastrozole group.81 In addition, anastrozole resulted in further

improvement in breast cancer-free interval, in younger postmenopausal

patients (less than 60 years old). With respect to adverse effects, the

overall incidence of thrombosis or embolism was higher in the tamoxifen

group and the anastrozole group had slightly more cases of arthralgia

and myalgia.81

The results of the IBIS-II and the NSAP-B-35 studies indicate that

anastrozole provides benefit as adjuvant treatment for postmenopausal

women with hormone-receptor-positive DCIS.

NCCN Recommendations for Management of DCIS after Primary

Treatment

According to the NCCN Panel, endocrine therapy, with tamoxifen (for

premenopausal and postmenopausal women) or an aromatase inhibitor

(for postmenopausal women especially those under 60 years of age or

in those with concerns of embolism), may be considered as a strategy

to reduce the risk of ipsilateral breast cancer recurrence in women with

ER-positive DCIS treated with breast-conserving therapy (category 1 for

those undergoing breast-conserving surgery followed by radiation

therapy; category 2A for those undergoing excision alone). The benefit

of endocrine therapy for ER-negative DCIS is not known.

Strategies for reducing the risk of recurrence to the contralateral breast

are described in the NCCN Guidelines for Breast Cancer Risk

Reduction.

Surveillance

According to the NCCN Panel, follow-up of women with DCIS includes

interval history and physical examination every 6 to 12 months for 5

years and then annually, as well as yearly diagnostic mammography. In

patients treated with breast-conserving therapy, the first follow-up

mammogram should be performed 6 to 12 months after the completion

of breast-conserving radiation therapy (category 2B). Patients receiving

risk reduction agents should be monitored as described in the NCCN

Guidelines for Breast Cancer Risk Reduction.

The majority of recurrences of DCIS are in-breast recurrences after

breast-conserving therapy, and recurrences mostly occur close to the

site of prior disease. In those women for whom the initial DCIS was

treated with excision alone, the treatment for a recurrence of DCIS is

similar to that followed previously. In women whom the initial DCIS was

treated with breast-conserving surgery plus radiation therapy,

mastectomy is usually necessary to treat DCIS recurrence. Local

recurrences after mastectomy for DCIS should be treated with wide

local excision with consideration for chest wall irradiation.

Overall, approximately half of the local recurrences after initial treatment

for a pure DCIS are again DCIS, and the others are invasive cancer.

Those with local recurrences that are invasive should receive systemic

treatment as appropriate for a newly diagnosed invasive breast cancer.

NCCN Guidelines Inde

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Breast Cancer

Invasive Breast Cancer

Stage I, IIA, IIB, or III A (T3, N1, M0)

Workup

The recommended workup of localized invasive breast cancer includes:

history and physical exam; bilateral diagnostic mammography; breast

ultrasonography, if necessary; determination of tumor hormone receptor

status (ER and PR determinations); determination of HER2–receptor

status; and pathology review. Complete blood count (CBC) and liver

function tests (LFTs) have no added benefit in the detection of

underlying metastatic disease in asymptomatic early-stage breast

cancer patients.82 In addition, monitoring of disease relapse with any

tumor markers is not recommended.

Use of MRI is optional and is not universally recommended by experts

in the field. Breast MRI advocates note its high sensitivity for evaluation

of extent of disease, particularly for invasive cancer and in dense

breasts where mammographically occult disease is more likely to elude

preoperative detection. MRI detractors note that MRI has a high

percentage of false-positive findings resulting in further diagnostic

workup in many circumstances including MRI-guided biopsy83-85 MRI

findings tend to overestimate extent of disease86 resulting in increase in

frequency of mastectomies.87-90

MRI findings alone are insufficient to determine whether breast

conservation therapy is optimal as additional tissue sampling is needed

to verify true malignant disease warranting excision. MRI use may

increase mastectomy rates by identifying mammographically occult

disease satellites that would have been adequately treated with post-

lumpectomy radiation had the disease remained undiscovered without

MRI.90

Two prospective randomized studies have examined the utility of pre-

operative MRI in determining disease extent, and neither demonstrated

improvement in rates of post-lumpectomy re-excision.91,92 Retrospective

review of utility MRI showed conflicting outcome results, one with

benefit93 and another without.94 One systematic review85 documented

that breast MRI staging altered surgical treatment in 7.8% to 33.3% of

women,85 however no differences in local recurrence or survival have

yet been demonstrated. In addition, there is no evidence that use of

breast MRI increases rates of margin-negative resection.95,96

If breast MRI imaging is performed, a dedicated breast coil, an imaging

team experienced with breast MRI guided biopsy, and multidisciplinary

treatment team are the standard of care. Clinically positive axillary

nodes and occult primary breast cancer or Paget’s disease of the nipple

with breast primary not identified on mammography, ultrasound, or

physical examination are specific indications for breast MRI imaging.

MRI may also be useful for the evaluation of breast cancer response to

preoperative systemic therapy and to assess the potential for breast-

conserving therapy.

Pathology Assessment: Full knowledge of extent of disease and

biologic features is central to the treatment of breast cancer. Several

factors contribute to the determination of the disease staging,

recurrence risk assessment, and predictive response (ie, ER, PR,

HER2). The excised tissue detailing the written pathology report details

these key factors. The accuracy of pathology reporting requires

communication between the clinician and the pathologist relating

pertinent patient history, prior breast biopsies, prior chest irradiation,

pregnancy status, biopsy characteristics (ie, palpable,

mammographically detected microcalcifications), clinical state of lymph

nodes, presence of inflammatory change or other skin abnormality, and

any prior treatment administered (ie, chemotherapy, radiation therapy).

NCCN Guidelines Inde

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Breast Cancer

The specimens should be oriented for the pathologist, and specific

requests for determination of biomarkers should be stated (eg, ER, PR,

and HER2 status). Data from both national and local surveys show that

as many as 50% of pathology reports for breast cancer are missing

some elements critical to patient management.12,13 Significant omissions

include failure to orient and report surgical margins and failure to report

tumor grade consistently. CAP has developed pathology reporting

protocols to promote complete and standardized reporting of malignant

specimens (www.cap.org). The NCCN Breast Cancer Panel endorses

the use of the CAP protocols for reporting the pathologic analysis of all

breast cancer specimens.

Genetic counseling: For patients considered to be at high risk for

hereditary breast cancer as defined by the NCCN Guidelines for

Genetic/Familial High-Risk Assessment: Breast and Ovarian, genetic

counseling is recommended

Distress Assessment: Levels of distress may vary in patients and

should be addressed individually. Psychological distress can be

impacted by body image and other factors. Younger women have

higher rates of psychosocial distress than women diagnosed at older

ages.97-101 The NCCN Breast Cancer Panel recommends accessing for

distress in patients newly diagnosed with breast cancer.

Fertility Counseling: Numerous epidemiologic studies have

demonstrated that child-bearing after treatment for invasive breast

cancer does not increase rates of recurrence or death from breast

cancer.102 The offspring of pregnancies after treatment for breast cancer

do not have an increased rate of birth defects or other serious childhood

illness. However, treatment for breast cancer, especially with cytotoxic

agents, may impair fertility.

Many women, especially those younger than age 35, regain menstrual

function within 2 years of completing chemotherapy.103 Resumption of

menses does not necessarily correlate with fertility, and fertility may be

preserved without menses. All premenopausal patients should be

informed about the potential impact of chemotherapy on fertility and

asked about their desire for potential future pregnancies.

A decision for fertility preservation should include multiple factors such

as patient preference, tumor stage and biology, age of the patient, risk

of premature ovarian failure based on anticipated type and duration of

chemotherapy and/or endocrine therapy, as well as the timing and

duration allowed for fertility preservation.

Several studies report lower rates of fertility discussion among female

patients with cancer104-106 despite the updated ASCO guidelines stating

that patients should not be excluded from consideration for discussion

of fertility preservation for any reason, including parity, prognosis, age,

and socioeconomic status.107 The NCCN Panel recommends that all

women of childbearing potential should have a discussion with their

treating physicians. Patients who desire to bear children after systemic

therapy should be referred to a fertility specialist prior to initiating

systemic (chemotherapy or endocrine) therapy.107-113

Randomized trials have demonstrated that GnRH agonists (such as

goserelin) administered prior to initiating chemotherapy and then

administered concurrently with adjuvant chemotherapy protect against

ovarian failure and reduce the risk of early menopause.114-117 In one trial

goserelin improved the probability of pregnancy from 11% to 21% in

patients with hormone receptor-negative early-stage breast cancer.117

Smaller historical experiences in patients with hormone receptor-

positive disease have conflicting results with respect to the protective

effects of GnRH agonists in fertility preservation.

NCCN Guidelines Inde

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Breast Cancer

Patients should be informed of all the various modalities available to

minimize gonadal damage and preserve ovarian function and future

fertility. The fertility specialist should discuss specifics of fertility

preservation options inclusive of types of hormonal interventions and

risks involved with ovarian stimulation, embryo or oocyte

cryopreservation, and other investigational options, as well as the

probability of successful gestation and childbirth.118,119

Combining the various modalities for a specific patient may increase the

odds of preservation of future fertility. It is important for fetal safety that

women actively avoid becoming pregnant during breast cancer

treatment. Also see NCCN Guidelines for Adolescent and Young Adult

Oncology.

Additional Workup

The panel has re-iterated that routine systemic imaging is not indicated

for patients with early breast cancer in the absence of signs/symptoms

of metastatic disease.120 These recommendations are based on studies

showing no additional value of these tests in patients with early-stage

disease.121-123 In one study, metastases were identified by bone scan in

5.1%, 5.6%, and 14% of patients with stage I, II, and III disease,

respectively, and no evidence of metastasis was detected by liver

ultrasonography or chest radiography in patients with stage I or II

disease.121 For patients with stage III breast cancer, the prevalence of a

positive liver ultrasound and positive chest x-ray was 6% and 7%,

respectively.121

For patients presenting with disease confined to the breast (stage I to II)

the NCCN Panel does not recommend routine systemic imaging in the

absence of signs or symptoms suspicious for metastatic disease.

According to the panel, additional tests may be considered in patients

who present with locally advanced (T3 N1-3 M0) disease and in those

with signs or symptoms suspicious for metastatic disease.

CBCs and LFTs may be considered if the patient is a candidate for

preoperative systemic therapy, or if otherwise clinically indicated.

Additional tests may be considered only based on the signs and

symptoms.

A chest diagnostic CT is indicated only if pulmonary symptoms (ie,

cough or hemoptysis) are present. Likewise, abdominal imaging using

diagnostic CT or MRI is indicated if the patient has elevated alkaline

phosphatase, abnormal results on LFTs, abdominal symptoms, or

abnormal physical examination of the abdomen or pelvis.

A bone scan is indicated in patients presenting with localized bone pain

or elevated alkaline phosphatase. The use of PET or PET/CT scanning

is not indicated in the staging of clinical stage I, II, or operable III (T3

N1) breast cancer. The recommendation against the use of PET

scanning is supported by the high false-negative rate in the detection of

lesions that are small (<1 cm) and/or low grade, the low sensitivity for

detection of axillary nodal metastases, the low prior probability of these

patients having detectable metastatic disease, and the high rate of

false-positive scans.124-127

FDG PET/CT is most helpful in situations where standard staging

studies are equivocal or suspicious, especially in the setting of locally

advanced or metastatic disease.

Locoregional Treatment

Surgery

In general, patients with early-stage breast cancer undergo primary

surgery (lumpectomy or mastectomy) with or without radiation therapy.

NCCN Guidelines Inde

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Breast Cancer

Following local treatment, adjuvant systemic therapy may be offered

based on primary tumor characteristics, such as tumor size, grade,

lymph node involvement, ER/PR status, and expression of HER2-

receptor.

Several randomized trials document that mastectomy is equivalent to

breast-conserving therapy (lumpectomy with whole breast irradiation)

with respect to survival as primary breast local treatment for the majority

of women with stage I and stage II breast cancers (category 1).128-132

After surgical resection, a careful histologic assessment of resection

margins is essential. The NCCN Panel notes that benefit of lumpectomy

is predicated on achieving pathologically negative margins after

resection. The NCCN Panel accepts the most recent definition outlined

in the guidelines established by the Society of Surgical Oncology

(SSO)/American Society for Radiation Oncology (ASTRO) of no ink on

a tumor as the standard for negative surgical margins for invasive

cancer (with or without a component of DCIS).133

If margins remain positive after further surgical re-excision(s), then

mastectomy may be required for optimal local disease control.

In order to adequately assess margins following surgery, the panel

recommends that the surgical specimens be directionally oriented and

that the pathologist provide descriptions of the gross and microscopic

margin status and the distance, orientation, and type of tumor (invasive

cancer or pure DCIS) in relation to the closest margin. Marking the

tumor bed with clips facilitates accurate planning of the radiation boost

field, where appropriate. It may be reasonable to treat selected patients

with invasive cancer (without extensive intraductal component) despite

a microscopically focally positive margin with breast conservation

therapy.

Breast-Conserving Therapy (Lumpectomy)

Lumpectomy allows patients to preserve their breast without sacrificing

oncologic outcome. Lumpectomy is contraindicated for patients who are

pregnant and would require radiation during pregnancy; have diffuse

suspicious or malignant-appearing microcalcifications on

mammography; have widespread disease that cannot be incorporated

by local excision through a single incision with a satisfactory cosmetic

result; or have diffusely positive pathologic margins. Relative

contraindications to lumpectomy include previous radiation therapy to

the breast or chest wall; active connective tissue disease involving the

skin (especially scleroderma and lupus), tumors greater than 5 cm

(category 2B), and positive pathologic margins.

Several studies of women with early-stage breast cancer treated with

lumpectomy have identified young age as a significant predictor of an

increased likelihood of ipsilateral breast tumor recurrences after

lumpectomy.134-136 Risk factors, such as a family history of breast cancer

or a genetic predisposition to breast cancer (ie, BRCA1/2 or other

cancer-predisposing mutation), are more likely to exist in the population

of young women with breast cancer, thereby confounding the

independent contributions of age and treatment to clinical outcome.137

Studies have shown that survival outcomes for young women with

breast cancer receiving either lumpectomy or mastectomy are

similar.130,131,138-140 Some recent studies show improved survival141-143 and

fewer post-surgical complications144 with lumpectomy.

Mastectomy

Mastectomy is indicated for patients who are not candidates for

lumpectomy and those who choose to undergo this procedure over

lumpectomy.

NCCN Guidelines Inde

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Breast Cancer

Only limited data are available on the survival impact of risk-reducing

contralateral mastectomy in women with a unilateral breast cancer.145

Analysis of women included in the SEER database treated with

mastectomy for a unilateral breast cancer from 1998 to 2003 showed

that contralateral mastectomy performed at the time of treatment of a

unilateral cancer was associated with a reduction in breast

cancer-specific mortality only in the population of young women (18–49

years of age) with stage I/II, ER-negative breast cancer (HR, 0.68; 95%

CI, 0.53–0.88; P = .004).146 The 5-year breast cancer survival for this

group was slightly improved with contralateral mastectomy versus

without (88.5% vs. 83.7%, difference = 4.8%).146 These differences

observed in retrospective analysis could be due to selection bias among

patients who chose risk-reducing contralateral mastectomy.147 A

statistical simulation of survival outcomes after risk-reducing

contralateral mastectomy among women with stage I or II breast cancer

with no BRCA mutation found that the absolute 20-year survival benefit

from risk-reducing contralateral mastectomy was less than 1% among

all age, ER status, and cancer stage groups.148 Data from a recent

meta-analysis found no absolute reduction in risk of distant metastases

with risk-reduction mastectomy.149 Furthermore, among patients with

unilateral breast cancer who have an increased familial/genetic risk,

although a decrease in metastatic contralateral breast cancer incidence

was observed in those who received risk-reducing contralateral

mastectomy, no improvement was seen in OS of these patients.149

The panel recommends that women with breast cancer who are less

than or equal to 35 years or premenopausal and carriers of a known

BRCA1/2 mutation consider additional risk reduction strategies following

appropriate risk assessment and counseling (see NCCN Guidelines for

Breast Risk Reduction and NCCN Guidelines for Genetic/Familial

High-Risk Assessment: Breast and Ovarian). This process should

involve multidisciplinary consultations prior to surgery, and should

include a discussion of the risks associated with development of a

contralateral breast cancer as compared with the risks associated with

recurrent disease from the primary cancer. Except as specifically

outlined in these guidelines, risk-reduction mastectomy of a breast

contralateral to a known unilateral breast cancer treated with

mastectomy is discouraged by the panel. The use of a prophylactic

mastectomy contralateral to a breast treated with lumpectomy is very

strongly discouraged in all patients.

The NCCN Panel recommends referring to the NCCN Guidelines for

Older Adult Oncology for special considerations for this population.

Surgical Axillary Staging

The NCCN Guidelines for Breast Cancer include a section for surgical

staging of the axilla for stages I, IIA, IIB, and IIIA (T3 N1 M0) breast

cancer. Pathologic confirmation of malignancy using ultrasound-guided

fine-needle aspiration (FNA)150 or core biopsy must be considered in

patients with clinically positive nodes to determine whether ALN

dissection is needed.

Performance of SLN mapping and resection in the surgical staging of

the clinically negative axilla is recommended and preferred by the panel

for assessment of the pathologic status of the ALNs in patients with

clinical stage I, stage II, and stage IIIA (T3 N1 M0) breast cancer.51,151-159

This recommendation is supported by results of randomized clinical

trials showing decreased arm and shoulder morbidity (ie, pain,

lymphedema, sensory loss) in patients with breast cancer undergoing

SLN biopsy compared with patients undergoing standard ALN

dissection.159,160 No significant differences in the effectiveness of the

SLN procedure or level I and II dissection in determining the presence

or absence of metastases in axillary nodes were seen in these studies.

NCCN Guidelines Inde

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Breast Cancer

However, not all women are candidates for SLN resection. An

experienced SLN team is mandatory for the use of SLN mapping and

excision.161,162 Women who have clinical stage I or II disease and do not

have immediate access to an experienced SLN team should be referred

to an experienced SLN team for the definitive surgical treatment of the

breast and surgical ALN staging. In addition, potential candidates for

SLN mapping and excision should have clinically negative ALNs at the

time of diagnosis, or a negative core or FNA biopsy of any clinically

suspicious ALN(s). SLNs can be are assessed for the presence of

metastases by both hematoxylin and eosin (H&E) staining and

cytokeratin IHC. The clinical significance of a lymph node that is

negative by H&E staining but positive by cytokeratin IHC is not clear.

Because the historical and clinical trial data on which treatment

decisions are based have relied on H&E staining, the panel does not

recommend routine cytokeratin IHC to define node involvement and

believes that current treatment decisions should be made based solely

on H&E staining. This recommendation is further supported by a

randomized clinical trial (ACOSOG Z0010) for patients with H&E

negative nodes where further examination by cytokeratin IHC was not

associated with improved OS over a median of 6.3 years.163 In the

uncommon situation in which H&E staining is equivocal, reliance on the

results of cytokeratin IHC is appropriate. Multiple attempts have been

made to identify cohorts of women with involved SLNs who have a low

enough risk for non-SLN involvement that complete axillary dissection

might be avoided if the SLN is positive. None of the early studies

identified a low-risk group of patients with positive SLN biopsies but

consistently negative non-sentinel nodes.164-170 A randomized trial

(ACOSOG Z0011) compared SLN resection alone with ALN dissection

in women greater than or equal to 18 years of age with T1/T2 tumors,

fewer than 3 positive SLNs, and undergoing breast-conserving surgery

and whole breast irradiation. In this study, there was no difference in

local recurrence, DFS, or OS between the two treatment groups. Only

ER-negative status, age less than 50, and lack of adjuvant systemic

therapy were associated with decreased OS.171 At a median follow-up of

6.3 years, locoregional recurrences were noted in 4.1% of the ALN

dissection group (n = 420) and 2.8% of the SLN dissection patients (n =

436) (P = .11). Median OS was approximately 92% in each group.172

Therefore, based on these results after SLN mapping and excision, if a

patient has a T1 or T2 tumor with 1 to 2 positive SLNs, did not receive

preoperative systemic therapy, was treated with lumpectomy, and will

receive whole breast radiation, the panel recommends no further

axillary surgery.

The panel recommends level I or II axillary dissection when 1) patients

have clinically positive nodes at the time of diagnosis that is confirmed

by FNA or core biopsy; or 2) sentinel nodes are not identified. For

patients with clinically negative axillae who are undergoing mastectomy

and for whom radiation therapy is planned, the panel notes that axillary

radiation may replace axillary dissection level I/II for regional control of

disease.

Traditional level I and level II evaluation of ALN requires that at least 10

lymph nodes should be provided for pathologic evaluation to accurately

stage the axilla.173,174 ALN should be extended to include level III nodes

only if gross disease is apparent in the level II or III nodes. In the

absence of gross disease in level II nodes, lymph node dissection

should include tissue inferior to the axillary vein from the latissimus

dorsi muscle laterally to the medial border of the pectoralis minor

muscle (level I/II).

Furthermore, according to the panel, without definitive data

demonstrating superior survival with ALN dissection or SLN resection,

these procedures may be considered optional in patients who have

NCCN Guidelines Inde

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Breast Cancer

particularly favorable tumors, patients for whom the selection of

adjuvant systemic therapy will not be affected by the results of the

procedure, elderly patients, and patients with serious comorbid

conditions. Women who do not undergo ALN dissection or ALN

irradiation are at increased risk for ipsilateral lymph node recurrence.175

Radiation Therapy

Planning Techniques, Targets, and Doses

It is important to individualize radiation therapy planning and delivery.

CT-based treatment planning is encouraged to delineate target volumes

and adjacent organs at risk. Greater target dose homogeneity and

sparing of normal tissues can be accomplished using compensators

such as wedges, forward planning using segments, and intensity-

modulated radiation therapy (IMRT). Respiratory control techniques

including deep inspiration breath-hold and prone positioning may be

used to try to further reduce dose to adjacent normal tissues,

particularly heart and lung. Boost treatment in the setting of breast

conservation can be delivered using enface electrons, photons, or

brachytherapy. Chest wall scar boost when indicated is typically treated

with electrons or photons. Verification of daily setup consistency is done

with weekly imaging. In certain circumstances, more frequent imaging

may be appropriate. Routine use of daily imaging is not recommended.

Whole Breast Radiation

Whole breast radiation reduces the risk of local recurrence and has

shown to have a beneficial effect on survival.129,132 Randomized trials

have demonstrated decreased in-breast recurrences with an additional

boost dose of radiation (by photons, brachytherapy, or electron beam)

to the tumor bed.176,177 The panel recommends whole breast irradiation

to include breast tissue in its entirety. CT-based treatment planning is

recommended to limit irradiation exposure of the heart and lungs, and to

assure adequate coverage of the breast and lumpectomy site.

For greater homogeneity of target dose and to spare normal tissues

using compensators such as tissue wedges, forward planning using

segments, and IMRT may be used.178,179 Respiratory control techniques

including deep inspiration breath-hold and prone positioning may be

used to try to further reduce dose to adjacent normal tissues,

particularly heart and lung.180 Radiation boost treatment in the setting of

breast conservation can be delivered using enface electrons, photons,

or brachytherapy.

Dose and Fractionation

Four randomized clinical trials have investigated hypofractionated whole

breast radiation schedules (39–42.9 Gy in single fractions of 2.6–3.3

Gy) compared to standard 50 Gy in single fractions of 2 Gy.181-184 The

10-year follow-up data from the START trials185 are consistent with the

10-year results of the Canadian trial,184 which reported that local tumor

control and breast cosmesis were similar with a regimen of 42.5 Gy in

16 fractions over 3.2 weeks compared with 50 Gy in 25 fractions over 5

weeks.184 The START trials reported radiation-related effects to normal

breast tissue such as breast shrinkage, telangiectasia, and breast

edema as less common with the hypofractionated fraction regimen.185

The NCCN Panel recommends whole breast irradiation, a dose of 46 to

50 Gy in 23 to 25 fractions, or a dose of 40 to 42.5 Gy in 15 to 16

fractions. Based on convenience and the data from the START trials,185

the short course of radiation therapy (40–42.5 Gy in 15–16 fractions) is

the NCCN-preferred option for treatment of patients receiving radiation

therapy to the whole breast only. A boost to the tumor bed is

recommended in patients with higher risk characteristics (such as age

<50, high-grade disease, or patients with focally positive margins) in

order to reduce local relapse.177,185-189 Typical boost doses are 10 to 16

Gy in 4 to 8 fractions.

Chest Wall Radiation (Including Breast Reconstruction)

NCCN Guidelines Inde

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Breast Cancer

The target includes the ipsilateral chest wall, mastectomy scar, and

drain sites when indicated. Depending on whether the patient has had

breast reconstruction, several techniques using photons and/or

electrons are appropriate. The NCCN Panel recommends a dose of 46

to 50 Gy in 23 to 25 fractions to the chest wall. A boost at the scar with

a dose of 2 Gy per fraction to a total dose of approximately 60 Gy may

be considered in some cases based on risk.

Regional Nodal Irradiation

The NCCN Guidelines include updated recommendations for regional

lymph node irradiation in patients treated with lumpectomy and

mastectomy depending on lymph node involvement (see Principles of

Radiation Therapy in the NCCN Guidelines for Breast Cancer).

Two studies, MA.20 and EORTC 22922/10925, evaluated the addition

of regional nodal irradiation to the internal mammary nodes and the

upper axillary nodes including the supraclavicular region, in addition to

whole breast irradiation or chest wall irradiation after lumpectomy or

mastectomy, respectively. In MA.20, regional recurrences were reduced

from 2.7% with breast irradiation only to 0.7% with the addition of nodal

irradiation.190 The distant recurrences were reduced from 17.3% to

13.4%.190 An improvement in DFS was seen from 77% to 82% at 10

years in those who received regional nodal irradiation compared to

those who did not.190 In EORTC 22922/10925, regional radiation

therapy reduced the incidence of regional recurrences from 4.2% to

2.7% and decreased the rate of distant metastases from 19.6% to

15.9% at a median follow-up of 10.9 years.191

Accelerated Partial Breast Irradiation

Several studies have been reported using accelerated partial breast

irradiation (APBI) rather than whole breast irradiation following complete

surgical excision of in-breast disease. The panel generally views the

use of APBI as investigational, and encourages its use within the

confines of a high-quality, prospective clinical trial.192 For patients who

are not trial eligible, recommendations from ASTRO indicate that APBI

may be suitable in selected patients with early-stage breast cancer and

may be comparable to treatment with standard whole-breast RT.193

Patients who may be suitable for APBI are women 60 years of age and

older who are not carriers of a known BRCA1/2 mutation and who have

been treated with primary surgery for a unifocal stage I, ER-positive

cancer. Tumors should be infiltrating ductal or have a favorable

histology, should not be associated with an extensive intraductal

component or LCIS, and should have negative margins. Thirty-four Gy

in 10 fractions delivered twice per day with brachytherapy or 38.5 Gy in

10 fractions delivered twice per day with external beam photon therapy

to the tumor bed is recommended. Other fractionation schemes are

under investigation. Studies have suggested that the ASTRO

stratification guidelines may not adequately predict ipsilateral breast

tumor recurrences following APBI.194,195 Follow-up is limited and studies

are ongoing.

Radiation Therapy in Patients Receiving Preoperative Systemic

Therapy

The panel recommends that decisions related to administration of

radiation therapy for patients receiving preoperative systemic

chemotherapy should be made based on maximal stage from

pre-chemotherapy tumor characteristics and/or pathological stage,

irrespective of tumor response to preoperative systemic therapy.

Radiation Therapy After Lumpectomy

After lumpectomy, whole breast irradiation is strongly recommended

with or without boost to tumor bed for node-positive disease (category 1

for those with positive nodes; category 2A for those with negative

axillary nodes). This recommendation is supported by the results of a

NCCN Guidelines Inde

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Breast Cancer

meta-analysis by the EBCTCG showing reduction in 10-year risk of

recurrence in those who received whole breast irradiation versus those

who did not (19% vs. 35%; RR 0.52; 95% CI, 0.48–0.56).132 In addition,

a significant reduction in 15-year risk of breast cancer death (21% vs.

25%; RR 0.82; 95% CI, 0.75–0.90) was also observed.132

Regional Nodal Irradiation

The reduction in the risk of locoregional and distant recurrence and

improvement in DFS seen in the MA.20 and EORTC 22922/10925 trials

support the importance of regional nodal irradiation after

lumpectomy.190,191 The NCCN Panel strongly recommends irradiation of

infraclavicular and supraclavicular areas, internal mammary nodes, and

any part of the axillary bed that may be suspicious (category 1 for ≥4

positive nodes). Irradiation of the regional nodal area is generally not

recommended by the panel for those with negative axillary nodes.

If adjuvant chemotherapy is indicated after lumpectomy, radiation

should be given after chemotherapy is completed.196,197 This

recommendation is based on results of the “Upfront-Outback” trial in

which patients who had undergone breast-conserving surgery and

axillary dissection were randomly assigned to receive chemotherapy

following radiation therapy or radiation therapy following chemotherapy.

The initial results showed an increased rate of local recurrence in the

group with delayed radiotherapy at a median follow-up of 58 months;197

however, differences in rates of distant or local recurrence were not

statistically significant when the two arms were compared at 135-month

follow-up.196

Radiation Therapy After Lumpectomy in Older Adults

Whole breast irradiation as a component of breast-conserving therapy is

not always necessary in selected women 70 years of age or older. In a

study of women with clinical stage I, ER-positive breast cancer who

were greater than or equal to 70 years of age at diagnosis, patients

were randomized to receive lumpectomy with whole breast radiation or

lumpectomy alone, both with tamoxifen for five years. Locoregional

recurrence rates were 1% in the lumpectomy, radiation, and tamoxifen

arm and 4% in the lumpectomy plus tamoxifen arm. There were no

differences in OS, DFS, or need for mastectomy.198 These results were

confirmed in an updated analysis of this study with a median follow-up

of 12.6 years.199 At 10 years, a statistically significant reduction in

ipsilateral breast recurrences was seen with radiation therapy with 90%

of patients in the lumpectomy and tamoxifen arm compared with 98% in

the lumpectomy plus radiation and tamoxifen arm who were free from

locoregional recurrence.199 Similar results were obtained in other studies

of similar design.200,201 Whether the difference in tumor control is

clinically significant and the patient receives breast radiotherapy should

be individualized based upon discussion between the patient and her

care team.

The NCCN Guidelines allow for the use of lumpectomy (pathologically

negative margin required) plus tamoxifen or an aromatase inhibitor

without breast irradiation in women greater than or equal to 70 years of

age with clinically negative lymph nodes and ER-positive, T1 breast

cancer (category 1).

Radiation Therapy After Mastectomy

Node-Positive Disease: Randomized clinical trials have shown that a

DFS and OS advantage is conferred by the irradiation of chest wall and

regional lymph nodes in women with positive ALNs after mastectomy

and ALN dissection.202-206 In these trials, the ipsilateral chest wall and

the ipsilateral locoregional lymph nodes were irradiated. The results of

EBCTCG meta-analyses207 show that radiotherapy after mastectomy

and axillary node dissection reduced both recurrence and breast cancer

mortality in the women with 1 to 3 positive lymph nodes even when

systemic therapy was administered.191 Based on these studies, the

NCCN Guidelines Inde

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Breast Cancer

current guidelines recommend postmastectomy chest wall irradiation in

women with positive ALNs (category 1). Two retrospective analyses

have provided evidence for benefit of radiation therapy for only selected

patients (patients presenting with clinical stage III disease and patients

with four or more positive nodes) receiving preoperative systemic

therapy prior to mastectomy.208,209

Regional Nodal Irradiation

The use of regional nodal irradiation for patients undergoing

mastectomy is supported by a subgroup analysis of studies from the

Danish Breast Cancer Cooperative Group.210 In this analysis, a

substantial survival benefit was associated with postmastectomy

radiation therapy for women with 1 to 3 positive ALNs. In addition, data

from the EORTC 22922/10925 trial supports the role of regional RT in

this population based on the inclusion of patients who had undergone

mastectomy in this study. Based on the above data, the NCCN Panel

recommends irradiation of infraclavicular and supraclavicular areas,

internal mammary nodes, and any part of the axillary bed that may be

suspicious (category 1 for ≥4 positive nodes; 2A for 1–3 positive nodes).

Node-Negative Disease: Features in node-negative tumors that predict

a high rate of local recurrence include primary tumors greater than 5 cm

or positive pathologic margins. Chest wall irradiation is recommended

for these patients.211 Consideration should be given to radiation to the

ipsilateral supraclavicular area and to the ipsilateral internal mammary

lymph nodes, especially in patients with tumors greater than 5 cm, or

positive surgical margins. In patients with tumors less than or equal to 5

cm and negative margins but less than or equal to 1 mm, chest wall

irradiation should be considered.

In patients with negative nodes, tumor less than or equal to 5 cm, and

clear margins (≥1 mm), post-mastectomy radiation therapy is usually

not recommended. However, the panel has noted that it may be

considered only for patients with high risk of recurrence. A retrospective

analysis suggests benefit of post-mastectomy radiation therapy in

reducing risk of recurrence in patients with node-negative disease with

high-risk factors such as close margins, tumors greater than or equal to

2 cm, premenopausal status, and lymphovascular invasion.212 Another

study showed increased risk of locoregional recurrence in women with

node-negative triple-negative breast cancer with tumors less than or

equal to 5 cm.213

Breast Reconstruction

Breast reconstruction may be an option for any woman receiving

surgical treatment for breast cancer. Therefore, all women undergoing

breast cancer treatment should be educated about breast reconstructive

options as adapted to their individual clinical situation and be offered an

opportunity to consult with a reconstructive plastic surgeon. Breast

reconstruction should not interfere with the appropriate surgical

management. This may increase the risk of overall and cancer-related

death, especially in those with late-stage disease.214 Coordinating

consultation and surgical treatment with a reconstructive surgeon

should be executed within a reasonable timeframe.

Several reconstructive approaches are summarized for these patients in

the NCCN Guidelines for Breast Cancer under Principles of Breast

Reconstruction Following Surgery.

The decision regarding type of reconstruction includes patient

preference, body habitus, smoking history, comorbidities, plans for

irradiation, and expertise and experience of the reconstruction team.

Smoking and obesity increase the risk of complications for all types of

NCCN Guidelines Inde

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Breast Cancer

breast reconstruction whether with implant or flap.215-219 Smoking and

obesity are therefore considered a relative contraindication to breast

reconstruction by the NCCN Panel. Patients should be informed of

increased rates of wound healing complications and partial or complete

flap failure among smokers and obese patients.

Reconstruction is an optional procedure that does not impact the

probability of recurrence or death, but it is associated with an improved

quality of life for many patients. It is sometimes necessary to perform

surgery on the contralateral breast (ie, breast reduction, implantation) to

achieve optimal symmetry between the ipsilateral reconstructed breast

and the contralateral breast.

Breast Reconstruction After Mastectomy

Mastectomy results in loss of the breast for breastfeeding, loss of

sensation in the skin of the breast and nipple-areolar complex (NAC),

and loss of the breast for cosmetic, body image, and psychosocial

purposes. The loss of the breast for cosmetic, body image, and

psychosocial issues may be partially overcome through the

performance of breast reconstruction with or without reconstruction of

the NAC.

Women undergoing mastectomy should be offered consultation

regarding options and timing of breast reconstruction.

Many factors must be considered in the decision-making about breast

reconstruction. There are several different types of breast

reconstruction that include the use of implants, autogenous tissues, or

both.220-222 Reconstruction with implants can be performed either by

immediate placement of a permanent subpectoral implant or initial

placement of a subpectoral expander implant followed by gradual

expansion of the implant envelope with stretching of the pectoralis

major muscle and overlying skin followed by replacement of the

expander with a permanent implant. A wide variety of implants are

available that contain saline, silicone gel, or a combination of saline and

silicone gel inside a solid silicone envelope.

Autogenous tissue methods of reconstruction use various combinations

of fat, muscle, skin, and vasculature from donor sites (ie, abdomen,

buttock, back) that may be brought to the chest wall with their original

blood supply (pedicle flap) or as free flaps with microvascular

anastomoses to supply blood from the chest wall/thorax.223 Several

procedures using autologous tissue are available including transverse

rectus abdominis myocutaneous flap, latissimus dorsi flap, and gluteus

maximus myocutaneous flap reconstruction.

Composite reconstruction techniques use implants in combination with

autogenous tissue reconstruction to provide volume and symmetry.

Patients with underlying diabetes or who smoke tobacco have

increased rates of complications following autogenous tissue breast

cancer reconstruction, presumably because of underlying microvascular

disease.

Reconstruction can be performed either at the time of the mastectomy

known as “immediate breast reconstruction” and under the same

anesthetic or in a delayed fashion any time, known as “delayed breast

reconstruction.” In many cases, breast reconstruction involves a staged

approach requiring more than one procedure such as surgery on the

contralateral breast to improve symmetry, revision surgery involving the

breast and/or donor site, and/or nipple and areola reconstruction and

tattoo pigmentation.

Plans for post-mastectomy radiation therapy can impact decisions

related to breast reconstruction since there is a significantly increased

NCCN Guidelines Inde

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Breast Cancer

risk of implant capsular contracture following irradiation of an implant.

Furthermore, postmastectomy irradiation may have a negative impact

on breast cosmesis when autologous tissue is used in immediate breast

reconstruction, and may interfere with the targeted delivery of radiation

when immediate reconstruction is performed using either autologous

tissue or breast implants.224,225 Some studies, however, have not found a

significant compromise in reconstruction cosmesis after radiation

therapy.226 The preferred approach to breast reconstruction for

irradiated patients was a subject of controversy among the panel. While

some experienced breast cancer teams have employed protocols in

which immediate tissue reconstructions are followed by radiation

therapy, generally radiation therapy is preferred to precede autologous

reconstruction due to the reported loss in reconstruction cosmesis

(category 2B). When implant reconstruction is planned in a post

mastectomy patient requiring radiation therapy, the NCCN Panel prefers

a staged approach with immediate tissue expander placement followed

by implant placement. Immediate placement of an implant in patients

requiring postoperative radiation has an increased rate of capsular

contracture, malposition, poor cosmesis, and implant exposure. Surgery

to exchange the tissue expanders with permanent implants can be

performed prior to radiation or after completion of radiation therapy.

In a previously radiated patient, the use of tissue expanders/implants is

relatively contraindicated.227 Tissue expansion of irradiated skin can

result in a significantly increased risk of capsular contracture,

malposition, poor cosmesis, implant exposure, and failed

reconstruction.228,229 If a patient has previously received radiation therapy

to the breast, autologous tissue reconstruction is the preferred method

of breast reconstruction.

Skin-sparing Mastectomy

Skin-sparing mastectomy procedures are appropriate for some patients

and involve removal of the breast parenchyma including the NAC while

preserving the majority of the original skin envelope, and are followed

by immediate reconstruction with autogenous tissue, a prosthetic

implant, or a composite of autogenous tissue and an implant.

Skin-sparing mastectomy involving preservation of the skin of the NAC

has become the subject of increased attention. Possible advantages of

this procedure include improvements in breast cosmesis, body image,

and nipple sensation following mastectomy, although the impact of this

procedure on these quality-of-life issues has not been well-studied.230-232

There are limited data from surgical series, with short follow-up, that

suggest that performance of NAC-sparing mastectomy in selected

patients is associated with low rates of occult involvement of the NAC

with breast cancer and local disease recurrence.231,233,234 NAC-sparing

procedures may be an option in patients who are carefully selected by

experienced multidisciplinary teams. According to the NCCN Panel,

when considering a NAC-sparing procedure, assessment of nipple

margins is mandatory. Retrospective data support the use of NAC-

sparing procedures for patients with breast cancer with low rates of

nipple involvement and low rates of local recurrence due to early-stage,

biologically favorable (ie, Nottingham grade I or 2, node-negative,

HER2-negative, no lymphovascular invasion) invasive cancers and/or

DCIS that are peripherally located in the breast (>2 cm from

nipple).235,236 Contraindications for nipple preservation include evidence

of nipple involvement such as Paget’s disease or other nipple discharge

associated with malignancy and/or imaging findings suggesting

malignant involvement of nipple and subareolar tissues. Several

prospective trials are underway to evaluate NAC-sparing mastectomy in

the setting of cancer and enrollment in such trials is encouraged.

NCCN Guidelines Inde

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Breast Cancer

Advantages of a skin-sparing mastectomy procedure include an

improved cosmetic outcome resulting in a reduction in the size of the

mastectomy scar and a more natural breast shape, especially when

autologous tissue is used in reconstruction,237 and the ability to perform

immediate reconstruction. Although no randomized studies have been

performed, results of several mostly retrospective studies have

indicated that the risk of local recurrence is not increased when patients

receiving skin-sparing mastectomies are compared with those

undergoing non-skin–sparing procedures. However, strong selection

biases almost certainly exist in the identification of patients appropriate

for skin-sparing procedures.238-242 Reconstruction of the NAC may also

be performed in a delayed fashion if desired by the patient.

Reconstructed nipples are devoid of sensation. According to the NCCN

Panel, skin-sparing mastectomy should be performed by an

experienced breast surgery team that works in a coordinated,

multidisciplinary fashion to guide proper patient selection for skin-

sparing mastectomy, determine optimal sequencing of the

reconstructive procedure(s) in relation to adjuvant therapies, and

perform a resection that achieves appropriate surgical margins. Post-

mastectomy radiation should still be applied for patients treated by skin-

sparing mastectomy following the same selection criteria as for

standard mastectomy.

Breast Reconstruction After Lumpectomy

Issues related to breast reconstruction also pertain to women who

undergo or have undergone a lumpectomy, particularly in situations

where the surgical defect is large and/or expected to be cosmetically

unsatisfactory. An evaluation of the likely cosmetic outcome of

lumpectomy should be performed prior to surgery. Oncoplastic

techniques for breast conservation can extend breast-conserving

surgical options in situations where the resection by itself would likely

yield an unacceptable cosmetic outcome.243 The evolving field of

oncoplastic surgery includes the use of “volume displacement”

techniques performed in conjunction with a large partial mastectomy.244

Oncoplastic volume displacement procedures combine the removal of

generous regions of breast tissue (typically designed to conform to the

segmentally distributed cancer in the breast) with “mastopexy”

techniques in which remaining breast tissues are shifted together within

the breast envelope to fill the resulting surgical defect and thereby avoid

the creation of significant breast deformity. Volume displacement

techniques are generally performed during the same operative setting

as the breast-conserving lumpectomy by the same surgeon who is

performing the cancer resection.244,245

Advantages of oncoplastic volume displacement techniques are that

they permit the removal of larger regions of breast tissue, thereby

achieving wider surgical margins around the cancer, and at the same

time better preserve the natural shape and appearance of the breast

than do standard breast resections.246

Limitations of oncoplastic volume displacement techniques include lack

of standardization among centers, performance at only a limited number

of sites in the United States, and the possible necessity for subsequent

mastectomy if pathologic margins are positive when further

breast-conserving attempts are deemed impractical or unrealistic.

Nevertheless, the consensus of the panel is that these issues should be

considered prior to surgery for women who are likely to have a surgical

defect that is cosmetically unsatisfactory, and that women who undergo

lumpectomy and are dissatisfied with the cosmetic outcome after

treatment should be offered a consultation with a plastic surgeon to

address the repair of resulting breast defects. Patients should be

informed of the possibility of positive margins and potential need for

secondary surgery, which could include re-excision segmental

resection, or could require mastectomy with or without loss of the

NCCN Guidelines Inde

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Breast Cancer

nipple. Oncoplastic procedures can be combined with surgery on the

contralateral unaffected breast to minimize long-term asymmetry.

Finally, decisions regarding breast reconstruction should primarily focus

on treatment of the tumor, and such treatment should not be

compromised.

Systemic Therapies (Preoperative and Adjuvant)

Principles of Preoperative Systemic Therapy

The NCCN Panel has outlined the rationale, appropriate patient

selection, and response assessment for preoperative systemic therapy

in a new section titled, Principles of Preoperative Chemotherapy.

Rationale for Preoperative Chemotherapy

Randomized clinical trials have found no significant differences in long-

term outcomes when systemic chemotherapy is given before or after

surgery.297,298 Historically, a primary advantage of administering

preoperative systemic therapy has been to improve surgical outcomes.

Preoperative systemic therapy can render inoperable tumors resectable

and also downstage patients with operable breast cancer desiring

breast conservation.299 Results from large clinical trials and

retrospective reviews indicate that breast conservation rates are

improved with preoperative systemic therapy.298,300 Clinicians need to

carefully consider the extent of disease in the breast and likelihood of

adequate tumor response before recommending preoperative systemic

therapy to improve the likelihood of successful breast conservation.

In addition, use of preoperative systemic therapy may provide important

prognostic information based on response to therapy. Achieving a

pathologic complete response (pCR) to neoadjuvant therapy is

associated with favorable disease-free and OS in early-stage breast

cancer. The correlation between pathologic response and long-term

outcomes in patients with early-stage breast cancer is strongest for

patients with triple-negative breast cancer, less so for HER2-positive

disease, and least for hormone-positive disease.301-303

Other benefits of preoperative systemic therapy include allowing time

for appropriate genetic testing and for planning breast reconstruction in

patients proceeding with mastectomy. For those with significant residual

disease after standard preoperative systemic therapy, it may provide an

opportunity to identify patients who are candidates for clinical trials of

novel agents in the adjuvant setting. To date, the tailoring of therapy

based on poor response to standard preoperative chemotherapy has

not yet demonstrated improved outcomes. In addition, preoperative

systemic therapy also serves as an excellent research platform to test

novel therapies and predictive biomarkers by providing tumor

specimens and blood samples prior to and during systemic treatment.

Selection of Patients for Preoperative Therapy

Not all patients are appropriate candidates for preoperative systemic

therapy. According to the NCCN Panel, among those with inoperable

breast tumors, preoperative systemic therapy is indicated in women with

locally advanced or inoperable breast cancer including those with

inflammatory breast cancer; those with N2 and N3 regional lymph node

nodal disease; and T4 tumors. In patients with operable breast cancer

who are clear candidates for adjuvant chemotherapy, preoperative

systemic therapy may be considered if a patient desires breast-

conserving surgery but the surgery is not possible due to the size of the

tumor relative to that of the breast, with the hope that this will help

obtain clear surgical margins at final resection. Preoperative systemic

therapy may also be administered in patients with operable tumors if the

patient’s breast cancer subtype is one associated with a high likelihood

of response. When preoperative systemic therapy is used to improve

NCCN Guidelines Inde

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Breast Cancer

the likelihood of successful breast conservation, the surgical plan

should consider the possibility that clear surgical margins may not

always be obtained, and a follow-up mastectomy may be required, with

or without breast reconstruction. This consideration is especially

important when oncoplastic breast reduction techniques or contralateral

breast symmetry procedures are added to the breast-conserving

surgery to achieve optimal cosmetic outcomes.

The NCCN Panel cautions that preoperative systemic therapy is not

appropriate for certain patients. Preoperative systemic therapy should

not be offered in patients with extensive in situ disease when the extent

of invasive disease cannot be defined; in patients where the extent of

the tumor is poorly delineated; or in those whose tumors are not

palpable or clinically assessable. The decision to utilize preoperative

therapy should be made in the context of a coordinated and

collaborative multi-disciplinary team.

Preoperative Systemic Therapy Options

Chemotherapy: A number of chemotherapy regimens have activity in

the preoperative setting. According to the NCCN Panel, those regimens

recommended in the adjuvant setting may be considered in the

preoperative setting. In both settings, the underlying aim remains the

same: eradication or control of undiscovered distant metastases.

Endocrine Therapy: Neoadjuvant endocrine therapy alone may be

offered to those with strongly hormone receptor-positive tumors.304-311

According to the NCCN Panel, the endocrine therapy options include an

aromatase inhibitor (with ovarian suppression for premenopausal

women) or tamoxifen. The preferred endocrine therapy option for

postmenopausal women is an aromatase inhibitor.

HER2 Targeted Therapy: For patients with HER2-positive breast

cancer, who are candidates for preoperative systemic therapy,

chemotherapy and trastuzumab-based therapy is recommended.312

Chemotherapy and dual anti-HER2 blockade associated with

trastuzumab plus pertuzumab has shown significant improvements in

the pCR rate when compared with chemotherapy and one anti-HER2

agent in the preoperative setting.313-315 In the Neosphere trial, the

addition of pertuzumab to trastuzumab and docetaxel preoperatively led

to a statistically significant increase in pCR in the breast (16.8%

increase; 95% CI, 3.5–30.1; P = .0141).315 In the TRYPHAENA trial,

preoperative therapy with pertuzumab and trastuzumab given along

with anthracycline-containing or anthracycline-free standard

chemotherapy regimens to patients with operable, locally advanced, or

inflammatory HER2-positive breast cancer showed pCR rates in all

treatment arms ranging from 57% to 66%.316 The mean change in left

ventricular ejection fraction was similar in all treatment arms.316 The

NCCN Panel supports the FDA-approved indication that a pertuzumab-

containing regimen may be administered preoperatively to patients with

greater than or equal to T2, or greater than or equal to N1, HER2-

positive, early-stage breast cancer.

Response Assessment During Preoperative Chemotherapy: The NCCN

panel recommends that tumor response should be routinely assessed

by clinical exam during the delivery of preoperative systemic therapy.

Patients with operable breast cancer experiencing progression of

disease while undergoing preoperative systemic therapy should be

taken promptly to surgery. Imaging during preoperative systemic

therapy should not be done routinely, but may be considered if tumor

progression is suspected. Imaging prior to surgery should be

determined by a multi-disciplinary team.

NCCN Guidelines Inde

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Breast Cancer

Systemic Adjuvant Therapy

After surgical treatment, adjuvant systemic therapy should be

considered. The decision is often based on individual risk of relapse and

predicted sensitivity to a particular treatment (eg, ER/PR and HER2

status).

The published results of the EBCTCG overview analyses of adjuvant

chemotherapy and tamoxifen show convincing reductions in the odds of

recurrence and death in all age groups for chemotherapy and endocrine

therapy.4,247 Thus, the current guidelines recommend adjuvant therapy

without regard to patient age (category 1). The decision to use systemic

adjuvant therapy requires considering and balancing risk for disease

recurrence with local therapy alone, the magnitude of benefit from

applying adjuvant therapy, toxicity of the therapy, and comorbidity.248,249

The decision-making process requires collaboration between the health

care team and patient.

Estimating Risk of Relapse or Death and Benefits of Systemic

Treatment

Several prognostic factors predict for future recurrence or death from

breast cancer. The strongest prognostic factors are patient age,

comorbidity, tumor size, tumor grade, number of involved ALNs, and

possibly HER2 tumor status. Algorithms have been published

estimating rates of recurrence,248 and a validated, computer-based

model (Adjuvant! Online; www.adjuvantonline.com) is available to

estimate 10-year DFS and OS that incorporates all of the above

prognostic factors except for HER2 tumor status.249,250 These tools aid

the clinician in objectively estimating outcome with local treatment only,

and also assist in estimating the absolute benefits expected from

systemic adjuvant endocrine therapy and chemotherapy. These

estimates may be utilized by the clinician and patient in their shared

decision-making regarding the toxicities and benefits of systemic

adjuvant therapy.251

A determination of the HER2 status of the tumor is recommended for

prognostic purposes for patients with node-negative breast cancer.252

More importantly, HER2 tumor status also provides predictive

information used in selecting optimal adjuvant/neoadjuvant therapy and

in the selection of therapy for recurrent or metastatic disease (category

1). For example, retrospective analyses have demonstrated that

anthracycline-based adjuvant therapy is superior to non-anthracycline–

based adjuvant chemotherapy in patients with HER2-positive tumors,253-

257 and that the dose of doxorubicin may be important in the treatment of

tumors that are HER2-positive.258 Prospective evidence of the predictive

utility of HER2 status in early-stage 259-264 and metastatic breast

cancer265-267 is available for trastuzumab-containing therapies.

Use of DNA microarray technologies to characterize breast cancer has

allowed for development of classification systems of breast cancer by

gene expression profile.268 Five major subtypes of breast cancer have

been identified by DNA microarray gene expression profiling:

ER-positive/HER2-negative (luminal A and luminal B subtypes);

ER-negative/HER2-negative (basal subtype); HER2-positive; and

tumors that have characteristics similar to normal breast tissue.269-271 In

retrospective analyses, these gene expression subtypes are associated

with differing relapse-free survival and OS.

There are many gene-based assays to predict prognosis such as

distant recurrence, local recurrence, or survival.

The 21-gene assay using reverse transcription polymerase chain

reaction (RT-PCR) on RNA isolated from paraffin-embedded breast

cancer tissue is among the best-validated prognostic assays, and there

NCCN Guidelines Inde

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Breast Cancer

are data showing that it can predict who is most likely to respond to

systemic chemotherapy.

Studies have shown that the 21-gene assay recurrence score obtained

is predictive of locoregional and distant recurrence for postmenopausal

women treated with tamoxifen or those treated with an aromatase

inhibitor.272-274 Studies have also demonstrated the ability of the

recurrence score to independently predict response to adjuvant

chemotherapy.275-277 Unplanned, retrospective subset analysis from a

single randomized clinical trial in post-menopausal, ALN-positive,

ER-positive breast cancer found that the 21-gene RT-PCR assay may

provide predictive information for chemotherapy benefit in addition to

tamoxifen.275 Patients with a high score in the study benefited from

chemotherapy, whereas patients with a low score did not appear to

benefit from the addition of chemotherapy regardless of the number of

positive lymph nodes.275 Many other multi-gene or multi-gene

expression assay systems have been developed.

The 70-gene signature assay uses microarray technology to analyze

gene expression profile from breast tumor tissue (formalin-fixed,

paraffin-embedded fresh or frozen breast tumor tissue) to help identify

patients with early-stage breast cancer likely to develop distant

metastases.278-284 This assay is approved by the FDA to assist in

assignment of women with ER-positive or ER-negative breast cancer

into a high versus low risk for recurrence, but not for predicting benefit

from adjuvant systemic therapy. The prospective RASTER study

reported that breast cancer patients classified by the 70-gene signature

as low risk (of whom 85% did not receive adjuvant chemotherapy) had

an overall 97% distant recurrence-free interval at five years.285

Another assay with 50 genes identifies intrinsic breast cancer subtypes

(luminal A, luminal B, HER2 enriched and basal-like) in addition to

generating a risk of recurrence (ROR) score that can be used to predict

prognosis among postmenopausal women with hormone-positive breast

cancer. In a retrospective analysis of the ATAC trial,286 the ROR score

obtained using the 50-gene assay in postmenopausal patients treated

with adjuvant tamoxifen or anastrozole was seen to have a continuous

relationship with the risk of distant recurrence at 10 years in node-

negative and node-positive disease. The retrospective analysis also

compared the ROR score obtained using the 50-gene assay with the

recurrence score obtained using the 21-gene assay. Both assays

identified similar percentage of low-risk patients (hormone receptor-

positive, node-negative) with similar risk of recurrence. The ABCSG-8

trial showed that the ROR score provides prognostic information and

predicts the risk of distant recurrence in postmenopausal women with

ER-positive early-stage breast cancer.287 A recent combined analysis of

the ATAC and the ABCSG-8 trials reported ROR score as a strong

predictor of late distant recurrence (greater than 5 years) for patients

with hormone receptor-positive, node-negative disease.288The NCCN

Panel members acknowledge that many assays have been clinically

validated for prediction of prognosis. However, based on the currently

available data, the panel believes that the 21-gene assay has been best

validated for its use as a prognostic test as well as in predicting who is

most likely to respond to systemic chemotherapy.

Patients with a high recurrence score obtained using the 21-gene assay

clearly benefit from chemotherapy, whereas patients with a low score

do not appear to benefit from the addition of chemotherapy regardless

of the number of positive lymph nodes.275 The results from the

prospective TAILORx study support the use of the 21-gene assay to

spare the use of chemotherapy in patients with a low-risk score.289 In

patients with a low-risk score (≤10) at 5 years, the risk of the recurrence

NCCN Guidelines Inde

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Breast Cancer

of breast cancer at a distant site was less than 1% and the risk of any

recurrence was less than 2%.289

The additional benefit from adjuvant chemotherapy in addition to

endocrine therapy is currently unclear for patients with intermediate

recurrence score. The long-term follow-up results from the TAILORx

trial clarify the use of chemotherapy in women with hormone-receptor–

positive, HER2-negative, axillary node–negative invasive breast cancer

with mid-range 21-gene assay recurrence score (between 11–25).290

The ongoing RxPONDER trial is evaluating whether adjuvant

chemotherapy is beneficial in patients with hormone receptor-positive,

HER2-negative breast cancer with positive ALNs and a recurrence

score of 25 or less.291

The MINDACT trial is phase III trial comparing the 70-gene signature

with the commonly used clinicopathologic criteria in selecting patients

for adjuvant chemotherapy in breast cancer with 0 to 3 positive

nodes.292 The early results from the MINDACT trial suggest that the 70-

gene signature can help avoid chemotherapy in certain patients

regardless of larger tumor size and nodal status, without compromising

the outcome.293 Among the MINDACT trial patients, if decision on

administering adjuvant chemotherapy was based on clinical

characteristics alone (tumor size and nodal status), 50% would receive

adjuvant chemotherapy; however, only 36% received chemotherapy

using the risk status based on the 70-gene signature—an absolute

reduction of 14% in chemotherapy administration rate.293

Axillary Lymph Node-Negative Tumors

Small tumors (up to 0.5 cm in greatest diameter) that do not involve the

lymph nodes are so favorable that adjuvant systemic therapy is of

minimal incremental benefit and is not recommended as treatment of

the invasive breast cancer. According to the NCCN Panel, endocrine

therapy may be considered to reduce the risk for a second contralateral

breast cancer, especially in those with ER-positive disease. The NSABP

database demonstrated a correlation between the ER status of a new

contralateral breast tumor and the original primary tumor, which

reinforced the notion that endocrine therapy is not an effective strategy

to reduce the risk for contralateral breast cancer in patients diagnosed

with ER-negative tumors.294

Patients with invasive ductal or lobular tumors greater than 0.5 cm in

diameter and no lymph node involvement may be divided into patients

with a low risk of recurrence and those with unfavorable prognostic

features that warrant consideration of adjuvant therapy. Unfavorable

prognostic features include intramammary angiolymphatic invasion,

high nuclear grade, high histologic grade, HER2-positive status, or

hormone receptor-negative status. The use of endocrine therapy and

chemotherapy in these relatively lower risk subsets of women must be

based on balancing the expected absolute risk reduction and the

individual patient’s willingness to experience toxicity to achieve that

incremental risk reduction.

For women with lymph node-negative, hormone receptor-negative

tumors less than or equal to 0.5 cm with micrometastasis (pN1mi) or

tumors 0.6 to 1.0 cm, the NCCN Guidelines suggest considering

adjuvant chemotherapy (category 2A). For tumors greater than 1 cm in

diameter chemotherapy is a category 1 recommendation.

For those with lymph node-negative, hormone receptor-positive breast

cancer tumors greater than 0.5 cm, the panel recommends endocrine

therapy (category 1) with the consideration of chemotherapy.

Incremental benefit of combination chemotherapy in patients with lymph

node-negative, hormone receptor-positive breast cancer may be

NCCN Guidelines Inde

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Breast Cancer

relatively small.295 However, chemotherapy should not be withheld from

these patients solely based on ER-positive tumor status.4,295,296 The

panel considers the 21-gene RT-PCR assay an option for these patients

to help estimate likelihood of recurrence and benefit from

chemotherapy. The panel emphasizes that the recurrence score should

be used for decision-making only in the context of other elements of risk

stratification for an individual patient.

Axillary Lymph Node-Positive Tumors

Patients with lymph node-positive disease are most often candidates for

chemotherapy and, if the tumor is hormone receptor-positive, for the

addition of endocrine therapy (category 1). When HER2 is amplified or

over-expressed, HER2-targeted therapy should be incorporated into the

adjuvant chemotherapy. The NCCN Panel has noted in a footnote that

the 21-gene RT-PCR assay recurrence score can be considered in

select patients with 1 to 3 involved ipsilateral ALNs to guide the addition

of combination chemotherapy to standard hormone therapy based on

the retrospective study by Albain et al.275

Stratification for Systemic Adjuvant Therapy

The NCCN Guidelines stratify patients with breast cancer based on their

hormone receptor status and HER2 expression. Patients are then

further stratified based on risk of disease recurrence based on anatomic

and pathologic characteristics (ie, tumor grade, tumor size, ALN status,

angiolymphatic invasion).

Adjuvant Endocrine Therapy

The NCCN Guidelines call for the determination of ER and PR content

in all primary invasive breast cancers.17 Patients with invasive breast

cancers that are ER or PR positive should be considered for adjuvant

endocrine therapy regardless of patient age, lymph node status, or

whether adjuvant chemotherapy is to be administered.317 Selected

studies suggest that HER2-positive breast cancers may be less

sensitive to some endocrine therapies, although other studies have

failed to confirm this finding.255,318-325 A retrospective analysis of tumor

blocks collected in the ATAC trial indicated that HER2 amplification is a

marker of relative endocrine resistance independent of type of

endocrine therapy.326 However, given the favorable toxicity profile of the

available endocrine therapies, the panel recommends the use of

adjuvant endocrine therapy in the majority of women with hormone

receptor-positive breast cancer regardless of menopausal status, age,

or HER2 status of the tumor.

Tamoxifen

The most firmly established adjuvant endocrine therapy is tamoxifen for

both premenopausal and postmenopausal women.4 In women with

ER-positive breast cancer, adjuvant tamoxifen decreases the annual

odds of recurrence by 39% and the annual odds of death by 31%

irrespective of the use of chemotherapy, patient age, menopausal

status, or ALN status.4 In patients receiving both tamoxifen and

chemotherapy, chemotherapy should be given first, followed by

sequential tamoxifen.296 Prospective randomized trials have

demonstrated that 5 years of tamoxifen is more effective than 1 to 2

years of tamoxifen.327,328

The ATLAS trial randomly allocated 12,894 women to continue

tamoxifen up to 10 years or to discontinue tamoxifen (control). The

outcome analyses of 6846 women with ER-positive disease showed

that by extending adjuvant treatment to 10 years, the risk of relapse and

breast cancer-related mortality was reduced.329 The risk of recurrence

during years 5 to 14 was 21.4% for women receiving tamoxifen versus

25.1% for controls (absolute recurrence reduction 3.7%). Patients

receiving tamoxifen beyond 10 years of treatment had a greater

reduction in risk of progression, possibly due to a “carryover effect.” The

NCCN Guidelines Inde

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Breast Cancer

reduction in risk of recurrence was 0.90 (95% CI, 0.79–1.02) during 5 to

9 years of tamoxifen treatment and 0.75 (0.62–0.90) after 10 years of

treatment. Furthermore, reduced mortality was apparent after

completion of 10 years of treatment with tamoxifen. With regards to

toxicity, the most important adverse effects noted in all women in the

ATLAS trial after treatment with 10 years of tamoxifen were an

increased risk for endometrial cancer and pulmonary embolism. The

recurrence rate ratio reported for pulmonary embolus was 1.87 (95% CI,

1.13–3.07; P = .01 [including 0.2% mortality in both groups]) and for

endometrial cancer was 1.74 (1.30–2.34, P = .0002). The cumulative

risk for endometrial cancers during 5 to 14 years was 3.1%, with a

mortality of 0.4% associated with endometrial cancer, higher than what

was noted in the control group of patients receiving only 5 years of

therapy (cumulative risk: 1.6%; mortality: 0.2%).329 The results of the

aTTom trial confirm the ATLAS reduction in recurrence and death from

breast cancer.330

In women who are premenopausal at diagnosis, the NCCN Panel

recommends tamoxifen treatment with or without ovarian

suppression/ablation. Ovarian ablation may be accomplished by

surgical oophorectomy or by ovarian irradiation. Ovarian suppression

utilizes luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone (LHRH) agonists that

result in suppression of luteinizing hormone (LH) and release of follicle-

stimulating hormone (FSH) from the pituitary and reduction in ovarian

estrogen production. Available LHRH agonists in the United States

include goserelin and leuprolide and, when used for ovarian

suppression, both agents should be given as monthly injections as the

3-month depots do not reliably suppress estrogen levels in all patients.

The EBCTCG performed a meta-analysis of randomized studies of

ovarian ablation or suppression alone versus no additional systemic

adjuvant therapy for early-stage breast cancer. Analysis of ovarian

suppression versus no adjuvant therapy did not demonstrate significant

reduction in recurrence (HR 0.72; 95% CI, 0.49–1.04) or death (HR

0.82; 95% CI, 0.47–1.43).331 In addition, data on ovarian suppression

with tamoxifen, chemotherapy, or both showed no significant reduction

in reduced recurrence or death.

Studies in premenopausal women of ovarian ablation or suppression

alone versus CMF (cyclophosphamide/methotrexate/fluorouracil)

chemotherapy alone generally demonstrate similar antitumor efficacy in

patients with hormone receptor-positive tumors and superior outcomes

with CMF in patients with hormone receptor-negative tumors.331-339

There is also the suggestion that the benefits of ovarian

suppression/ablation may be greater in the younger premenopausal

group. Studies in premenopausal women of ovarian

ablation/suppression plus tamoxifen versus chemotherapy alone

generally demonstrate no difference in rates of recurrence or

survival.340-342

A large intergroup study in premenopausal women with hormone

receptor-positive, node-positive breast cancer studied adjuvant CAF

(cyclophosphamide/doxorubicin/5-fluorouracil) chemotherapy versus

CAF plus ovarian suppression with goserelin (CAF-Z) versus CAF-Z

plus tamoxifen (CAF-ZT).332 The results demonstrated no improvement

in time to recurrence or OS comparing CAF with CAF-Z. There was

improvement in time to recurrence (HR, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.59–0.90; P <

.01) but not OS with CAF-Z compared with CAF-ZT (HR, 0.91; 95% CI,

0.71–1.15; P = .21). This study did not include a CAF plus tamoxifen

arm, so the contribution of the goserelin to the improved time to

recurrence in the CAF-ZT arm cannot be assessed. The addition of

ovarian suppression/ablation has also been subjected to meta-analysis

by the EBCTCG.340 They identified no statistically significant reduction in

annual rates of recurrence or death with the addition of ovarian

NCCN Guidelines Inde

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Breast Cancer

suppression or ablation to chemotherapy in women less than 40 years

or 40 to 49 years of age.

Recent data from the randomized TEXT–SOFT trials evaluating

adjuvant endocrine therapy show that the aromatase inhibitor

exemestane plus ovarian suppression significantly reduces recurrences

as compared with tamoxifen plus ovarian suppression.

In two randomized trials (TEXT and SOFT), premenopausal women

with hormone receptor-positive early-stage breast cancer were

assigned to receive exemestane plus ovarian suppression or tamoxifen

plus ovarian suppression for a period of 5 years.343 Suppression of

ovarian estrogen production was achieved with the use of the

gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist triptorelin, oophorectomy, or

ovarian irradiation. The DFS was 92.8% in the exemestane plus ovarian

suppression group, as compared with 88.8% in the tamoxifen plus

ovarian suppression group (HR for recurrence, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.55–

0.80; P < .001).343 The OS did not differ significantly between the two

groups (HR for death in the exemestane plus ovarian suppression

group, 1.14; 95% CI, 0.86–1.51; P = .37).343 In the SOFT trial,344

premenopausal women with hormone-receptor breast cancer were

randomized to tamoxifen alone, tamoxifen plus ovarian suppression, or

exemestane plus ovarian suppression for 5 years. In the primary

analysis, tamoxifen plus ovarian suppression was not superior to

tamoxifen alone for DFS. After 67 months of median follow-up, the DFS

rate at 5 years was 86.6% in the tamoxifen–ovarian suppression group

and 84.7% in the tamoxifen alone group (HR 0.83; 95% CI, 0.66–1.04;

P = .10).344 In a subgroup analysis, women at high risk of recurrence,

who received prior chemotherapy, had improved outcomes with ovarian

suppression. Their chance of remaining disease-free at 5 years was

78% with tamoxifen alone, 82.5% with tamoxifen and ovarian

suppression, and 85.7% with exemestane and ovarian suppression.344

In the subgroup of women with no prior chemotherapy, no meaningful

benefit was seen from ovarian suppression, as women who received

tamoxifen alone demonstrated a 95% chance of remaining disease-free

for 5 years.344 The OS data from these trials is still pending because the

overall follow-up is relatively short in the context of endocrine-sensitive

disease.

Based on the results of the SOFT and TEXT trials, the NCCN Panel has

included ovarian suppression plus an aromatase inhibitor for 5 years as

an adjuvant endocrine therapy option for premenopausal women with

hormone-receptor–positive breast cancer at higher risk of recurrence

(eg, young age, high-grade tumor, lymph-node involvement).

Several studies have evaluated aromatase inhibitors in the treatment of

postmenopausal women with early-stage breast cancer. These studies

have utilized the aromatase inhibitors as initial adjuvant therapy, as

sequential therapy following 2 to 3 years of tamoxifen, or as extended

therapy following 4.5 to 6 years of tamoxifen. The aromatase inhibitors

are not active in the treatment of women with functioning ovaries and

should not be used in women whose ovarian function cannot reliably be

assessed owing to treatment-induced amenorrhea. The results from two

prospective, randomized, clinical trials have provided evidence of an OS

benefit for patients with early-stage breast cancer receiving initial

endocrine therapy with tamoxifen followed sequentially by anastrozole

(HR, 0.53; 95% CI, 0.28–0.99; P = .045) or exemestane (HR, 0.83; 95%

CI, 0.69–1.00; P = .05 [excluding patients with ER-negative disease])

when compared with tamoxifen as the only endocrine therapy.345,346 In

addition, the NCIC-CTG MA-17 trial demonstrated a survival advantage

with extended therapy with letrozole compared with placebo in women

with ALN-positive (but not lymph node-negative), ER-positive breast

cancer.347 However, no survival differences have been reported for

patients receiving initial adjuvant therapy with an aromatase inhibitor

NCCN Guidelines Inde

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Breast Cancer

versus first-line tamoxifen.348,349 Tamoxifen and aromatase inhibitors

have different side effect profiles. Both contribute to hot flashes and

night sweats and may cause vaginal dryness. Aromatase inhibitors are

more commonly associated with musculoskeletal symptoms,

osteoporosis, and increased rate of bone fracture, while tamoxifen is

associated with an increased risk for uterine cancer and deep venous

thrombosis.

Two studies have examined initial adjuvant endocrine treatment with

either tamoxifen or an aromatase inhibitor. The ATAC trial

demonstrated that anastrozole is superior to tamoxifen or the

combination of tamoxifen and anastrozole in the adjuvant endocrine

therapy of postmenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive

breast cancer.350,351 With a median of 100 months follow-up, results in

5216 postmenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive,

early-stage breast cancer enrolled in the ATAC trial demonstrated fewer

recurrences (HR for DFS, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.76–0.94; P = .003) with

anastrozole compared with tamoxifen.348 No difference in survival has

been observed (HR, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.75–1.07; P = .2). Patients in the

combined tamoxifen and anastrozole group gained no benefit over

those in the tamoxifen group, suggesting a possible deleterious effect

from the weak estrogenic effect of tamoxifen in patients with near

complete elimination of endogenous estrogen levels.351 ATAC trial

sub-protocols show a lesser effect of anastrozole compared with

tamoxifen on endometrial tissue;352 similar effects of anastrozole and

tamoxifen on quality of life, with most patients reporting that overall

quality of life was not significantly impaired;353 a greater loss of bone

mineral density with anastrozole;354 a small pharmacokinetic

interference of anastrozole in the presence of tamoxifen of unclear

significance;355 and no evidence for an interaction between prior

chemotherapy and anastrozole.356

BIG 1-98 is a randomized trial testing the use of tamoxifen alone for 5

years, letrozole alone for 5 years, or tamoxifen for 2 years followed

sequentially by letrozole for 3 years, or letrozole for 2 years followed

sequentially by tamoxifen for 3 years. An early analysis compared

tamoxifen alone versus letrozole alone, including those patients in the

sequential arms during their first 2 years of treatment only.349 With 8010

women included in the analysis, DFS was superior in the

letrozole-treated women (HR, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.70–0.93; log rank P =

.003). No interaction between PR expression and benefit was observed.

No difference in OS was observed. A comparison of the cardiovascular

side effects in the tamoxifen and letrozole arms of the BIG 1-98 trial

showed that the overall incidence of cardiac adverse events was similar

(letrozole, 4.8%; tamoxifen, 4.7%). However, the incidence of grade 3 to

5 cardiac adverse events was significantly higher in the letrozole arm,

and both the overall incidence and incidence of grade 3 to 5

thromboembolic events was significantly higher in the tamoxifen arm.357

In addition, a higher incidence of bone fracture was observed for

women in the letrozole arm compared with those in the tamoxifen arm

(9.5% vs. 6.5%).358 After a longer follow-up (median 71 months) no

significant improvement in DFS was noted with either tamoxifen

followed by letrozole or the reverse sequence as compared with

letrozole alone (HR for tamoxifen followed by letrozole, 1.05; 99% CI,

0.84–1.32; HR for letrozole followed by tamoxifen, 0.96; 99% CI, 0.76–

1.21).359

Five trials have studied the use of tamoxifen for 2 to 3 years followed

sequentially by a third-generation aromatase inhibitor versus continued

tamoxifen in postmenopausal women. The Italian Tamoxifen

Anastrozole (ITA) trial randomized 426 postmenopausal women with

breast cancer who had completed 2 to 3 years of tamoxifen to either

continue tamoxifen or to switch to anastrozole to complete a total of 5

NCCN Guidelines Inde

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Breast Cancer

years of endocrine therapy.360 The HR for relapse strongly favored

sequential treatment with anastrozole (HR, 0.35; 95% CI, 0.18–0.68; P

= .001) with a trend towards fewer deaths (P = .10).360 Updated results

from this study show the HR for relapse-free survival as 0.56 (95% CI,

0.35–0.89; P = .01); P value for OS analysis remained at 0.1.361 The IES

trial randomized 4742 postmenopausal women with breast cancer who

had completed a total of 2 to 3 years of tamoxifen to either continue

tamoxifen or to switch to exemestane to complete a total of 5 years of

endocrine therapy.362 The results at a median of 55.7 months of

follow-up demonstrated the superiority of sequential exemestane in

DFS (HR, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.66–0.88; P = .0001) with a significant

difference in OS in only patients with ER-positive tumors (HR, 0.83;

95% CI, 0.69–1.00; log rank P = .05). A prospectively planned,

combined analysis of 3224 patients enrolled in the ABCSG 8 trial and

the Arimidex Nolvadex (ARNO 95) trial has also been reported.363

Patients in this combined analysis had been randomized following 2

years of tamoxifen to complete 5 years of adjuvant tamoxifen or 3 years

of anastrozole. With 28 months of median follow-up available,

event-free survival was superior with crossover to anastrozole (HR,

0.60; 95% CI, 0.44–0.81; P = .0009). No statistically significant

difference in survival has been observed. An analysis of the ARNO 95

trial alone after 58 months of median follow-up demonstrated that

switching from tamoxifen to anastrozole was associated with significant

increases in both DFS (HR, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.44–1.00; P = .049) and OS

(HR, 0.53; 95% CI, 0.28–0.99; P = .045).346 A meta-analysis of ABCSG

8, ARNO 95, and ITA studies showed significant improvement in OS

(HR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.52-0.98; P = .04) with a switch to anastrozole.364

The TEAM trial compared treatment of exemestane alone versus

sequential therapy of tamoxifen for 2.5 to 3.0 years followed by

exemestane to complete 5 years of hormone therapy.365 At the end of 5

years, 85% of patients in the sequential group versus 86% in the

exemestane group were disease free (HR, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.88–1.08; P

= .60). This is consistent with the data from the BIG 1-98 trial,359 in

which tamoxifen followed by letrozole or the reverse sequence of

letrozole followed by tamoxifen was not associated with significant

differences in efficacy versus letrozole monotherapy after a median

follow-up of 71 months.

Results of the MA-17 trial in 5187 women who had completed 4.5 to 6

years of adjuvant tamoxifen demonstrated that extended therapy with

letrozole provides benefit in postmenopausal women with hormone

receptor-positive, early-stage breast cancer.347,366 At a median follow-up

of 2.5 years, the results showed fewer recurrences or new contralateral

breast cancers with extended letrozole (HR, 0.58; 95% CI, 0.45–0.76; P

< .001). No difference in OS was demonstrated (HR, 0.82; 95% CI,

0.57–1.19; P = .3), although there was a survival advantage in the

subset of patients with ALN-positive disease (HR 0.61; 95% CI, 0.38–

0.98; P = .04). In a separate cohort analysis of the MA-17 trial, the

efficacy of letrozole versus placebo was evaluated after un-blinding of

the study in the 1579 women who had been randomly assigned to

placebo after 4.5 to 6 years of tamoxifen.367,368 The median time since

completion of tamoxifen was 2.8 years. Both DFS and distant DFS were

significantly improved in the group receiving letrozole, thereby providing

some evidence for the efficacy of letrozole in patients who had received

4.5 to 6 years of tamoxifen therapy followed by no endocrine therapy for

an extended period. A formal quality-of-life analysis demonstrated

reasonable preservation of quality of life during extended endocrine

therapy, although women may experience ongoing menopausal

symptoms and loss of bone mineral density.369,370 No data are available

regarding use of aromatase inhibitors for more than 5 years or

long-term toxic effects from extended treatment. In addition, the ATLAS

NCCN Guidelines Inde

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Breast Cancer

trial data do not provide clear direction for treatment of postmenopausal

women.371 There are no data available to suggest that an aromatase

inhibitor for 5 years is better for long-term benefit than 10 years of

tamoxifen.

In the extension study of ABCSG trial 6, hormone receptor-positive

postmenopausal patients received 5 years of adjuvant tamoxifen and

were randomized to 3 years of anastrozole or no further therapy.372 At a

median follow-up of 62.3 months, women who received anastrozole (n =

387) were reported to have a statistically significantly reduced risk of

recurrence compared with women who received no further treatment (n

= 469; HR, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.40–0.96; P = .031).372

The differences in design and patient populations among the studies of

the aromatase inhibitors do not allow for the direct comparison of the

results of these studies. A meta-analysis of adjuvant trials of aromatase

inhibitors versus tamoxifen alone versus after 2 or 3 years of tamoxifen

documented lower recurrence rates with the aromatase

inhibitor-containing regimen, with no clear impact on OS.373 It is not

known whether initial, sequential, or extended use of adjuvant

aromatase inhibitors is the optimal strategy.

The optimal duration of aromatase inhibitor treatment is also not known,

nor is the optimal use vis-à-vis chemotherapy established. Further, the

long-term (greater than 5-year) safety and efficacy of these agents are

still under investigation. The various studies are consistent in

demonstrating that the use of a third-generation aromatase inhibitor in

postmenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive breast cancer

lowers the risk of recurrence, including ipsilateral breast tumor

recurrences, contralateral breast cancer, and distant metastatic disease

when used as initial adjuvant therapy, sequential therapy, or extended

therapy. The panel finds no compelling evidence that there is

meaningful efficacy or toxicity differences between the aromatase

inhibitors, anastrozole, letrozole, and exemestane. All three have shown

similar anti-tumor efficacy and toxicity profiles in randomized studies in

the adjuvant settings.

NCCN Recommendations for Adjuvant Endocrine Therapy for

Postmenopausal Women: The NCCN Guidelines for Breast Cancer

recommend the following adjuvant endocrine therapy options for women

with early-stage breast cancer who are postmenopausal at diagnosis:

an aromatase inhibitor as initial adjuvant therapy for 5 years (category

1); and tamoxifen for 2 to 3 years followed by one of the following

options: an aromatase inhibitor to complete 5 years of adjuvant

endocrine therapy (category 1) or 5 years of aromatase inhibitor therapy

(category 2B); or tamoxifen for 4.5 to 6 years followed by 5 years of an

aromatase inhibitor (category 1) or consideration of tamoxifen for up to

10 years. In postmenopausal women, the use of tamoxifen alone for 5

years (category 1) or up to 10 years is limited to those who decline or

who have a contraindication to aromatase inhibitors.

NCCN Recommendations for Adjuvant Endocrine Therapy for

Premenopausal Women: For women premenopausal at diagnosis, the

NCCN Guidelines for Breast Cancer recommend 5 years of tamoxifen

(category 1) with or without ovarian suppression (category 1) or ovarian

suppression plus an aromatase inhibitor for 5 years (category 1).

Women who are premenopausal at diagnosis and who become

amenorrheic with chemotherapy may have continued estrogen

production from the ovaries without menses. Serial assessment of

circulating LH, FSH, and estradiol to assure a true postmenopausal

status is mandatory if this subset of women is to be considered for

therapy with an aromatase inhibitor.374,375

NCCN Guidelines Inde

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Breast Cancer

After 5 years of initial endocrine therapy, for women who are

postmenopausal at that time (including those who have become

postmenopausal during the 5 years of tamoxifen therapy), the NCCN

Panel recommends considering extended therapy with an aromatase

inhibitor for up to 5 years (category 1) or based on the data from the

ATLAS trial considering tamoxifen for an additional 5 years. For those

who remain premenopausal after the initial 5 years of tamoxifen, the

panel recommends considering continuing up to 10 years of tamoxifen

therapy.

Response to Adjuvant Endocrine Therapy: The measurement of the

nuclear antigen, Ki-67 by IHC, gives an estimate of the tumor cells in

the proliferative phase (G1, G2, and M phases) of the cell cycle. Studies

have demonstrated the prognostic value of Ki-67 as a biomarker and its

usefulness in predicting response and clinical outcome.376 One small

study suggests that measurement of Ki-67 after short-term exposure to

endocrine treatment may be useful to select patients with tumors

resistant to endocrine therapy and those who may benefit from

additional interventions.377 However, these data require larger analytic

and clinical validation. In addition, standardization of tissue handling

and processing is required to improve the reliability and value of Ki-67

testing. At this time, there is no conclusive evidence that Ki-67 alone,

especially baseline Ki-67 as an individual biomarker, helps to select the

type of endocrine therapy for an individual patient. Therefore, the NCCN

Breast Cancer Panel does not currently recommend assessment of Ki-

67.

The cytochrome P-450 (CYP450) enzyme, CYP2D6, is involved in the

conversion of tamoxifen to endoxifen. Over 100 allelic variants of

CYP2D6 have been reported in the literature.378 Individuals with

wild-type CYP2D6 alleles are classified as extensive metabolizers of

tamoxifen. Those with one or two variant alleles with either reduced

or no activity are designated as intermediate metabolizers and poor

metabolizers, respectively. A large retrospective study of 1325 patients

found that time to disease recurrence was significantly shortened in

poor metabolizers of tamoxifen.379 However, the BIG 1-98 trial reported

on the outcome based on CYP2D6 genotype in a subset of

postmenopausal patients with endocrine-responsive, early invasive

breast cancer.380 The study found no correlation between CYP2D6

allelic status and disease outcome or between CYP2D6 allelic status

and tamoxifen-related adverse effects.380 A genetic analysis of the

ATAC trial found no association between CYP2D6 genotype and clinical

outcomes.381 Given the limited and conflicting evidence at this time,382

the NCCN Breast Cancer Panel does not recommend CYP2D6 testing

as a tool to determine the optimal adjuvant endocrine strategy. This

recommendation is consistent with the ASCO Guidelines.383 When

prescribing a selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRI), it is

reasonable to avoid potent and intermediate CYP2D6 inhibiting agents,

particularly paroxetine and fluoxetine, if an appropriate alternative

exists.

Adjuvant Cytotoxic Chemotherapy

Several combination chemotherapy regimens are appropriate to

consider when adjuvant cytotoxic chemotherapy is utilized. All adjuvant

chemotherapy regimens listed in the NCCN Guidelines have been

evaluated in phase III clinical trials, and the current version of the

adjuvant chemotherapy guidelines does not distinguish between options

for chemotherapy regimens by ALN status.

The adjuvant chemotherapy guidelines also include specific

representative doses and schedules for the recommended adjuvant

chemotherapy regimens. The regimens have been categorized as

“preferred” or “other.”

NCCN Guidelines Inde

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Breast Cancer

The purpose of distinguishing the adjuvant chemotherapy regimens as

preferred and other adjuvant chemotherapy regimens is to convey the

sense of the panel regarding the relative efficacy and toxicity of the

regimens.384 Factors considered by the panel include the efficacy,

toxicity, and treatment schedules of the regimens. Summarized below

are clinical trial results focusing on treatment efficacy.

Preferred Regimens

Regimens listed as preferred include: dose-dense doxorubicin and

cyclophosphamide (AC) with dose-dense sequential paclitaxel;

dose-dense AC followed by sequential weekly paclitaxel; and docetaxel

plus cyclophosphamide (TC).

The results of two randomized trials comparing AC chemotherapy with

or without sequential paclitaxel chemotherapy in women with axillary

node-positive breast cancer suggest improved disease-free rates, and

results from one of the trials showed an improvement in OS, with the

addition of paclitaxel.385,386 On retrospective analysis, the apparent

advantage of the paclitaxel-containing regimen appears greater in

women with ER-negative breast cancers.

A randomized trial evaluated the use of concurrent versus sequential

chemotherapy (doxorubicin followed by paclitaxel followed by

cyclophosphamide vs. doxorubicin plus cyclophosphamide followed by

paclitaxel) given either every 2 weeks with filgrastim support or every 3

weeks. The results show no significant difference between the two

chemotherapy regimens, but demonstrate a 26% reduction in hazard of

recurrence (P = .01) and a 31% reduction in the hazard of death (P =

.013) for the dose-dense regimens.387

The ECOG E1199 study was a four-arm trial that randomized 4950

women to receive AC chemotherapy followed by either paclitaxel or

docetaxel given by either an every-3-week schedule or a weekly

schedule.388-390 At a median 63.8 months of follow-up, no statistically

significant differences in DFS or OS were observed when comparing

paclitaxel to docetaxel or weekly versus every-3-week administration. In

a secondary series of comparisons, weekly paclitaxel was superior to

every-3-week paclitaxel in DFS (HR, 1.27; 95% CI, 1.03–1.57; P = .006)

and OS (HR, 1.32; 95% CI, 1.02–1.72; P = .01), and every-3-week

docetaxel was superior to every-3-week paclitaxel in DFS (HR, 1.23;

95% CI, 1.00–1.52; P = .02) but not in OS.390 Based on these results, as

well as the findings from the CALGB trial 9741 that showed dose-dense

AC followed by paclitaxel every 2 weeks to have a survival benefit when

compared with the regimen of AC followed by every-3-week

paclitaxel,387 the every-3-week paclitaxel regimen has been removed

from the guidelines.

Combination TC was compared with AC chemotherapy in a trial that

randomized 1016 women with stage I to III breast cancer.391 At a

median follow-up of 7 years, overall DFS (81% vs. 75%; HR, 0.74; 95%

CI, 0.56–0.98; P = .033) and OS (87% vs. 82%; HR, 0.69; 95% CI,

0.50–0.97; P = .032) were significantly improved with TC compared with

AC.

Other Regimens

Other regimens included in the guidelines are: AC; epirubicin and

cyclophosphamide (EC); CMF; AC with sequential docetaxel

administered every 3 weeks; AC with sequential weekly paclitaxel;

FEC/CEF followed by docetaxel or weekly paclitaxel; FAC followed by

weekly paclitaxel; and docetaxel, doxorubicin, and cyclophosphamide

(TAC).

The AC regimen for four cycles has been studied in randomized trials,

resulting in relapse-free survival and OS equivalent to CMF

NCCN Guidelines Inde

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Breast Cancer

chemotherapy.392,393 No benefit from dose escalation of either

doxorubicin or cyclophosphamide was shown.385,394

Studies of CMF chemotherapy versus no chemotherapy have shown

DFS and OS advantages with CMF chemotherapy.4,395 Studies using

FAC/CAF chemotherapy have shown that the use of full-dose

chemotherapy regimens is important.396 In the EBCTCG overview of

polychemotherapy, comparison of anthracycline-containing regimens

with CMF showed a 12% further reduction in the annual odds of

recurrence (P = .006) and an 11% further reduction in the annual odds

of death (P = .02) with anthracycline-containing regimens.395 Based on

these data, the panel qualified the appropriate chemotherapy regimens

by the statement that anthracycline-containing regimens are preferred

for node-positive patients.

The EBCTCG analysis, however, did not consider the potential

interaction between HER2 tumor status and efficacy of

anthracycline-containing versus CMF chemotherapy regimens.

Retrospective analysis has suggested that the superiority of

anthracycline-containing chemotherapy may be limited to the treatment

of those breast cancers that are HER2-positive.252,254,257,323,397-399 The

retrospective finding across several clinical trials that

anthracycline-based chemotherapy may be more efficacious in patients

whose tumors are HER2-positive has led to a footnote stating that

anthracycline-based chemotherapy may be superior to

non-anthracycline-containing regimens in the adjuvant treatment of

such patients.

A trial compared 2 dose levels of EC chemotherapy with CMF

chemotherapy in women with node-positive breast cancer.400 This study

showed that higher-dose EC chemotherapy was equivalent to CMF

chemotherapy and superior to moderate-dose EC in event-free survival

and OS.

The NSABP B-36 phase III trial data compared six cycles of 5-

fluorouracil, epirubicin, and cyclophosphamide (FEC) with four cycles of

AC, both given every 3 weeks as adjuvant therapy in patients with

node-negative breast cancer. The rationale for the trial was to

determine whether DFS improved with extra cycles of treatments.401

Patient and tumor characteristics were equally distributed between both

arms (<50 years of age: 40%, lumpectomy: 68%, and hormone

positivity: 65%).401 The results reported that DFS after eight years was

not greater for those women who had been on the longer FEC

chemotherapy treatment and that the women on the FEC experienced

greater side effects. Combined grade 3 and 4 toxicities with a significant

difference of 3% or more between AC and FEC arms included fatigue

3.55% versus 8.45%, febrile neutropenia 3.70% versus 9.42%, and

thrombocytopenia 0.74% versus 4.41%, respectively.401 Five deaths

resulted from the toxicity of FEC treatment, compared to the death of

two women on the AC treatment.401

The quality-of-life impact and menstrual history of women on the

NSABP (NRG) B-36 was also investigated in a phase III trial.402 Women

on FEC treatment experienced a worse quality of life at six months and

higher rate of post-chemotherapy amenorrhea.402

Based on the results of the NSABP B-36 trial, the NCCN Panel has now

excluded the FEC/CEF and FAC/CAF regimens as options for adjuvant

therapy.

Two randomized prospective trials of FEC chemotherapy in

ALN-positive breast cancer are available. In one trial, premenopausal

women with node-positive breast cancer were randomized to receive

NCCN Guidelines Inde

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Breast Cancer

classic CMF therapy versus FEC chemotherapy using high-dose

epirubicin. Both 10-year relapse-free survival (52% vs. 45%; P = .007)

and OS (62% vs. 58%; P = .085) favored the FEC arm of the trial.403

The second trial compared FEC given intravenously every 3 weeks at 2

dose levels of epirubicin (50 mg/m2 vs. 100 mg/m2) in premenopausal

and postmenopausal women with node-positive breast cancer.

Five-year DFS (55% vs. 66%; P = .03) and OS (65% vs. 76%; P =.007)

both favored the epirubicin 100 mg/m2 arm.404 Another randomized trial

in women with ALN-positive breast cancer compared 6 cycles of FEC

with 3 cycles of FEC followed by 3 cycles of docetaxel.341 Five-year DFS

(78.4% vs. 73.2%; adjusted P = .012) and OS (90.7% vs. 86.7%; P =

.017) were superior with sequential FEC followed by docetaxel.

However, no significant DFS differences were seen in a large

randomized study comparing adjuvant chemotherapy with 4 cycles of

every-3-week FEC followed by 4 cycles of every-3-week docetaxel with

standard anthracycline chemotherapy regimens (eg, FEC or epirubicin

followed by CMF) in women with node-positive or high-risk,

node-negative, operable breast cancer.405

The addition of weekly paclitaxel after FEC was shown to be superior to

FEC alone in a randomized study of 1246 women with early-stage

breast cancer.406 The former regimen was associated with a 23%

reduction in the risk of relapse compared with FEC (HR, 0.77; 95% CI,

0.62–0.95; P = .022), although no significant difference in OS was seen

when the two arms were compared at a median follow-up of 66 months.

The phase III E1199 trial compared patients with node-positive or high-

risk node-negative breast cancer who received 4 cycles of AC every 3

weeks, followed by either paclitaxel or docetaxel, either weekly or every

3 weeks. The 10-year updated results of this trial showed that

incorporation of weekly paclitaxel and docetaxel every 3 weeks was

associated with significant improvements in DFS, and marginal

improvements in OS, compared with paclitaxel given every 3 weeks.

Among patients with triple-negative disease, the10-year DFS rate with

weekly paclitaxel was 69% and the 10-year OS rate was 75%.407

Final results from a randomized trial of TAC versus FAC chemotherapy

in ALN-positive breast cancer demonstrated that TAC is superior to

FAC.408 Estimated 5-year DFS was 75% with TAC and 68% with FAC

(HR, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.59–0.88; P =.001); survival was 87% with TAC

and 81% with FAC (HR, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.53–0.91; P = .008). DFS

favored TAC in both ER-positive and ER-negative tumors. At a median

follow-up of 73 months, results from the 3-arm randomized NSABP

B-30 trial comparing TAC versus AT versus AC followed by docetaxel

(AC followed by T) demonstrated that AC followed by T had a significant

advantage in DFS (HR, 0.83; P = .006) but not in OS (HR, 0.86; P =

.086) when compared with TAC. In addition, both DFS (HR, 0.080; P =

.001) and OS (HR, 0.83; P = .034) were significantly increased when

AC followed by T was compared with AT, with AT demonstrating

non-inferiority compared with TAC.409

Several retrospective studies have evaluated the potential interaction of

chemotherapy benefit and ER status.4,295 These studies assessed the

effect of chemotherapy on the risk of breast cancer recurrence in

patients with ER-positive tumors receiving adjuvant endocrine therapy

when compared with patients with ER-negative tumor status not

undergoing adjuvant endocrine therapy. These analyses suggest that

the benefits of chemotherapy are significantly greater in patients with

ER-negative disease. For example, the results of Berry et al

demonstrated that 22.8% more patients with ER-negative tumors

survived without disease for 5 years if they received chemotherapy; this

benefit was only 7% for patients with ER-positive tumors receiving

chemotherapy.295

NCCN Guidelines Inde

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Breast Cancer

For women greater than 70 years of age, the consensus of the panel is

that there are insufficient data to make definitive chemotherapy

recommendations. Although AC or CMF has been shown to be superior

to capecitabine in a randomized trial of women aged greater than or

equal to 65 years with early-stage breast cancer,410 the enrollment in

that study was discontinued early.410 Therefore, there is also a

possibility that AC/CMF is not superior to any chemotherapy in this

cohort. The panel recommends that treatment should be individualized

for women in this age group, with consideration given to comorbid

conditions.

Adjuvant HER2-Targeted Therapy

The panel recommends HER2-targeted therapy in patients with HER2-

positive tumors (see Principles of HER2 Testing in the NCCN

Guidelines for Breast Cancer). Trastuzumab is a humanized

monoclonal antibody with specificity for the extracellular domain of

HER2.411Results of several randomized trials testing trastuzumab as

adjuvant therapy have been reported.259-264,412-414

NSABP B-31 patients with HER2-positive, node-positive breast cancer

were randomly assigned to 4 cycles of AC every 3 weeks followed by

paclitaxel for 4 cycles every 3 weeks or the same regimen with 52

weeks of trastuzumab commencing with paclitaxel. In the NCCTG

N9831 trial, patients with HER2-positive breast cancer that was

node-positive, or node-negative, with primary tumors greater than 1 cm

in size if ER- and PR-negative or greater than 2 cm in size if ER- or

PR-positive, were similarly randomized except that paclitaxel was given

by a low-dose weekly schedule for 12 weeks and a third arm delayed

trastuzumab until the completion of paclitaxel.

The B-31 and NCCTG N9831 trials have been jointly analyzed with the

merged control arms for both trials compared with the merged arms

using trastuzumab begun concurrently with paclitaxel. There were 4045

patients included in the joint analysis performed at 3.9 years median

follow-up. A 48% reduction in the risk of recurrence (HR, 0.52; 95% CI,

0.45–0.60; P < .001) and a 39% reduction in the risk of death (HR, 0.61;

95% CI, 0.50–0.75; log-rank P = .001) were documented.413 Similar

significant effects on DFS were observed when results of the NSABP

B-31 and NCCTG N9831 trials were analyzed separately. Cardiac

toxicity was increased in patients treated with trastuzumab.262,415,416 In

the adjuvant trastuzumab trials, the rates of grade III/IV congestive

heart failure (CHF) or cardiac-related death in patients receiving

treatment regimens containing trastuzumab ranged from 0% (FinHer

trial) to 4.1% (NSABP B-31 trial).259,260,262,264,415,416 The frequency of

cardiac dysfunction appears to be related to both age and baseline left

ventricular ejection fraction. An analysis of data from N9831 showed the

3-year cumulative incidence of CHF or cardiac death to be 0.3%, 2.8%,

and 3.3% in the arms of the trial without trastuzumab, with trastuzumab

following chemotherapy, and with trastuzumab initially combined with

paclitaxel, respectively.415 The acceptable rate of significant cardiac

toxicity observed in the trastuzumab adjuvant trials in part reflects

rigorous monitoring for cardiac dysfunction. Furthermore, concerns

have been raised regarding the long-term cardiac risks associated with

trastuzumab therapy based on results of follow-up evaluations of

cardiac function in patients enrolled in some of these trials.417,418

A third trial (HERA) (N = 5081) tested trastuzumab for 1 or 2 years

compared to none following all local therapy and a variety of standard

chemotherapy regimens in patients with node-positive disease or

node-negative disease with tumor greater than or equal to 1 cm.260 At a

median follow-up of one year, a 46% reduction in the risk of recurrence

was reported in those who received trastuzumab compared with those

who did not (HR, 0.54; 95% CI, 0.43–0.67; P < .0001), there was no

NCCN Guidelines Inde

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Breast Cancer

difference in OS, and acceptable cardiac toxicity was reported. The

2-year data indicate that 1 year of trastuzumab therapy is associated

with an OS benefit when compared with observation (HR for risk of

death = 0.66; 95% CI, 0.47–0.91; P = .0115).419 After this initial analysis,

patients randomized to chemotherapy alone were allowed to cross over

to receive trastuzumab. Intent-to-treat analysis including a crossover

patient was reported at 4-year median follow-up.414 The primary

endpoint of DFS continued to be significantly higher in the

trastuzumab-treated group (78.6%) versus the observation group (72.2;

HR, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.66–0.87; P < .0001). At a median follow-up of 8

years, the study reported no significant difference in DFS, a secondary

endpoint, in patients treated with trastuzumab for 2 years compared

with 1 year.261 Therefore, 1 year of adjuvant trastuzumab remains the

current standard of treatment.

The BCIRG 006 study randomized 3222 women with HER2-positive,

node-positive, or high-risk node-negative breast cancer to AC followed

by docetaxel; AC followed by docetaxel plus trastuzumab for one year;

or carboplatin, docetaxel, and trastuzumab for one year.264 At 65-month

follow-up, patients receiving AC followed by docetaxel with trastuzumab

(AC-TH) had an HR for DFS of 0.64 (P < .001) when compared with the

group of patients in the control arm receiving the same chemotherapy

regimen without trastuzumab (AC-T). The HR for DFS was 0.75 (P =

.04) when patients in the carboplatin/docetaxel/ trastuzumab

(TCH)-containing arm were compared to patients in the control arm. No

statistically significant difference in the HR for DFS was observed

between the two trastuzumab-containing arms. An OS advantage was

reported for patients in both trastuzumab-containing arms relative to the

control arm (HR for AC-TH vs. AC-T = 0.63; P = .001; HR for TCH vs.

AC-T = 0.77; P = .04). Cardiac toxicity was significantly lower in the

TCH arm (9.4% patients with >10% relative decline in left ventricular

ejection fraction) compared with the AC-TH arm (18.6%; P < .0001).

CHF was also more frequent with AC-TH than TCH (2% vs. 0.4%; P <

.001). Analysis of this trial by critical clinical event revealed more distant

breast cancer recurrences with TCH (144 vs. 124) but fewer cardiac

events with TCH compared with AC-TH (4 vs. 21).264 In the FinHer trial,

1010 women were randomized to 9 weeks of vinorelbine followed by 3

cycles of FEC chemotherapy versus docetaxel for 3 cycles followed by

3 cycles of FEC chemotherapy.259 Patients (n = 232) with HER2-positive

cancers that were either node-positive or node-negative and greater

than or equal to 2 cm and PR-negative were further randomized to

receive or not receive trastuzumab for 9 weeks during the vinorelbine or

docetaxel portions of the chemotherapy only. With a median follow-up

of 3 years, the addition of trastuzumab was associated with a reduction

in risk of recurrence (HR, 0.42; 95% CI, 0.21–0.83; P = .01). No

statistically significant differences in OS (HR, 0.41; 95% CI, 0.16–1.08;

P = .07) or cardiac toxicity were observed with the addition of

trastuzumab.259 At 5-year follow-up, a comparison of the two arms (ie,

chemotherapy with and without trastuzumab) demonstrated that the

HRs for distant DFS (HR, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.38–1.12; P = .12) and OS

(HR, 0.55; 95% CI, 0.27–1.11; P = .094) were higher relative to those

reported at 3 years.412

All of the adjuvant trials of trastuzumab have demonstrated clinically

significant improvements in DFS, and the combined analysis from the

NSABP B31 and NCCTG N9831 trials, and the HERA trial, showed

significant improvement in OS with the use of trastuzumab in patients

with high-risk, HER2-positive breast cancer. Therefore, regimens from

each of these trials are included as trastuzumab-containing adjuvant

regimen choices in the guideline. The benefits of trastuzumab are

independent of ER status.262,263 In the FNCLCC-PACS-04 trial, 528

women with HER2-positive, node-positive breast cancer were randomly

NCCN Guidelines Inde

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Breast Cancer

assigned to receive trastuzumab or observation after completion of

adjuvant anthracycline-based chemotherapy with or without

docetaxel.420 No statistically significant DFS or OS benefit was observed

with the addition of trastuzumab. These results suggest that the

sequential administration of trastuzumab following chemotherapy is not

as efficacious as a schedule involving concomitant chemotherapy and

trastuzumab. The NCCN Guidelines recommend a total of 12 months of

adjuvant trastuzumab as the standard of care. Shorter than 12-month

duration has not been found to be as effective421 and longer than 12

months duration does not have any added benefit; it has been found to

be as effective as the 12 months of trastuzumab therapy.422

Retrospective analyses of low-risk patients with small tumors

demonstrate that in T1a-bN0 breast cancers, HER2 overexpression

added a 15% to 30% risk for recurrence.423-426 These risks rates are

substantially higher than seen among similarly sized HER2-negative

tumors.

A recent single-arm, multicenter trial studied the benefit of trastuzumab-

based chemotherapy in patients with HER2-positive, node-negative

tumors less than or equal to 3 cm. All patients received trastuzumab

and weekly paclitaxel for 12 weeks, followed by completion of a year of

trastuzumab monotherapy.427 Fifty percent of patients enrolled had

tumors less than or equal to 1.0 cm and 9% of patients had tumors that

were between 2 and 3 cm. The endpoint of the study was DFS. The

results presented at the 2013 Annual San Antonio Breast Cancer

Symposium demonstrated that the 3-year DFS rate in the overall

population was 98.7% (95% CI, 97.6–99.8; P < .0001).

Dual anti-HER2 blockade associated with trastuzumab plus lapatinib

and trastuzumab plus pertuzumab has shown significant improvements

in the pCR rate when compared with chemotherapy associated with one

anti-HER2 agent in the neoadjuvant setting.313,314,316

However, in the adjuvant setting, the results of the ALTTO trial failed to

demonstrate a significant improvement in DFS with dual anti-HER2

therapy compared with trastuzumab alone.428 After a median follow-up

of 4.5 years, the DFS rates were 86% for patients who received

trastuzumab alone; 88% for participants treated with trastuzumab and

lapatinib concurrently; and 87% for patients who received trastuzumab

followed by lapatinib.428

NCCN Recommendation for Adjuvant HER2-Targeted Therapy

Based on these studies, the panel has designated use of trastuzumab

with chemotherapy as a category 1 recommendation in patients with

HER2-positive tumors greater than 1 cm.

The NCCN Panel suggests trastuzumab and chemotherapy be used for

women with HER2-positive, node-negative tumors measuring 0.6 to 1.0

cm (ie, T1b) and for smaller tumors that have less than or equal to 2

mm axillary node metastases (pN1mi). Some support for this

recommendation comes from studies showing a higher risk of

recurrence for patients with HER2-positive, node-negative tumors less

than or equal to 1 cm compared to those with HER2-negative tumors of

the same size.423 Ten-year breast cancer-specific survival and 10-year

recurrence-free survival were 85% and 75%, respectively, in women

with tumors characterized as HER2-positive, ER-positive tumors, and

70% and 61%, respectively, in women with HER2-positive, ER-negative

tumors. Two more retrospective studies have also investigated

recurrence-free survival in this patient population. None of the patients

in these two retrospective studies received trastuzumab. In the first

study, 5-year recurrence-free survival rates of 77.1% and 93.7% (P <

.001) were observed for patients with HER2-positive and

NCCN Guidelines Inde

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Breast Cancer

HER2-negative T1a-bN0M0 breast tumors, respectively, with no

recurrence-free survival differences seen in the HER2-positive group

when hormonal receptor status was considered.424 In the other

retrospective study of women with small HER2-positive tumors, the risk

of recurrence at 5 years was low (99% [95% CI; 96%–100%] for HER2-

negative disease and 92% [95% CI; 86%–99%] for HER2-positive

disease).429 Subgroup analyses from several of the randomized trials

have shown consistent benefit of trastuzumab irrespective of tumor size

or nodal status.264,430,431

NCCN-Recommended HER-Targeted Regimens

The panel recommends AC followed by paclitaxel with trastuzumab for

1 year commencing with the first dose of paclitaxel as a preferred

HER2-targeting adjuvant regimen. The TCH regimen is also a preferred

regimen, especially for those with risk factors for cardiac toxicity, given

the results of the BCIRG 006 study that demonstrated superior DFS in

patients receiving TCH or AC followed by docetaxel plus trastuzumab

compared with AC followed by docetaxel alone.

Other trastuzumab-containing regimens included in the NCCN

Guidelines are: AC followed by docetaxel and trastuzumab,264 and

docetaxel plus trastuzumab followed by FEC259 (see Preoperative

/Adjuvant Systemic Therapy in NCCN Guidelines for Breast Cancer for

a complete list of regimens).

Considering the unprecedented improvement in OS in the metastatic

setting432 and the significant improvement in pCR seen in the

neoadjuvant setting,314,316 the NCCN Panel considers it reasonable to

incorporate pertuzumab into the above adjuvant regimens, if the patient

did not receive pertuzumab as a part of neoadjuvant therapy. An

ongoing study is evaluating pertuzumab and trastuzumab with standard

chemotherapy regimens in the adjuvant setting.433,434

The NCCN Panel has included paclitaxel and trastuzumab as an option

for patients with low-risk, HER2-positive, stage 1 tumors. This is based

on a trial that studied this combination in 406 patients with small, node-

negative, HER2-positive tumors. The results showed that the 3-year

rate of DFS was 98.7% (95% CI, 97.6–99.8) and the risk of serious toxic

effects with this regimen was low (incidence of heart failure reported

was 0.5%).435

Adjuvant Therapy for Tumors of Favorable Histologies

The guidelines provide systemic treatment recommendations for the

favorable histology of invasive breast cancers, such as tubular and

mucinous cancers, based on tumor size and ALN status. If used, the

treatment options for endocrine therapy, chemotherapy, and

sequencing of treatment with other modalities are similar to those of the

usual histology of breast cancers. The vast majority of tubular breast

cancers are both ER-positive and HER2-negative. Thus, the pathology

evaluation and accuracy of the ER and/or HER2 determination should

be reviewed if a tubular breast cancer is ER-negative and/or

HER2-positive, or if a tumor with an ER- and PR-negative status is

grade 1.17 Should a breast cancer be histologically identified as a

tubular or mucinous breast cancer and be confirmed as ER-negative,

then the tumor should be treated according to the guideline for the

usual histology, ER-negative breast cancers. The panel acknowledges

that prospective data regarding systemic adjuvant therapy of tubular

and mucinous histologies are lacking.

Systemic Therapy for Triple-Negative Breast Cancer

For women with triple-negative breast cancer, several clinical trials

sought to determine whether the addition of carboplatin (alone or in

combination) as neoadjuvant chemotherapy can improve outcomes for

women with triple-negative breast cancer. In the German GeparSixto

NCCN Guidelines Inde

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Breast Cancer

trial, 315 patients with triple-negative breast cancer were administered

neoadjuvant therapy consisting of weekly paclitaxel plus non-pegylated

liposomal doxorubicin with bevacizumab and then randomly assigned to

additional treatment with weekly carboplatin.436 The addition of

carboplatin achieved a pCR rate of 59% compared with pCR of 38% in

patients who did not receive carboplatin.436

In the CALGB 40603 randomized phase II trial, 443 patients with stage

II to III triple-negative breast cancer received standard anthracycline-

and taxane-based chemotherapy with or without carboplatin and with or

without bevacizumab. Compared with standard chemotherapy, the

addition of carboplatin resulted in significantly higher pCR rate (54% vs.

41%, OR 1.71).437 The addition of bevacizumab increased the numeric

rate of pCR but was not statistically significant (with bevacizumab, pCR

was 52% [95% CI; 45%–58%] and without bevacizumab pCR was 44%

[95% CI; 38%–51%]; P = .057). In this study,437 as well as in the

GeparSixto study,436 the addition of carboplatin and/or bevacizumab led

to increased rates of adverse events. Neutropenia and

thrombocytopenia were more common with carboplatin. Hypertension

and postsurgical complications were more common with bevacizumab.

Even though the results of randomized trials show improvement in pCR

rates when carboplatin is added to anthracycline- and taxane-based

chemotherapy, the long-term outcomes such as OS or DFS associated

with the incorporation of carboplatin are not yet known. Therefore, at

this time, the NCCN Panel does not recommend addition of carboplatin

to neoadjuvant standard chemotherapy for patients with triple-negative

breast cancer outside a clinical trial setting.

Medullary Carcinoma

Medullary carcinoma is an uncommon variant of infiltrating ductal

carcinoma characterized by high nuclear grade, lymphocytic infiltration,

a pushing tumor border, and the presence of a syncytial growth pattern.

It was previously thought that medullary carcinoma has a lower potential

for metastases and a better prognosis than typical infiltrating ductal

carcinoma. However, the best available evidence suggests that the risk

of metastases equals that of other high-grade carcinomas, even for

cases that meet all the pathologic criteria for typical medullary

carcinoma. Furthermore, typical medullary carcinoma is uncommon,

and there is marked interobserver variation in diagnosing this entity.

Many cases classified as medullary carcinoma do not have all the

pathologic features on subsequent pathologic review. Given these facts,

there is concern that patients may be harmed if a high-grade infiltrating

ductal carcinoma is misclassified as typical medullary carcinoma and

this classification is used as the basis for withholding otherwise

indicated adjuvant systemic therapy. Therefore, the NCCN Panel

believes that including medullary carcinoma with other special histology

cancers that carry a favorable prognosis and often do not require

systemic therapy is not appropriate. The panel recommends that cases

classified as medullary carcinoma be treated as other infiltrating ductal

carcinomas based on tumor size, grade, and lymph node status.

Post-Therapy Surveillance and Follow-up

See page MS-48.

Stage III Invasive Breast Cancer

Staging and Workup

The staging evaluation for most patients with stage III invasive breast

cancer is similar to the one for patients with T3, N1, M0 disease. The

workup includes history and physical exam, a CBC, liver function and

alkaline phosphatase tests, chest imaging, pathology review, and

pre-chemotherapy determination of tumor ER/PR receptor status and

HER2 status. Diagnostic bilateral mammogram and breast ultrasound

NCCN Guidelines Inde

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Breast Cancer

should be performed as clinically warranted. Genetic counseling is

recommended if the patient is considered to be at high risk for

hereditary breast cancer as defined by the NCCN Guidelines for

Genetic/Familial High-Risk Assessment: Breast and Ovarian.

The performance of other studies, such as a breast MRI, a bone scan

(category 2B), and abdominal imaging with diagnostic CT (with or

without pelvic CT) or MRI (all category 2A) are optional unless directed

by symptoms or other abnormal study results. PET/CT scan is also

included as an optional additional study (category 2B). Ultrasound is an

alternative when diagnostic CT or MRI is unavailable.

The consensus of the panel is that FDG PET/CT is most helpful in

situations where standard imaging results are equivocal or suspicious.

However, limited studies125,126,438-442 support a potential role for FDG

PET/CT to detect regional node involvement as well as distant

metastases in locally advanced breast cancer, including T3, N1, M0

disease.

A retrospective study comparing bone scan with integrated FDG

PET/CT, in women with stages I–III breast cancer with suspected

metastasis, observed a high concordance (81%) between the two

studies for reporting osseous metastases.443 The NCCN Panel suggests

that bone scan may be omitted if FDG PET/CT results are positive for

bone metastases.

Equivocal or suspicious sites identified by PET/CT scanning should be

biopsied for confirmation whenever possible and if the site of disease

would impact the course of treatment. In the past decade, the advent of

PET/CT scanners has significantly changed the approach to PET

imaging.444 However, the terminology has also created confusion

regarding the nature of the scans obtained from a PET/CT device.

PET/CT scanners have both a PET and CT scanner in the same gantry

that allows precise coregistration of molecular (PET) and anatomic (CT)

imaging. Almost all current clinical PET imaging is performed using

combined PET/CT devices.

In PET/CT tomographs, the CT scanner has a second important role

beyond diagnostic CT scanning.444 For PET applications, the CT scan is

also used for photon attenuation correction and for anatomic localization

of the PET imaging findings. For these tasks, the CT scan is usually

taken without breathholding, to match PET image acquisition, and

typically uses low-dose (non-diagnostic) CT. Radiation exposure for

these non-diagnostic CT scans is lower than for diagnostic CT.

Intravenous contrast is not needed for this task.

PET/CT scanners typically include a high-quality CT device that can

also be used for stand-alone, optimized, and fully diagnostic CT.

Diagnostic CT scans are acquired using breathholding for optimal chest

imaging, and are often performed with intravenous contrast. For fully

diagnostic CT, the CT beam current, and therefore patient radiation

exposure, is considerably higher than for the low-dose CT needed for

PET requirements. Radiation exposures for fully diagnostic CT are often

greater than for the emission (PET) component of the study.

Currently, the approach to clinical PET/CT imaging varies widely across

centers.445 Many centers perform low-dose CT as part of a PET/CT

scan, and perform optimized, fully diagnostic CT only when diagnostic

CT has also been requested in addition to PET/CT. Other centers

combine diagnostic CT scans with PET on all of their PET/CT images.

The CT scans described in the workup section of the guidelines refer to

fully optimized diagnostic CT scans, while the PET or PET/CT scans

refer to scans primarily directed towards the PET component, not

necessarily using diagnostic-quality CT. It is important for referring

NCCN Guidelines Inde

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Breast Cancer

physicians to understand the differences between PET/CT performed

primarily for PET imaging and fully optimized CT performed as a

stand-alone diagnostic CT examination.445 It may be convenient to

perform PET/CT and diagnostic CT at the same time.

Operable Locally Advanced Breast Cancer

(Clinical stage T3, N1, M0)

Locally advanced breast cancer describes a subset of invasive breast

cancer where the initial clinical and radiographic evaluation documents

advanced disease confined to the breast and regional lymph nodes.

The AJCC clinical staging system used in these guidelines and for the

determination of operability is recommended, and locally advanced

disease is represented by the stage III category. Patients with stage III

disease may be further divided into: 1) those where an initial surgical

approach is unlikely to successfully remove all disease or to provide

long-term local control; and 2) those with disease where a reasonable

initial surgical approach is likely to achieve pathologically negative

margins and provide long-term local control. Thus, stage IIIA patients

are divided into those who have clinical T3, N1, M0 disease versus

those who have clinical T any, N2, M0 disease, based on evaluation by

a multidisciplinary team.

Postsurgical systemic adjuvant therapy for patients with stage IIIA

breast cancer who do not receive neoadjuvant chemotherapy is similar

to that for patients with stage II disease.

Inoperable Locally Advanced Breast Cancer

(Clinical stage IIIA [except for T3, N1, M0], clinical stage IIIB, or clinical

stage IIIC)

For patients with inoperable, non-inflammatory, locally advanced

disease at presentation, the initial use of anthracycline-based

preoperative systemic therapy with or without a taxane is standard

therapy.446 Patients with locally advanced breast cancer that is

HER2-positive should receive an initial chemotherapy program that

incorporates preoperative trastuzumab and possibly pertuzumab. Local

therapy following a clinical response to preoperative systemic therapy

usually consists of: 1) total mastectomy with level I/II ALN dissection,

with or without delayed breast reconstruction; or 2) lumpectomy and

level I/II axillary dissection.

Both local treatment groups are considered to have sufficient risk of

local recurrence to warrant the use of chest wall (or breast) and

supraclavicular node irradiation. If internal mammary lymph nodes are

involved, they should also be irradiated. Without detected internal

mammary node involvement, consideration may be given to include the

internal mammary lymph nodes in the radiation field (category 2B).

Adjuvant therapy may involve completion of planned chemotherapy

regimen course if not completed preoperatively, followed by endocrine

therapy in patients with hormone receptor-positive disease. Up to one

year of total trastuzumab therapy should be completed if the tumor is

HER2-positive (category 1). Endocrine therapy and trastuzumab can be

administered concurrently with radiation therapy if indicated.

Patients with an inoperable stage III tumor with disease progression

during preoperative systemic therapy should be considered for palliative

breast irradiation in an attempt to enhance local control. In all subsets of

patients, further systemic adjuvant chemotherapy after local therapy is

felt to be standard. Tamoxifen (or an aromatase inhibitor if

postmenopausal) should be added for those with hormone

receptor-positive tumors, and trastuzumab should be given to those with

HER2-positive tumors. Post-treatment follow-up for women with stage

III disease is the same as for women with early-stage invasive breast

cancer.

NCCN Guidelines Inde

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Breast Cancer

Post-Therapy Surveillance and Follow-up for Stage I-III

Post-therapy follow-up is optimally performed by members of the

treatment team and includes the performance of regular history/physical

examinations every 4 to 6 months for the first 5 years after primary

therapy and annually thereafter. Mammography should be performed

annually.

Regarding frequency of mammograms after breast-conserving surgery

followed by radiation, the NCCN Panel agrees with ASTRO’s “Choosing

Wisely’ list of recommendations released in 2014.447 The

recommendations state that “annual mammograms are the appropriate

frequency for surveillance of breast cancer patients who have had

breast-conserving surgery and radiation therapy with no clear

advantage to shorter interval imaging. Patients should wait 6 to 12

months after the completion of radiation therapy to begin their annual

mammogram surveillance. Suspicious findings on physical examination

or surveillance imaging might warrant a shorter interval between

mammograms.”

The NCCN panel notes that any imaging of reconstructed breast is not

indicated.

According to the NCCN Panel, in the absence of clinical signs and

symptoms suggestive of recurrent disease, laboratory or imaging

studies to screen for metastasis are not necessary. The routine

performance of alkaline phosphatase tests and LFTs are not included in

the guidelines.448-450 In addition, the panel notes no evidence to support

the use of “tumor markers” for breast cancer, and routine bone scans,

CT scans, MRI scans, PET scans, or ultrasound examinations in the

asymptomatic patient provide no advantage in survival or ability to

palliate recurrent disease and are, therefore, not recommended.125,451

The use of breast MRI in follow-up of women with prior breast cancer is

undefined. It may be considered as an option in women with high

lifetime risk (greater than 20% based on models largely dependent on

family history) of developing a second primary breast cancer. Rates of

contralateral breast cancer after either breast-conserving therapy or

mastectomy have been reported to be increased in women with

BRCA1/2 mutations when compared with patients with sporadic breast

cancer.452-454

The panel recommends that women with intact uteri who are taking

adjuvant tamoxifen should have yearly gynecologic assessments and

rapid evaluation of any vaginal spotting that might occur because of the

risk of tamoxifen-associated endometrial carcinoma in postmenopausal

women.455 The performance of routine endometrial biopsy or

ultrasonography in the asymptomatic woman is not recommended.

Neither test has demonstrated utility as a screening test in any

population of women. The vast majority of women with

tamoxifen-associated uterine carcinoma have early vaginal spotting.

If an adjuvant aromatase inhibitor is considered in women with

amenorrhea following treatment, baseline levels of estradiol and

gonadotropin followed by serial monitoring of these hormones should be

performed if endocrine therapy with an aromatase inhibitor is initiated.374

Bilateral oophorectomy assures postmenopausal status in young

women with therapy-induced amenorrhea and may be considered prior

to initiating therapy with an aromatase inhibitor in a young woman.

Symptom management for women on adjuvant endocrine therapies

often requires treatment of hot flashes and the treatment of concurrent

depression. Venlafaxine, a serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor

(SNRI) has been studied and is an effective intervention in decreasing

hot flashes.456-459 There is evidence suggesting that concomitant use of

NCCN Guidelines Inde

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Breast Cancer

tamoxifen with certain SSRIs (eg, paroxetine, fluoxetine) may decrease

plasma levels of endoxifen, an active metabolite of tamoxifen.460,461

These SSRIs/SNRIs may interfere with the enzymatic conversion of

tamoxifen to endoxifen by inhibiting a particular isoform of CYP2D6.

However, the mild CYP2D6 inhibitors such as citalopram, escitalopram,

sertraline, and venlafaxine appear to have no or only minimal effect on

tamoxifen metabolism.374,462,463

Follow-up also includes assessment of patient adherence to ongoing

medication regimens such as endocrine therapies. Predictors of poor

adherence to medication include the presence of side effects

associated with the medication, and incomplete understanding by the

patient of the benefits associated with regular administration of the

medication.464 The panel recommends the implementation of simple

strategies to enhance patient adherence to endocrine therapy, such as

direct questioning of the patient during office visits, as well as brief,

clear explanations on the value of taking the medication regularly and

the therapeutic importance of longer durations of endocrine therapy.

Lymphedema is a common complication after treatment for breast

cancer. Factors associated with increased risk of lymphedema include

extent of axillary surgery, axillary radiation, infection, and patient

obesity.465,466 The panel recommends educating the patients on

lymphedema, monitoring for lymphedema, and referring for

lymphedema management as needed.

Many young women treated for breast cancer maintain or regain

premenopausal status following treatment for breast cancer. For these

women, the NCCN Panel discourages the use of hormonal birth control

methods, regardless of the hormone receptor status of the tumor.467

Alternative birth control methods are recommended, including

intrauterine devices, barrier methods, and, for those with no intent of

future pregnancy, tubal ligation or vasectomy for the partner.

Breastfeeding during endocrine or chemotherapy treatment is not

recommended by the NCCN Panel because of risks to the infant.

Breastfeeding after breast-conserving treatment for breast cancer is not

contraindicated. However, lactation from an irradiated breast may not

be possible, or may occur only with a diminished capacity.467,468

The panel recommends that women on an adjuvant aromatase inhibitor

or who experience ovarian failure secondary to treatment should have

monitoring of bone health with a bone mineral density determination at

baseline and periodically thereafter. The use of estrogen, progesterone,

or selective ER modulators to treat osteoporosis or osteopenia in

women with breast cancer is discouraged. The use of a bisphosphonate

is generally the preferred intervention to improve bone mineral density.

A single phase 3 study, ABCSG12, demonstrated improved outcomes

with the addition of zoledronic acid in premenopausal women receiving

endocrine therapy with ovarian suppression.469 Use of bisphosphonates

in such patients and in other subgroups remains controversial.

Denosumab has shown to significantly reduce fractures in

postmenopausal women receiving adjuvant therapy aromatase

inhibitors, and improves bone mineral density.470

Optimal duration of bisphosphonate therapy has not been established.

Factors to consider for duration of anti-osteoporosis therapy include

bone mineral density, response to therapy, and risk factors for

continued bone loss or fracture. Women treated with a bisphosphonate

should undergo a dental examination with preventive dentistry prior to

the initiation of therapy, and should take supplemental calcium and

vitamin D.

Evidence suggests that a healthy lifestyle may lead to better breast

cancer outcomes. A nested case control study of 369 women with

NCCN Guidelines Inde

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Breast Cancer

ER-positive tumors who developed a second primary breast cancer

compared with 734 matched control patients who did not develop a

second primary tumor showed an association between obesity (body

mass index [BMI] ≥30), smoking, and alcohol consumption and

contralateral breast cancer.471 A prospective study of 1490 women

diagnosed with stage I–III breast cancer showed an association

between high fruit and vegetable consumption, physical activity, and

improved survivorship, regardless of obesity.472 There is emerging

evidence that obesity is associated with poorer outcomes for certain

subtypes of breast cancers. The study by the Women’s Intervention

Nutrition group randomized early-stage breast cancer patients to an

intervention group and a control group. The intervention consisted of

eight one-on-one visits with a registered dietitian who had been trained

on a low-fat eating plan. OS analysis showed no significant difference

between the two study arms (17% for the intervention vs. 13.6%

without); however, subgroup analysis showed that those with ER- and

PR-negative disease who were part of the intervention group saw a

54% improvement in OS.473

The NCCN Panel recommends an active lifestyle and ideal body weight

(BMI 20–25) for optimal overall health and breast cancer outcomes as

there are reports of proven benefits of exercise and active lifestyle

during and after treatment.474-476

For management of issues related to survivorship including late/long-

term effects of cancer and its treatment, see the NCCN Guidelines for

Survivorship.

Stage IV Metastatic or Recurrent Breast Cancer

Staging and Workup

The staging evaluation of women who present with metastatic or

recurrent breast cancer includes history and physical exam; the

performance of a CBC, LFTs, chest diagnostic CT, bone scan, and

radiographs of any long or weight-bearing bones that are painful or

appear abnormal on bone scan; consideration of diagnostic CT of the

abdomen (with or without diagnostic CT of the pelvis) or MRI scan of

the abdomen; and biopsy documentation of first recurrence if possible.

The panel generally discourages the use of sodium fluoride PET or

PET/CT scans for the evaluation of patients with recurrent disease,

except in those situations where other staging studies are equivocal or

suspicious. There is limited evidence (mostly from retrospective studies)

to support the use of PET/CT scanning to guide treatment planning

through determination of the extent of disease in select patients with

recurrent or metastatic disease.125,126,477,478 The panel considers biopsy of

equivocal or suspicious sites to be more likely than PET/CT scanning to

provide accurate staging information in this population of patients.

The consensus of the panel is that FDG PET/CT is optional (category

2B) and most helpful in situations where standard imaging results are

equivocal or suspicious. The NCCN Panel recommends bone scan or

sodium fluoride PET/CT to detect bone metastases (category 2B).

However, if the FDG PET results clearly indicate bone metastasis,

these scans can be omitted.

The NCCN Panel recommends that metastatic disease at presentation

or first recurrence of disease should be biopsied as a part of the workup

for patients with recurrent or stage IV disease. This ensures accurate

determination of metastatic/recurrent disease and tumor histology, and

NCCN Guidelines Inde

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Breast Cancer

allows for biomarker determination and selection of appropriate

treatment.

Determination of hormone receptor status (ER and PR) and HER2

status should be repeated in all cases when diagnostic tissue is

obtained. ER and PR assays may be falsely negative or falsely positive,

and there may be discordance between the primary and metastatic

tumors.479,480 The reasons for the discordance may relate to change in

biology of disease, differential effect of prior treatment on clonal

subsets, tumor heterogeneity, or imperfect accuracy and reproducibility

of assays.480 Discordance between the receptor status of primary and

recurrent disease has been reported in a number of studies. The

discordance rates are in the range of 3.4% to 60% for ER-negative to

ER-positive; 7.2% to 31% for ER-positive to ER-negative; and 0.7% to

11% for HER2.481-490

The NCCN Panel recommends that re-testing the receptor status of

recurrent disease be performed, especially in cases when it was

previously unknown, originally negative, or not overexpressed. For

patients with clinical courses consistent with hormone receptor–positive

breast cancer, or with prior positive hormone receptor results, the panel

has noted that a course of endocrine therapy is reasonable, regardless

of whether the receptor assay is repeated or the result of the most

recent hormone receptor assay.

Genetic counseling is recommended if the patient is considered to be at

high risk for hereditary breast cancer, as defined by the NCCN

Guidelines for Genetic/Familial High-Risk Assessment: Breast and

Ovarian.

Management of Local Disease Only

Patients with local recurrence only are divided into 3 groups: those who

had been treated initially by mastectomy alone, those who had been

treated initially by mastectomy plus radiation therapy, and those who

had received breast-conserving therapy.

In one retrospective study of local recurrence patterns in women with

breast cancer who had undergone mastectomy and adjuvant

chemotherapy without radiation therapy, the most common sites of local

recurrence were at the chest wall and the supraclavicular lymph

nodes.491 The recommendations for treatment of the population of

patients experiencing a local recurrence only are supported by analyses

of a combined database of patients from the EORTC 10801 and Danish

Breast Cancer Cooperative Group 82TM trials. The analyses compared

breast-conserving therapy with mastectomy in patients with stage I and

stage II disease. The 133 (approximately 8%) patients experiencing a

local recurrence as an initial event were approximately equally divided

between those who had undergone mastectomy and those who had

received breast-conserving therapy as initial treatment for breast

cancer. Of those in the former group, 51 (76%) were able to undergo

radiation therapy with or without surgery as treatment for local disease

recurrence. No difference in survival emerged between patients

receiving treatment after initial treatment with mastectomy or

breast-conserving therapy; approximately 50% of both groups were

alive at 10-year follow-up.492

According to the NCCN Panel, mastectomy-treated patients should

undergo surgical resection of the local recurrence (if it can be

accomplished without heroic surgery) and involved-field radiation

therapy to the chest wall and supraclavicular area (if the chest wall was

not previously treated or if additional radiation therapy may be safely

NCCN Guidelines Inde

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Breast Cancer

administered). The use of surgical resection in this setting implies the

use of limited excision of disease with the goal of obtaining clear

margins of resection. Unresectable chest wall recurrent disease should

be treated with radiation therapy if no prior radiation has been given.

Women with a local recurrence of disease after initial breast-conserving

therapy should undergo a total mastectomy and axillary staging if a

level I/II axillary dissection was not previously performed. Limited data

suggest that a repeat SLN biopsy following local recurrence of disease

may be successfully performed in 80% of women who have previously

undergone breast-conserving therapy and sentinel node biopsy.493 The

consensus of the panel is that the preferred surgical approach for most

women with a local recurrence following breast-conserving therapy and

sentinel node biopsy is mastectomy and a level I/II axillary dissection,

although sentinel node biopsy in lieu of a level I/II axillary dissection can

be considered if prior axillary staging was done by sentinel node biopsy

only.

The results of the CALOR trial found that after complete resection in

patients with isolated locoregional recurrence, adjuvant chemotherapy

improves both DFS and OS.494 After median follow-up of 4.9 years, the

overall DFS was 69% in the chemotherapy group versus 57% in the

group that did not receive chemotherapy (HR = 0.59, P = .046).494 Five-

year OS in all patients in the study was also significantly improved with

chemotherapy (88% vs. 76%, P = .024).494 The benefit of adjuvant

chemotherapy was mostly seen in women with ER-negative disease.

Among women with ER-negative disease, 5-year DFS was 67% versus

35% (HR, 0.32; 95% CI, 0.14–0.73) and in those ER-positive disease,

the 5-year DFS was 70% versus 69% (HR, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.47–1.89).494

According to the NCCN Panel, after local treatment, women with local

recurrences only should be considered for limited duration systemic

chemotherapy or endocrine therapy similar to that outlined in the

adjuvant chemotherapy section. The panel emphasized the importance

of individualizing treatment strategies in patients with a recurrence of

disease limited to a local site.

Management of Stage IV or Recurrent Metastatic Disease

The systemic treatment of breast cancer recurrence or stage IV disease

prolongs survival and enhances quality of life but is not curative.

Therefore, treatments associated with minimal toxicity are preferred.

Thus, the use of the minimally toxic endocrine therapies is preferred to

the use of cytotoxic therapy whenever reasonable.495

Guideline Stratification for Therapy in Systemic Disease

Patients with recurrence of breast cancer or metastatic breast cancer at

diagnosis are initially stratified according to whether bone metastasis is

present. These two patient subsets are then stratified further by tumor

hormone receptor and HER2 status.

Supportive Therapy for Bone Metastases

Treatment targeting osteoclast activity is of value in patients with

metastatic breast cancer in bone to prevent bone fractures, bone pain

requiring radiation therapy, spinal cord compression, and hypercalcemia

(skeletal-related events; SREs).496-498 The bisphosphonates zoledronic

acid or pamidronate have been used for this purpose, and there is

extensive clinical trial support for their efficacy in prevention of SREs

(see section below on Bisphosphonates). Denosumab is a fully human

monoclonal antibody directed against RANK ligand, a mediator of

osteoclast function.499 A single, randomized, active, controlled trial in

metastatic breast cancer showed equivalency and superiority of time to

the occurrence of SRE with denosumab, as compared with zoledronic

acid.498 No study of bisphosphonate or denosumab has demonstrated

an impact on OS in patients with metastatic disease.

NCCN Guidelines Inde

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Breast Cancer

The bisphosphonates and denosumab are associated with a risk of

development of osteonecrosis of the jaw (ONJ). Poor baseline dental

health or dental procedures during treatment are known risk factors for

ONJ. Thus, a dental examination with preventive dentistry intervention

is recommended prior to treatment with intravenous bisphosphonate or

denosumab, and dental procedures during treatment should be avoided

if at all possible. Additional risk factors for the development of ONJ

include administration of chemotherapy or corticosteroids and poor oral

hygiene with periodontal disease and dental abscess.500

Confirmation of metastatic disease by imaging, including x-ray,

diagnostic CT, or MRI, and initial evaluation of serum calcium,

creatinine, phosphorous, and magnesium levels should be undertaken

prior to the initiation of intravenous bisphosphonate treatment or

subcutaneous denosumab treatment in patients with metastatic

disease. Frequent measurement of calcium, phosphorous, and

magnesium may be prudent since hypophosphatemia and

hypocalcemia have been reported.

Bisphosphonates

An intravenous bisphosphonate (eg, pamidronate, zoledronic acid) in

combination with oral calcium citrate and vitamin D supplementation

should be used in women with bone metastasis, especially if lytic and/or

in weight-bearing bone, if expected survival is 3 months or longer, and if

creatinine levels are below 3.0 mg/dL (category 1).497,501-506

Bisphosphonates are given in addition to chemotherapy or endocrine

therapy. Zoledronic acid may be superior to pamidronate in lytic breast

metastasis.507,508

There are extensive data from randomized trials in support of the use of

bisphosphonates for patients with metastatic disease to bone. The

randomized clinical trial data include the use of zoledronic acid and

pamidronate in the United States and ibandronate and clodronate in

European countries.504,506,508-513 In metastatic bone disease,

bisphosphonate treatment is associated with fewer SREs, fewer

pathologic fractures, and less need for radiation therapy and surgery to

treat bone pain.

The use of bisphosphonates in metastatic disease is a palliative care

measure. No impact on OS has been observed in patients treated with

bisphosphonates. The data indicate that zoledronic acid and

pamidronate may be given on a 3- to 5-week schedule in conjunction

with antineoplastic therapy (ie, endocrine therapy, chemotherapy,

biologic therapy). Recent data from a phase III study showed

zoledronic acid administered once every 12 weeks versus the current

standard of once every four weeks does not compromise efficacy

among women with breast cancer and bone metastases. The SRE rate

was 22% when zoledronic acid was administered every 4 weeks versus

23.2% when administered once every 12 weeks.514

The use of bisphosphonates should be accompanied by calcium and

vitamin D supplementation with daily doses of calcium of 1200 to 1500

mg and vitamin D3 of 400 to 800 IU. Recommended agents for use in

the United States are pamidronate 90 mg intravenously over 2 hours or

zoledronic acid 4 mg intravenously over 15 minutes. The original

studies continued treatment for up to 24 months; however, there are

limited long-term safety data indicating treatment can continue beyond

that time.511,513,515 The risk of renal toxicity necessitates monitoring of

serum creatinine prior to administration of each dose and dose

reduction or discontinuation if renal function is reduced. Current clinical

trial results support the use of bisphosphonates for up to 2 years.

Longer durations of bisphosphonate therapy may provide additional

benefit, but this has not yet been tested in clinical trials.

NCCN Guidelines Inde

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Breast Cancer

ONJ, a complication of bisphosphonate treatment, has been described.

In a review of more than 16,000 cancer patients, an increased risk for

jaw or facial bone surgery along with an increased risk of being

diagnosed with inflammatory conditions or osteomyelitis of the jaw with

the use of intravenous bisphosphonates was documented. An absolute

risk of 5.48 events per 100 patients treated was seen, with an increase

in risk associated with an increase in cumulative dose of drug.516 It is

recommended that patients should undergo a dental examination with

preventive dentistry prior to initiation of bisphosphonate therapy.

Denosumab

Women with metastatic breast cancer to bone who are candidates for

bisphosphonate therapy may also be considered for treatment with

denosumab (category 1). This recommendation is based on the results

of a single randomized trial comparing denosumab to zoledronic acid.498

All trial patients were recommended to supplement with vitamin D and

calcium. Patients on the experimental arm were given 120 mg of

denosumab injected subcutaneously every 4 weeks plus intravenous

placebo versus the control arm where patients were given an

intravenous infusion of 4 mg of zoledronic acid every 4 weeks, and a

subcutaneous placebo. In this trial with non-inferiority as the primary

endpoint, denosumab was shown to significantly delay time to first SRE

by 18% as compared with zoledronic acid (HR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.71–

0.95; P < .001 for non-inferiority; P = .01 for superiority) and time to first

and subsequent SREs (rate ratio, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.66–0.89; P = .001).

No difference in time to progression or OS was observed. Adverse

event profiles were similar for the two groups, including incidence of

ONJ, with a reduced risk of renal-related and acute phase adverse

events in the denosumab treatment group. Long-term risks of

denosumab treatment are unknown. The optimal duration of treatment

with denosumab is not known.

Endocrine Therapy for Stage IV or Recurrent Metastatic Disease

Women with recurrent or metastatic disease characterized by tumors

that are ER- and/or PR-positive are appropriate candidates for initial

endocrine therapy.

In premenopausal women without previous exposure to an

antiestrogen, initial treatment is with selective ER modulator alone or

ovarian suppression/ablation plus endocrine therapy as for

postmenopausal women.517 In premenopausal women who received a

prior endocrine therapy within 12 months, the preferred second-line

therapy is ovarian ablation or suppression followed by endocrine

therapy as for postmenopausal women.

Endocrine therapies for recurrent/stage IV disease in postmenopausal

women include nonsteroidal aromatase inhibitors (anastrozole and

letrozole); steroidal aromatase inhibitors (exemestane); serum ER

modulators (tamoxifen or toremifene); ER down-regulators (fulvestrant);

progestin (megestrol acetate); androgens (fluoxymesterone); and

high-dose estrogen (ethinyl estradiol) and recently several new

combination therapies with novel agents have become available such

as exemestane with everolimus, palbociclib in combination with

fulvestrant, and palbociclib with letrozole.

According to some studies, in postmenopausal women, aromatase

inhibitors appear to have superior outcome compared with tamoxifen,

although the differences are modest.518-521 A Cochrane review has also

suggested a survival benefit favoring the aromatase inhibitors over

other endocrine therapies, although the advantage is small.522 A

randomized phase III trial comparing tamoxifen with exemestane as

first-line endocrine therapy for postmenopausal women with metastatic

breast cancer showed no significant differences in progression-free

survival (PFS) or OS between the two arms.520

NCCN Guidelines Inde

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Breast Cancer

Fulvestrant appears to be at least as effective as anastrozole in patients

whose disease progressed on previous tamoxifen.523,524 A randomized

phase II study compared anastrozole versus fulvestrant in over 200

patients with advanced breast cancer.525,526 In the initial analysis,

fulvestrant was as effective as anastrozole in terms of overall response

(36.0% vs. 35.5%; odds ratio, 1.02; 95% CI, 0.56 –1.87; P = .947) in

evaluable patients (n = 89 for fulvestrant and n = 93 for anastrozole).525

An improved time to progression was seen with fulvestrant compared to

anastrazole (median time to progression was 23.4 months for

fulvestrant vs. 13.1 months for anastrozole; HR, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.39–

1.00; P = .0496).526 This study used a higher 500 mg loading dose every

2 weeks for 3 doses and then 500 mg monthly.525 The median OS was

observed to be longer in the fulvestrant group than in the anastrozole

group (54.1 months vs. 48.4 months; HR, 0.70; P = .041).527 These

findings are currently being studied in a prospective phase III trial

(ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01602380).

A phase II study of fulvestrant in postmenopausal women with

advanced breast cancer and disease progression following aromatase

inhibitor therapy documented a partial response rate of 14.3% with an

additional 20.8% of patients achieving stable disease for at least 6

months.528 The clinical benefit rates of exemestane and fulvestrant

observed in a phase III trial of postmenopausal women with hormone

receptor-positive advanced breast cancer who experienced disease

progression on prior nonsteroidal aromatase inhibitor therapy were

comparable (32.2% vs. 31.5%; P = .853).529 In that study, fulvestrant

was administered as a 500 mg loading dose followed by doses of 250

mg on day 14, day 28, and then monthly.

A separate phase III randomized study in postmenopausal women with

metastatic ER-positive breast cancer compared fulvestrant 500 mg

every 2 weeks for 3 doses followed by 500 mg monthly versus

fulvestrant 250 mg monthly. The PFS was superior with the fulvestrant

500 mg regimen (HR, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.68–0.94; P = .006),530 indicating

an increased duration of response with the higher dose of fulvestrant.

The final analyses demonstrated an increase in median OS (4.1

months) and reduced risk of death (19%) with a dose of 500 mg

compared with 250 mg. Median OS was 26.4 versus 22.3 months (HR,

0.81; 95% CI, 0.69–0.96; P = .02).531

Combination endocrine therapy in postmenopausal women with

hormone receptor-positive, previously untreated metastatic breast

cancer has been reported from two studies comparing single-agent

anastrozole versus anastrozole plus fulvestrant.

In one study (FACT), combination endocrine therapy was not superior

to single-agent anastrozole (time to progression HR, 0.99; 95% CI,

0.81–1.20; P = .91).532 In the second study (S0226), PFS (HR, 0.80;

95% CI, 0.68–0.94; stratified log-rank P = .007) and OS (HR, 0.81; 95%

CI, 0.65–1.00; stratified P = .049) were superior with combination

anastrozole plus fulvestrant.533 An unplanned subset analysis in this trial

suggested that patients without prior adjuvant tamoxifen experienced

the greatest benefit. The reason for the divergent outcomes in these two

studies is not known.

A phase III trial studied the effect of fulvestrant alone or in combination

with anastrozole or exemestane in patients with advanced breast

cancer and an acquired non-steroidal aromatase inhibitor-resistant

disease.534 An aromatase inhibitor had been given as adjuvant

treatment to 18% of patients for a median of 27.9 months, and to 82%

of patients for locally advanced/metastatic disease for a median of 19.3

months. Median PFS was 4.8 months, 4.4 months, and 3.4 months for

patients treated with fulvestrant alone, anastrazole plus fulvestrant, and

fulvestrant plus exemestane, respectively. No differences were

NCCN Guidelines Inde

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Breast Cancer

observed for overall response rate, clinical benefit rate, and OS. This

trial provides no evidence that adding an aromatase inhibitor to

fulvestrant in patients with non-steroidal aromatase inhibitor-resistant

disease improves the results achieved with fulvestrant alone. In

postmenopausal women who have received previous antiestrogen

therapy and are within one year of antiestrogen exposure, there is

evidence supporting the use of a selective aromatase inhibitor as the

preferred first-line therapy for their recurrent disease.535,536

Palbociclib, a highly selective inhibitor of CDK 4/6 kinase activity, has a

role in treating women with ER-positive metastatic breast cancer in

combination with endocrine therapy. A phase II, open-label,

randomized, multicenter trial evaluated the safety and efficacy of

palbociclib in combination with letrozole versus letrozole alone as first-

line treatment for patients with advanced ER-positive, HER2- negative

breast cancer.537 Median PFS reported was double with the

combination regimen compared to letrozole alone (20.2 months for the

palbociclib plus letrozole group and 10.2 months for the letrozole alone

group; HR, 0.488; 95% CI, 0.319–0.748).537 Grade 3/4 adverse

reactions reported at a higher incidence in the palbociclib plus letrozole

versus letrozole alone group included neutropenia (54% vs. 1%) and

leukopenia (19% vs. 0%). Based on this study, the FDA approved

palbociclib in combination with letrozole for the treatment of

postmenopausal women with ER-positive, HER2-negative advanced

breast cancer as initial endocrine-based therapy for their metastatic

disease.

The phase III trial (PALOMA-3) compared the combination of palbociclib

and fulvestrant to fulvestrant in pre- or post-menopausal hormone

receptor-positive, HER2-negative advanced breast cancer patients,

whose disease progressed on prior endocrine therapy. Pre- or peri-

menopausal patients also received goserelin. The median PFS was 9.2

months for the combination compared to 3.8 months for fulvestrant (HR

0.42, P < .000001) with similar discontinuation rates because of

adverse effects (2.6% and 1.7%, respectively).538 Grade 3/4 adverse

events of palbociclib and fulvestrant were mainly confined to

neutropenia with the same low incidence (0.6%) of febrile neutropenia

in both arms. OS data from this trial are immature.538

The NCCN Panel has included the combination of palbociclib with

letrozole as a first-line endocrine therapy option for postmenopausal

patients with hormone receptor-positive, HER2-negative metastatic

breast cancer. In addition, the recently updated version includes

palbociclib with fulvestrant as a category 1 option for women with

hormone receptor-positive (post-menopausal or premenopausal women

receiving ovarian suppression with an LHRH agonist), HER2-negative

metastatic breast cancer who have progressed on endocrine therapy.

Limited studies document a PFS advantage of adding trastuzumab or

lapatinib to aromatase inhibition in postmenopausal women with

hormone receptor-positive metastatic breast cancer that is HER2-

positive.539,540

Resistance to endocrine therapy in women with hormone

receptor-positive disease is frequent. One mechanism of resistance to

endocrine therapy is activation of the mammalian target of rapamycin

(mTOR) signal transduction pathway. Several randomized studies have

investigated the use of aromatase inhibition in combination with

inhibitors of the mTOR pathway.

A randomized phase II study estimated the efficacy of tamoxifen alone

versus tamoxifen combined with everolimus, an oral inhibitor of mTOR,

in women with hormone receptor-positive, HER2-negative metastatic

breast cancer previously treated with an aromatase inhibitor.541 After a

NCCN Guidelines Inde

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Breast Cancer

median follow-up of 13 months, an intent-to-treat analysis showed that

the clinical benefit was 42.1% (95% CI, 29.1–55.9) with tamoxifen alone

and 61.1% (95% CI, 46.9–74.1) with tamoxifen plus everolimus. An

improvement in median time to progression was seen when everolimus

was combined with tamoxifen compared with tamoxifen alone. Median

time to progression was 4.5 months (95% CI, 3.7–8.7) with tamoxifen

alone versus 8.5 months (95% CI, 6.01–13.9) with everolimus and

tamoxifen.541

A phase III trial in postmenopausal women with advanced, hormone

receptor-positive breast cancer with no prior endocrine therapy for

advanced disease, randomized subjects to letrozole with or without the

mTOR inhibitor temsirolimus has been reported.542 In this study, PFS

was not different between the treatment arms (HR, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.75–

1.05; long-rank P = .18).

The results of this trial differ from that of the BOLERO-2 trial (described

below). The reasons for the differences in the outcomes of these two

randomized phase III studies542,543 is uncertain, but may be related to the

issues of patient selection and extent of prior endocrine therapy.

A phase III study (BOLERO-2) randomized postmenopausal women

with hormone receptor-positive advanced breast cancer that had

progressed or recurred during treatment with a nonsteroidal aromatase

inhibitor to exemestane with or without the mTOR inhibitor

everolimus.544 Final results reported after median 18-month follow-up

show that median PFS (by central review) remained significantly longer

with everolimus plus exemestane versus placebo plus exemestane at

11.0 versus 4.1 months, respectively; (HR, 0.38; 95% CI, 0.31–0.48; P

< .0001).543 The adverse events (all grades) that occurred more

frequently in those receiving everolimus included stomatitis, infections,

rash, pneumonitis, and hyperglycemia.543,544 Analysis of safety and

efficacy in the elderly patients enrolled in this trial showed that elderly

patients treated with an everolimus-containing regimen had similar

incidences of these adverse events, but the younger patients had more

on-treatment deaths.545 Based on the evidence from the BOLERO-2

trial, the NCCN Panel has included everolimus plus exemestane as an

option for women who fulfill the entry criteria for BOLERO-2.

Many premenopausal and postmenopausal women with

hormone-responsive breast cancer benefit from sequential use of

endocrine therapies at disease progression. Therefore, women with

breast cancers who respond to an endocrine maneuver with either

shrinkage of the tumor or long-term disease stabilization (clinical

benefit) should receive additional endocrine therapy at disease

progression. After second-line endocrine therapy, little high-level

evidence exists to assist in selecting the optimal sequence of endocrine

therapy. Additional endocrine therapies for second-line and subsequent

therapy are listed in the NCCN Guidelines for Breast Cancer.

Endocrine therapy may be active in patients with negative ER and PR

determinations, especially on the primary tumor and in soft tissue

disease and/or bone-dominant disease.546-548 Endocrine therapy is

associated with relatively low toxicity. Further false-negative

determinations of ER and PR tumor status are not unusual and the

hormone receptor status of primary and metastatic sites of disease may

differ. Therefore, the NCCN Breast Cancer Panel recommends

consideration of a trial of endocrine therapy for patients with disease

characterized as hormone receptor-negative with disease localized to

the bone or soft tissue only or with asymptomatic visceral disease,

irrespective of HER2 tumor status.

NCCN Guidelines Inde

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Breast Cancer

Cytotoxic Chemotherapy for Stage IV or Recurrent Metastatic Disease

Women with hormone receptor-negative tumors not localized to the

bone or soft tissue only, that are associated with symptomatic visceral

metastasis, or that have hormone receptor-positive tumors that are

refractory to endocrine therapy should receive chemotherapy. A variety

of chemotherapy regimens are felt to be appropriate, as outlined in the

treatment algorithm. Combination chemotherapy generally provides

higher rates of objective response and longer time to progression, in

comparison to single-agent chemotherapy. Combination chemotherapy

is, however, associated with an increase in toxicity and is of little

survival benefit.549-553 Furthermore, administering single agents

sequentially decreases the likelihood that dose reductions will be

needed. Thus, the panel finds little compelling evidence that

combination chemotherapy is superior to sequential single agents.

Standard clinical practice is to continue first-line chemotherapy until

progression. Adverse effects may require dose reduction and cessation

of chemotherapy prior to disease progression. Limited information

suggests that PFS can be prolonged with the use of continuous

chemotherapy versus shorter-course chemotherapy.554,555 Due to the

lack of consistent OS differences, the use of prolonged versus shorter

chemotherapy needs to be weighed against the detrimental effects of

continuous chemotherapy on overall quality of life.

Single cytotoxic agents and combination chemotherapy regimens

recommended by the panel for the treatment of patients with metastatic

disease are listed in the NCCN Guidelines.

Single Agents

Single agents are categorized as either preferred or other single agents

based on a balance of the efficacy, toxicity, and treatment schedules of

the drugs. Among preferred single agents, the panel includes: the

anthracyclines, doxorubicin, epirubicin, and pegylated liposomal

doxorubicin; the taxanes, paclitaxel, docetaxel, and albumin-bound

paclitaxel; anti-metabolites, capecitabine and gemcitabine; and

non-taxane microtubule inhibitors, eribulin and vinorelbine.

Eribulin is a non-taxane microtubule inhibitor used for the treatment of

patients with metastatic breast cancer who have previously received at

least two chemotherapeutic regimens for the treatment of metastatic

disease. Prior therapy should have included an anthracycline and a

taxane in either the adjuvant or metastatic setting. In a phase III trial,

762 patients with metastatic breast cancer were randomized 2:1 to

eribulin or treatment of physicians’ choice. One-year OS was 53.9% for

patients receiving eribulin versus 43.7% for the control arm, and median

OS was 13.12 versus 10.65 months, representing a 19% statistically

significant risk reduction (P = .041). Time to progression was greater

with eribulin 3.7 versus 2.2 months for patients in the control arm (P =

.14).556

Several studies have demonstrated that eribulin is active in metastatic

breast cancer. A large randomized trial of heavily pre-treated patients

with metastatic breast cancer compared treatment with eribulin versus

therapy of physician’s choice. Eribulin demonstrated significant

improvement in OS with 2.5-month prolongation of median OS (median

OS for patients treated with eribulin was 13.1 months compared with

10.6 months for those receiving other treatments. HR, 0.81; 95% CI,

0.66–0.99; P = .041).556

A phase III trial compared eribulin with capecitabine in patients with

metastatic breast cancer. While a survival advantage was observed with

eribulin treatment in all sub-groups of patients, there was a significant

survival advantage observed with eribulin over capecitabine among

patients with HER2-negative (15.9 vs. 13.5 months; HR 0.84; 95% CI

NCCN Guidelines Inde

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Breast Cancer

0.72, 0.98; P = .03) and triple-negative (14.4 vs. 9.4 months; HR 0.70;

95% CI 0.55, 0.91; P = .01) breast cancer.557

Among other single agents, the panel includes: cyclophosphamide,

carboplatin, docetaxel, albumin-bound paclitaxel, cisplatin, ixabepilone,

and epirubicin.

Ixabepilone, an epothilone B analogue, is also used for treatment of

recurrent or metastatic breast cancer as a single agent. Use of

ixabepilone as monotherapy has been evaluated in several phase II

trials of women with metastatic breast cancer: in a first-line setting in

patients previously treated with anthracycline chemotherapy 558; in

patients with taxane-resistant metastatic breast cancer559; and in

patients with advanced breast cancer resistant to an anthracycline, a

taxane, and capecitabine.560 In the phase II trials, objective response

rate, median duration of response, and median OS duration were 41.5%

(95% CI, 29.4%–54.4%), 8.2 months (95% CI, 5.7–10.2 months), and

22.0 months (95% CI, 15.6–27.0 months) in the first-line setting;558 12%

(95% CI, 4.7%– 26.5%), 10.4 months, and 7.9 months for the

taxane-resistant patients;559 and 11.5% (95% CI, 6.3%–18.9%), 5.7

months, and 8.6 months for the patients previously treated with an

anthracycline, a taxane, and capecitabine.560 In the study by Perez et

al,560 grade 3/4 treatment-related toxicities included peripheral sensory

neuropathy (14%) and neutropenia (54%).

Combination Regimens

Among combination regimens, the panel includes FAC/CAF; FEC; AC;

EC; CMF; docetaxel, capecitabine; gemcitabine, paclitaxel;

gemcitabine, carboplatin; and paclitaxel, bevacizumab.

A series of trials have sought to define the role for bevacizumab, a

humanized monoclonal antibody against the vascular endothelial

growth factor in the treatment of metastatic breast cancer. The E2100

trial randomized 722 women with recurrent or metastatic breast cancer

to first-line chemotherapy with paclitaxel with or without bevacizumab.561

This trial documented superior PFS (11.8 months vs. 5.9 months; HR

0.60; P <.001) favoring bevacizumab plus paclitaxel compared with

paclitaxel alone. A similar trial enrolled 736 patients who were

randomized to treatment with docetaxel and bevacizumab or docetaxel

and placebo.562 This trial also documented increased PFS in the arm

containing bevacizumab (10.1 months vs. 8.2 months with docetaxel

alone; HR 0.77; P = .006). An additional trial, RIBBON-1, combined

bevacizumab with capecitabine, with a taxane (docetaxel,

nab-paclitaxel), with anthracyclines (FEC, CAF, AC, or EC), or with the

same chemotherapy alone. Results of this trial show a statistically

significant increase in PFS with bevacizumab and capecitabine (8.6

months vs. 5.7 months; HR, 0.69; P < .001) and taxane- or

anthracycline- (9.2 months vs. 8.0 months; HR, 0.64; P < .001)

containing arms.563,564 None of these studies demonstrates an increase

in OS or quality of life when analyzed alone or in a meta-analysis

combining the trials.565 The increase in PFS with bevacizumab is

modest, and appears the greatest in combination with paclitaxel,

especially as reported in an unpublished analysis provided to the

FDA.566

As with endocrine therapy, sequential responses are often observed

with chemotherapy, supporting the use of sequential single agents and

combination chemotherapy regimens. The current guidelines include

doses and schedules of these single agents and combination regimens

for metastatic breast cancer. Failure to achieve a tumor response to 3

sequential chemotherapy regimens or ECOG performance status of 3 or

greater is an indication for supportive therapy only. In this context,

failure to respond to a chemotherapy regimen means the absence of

NCCN Guidelines Inde

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Breast Cancer

even a marginal response to the use of a given chemotherapy regimen.

Response to a chemotherapy regimen followed by progression of

disease is not considered a failure to experience response.

Patients with metastatic breast cancer frequently develop many

anatomically localized problems that may benefit from local irradiation,

surgery, or regional chemotherapy (eg, intrathecal methotrexate for

leptomeningeal carcinomatosis).

HER2-Targeted Therapy for Stage IV or Recurrent Metastatic Disease

Patients with tumors that are HER2-positive may derive benefit from

treatment with HER2-targeted therapy. The panel recommends

selecting patients for HER2-targeted therapy if their tumors are either

positive for HER2 by ISH or 3+ by IHC. HER2 testing recommendations

are described in the guideline. Patients with tumors IHC 0 or 1+ for

HER2 or ISH not amplified have very low rates of HER2-targeted

response and HER2-targeted therapy.567 Adequate standardization and

validation of HER2 assays by ISH and IHC used in clinical practice is a

concern, and data suggest that false-positive determinations are

common.22,23,568-570 Recommendations regarding HER2 testing have

been published.568,570

First-Line Regimens for HER2-Positive Tumors

The NCCN Panel has categorized HER2-targeting regimens as either

preferred or other.

Preferred First-Line Regimens

A randomized, double-blind, phase III study compared the efficacy and

safety of pertuzumab in combination with trastuzumab and docetaxel

versus trastuzumab and docetaxel as first-line treatment for

HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer.571 The primary endpoint of the

study was independent assessment of PFS. The secondary endpoints

were PFS assessed by investigator, objective response rate, OS, and

safety. A total of 808 patients were enrolled in this trial.571 The addition

of pertuzumab provided a statistically significant improvement in PFS

compared to trastuzumab plus docetaxel alone. The median

independently assessed PFS was increased by 6.1 months, from 12.4

months in the control group to 18.5 months in the pertuzumab group

(HR for progression or death, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.51– 0.75; P < .001).571 At

a median follow-up of 30 months the results showed a statistically

significant improvement in OS in favor of the pertuzumab-containing

regimen, with a 34% reduction in the risk of death (HR, 0.66; 95% CI,

0.52–0.84; P = .0008). The median OS was 37.6 months in the

non-pertuzumab group and had not yet been reached in the

pertuzumab-containing regimen.432 The most common adverse

reactions reported in the pertuzumab group compared to the control

group were diarrhea, rash, mucosal inflammation, febrile neutropenia,

and dry skin. Peripheral edema and constipation were greater in the

control group.571 Cardiac adverse events or left ventricular systolic

dysfunction were reported slightly more frequently in the control

group.572 Health-related quality of life was not different in the two

treatment groups.573

Phase II trials have also found activity and tolerability for pertuzumab,

pertuzumab with trastuzumab, and for other regimens combining

pertuzumab and trastuzumab together with other active cytotoxics (ie,

paclitaxel, vinorelbine).574,575,576 Phase III trials of pertuzumab plus

chemotherapy without trastuzumab have not been reported.

The NCCN Panel recommends pertuzumab plus trastuzumab in

combination with a taxane as a preferred option for first-line treatment of

patients with HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer. Pertuzumab plus

trastuzumab in combination with docetaxel is an NCCN category 1 and

in combination with paclitaxel is an NCCN category 2A

recommendation.

NCCN Guidelines Inde

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Breast Cancer

Other First-Line Regimens for HER2-Positive Tumors

First-line trastuzumab in combination with selected

chemotherapeutics266 or as a single agent265,267 is another option for

HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer patients. Randomized trials

demonstrate benefit from adding trastuzumab to other agents including

paclitaxel with or without carboplatin,266,567,577,578 docetaxel,577 and

vinorelbine,577 or as a single agent267 for patients with HER2-positive

disease. In addition, the combination of trastuzumab and capecitabine

has also shown efficacy as a first-line trastuzumab-containing regimen

in this population of patients.579,580 For those patients with hormone

receptor-positive, HER2-positive disease, the panel recommends initial

treatment with endocrine therapy, an approach consistent with most of

these studies. The panel believes the 27% frequency of significant

cardiac dysfunction in patients treated with the combination of

trastuzumab and doxorubicin/cyclophosphamide chemotherapy in the

metastatic setting is too high for use of this combination outside the

confines of a prospective clinical trial.266,580,581

T-DM1 is an antibody-drug conjugate. Through a stable linker, the

HER2-targeting antitumor property of trastuzumab is conjugated with

the cytotoxic activity of the microtubule-inhibitory agent DM1 (derivative

of maytansine).

A randomized, international, multicenter, open-label, phase III study

(EMILIA) evaluated the safety and efficacy of T-DM1 compared with

lapatinib plus capecitabine for HER2-positive patients with locally

advanced breast cancer or metastatic breast cancer previously treated

with trastuzumab and a taxane.582 The primary endpoints of this study

were PFS, OS, and safety. T-DM1 demonstrated a statistically

significant improvement in both primary endpoints of PFS and OS. PFS

(assessed by independent review) was significantly improved with

T-DM1 with median PFS of 9.6 months vs. 6.4 months with lapatinib

plus capecitabine; HR for progression or death from any cause was

0.65 (95% CI, 0.55–0.77; P < .001). At the first interim analysis, T-DM1

also demonstrated significant improvement in OS. The stratified HR for

death from any cause with T-DM1 versus lapatinib plus capecitabine

was 0.62 (95% CI, 0.48–0.81; P = .0005).582 Rates of grade 3 or 4

adverse events were higher with lapatinib plus capecitabine than with

T-DM1 (57% vs. 41%). The incidences of thrombocytopenia and

increased serum aminotransferase levels were higher with T-DM1

(frequency >25%), whereas the incidences of diarrhea, nausea,

vomiting, and palmar-plantar erythrodysesthesia were higher with

lapatinib plus capecitabine.582

In a phase III trial (MARIANNE), 1,095 patients with locally advanced or

metastatic breast cancer were randomized to first-line treatment with T-

DM1 with or without pertuzumab or to treatment with trastuzumab plus a

taxane. The primary endpoints were safety and PFS assessed by

independent review. The PFS for T-DM1 with pertuzumab was found

non-inferior to trastuzumab and a taxane (15.2 and 13.7 months

respectively; HR, 0.87; 97.5% CI, 0.69–1.08; P = .14).583 The PFS for T-

DM1 alone was non-inferior to trastuzumab plus a taxane (14.1 and

13.7, respectively; HR, 0.91; 97.5% CI, 0.73–1.13; P = .31).583 The

incidence of Grade 3–5 adverse events was 54.1%, 45.4%, and 46.2%

in the trastuzumab plus a taxane arm, T-DM1 arm, and T-DM1 plus

pertuzumab arm, respectively. Health-related quality of life was

maintained for a longer duration with a median of 7.7 months for T-DM1

(HR, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.57–0.86) and a median of 9 months for T-DM1

plus pertuzumab (HR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.55–0.84) compared with a

median of 3.9 months for trastuzumab and a taxane.583

Based on the MARIANNE trial data demonstrating T-DM1 and T-DM1

with pertuzumab being non-inferior, with better QOL compared with

trastuzumab plus taxane and possibly better-tolerated for some

NCCN Guidelines Inde

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Breast Cancer

patients, 583 the NCCN Panel included T-DM1 as one of the first-line

options for treatment of patients with HER2-positive metastatic breast

cancer. Pertuzumab, trastuzumab, and a taxane, however, remains the

preferred frontline regimen for HER2-positive metastatic disease based

on data demonstrating improved OS compared to trastuzumab and a

taxane. TDM-1 as first-line therapy should be considered only in those

not suitable for the preferred treatment.

Regimens for Trastuzumab-Exposed HER2-Positive Disease

The NCCN Panel recommends continuation of HER2 blockade for

patients with HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer that progresses

on first-line trastuzumab-containing regimens. This recommendation

also applies to patients who are diagnosed with HER2-positive

metastatic disease after prior exposure to trastuzumab in the adjuvant

setting. Several trials have demonstrated benefit of continuation of

trastuzumab therapy following disease progression on a

trastuzumab-containing regimen.584-586 However, the optimal duration of

trastuzumab in patients with long-term control of disease is unknown.

The NCCN Guidelines include doses and schedules of representative

regimens for use in HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer.

Pertuzumab is active in patients beyond the first-line setting. The results

of a multicenter, open-label, single-arm, phase II study (n = 66) show

that the combination of pertuzumab and trastuzumab is active and well

tolerated in patients with HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer that

has progressed on prior trastuzumab therapy.587 The trial reported an

objective response rate of 24.2% (16 patients out of 66). The overall

median PFS time observed with pertuzumab and trastuzumab

combination was 15.5 months (range, 0.9–17.0 months; 80% CI, 18–31

months.587 The reported median duration of response with the

combination was 5.8 months (range, 2.9–15.3 months).587

To determine whether the clinical benefit seen in the study was from

pertuzumab alone or was a result of the combined effect of pertuzumab

and trastuzumab, a cohort of patients (n = 29) whose disease

progressed during prior trastuzumab-based therapy received

pertuzumab monotherapy until progressive disease or unacceptable

toxicity. Of these, patients with disease progression (n = 17) continued

to receive pertuzumab with the addition of trastuzumab. In the 29

patients who received pertuzumab monotherapy, the objective response

rate and clinical benefit rate reported were 3.4% and 10.3%,

respectively, whereas in the patients who received dual blockade after

progression on pertuzumab, the objective response rate and clinical

benefit rate were 17.6% and 41.2%, respectively.588

According to the NCCN Panel, for patients with disease progression

after treatment with trastuzumab-based therapy without pertuzumab, a

line of therapy containing both trastuzumab plus pertuzumab with or

without a cytotoxic agent (such as vinorelbine or taxane) may be

considered. Further research is needed to determine the ideal

sequencing strategy for anti-HER2 therapy.

The regimen of capecitabine plus lapatinib is also an option for patients

with HER2-positive disease following progression on a

trastuzumab-containing regimen. A phase III study compared lapatinib

plus capecitabine with capecitabine alone in women with advanced or

metastatic breast cancer refractory to trastuzumab in the metastatic

setting and with prior treatment with an anthracycline and a taxane in

either the metastatic or adjuvant setting.589 Time to progression was

increased in the group receiving combination therapy when compared

with the group receiving capecitabine monotherapy (8.4 months vs. 4.4

months; HR, 0.49; 95% CI, 0.34–0.71; P < .001). The patients who

progressed on monotherapy were allowed to cross over to the

combination arm. This resulted in insufficient power to detect significant

NCCN Guidelines Inde

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Breast Cancer

differences in OS; an exploratory analysis demonstrated a trend toward

a survival advantage with lapatinib plus capecitabine.590 The analysis

reported a median OS of 75.0 weeks for the combination arm and 64.7

weeks for the monotherapy arm (HR, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.71–1.08; P =

.210).590

Another study of women with metastatic breast cancer showed that

lapatinib in combination with letrozole increased PFS over letrozole

alone in the subset of women with HER2-positive cancer (3.0 months

for letrozole and placebo vs. 8.2 months for letrozole and lapatinib; HR,

0.71; 95% CI, 0.53–0.96; P = .019).539 In addition, results from a phase

III trial in which patients with heavily pretreated metastatic breast cancer

and disease progression on trastuzumab therapy were randomly

assigned to monotherapy with lapatinib or trastuzumab plus lapatinib

showed that PFS was increased from 8.1 weeks to 12 weeks (P = .008)

with the combination.591 The OS analysis data showed that lapatinib

plus trastuzumab improved median survival by 4.5 months, with median

OS of 14 months for the combination therapy and 9.5 months for

lapatinib alone (HR, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.57–0.97; P =.026). 592 This

improvement in OS analysis included patients who were initially

assigned to monotherapy and crossed over to receive combination

therapy at the time of progression.592

Based on the absence of data, the panel does not recommend the

addition of chemotherapy to the trastuzumab and lapatinib combination.

Surgery for Stage IV or Recurrent Metastatic Disease

The primary treatment approach recommended by the NCCN Panel for

women with metastatic breast cancer and an intact primary tumor is

systemic therapy, with consideration of surgery after initial systemic

treatment for those women requiring palliation of symptoms or with

impending complications, such as skin ulceration, bleeding, fungation,

and pain.593 Generally such surgery should be undertaken only if

complete local clearance of tumor may be obtained and if other sites of

disease are not immediately threatening to life. Alternatively, radiation

therapy may be considered as an option to surgery. Often such surgery

requires collaboration between the breast surgeon and the

reconstructive surgeon to provide optimal cancer control and wound

closure.

Retrospective studies suggest a potential survival benefit from complete

excision of the in-breast tumor in select patients with metastatic breast

cancer.594-597 Substantial selection biases exist in all of these studies

and are likely to confound the study results.598,599 Two recent

prospective, randomized studies assessed whether or not surgery on

the primary tumor in the breast is necessary for women who are

diagnosed with metastatic/stage IV breast cancer. The results from both

studies presented at the 2013 Annual San Antonio Breast Cancer

Symposium were similar showing that surgical treatment of primary

tumors in women presenting with stage IV disease does not produce an

increase in OS.600,601

Nevertheless, the panel recognizes the need for randomized clinical

trials that will address the risks and benefits of local therapy for patients

with stage IV disease while eliminating selection biases. Patient

enrollment in such trials is encouraged.

Distant Sites of Recurrence Requiring Consideration of Therapies Local

to the Metastatic Site

Surgery, radiation, or regional chemotherapy (eg, intrathecal

methotrexate) may be indicated as needed for localized clinical

scenarios such as brain metastases, leptomeningeal disease, choroid

metastases, pleural effusion, pericardial effusion, biliary obstruction,

NCCN Guidelines Inde

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Breast Cancer

ureteral obstruction, impending pathologic fracture, cord compression,

localized painful bone, or soft-tissue disease.

The guidelines include consideration of the addition of hyperthermia to

irradiation for localized recurrences/metastasis (category 3). There have

been several prospective randomized trials comparing radiation to

radiation plus hyperthermia in the treatment of locally

advanced/recurrent cancers, primarily breast cancer chest wall

recurrences.602,603 While there is heterogeneity among the study results,

a series with strict quality assurance demonstrated a statistically

significant increase in local tumor response and greater duration of local

control with the addition of hyperthermia to radiation compared to

radiation alone.602 No differences in OS have been demonstrated.

Delivery of local hyperthermia is technically demanding and requires

specialized expertise and equipment (eg, the monitoring of

temperatures and management of possible tissue burns). The panel

thus recommends that the use of hyperthermia be limited to treatment

centers with appropriate training, expertise, and equipment. The

addition of hyperthermia generated substantial discussion and

controversy among the panel and is a category 3 recommendation.

Monitoring Metastatic Disease

Monitoring the treatment of metastatic breast cancer involves a wide

array of assessments and the need for the clinician to integrate several

different forms of information to make a determination of the

effectiveness of treatment and the acceptability of toxicity. The

information includes those from direct observations of the patient,

including patient-reported symptoms, performance status, change in

weight, and physical examination; laboratory tests such as alkaline

phosphatase, liver function, blood counts, and calcium; radiographic

imaging; functional imaging; and, where appropriate, tumor biomarkers.

The results of these evaluations generally are classified as response,

continued response to treatment, stable disease, uncertainty regarding

disease status, or progression of disease. The clinician typically must

assess and balance multiple different forms of information to make a

determination regarding whether disease is being controlled and the

toxicity of treatment is acceptable. Sometimes this information may be

contradictory.

The panel recommends using widely accepted criteria for reporting

response, stability, and progression of disease such as the RECIST

criteria604 and the WHO criteria.605 The NCCN Panel also recommends

using the same method of assessment over time. For example, an

abnormality initially found on diagnostic CT scan of the chest should be

monitored with repeat diagnostic CT scans of the chest.

The optimal frequency of testing is uncertain, and is primarily based on

the monitoring strategies utilized in breast cancer clinical trials. The

page titled Principles of Monitoring Metastatic Disease in the algorithm

provides a table outlining general recommendations for the frequency

and type of monitoring as a baseline before initiation of new therapy, for

monitoring the effectiveness of cytotoxic chemotherapy and endocrine

therapy, and as an assessment when there is evidence of disease

progression. The panel has indicated in a footnote that the frequency of

monitoring can be reduced in patients who have long-term stable

disease. These are guidelines and should be modified for the individual

patient using clinical judgment, especially for those with stable or

responding disease for long periods of time.

The clinical use of Circulating Tumor Cells (CTC) in metastatic breast

cancer is not yet included in the NCCN Guidelines for Breast Cancer for

disease assessment and monitoring. Patients with persistently

increased CTC after 3 weeks of first-line chemotherapy have a poor

NCCN Guidelines Inde

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Breast Cancer

PFS and OS.606 In spite of its prognostic ability, CTC count has failed to

show a predictive value. A prospective, randomized, phase 3 trial

(SWOG S0500) evaluated the clinical utility of serial enumeration of

CTC in patients with metastatic breast cancer. 606 According to the study

results, switching to an alternative cytotoxic therapy after 3 weeks of

first-line chemotherapy in patients with persistently increased CTC did

not affect either PFS or OS.606

Special Situations

Paget’s Disease

Paget’s disease of the breast is a rare manifestation of breast cancer

characterized by neoplastic cells in the epidermis of the NAC.607 It most

commonly presents with eczema of the areola, bleeding, ulceration, and

itching of the nipple. The diagnosis is often delayed because of the rare

nature of the condition and confusion with other dermatologic

conditions. There is an associated cancer elsewhere in the breast in up

to about 80% to 90% of cases.608-610 The associated cancers are not

necessarily located adjacent to the NAC and may be either DCIS or

invasive cancer.

Women with clinical signs that raise suspicion for Paget’s disease

require a complete history and physical examination and diagnostic

breast imaging. Any breast lesion identified by imaging or examination

should be evaluated according to the NCCN Guidelines for Breast

Screening and Diagnosis. The skin of the NAC should undergo surgical

biopsy, including the full thickness of the epidermis including at least a

portion of any clinically involved NAC. When biopsy of the NAC is

positive for Paget’s disease, breast MRI is recommended to define the

extent of disease and identify additional disease.610,611

There are no category 1 data that specifically address local

management of Paget’s disease. Systemic therapy is based on the

stage and biological characteristics of any underlying cancer, and is

supported by the evidence cited in the relevant stage-specific breast

cancer treatment guidelines.

Management of Paget’s disease has traditionally been total mastectomy

with axillary dissection. Total mastectomy remains a reasonable option

for patients regardless of the absence or presence of an associated

breast cancer.609 Data demonstrate that satisfactory local control may

be achieved with breast-conserving surgery including the excision with

negative margins of any underlying breast cancer along with resection

of the NAC followed by whole breast radiation therapy.612-616 The risk of

ipsilateral breast recurrence after breast-conserving NAC resection and

radiation therapy with or without an associated cancer is similar to that

with breast-conserving surgery and radiation therapy with the typical

invasive or in situ cancer.

For Paget’s disease without an associated cancer (ie, no palpable mass

or imaging abnormality), it is recommended that breast-conserving

surgery consist of removal of the entire NAC with a negative margin of

underlying breast tissue. In cases with an associated cancer elsewhere

in the breast, the surgery includes removal of the NAC with a negative

margin and removal of the peripheral cancer using standard

breast-conserving technique to achieve a negative margin. It is not

necessary to remove the NAC and the peripheral cancer in continuity in

a single surgical specimen or through a single incision. Mastectomy

also remains an appropriate treatment option.

ALN staging is not necessary when breast-conserving therapy is used

to treat Paget’s disease with underlying DCIS without evidence of

invasive cancer following clinical examination, imaging evaluation, and

NCCN Guidelines Inde

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Breast Cancer

full-thickness skin biopsy of the involved NAC. In the presence of an

underlying invasive breast cancer treated with breast-conserving

surgery, axillary surgery should be performed according to the Surgical

Axillary Staging outlined in the NCCN Guidelines. In cases treated by

total mastectomy, axillary staging is recommended for patients with

invasive disease and should also be considered for patients with

underlying DCIS without evidence of invasive disease. This is because

the final pathology may reveal an invasive cancer in the mastectomy

specimen and the mastectomy precludes subsequent sentinel node

biopsy. Two retrospective studies have provided evidence for a high

degree of accuracy in the identification of the sentinel node(s) in

patients with Paget’s disease.617,618 Patients treated with breast

conservation should receive whole breast radiation. Extended-field

radiation to regional lymph nodes should be used in cases of an

associated invasive breast cancer with involved lymph nodes as for any

breast cancer as described in the initial sections of the NCCN

Guidelines. A radiation boost should be considered for the site of the

resected NAC and any associated resected cancer site, if applicable.

Women with an associated invasive cancer have substantial risk of

developing metastases. Adjuvant systemic therapy should be

administered according to the stage of the cancer. Women with Paget’s

disease treated with breast conservation and without an associated

cancer or those with associated ER-positive DCIS should consider

tamoxifen for risk reduction. Those with an associated invasive cancer

should receive adjuvant systemic therapy based on the stage and

hormone receptor status.

Phyllodes Tumors of the Breast

(also known as phyllodes tumors, cystosarcoma phyllodes)

Phyllodes tumors of the breast are rare tumors comprised of both

stromal and epithelial elements.619 Phyllodes tumors exist in benign,

borderline, and malignant subtypes, although there is not uniform

agreement on the criteria for assigning subtype or for predicting

biological behavior.620 The subtype of phyllodes tumor appears less

important for risk of recurrence than does the margin of tumor-free

resection achieved by surgical treatment. Diagnosis of phyllodes tumors

prior to excisional biopsy/lumpectomy is uncommon. Phyllodes tumors

occur in an older age distribution than fibroadenoma, a younger age

distribution than the invasive ductal and lobular cancers, and with a

mean age of 40.621 Phyllodes tumors often enlarge rapidly and are

usually painless. Phyllodes tumors often appear on ultrasound and

mammography as fibroadenomas, and FNA cytology and even core

needle biopsy are inadequate to reliably distinguish phyllodes tumors

from fibroadenoma.621 Thus, in the setting of a large or rapidly enlarging

clinical fibroadenoma, excisional biopsy should be considered to

pathologically exclude a phyllodes tumor. Patients with Li-Fraumeni

syndrome (germline TP53 mutation, see NCCN Guidelines for

Genetic/Familial High Risk Assessment) have an increased risk for

phyllodes tumors.622 Local recurrences of phyllodes tumors are the most

common site of recurrence. Most distant recurrences occur in the lung,

and may be solid nodules or thin-walled cavities.

Treatment of phyllodes tumors (which includes benign, borderline, and

malignant subtypes) is with local surgical excision with tumor-free

margins of 1 cm or greater. Lumpectomy or partial mastectomy is the

preferred surgical therapy. Total mastectomy is necessary only if

negative margins cannot be obtained by lumpectomy or partial

mastectomy.623 Since phyllodes tumors rarely metastasize to the ALNs,

surgical axillary staging or ALN dissection is not necessary unless the

lymph nodes are pathologic on clinical examination.624 In those patients

who experience a local recurrence, resection of the recurrence with

wide, tumor-free surgical margins should be performed. Some panel

members recommend local radiation therapy of the remaining breast or

NCCN Guidelines Inde

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Breast Cancer

chest wall following resection of a local recurrence, but this

recommendation is controversial (category 2B).625

While the epithelial component of most phyllodes tumors contains ER

(58%) and/or PR (75%),626 endocrine therapy has no proven role in the

treatment of phyllodes tumors. Similarly, there is no evidence that

adjuvant cytotoxic chemotherapy provides benefit in reduction of

recurrences or death. In the rare patient who experiences a systemic

recurrence (usually in the lung), treatment should be as recommended

in the NCCN Guidelines for Soft Tissue Sarcoma.

Breast Cancer During Pregnancy

Breast cancer occurring concurrently with pregnancy is an infrequent

clinical event. In a California registry study, there were 1.3 breast

cancers diagnosed per 10,000 live births.627 Unfortunately, breast

cancer during pregnancy is most often ALN-positive and with larger

primary tumor size. Histologically the tumors are poorly differentiated,

are more frequently ER/PR-negative, and approximately 30% are

HER2-positive.628,629 The diagnosis is often delayed because neither the

patient nor the physician suspects malignancy.

Evaluation of the pregnant patient with suspected breast cancer should

include a physical examination with particular attention to the breast and

regional lymph nodes. Mammogram of the breast with shielding can be

done safely and the accuracy is reported to be greater than 80%.630

Ultrasound of the breast and regional lymph nodes can be used to

assess the extent of disease and also to guide biopsy. Ultrasound has

been reported to be abnormal in up to 100% of breast cancers occurring

during pregnancy.630 Biopsies for cytologic evaluation of a suspicious

breast mass may be done with FNA of the breast and suspicious lymph

nodes. However, the preferred technique is core needle biopsy. This

provides tissue for histologic confirmation of invasive disease as well as

adequate tissue for hormone receptor and HER2 analyses.

Staging assessment of the pregnant patient with breast cancer may be

guided by clinical disease stage. The staging studies should be tailored

to minimize fetal exposure to radiation. For clinically node-negative

T1-T2 tumors, a chest x-ray (with shielding), liver function and renal

function assessment, and a CBC with differential are appropriate. In

patients who have clinically node-positive or T3 breast lesions, in

addition to the aforementioned, an ultrasound of the liver and

consideration of a screening MRI of the thoracic and lumbar spine

without contrast may be employed. The documentation of the presence

of metastases may alter the treatment plan and influence the patient’s

decision regarding maintenance of the pregnancy. Assessment of the

pregnancy should include a maternal fetal medicine consultation and

review of antecedent maternal risks such as hypertension, diabetes,

and complications with prior pregnancies. Documentation of fetal growth

and development and fetal age by means of ultrasonographic

assessment is appropriate. Estimation of the date of the delivery will

help with systemic chemotherapy planning. In addition, maternal fetal

medicine consultation should include counseling regarding maintaining

or terminating pregnancy. Counseling of the pregnant patient with

breast cancer should include a review of the treatment options, which

include mastectomy or breast-conserving surgery as well as the use of

systemic therapy. The most common surgical procedure has been

modified radical mastectomy. However, breast-conserving surgery is

possible if radiation therapy can be delayed to the postpartum period,631

and breast-conserving therapy during pregnancy does not appear to

have a negative impact on survival.631,632 When surgery is performed at

25 weeks of gestation or later, obstetrical and prenatal specialists must

NCCN Guidelines Inde

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Breast Cancer

be onsite and immediately available in the event of precipitous delivery

of a viable fetus.

Although there are a limited number of isolated case reports and small

retrospective studies evaluating use of SLN biopsy in pregnant

patients,633,634 the sensitivity and specificity of the procedure has not

been established in this setting. Thus, there are insufficient data on

which to base recommendations for its use in pregnant women.

Decisions related to use of SLN biopsy in pregnancy should be

individualized. A review of the relative and absolute contraindications to

sentinel node biopsy concluded that sentinel node biopsy should not be

offered to pregnant women under 30 weeks gestation.635 There are

limited data with only case reports and estimations of fetal radiation

dose regarding use of radioactive tracer (eg, technetium 99m sulfur

colloid).636-638 Isosulfan blue or methylene blue dye for sentinel node

biopsy procedures is discouraged during pregnancy.

The indications for systemic chemotherapy are the same in the

pregnant patient as in the non-pregnant breast cancer patient, although

chemotherapy should not be administered at any point during the first

trimester of pregnancy. The largest experience in pregnancy has been

with anthracycline and alkylating agent chemotherapy.639,640 Collected

data of chemotherapy exposure in utero indicate that the first trimester

has the greatest risk of fetal malformation.641,642 Fetal malformation risks

in the second and third trimester are approximately 1.3%, not different

than that of fetuses not exposed to chemotherapy during pregnancy. If

systemic therapy is initiated, fetal monitoring prior to each

chemotherapy cycle is appropriate. Chemotherapy during pregnancy

should not be given after week 35 of pregnancy or within 3 weeks of

planned delivery in order to avoid the potential for hematologic

complications during delivery. Data from a single-institution prospective

study indicate that FAC chemotherapy (5-FU 500 mg/m2 IV days 1 and

4, doxorubicin 50 mg/m2 by IV infusion over 72 hours, and

cyclophosphamide 500 mg/m2 IV day 1) may be given with relative

safety during the second and third trimesters of pregnancy.640 As

reported by Gwyn et al, the median gestational age at delivery was 38

weeks, more than 50% of the patients had a vaginal delivery, and there

were no fetal deaths.628 An update of this experience reported on 57

women treated with FAC in the adjuvant or neoadjuvant setting. There

were 57 live births. A survey of parents/guardians reported on the

health of 40 children. There was one child with Down syndrome and two

with congenital abnormalities (club foot, congenital bilateral ureteral

reflux). The children are reported to be healthy and progressing well in

school.640,643 Ondansetron, lorazepam, and dexamethasone can be used

as part of the pre-chemotherapy antiemetic regimen.

There are limited data on the use of taxanes during pregnancy.644-647 If

used, the NCCN Panel recommends weekly administration of paclitaxel

after the first trimester if clinically indicated by disease status. There are

only case reports of trastuzumab use during pregnancy.648-655 The

majority of these case reports indicated oligo- or anhydramnios with

administration of trastuzumab; fetal renal failure occurred in one case. If

trastuzumab is otherwise indicated, it should be administered in the

postpartum period; the panel recommends against its use during

pregnancy.

A single case report of first trimester exposure to lapatinib during

treatment for breast cancer reported an uncomplicated delivery of a

healthy female neonate.656

Endocrine therapy and radiation therapy are contraindicated during

pregnancy. Endocrine therapy and radiation therapy, if indicated, should

thus not be initiated until the postpartum period.

NCCN Guidelines Inde

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Breast Cancer

Communication between the oncologist and maternal fetal medicine

specialist is essential at every visit and for every treatment decision

point for the patient.

Inflammatory Breast Cancer

Inflammatory breast cancer (IBC) is a rare, aggressive form of breast

cancer estimated to account for 1% to 6% of breast cancer cases in the

United States.657,658 IBC is a clinical diagnosis that requires erythema

and dermal edema (peau d’orange) of a third or more of the skin of the

breast.

IBC is usually hormone receptor-negative and is more frequently

HER2-positive than the usual ductal breast cancers. Studies on gene

expression profiling of IBC have demonstrated that all the subtypes of

IBC exist, but basal and HER2 overexpressed are more frequent.659-662

According to the 7th edition of the AJCC Cancer Staging Manual, IBC is

classified as stage IIIB, stage IIIC, or stage IV breast cancer, depending

on the degree of nodal involvement and whether distant metastases are

present. The primary tumor of IBC is classified as T4d by definition,

even when no mass is specifically apparent in the breast. On

radiographic imaging, findings of skin thickening and, in some cases, an

underlying mass are observed. Despite use of the term “inflammatory,”

the characteristic clinical features of IBC are due to blockage of dermal

lymphatics by tumor emboli. Although a biopsy is required to evaluate

for the presence of cancer in breast tissue and the dermal lymphatics, a

diagnosis of IBC is based on clinical findings, and dermal lymphatic

involvement is neither required, nor sufficient by itself, to assign a

diagnosis of IBC.11,663 The differential diagnosis includes cellulitis of the

breast and mastitis.

In the past, IBC has often been placed under the general heading of

locally advanced breast cancer. There is a growing body of evidence

that IBC patients, when compared with noninflammatory forms of locally

advanced breast cancer, are more likely to have a less favorable

prognosis664-666 and to be younger at the time of disease presentation.667

The NCCN Panel acknowledges that studies focusing on genetic

characterization of IBC are needed to more clearly define IBC as a

disease entity and to optimize treatment.668,669 Nevertheless, current

evidence provides justification for a separate guideline for the workup

and treatment of patients diagnosed with IBC.

StageT4d, N0- N3, M0

Workup

Women with a clinical/pathologic diagnosis of IBC without distant

metastasis (stage T4d, N0-N3, M0) should undergo a thorough staging

evaluation by a multidisciplinary team.

Recommendations for workup include a complete history and physical

examination involving a CBC and platelet count.

A pathology review and pre-chemotherapy determinations of tumor

hormone receptor and HER2 receptor status should be performed.

HER2 has a predictive role in determining which patients with IBC will

benefit from HER2-targeted therapy. The NCCN Panel endorses the

CAP protocol for pathology reporting (www.cap.org) and endorses the

ASCO CAP recommendations for quality control performance of HER2

testing and interpretation of IHC and ISH results.570

Imaging studies help facilitate image-guided biopsy, delineate

locoregional disease, and identify distant metastases. Evaluation of all

women suspected with IBC must include diagnostic bilateral

mammogram, with the addition of ultrasound as necessary. A breast

MRI scan is optional.

NCCN Guidelines Inde

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Breast Cancer

Evaluations for the presence of distant metastasis in the asymptomatic

patient include LFTs, bone scan or sodium fluoride PET/CT (category

2B), and diagnostic CT imaging of the chest, abdomen, and pelvis

(category 2B; category 2A for diagnostic CT imaging of the chest when

pulmonary symptoms are present).

FDG PET/CT may be most helpful in situations where standard imaging

results are equivocal or suspicious. However, there is limited evidence

suggesting that PET/CT may be a useful adjunct to standard imaging of

IBC due to the increased risk of regional lymph node involvement and

distant spread of disease in this group of patients.125,126,670,671

Nevertheless, equivocal or suspicious sites identified by FDG PET/CT

scanning or other imaging methods should be biopsied for confirmation

of stage IV disease whenever possible. FDG PET/CT is a category 2B

recommendation. The consensus of the panel is that FDG PET/CT can

be performed at the same time as diagnostic CT. If FDG PET and

diagnostic CT are performed and both clearly indicate bone metastases,

bone scan or sodium fluoride PET/CT may not be needed.

Genetic counseling is recommended if the patient is considered to be at

high risk for hereditary breast cancer as defined by the NCCN

Guidelines for Genetic/Familial High-Risk Assessment: Breast and

Ovarian.

Treatment

The treatment of patients with IBC should involve a combined modality

approach657 comprising preoperative systemic therapy followed by

surgery (mastectomy)andradiotherapy.

Preoperative Chemotherapy

There are no large randomized trials evaluating the optimal systemic

treatment of IBC, since it is a rare disease. The systemic therapy

recommendations are based on data from retrospective analyses, small

prospective studies, and data from non-IBC, locally advanced breast

cancer.

The benefit of preoperative systemic therapy followed by mastectomy

over preoperative systemic therapy alone in patients with IBC was

shown in a retrospective analysis in which lower local recurrence rates

and longer disease-specific survival were reported for the combined

modality approach.672 Results from a large retrospective study of

patients with IBC performed over a 20-year period at The University of

Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center demonstrated that initial treatment

with doxorubicin-based chemotherapy followed by local therapy (ie,

radiation therapy or mastectomy, or both) and additional postoperative

chemotherapy resulted in a 15-year DFS rate of 28%.673

A retrospective study demonstrated that the addition of a taxane to an

anthracycline-based regimen improved PFS and OS in patients with

ER-negative IBC.674 A systematic review found evidence for an

association between the intensity of preoperative therapy and the

likelihood of a pCR.675 A study of IBC patients, with cytologically

confirmed ALN metastases, treated with anthracycline-based

chemotherapy with or without a taxane indicated that more patients

receiving the anthracycline-taxane combination achieved a pCR

compared with those who received only anthracycline-based therapy. In

addition, patients who had a pCR in the ALNs had superior OS and

DFS compared with those with residual axillary disease.676

The NCCN Panel recommends preoperative systemic therapy with an

anthracycline-based regimen with or without taxanes for the initial

treatment of patients with IBC. The panel also recommends completing

the planned chemotherapy prior to mastectomy. If the chemotherapy

NCCN Guidelines Inde

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Breast Cancer

was not completed preoperatively, it should be completed

postoperatively.

Targeted Therapy

All women with hormone receptor-positive IBC are recommended to

receive endocrine therapy sequentially after completing the planned

preoperative systemic therapy.

HER2-positive IBC is associated with a poor prognosis.661,677 For women

with HER2-positive disease, the addition of trastuzumab to primary

systemic chemotherapy is associated with better response rates.678-682 A

prospective study that randomized women with locally advanced breast

cancers, including those with IBC, to neoadjuvant anthracycline-based

chemotherapy with or without trastuzumab for 1 year demonstrated that

the addition of trastuzumab significantly improved the response rate and

event-free survival.678 The NCCN Panel recommends inclusion of

trastuzumab in the chemotherapy regimen and is recommended for

patients with HER2-positive disease.There are no available data to

indicate the optimal duration of trastuzumab, specifically among women

with IBC. However, based on the available data,678 the panel

recommends continuing trastuzumab therapy for up to 1 year.

Results of small phase II trials indicate that other HER2-targeting

agents such as lapatinib and pertuzumab have a clinical benefit in

IBC.314,683 The results of the NEOSPHERE trial that included patients

with IBC showed increased pCR with the pertuzumab-containing

regimens. Therefore, the NCCN Panel has included in a footnote that a

pertuzumab-containing regimen may be administered preoperatively in

patients with HER2-positive IBC.314

Determination of response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in IBC should

include a combination of physical examination and radiologic

assessment.

Surgery

Patients with a clinical/pathologic diagnosis of IBC should always be

treated with chemotherapy before surgery. It has been known for many

years that surgical treatment as primary treatment of patients with IBC

is associated with poor outcomes.684 SLN dissection is not a reliable

method of assessing ALNs among women with IBC.685 Use of

breast-conserving surgery in patients with IBC has been associated with

poor cosmesis, and limited data suggest that rates of local recurrence

may be higher when compared with mastectomy. Breast-conserving

therapy is not recommended for patients with IBC.

Mastectomy with level I/II ALN dissection is the recommended surgical

procedure recommended by the NCCN Panel for patients who respond

to neoadjuvant chemotherapy. The NCCN Panel has listed delayed

breast reconstruction as an option that can be recommended to women

with IBC who have undergone a modified radical mastectomy.

Reconstruction of the breasts soon after mastectomy may compromise

the post-mastectomy radiation therapy outcomes.686

For patients with IBC who do not respond to preoperative systemic

therapy, mastectomy is not generally recommended. Additional

systemic chemotherapy and/or preoperative radiation should be

considered for these patients. Patients with tumors responding to this

secondary therapy should undergo mastectomy and subsequent

treatment as described above.

NCCN Guidelines Inde

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Breast Cancer

Radiation

After mastectomy, radiation therapy is recommended after the

completion of the planned chemotherapy.

The probability of locoregional lymph node involvement is high for

women with IBC. To reduce the risk of local recurrence, the panel

recommends radiation therapy to the chest wall and the supraclavicular

region. If the internal mammary lymph node(s) is clinically or

pathologically involved, radiation therapy should include the internal

mammary nodes. If the internal mammary nodes are not clinically or

pathologically involved, then including the internal mammary nodes in

the radiation therapy field is at the discretion of the treating radiation

oncologist (category 3). For HER2-positive disease, trastuzumab may

be administered concomitantly with radiation therapy.

Stage IV or Recurrent IBC

Patients with stage IV or recurrent IBC should be treated according to

the guidelines for recurrence/stage IV breast cancer (See NCCN

Guidelines for Breast Cancer).

Axillary Breast Cancer

Occult breast cancer presenting with axillary metastases is an unusual

presentation that can be a diagnostic and therapeutic challenge.

Evidence to support recommendations on the management of patients

presenting with axillary breast cancer comes from a limited number of

retrospective studies involving small numbers of patients687-689(see also

references therein). Although treatment of women with axillary

metastases from an unknown primary tumor has typically involved

mastectomy and axillary nodal dissection, some of these patients have

also been successfully treated with axillary nodal dissection followed by

radiation therapy.688,689

Patients with a suspected occult primary breast cancer will typically

present to the oncologist after undergoing an initial biopsy: core needle

biopsy (preferred), and/or FNA. Accurate pathologic assessment of the

biopsied material is most important. Therefore, the pathologist must be

consulted to determine whether the available biopsy material is

adequate, or if additional biopsy material is necessary (eg, core needle,

incisional, or excisional biopsy) to provide an accurate and complete

diagnosis.

Workup for Possible Primary Breast Cancer

MRI of the breast can facilitate the identification of occult breast cancer,

and can help select those patients most likely to benefit from

mastectomy.690 For example, in a study of 40 patients with

biopsy-proven breast cancer in the axilla, and a negative or

indeterminate mammogram, MRI identified the primary breast lesion in

70% of the patients.688 In addition, of the 7 patients with a negative MRI

who subsequently underwent ALN dissection and radiation therapy to

the whole breast, no evidence of local recurrence was evident at a

median follow-up of 19 months.

The NCCN Guidelines for Occult Primary Cancer provide guidance on

the diagnosis and initial workup of patients with a suspicious axillary

mass without any signs of a primary tumor. A small subset of these

patients may have a primary cancer in the axillary tail of the breast.

Adenocarcinoma with positive axillary nodes and mediastinal nodes in a

woman is highly suggestive of a breast primary. Adenocarcinoma in the

supraclavicular nodes, chest, peritoneum, retroperitoneum, liver, bone,

or brain could also indicate primary breast cancer in women. The

guidelines suggest the use of a mammogram and breast ultrasound for

such patients.

NCCN Guidelines Inde

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Breast Cancer

Testing for immunohistochemical markers including ER/PR and HER2

is recommended. Elevated ER/PR levels provide strong evidence for a

breast cancer diagnosis.691 MRI of the breast should be considered for a

patient with histopathologic evidence of breast cancer when

mammography and ultrasound are not adequate to assess the extent of

the disease. MRI may be especially helpful in women with dense breast

tissue, positive axillary nodes, and suspected occult primary breast

tumor or to evaluate the chest wall.692 Breast MRI has been shown to be

useful in identifying the primary site in patients with occult primary

breast cancer and may also facilitate breast conservation in selected

women by allowing for lumpectomy instead of mastectomy.688,693 In one

report, the primary site was identified using MRI in about half of the

women presenting with axillary metastases, irrespective of the breast

density.694

The NCCN Guidelines for Occult Primary Cancer also provide

recommendations for additional workup, including chest and abdominal

CT to evaluate for evidence of distant metastases for patients

diagnosed with adenocarcinoma (or carcinoma not otherwise specified)

of the axillary nodes without evidence of a primary breast lesion. In

particular, breast MRI and ultrasound are recommended. Axillary

ultrasound should also be performed.

Treatment for Possible Primary Breast Cancer

Patients with MRI-positive breast disease should undergo evaluation

with ultrasound or MRI-guided biopsy and receive treatment according

to the clinical stage of the breast cancer. Treatment recommendations

for those with MRI-negative disease are based on nodal status. For

patients with T0, N1, M0 disease, options include mastectomy plus

axillary nodal dissection or axillary nodal dissection plus whole breast

irradiation with or without nodal irradiation. Systemic chemotherapy,

endocrine therapy, or trastuzumab is given according to the

recommendations for stage II or III disease. Neoadjuvant

chemotherapy, trastuzumab, and endocrine therapy should be

considered for patients with T0, N2-N3, M0 disease followed by axillary

nodal dissection and mastectomy as for patients with locally advanced

disease.

Summary

The therapeutic options for patients with noninvasive or invasive breast

cancer are complex and varied. In many situations, the patient and

physician have the responsibility to jointly explore and select the most

appropriate option from among the available alternatives. With few

exceptions, the evaluation, treatment, and follow-up recommendations

in these guidelines are based on the results of past and present clinical

trials. However, there is not a single clinical situation in which the

treatment of breast cancer has been optimized with respect to either

maximizing cure or minimizing toxicity and disfigurement. Therefore,

patient/physician participation in prospective clinical trials allows

patients to not only receive state-of-the-art cancer treatment but also to

contribute to improving the treatment outcomes.

NCCN Guidelines Inde

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Breast Cancer

References

1. Mohammad H. Forouzanfar KJF, Allyne M. Delossantos, Rafael

Lozano, Alan D. Lopez, Christopher J. L. Murray, Mohsen Naghavi.

Breast and cervical cancer in 187 countries between 1980 and 2010: a

systematic analysis. The Lancet 2011;6736:61351-61352

2. Siegel RL, Miller KD, Jemal A. Cancer statistics, 2016. CA Cancer J

Clin 2016;66:7-30. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26742998.

3. DeSantis C, Ma J, Bryan L, Jemal A. Breast cancer statistics, 2013.

CA Cancer J Clin 2014;64:52-62. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24114568.

4. Effects of chemotherapy and hormonal therapy for early breast

cancer on recurrence and 15-year survival: an overview of the

randomised trials. Lancet 2005;365:1687-1717. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15894097.

5. Siegel RL, Miller KD, Jemal A. Cancer statistics, 2015. CA Cancer J

Clin 2015;65:5-29. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25559415.

6. Berry DA, Cronin KA, Plevritis SK, et al. Effect of screening and

adjuvant therapy on mortality from breast cancer. N Engl J Med

2005;353:1784-1792. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16251534.

7. Gail MH, Costantino JP, Bryant J, et al. Weighing the risks and

benefits of tamoxifen treatment for preventing breast cancer. J Natl

Cancer Inst 1999;91:1829-1846. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10547390.

8. Dupont WD, Page DL. Risk factors for breast cancer in women with

proliferative breast disease. N Engl J Med 1985;312:146-151. Available

at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/3965932.

9. Dupont WD, Page DL. Risk factors for breast cancer in women with

proliferative breast disease. N Engl J Med 1985;312:146-151. Available

at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/3965932.

10. U.S. National Library of Medicine-Key MEDLINE® Indicators.

Available at: http://www.nlm.nih.gov/bsd/bsd_key.html.

11. Edge SB, Byrd DR, Compton CC, et al., eds. AJCC Cancer Staging

Manual, 7th Edition. New York: Springer; 2010.

12. White J, Morrow M, Moughan J, et al. Compliance with breast-

conservation standards for patients with early-stage breast carcinoma.

Cancer 2003;97:893-904. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12569588.

13. Wilkinson NW, Shahryarinejad A, Winston JS, et al. Concordance

with breast cancer pathology reporting practice guidelines. J Am Coll

Surg 2003;196:38-43. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12517547.

14. Allred DC, Harvey JM, Berardo M, Clark GM. Prognostic and

predictive factors in breast cancer by immunohistochemical analysis.

Mod Pathol 1998;11:155-168. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9504686.

15. Rhodes A, Jasani B, Barnes DM, et al. Reliability of

immunohistochemical demonstration of oestrogen receptors in routine

practice: interlaboratory variance in the sensitivity of detection and

evaluation of scoring systems. J Clin Pathol 2000;53:125-130. Available

at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10767828.

16. Rudiger T, Hofler H, Kreipe HH, et al. Quality assurance in

immunohistochemistry: results of an interlaboratory trial involving 172

pathologists. Am J Surg Pathol 2002;26:873-882. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12131154.

17. Allred DC, Carlson RW, Berry DA, et al. NCCN Task Force Report:

Estrogen receptor and progesterone receptor testing in breast cancer

NCCN Guidelines Inde

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Breast Cancer

by immunohistochemistry. J Natl Compr Canc Netw 2009;7 Suppl 6:S1-

S21; quiz S22-23. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19755043.

18. Hammond MEH, Hayes DF, Dowsett M, 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 2010;28:2784-

2795. Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20404251.

19. Hammond ME. ASCO-CAP guidelines for breast predictive factor

testing: an update. Appl Immunohistochem Mol Morphol 2011;19:499-

500. Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22089488.

20. Wang S, Saboorian MH, Frenkel E, et al. Laboratory assessment of

the status of Her-2/neu protein and oncogene in breast cancer

specimens: comparison of immunohistochemistry assay with

fluorescence in situ hybridisation assays. J Clin Pathol 2000;53:374-

381. Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10889820.

21. Dybdal N, Leiberman G, Anderson S, et al. Determination of HER2

gene amplification by fluorescence in situ hybridization and

concordance with the clinical trials immunohistochemical assay in

women with metastatic breast cancer evaluated for treatment with

trastuzumab. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2005;93:3-11. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16184453.

22. Paik S, Bryant J, Tan-Chiu E, et al. Real-world performance of

HER2 testing--National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project

experience. J Natl Cancer Inst 2002;94:852-854. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12048273.

23. Perez EA, Suman VJ, Davidson NE, et al. HER2 testing by local,

central, and reference laboratories in specimens from the North Central

Cancer Treatment Group N9831 intergroup adjuvant trial. J Clin Oncol

2006;24:3032-3038. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16809727.

24. Tubbs RR, Pettay JD, Roche PC, et al. Discrepancies in clinical

laboratory testing of eligibility for trastuzumab therapy: apparent

immunohistochemical false-positives do not get the message. J Clin

Oncol 2001;19:2714-2721. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11352964.

25. Press MF, Sauter G, Bernstein L, et al. Diagnostic evaluation of

HER-2 as a molecular target: an assessment of accuracy and

reproducibility of laboratory testing in large, prospective, randomized

clinical trials. Clin Cancer Res 2005;11:6598-6607. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16166438.

26. Wolff AC, Hammond ME, Hicks DG, et al. Recommendations for

human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 testing in breast cancer:

American Society of Clinical Oncology/College of American Pathologists

clinical practice guideline update. J Clin Oncol 2013;31:3997-4013.

Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24101045.

27. Wolff AC, Hammond ME, Hicks DG, et al. Recommendations for

Human Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor 2 testing in breast cancer:

American Society of Clinical Oncology/College of American Pathologists

Clinical Practice Guideline update. Arch Pathol Lab Med 2014;138:241-

256. Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24099077.

28. Giordano SH, Buzdar AU, Hortobagyi GN. Breast cancer in men.

Ann Intern Med 2002;137:678-687. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12379069.

29. Giordano SH, Valero V, Buzdar AU, Hortobagyi GN. Efficacy of

anastrozole in male breast cancer. Am J Clin Oncol 2002;25:235-237.

Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12040279.

30. Rosai J. Borderline epithelial lesions of the breast. Am J Surg Pathol

1991;15:209-221. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1847606.

31. Schnitt SJ, Connolly JL, Tavassoli FA, et al. Interobserver

reproducibility in the diagnosis of ductal proliferative breast lesions

NCCN Guidelines Inde

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Breast Cancer

using standardized criteria. Am J Surg Pathol 1992;16:1133-1143.

Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1463092.

32. Renshaw AA, Derhagopian RP, Martinez P, Gould EW. Lobular

neoplasia in breast core needle biopsy specimens is associated with a

low risk of ductal carcinoma in situ or invasive carcinoma on

subsequent excision. Am J Clin Pathol 2006;126:310-313. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16891208.

33. Nagi CS, O'Donnell JE, Tismenetsky M, et al. Lobular neoplasia on

core needle biopsy does not require excision. Cancer 2008;112:2152-

2158. Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18348299.

34. Hwang H, Barke LD, Mendelson EB, Susnik B. Atypical lobular

hyperplasia and classic lobular carcinoma in situ in core biopsy

specimens: routine excision is not necessary. Mod Pathol

2008;21:1208-1216. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18660792.

35. Elsheikh TM, Silverman JF. Follow-up surgical excision is indicated

when breast core needle biopsies show atypical lobular hyperplasia or

lobular carcinoma in situ: a correlative study of 33 patients with review

of the literature. Am J Surg Pathol 2005;29:534-543. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15767810.

36. Karabakhtsian RG, Johnson R, Sumkin J, Dabbs DJ. The clinical

significance of lobular neoplasia on breast core biopsy. Am J Surg

Pathol 2007;31:717-723. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17460455.

37. O'Neil M, Madan R, Tawfik OW, et al. Lobular carcinoma in

situ/atypical lobular hyperplasia on breast needle biopsies: does it

warrant surgical excisional biopsy? A study of 27 cases. Ann Diagn

Pathol 2010;14:251-255. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20637429.

38. Foster MC, Helvie MA, Gregory NE, et al. Lobular carcinoma in situ

or atypical lobular hyperplasia at core-needle biopsy: is excisional

biopsy necessary? Radiology 2004;231:813-819. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15105449.

39. Hussain M, Cunnick GH. Management of lobular carcinoma in-situ

and atypical lobular hyperplasia of the breast--a review. Eur J Surg

Oncol 2011;37:279-289. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21306860.

40. Rendi MH, Dintzis SM, Lehman CD, et al. Lobular in-situ neoplasia

on breast core needle biopsy: imaging indication and pathologic extent

can identify which patients require excisional biopsy. Ann Surg Oncol

2012;19:914-921. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21861212.

41. Anderson BO, Calhoun KE, Rosen EL. Evolving concepts in the

management of lobular neoplasia. J Natl Compr Canc Netw

2006;4:511-522. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16687097.

42. Kerlikowske K, Molinaro AM, Gauthier ML, et al. Biomarker

expression and risk of subsequent tumors after initial ductal carcinoma

in situ diagnosis. J Natl Cancer Inst 2010;102:627-637. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20427430.

43. Stackievicz R, Paran H, Bernheim J, et al. Prognostic significance of

HER-2/neu expression in patients with ductal carcinoma in situ. Isr Med

Assoc J 2010;12:290-295. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20929083.

44. Zhou W, Jirstrom K, Johansson C, et al. Long-term survival of

women with basal-like ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast: a

population-based cohort study. BMC Cancer 2010;10:653. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21118480.

45. Lari SA, Kuerer HM. Biological markers in DCIS and risk of breast

recurrence: A systematic review. J Cancer 2011;2:232-261. Available

at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21552384.

NCCN Guidelines Inde

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Breast Cancer

46. Kuhl CK, Schrading S, Bieling HB, et al. MRI for diagnosis of pure

ductal carcinoma in situ: a prospective observational study. Lancet

2007;370:485-492. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17693177.

47. Kowalchik KV, Vallow LA, McDonough M, et al. The role of

preoperative bilateral breast magnetic resonance imaging in patient

selection for partial breast irradiation in ductal carcinoma in situ. Int J

Surg Oncol 2012;2012:206342. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22655183.

48. Brennan ME, Turner RM, Ciatto S, et al. Ductal carcinoma in situ at

core-needle biopsy: meta-analysis of underestimation and predictors of

invasive breast cancer. Radiology 2011;260:119-128. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21493791.

49. Cody HS, Van Zee KJ. Point: sentinel lymph node biopsy is

indicated for patients with DCIS. J Natl Compr Canc Netw 2003;1:199-

206. Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19768878.

50. Edge SB, Sheldon DG. Counterpoint: sentinel lymph node biopsy is

not indicated for ductal carcinoma in situ. J Natl Compr Canc Netw

2003;1:207-212. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19768879.

51. Lyman GH, Giuliano AE, Somerfield MR, et al. American Society of

Clinical Oncology guideline recommendations for sentinel lymph node

biopsy in early-stage breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 2005;23:7703-7720.

Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16157938.

52. Virnig BA, Tuttle TM, Shamliyan T, Kane RL. Ductal carcinoma in

situ of the breast: a systematic review of incidence, treatment, and

outcomes. J Natl Cancer Inst 2010;102:170-178. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20071685.

53. Waddell BE, Stomper PC, DeFazio JL, et al. Postexcision

mammography is indicated after resection of ductal carcinoma-in-situ of

the breast. Ann Surg Oncol 2000;7:665-668. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11034243.

54. Bijker N, Meijnen P, Peterse JL, et al. Breast-conserving treatment

with or without radiotherapy in ductal carcinoma-in-situ: ten-year results

of European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer

randomized phase III trial 10853--a study by the EORTC Breast Cancer

Cooperative Group and EORTC Radiotherapy Group. J Clin Oncol

2006;24:3381-3387. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16801628.

55. Emdin SO, Granstrand B, Ringberg A, et al. SweDCIS:

Radiotherapy after sector resection for ductal carcinoma in situ of the

breast. Results of a randomised trial in a population offered

mammography screening. Acta Oncol 2006;45:536-543. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16864166.

56. Fisher B, Dignam J, Wolmark N, et al. Lumpectomy and radiation

therapy for the treatment of intraductal breast cancer: findings from

National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project B-17. J Clin Oncol

1998;16:441-452. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9469327.

57. Houghton J, George WD, Cuzick J, et al. Radiotherapy and

tamoxifen in women with completely excised ductal carcinoma in situ of

the breast in the UK, Australia, and New Zealand: randomised

controlled trial. Lancet 2003;362:95-9102. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12867108.

58. Julien JP, Bijker N, Fentiman IS, et al. Radiotherapy in breast-

conserving treatment for ductal carcinoma in situ: first results of the

EORTC randomised phase III trial 10853. EORTC Breast Cancer

Cooperative Group and EORTC Radiotherapy Group. Lancet

2000;355:528-533. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10683002.

59. Cuzick J, Sestak I, Pinder SE, et al. Effect of tamoxifen and

radiotherapy in women with locally excised ductal carcinoma in situ:

NCCN Guidelines Inde

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Breast Cancer

long-term results from the UK/ANZ DCIS trial. Lancet Oncol

2011;12:21-29. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21145284.

60. Wapnir IL, Dignam JJ, Fisher B, et al. Long-term outcomes of

invasive ipsilateral breast tumor recurrences after lumpectomy in

NSABP B-17 and B-24 randomized clinical trials for DCIS. J Natl

Cancer Inst 2011;103:478-488. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21398619.

61. Holmberg L, Garmo H, Granstrand B, et al. Absolute risk reductions

for local recurrence after postoperative radiotherapy after sector

resection for ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast. J Clin Oncol

2008;26:1247-1252. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18250350.

62. Di Saverio S, Catena F, Santini D, et al. 259 Patients with DCIS of

the breast applying USC/Van Nuys prognostic index: a retrospective

review with long term follow up. Breast Cancer Res Treat

2008;109:405-416. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17687650.

63. Gilleard O, Goodman A, Cooper M, et al. The significance of the

Van Nuys prognostic index in the management of ductal carcinoma in

situ. World J Surg Oncol 2008;6:61-61. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18564426.

64. Silverstein MJ, Lagios MD, Craig PH, et al. A prognostic index for

ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast. Cancer 1996;77:2267-2274.

Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8635094.

65. Silverstein MJ, Lagios MD, Groshen S, et al. The influence of

margin width on local control of ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast. N

Engl J Med 1999;340:1455-1461. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10320383.

66. Hughes LL, Wang M, Page DL, et al. Local excision alone without

irradiation for ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast: a trial of the Eastern

Cooperative Oncology Group. J Clin Oncol 2009;27:5319-5324.

Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19826126.

67. Wong P, Lambert C, Agnihotram RV, et al. Ductal carcinoma in situ-

the influence of the radiotherapy boost on local control. Int J Radiat

Oncol Biol Phys 2011. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21664063.

68. Wong JS, Chen YH, Gadd MA, et al. Eight-year update of a

prospective study of wide excision alone for small low- or intermediate-

grade ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS). Breast Cancer Res Treat

2014;143:343-350. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24346130.

69. Goodwin A, Parker S, Ghersi D, Wilcken N. Post-operative

radiotherapy for ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast--a systematic

review of the randomised trials. Breast 2009;18:143-149. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19447038.

70. MacDonald HR, Silverstein MJ, Mabry H, et al. Local control in

ductal carcinoma in situ treated by excision alone: incremental benefit of

larger margins. Am J Surg 2005;190:521-525. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16164913.

71. Dunne C, Burke JP, Morrow M, Kell MR. Effect of margin status on

local recurrence after breast conservation and radiation therapy for

ductal carcinoma in situ. J Clin Oncol 2009;27:1615-1620. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19255332.

72. Van Zee KJ, Subhedar P, Olcese C, et al. Relationship between

margin width and recurrence of ductal carcinoma in situ: Analysis of

2996 women treated with breast-conserving surgery for 30 years. Ann

Surg 2015;262:623-631. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26366541.

73. Warnberg F, Garmo H, Emdin S, et al. Effect of radiotherapy after

breast-conserving surgery for ductal carcinoma in situ: 20 years follow-

NCCN Guidelines Inde

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Breast Cancer

up in the randomized SweDCIS Trial. J Clin Oncol 2014;32:3613-3618.

Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25311220.

74. McCormick B, Winter K, Hudis C, et al. RTOG 9804: a prospective

randomized trial for good-risk ductal carcinoma in situ comparing

radiotherapy with observation. J Clin Oncol 2015;33:709-715. Available

at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25605856.

75. Narod SA, Iqbal J, Giannakeas V, et al. Breast Cancer Mortality

After a Diagnosis of Ductal Carcinoma In Situ. JAMA Oncol 2015;1:888-

896. Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26291673.

76. Fisher B, Costantino JP, Wickerham DL, et al. Tamoxifen for the

prevention of breast cancer: current status of the National Surgical

Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project P-1 study. J Natl Cancer Inst

2005;97:1652-1662. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16288118.

77. Fisher B, Costantino JP, Wickerham DL, et al. Tamoxifen for

prevention of breast cancer: report of the National Surgical Adjuvant

Breast and Bowel Project P-1 Study. J Natl Cancer Inst 1998;90:1371-

1388. Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9747868.

78. Tan-Chiu E, Wang J, Costantino JP, et al. Effects of tamoxifen on

benign breast disease in women at high risk for breast cancer. J Natl

Cancer Inst 2003;95:302-307. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12591986.

79. Allred DC, Bryant J, Land S, et al. Estrogen receptor expression as

a predictive marker of the effectiveness of tamoxifen in the treatment of

DCIS: Findings from the NSABP Protocol B-24 [abstract]. Breast

Cancer Res Treat 2002;76(Suppl 1):Abstract A30. Available at:

80. Forbes JF, Sestak I, Howell A, et al. Anastrozole versus tamoxifen

for the prevention of locoregional and contralateral breast cancer in

postmenopausal women with locally excised ductal carcinoma in situ

(IBIS-II DCIS): a double-blind, randomised controlled trial. Lancet 2015.

Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26686313.

81. Margolese RG, Cecchini RS, Julian TB, et al. Anastrozole versus

tamoxifen in postmenopausal women with ductal carcinoma in situ

undergoing lumpectomy plus radiotherapy (NSABP B-35): a

randomised, double-blind, phase 3 clinical trial. Lancet 2015. Available

at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26686957.

82. Louie RJ, Tonneson JE, Gowarty M, et al. Complete blood counts,

liver function tests, and chest x-rays as routine screening in early-stage

breast cancer: value added or just cost? Breast Cancer Res Treat 2015.

Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26467045.

83. Esserman L. Integration of imaging in the management of breast

cancer. J Clin Oncol 2005;23:1601-1602. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15755961.

84. Gundry KR. The application of breast MRI in staging and screening

for breast cancer. Oncology (Williston Park) 2005;19:159-169. Available

at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15770888.

85. Houssami N, Ciatto S, Macaskill P, et al. Accuracy and surgical

impact of magnetic resonance imaging in breast cancer staging:

systematic review and meta-analysis in detection of multifocal and

multicentric cancer. J Clin Oncol 2008;26:3248-3258. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18474876.

86. Weber JJ, Bellin LS, Milbourn DE, et al. Selective preoperative

magnetic resonance imaging in women with breast cancer: no reduction

in the reoperation rate. Arch Surg 2012;147:834-839. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22987175.

87. Feigelson HS, James TA, Single RM, et al. Factors associated with

the frequency of initial total mastectomy: results of a multi-institutional

study. J Am Coll Surg 2013;216:966-975. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23490543.

88. Katipamula R, Degnim AC, Hoskin T, et al. Trends in mastectomy

rates at the Mayo Clinic Rochester: effect of surgical year and

NCCN Guidelines Inde

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Breast Cancer

preoperative magnetic resonance imaging. J Clin Oncol 2009;27:4082-

4088. Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19636020.

89. Sorbero ME, Dick AW, Beckjord EB, Ahrendt G. Diagnostic breast

magnetic resonance imaging and contralateral prophylactic

mastectomy. Ann Surg Oncol 2009;16:1597-1605. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19330381.

90. Miller BT, Abbott AM, Tuttle TM. The influence of preoperative MRI

on breast cancer treatment. Ann Surg Oncol 2012;19:536-540.

Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21751044.

91. Peters NH, van Esser S, van den Bosch MA, et al. Preoperative

MRI and surgical management in patients with nonpalpable breast

cancer: the MONET - randomised controlled trial. Eur J Cancer

2011;47:879-886. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21195605.

92. Turnbull LW, Brown SR, Olivier C, et al. Multicentre randomised

controlled trial examining the cost-effectiveness of contrast-enhanced

high field magnetic resonance imaging in women with primary breast

cancer scheduled for wide local excision (COMICE). Health Technol

Assess 2010;14:1-182. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20025837.

93. Fischer U, Zachariae O, Baum F, et al. The influence of

preoperative MRI of the breasts on recurrence rate in patients with

breast cancer. Eur Radiol 2004;14:1725-1731. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15248080.

94. Solin LJ, Orel SG, Hwang W-T, et al. Relationship of breast

magnetic resonance imaging to outcome after breast-conservation

treatment with radiation for women with early-stage invasive breast

carcinoma or ductal carcinoma in situ. J Clin Oncol 2008;26:386-391.

Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18202414.

95. Bleicher RJ, Ciocca RM, Egleston BL, et al. Association of routine

pretreatment magnetic resonance imaging with time to surgery,

mastectomy rate, and margin status. J Am Coll Surg 2009;209:180-187;

quiz 294-185. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19632594.

96. Turnbull L, Brown S, Harvey I, et al. Comparative effectiveness of

MRI in breast cancer (COMICE) trial: a randomised controlled trial.

Lancet 2010;375:563-571. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20159292.

97. Baucom DH, Porter LS, Kirby JS, et al. Psychosocial issues

confronting young women with breast cancer. Breast Dis 2005;23:103-

113. Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16823173.

98. Dunn J, Steginga SK. Young women's experience of breast cancer:

defining young and identifying concerns. Psychooncology 2000;9:137-

146. Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10767751.

99. Ganz PA, Greendale GA, Petersen L, et al. Breast cancer in

younger women: reproductive and late health effects of treatment. J Clin

Oncol 2003;21:4184-4193. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14615446.

100. Gorman JR, Bailey S, Pierce JP, Su HI. How do you feel about

fertility and parenthood? The voices of young female cancer survivors. J

Cancer Surviv 2012;6:200-209. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22179785.

101. Howard-Anderson J, Ganz PA, Bower JE, Stanton AL. Quality of

life, fertility concerns, and behavioral health outcomes in younger breast

cancer survivors: a systematic review. J Natl Cancer Inst 2012;104:386-

405. Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22271773.

102. Kranick JA, Schaefer C, Rowell S, et al. Is pregnancy after breast

cancer safe? Breast J 2010;16:404-411. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20522097.

103. Sukumvanich P, Case LD, Van Zee K, et al. Incidence and time

course of bleeding after long-term amenorrhea after breast cancer

NCCN Guidelines Inde

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Breast Cancer

treatment: a prospective study. Cancer 2010;116:3102-3111. Available

at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20564648.

104. Quinn GP, Block RG, Clayman ML, et al. If you did not document

it, it did not happen: rates of documentation of discussion of infertility

risk in adolescent and young adult oncology patients' medical records. J

Oncol Pract 2015;11:137-144. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25549654.

105. Yee S, Abrol K, McDonald M, et al. Addressing oncofertility needs:

views of female cancer patients in fertility preservation. J Psychosoc

Oncol 2012;30:331-346. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22571247.

106. Yeomanson DJ, Morgan S, Pacey AA. Discussing fertility

preservation at the time of cancer diagnosis: dissatisfaction of young

females. Pediatr Blood Cancer 2013;60:1996-2000. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23836521.

107. Loren AW, Mangu PB, Beck LN, et al. Fertility preservation for

patients with cancer: American Society of Clinical Oncology clinical

practice guideline update. J Clin Oncol 2013;31:2500-2510. Available

at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23715580.

108. Cruz MR, Prestes JC, Gimenes DL, Fanelli MF. Fertility

preservation in women with breast cancer undergoing adjuvant

chemotherapy: a systematic review. Fertil Steril 2010;94:138-143.

Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19339000.

109. Dunn L, Fox KR. Techniques for fertility preservation in patients

with breast cancer. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol 2009;21:68-73. Available

at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19125006.

110. Oktem O, Oktay K. Fertility preservation for breast cancer patients.

Semin Reprod Med 2009;27:486-492. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19806518.

111. Redig AJ, Brannigan R, Stryker SJ, et al. Incorporating fertility

preservation into the care of young oncology patients. Cancer

2011;117:4-10. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21235031.

112. Lee S, Ozkavukcu S, Heytens E, et al. Value of early referral to

fertility preservation in young women with breast cancer. J Clin Oncol

2010;28:4683-4686. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20876425.

113. Peate M, Meiser B, Friedlander M, et al. It's now or never: fertility-

related knowledge, decision-making preferences, and treatment

intentions in young women with breast cancer--an Australian fertility

decision aid collaborative group study. J Clin Oncol 2011;29:1670-1677.

Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21444865.

114. Blumenfeld Z, Evron A. Preserving fertility when choosing

chemotherapy regimens - the role of gonadotropin-releasing hormone

agonists. Expert Opin Pharmacother 2015;16:1009-1020. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25826240.

115. Del Mastro L, Lambertini M. Temporary Ovarian Suppression With

Gonadotropin-Releasing Hormone Agonist During Chemotherapy for

Fertility Preservation: Toward the End of the Debate? Oncologist

2015;20:1233-1235. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26463868.

116. Lambertini M, Peccatori FA, Moore HC, Del Mastro L. Reply to the

letter to the editor 'Can ovarian suppression with gonadotropin releasing

hormone analogs (GnRHa) preserve fertility in cancer patients?' by

Rodriguez-Wallberg et al. Ann Oncol 2015. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26646756.

117. Moore HC, Unger JM, Phillips KA, et al. Goserelin for ovarian

protection during breast-cancer adjuvant chemotherapy. N Engl J Med

2015;372:923-932. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25738668.

NCCN Guidelines Inde

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Breast Cancer

118. Moffat R, Guth U. Preserving fertility in patients undergoing

treatment for breast cancer: current perspectives. Breast Cancer (Dove

Med Press) 2014;6:93-101. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25114587.

119. Oktay K, Turan V, Bedoschi G, et al. Fertility Preservation Success

Subsequent to Concurrent Aromatase Inhibitor Treatment and Ovarian

Stimulation in Women With Breast Cancer. Journal of Clinical Oncology

2015;33:2424-2429. Available at:

http://jco.ascopubs.org/content/33/22/2424.abstract.

120. Baseline staging tests in primary breast cancer: Practice guideline

report # 1-14: Members of the Breast Cancer Disease Site Group.

Available at:

http://www.cancercare.on.ca/common/pages/UserFile.aspx?serverId=6

&path=/File%20Database/CCO%20Files/PEBC/pebc1-14f.pdf

Accessed: May, 2016.

121. Ravaioli A, Pasini G, Polselli A, et al. Staging of breast cancer:

new recommended standard procedure. Breast Cancer Res Treat

2002;72:53-60. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12000220.

122. Puglisi F, Follador A, Minisini AM, et al. Baseline staging tests after

a new diagnosis of breast cancer: further evidence of their limited

indications. Ann Oncol 2005;16:263-266. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15668281.

123. Brothers JM, Kidwell KM, Brown RK, Henry NL. Incidental

radiologic findings at breast cancer diagnosis and likelihood of disease

recurrence. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2016;155:395-403. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26797222.

124. Kumar R, Chauhan A, Zhuang H, et al. Clinicopathologic factors

associated with false negative FDG-PET in primary breast cancer.

Breast Cancer Res Treat 2006;98:267-274. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16555126.

125. Podoloff DA, Advani RH, Allred C, et al. NCCN task force report:

positron emission tomography (PET)/computed tomography (CT)

scanning in cancer. J Natl Compr Canc Netw 2007;5 Suppl 1:1-1.

Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17509259.

126. Rosen EL, Eubank WB, Mankoff DA. FDG PET, PET/CT, and

breast cancer imaging. Radiographics 2007;27 Suppl 1:S215-229.

Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18180228.

127. Wahl RL, Siegel BA, Coleman RE, Gatsonis CG. Prospective

multicenter study of axillary nodal staging by positron emission

tomography in breast cancer: a report of the staging breast cancer with

PET Study Group. J Clin Oncol 2004;22:277-285. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14722036.

128. Arriagada R, Le MG, Rochard F, Contesso G. Conservative

treatment versus mastectomy in early breast cancer: patterns of failure

with 15 years of follow-up data. Institut Gustave-Roussy Breast Cancer

Group. J Clin Oncol 1996;14:1558-1564. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8622072.

129. Clarke M, Collins R, Darby S, et al. Effects of radiotherapy and of

differences in the extent of surgery for early breast cancer on local

recurrence and 15-year survival: an overview of the randomised trials.

Lancet 2005;366:2087-2106. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16360786.

130. Fisher B, Anderson S, Bryant J, et al. Twenty-year follow-up of a

randomized trial comparing total mastectomy, lumpectomy, and

lumpectomy plus irradiation for the treatment of invasive breast cancer.

N Engl J Med 2002;347:1233-1241. Available at:

http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa022152.

131. Veronesi U, Cascinelli N, Mariani L, et al. Twenty-year follow-up of

a randomized study comparing breast-conserving surgery with radical

mastectomy for early breast cancer. N Engl J Med 2002;347:1227-

1232. Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12393819.

NCCN Guidelines Inde

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Breast Cancer

132. Early Breast Cancer Trialists' Collaborative G, Darby S, McGale P,

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

2011;378:1707-1716. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22019144.

133. Moran MS, Schnitt SJ, Giuliano AE, 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. J Clin Oncol

2014;32:1507-1515. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24516019.

134. Fourquet A, Campana F, Zafrani B, et al. Prognostic factors of

breast recurrence in the conservative management of early breast

cancer: a 25-year follow-up. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 1989;17:719-

725. Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2777661.

135. Komoike Y, Akiyama F, Iino Y, et al. Ipsilateral breast tumor

recurrence (IBTR) after breast-conserving treatment for early breast

cancer: risk factors and impact on distant metastases. Cancer

2006;106:35-41. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16333848.

136. Zhou P, Gautam S, Recht A. Factors affecting outcome for young

women with early stage invasive breast cancer treated with breast-

conserving therapy. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2007;101:51-57.

Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16821084.

137. Golshan M, Miron A, Nixon AJ, et al. The prevalence of germline

BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations in young women with breast cancer

undergoing breast-conservation therapy. Am J Surg 2006;192:58-62.

Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16769276.

138. Kroman N, Holtveg H, Wohlfahrt J, et al. Effect of breast-

conserving therapy versus radical mastectomy on prognosis for young

women with breast carcinoma. Cancer 2004;100:688-693. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14770422.

139. Blichert-Toft M, Nielsen M, During M, et al. Long-term results of

breast conserving surgery vs. mastectomy for early stage invasive

breast cancer: 20-year follow-up of the Danish randomized DBCG-

82TM protocol. Acta Oncol 2008;47:672-681. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18465335.

140. Litiere S, Werutsky G, Fentiman IS, et al. Breast conserving

therapy versus mastectomy for stage I-II breast cancer: 20 year follow-

up of the EORTC 10801 phase 3 randomised trial. Lancet Oncol

2012;13:412-419. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22373563.

141. Agarwal S, Pappas L, Neumayer L, et al. Effect of breast

conservation therapy vs mastectomy on disease-specific survival for

early-stage breast cancer. JAMA Surg 2014;149:267-274. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24429935.

142. Hwang ES, Lichtensztajn DY, Gomez SL, et al. Survival after

lumpectomy and mastectomy for early stage invasive breast cancer: the

effect of age and hormone receptor status. Cancer 2013;119:1402-

1411. Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23359049.

143. Hartmann-Johnsen OJ, Karesen R, Schlichting E, Nygard JF.

Survival is better after breast conserving therapy than mastectomy for

early stage breast cancer: A registry-based follow-up study of

Norwegian women Primary operated between 1998 and 2008. Ann

Surg Oncol 2015;22:3836-3845. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25743325.

144. Chatterjee A, Pyfer B, Czerniecki B, et al. Early postoperative

outcomes in lumpectomy versus simple mastectomy. J Surg Res

2015;198:143-148.

NCCN Guidelines Inde

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Breast Cancer

145. Recht A. Contralateral prophylactic mastectomy: caveat emptor. J

Clin Oncol 2009;27:1347-1349. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19224834.

146. Bedrosian I, Hu CY, Chang GJ. Population-based study of

contralateral prophylactic mastectomy and survival outcomes of breast

cancer patients. J Natl Cancer Inst 2010;102:401-409. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20185801.

147. Jatoi I, Parsons HM. Contralateral prophylactic mastectomy and its

association with reduced mortality: evidence for selection bias. Breast

Cancer Res Treat 2014;148:389-396. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25301088.

148. Portschy PR, Kuntz KM, Tuttle TM. Survival outcomes after

contralateral prophylactic mastectomy: a decision analysis. J Natl

Cancer Inst 2014;106. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25031308

http://jnci.oxfordjournals.org/content/106/8/dju160.full.pdf.

149. Fayanju OM, Stoll CR, Fowler S, et al. Contralateral prophylactic

mastectomy after unilateral breast cancer: a systematic review and

meta-analysis. Ann Surg 2014;260:1000-1010. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24950272.

150. Rocha RD, Girardi AR, Pinto RR, de Freitas VA. Axillary

ultrasound and fine-needle aspiration in preoperative staging of axillary

lymph nodes in patients with invasive breast cancer. Radiol Bras

2015;48:345-352. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26811550.

151. Bass SS, Lyman GH, McCann CR, et al. Lymphatic mapping and

sentinel lymph node biopsy. Breast J 1999;5:288-295. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11348304.

152. Cox CE. Lymphatic mapping in breast cancer: combination

technique. Ann Surg Oncol 2001;8:67S-70S. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11599905.

153. Cox CE, Nguyen K, Gray RJ, et al. Importance of lymphatic

mapping in ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS): why map DCIS? Am Surg

2001;67:513-519. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11409797.

154. Krag D, Weaver D, Ashikaga T, et al. The sentinel node in breast

cancer--a multicenter validation study. N Engl J Med 1998;339:941-946.

Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9753708.

155. Krag DN, Anderson SJ, Julian TB, 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

2010;11:927-933. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20863759.

156. Kuehn T, Vogl FD, Helms G, et al. Sentinel-node biopsy for axillary

staging in breast cancer: results from a large prospective German multi-

institutional trial. Eur J Surg Oncol 2004;30:252-259. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15028305.

157. McMasters KM, Giuliano AE, Ross MI, et al. Sentinel-lymph-node

biopsy for breast cancer--not yet the standard of care. N Engl J Med

1998;339:990-995. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9753717.

158. O'Hea BJ, Hill AD, El-Shirbiny AM, et al. Sentinel lymph node

biopsy in breast cancer: initial experience at Memorial Sloan-Kettering

Cancer Center. J Am Coll Surg 1998;186:423-427. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9544956.

159. Veronesi U, Paganelli G, Viale G, et al. A randomized comparison

of sentinel-node biopsy with routine axillary dissection in breast cancer.

NCCN Guidelines Inde

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Breast Cancer

N Engl J Med 2003;349:546-553. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12904519.

160. Mansel RE, Fallowfield L, Kissin M, et al. Randomized multicenter

trial of sentinel node biopsy versus standard axillary treatment in

operable breast cancer: the ALMANAC Trial. J Natl Cancer Inst

2006;98:599-609. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16670385.

161. Cox CE, Salud CJ, Cantor A, et al. Learning curves for breast

cancer sentinel lymph node mapping based on surgical volume

analysis. J Am Coll Surg 2001;193:593-600. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11768674.

162. Dupont E, Cox C, Shivers S, et al. Learning curves and breast

cancer lymphatic mapping: institutional volume index. J Surg Res

2001;97:92-96. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11319887.

163. Giuliano AE, Hawes D, Ballman KV, et al. Association of occult

metastases in sentinel lymph nodes and bone marrow with survival

among women with early-stage invasive breast cancer. JAMA

2011;306:385-393. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21791687.

164. Degnim AC, Reynolds C, Pantvaidya G, et al. Nonsentinel node

metastasis in breast cancer patients: assessment of an existing and a

new predictive nomogram. Am J Surg 2005;190:543-550. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16164917.

165. Houvenaeghel G, Nos C, Giard S, et al. A nomogram predictive of

non-sentinel lymph node involvement in breast cancer patients with a

sentinel lymph node micrometastasis. Eur J Surg Oncol 2009;35:690-

695. Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19046847.

166. Katz A, Smith BL, Golshan M, et al. Nomogram for the prediction

of having four or more involved nodes for sentinel lymph node-positive

breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 2008;26:2093-2098. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18445838.

167. Kohrt HE, Olshen RA, Bermas HR, et al. New models and online

calculator for predicting non-sentinel lymph node status in sentinel

lymph node positive breast cancer patients. BMC Cancer 2008;8:66-66.

Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18315887.

168. Scow JS, Degnim AC, Hoskin TL, et al. Assessment of the

performance of the Stanford Online Calculator for the prediction of

nonsentinel lymph node metastasis in sentinel lymph node-positive

breast cancer patients. Cancer 2009;115:4064-4070. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19517477.

169. van la Parra RFD, Ernst MF, Bevilacqua JLB, et al. Validation of a

nomogram to predict the risk of nonsentinel lymph node metastases in

breast cancer patients with a positive sentinel node biopsy: validation of

the MSKCC breast nomogram. Ann Surg Oncol 2009;16:1128-1135.

Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19252954.

170. Werkoff G, Lambaudie E, Fondrinier E, et al. Prospective

multicenter comparison of models to predict four or more involved

axillary lymph nodes in patients with breast cancer with one to three

metastatic sentinel lymph nodes. J Clin Oncol 2009;27:5707-5712.

Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19826125.

171. Giuliano AE, McCall L, Beitsch P, et al. Locoregional recurrence

after sentinel lymph node dissection with or without axillary dissection in

patients with sentinel lymph node metastases: the American College of

Surgeons Oncology Group Z0011 randomized trial. Ann Surg

2010;252:426-432; discussion 432-423. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20739842.

172. Giuliano AE, Hunt KK, Ballman KV, et al. Axillary dissection vs no

axillary dissection in women with invasive breast cancer and sentinel

node metastasis: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA 2011;305:569-575.

Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21304082.

NCCN Guidelines Inde

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Breast Cancer

173. Axelsson CK, Mouridsen HT, Zedeler K. Axillary dissection of level

I and II lymph nodes is important in breast cancer classification. The

Danish Breast Cancer Cooperative Group (DBCG). Eur J Cancer

1992;28A:1415-1418. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1515262.

174. Kiricuta CI, Tausch J. A mathematical model of axillary lymph node

involvement based on 1446 complete axillary dissections in patients

with breast carcinoma. Cancer 1992;69:2496-2501. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1568171.

175. Fisher B, Redmond C, Fisher ER, et al. Ten-year results of a

randomized clinical trial comparing radical mastectomy and total

mastectomy with or without radiation. N Engl J Med 1985;312:674-681.

Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/3883168.

176. Antonini N, Jones H, Horiot JC, et al. Effect of age and radiation

dose on local control after breast conserving treatment: EORTC trial

22881-10882. Radiother Oncol 2007;82:265-271. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17126434.

177. Bartelink H, Horiot JC, Poortmans P, et al. Recurrence rates after

treatment of breast cancer with standard radiotherapy with or without

additional radiation. N Engl J Med 2001;345:1378-1387. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11794170.

178. Pignol JP, Olivotto I, Rakovitch E, et al. A multicenter randomized

trial of breast intensity-modulated radiation therapy to reduce acute

radiation dermatitis. J Clin Oncol 2008;26:2085-2092. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18285602.

179. Mukesh MB, Barnett GC, Wilkinson JS, et al. Randomized

controlled trial of intensity-modulated radiotherapy for early breast

cancer: 5-year results confirm superior overall cosmesis. J Clin Oncol

2013;31:4488-4495. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24043742.

180. Mulliez T, Veldeman L, van Greveling A, et al. Hypofractionated

whole breast irradiation for patients with large breasts: a randomized

trial comparing prone and supine positions. Radiother Oncol

2013;108:203-208. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24044803.

181. Group ST, Bentzen SM, Agrawal RK, et al. The UK

Standardisation of Breast Radiotherapy (START) Trial B of radiotherapy

hypofractionation for treatment of early breast cancer: a randomised

trial. Lancet 2008;371:1098-1107. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18355913.

182. Group ST, Bentzen SM, Agrawal RK, et al. The UK

Standardisation of Breast Radiotherapy (START) Trial A of radiotherapy

hypofractionation for treatment of early breast cancer: a randomised

trial. Lancet Oncol 2008;9:331-341. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18356109.

183. Owen JR, Ashton A, Bliss JM, et al. Effect of radiotherapy fraction

size on tumour control in patients with early-stage breast cancer after

local tumour excision: long-term results of a randomised trial. Lancet

Oncol 2006;7:467-471. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16750496.

184. Whelan TJ, Pignol JP, Levine MN, et al. Long-term results of

hypofractionated radiation therapy for breast cancer. N Engl J Med

2010;362:513-520. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20147717.

185. Haviland JS, Owen JR, Dewar JA, 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 2013;14:1086-1094.

Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24055415.

186. Bartelink H, Horiot JC, Poortmans PM, et al. Impact of a higher

radiation dose on local control and survival in breast-conserving therapy

of early breast cancer: 10-year results of the randomized boost versus

NCCN Guidelines Inde

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Breast Cancer

no boost EORTC 22881-10882 trial. J Clin Oncol 2007;25:3259-3265.

Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17577015.

187. Romestaing P, Lehingue Y, Carrie C, et al. Role of a 10-Gy boost

in the conservative treatment of early breast cancer: results of a

randomized clinical trial in Lyon, France. J Clin Oncol 1997;15:963-968.

Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9060534.

188. Vrieling C, Collette L, Fourquet A, et al. The influence of patient,

tumor and treatment factors on the cosmetic results after breast-

conserving therapy in the EORTC 'boost vs. no boost' trial. EORTC

Radiotherapy and Breast Cancer Cooperative Groups. Radiother Oncol

2000;55:219-232. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10869738.

189. Jones HA, Antonini N, Hart AA, et al. Impact of pathological

characteristics on local relapse after breast-conserving therapy: a

subgroup analysis of the EORTC boost versus no boost trial. J Clin

Oncol 2009;27:4939-4947. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19720914.

190. Whelan TJ, Olivotto IA, Parulekar WR, et al. Regional nodal

irradiation in early-stage breast cancer. N Engl J Med 2015;373:307-

316. Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26200977.

191. Poortmans PM, Collette S, Kirkove C, et al. Internal mammary and

medial supraclavicular irradiation in breast cancer. New England

Journal of Medicine 2015;373:317-327. Available at:

http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa1415369.

192. McCormick B. Partial-breast radiation for early staged breast

cancers: hypothesis, existing data, and a planned phase III trial. J Natl

Compr Canc Netw 2005;3:301-307. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16002002.

193. Smith BD, Arthur DW, Buchholz TA, et al. Accelerated partial

breast irradiation consensus statement from the American Society for

Radiation Oncology (ASTRO). Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys

2009;74:987-1001. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19545784.

194. Shaitelman SF, Vicini FA, Beitsch P, et al. Five-year outcome of

patients classified using the American Society for Radiation Oncology

consensus statement guidelines for the application of accelerated

partial breast irradiation: an analysis of patients treated on the American

Society of Breast Surgeons MammoSite Registry Trial. Cancer

2010;116:4677-4685. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20602483.

195. Vicini F, Arthur D, Wazer D, et al. Limitations of the American

Society of Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology consensus panel

guidelines on the use of accelerated partial breast irradiation. Int J

Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2010. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20510540.

196. Bellon JR, Come SE, Gelman RS, et al. Sequencing of

chemotherapy and radiation therapy in early-stage breast cancer:

updated results of a prospective randomized trial. J Clin Oncol

2005;23:1934-1940. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15774786.

197. Recht A, Come SE, Henderson IC, et al. The sequencing of

chemotherapy and radiation therapy after conservative surgery for

early-stage breast cancer. N Engl J Med 1996;334:1356-1361.

Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8614420.

198. Hughes KS, Schnaper LA, Berry D, et al. Lumpectomy plus

tamoxifen with or without irradiation in women 70 years of age or older

with early breast cancer. N Engl J Med 2004;351:971-977. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15342805.

199. Hughes KS, Schnaper LA, Bellon JR, et al. Lumpectomy plus

tamoxifen with or without irradiation in women age 70 years or older

with early breast cancer: long-term follow-up of CALGB 9343. J Clin

Oncol 2013;31:2382-2387. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23690420.

NCCN Guidelines Inde

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Breast Cancer

200. Fyles AW, McCready DR, Manchul LA, et al. Tamoxifen with or

without breast irradiation in women 50 years of age or older with early

breast cancer. N Engl J Med 2004;351:963-970. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15342804.

201. Kunkler IH, Williams LJ, Jack WJ, et al. Breast-conserving surgery

with or without irradiation in women aged 65 years or older with early

breast cancer (PRIME II): a randomised controlled trial. Lancet Oncol

2015;16:266-273. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25637340.

202. Hellman S. Stopping metastases at their source. N Engl J Med

1997;337:996-997. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9309106.

203. Overgaard M, Hansen PS, Overgaard J, et al. Postoperative

radiotherapy in high-risk premenopausal women with breast cancer who

receive adjuvant chemotherapy. Danish Breast Cancer Cooperative

Group 82b Trial. N Engl J Med 1997;337:949-955. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9395428.

204. Overgaard M, Jensen MB, Overgaard J, et al. Postoperative

radiotherapy in high-risk postmenopausal breast-cancer patients given

adjuvant tamoxifen: Danish Breast Cancer Cooperative Group DBCG

82c randomised trial. Lancet 1999;353:1641-1648. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10335782.

205. Ragaz J, Olivotto IA, Spinelli JJ, et al. Locoregional radiation

therapy in patients with high-risk breast cancer receiving adjuvant

chemotherapy: 20-year results of the British Columbia randomized trial.

J Natl Cancer Inst 2005;97:116-126. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15657341.

206. Recht A, Edge SB, Solin LJ, et al. Postmastectomy radiotherapy:

clinical practice guidelines of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

J Clin Oncol 2001;19:1539-1569. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11230499.

207. Early Breast Cancer Trialists' Collaborative G, McGale P, Taylor C,

et al. 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 2014;383:2127-2135. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24656685.

208. Huang EH, Tucker SL, Strom EA, et al. Postmastectomy radiation

improves local-regional control and survival for selected patients with

locally advanced breast cancer treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy

and mastectomy. J Clin Oncol 2004;22:4691-4699. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15570071.

209. McGuire SE, Gonzalez-Angulo AM, Huang EH, 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

2007;68:1004-1009. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17418973.

210. Overgaard M, Nielsen HM, Overgaard J. Is the benefit of

postmastectomy irradiation limited to patients with four or more positive

nodes, as recommended in international consensus reports? A

subgroup analysis of the DBCG 82 b&c randomized trials. Radiother

Oncol 2007;82:247-253. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17306393.

211. Nielsen HM, Overgaard M, Grau C, et al. Study of failure pattern

among high-risk breast cancer patients with or without postmastectomy

radiotherapy in addition to adjuvant systemic therapy: long-term results

from the Danish Breast Cancer Cooperative Group DBCG 82 b and c

randomized studies. J Clin Oncol 2006;24:2268-2275. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16618947.

212. Jagsi R, Raad RA, Goldberg S, et al. Locoregional recurrence

rates and prognostic factors for failure in node-negative patients treated

with mastectomy: implications for postmastectomy radiation. Int J

NCCN Guidelines Inde

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Breast Cancer

Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2005;62:1035-1039. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15990006.

213. Abdulkarim BS, Cuartero J, Hanson J, et al. Increased risk of

locoregional recurrence for women With T1-2N0 triple-negative breast

cancer treated with modified radical mastectomy without adjuvant

radiation therapy compared with breast-conserving therapy. Journal of

Clinical Oncology 2011;29:2852-2858. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21670451.

214. McLaughlin JM, Anderson RT, Ferketich AK, et al. Effect on

survival of longer intervals between confirmed diagnosis and treatment

initiation among low-income women with breast cancer. J Clin Oncol

2012;30:4493-4500. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23169521.

215. Liu AS, Kao HK, Reish RG, et al. Postoperative complications in

prosthesis-based breast reconstruction using acellular dermal matrix.

Plast Reconstr Surg 2011;127:1755-1762. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21228744.

216. McCarthy CM, Mehrara BJ, Riedel E, et al. Predicting

complications following expander/implant breast reconstruction: an

outcomes analysis based on preoperative clinical risk. Plast Reconstr

Surg 2008;121:1886-1892. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18520873.

217. Cowen D, Gross E, Rouannet P, et al. Immediate post-mastectomy

breast reconstruction followed by radiotherapy: risk factors for

complications. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2010;121:627-634. Available

at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20424909.

218. Woerdeman LA, Hage JJ, Hofland MM, Rutgers EJ. A prospective

assessment of surgical risk factors in 400 cases of skin-sparing

mastectomy and immediate breast reconstruction with implants to

establish selection criteria. Plast Reconstr Surg 2007;119:455-463.

Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17230076.

219. Antony AK, McCarthy CM, Cordeiro PG, et al. Acellular human

dermis implantation in 153 immediate two-stage tissue expander breast

reconstructions: determining the incidence and significant predictors of

complications. Plast Reconstr Surg 2010;125:1606-1614. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20517083.

220. Ahmed S, Snelling A, Bains M, Whitworth IH. Breast

reconstruction. BMJ 2005;330:943-948. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15845976.

221. Edlich RF, Winters KL, Faulkner BC, et al. Advances in breast

reconstruction after mastectomy. J Long Term Eff Med Implants

2005;15:197-207. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15777171.

222. Pennington DG. Breast reconstruction after mastectomy: current

state of the art. ANZ J Surg 2005;75:454-458. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15943736.

223. Chang DW. Breast Reconstruction with Microvascular MS-TRAM

and DIEP Flaps. Arch Plast Surg 2012;39:3-10. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22783484.

224. Kronowitz SJ, Robb GL. Radiation therapy and breast

reconstruction: a critical review of the literature. Plast Reconstr Surg

2009;124:395-408. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19644254.

225. Tran NV, Chang DW, Gupta A, et al. Comparison of immediate

and delayed free TRAM flap breast reconstruction in patients receiving

postmastectomy radiation therapy. Plast Reconstr Surg 2001;108:78-

82. Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11420508.

226. Mehta VK, Goffinet D. Postmastectomy radiation therapy after

TRAM flap breast reconstruction. Breast J 2004;10:118-122. Available

at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15009038.

NCCN Guidelines Inde

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Breast Cancer

227. Berry T, Brooks S, Sydow N, et al. Complication rates of radiation

on tissue expander and autologous tissue breast reconstruction. Ann

Surg Oncol 2010;17 Suppl 3:202-210. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20853034.

228. Francis SH, Ruberg RL, Stevenson KB, et al. Independent risk

factors for infection in tissue expander breast reconstruction. Plast

Reconstr Surg 2009;124:1790-1796. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19952635.

229. Colwell AS, Damjanovic B, Zahedi B, et al. Retrospective review of

331 consecutive immediate single-stage implant reconstructions with

acellular dermal matrix: indications, complications, trends, and costs.

Plast Reconstr Surg 2011;128:1170-1178. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22094736.

230. Garcia-Etienne CA, Cody Iii HS, Disa JJ, et al. Nipple-sparing

mastectomy: initial experience at the Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer

Center and a comprehensive review of literature. Breast J 2009;15:440-

449. Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19496781.

231. Petit JY, Veronesi U, Orecchia R, et al. Nipple sparing mastectomy

with nipple areola intraoperative radiotherapy: one thousand and one

cases of a five years experience at the European institute of oncology of

Milan (EIO). Breast Cancer Res Treat 2009;117:333-338. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19152026.

232. Yueh JH, Houlihan MJ, Slavin SA, et al. Nipple-sparing

mastectomy: evaluation of patient satisfaction, aesthetic results, and

sensation. Ann Plast Surg 2009;62:586-590. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19387167.

233. Chung AP, Sacchini V. Nipple-sparing mastectomy: Where are we

now? Surg Oncol 2008;17:261-266. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18456492.

234. Gerber B, Krause A, Dieterich M, et al. The oncological safety of

skin sparing mastectomy with conservation of the nipple-areola complex

and autologous reconstruction: an extended follow-up study. Ann Surg

2009;249:461-468. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19247035.

235. Mallon P, Feron JG, Couturaud B, et al. The role of nipple-sparing

mastectomy in breast cancer: a comprehensive review of the literature.

Plast Reconstr Surg 2013;131:969-984. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23629079.

236. Piper M, Peled AW, Foster RD, et al. Total skin-sparing

mastectomy: A aystematic review of oncologic outcomes and

postoperative complications. Ann Plast Surg 2013. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23486127.

237. Toth BA, Forley BG, Calabria R. Retrospective study of the skin-

sparing mastectomy in breast reconstruction. Plast Reconstr Surg

1999;104:77-84. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10597677.

238. Carlson GW, Styblo TM, Lyles RH, et al. The use of skin sparing

mastectomy in the treatment of breast cancer: The Emory experience.

Surg Oncol 2003;12:265-269. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14998566.

239. Downes KJ, Glatt BS, Kanchwala SK, et al. Skin-sparing

mastectomy and immediate reconstruction is an acceptable treatment

option for patients with high-risk breast carcinoma. Cancer

2005;103:906-913. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15651068.

240. Foster RD, Esserman LJ, Anthony JP, et al. Skin-sparing

mastectomy and immediate breast reconstruction: a prospective cohort

study for the treatment of advanced stages of breast carcinoma. Ann

Surg Oncol 2002;9:462-466. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12052757.

241. Medina-Franco H, Vasconez LO, Fix RJ, et al. Factors associated

with local recurrence after skin-sparing mastectomy and immediate

NCCN Guidelines Inde

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Breast Cancer

breast reconstruction for invasive breast cancer. Ann Surg

2002;235:814-819. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12035037.

242. Newman LA, Kuerer HM, Hunt KK, et al. Presentation, treatment,

and outcome of local recurrence afterskin-sparing mastectomy and

immediate breast reconstruction. Ann Surg Oncol 1998;5:620-626.

Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9831111.

243. Clough KB, Kaufman GJ, Nos C, et al. Improving breast cancer

surgery: a classification and quadrant per quadrant atlas for oncoplastic

surgery. Ann Surg Oncol 2010;17:1375-1391. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20140531.

244. Anderson BO, Masetti R, Silverstein MJ. Oncoplastic approaches

to partial mastectomy: an overview of volume-displacement techniques.

Lancet Oncol 2005;6:145-157. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15737831.

245. Huemer GM, Schrenk P, Moser F, et al. Oncoplastic techniques

allow breast-conserving treatment in centrally located breast cancers.

Plast Reconstr Surg 2007;120:390-398. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17632339.

246. Kaur N, Petit J-Y, Rietjens M, et al. Comparative study of surgical

margins in oncoplastic surgery and quadrantectomy in breast cancer.

Ann Surg Oncol 2005;12:539-545. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15889210.

247. Early Breast Cancer Trialists' Collaborative G, Peto R, Davies C, et

al. Comparisons between different polychemotherapy regimens for early

breast cancer: meta-analyses of long-term outcome among 100,000

women in 123 randomised trials. Lancet 2012;379:432-444. Available

at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22152853.

248. Loprinzi CL, Thome SD. Understanding the utility of adjuvant

systemic therapy for primary breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 2001;19:972-

979. Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11181659.

249. Ravdin PM, Siminoff LA, Davis GJ, et al. Computer program to

assist in making decisions about adjuvant therapy for women with early

breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 2001;19:980-991. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11181660.

250. Olivotto IA, Bajdik CD, Ravdin PM, et al. Population-based

validation of the prognostic model ADJUVANT! for early breast cancer.

J Clin Oncol 2005;23:2716-2725. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15837986.

251. Loprinzi CL, Ravdin PM. Decision-making for patients with

resectable breast cancer: individualized decisions for and by patients

and their physicians. J Natl Compr Canc Netw 2003;1:189-196.

Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19768877.

252. Cooke T, Reeves J, Lanigan A, Stanton P. HER2 as a prognostic

and predictive marker for breast cancer. Ann Oncol 2001;12 Suppl 1:23-

28. Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11521717.

253. Paik S, Bryant J, Park C, et al. erbB-2 and response to doxorubicin

in patients with axillary lymph node-positive, hormone receptor-negative

breast cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst 1998;90:1361-1370. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9747867.

254. Paik S, Bryant J, Tan-Chiu E, et al. HER2 and choice of adjuvant

chemotherapy for invasive breast cancer: National Surgical Adjuvant

Breast and Bowel Project Protocol B-15. J Natl Cancer Inst

2000;92:1991-1998. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11121461.

255. Piccart MJ, Di Leo A, Hamilton A. HER2. a 'predictive factor' ready

to use in the daily management of breast cancer patients? Eur J Cancer

2000;36:1755-1761. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10974622.

256. Pritchard KI, Shepherd LE, O'Malley FP, et al. HER2 and

responsiveness of breast cancer to adjuvant chemotherapy. N Engl J

NCCN Guidelines Inde

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Breast Cancer

Med 2006;354:2103-2111. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16707747.

257. Thor AD, Berry DA, Budman DR, et al. erbB-2, p53, and efficacy of

adjuvant therapy in lymph node-positive breast cancer. J Natl Cancer

Inst 1998;90:1346-1360. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9747866.

258. Dressler LG, Berry DA, Broadwater G, et al. Comparison of HER2

status by fluorescence in situ hybridization and immunohistochemistry

to predict benefit from dose escalation of adjuvant doxorubicin-based

therapy in node-positive breast cancer patients. J Clin Oncol

2005;23:4287-4297. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15994142.

259. Joensuu H, Kellokumpu-Lehtinen P, Bono P, et al. Adjuvant

docetaxel or vinorelbine with or without trastuzumab for breast cancer.

N Engl J Med 2006;354:809-820. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16495393.

260. Piccart-Gebhart M, Procter M, Leyland-Jones B, et al.

Trastuzumab after adjuvant chemotherapy in HER2-positive breast

cancer. N Engl J Med 2005;353:1659-1672. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16236737.

261. Goldhirsch A, Piccart-Gebhart M, Procter M, et al. HERA TRIAL: 2

years versus 1 year of trastuzumab after adjuvant chemotherapy in

women with HER2-positive early breast cancer at 8 years of median

follow up. Cancer Research 2012;72:S5-2. Available at:

http://cancerres.aacrjournals.org/cgi/content/meeting_abstract/72/24_M

eetingAbstracts/S5-2.

262. Romond E, Perez E, Bryant J, et al. Trastuzumab plus adjuvant

chemotherapy for operable HER2-positive breast cancer. N Engl J Med

2005;353:1673-1684. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16236738.

263. Romond E, Suman V, Jeong J-H, et al. Trastuzumab plus adjuvant

chemotherapy for HER2-positive breast cancer: Final planned joint

analysis of overall survival (OS) from NSABP B-31 and NCCTG N9831.

Cancer Research 2012;72:S5-5. Available at:

http://cancerres.aacrjournals.org/cgi/content/meeting_abstract/72/24_M

eetingAbstracts/S5-5.

264. Slamon D, Eiermann W, Robert N, et al. Adjuvant trastuzumab in

HER2-positive breast cancer. N Engl J Med 2011;365:1273-1283.

Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21991949.

265. Cobleigh MA, Vogel CL, Tripathy D, et al. Multinational study of the

efficacy and safety of humanized anti-HER2 monoclonal antibody in

women who have HER2-overexpressing metastatic breast cancer that

has progressed after chemotherapy for metastatic disease. J Clin Oncol

1999;17:2639-2648. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10561337.

266. Slamon DJ, Leyland-Jones B, Shak S, et al. Use of chemotherapy

plus a monoclonal antibody against HER2 for metastatic breast cancer

that overexpresses HER2. N Engl J Med 2001;344:783-792. Available

at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11248153.

267. Vogel CL, Cobleigh MA, Tripathy D, et al. Efficacy and safety of

trastuzumab as a single agent in first-line treatment of HER2-

overexpressing metastatic breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 2002;20:719-

726. Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11821453.

268. Jeffrey SS, Lonning PE, Hillner BE. Genomics-based prognosis

and therapeutic prediction in breast cancer. J Natl Compr Canc Netw

2005;3:291-300. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16002001.

269. Perou CM, Jeffrey SS, van de Rijn M, et al. Distinctive gene

expression patterns in human mammary epithelial cells and breast

cancers. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 1999;96:9212-9217. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10430922.

NCCN Guidelines Inde

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Breast Cancer

270. Sorlie T, Perou CM, Tibshirani R, et al. Gene expression patterns

of breast carcinomas distinguish tumor subclasses with clinical

implications. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2001;98:10869-10874. Available

at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11553815.

271. Sorlie T, Tibshirani R, Parker J, et al. Repeated observation of

breast tumor subtypes in independent gene expression data sets. Proc

Natl Acad Sci U S A 2003;100:8418-8423. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12829800.

272. Paik S, Shak S, Tang G, et al. A multigene assay to predict

recurrence of tamoxifen-treated, node-negative breast cancer. N Engl J

Med 2004;351:2817-2826. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15591335.

273. Dowsett M, Cuzick J, Wale C, et al. Prediction of risk of distant

recurrence using the 21-gene recurrence score in node-negative and

node-positive postmenopausal patients with breast cancer treated with

anastrozole or tamoxifen: a TransATAC study. J Clin Oncol

2010;28:1829-1834. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20212256.

274. Mamounas EP, Tang G, Fisher B, et al. Association between the

21-gene recurrence score assay and risk of locoregional recurrence in

node-negative, estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer: results from

NSABP B-14 and NSABP B-20. J Clin Oncol 2010;28:1677-1683.

Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20065188.

275. Albain KS, Barlow WE, Shak S, et al. Prognostic and predictive

value of the 21-gene recurrence score assay in postmenopausal

women with node-positive, oestrogen-receptor-positive breast cancer

on chemotherapy: a retrospective analysis of a randomised trial. Lancet

Oncol 2010;11:55-65. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20005174.

276. Paik S, Tang G, Shak S, et al. Gene expression and benefit of

chemotherapy in women with node-negative, estrogen receptor-positive

breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 2006;24:3726-3734. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16720680.

277. Tang G, Shak S, Paik S, et al. Comparison of the prognostic and

predictive utilities of the 21-gene Recurrence Score assay and

Adjuvant! for women with node-negative, ER-positive breast cancer:

results from NSABP B-14 and NSABP B-20. Breast Cancer Res Treat

2011;127:133-142. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21221771.

278. Glas AM, Floore A, Delahaye LJMJ, et al. Converting a breast

cancer microarray signature into a high-throughput diagnostic test. BMC

Genomics 2006;7:278-278. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17074082.

279. van de Vijver MJ, He YD, van't Veer LJ, et al. A gene-expression

signature as a predictor of survival in breast cancer. N Engl J Med

2002;347:1999-2009. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12490681.

280. van 't Veer LJ, Dai H, van de Vijver MJ, et al. Gene expression

profiling predicts clinical outcome of breast cancer. Nature

2002;415:530-536. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11823860.

281. Knauer M, Mook S, Rutgers EJ, et al. The predictive value of the

70-gene signature for adjuvant chemotherapy in early breast cancer.

Breast Cancer Res Treat 2010;120:655-661. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20204499.

282. Kunz G. Use of a genomic test (MammaPrint) in daily clinical

practice to assist in risk stratification of young breast cancer patients.

Arch Gynecol Obstet 2011;283:597-602. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20383789.

283. Ishitobi M, Goranova TE, Komoike Y, et al. Clinical utility of the 70-

gene MammaPrint profile in a Japanese population. Jpn J Clin Oncol

NCCN Guidelines Inde

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Breast Cancer

2010;40:508-512. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20110242.

284. Mook S, Knauer M, Bueno-de-Mesquita JM, et al. Metastatic

potential of T1 breast cancer can be predicted by the 70-gene

MammaPrint signature. Ann Surg Oncol 2010;17:1406-1413. Available

at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20094918.

285. Drukker CA, Bueno-de-Mesquita JM, Retel VP, et al. A prospective

evaluation of a breast cancer prognosis signature in the observational

RASTER study. Int J Cancer 2013;133:929-936. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23371464.

286. Dowsett M, Sestak I, Lopez-Knowles E, et al. Comparison of

PAM50 risk of recurrence score with oncotype DX and IHC4 for

predicting risk of distant recurrence after endocrine therapy. J Clin

Oncol 2013;31:2783-2790. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23816962.

287. Gnant M, Filipits M, Greil R, et al. Predicting distant recurrence in

receptor-positive breast cancer patients with limited clinicopathological

risk: using the PAM50 Risk of Recurrence score in 1478

postmenopausal patients of the ABCSG-8 trial treated with adjuvant

endocrine therapy alone. Ann Oncol 2014;25:339-345. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24347518.

288. Sestak I, Cuzick J, Dowsett M, et al. Prediction of late distant

recurrence after 5 years of endocrine treatment: a combined analysis of

patients from the Austrian breast and colorectal cancer study group 8

and arimidex, tamoxifen alone or in combination randomized trials using

the PAM50 risk of recurrence score. J Clin Oncol 2015;33:916-922.

Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25332252.

289. Sparano JA, Gray RJ, Makower DF, et al. Prospective validation of

a 21-gene expression assay in breast cancer. New England Journal of

Medicine 2015;373:2005-2014. Available at:

http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa1510764.

290. Hormone therapy with or without combination chemotherapy in

treating women who have undergone surgery for node-negative breast

cancer (The TAILORx Trial). Clinical Trial ID: NCT00310180. Available

at:

http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00310180?term=TAILORx&rank=2.

291. A phase III, randomized clinical trial of standard adjuvant

endocrine therapy +/-chemotherapy in patients with 1-3 positive nodes,

hormone receptor-positive and HER2-negative breast cancer with

recurence score (RS) of 25 or less. RXPONDER: A clinical trial RX for

positive node, endocrine responsive breast cancer. Clincial Trial ID

NCT01272037. Available at:

http://clinicaltrials.gov/show/NCT01272037.

292. MINDACT (Microarray In Node-Negative and 1 to 3 positive lymph

node disease may avoid chemotherapy): A prospective, randomized

study comparing the 70-Gene signature with the common clinical-

pathological criteria in selecting patients for adjuvant chemotherapy in

breast cancer with 0 to 3 positive nodes. Clinical Trial ID:

NCT00433589. Available at:

http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00433589?term=NCT00433589&ra

nk=1.

293. Piccart M, Rutgers E, van' t Veer L, et al. Primary analysis of the

EORTC 10041/ BIG 3-04 MINDACT study: a prospective, randomized

study evaluating the clinical utility of the 70-gene signature

(MammaPrint) combined with common clinical-pathological criteria for

selection of patients for adjuvant chemotherapy in breast cancer with 0

to 3 positive nodes [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 107th Annual

Meeting of the American Association for Cancer Research; 2016 Apr

16-20; New Orleans, Louisiana: AACR; 2016. Abstract CT039 2016.

294. Swain SM, Wilson JW, Mamounas EP, et al. Estrogen receptor

status of primary breast cancer is predictive of estrogen receptor status

of contralateral breast cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst 2004;96:516-523.

Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15069113.

NCCN Guidelines Inde

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Breast Cancer

295. Berry DA, Cirrincione C, Henderson IC, et al. Estrogen-receptor

status and outcomes of modern chemotherapy for patients with node-

positive breast cancer. JAMA 2006;295:1658-1667. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16609087.

296. Albain KS, Barlow WE, Ravdin PM, et al. Adjuvant chemotherapy

and timing of tamoxifen in postmenopausal patients with endocrine-

responsive, node-positive breast cancer: a phase 3, open-label,

randomised controlled trial. Lancet 2009;374:2055-2063. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20004966.

297. Mauri D, Pavlidis N, Ioannidis JP. Neoadjuvant versus adjuvant

systemic treatment in breast cancer: a meta-analysis. J Natl Cancer Inst

2005;97:188-194. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15687361.

298. Rastogi P, Anderson SJ, Bear HD, et al. Preoperative

chemotherapy: updates of National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel

Project Protocols B-18 and B-27. J Clin Oncol 2008;26:778-785.

Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18258986.

299. Gralow JR, Burstein HJ, Wood W, et al. Preoperative therapy in

invasive breast cancer: pathologic assessment and systemic therapy

issues in operable disease. J Clin Oncol 2008;26:814-819. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18258991.

300. Killelea BK, Yang VQ, Mougalian S, et al. Neoadjuvant

chemotherapy for breast cancer increases the rate of breast

conservation: results from the National Cancer Database. J Am Coll

Surg 2015;220:1063-1069. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25868410.

301. Liedtke C, Mazouni C, Hess KR, et al. Response to neoadjuvant

therapy and long-term survival in patients with triple-negative breast

cancer. J Clin Oncol 2008;26:1275-1281. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18250347.

302. Cortazar P, Zhang L, Untch M, et al. Pathological complete

response and long-term clinical benefit in breast cancer: the CTNeoBC

pooled analysis. Lancet 2014;384:164-172. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24529560.

303. von Minckwitz G, Untch M, Blohmer JU, et al. Definition and impact

of pathologic complete response on prognosis after neoadjuvant

chemotherapy in various intrinsic breast cancer subtypes. J Clin Oncol

2012;30:1796-1804. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22508812.

304. Cataliotti L, Buzdar AU, Noguchi S, et al. Comparison of

anastrozole versus tamoxifen as preoperative therapy in

postmenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive breast cancer:

the Pre-Operative "Arimidex" Compared to Tamoxifen (PROACT) trial.

Cancer 2006;106:2095-2103. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16598749.

305. Smith IE, Dowsett M, Ebbs SR, et al. Neoadjuvant treatment of

postmenopausal breast cancer with anastrozole, tamoxifen, or both in

combination: the Immediate Preoperative Anastrozole, Tamoxifen, or

Combined with Tamoxifen (IMPACT) multicenter double-blind

randomized trial. J Clin Oncol 2005;23:5108-5116. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15998903.

306. Eiermann W, Paepke S, Appfelstaedt J, et al. Preoperative

treatment of postmenopausal breast cancer patients with letrozole: A

randomized double-blind multicenter study. Ann Oncol 2001;12:1527-

1532. Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11822750.

307. Ellis MJ, Ma C. Letrozole in the neoadjuvant setting: the P024 trial.

Breast Cancer Res Treat 2007;105 Suppl 1:33-43. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17912634.

308. Ellis MJ, Suman VJ, Hoog J, et al. Randomized phase II

neoadjuvant comparison between letrozole, anastrozole, and

exemestane for postmenopausal women with estrogen receptor-rich

stage 2 to 3 breast cancer: clinical and biomarker outcomes and

NCCN Guidelines Inde

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Breast Cancer

predictive value of the baseline PAM50-based intrinsic subtype--

ACOSOG Z1031. J Clin Oncol 2011;29:2342-2349. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21555689.

309. Masuda N, Sagara Y, Kinoshita T, et al. Neoadjuvant anastrozole

versus tamoxifen in patients receiving goserelin for premenopausal

breast cancer (STAGE): a double-blind, randomised phase 3 trial.

Lancet Oncol 2012;13:345-352. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22265697.

310. Torrisi R, Bagnardi V, Rotmensz N, et al. Letrozole plus GnRH

analogue as preoperative and adjuvant therapy in premenopausal

women with ER positive locally advanced breast cancer. Breast Cancer

Res Treat 2011;126:431-441. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21221766.

311. Fontein DB, Charehbili A, Nortier JW, et al. Efficacy of six month

neoadjuvant endocrine therapy in postmenopausal, hormone receptor-

positive breast cancer patients--a phase II trial. Eur J Cancer

2014;50:2190-2200. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24970786.

312. Petrelli F, Borgonovo K, Cabiddu M, et al. Neoadjuvant

chemotherapy and concomitant trastuzumab in breast cancer: a pooled

analysis of two randomized trials. Anticancer Drugs 2011;22:128-135.

Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21218604.

313. Piccart-Gebhart M HA, de Azambuja E, et al. . The association

between event-free survival and pathological complete response to

neoadjuvant lapatinib, trastuzumab or their combination in HER2-

positive breast cancer. Survival follow-up analysis of the NeoALTTO

study (BIG 1-06) [abstract]. SABCS 2013:Abstract S1–01. Available at:

314. Gianni L, Pienkowski T, Im YH, et al. Efficacy and safety of

neoadjuvant pertuzumab and trastuzumab in women with locally

advanced, inflammatory, or early HER2-positive breast cancer

(NeoSphere): a randomised multicentre, open-label, phase 2 trial.

Lancet Oncol 2012;13:25-32. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22153890.

315. Gianni L, Pienkowski T, Im Y-H, et al. Five-year analysis of the

phase II NeoSphere trial evaluating four cycles of neoadjuvant

docetaxel (D) and/or trastuzumab (T) and/or pertuzumab (P). ASCO

Meeting Abstracts 2015;33:505. Available at:

http://meeting.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/abstract/33/15_suppl/505.

316. Schneeweiss A, Chia S, Hickish T, et al. Pertuzumab plus

trastuzumab in combination with standard neoadjuvant anthracycline-

containing and anthracycline-free chemotherapy regimens in patients

with HER2-positive early breast cancer: a randomized phase II cardiac

safety study (TRYPHAENA). Ann Oncol 2013;24:2278-2284. Available

at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23704196.

317. Tamoxifen for early breast cancer: an overview of the randomised

trials. Early Breast Cancer Trialists' Collaborative Group. Lancet

1998;351:1451-1467. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9605801.

318. Arpino G, Green SJ, Allred DC, et al. HER-2 amplification, HER-1

expression, and tamoxifen response in estrogen receptor-positive

metastatic breast cancer: a southwest oncology group study. Clin

Cancer Res 2004;10:5670-5676. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15355892.

319. Berry DA, Muss HB, Thor AD, et al. HER-2/neu and p53

expression versus tamoxifen resistance in estrogen receptor-positive,

node-positive breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 2000;18:3471-3479. Available

at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11032587.

320. De Laurentiis M, Arpino G, Massarelli E, et al. A meta-analysis on

the interaction between HER-2 expression and response to endocrine

treatment in advanced breast cancer. Clin Cancer Res 2005;11:4741-

4748. Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16000569.

NCCN Guidelines Inde

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Breast Cancer

321. Eppenberger-Castori S, Kueng W, Benz C, et al. Prognostic and

predictive significance of ErbB-2 breast tumor levels measured by

enzyme immunoassay. J Clin Oncol 2001;19:645-656. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11157014.

322. Knoop AS, Bentzen SM, Nielsen MM, et al. Value of epidermal

growth factor receptor, HER2, p53, and steroid receptors in predicting

the efficacy of tamoxifen in high-risk postmenopausal breast cancer

patients. J Clin Oncol 2001;19:3376-3384. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11454885.

323. Mass R. The role of HER-2 expression in predicting response to

therapy in breast cancer. Semin Oncol 2000;27:46-52. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11236028.

324. Paik S, Shak S, Tang G, et al. Expression of the 21 genes in the

Recurrence Score assay and tamoxifen clinical benefit in the NSABP

study B-14 of node negative, estrogen receptor positive breast cancer

[abstract]. J Clin Oncol 2005;23(Suppl 16):Abstract 510. Available at:

http://meeting.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/abstract/23/16_suppl/510.

325. Pegram MD, Pauletti G, Slamon DJ. HER-2/neu as a predictive

marker of response to breast cancer therapy. Breast Cancer Res Treat

1998;52:65-77. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10066073.

326. Dowsett M, Allred C, Knox J, et al. Relationship between

quantitative estrogen and progesterone receptor expression and human

epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER-2) status with recurrence in

the Arimidex, Tamoxifen, Alone or in Combination trial. J Clin Oncol

2008;26:1059-1065. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18227529.

327. Early Breast Cancer Trialists' Collaborative G, Davies C, Godwin J,

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 2011;378:771-784. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21802721.

328. Early Breast Cancer Trialists' Collaborative G. Effects of

chemotherapy and hormonal therapy for early breast cancer on

recurrence and 15-year survival: an overview of the randomised trials.

Lancet 2005;365:1687-1717. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15894097.

329. Davies C, Pan H, Godwin J, et al. Long-term effects of continuing

adjuvant tamoxifen to 10 years versus stopping at 5 years after

diagnosis of oestrogen receptor-positive breast cancer: ATLAS, a

randomised trial. Lancet 2013;381:805-816. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23219286.

330. Gray R, Rea D, Handley K, et al. aTTom: Long-term effects of

continuing adjuvant tamoxifen to 10 years versus stopping at 5 years in

6,953 women with early breast cancer [Abstract]. J Clin Oncol

2013;31(suppl):Abstract 5. Available at:

331. Cuzick J, Ambroisine L, Davidson N, et al. Use of luteinising-

hormone-releasing hormone agonists as adjuvant treatment in

premenopausal patients with hormone-receptor-positive breast cancer:

a meta-analysis of individual patient data from randomised adjuvant

trials. Lancet 2007;369:1711-1723. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17512856.

332. Davidson NE, O'Neill AM, Vukov AM, et al. Chemoendocrine

therapy for premenopausal women with axillary lymph node-positive,

steroid hormone receptor-positive breast cancer: results from INT 0101

(E5188). J Clin Oncol 2005;23:5973-5982. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16087950.

333. Ejlertsen B, Mouridsen HT, Jensen MB, et al. Similar efficacy for

ovarian ablation compared with cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and

fluorouracil: from a randomized comparison of premenopausal patients

with node-positive, hormone receptor-positive breast cancer. J Clin

Oncol 2006;24:4956-4962. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17075113.

NCCN Guidelines Inde

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Breast Cancer

334. Goel S, Sharma R, Hamilton A, Beith J. LHRH agonists for

adjuvant therapy of early breast cancer in premenopausal women.

Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2009:CD004562. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19821328.

335. Kaufmann M, Jonat W, Blamey R, et al. Survival analyses from the

ZEBRA study. goserelin (Zoladex) versus CMF in premenopausal

women with node-positive breast cancer. Eur J Cancer 2003;39:1711-

1717. Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12888366.

336. Schmid P, Untch M, Wallwiener D, et al. Cyclophosphamide,

methotrexate and fluorouracil (CMF) versus hormonal ablation with

leuprorelin acetate as adjuvant treatment of node-positive,

premenopausal breast cancer patients: preliminary results of the

TABLE-study (Takeda Adjuvant Breast cancer study with Leuprorelin

Acetate). Anticancer Res 2002;22:2325-2332. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12174922.

337. Thomson CS, Twelves CJ, Mallon EA, Leake RE. Adjuvant ovarian

ablation vs CMF chemotherapy in premenopausal breast cancer

patients: trial update and impact of immunohistochemical assessment of

ER status. Breast 2002;11:419-429. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14965706.

338. von Minckwitz G, Graf E, Geberth M, et al. CMF versus goserelin

as adjuvant therapy for node-negative, hormone-receptor-positive

breast cancer in premenopausal patients: a randomised trial (GABG

trial IV-A-93). Eur J Cancer 2006;42:1780-1788. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16765589.

339. Castiglione-Gertsch M, O'Neill A, Price KN, et al. Adjuvant

chemotherapy followed by goserelin versus either modality alone for

premenopausal lymph node-negative breast cancer: a randomized trial.

J Natl Cancer Inst 2003;95:1833-1846. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14679153.

340. Puhalla S, Brufsky A, Davidson N. Adjuvant endocrine therapy for

premenopausal women with breast cancer. Breast 2009;18 Suppl

3:S122-130. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19914530.

341. Roche H, Fumoleau P, Spielmann M, et al. Sequential adjuvant

epirubicin-based and docetaxel chemotherapy for node-positive breast

cancer patients: the FNCLCC PACS 01 Trial. J Clin Oncol

2006;24:5664-5671. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17116941.

342. Boccardo F, Rubagotti A, Amoroso D, et al. Cyclophosphamide,

methotrexate, and fluorouracil versus tamoxifen plus ovarian

suppression as adjuvant treatment of estrogen receptor-positive pre-

/perimenopausal breast cancer patients: results of the Italian Breast

Cancer Adjuvant Study Group 02 randomized trial.

boccardo@hp380.ist.unige.it. J Clin Oncol 2000;18:2718-2727.

Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10894871.

343. Pagani O, Regan MM, Walley BA, et al. Adjuvant exemestane with

ovarian suppression in premenopausal breast cancer. N Engl J Med

2014;371:107-118. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24881463.

344. Francis PA, Regan MM, Fleming GF, et al. Adjuvant ovarian

suppression in premenopausal breast cancer. N Engl J Med

2015;372:436-446. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25495490.

345. Coombes RC, Kilburn LS, Snowdon CF, et al. Survival and safety

of exemestane versus tamoxifen after 2-3 years' tamoxifen treatment

(Intergroup Exemestane Study): a randomised controlled trial. Lancet

2007;369:559-570. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17307102.

346. Kaufmann M, Jonat W, Hilfrich J, et al. Improved overall survival in

postmenopausal women with early breast cancer after anastrozole

initiated after treatment with tamoxifen compared with continued

tamoxifen: the ARNO 95 Study. J Clin Oncol 2007;25:2664-2670.

Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17563395.

NCCN Guidelines Inde

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Breast Cancer

347. Goss PE, Ingle JN, Martino S, et al. Randomized trial of letrozole

following tamoxifen as extended adjuvant therapy in receptor-positive

breast cancer: updated findings from NCIC CTG MA.17. J Natl Cancer

Inst 2005;97:1262-1271. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16145047.

348. Forbes JF, Cuzick J, Buzdar A, et al. Effect of anastrozole and

tamoxifen as adjuvant treatment for early-stage breast cancer: 100-

month analysis of the ATAC trial. Lancet Oncol 2008;9:45-53. Available

at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18083636.

349. Thurlimann B, Keshaviah A, Coates AS, et al. A comparison of

letrozole and tamoxifen in postmenopausal women with early breast

cancer. N Engl J Med 2005;353:2747-2757. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16382061.

350. Baum M, Budzar AU, Cuzick J, et al. Anastrozole alone or in

combination with tamoxifen versus tamoxifen alone for adjuvant

treatment of postmenopausal women with early breast cancer: first

results of the ATAC randomised trial. Lancet 2002;359:2131-2139.

Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12090977.

351. Howell A, Cuzick J, Baum M, et al. Results of the ATAC (Arimidex,

Tamoxifen, Alone or in Combination) trial after completion of 5 years'

adjuvant treatment for breast cancer. Lancet 2005;365:60-62. Available

at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15639680.

352. Duffy S, Jackson TL, Lansdown M, et al. The ATAC ('Arimidex',

Tamoxifen, Alone or in Combination) adjuvant breast cancer trial: first

results of the endometrial sub-protocol following 2 years of treatment.

Hum Reprod 2006;21:545-553. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16210385.

353. Fallowfield L, Cella D, Cuzick J, et al. Quality of life of

postmenopausal women in the Arimidex, Tamoxifen, Alone or in

Combination (ATAC) Adjuvant Breast Cancer Trial. J Clin Oncol

2004;22:4261-4271. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15514369.

354. Eastell R, Adams JE, Coleman RE, et al. Effect of anastrozole on

bone mineral density: 5-year results from the anastrozole, tamoxifen,

alone or in combination trial 18233230. J Clin Oncol 2008;26:1051-

1057. Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18309940.

355. Dowsett M, Cuzick J, Howell A, Jackson I. Pharmacokinetics of

anastrozole and tamoxifen alone, and in combination, during adjuvant

endocrine therapy for early breast cancer in postmenopausal women: a

sub-protocol of the 'Arimidex and tamoxifen alone or in combination'

(ATAC) trial. Br J Cancer 2001;85:317-324. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11487258.

356. Buzdar AU, Guastalla JP, Nabholtz JM, et al. Impact of

chemotherapy regimens prior to endocrine therapy: Results from the

ATAC (anastrozole and tamoxifen, alone or in combination) trial. Cancer

2006;107:472-480. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16804925.

357. Mouridsen H, Keshaviah A, Coates AS, et al. Cardiovascular

adverse events during adjuvant endocrine therapy for early breast

cancer using letrozole or tamoxifen: safety analysis of BIG 1-98 trial. J

Clin Oncol 2007;25:5715-5722. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17998546.

358. Rabaglio M, Sun Z, Price KN, et al. Bone fractures among

postmenopausal patients with endocrine-responsive early breast cancer

treated with 5 years of letrozole or tamoxifen in the BIG 1-98 trial. Ann

Oncol 2009;20:1489-1498. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19474112.

359. Mouridsen H, Giobbie-Hurder A, Goldhirsch A, et al. Letrozole

therapy alone or in sequence with tamoxifen in women with breast

cancer. N Engl J Med 2009;361:766-776. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19692688.

360. Boccardo F, Rubagotti A, Puntoni M, et al. Switching to

anastrozole versus continued tamoxifen treatment of early breast

cancer: preliminary results of the Italian Tamoxifen Anastrozole Trial. J

NCCN Guidelines Inde

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Breast Cancer

Clin Oncol 2005;23:5138-5147. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16009955.

361. Boccardo F, Rubagotti A, Guglielmini P, et al. Switching to

anastrozole versus continued tamoxifen treatment of early breast

cancer. Updated results of the Italian tamoxifen anastrozole (ITA) trial.

Ann Oncol 2006;17 Suppl 7:10-14. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16760270.

362. Coombes RC, Hall E, Gibson LJ, et al. A randomized trial of

exemestane after two to three years of tamoxifen therapy in

postmenopausal women with primary breast cancer. N Engl J Med

2004;350:1081-1092. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15014181.

363. Jakesz R, Jonat W, Gnant M, et al. Switching of postmenopausal

women with endocrine-responsive early breast cancer to anastrozole

after 2 years' adjuvant tamoxifen: combined results of ABCSG trial 8

and ARNO 95 trial. Lancet 2005;366:455-462. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16084253.

364. Jonat W, Gnant M, Boccardo F, et al. Effectiveness of switching

from adjuvant tamoxifen to anastrozole in postmenopausal women with

hormone-sensitive early-stage breast cancer: a meta-analysis. Lancet

Oncol 2006;7:991-996. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17138220.

365. van de Velde CJ, Rea D, Seynaeve C, et al. Adjuvant tamoxifen

and exemestane in early breast cancer (TEAM): a randomised phase 3

trial. Lancet 2011;377:321-331. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21247627.

366. Goss PE, Ingle JN, Martino S, et al. A randomized trial of letrozole

in postmenopausal women after five years of tamoxifen therapy for

early-stage breast cancer. N Engl J Med 2003;349:1793-1802.

Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14551341.

367. Goss PE, Ingle JN, Pater JL, et al. Late extended adjuvant

treatment with letrozole improves outcome in women with early-stage

breast cancer who complete 5 years of tamoxifen. J Clin Oncol

2008;26:1948-1955. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18332475.

368. Ingle JN, Tu D, Pater JL, et al. Intent-to-treat analysis of the

placebo-controlled trial of letrozole for extended adjuvant therapy in

early breast cancer: NCIC CTG MA.17. Ann Oncol 2008;19:877-882.

Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18332043.

369. Perez EA, Josse RG, Pritchard KI, et al. Effect of letrozole versus

placebo on bone mineral density in women with primary breast cancer

completing 5 or more years of adjuvant tamoxifen: a companion study

to NCIC CTG MA.17. J Clin Oncol 2006;24:3629-3635. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16822845.

370. Whelan TJ, Goss PE, Ingle JN, et al. Assessment of quality of life

in MA.17: a randomized, placebo-controlled trial of letrozole after 5

years of tamoxifen in postmenopausal women. J Clin Oncol

2005;23:6931-6940. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16157934.

371. Davies C, Pan H, Godwin J, et al. Long-term effects of continuing

adjuvant tamoxifen to 10 years versus stopping at 5 years after

diagnosis of oestrogen receptor-positive breast cancer: ATLAS, a

randomised trial. The Lancet 2012. Available at:

http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0140673612619631.

372. Jakesz R, Greil R, Gnant M, et al. Extended adjuvant therapy with

anastrozole among postmenopausal breast cancer patients: results

from the randomized Austrian Breast and Colorectal Cancer Study

Group Trial 6a. J Natl Cancer Inst 2007;99:1845-1853. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18073378.

373. Dowsett M, Cuzick J, Ingle J, et al. Meta-analysis of breast cancer

outcomes in adjuvant trials of aromatase inhibitors versus tamoxifen. J

NCCN Guidelines Inde

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Breast Cancer

Clin Oncol 2010;28:509-518. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19949017.

374. Smith IE, Dowsett M, Yap Y-S, et al. Adjuvant aromatase inhibitors

for early breast cancer after chemotherapy-induced amenorrhoea:

caution and suggested guidelines. J Clin Oncol 2006;24:2444-2447.

Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16735701.

375. Yu B, Douglas N, Ferin MJ, et al. Changes in markers of ovarian

reserve and endocrine function in young women with breast cancer

undergoing adjuvant chemotherapy. Cancer 2010;116:2099-2105.

Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20187091.

376. Dowsett M, Nielsen TO, A'Hern R, et al. Assessment of Ki67 in

Breast Cancer: Recommendations from the International Ki67 in Breast

Cancer Working Group. J Natl Cancer Inst 2011. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21960707.

377. Dowsett M, Smith IE, Ebbs SR, et al. Prognostic value of Ki67

expression after short-term presurgical endocrine therapy for primary

breast cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst 2007;99:167-170. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17228000.

378. . Available at: http://www.cypalleles.ki.se/.

379. Schroth W, Goetz MP, Hamann U, et al. Association between

CYP2D6 polymorphisms and outcomes among women with early stage

breast cancer treated with tamoxifen. JAMA 2009;302:1429-1436.

Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19809024.

380. Leyland-Jones B, Regan M, Bouzyk M, et al. Outcome according

to CYP2D6 genotype among postmenopausal women with endocrine-

responsive early invasive breast cancer randomized in the BIG 1-98 trial

[abstract]. Cancer Res 2010;70(24 Suppl):Abstract nr S1-8. Available

at:

http://cancerres.aacrjournals.org/cgi/content/short/70/24_MeetingAbstra

cts/S1-8.

381. Rae J, Drury S, Hayes D, et al. Lack of correlation between gene

variants in tamoxifen metabolizing enzymes with primary endpoints in

the ATAC trial [abstract]. Cancer Res 2010;70(24 Suppl):Abstract S1-7.

Available at:

http://cancerres.aacrjournals.org/cgi/content/meeting_abstract/70/24_M

eetingAbstracts/S1-7?sid=e2c268c0-3fe1-481b-a9c9-01b32769a3d9.

382. Higgins MJ, Stearns V. Pharmacogenetics of endocrine therapy for

breast cancer. Annu Rev Med 2011;62:281-293. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21226615.

383. Visvanathan K, Chlebowski RT, Hurley P, et al. American Society

of Clinical Oncology clinical practice guideline update on the use of

pharmacologic interventions including tamoxifen, raloxifene, and

aromatase inhibition for breast cancer risk reduction. J Clin Oncol

2009;27:3235-3258. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19470930.

384. Erban JK, Lau J. On the toxicity of chemotherapy for breast

cancer--the need for vigilance. J Natl Cancer Inst 2006;98:1096-1097.

Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16912256.

385. Henderson I, Berry D, Demetri G, et al. Improved outcomes from

adding sequential paclitaxel but not from escalating doxorubicin dose in

an adjuvant chemotherapy regimen for patients with node-positive

primary breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 2003;21:976-983. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12637460.

386. Mamounas E, Bryant J, Lembersky B, et al. Paclitaxel after

doxorubicin plus cyclophosphamide as adjuvant chemotherapy for

node-positive breast cancer: results from NSABP B-28. J Clin Oncol

2005;23:3686-3696. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15897552.

387. Citron ML, Berry DA, Cirrincione C, et al. Randomized trial of dose-

dense versus conventionally scheduled and sequential versus

concurrent combination chemotherapy as postoperative adjuvant

treatment of node-positive primary breast cancer: first report of

NCCN Guidelines Inde

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Breast Cancer

Intergroup Trial C9741/Cancer and Leukemia Group B Trial 9741. J Clin

Oncol 2003;21:1431-1439. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12668651.

388. Sparano JA, Wang M, Martino S, et al. Phase III study of

doxorubicin-cyclophosphamide followed by paclitaxel or docetaxel given

every 3 weeks or weekly in patients with axillary node positive or high

risk node negative breast cancer [abstract]. San Antonio Breast Cancer

Symposium 2005:Abstract 48. Available at:

389. Sparano JA, Wang M, Martino S, et al. Phase III study of

doxorubicin-cyclophosphamide followed by paclitaxel or docetaxel given

every 3 weeks or weekly in operable breast cancer: Results of

Intergroup Trial E1199 [abstract]. J Clin Oncol 2007;25 (Suppl_18)

Abstract 516. Available at:

http://meeting.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/abstract/25/18_suppl/516.

390. Sparano J, Wang M, Martino S, et al. Weekly paclitaxel in the

adjuvant treatment of breast cancer. N Engl J Med 2008;358:1663-

1671. Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18420499.

391. Jones S, Holmes FA, O'Shaughnessy J, et al. Docetaxel with

cyclophosphamide is associated with an overall survival benefit

compared with doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide: 7-year follow-up of

US Oncology Research trial 9735. J Clin Oncol 2009;27:1177-1183.

Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19204201.

392. Bang SM, Heo DS, Lee KH, et al. Adjuvant doxorubicin and

cyclophosphamide versus cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and 5-

fluorouracil chemotherapy in premenopausal women with axillary lymph

node positive breast carcinoma. Cancer 2000;89:2521-2526. Available

at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11135211.

393. Fisher B, Brown AM, Dimitrov NV, et al. Two months of

doxorubicin-cyclophosphamide with and without interval reinduction

therapy compared with 6 months of cyclophosphamide, methotrexate,

and fluorouracil in positive-node breast cancer patients with tamoxifen-

nonresponsive tumors: results from the National Surgical Adjuvant

Breast and Bowel Project B-15. J Clin Oncol 1990;8:1483-1496.

Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2202791.

394. Fisher B, Anderson S, Wickerham DL, et al. Increased

intensification and total dose of cyclophosphamide in a doxorubicin-

cyclophosphamide regimen for the treatment of primary breast cancer:

findings from National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project B-22.

J Clin Oncol 1997;15:1858-1869. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9164196.

395. Polychemotherapy for early breast cancer: an overview of the

randomised trials. Early Breast Cancer Trialists' Collaborative Group.

Lancet 1998;352:930-942. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9752815.

396. Wood WC, Budman DR, Korzun AH, et al. Dose and dose intensity

of adjuvant chemotherapy for stage II, node-positive breast carcinoma.

N Engl J Med 1994;330:1253-1259. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8080512.

397. Menard S, Valagussa P, Pilotti S, et al. Response to

cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and fluorouracil in lymph node-

positive breast cancer according to HER2 overexpression and other

tumor biologic variables. J Clin Oncol 2001;19:329-335. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11208823.

398. Muss HB, Thor AD, Berry DA, et al. c-erbB-2 expression and

response to adjuvant therapy in women with node-positive early breast

cancer. N Engl J Med 1994;330:1260-1266. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/7908410.

399. Watanabe T, Kuranami M, Inoue K, et al. Phase III trial comparing

4-cycle doxorubicin plus cyclophosphamide followed by 4-cycle taxan

with 8-cycle taxan as adjuvant therapy for node-positive breast cancer:

Results of N-SAS-BC02 trial [abstract]. J Clin Oncol 2009;27(Suppl

15):Abstract 516. Available at:

http://meeting.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/abstract/27/15S/516.

NCCN Guidelines Inde

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Breast Cancer

400. Piccart MJ, Di Leo A, Beauduin M, et al. Phase III trial comparing

two dose levels of epirubicin combined with cyclophosphamide with

cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and fluorouracil in node-positive

breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 2001;19:3103-3110. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11408507.

401. Samuel JA, Wilson JW, Bandos H, et al. Abstract S3-02: NSABP

B-36: A randomized phase III trial comparing six cycles of 5-fluorouracil

(5-FU), epirubicin, and cyclophosphamide (FEC) to four cycles of

adriamycin and cyclophosphamide (AC) in patients (pts) with node-

negative breast cancer. Cancer Research 2015;75:S3-02. Available at:

http://cancerres.aacrjournals.org/content/75/9_Supplement/S3-

02.abstract.

402. Ganz PA, Wilson JW, Bandos H, et al. Abstract P3-12-01: Impact

of treatment on quality of life (QOL) and menstrual history (MH) in the

NSABP B-36: A randomized phase III trial comparing six cycles of 5-

fluorouracil (5-FU), epirubicin, and cyclophosphamide (FEC) to four

cycles of adriamycin and cyclophosphamide. Cancer Research

2015;75:P3-12-01. Available at:

http://cancerres.aacrjournals.org/content/75/9_Supplement/P3-12-

01.abstract.

403. Levine M, Pritchard K, Bramwell V, et al. Randomized trial

comparing cyclophosphamide, epirubicin, and fluorouracil with

cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and fluorouracil in premenopausal

women with node-positive breast cancer: update of National Cancer

Institute of Canada Clinical Trials Group Trial MA5. J Clin Oncol

2005;23:5166-5170. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16051958.

404. Benefit of a high-dose epirubicin regimen in adjuvant

chemotherapy for node-positive breast cancer patients with poor

prognostic factors: 5-year follow-up results of French Adjuvant Study

Group 05 Randomized Trial. J Clin Oncol 2001;19:602-611. Available

at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11157009.

405. Ellis P, Barrett-Lee P, Johnson L, et al. Sequential docetaxel as

adjuvant chemotherapy for early breast cancer (TACT): an open-label,

phase III, randomised controlled trial. Lancet 2009;373:1681-1692.

Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19447249.

406. Martin M, Rodriguez-Lescure A, Ruiz A, et al. Randomized phase

3 trial of fluorouracil, epirubicin, and cyclophosphamide alone or

followed by Paclitaxel for early breast cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst

2008;100:805-814. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18505968.

407. Sparano JA ZF, Martino S, et al. Ten year update of E1199: Phase

III study of doxorubicin-cyclophosphamide followed by paclitaxel or

docetaxel given every 3 weeks or weekly in patients with axillary node-

positive or high-risk node-negative breast cancer [abstract]. San

Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium. Oral Presentation Abstract S3-03.

2014 Available at:

408. Martin M, Pienkowski T, Mackey J, et al. Adjuvant docetaxel for

node-positive breast cancer. N Engl J Med 2005;352:2302-2313.

Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15930421.

409. Swain SM, Jeong J-H, Geyer CE, et al. NSABP B-30: definitive

analysis of patient outcome from a randomized trial evaluating different

schedules and combinations of adjuvant therapy containing

doxorubicin, docetaxel and cyclophosphamide in women with operable,

node-positive breast cancer [abstract]. Cancer Research 2009;69

(Suppl_1):Abstract 75. Available at:

http://cancerres.aacrjournals.org/cgi/content/meeting_abstract/69/2_Me

etingAbstracts/75.

410. Muss HB, Berry DA, Cirrincione CT, et al. Adjuvant chemotherapy

in older women with early-stage breast cancer. N Engl J Med

2009;360:2055-2065. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19439741.

NCCN Guidelines Inde

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Breast Cancer

411. Burstein HJ. The distinctive nature of HER2-positive breast

cancers. N Engl J Med 2005;353:1652-1654. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16236735.

412. Joensuu H, Bono P, Kataja V, et al. Fluorouracil, epirubicin, and

cyclophosphamide with either docetaxel or vinorelbine, with or without

trastuzumab, as adjuvant treatments of breast cancer: final results of

the FinHer Trial. J Clin Oncol 2009;27:5685-5692. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19884557.

413. Perez EA, Romond EH, Suman VJ, et al. Four-year follow-up of

trastuzumab plus adjuvant chemotherapy for operable human epidermal

growth factor receptor 2-positive breast cancer: joint analysis of data

from NCCTG N9831 and NSABP B-31. J Clin Oncol 2011;29:3366-

3373. Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21768458.

414. Gianni L, Dafni U, Gelber RD, et al. Treatment with trastuzumab

for 1 year after adjuvant chemotherapy in patients with HER2-positive

early breast cancer: a 4-year follow-up of a randomised controlled trial.

Lancet Oncol 2011;12:236-244. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21354370.

415. Perez EA, Suman VJ, Davidson NE, et al. Cardiac safety analysis

of doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide followed by paclitaxel with or

without trastuzumab in the North Central Cancer Treatment Group

N9831 adjuvant breast cancer trial. J Clin Oncol 2008;26:1231-1238.

Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18250349.

416. Tan-Chiu E, Yothers G, Romond E, et al. Assessment of cardiac

dysfunction in a randomized trial comparing doxorubicin and

cyclophosphamide followed by paclitaxel, with or without trastuzumab

as adjuvant therapy in node-positive, human epidermal growth factor

receptor 2-overexpressing breast cancer: NSABP B-31. J Clin Oncol

2005;23:7811-7819. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16258083.

417. Geyer CE, Jr., Bryant JL, Romond EH, et al. Update of cardiac

dysfunction on NSABP B-31, a randomized trial of sequential

doxorubicin/cyclophosphamide (AC)->paclitaxel (T) vs. AC->T with

trastuzumab (H) [abstract]. J Clin Oncol 2006;24(Suppl 18):Abstract

581. Available at:

http://meeting.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/abstract/24/18_suppl/581.

418. Telli ML, Hunt SA, Carlson RW, Guardino AE. Trastuzumab-

related cardiotoxicity: calling into question the concept of reversibility. J

Clin Oncol 2007;25:3525-3533. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17687157.

419. Smith I, Procter M, Gelber RD, et al. 2-year follow-up of

trastuzumab after adjuvant chemotherapy in HER2-positive breast

cancer: a randomised controlled trial. Lancet 2007;369:29-36. Available

at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17208639.

420. Spielmann M, Roché H, Delozier T, et al. Trastuzumab for patients

with axillary-node-positive breast cancer: results of the FNCLCC-PACS

04 trial. J Clin Oncol 2009;27:6129-6134. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19917839.

421. Pivot X, Romieu G, Debled M, et al. 6 months versus 12 months of

adjuvant trastuzumab for patients with HER2-positive early breast

cancer (PHARE): a randomised phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol

2013;14:741-748. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23764181.

422. Goldhirsch A, Gelber RD, Piccart-Gebhart MJ, et al. 2 years versus

1 year of adjuvant trastuzumab for HER2-positive breast cancer

(HERA): an open-label, randomised controlled trial. Lancet

2013;382:1021-1028. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23871490.

423. Chia S, Norris B, Speers C, et al. Human epidermal growth factor

receptor 2 overexpression as a prognostic factor in a large tissue

microarray series of node-negative breast cancers. J Clin Oncol

2008;26:5697-5704. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19001334.

NCCN Guidelines Inde

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Breast Cancer

424. Gonzalez-Angulo AM, Litton JK, Broglio KR, et al. High risk of

recurrence for patients with breast cancer who have human epidermal

growth factor receptor 2-positive, node-negative tumors 1 cm or smaller.

J Clin Oncol 2009;27:5700-5706. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19884543.

425. O'Sullivan C, Holmes E, Spielmann M, et al. The prognosis of

small HER2+ breast cancers: A meta-analysis of the randomized

trastuzumab trials [abstract]. San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium

Meeting Abstracts 2013:Abstract S 6-03 Available at:

426. Zhou Q, Yin W, Du Y, Lu J. For or against adjuvant trastuzumab

for pT1a-bN0M0 breast cancer patients with HER2-positive tumors: A

meta-analysis of published literatures. PLoS One 2014;9:e83646.

Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24392090.

427. Tolaney S, Barry W, Dang C, et al. A phase II study of adjuvant

paclitaxel (T) and trastuzumab (H) (APT trial) for node-negative, HER2-

positive breast cancer (BC) [abstract]. San Antonio Breast Symposium

Meeting Abstract 2013:Abstract S 1-04 (Oral Presentation). Available at:

428. Piccart-Gebhart MJ, Holmes AP, Baselga J, et al. First results from

the phase III ALTTO trial (BIG 2-06; NCCTG [Alliance] N063D)

comparing one year of anti-HER2 therapy with lapatinib alone (L),

trastuzumab alone (T), their sequence (T->L), or their combination

(T+L) in the adjuvant treatment of HER2-positive early breast cancer

(EBC). ASCO Meeting Abstracts 2014;32:LBA4. Available at:

http://meeting.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/abstract/32/18_suppl/LBA4.

429. Curigliano G, Viale G, Bagnardi V, et al. Clinical relevance of

HER2 overexpression/amplification in patients with small tumor size and

node-negative breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 2009;27:5693-5699.

Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19884553.

430. Perez EA, Romond EH, Suman VJ, et al. Updated results of the

combined analysis of NCCTG N9831 and NSABP B-31 adjuvant

chemotherapy with/without trastuzumab in patients with HER2-positive

breast cancer [abstract]. J Clin Oncol 2007;25(Suppl 18):Abstract 512.

Available at:

http://meeting.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/abstract/25/18_suppl/512.

431. Untch M, Gelber RD, Jackisch C, et al. Estimating the magnitude

of trastuzumab effects within patient subgroups in the HERA trial. Ann

Oncol 2008;19:1090-1096. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18296421.

432. Swain S, Kim S-B, Cortes J, et al. Confirmatory overall survival

(OS) analysis of CLEOPATRA: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-

controlled Phase III study with pertuzumab (P), trastuzumab (T), and

docetaxel (D) in patients (pts) with HER2-positive first-line (1L)

metastatic breast cancer (MBC). Cancer Research 2012;72:P5-18-26.

Available at:

http://cancerres.aacrjournals.org/cgi/content/meeting_abstract/72/24_M

eetingAbstracts/P5-18-26.

433. von MG, Baselga J, Bradbury I, et al. Adjuvant Pertuzumab and

Herceptin IN IniTial TherapY of Breast Cancer: APHINITY (BIG 4–

11/BO25126/TOC4939g) [abstract]. Cancer Res 2011; 71(Suppl 24

):Abstract OT1-02-04. Available at:

434. A randomized multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled

comparison of chemotherapy plus trastuzumab plus placebo versus

chemotherapy plus trastuzumab plus pertuzumab as adjuvant therapy

in patients with operable HER2-positive primary breast cancer (Clinical

Trial ID: NCT01358877). Available at:

http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01358877.

435. Tolaney SM, Barry WT, Dang CT, et al. Adjuvant paclitaxel and

trastuzumab for node-negative, HER2-positive breast cancer. N Engl J

Med 2015;372:134-141. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25564897.

436. von Minckwitz G, Schneeweiss A, Loibl S, et al. Neoadjuvant

carboplatin in patients with triple-negative and HER2-positive early

breast cancer (GeparSixto; GBG 66): a randomised phase 2 trial Lancet

NCCN Guidelines Inde

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Breast Cancer

Oncol 2014;15:747-756. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24794243.

437. Sikov WM, Berry DA, Perou CM, 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) [abstract]. Journal of Clinical

Oncology 2014. Available at:

http://jco.ascopubs.org/content/early/2014/08/01/JCO.2014.57.0572.ab

stract.

438. Aukema TS, Straver ME, Peeters MJ, et al. Detection of extra-

axillary lymph node involvement with FDG PET/CT in patients with

stage II-III breast cancer. Eur J Cancer 2010;46:3205-3210. Available

at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20719497.

439. Fuster D, Duch J, Paredes P, et al. Preoperative staging of large

primary breast cancer with [18F]fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission

tomography/computed tomography compared with conventional

imaging procedures. J Clin Oncol 2008;26:4746-4751. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18695254.

440. Groheux D, Moretti JL, Baillet G, et al. Effect of (18)F-FDG PET/CT

imaging in patients with clinical Stage II and III breast cancer. Int J

Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2008;71:695-704. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18436392.

441. van der Hoeven JJM, Krak NC, Hoekstra OS, et al. 18F-2-fluoro-2-

deoxy-d-glucose positron emission tomography in staging of locally

advanced breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 2004;22:1253-1259. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15051773.

442. Niikura N, Costelloe CM, Madewell JE, et al. FDG-PET/CT

compared with conventional imaging in the detection of distant

metastases of primary breast cancer. Oncologist 2011;16:1111-1119.

Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21765193.

443. Morris PG, Lynch C, Feeney JN, et al. Integrated positron emission

tomography/computed tomography may render bone scintigraphy

unnecessary to investigate suspected metastatic breast cancer. J Clin

Oncol 2010;28:3154-3159. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20516453.

444. Alessio AM, Kinahan PE, Cheng PM, et al. PET/CT scanner

instrumentation, challenges, and solutions. Radiol Clin North Am

2004;42:1017-1032. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15488555.

445. Wong TZ, Paulson EK, Nelson RC, et al. Practical approach to

diagnostic CT combined with PET. AJR Am J Roentgenol

2007;188:622-629. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17312045.

446. Hortobagyi GN, Singletary SE, Strom EA. Locally advanced breast

cancer. In: Harris JR, Lippman ME, Morrow M, Osborne CK, eds.

Diseases of the Breast. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins;

2004.

447. https://www.astro.org/Clinical-Practice/Choosing-Wisely/2014-

Choosing-Wisely.aspx Aa. Available at:

448. Impact of follow-up testing on survival and health-related quality of

life in breast cancer patients. A multicenter randomized controlled trial.

The GIVIO Investigators. JAMA 1994;271:1587-1592. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8182811.

449. Rosselli Del Turco M, Palli D, Cariddi A, et al. Intensive diagnostic

follow-up after treatment of primary breast cancer. A randomized trial.

National Research Council Project on Breast Cancer follow-up. JAMA

1994;271:1593-1597. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/7848404.

450. Smith TJ, Davidson NE, Schapira DV, et al. American Society of

Clinical Oncology 1998 update of recommended breast cancer

NCCN Guidelines Inde

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Breast Cancer

surveillance guidelines. J Clin Oncol 1999;17:1080-1082. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10071303.

451. Bast RC, Ravdin P, Hayes DF, et al. 2000 update of

recommendations for the use of tumor markers in breast and colorectal

cancer: clinical practice guidelines of the American Society of Clinical

Oncology. J Clin Oncol 2001;19:1865-1878. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11251019.

452. Kirova YM, Stoppa-Lyonnet D, Savignoni A, et al. Risk of breast

cancer recurrence and contralateral breast cancer in relation to BRCA1

and BRCA2 mutation status following breast-conserving surgery and

radiotherapy. Eur J Cancer 2005;41:2304-2311. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16140006.

453. Metcalfe K, Lynch HT, Ghadirian P, et al. Contralateral breast

cancer in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers. J Clin Oncol

2004;22:2328-2335. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15197194.

454. Pierce LJ, Levin AM, Rebbeck TR, et al. Ten-year multi-

institutional results of breast-conserving surgery and radiotherapy in

BRCA1/2-associated stage I/II breast cancer. J Clin Oncol

2006;24:2437-2443. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16636335.

455. ACOG committee opinion. No. 336: Tamoxifen and uterine cancer.

Obstet Gynecol 2006;107:1475-1478. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16738185.

456. Loprinzi CL, Kugler JW, Sloan JA, et al. Venlafaxine in

management of hot flashes in survivors of breast cancer: a randomised

controlled trial. Lancet 2000;356:2059-2063. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11145492.

457. Boekhout AH, Vincent AD, Dalesio OB, et al. Management of hot

flashes in patients who have breast cancer with venlafaxine and

clonidine: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. J Clin

Oncol 2011;29:3862-3868. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21911720.

458. Kaplan M, Mahon S, Cope D, et al. Putting evidence into practice:

evidence-based interventions for hot flashes resulting from cancer

therapies. Clin J Oncol Nurs 2011;15:149-157. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21444282.

459. Bordeleau L, Pritchard KI, Loprinzi CL, et al. Multicenter,

randomized, cross-over clinical trial of venlafaxine versus gabapentin

for the management of hot flashes in breast cancer survivors. J Clin

Oncol 2010;28:5147-5152. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21060031.

460. Garber K. Tamoxifen pharmacogenetics moves closer to reality. J

Natl Cancer Inst 2005;97:412-413. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15770000.

461. Jin Y, Desta Z, Stearns V, et al. CYP2D6 genotype, antidepressant

use, and tamoxifen metabolism during adjuvant breast cancer

treatment. J Natl Cancer Inst 2005;97:30-39. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15632378.

462. Henry NL, Stearns V, Flockhart DA, et al. Drug interactions and

pharmacogenomics in the treatment of breast cancer and depression.

Am J Psychiatry 2008;165:1251-1255. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18829880.

463. Ahern TP, Pedersen L, Cronin-Fenton DP, et al. No increase in

breast cancer recurrence with concurrent use of tamoxifen and some

CYP2D6-inhibiting medications. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev

2009;18:2562-2564. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19690182.

464. Osterberg L, Blaschke T. Adherence to medication. N Engl J Med

2005;353:487-497. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16079372.

NCCN Guidelines Inde

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Breast Cancer

465. Dayes IS, Whelan TJ, Julian JA, et al. Randomized trial of

decongestive lymphatic therapy for the treatment of lymphedema in

women with breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 2013;31:3758-3763. Available

at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24043733.

466. Warren AG, Brorson H, Borud LJ, Slavin SA. Lymphedema: a

comprehensive review. Ann Plast Surg 2007;59:464-472. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17901744.

467. Hickey M, Peate M, Saunders CM, Friedlander M. Breast cancer in

young women and its impact on reproductive function. Human

Reproduction Update 2009;15:323-339. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19174449.

468. Moran MS, Colasanto JM, Haffty BG, et al. Effects of breast-

conserving therapy on lactation after pregnancy. Cancer J 2005;11:399-

403. Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16259870.

469. Gnant M, Mlineritsch B, Schippinger W, et al. Endocrine therapy

plus zoledronic acid in premenopausal breast cancer. N Engl J Med

2009;360:679-691. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19213681.

470. Gnant M, Pfeiler G, Dubsky PC, et al. Adjuvant denosumab in

breast cancer (ABCSG-18): a multicentre, randomised, double-blind,

placebo-controlled trial. Lancet 2015;386:433-443. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26040499.

471. Li CI, Daling JR, Porter PL, et al. Relationship between potentially

modifiable lifestyle factors and risk of second primary contralateral

breast cancer among women diagnosed with estrogen receptor-positive

invasive breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 2009;27:5312-5318. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19738113.

472. Pierce JP, Stefanick ML, Flatt SW, et al. Greater survival after

breast cancer in physically active women with high vegetable-fruit intake

regardless of obesity. J Clin Oncol 2007;25:2345-2351. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17557947.

473. Chlebowski RT BG, et al. . Final survival analysis from the

randomized Women's Intervention Nutrition Study (WINS) evaluating

dietary intervention as adjuvant breast cancer therapy [abstract]. San

Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium 2014;Abstract S5-08. Available at:

474. de Glas NA, Fontein DB, Bastiaannet E, et al. Physical activity and

survival of postmenopausal, hormone receptor-positive breast cancer

patients: results of the Tamoxifen Exemestane Adjuvant Multicenter

Lifestyle study. Cancer 2014;120:2847-2854. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24840230.

475. Courneya KS, Segal RJ, McKenzie DC, et al. Effects of exercise

during adjuvant chemotherapy on breast cancer outcomes. Med Sci

Sports Exerc 2014;46:1744-1751. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24633595.

476. Mishra SI, Scherer RW, Snyder C, et al. Exercise interventions on

health-related quality of life for people with cancer during active

treatment. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2012;8:CD008465. Available

at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22895974.

477. Eubank WB, Mankoff D, Bhattacharya M, et al. Impact of FDG PET

on defining the extent of disease and on the treatment of patients with

recurrent or metastatic breast cancer. AJR Am J Roentgenol

2004;183:479-486. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15269044.

478. Moon DH, Maddahi J, Silverman DH, et al. Accuracy of whole-

body fluorine-18-FDG PET for the detection of recurrent or metastatic

breast carcinoma. J Nucl Med 1998;39:431-435. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9529287.

479. Arslan C, Sari E, Aksoy S, Altundag K. Variation in hormone

receptor and HER-2 status between primary and metastatic breast

cancer: review of the literature. Expert Opin Ther Targets 2011;15:21-

30. Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21105765.

NCCN Guidelines Inde

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Breast Cancer

480. Pusztai L, Viale G, Kelly CM, Hudis CA. Estrogen and HER-2

receptor discordance between primary breast cancer and metastasis.

Oncologist 2010;15:1164-1168. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21041379.

481. Bogina G, Bortesi L, Marconi M, et al. Comparison of hormonal

receptor and HER-2 status between breast primary tumours and

relapsing tumours: clinical implications of progesterone receptor loss.

Virchows Arch 2011;459:1-10. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21643691.

482. Fabi A, Di Benedetto A, Metro G, et al. HER2 protein and gene

variation between primary and metastatic breast cancer: significance

and impact on patient care. Clin Cancer Res 2011;17:2055-2064.

Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21307144.

483. Karlsson E, Lindström LS, Wilking U, et al. Discordance in

hormone receptor status in breast cancer during tumor progression

[abstract]. J Clin Oncol 2010;28:(15_Suppl):Abstract 1009. Available at:

http://www.asco.org/ASCOv2/Meetings/Abstracts?&vmview=abst_detail

_view&confID=74&abstractID=47385.

484. Sari E, Guler G, Hayran M, et al. Comparative study of the

immunohistochemical detection of hormone receptor status and HER-2

expression in primary and paired recurrent/metastatic lesions of patients

with breast cancer. Med Oncol 2011;28:57-63. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20099049.

485. Simmons C, Miller N, Geddie W, et al. Does confirmatory tumor

biopsy alter the management of breast cancer patients with distant

metastases? Ann Oncol 2009;20:1499-1504. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19299408.

486. Gong Y, Booser DJ, Sneige N. Comparison of HER-2 status

determined by fluorescence in situ hybridization in primary and

metastatic breast carcinoma. Cancer 2005;103:1763-1769. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15786420.

487. Tapia C, Savic S, Wagner U, et al. HER2 gene status in primary

breast cancers and matched distant metastases. Breast Cancer Res

2007;9. Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17511881.

488. Lindstrom LS, Karlsson E, Wilking UM, et al. Clinically used breast

cancer markers such as estrogen receptor, progesterone receptor, and

human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 are unstable throughout

tumor progression. J Clin Oncol 2012;30:2601-2608. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22711854.

489. Dieci MV, Barbieri E, Piacentini F, et al. Discordance in receptor

status between primary and recurrent breast cancer has a prognostic

impact: a single-institution analysis. Ann Oncol 2013;24:101-108.

Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23002281.

490. Aurilio G, Disalvatore D, Pruneri 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 2014;50:277-289. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24269135.

491. Katz A, Strom EA, Buchholz TA, et al. Locoregional recurrence

patterns after mastectomy and doxorubicin-based chemotherapy:

implications for postoperative irradiation. J Clin Oncol 2000;18:2817-

2827. Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10920129.

492. van Tienhoven G, Voogd AC, Peterse JL, et al. Prognosis after

treatment for loco-regional recurrence after mastectomy or breast

conserving therapy in two randomised trials (EORTC 10801 and DBCG-

82TM). EORTC Breast Cancer Cooperative Group and the Danish

Breast Cancer Cooperative Group. Eur J Cancer 1999;35:32-38.

Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10211085.

493. Cox CE, Furman BT, Kiluk JV, et al. Use of reoperative sentinel

lymph node biopsy in breast cancer patients. J Am Coll Surg

2008;207:57-61. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18589362.

NCCN Guidelines Inde

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Breast Cancer

494. Aebi S, Gelber S, Anderson SJ, et al. Chemotherapy for isolated

locoregional recurrence of breast cancer (CALOR): a randomised trial.

Lancet Oncol 2014;15:156-163. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24439313.

495. Higgins MJ, Wolff AC. Therapeutic options in the management of

metastatic breast cancer. Oncology (Williston Park) 2008;22:614-623.

Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18561551.

496. Gralow JR, Biermann JS, Farooki A, et al. NCCN task force report:

Bone health in cancer care. J Natl Compr Canc Netw 2009;7 Suppl 3:1-

1. Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19555589.

497. Hillner BE, Ingle JN, Chlebowski RT, et al. American Society of

Clinical Oncology 2003 update on the role of bisphosphonates and

bone health issues in women with breast cancer. J Clin Oncol

2003;21:4042-4057. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12963702.

498. Stopeck AT, Lipton A, Body JJ, et al. Denosumab compared with

zoledronic acid for the treatment of bone metastases in patients with

advanced breast cancer: A randomized, double-blind study. J Clin

Oncol 2010;28:5132-5139. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21060033.

499. Lacey DL, Timms E, Tan HL, et al. Osteoprotegerin ligand is a

cytokine that regulates osteoclast differentiation and activation. Cell

1998;93:165-176. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9568710.

500. Woo S-B, Hellstein JW, Kalmar JR. Narrative [corrected] review:

bisphosphonates and osteonecrosis of the jaws. Ann Intern Med

2006;144:753-761. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16702591.

501. Ali SM, Esteva FJ, Hortobagyi G, et al. Safety and efficacy of

bisphosphonates beyond 24 months in cancer patients. J Clin Oncol

2001;19:3434-3437. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11454892.

502. Berenson JR, Rosen LS, Howell A, et al. Zoledronic acid reduces

skeletal-related events in patients with osteolytic metastases. Cancer

2001;91:1191-1200. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11283917.

503. Conte PF, Latreille J, Mauriac L, et al. Delay in progression of

bone metastases in breast cancer patients treated with intravenous

pamidronate: results from a multinational randomized controlled trial.

The Aredia Multinational Cooperative Group. J Clin Oncol

1996;14:2552-2559. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8823335.

504. Hortobagyi GN, Theriault RL, Lipton A, et al. Long-term prevention

of skeletal complications of metastatic breast cancer with pamidronate.

Protocol 19 Aredia Breast Cancer Study Group. J Clin Oncol

1998;16:2038-2044. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9626201.

505. Theriault RL. The role of bisphosphonates in breast cancer. J Natl

Compr Canc Netw 2003;1:232-241. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19768882.

506. Theriault RL, Lipton A, Hortobagyi GN, et al. Pamidronate reduces

skeletal morbidity in women with advanced breast cancer and lytic bone

lesions: a randomized, placebo-controlled trial. Protocol 18 Aredia

Breast Cancer Study Group. J Clin Oncol 1999;17:846-854. Available

at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10071275.

507. Rosen LS, Gordon D, Kaminski M, et al. Zoledronic acid versus

pamidronate in the treatment of skeletal metastases in patients with

breast cancer or osteolytic lesions of multiple myeloma: a phase III,

double-blind, comparative trial. Cancer J 2001;7:377-387. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11693896.

NCCN Guidelines Inde

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Breast Cancer

508. Rosen LS, Gordon DH, Dugan W, et al. Zoledronic acid is superior

to pamidronate for the treatment of bone metastases in breast

carcinoma patients with at least one osteolytic lesion. Cancer

2004;100:36-43. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14692022.

509. Diel IJ, Body JJ, Lichinitser MR, et al. Improved quality of life after

long-term treatment with the bisphosphonate ibandronate in patients

with metastatic bone disease due to breast cancer. Eur J Cancer

2004;40:1704-1712. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15251160.

510. Hortobagyi GN, Theriault RL, Porter L, et al. Efficacy of

pamidronate in reducing skeletal complications in patients with breast

cancer and lytic bone metastases. Protocol 19 Aredia Breast Cancer

Study Group. N Engl J Med 1996;335:1785-1791. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8965890.

511. Lipton A, Theriault RL, Hortobagyi GN, et al. Pamidronate prevents

skeletal complications and is effective palliative treatment in women

with breast carcinoma and osteolytic bone metastases: long term follow-

up of two randomized, placebo-controlled trials. Cancer 2000;88:1082-

1090. Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10699899.

512. McLachlan SA, Cameron D, Murray R, et al. Safety of oral

ibandronate in the treatment of bone metastases from breast cancer :

long-term follow-up experience. Clin Drug Investig 2006;26:43-48.

Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17163234.

513. Pecherstorfer M, Rivkin S, Body J-J, et al. Long-term safety of

intravenous ibandronic acid for up to 4 years in metastatic breast

cancer: an open-label trial. Clin Drug Investig 2006;26:315-322.

Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17163265.

514. Hortobagyi GN, Lipton A, Chew HK, et al. Efficacy and safety of

continued zoledronic acid every 4 weeks versus every 12 weeks in

women with bone metastases from breast cancer: Results of the

OPTIMIZE-2 trial. ASCO Meeting Abstracts 2014;32:LBA9500.

Available at:

http://meeting.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/abstract/32/18_suppl/LBA9500.

515. Rosen LS, Gordon D, Kaminski M, et al. Long-term efficacy and

safety of zoledronic acid compared with pamidronate disodium in the

treatment of skeletal complications in patients with advanced multiple

myeloma or breast carcinoma: a randomized, double-blind, multicenter,

comparative trial. Cancer 2003;98:1735-1744. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14534891.

516. Wilkinson GS, Kuo Y-F, Freeman JL, Goodwin JS. Intravenous

bisphosphonate therapy and inflammatory conditions or surgery of the

jaw: a population-based analysis. J Natl Cancer Inst 2007;99:1016-

1024. Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17596574.

517. Klijn JG, Blamey RW, Boccardo F, et al. Combined tamoxifen and

luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone (LHRH) agonist versus LHRH

agonist alone in premenopausal advanced breast cancer: a meta-

analysis of four randomized trials. J Clin Oncol 2001;19:343-353.

Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11208825.

518. Bonneterre J, Thurlimann B, Robertson JF, et al. Anastrozole

versus tamoxifen as first-line therapy for advanced breast cancer in 668

postmenopausal women: results of the Tamoxifen or Arimidex

Randomized Group Efficacy and Tolerability study. J Clin Oncol

2000;18:3748-3757. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11078487.

519. Nabholtz JM, Buzdar A, Pollak M, et al. Anastrozole is superior to

tamoxifen as first-line therapy for advanced breast cancer in

postmenopausal women: results of a North American multicenter

randomized trial. Arimidex Study Group. J Clin Oncol 2000;18:3758-

3767. Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11078488.

520. Paridaens RJ, Dirix LY, Beex LV, et al. Phase III study comparing

exemestane with tamoxifen as first-line hormonal treatment of

metastatic breast cancer in postmenopausal women: the European

Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Breast Cancer

NCCN Guidelines Inde

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Breast Cancer

Cooperative Group. J Clin Oncol 2008;26:4883-4890. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18794551.

521. Vergote I, Bonneterre J, Thurlimann B, et al. Randomised study of

anastrozole versus tamoxifen as first-line therapy for advanced breast

cancer in postmenopausal women. Eur J Cancer 2000;36 Suppl 4:S84-

85. Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11056332.

522. Gibson L, Lawrence D, Dawson C, Bliss J. Aromatase inhibitors for

treatment of advanced breast cancer in postmenopausal women.

Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2009. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19821307.

523. Howell A, Robertson JFR, Quaresma Albano J, et al. Fulvestrant,

formerly ICI 182,780, is as effective as anastrozole in postmenopausal

women with advanced breast cancer progressing after prior endocrine

treatment. J Clin Oncol 2002;20:3396-3403. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12177099.

524. Osborne CK, Pippen J, Jones SE, et al. Double-blind, randomized

trial comparing the efficacy and tolerability of fulvestrant versus

anastrozole in postmenopausal women with advanced breast cancer

progressing on prior endocrine therapy: results of a North American

trial. J Clin Oncol 2002;20:3386-3395. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12177098

525. Robertson JF, Llombart-Cussac A, Rolski J, et al. Activity of

fulvestrant 500 mg versus anastrozole 1 mg as first-line treatment for

advanced breast cancer: results from the FIRST study. J Clin Oncol

2009;27:4530-4535. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19704066.

526. Robertson JF, Lindemann JP, Llombart-Cussac A, et al.

Fulvestrant 500 mg versus anastrozole 1 mg for the first-line treatment

of advanced breast cancer: follow-up analysis from the randomized

'FIRST' study. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2012;136:503-511. Available

at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23065000.

527. Ellis MJ, Llombart-Cussac A, Feltl D, et al. Fulvestrant 500 mg

versus anastrozole 1 mg for the first-Line treatment of advanced breast

cancer: Overall survival analysis from the phase II FIRST study. J Clin

Oncol 2015;33:3781-3787. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26371134.

528. Ingle JN, Suman VJ, Rowland KM, et al. Fulvestrant in women with

advanced breast cancer after progression on prior aromatase inhibitor

therapy: North Central Cancer Treatment Group Trial N0032. J Clin

Oncol 2006;24:1052-1056. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16505423.

529. Chia S, Gradishar W, Mauriac L, et al. Double-blind, randomized

placebo controlled trial of fulvestrant compared with exemestane after

prior nonsteroidal aromatase inhibitor therapy in postmenopausal

women with hormone receptor-positive, advanced breast cancer: results

from EFECT. J Clin Oncol 2008;26:1664-1670. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18316794.

530. Di Leo A, Jerusalem G, Petruzelka L, et al. Results of the

CONFIRM phase III trial comparing fulvestrant 250 mg with fulvestrant

500 mg in postmenopausal women with estrogen receptor-positive

advanced breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 2010;28:4594-4600. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20855825.

531. Di Leo A, Jerusalem G, Petruzelka L, et al. Final overall survival:

fulvestrant 500 mg vs 250 mg in the randomized CONFIRM trial. J Natl

Cancer Inst 2014;106:djt337. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24317176.

532. Bergh J, Jonsson PE, Lidbrink EK, et al. FACT: an open-label

randomized phase III study of fulvestrant and anastrozole in

combination compared with anastrozole alone as first-line therapy for

patients with receptor-positive postmenopausal breast cancer. J Clin

Oncol 2012;30:1919-1925. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22370325.

NCCN Guidelines Inde

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Breast Cancer

533. Mehta RS, Barlow WE, Albain KS, et al. Combination anastrozole

and fulvestrant in metastatic breast cancer. N Engl J Med

2012;367:435-444. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22853014.

534. Johnston SR, Kilburn LS, Ellis P, et al. Fulvestrant plus

anastrozole or placebo versus exemestane alone after progression on

non-steroidal aromatase inhibitors in postmenopausal patients with

hormone-receptor-positive locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer

(SoFEA): a composite, multicentre, phase 3 randomised trial. Lancet

Oncol 2013;14:989-998. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23902874.

535. Buzdar A, Douma J, Davidson N, et al. Phase III, multicenter,

double-blind, randomized study of letrozole, an aromatase inhibitor, for

advanced breast cancer versus megestrol acetate. J Clin Oncol

2001;19:3357-3366. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11454883.

536. Buzdar AU, Jonat W, Howell A, et al. Anastrozole versus

megestrol acetate in the treatment of postmenopausal women with

advanced breast carcinoma: results of a survival update based on a

combined analysis of data from two mature phase III trials. Arimidex

Study Group. Cancer 1998;83:1142-1152. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9740079.

537. Finn RS, Crown JP, Lang I, et al. The cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6

inhibitor palbociclib in combination with letrozole versus letrozole alone

as first-line treatment of oestrogen receptor-positive, HER2-negative,

advanced breast cancer (PALOMA-1/TRIO-18): a randomised phase 2

study. Lancet Oncol 2015;16:25-35. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25524798.

538. Turner NC, Ro J, Andre F, et al. Palbociclib in hormone-receptor-

positive advanced breast cancer. N Engl J Med 2015;373:209-219.

Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26030518.

539. Johnston S, Pippen J, Pivot X, et al. Lapatinib combined with

letrozole versus letrozole and placebo as first-line therapy for

postmenopausal hormone receptor-positive metastatic breast cancer. J

Clin Oncol 2009;27:5538-5546. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19786658.

540. Kaufman B, Mackey JR, Clemens MR, et al. Trastuzumab plus

anastrozole versus anastrozole alone for the treatment of

postmenopausal women with human epidermal growth factor receptor

2-positive, hormone receptor-positive metastatic breast cancer: results

from the randomized phase III TAnDEM study. J Clin Oncol

2009;27:5529-5537. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19786670.

541. Bachelot T, Bourgier c, Cropet C, et al. TAMRAD: A GINECO

randomized phase II trial of everolimus in combination with tamoxifen

versus tamoxifen alone in patients (pts) with hormone-receptor positive,

HER2 negative metastatic breast Cancer (MBC) with prior exposure to

aromatase inhibitors (AI) [abstract]. Cancer Res 2010;70(24

Supplement):Abstract: S1-6 Available at:

http://cancerres.aacrjournals.org/cgi/content/meeting_abstract/70/24_M

eetingAbstracts/S1-6.

542. Chow L, Sun Y, Jassem J, et al. Phase 3 study of temsirolimus

with letrozole or letrozole alone in postmenopausal women with locally

advanced or metastatic breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat.

2006;100(Suppl 1):6091. Available at:

543. Yardley DA, Noguchi S, Pritchard KI, et al. Everolimus plus

exemestane in postmenopausal patients with HR(+) breast cancer:

BOLERO-2 final progression-free survival analysis. Adv Ther

2013;30:870-884. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24158787.

544. Baselga J, Campone M, Piccart M, et al. Everolimus in

postmenopausal hormone-receptor-positive advanced breast cancer. N

Engl J Med 2012;366:520-529. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22149876.

NCCN Guidelines Inde

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Breast Cancer

545. Pritchard KI, Burris HA, 3rd, Ito Y, et al. Safety and efficacy of

everolimus with exemestane vs. exemestane alone in elderly patients

with HER2-negative, hormone receptor-positive breast cancer in

BOLERO-2. Clin Breast Cancer 2013;13:421-432 e428. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24267730.

546. Buzdar A, Jonat W, Howell A, et al. Anastrozole, a potent and

selective aromatase inhibitor, versus megestrol acetate in

postmenopausal women with advanced breast cancer: results of

overview analysis of two phase III trials. Arimidex Study Group. J Clin

Oncol 1996;14:2000-2011. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8683230.

547. Dombernowsky P, Smith I, Falkson G, et al. Letrozole, a new oral

aromatase inhibitor for advanced breast cancer: double-blind

randomized trial showing a dose effect and improved efficacy and

tolerability compared with megestrol acetate. J Clin Oncol 1998;16:453-

461. Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9469328.

548. Lonning PE, Bajetta E, Murray R, et al. Activity of exemestane in

metastatic breast cancer after failure of nonsteroidal aromatase

inhibitors: a phase II trial. J Clin Oncol 2000;18:2234-2244. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10829043.

549. Albain KS, Nag S, Calderillo-Ruiz G, et al. Global phase III study of

gemcitabine plus paclitaxel (GT) vs. paclitaxel (T) as frontline therapy

for metastatic breast cancer (MBC): First report of overall survival

[Abstract]. J Clin Oncol 2004;22:Abstract 510 Available at:

http://meeting.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/abstract/22/14_suppl/510.

550. Carrick S, Parker S, Wilcken N, et al. Single agent versus

combination chemotherapy for metastatic breast cancer. Cochrane

Database Syst Rev 2005. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15846660.

551. O'Shaughnessy J, Miles D, Vukelja S, et al. Superior survival with

capecitabine plus docetaxel combination therapy in anthracycline-

pretreated patients with advanced breast cancer: phase III trial results. J

Clin Oncol 2002;20:2812-2823. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12065558.

552. Sledge GW, Neuberg D, Bernardo P, et al. Phase III trial of

doxorubicin, paclitaxel, and the combination of doxorubicin and

paclitaxel as front-line chemotherapy for metastatic breast cancer: an

intergroup trial (E1193). J Clin Oncol 2003;21:588-592. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12586793.

553. Gennari A, Stockler M, Puntoni M, et al. Duration of chemotherapy

for metastatic breast cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis of

randomized clinical trials. J Clin Oncol 2011;29:2144-2149. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21464403.

554. Falkson G, Gelman RS, Pandya KJ, et al. Eastern Cooperative

Oncology Group randomized trials of observation versus maintenance

therapy for patients with metastatic breast cancer in complete remission

following induction treatment. J Clin Oncol 1998;16:1669-1676.

Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9586877.

555. Muss HB, Case LD, Richards F, et al. Interrupted versus

continuous chemotherapy in patients with metastatic breast cancer. The

Piedmont Oncology Association. N Engl J Med 1991;325:1342-1348.

Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1922236.

556. Cortes J, O'Shaughnessy J, Loesch D, et al. Eribulin monotherapy

versus treatment of physician's choice in patients with metastatic breast

cancer (EMBRACE): a phase 3 open-label randomised study. Lancet

2011;377:914-923. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21376385.

557. Kaufman PA, Awada A, Twelves C, et al. Phase III open-label

randomized study of eribulin mesylate versus capecitabine in patients

with locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer previously treated

with an anthracycline and a taxane. J Clin Oncol 2015;33:594-601.

Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25605862.

NCCN Guidelines Inde

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Breast Cancer

558. Roche H, Yelle L, Cognetti F, et al. Phase II clinical trial of

ixabepilone (BMS-247550), an epothilone B analog, as first-line therapy

in patients with metastatic breast cancer previously treated with

anthracycline chemotherapy. J Clin Oncol 2007;25:3415-3420.

Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17606972.

559. Thomas E, Tabernero J, Fornier M, et al. Phase II clinical trial of

ixabepilone (BMS-247550), an epothilone B analog, in patients with

taxane-resistant metastatic breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 2007;25:3399-

3406. Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17606975.

560. Perez EA, Lerzo G, Pivot X, et al. Efficacy and safety of

ixabepilone (BMS-247550) in a phase II study of patients with advanced

breast cancer resistant to an anthracycline, a taxane, and capecitabine.

J Clin Oncol 2007;25:3407-3414. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17606974.

561. Miller K, Wang M, Gralow J, et al. Paclitaxel plus bevacizumab

versus paclitaxel alone for metastatic breast cancer. N Engl J Med

2007;357:2666-2676. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18160686.

562. Miles DW, Chan A, Dirix LY, et al. Phase III study of bevacizumab

plus docetaxel compared with placebo plus docetaxel for the first-line

treatment of human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative

metastatic breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 2010;28:3239-3247. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20498403.

563. Robert NJ, Dieras V, Glaspy J, et al. RIBBON-1: Randomized,

double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase III trial of chemotherapy with or

without bevacizumab (B) for first-line treatment of HER2-negative locally

recurrent or metastatic breast cancer (MBC) [abstract]. J Clin Oncol

2009;27(Suppl 15):Abstract 1005. Available at:

http://meeting.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/abstract/27/15S/1005.

564. Robert NJ, Dieras V, Glaspy J, et al. RIBBON-1: randomized,

double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase III trial of chemotherapy with or

without bevacizumab for first-line treatment of human epidermal growth

factor receptor 2-negative, locally recurrent or metastatic breast cancer.

J Clin Oncol 2011;29:1252-1260. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21383283.

565. O'Shaughnessy J, Miles D, Gray RJ, et al. A meta-analysis of

overall survival data from three randomized trials of bevacizumab (BV)

and first-line chemotherapy as treatment for patients with metastatic

breast cancer (MBC) [abstract]. J Clin Oncol 2010;28(Suppl

15):Abstract 1005. Available at:

http://meeting.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/abstract/28/15_suppl/1005.

566. BRIEFING BOOK, ONCOLOGY DRUGS ADVISORY

COMMITTEE MEETING, AVASTIN (Bevacizumab). Genentech, Inc., A

Member of the Roche Group; 2010. Available at:

http://www.fda.gov/downloads/AdvisoryCommittees/CommitteesMeeting

Materials/Drugs/OncologicDrugsAdvisoryCommittee/UCM219228.pdf.

567. Seidman A, Berry DA, Cirrincione C, et al. Randomized phase III

trial of weekly compared with every-3-weeks paclitaxel for metastatic

breast cancer, with trastuzumab for all HER-2 overexpressors and

random assignment to trastuzumab or not in HER-2 nonoverexpressors:

final results of Cancer and Leukemia Group B protocol 9840. J Clin

Oncol 2008;26:1642-1649. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18375893.

568. Carlson RW, Moench SJ, Hammond ME, et al. HER2 testing in

breast cancer: NCCN Task Force report and recommendations. J Natl

Compr Canc Netw 2006;4 Suppl 3:1-22. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16813731.

569. Roche PC, Suman VJ, Jenkins RB, et al. Concordance between

local and central laboratory HER2 testing in the breast intergroup trial

N9831. J Natl Cancer Inst 2002;94:855-857. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12048274.

570. Wolff AC, Hammond MEH, Schwartz JN, et al. American Society of

Clinical Oncology/College of American Pathologists guideline

recommendations for human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 testing

NCCN Guidelines Inde

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Breast Cancer

in breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 2007;25:118-145. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17159189.

571. Baselga J, Cortes J, Kim SB, et al. Pertuzumab plus trastuzumab

plus docetaxel for metastatic breast cancer. N Engl J Med

2012;366:109-119. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22149875.

572. Ewer M, Baselga J, Clark E, et al. Cardiac tolerability of

pertuzumab plus trastuzumab plus docetaxel in patients with HER2-

positive metastatic breast cancer in the CLEOPATRA study [abstract]. J

Clin Oncol 2012;30 (Suppl_15):Abstract 533. Available at:

http://www.asco.org/ASCOv2/Meetings/Abstracts?&vmview=abst_detail

_view&confID=114&abstractID=95049.

573. Cortés J, Baselga J, Im Y, et al. Quality of life assessment in

CLEOPATRA, a phase III study combining pertuzumab with

trastuzumab and docetaxel in metastatic breast cancer [abstract]. J Clin

Oncol 2012 30 (Suppl_15) Abstract 598 Available at:

http://www.asco.org/ASCOv2/Meetings/Abstracts?&vmview=abst_detail

_view&confID=114&abstractID=95084.

574. Datko F, D'Andrea G, Dickler M, et al. Phase II study of

pertuzumab, trastuzumab, and weekly paclitaxel in patients with

metastatic HER2-overexpressing metastatic breast cancer [abstract].

Cancer Research 2012;72:Abstract P5-18-20. Available at:

http://cancerres.aacrjournals.org/cgi/content/meeting_abstract/72/24_M

eetingAbstracts/P5-18-20.

575. Paclitaxel, trastuzumab, and pertuzumab in the treatment of

metastatic HER2-positive breast cancer (Clinical Trial ID:

NCT01276041). Available at:

http://clinicaltrials.gov/show/NCT01276041. .

576. Perez E, Lopez-Vega J, Mastro L, et al. A combination of

pertuzumab, trastuzumab, and vinorelbine for first-line treatment of

patients with HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer: An open-label,

two-cohort, phase II study (VELVET) [abstract]. J Clin Oncol 2012;30

(Suppl_15):Asbtract TPS653. Available at:

http://www.asco.org/ASCOv2/Meetings/Abstracts?&vmview=abst_detail

_view&confID=114&abstractID=93917.

577. Burstein HJ, Keshaviah A, Baron AD, et al. Trastuzumab plus

vinorelbine or taxane chemotherapy for HER2-overexpressing

metastatic breast cancer: the trastuzumab and vinorelbine or taxane

study. Cancer 2007;110:965-972. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17614302.

578. Robert N, Leyland-Jones B, Asmar L, et al. Randomized phase III

study of trastuzumab, paclitaxel, and carboplatin compared with

trastuzumab and paclitaxel in women with HER-2-overexpressing

metastatic breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 2006;24:2786-2792. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16782917.

579. Schaller G, Bangemann N, Weber J, et al. Efficacy and safety of

trastuzumab plus capecitabine in a German multicentre phase II study

of pre-treated metastatic breast cancer [abstract]. J Clin Oncol

2005;23(Suppl 16):Abstract 717. Available at:

http://meeting.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/abstract/23/16_suppl/717.

580. Yamamoto D, Iwase S, Kitamura K, et al. A phase II study of

trastuzumab and capecitabine for patients with HER2-overexpressing

metastatic breast cancer: Japan Breast Cancer Research Network

(JBCRN) 00 Trial. Cancer Chemother Pharmacol 2008;61:509-514.

Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17516068.

581. Seidman A, Hudis C, Pierri MK, et al. Cardiac dysfunction in the

trastuzumab clinical trials experience. J Clin Oncol 2002;20:1215-1221.

Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11870163.

582. Verma S, Miles D, Gianni L, et al. Trastuzumab emtansine for

HER2-positive advanced breast cancer. N Engl J Med 2012;367:1783-

1791. Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23020162.

583. Ellis PA, Barrios CH, Eiermann W, et al. Phase III, randomized

study of trastuzumab emtansine (T-DM1) {+/-} pertuzumab (P) vs

NCCN Guidelines Inde

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Breast Cancer

trastuzumab + taxane (HT) for first-line treatment of HER2-positive

MBC: Primary results from the MARIANNE study. ASCO Meeting

Abstracts 2015;33:507. Available at:

http://meeting.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/abstract/33/15_suppl/507.

584. Bartsch R, Wenzel C, Altorjai G, et al. Capecitabine and

trastuzumab in heavily pretreated metastatic breast cancer. J Clin Oncol

2007;25:3853-3858. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17679724.

585. von Minckwitz G, du Bois A, Schmidt M, et al. Trastuzumab

beyond progression in human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-

positive advanced breast cancer: a german breast group 26/breast

international group 03-05 study. J Clin Oncol 2009;27:1999-2006.

Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19289619.

586. Von Minckwitz G, Zielinski C, Maarteense E, et al. Capecitabine

vs. capecitabine + trastuzumab in patients with HER2-positive

metastatic breast cancer progressing during trastuzumab treatment:

The TBP phase III study (GBG 26/BIG 3-05) [abstract]. J Clin Oncol

2008;26(Suppl 15):Abstract 1025. Available at:

http://meeting.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/abstract/26/15_suppl/1025.

587. Baselga J, Gelmon KA, Verma S, et al. Phase II trial of

pertuzumab and trastuzumab in patients with human epidermal growth

factor receptor 2-positive metastatic breast cancer that progressed

during prior trastuzumab therapy. J Clin Oncol 2010;28:1138-1144.

Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20124182.

588. Cortes J, Fumoleau P, Bianchi GV, et al. Pertuzumab

monotherapy after trastuzumab-based treatment and subsequent

reintroduction of trastuzumab: activity and tolerability in patients with

advanced human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive breast

cancer. J Clin Oncol 2012;30:1594-1600. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22393084.

589. Geyer C, Forster J, Lindquist D, et al. Lapatinib plus capecitabine

for HER2-positive advanced breast cancer. N Engl J Med

2006;355:2733-2743. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17192538.

590. Cameron D, Casey M, Oliva C, et al. Lapatinib plus capecitabine in

women with HER-2-positive advanced breast cancer: final survival

analysis of a phase III randomized trial. Oncologist 2010;15:924-934.

Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20736298.

591. Blackwell KL, Burstein HJ, Storniolo AM, et al. Randomized study

of lapatinib alone or in combination with trastuzumab in women with

ErbB2-positive, trastuzumab-refractory metastatic breast cancer. J Clin

Oncol 2010;28:1124-1130. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20124187.

592. Blackwell KL, Burstein HJ, Storniolo AM, et al. Overall survival

benefit with lapatinib in combination with trastuzumab for patients with

human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive metastatic breast

cancer: final results from the EGF104900 Study. J Clin Oncol

2012;30:2585-2592. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22689807.

593. Hortobagyi GN. Multidisciplinary management of advanced primary

and metastatic breast cancer. Cancer 1994;74:416-423. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8004615.

594. Babiera GV, Rao R, Feng L, et al. Effect of primary tumor

extirpation in breast cancer patients who present with stage IV disease

and an intact primary tumor. Ann Surg Oncol 2006;13:776-782.

Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16614878.

595. Khan SA, Stewart AK, Morrow M. Does aggressive local therapy

improve survival in metastatic breast cancer? Surgery 2002;132:620-

626. Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12407345.

596. Rao R, Feng L, Kuerer HM, et al. Timing of surgical intervention for

the intact primary in stage IV breast cancer patients. Ann Surg Oncol

2008;15:1696-1702. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18357493.

NCCN Guidelines Inde

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Breast Cancer

597. Rapiti E, Verkooijen HM, Vlastos G, et al. Complete excision of

primary breast tumor improves survival of patients with metastatic

breast cancer at diagnosis. J Clin Oncol 2006;24:2743-2749. Available

at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16702580.

598. Morrow M, Goldstein L. Surgery of the primary tumor in metastatic

breast cancer: closing the barn door after the horse has bolted? J Clin

Oncol 2006;24:2694-2696. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16702578.

599. Olson JA, Marcom PK. Benefit or bias? The role of surgery to

remove the primary tumor in patients with metastatic breast cancer. Ann

Surg 2008;247:739-740. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18438109.

600. Badwe R, Parmar V, Hawaldar R, et al. Surgical removal of

primary breast tumor and axillary lymph nodes in women with

metastatic breast cancer at first presentation: a randomized controlled

trial. Presented at: 2013 [abstract]. San Antonio Breast Cancer

Symposium 2013:Abstract S2-02. Available at:

601. Soran A, Ozmen V, Ozbas S, et al. Early follow up of a randomized

trial evaluating resection of the primary breast tumor in women

presenting with de novo stage IV breast cancer; Turkish study (protocol

MF07-01) [abstract]. San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium

2013:Abstract S2-03. Available at:

602. Jones EL, Oleson JR, Prosnitz LR, et al. Randomized trial of

hyperthermia and radiation for superficial tumors. J Clin Oncol

2005;23:3079-3085. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15860867.

603. Vernon CC, Hand JW, Field SB, et al. Radiotherapy with or without

hyperthermia in the treatment of superficial localized breast cancer:

results from five randomized controlled trials. International Collaborative

Hyperthermia Group. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 1996;35:731-744.

Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8690639.

604. Eisenhauer EA, Therasse P, Bogaerts J, et al. New response

evaluation criteria in solid tumours: revised RECIST guideline (version

1.1). Eur J Cancer 2009;45:228-247. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19097774.

605. Miller AB, Hoogstraten B, Staquet M, Winkler A. Reporting results

of cancer treatment. Cancer 1981;47:207-214. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/7459811.

606. Smerage JB, Barlow WE, Hortobagyi GN, et al. Circulating tumor

cells and response to chemotherapy in metastatic breast cancer:

SWOG S0500. J Clin Oncol 2014;32:3483-3489. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24888818.

607. Sakorafas GH, Blanchard K, Sarr MG, Farley DR. Paget's disease

of the breast. Cancer Treat Rev 2001;27:9-18. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11237774.

608. Kollmorgen DR, Varanasi JS, Edge SB, Carson WE. Paget's

disease of the breast: a 33-year experience. J Am Coll Surg

1998;187:171-177. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9704964.

609. Marcus E. The management of Paget's disease of the breast. Curr

Treat Options Oncol 2004;5:153-160. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14990209.

610. Morrogh M, Morris EA, Liberman L, et al. MRI identifies otherwise

occult disease in select patients with Paget disease of the nipple. J Am

Coll Surg 2008;206:316-321. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18222386.

611. Frei KA, Bonel HM, Pelte M-F, et al. Paget disease of the breast:

findings at magnetic resonance imaging and histopathologic correlation.

Invest Radiol 2005;40:363-367. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15905723.

NCCN Guidelines Inde

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Breast Cancer

612. Bijker N, Rutgers EJ, Duchateau L, et al. Breast-conserving

therapy for Paget disease of the nipple: a prospective European

Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer study of 61

patients. Cancer 2001;91:472-477. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11169928.

613. Kawase K, Dimaio DJ, Tucker SL, et al. Paget's disease of the

breast: there is a role for breast-conserving therapy. Ann Surg Oncol

2005;12:391-397. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15915373.

614. Marshall JK, Griffith KA, Haffty BG, et al. Conservative

management of Paget disease of the breast with radiotherapy: 10- and

15-year results. Cancer 2003;97:2142-2149. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12712465.

615. Pierce LJ, Haffty BG, Solin LJ, et al. The conservative

management of Paget's disease of the breast with radiotherapy. Cancer

1997;80:1065-1072. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9305706.

616. Singh A, Sutton RJ, Baker CB, Sacks NP. Is mastectomy

overtreatment for Paget's disease of the nipple? Breast 1999;8:191-

194. Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14731439.

617. Laronga C, Hasson D, Hoover S, et al. Paget's disease in the era

of sentinel lymph node biopsy. Am J Surg 2006;192:481-483. Available

at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16978954.

618. Sukumvanich P, Bentrem DJ, Cody HS, et al. The role of sentinel

lymph node biopsy in Paget's disease of the breast. Ann Surg Oncol

2007;14:1020-1023. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17195914.

619. Telli ML, Horst KC, Guardino AE, et al. Phyllodes tumors of the

breast: natural history, diagnosis, and treatment. J Natl Compr Canc

Netw 2007;5:324-330. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17439760.

620. Anderson BO, Lawton TJ, Lehman CD, Moe RE. Phyllodes

tumors. In: Harris JR, Lippman ME, Morrow M, Osborne CK, eds.

Diseases of the Breast (ed 3rd). Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams &

Wilkins; 2004.

621. Salvadori B, Cusumano F, Del Bo R, et al. Surgical treatment of

phyllodes tumors of the breast. Cancer 1989;63:2532-2536. Available

at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2541890.

622. Birch JM, Alston RD, McNally RJ, et al. Relative frequency and

morphology of cancers in carriers of germline TP53 mutations.

Oncogene 2001;20:4621-4628. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11498785.

623. Chaney AW, Pollack A, McNeese MD, et al. Primary treatment of

cystosarcoma phyllodes of the breast. Cancer 2000;89:1502-1511.

Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11013364.

624. Mangi AA, Smith BL, Gadd MA, et al. Surgical management of

phyllodes tumors. Arch Surg 1999;134:487-492. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10323420.

625. Pandey M, Mathew A, Kattoor J, et al. Malignant phyllodes tumor.

Breast J 2001;7:411-416. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11843853.

626. Tse GMK, Lee CS, Kung FYL, et al. Hormonal receptors

expression in epithelial cells of mammary phyllodes tumors correlates

with pathologic grade of the tumor: a multicenter study of 143 cases.

Am J Clin Pathol 2002;118:522-526. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12375638.

627. Smith LH, Dalrymple JL, Leiserowitz GS, et al. Obstetrical

deliveries associated with maternal malignancy in California, 1992

through 1997. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2001;184:1504-1512. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11408874.

NCCN Guidelines Inde

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Breast Cancer

628. Gwyn K, Theriault R. Breast cancer during pregnancy. Oncology

(Williston Park) 2001;15:39-46. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11271981.

629. Middleton LP, Amin M, Gwyn K, et al. Breast carcinoma in

pregnant women: assessment of clinicopathologic and

immunohistochemical features. Cancer 2003;98:1055-1060. Available

at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12942575.

630. Yang WT, Dryden MJ, Gwyn K, et al. Imaging of breast cancer

diagnosed and treated with chemotherapy during pregnancy. Radiology

2006;239:52-60. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16484353.

631. Kuerer HM, Gwyn K, Ames FC, Theriault RL. Conservative surgery

and chemotherapy for breast carcinoma during pregnancy. Surgery

2002;131:108-110. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11812971.

632. Annane K, Bellocq JP, Brettes JP, Mathelin C. Infiltrative breast

cancer during pregnancy and conservative surgery. Fetal Diagn Ther

2005;20:442-444. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16113569.

633. Khera SY, Kiluk JV, Hasson DM, et al. Pregnancy-associated

breast cancer patients can safely undergo lymphatic mapping. Breast J

2008;14:250-254. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18476883.

634. Mondi MM, Cuenca RE, Ollila DW, et al. Sentinel lymph node

biopsy during pregnancy: initial clinical experience. Ann Surg Oncol

2007;14:218-221. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17066225.

635. Filippakis GM, Zografos G. Contraindications of sentinel lymph

node biopsy: are there any really? World J Surg Oncol 2007;5:10.

Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17261174.

636. Gentilini O, Cremonesi M, Trifiro G, et al. Safety of sentinel node

biopsy in pregnant patients with breast cancer. Ann Oncol

2004;15:1348-1351. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15319240.

637. Keleher A, Wendt R, Delpassand E, et al. The safety of lymphatic

mapping in pregnant breast cancer patients using Tc-99m sulfur colloid.

Breast J 2004;10:492-495. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15569204.

638. Pandit-Taskar N, Dauer LT, Montgomery L, et al. Organ and fetal

absorbed dose estimates from 99mTc-sulfur colloid lymphoscintigraphy

and sentinel node localization in breast cancer patients. J Nucl Med

2006;47:1202-1208. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16818956.

639. Germann N, Goffinet F, Goldwasser F. Anthracyclines during

pregnancy: embryo-fetal outcome in 160 patients. Ann Oncol

2004;15:146-150. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14679135.

640. Johnson PH, Gwyn K, Gordon N, et al. The treatment of pregnant

women with breast cancer and the outcomes of the children exposed to

chemotherapy in utero [abstract]. J Clin Oncol 2005;23(Suppl

16):Abstract 540. Available at:

http://meeting.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/abstract/23/16_suppl/540.

641. Doll DC, Ringenberg QS, Yarbro JW. Antineoplastic agents and

pregnancy. Semin Oncol 1989;16:337-346. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2678485.

642. Ebert U, Loffler H, Kirch W. Cytotoxic therapy and pregnancy.

Pharmacol Ther 1997;74:207-220. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9336023.

643. Hahn KME, Johnson PH, Gordon N, et al. Treatment of pregnant

breast cancer patients and outcomes of children exposed to

NCCN Guidelines Inde

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Breast Cancer

chemotherapy in utero. Cancer 2006;107:1219-1226. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16894524.

644. Gainford MC, Clemons M. Breast cancer in pregnancy: are

taxanes safe? Clinical Oncol (R Coll Radiol) 2006;18:159. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16523825.

645. Garcia-Manero M, Royo MP, Espinos J, et al. Pregnancy

associated breast cancer. Eur J Surg Oncol 2009;35:215-218. Available

at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18550321.

646. Gonzalez-Angulo AM, Walters RS, Carpenter RJ, et al. Paclitaxel

chemotherapy in a pregnant patient with bilateral breast cancer. Clin

Breast Cancer 2004;5:317-319. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15507181.

647. Mir O, Berveiller P, Ropert S, et al. Emerging therapeutic options

for breast cancer chemotherapy during pregnancy. Ann Oncol

2008;19:607-613. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17921242.

648. Bader AA, Schlembach D, Tamussino KF, et al. Anhydramnios

associated with administration of trastuzumab and paclitaxel for

metastatic breast cancer during pregnancy. Lancet Oncol 2007;8:79-81.

Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17196514.

649. Fanale MA, Uyei AR, Theriault RL, et al. Treatment of metastatic

breast cancer with trastuzumab and vinorelbine during pregnancy. Clin

Breast Cancer 2005;6:354-356. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16277887.

650. Pant S, Landon MB, Blumenfeld M, et al. Treatment of breast

cancer with trastuzumab during pregnancy. J Clin Oncol 2008;26:1567-

1569. Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18349415.

651. Sekar R, Stone PR. Trastuzumab use for metastatic breast cancer

in pregnancy. Obstet Gynecol 2007;110:507-510. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17666645.

652. Shrim A, Garcia-Bournissen F, Maxwell C, et al. Favorable

pregnancy outcome following Trastuzumab (Herceptin) use during

pregnancy--Case report and updated literature review. Reprod Toxicol

2007;23:611-613. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17399946.

653. Waterston AM, Graham J. Effect of Adjuvant Trastuzumab on

Pregnancy. J Clin Oncol 2006;24:321-322. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16401684.

654. Watson WJ. Herceptin (trastuzumab) therapy during pregnancy:

association with reversible anhydramnios. Obstet Gynecol

2005;105:642-643. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15738038.

655. Witzel ID, Müller V, Harps E, et al. Trastuzumab in pregnancy

associated with poor fetal outcome. Ann Oncol 2008;19:191-192.

Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18084047.

656. Kelly H, Graham M, Humes E, et al. Delivery of a healthy baby

after first-trimester maternal exposure to lapatinib. Clin Breast Cancer

2006;7:339-341. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17092403.

657. Dawood, S, Cristofanilli M. What progress have we made in

managing inflammatory breast cancer? Oncology 2007;21:673-679.

Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17564325

658. Jaiyesimi IA, Buzdar AU, Hortobagyi G. Inflammatory breast

cancer: a review. J Clin Oncol 1992;10:1014-1024. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1588366.

659. Bertucci F, Finetti P, Rougemont J, et al. Gene expression profiling

identifies molecular subtypes of inflammatory breast cancer. Cancer

Res 2005;65:2170-2178. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15781628.

NCCN Guidelines Inde

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Breast Cancer

660. Van Laere SJ, Van den Eynden GG, Van der Auwera I, et al.

Identification of cell-of-origin breast tumor subtypes in inflammatory

breast cancer by gene expression profiling. Breast Cancer Res Treat

2006;95:243-255. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16261404.

661. Zell JA, Tsang WY, Taylor TH, et al. Prognostic impact of human

epidermal growth factor-like receptor 2 and hormone receptor status in

inflammatory breast cancer (IBC): analysis of 2,014 IBC patient cases

from the California Cancer Registry. Breast Cancer Res 2009;11:R9.

Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19228416.

662. Parton M, Dowsett M, Ashley S, et al. High incidence of HER-2

positivity in inflammatory breast cancer. Breast 2004;13:97-103.

Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15019688.

663. Haagensen CD. Inflammatory Carcinoma. Diseases of the Breast.

Philadelphia: WB Saunders; 1956:488-498.

664. Cristofanilli M, Valero V, Buzdar AU, et al. Inflammatory breast

cancer (IBC) and patterns of recurrence: understanding the biology of a

unique disease. Cancer 2007;110:1436-1444. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17694554.

665. Panades M, Olivotto IA, Speers CH, et al. Evolving treatment

strategies for inflammatory breast cancer: a population-based survival

analysis. J Clin Oncol 2005;23:1941-1950. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15774787.

666. Dawood S, Ueno NT, Valero V, et al. Differences in survival among

women with stage III inflammatory and noninflammatory locally

advanced breast cancer appear early: a large population-based study.

Cancer 2011;117:1819-1826. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21509759.

667. Hance KW, Anderson WF, Devesa SS, et al. Trends in

inflammatory breast carcinoma incidence and survival: the surveillance,

epidemiology, and end results program at the National Cancer Institute.

J Natl Cancer Inst 2005;97:966-975. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15998949.

668. Bleicher RJ, Morrow M. Inflammatory breast cancer: Still poorly

characterized. The Dawood/Cristofanilli article reviewed. Oncology

2007;21:679-680. Available at: http://www.cancernetwork.com/breast-

cancer/content/article/10165/61508.

669. Nguyen DM, Sam K, Tsimelzon A, et al. Molecular heterogeneity of

inflammatory breast cancer: a hyperproliferative phenotype. Clin Cancer

Res 2006;12:5047-5054. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16951220.

670. Carkaci S, Macapinlac HA, Cristofanilli M, et al. Retrospective

study of 18F-FDG PET/CT in the diagnosis of inflammatory breast

cancer: preliminary data. J Nucl Med 2009;50:231-238. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19164229.

671. Chia S, Swain SM, Byrd DR, Mankoff DA. Locally advanced and

inflammatory breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 2008;26:786-790. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18258987.

672. Fleming RY, Asmar L, Buzdar AU, et al. Effectiveness of

mastectomy by response to induction chemotherapy for control in

inflammatory breast carcinoma. Ann Surg Oncol 1997;4:452-461.

Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9309333.

673. Ueno NT, Buzdar AU, Singletary SE, et al. Combined-modality

treatment of inflammatory breast carcinoma: twenty years of experience

at M. D. Anderson Cancer Center. Cancer Chemother Pharmacol

1997;40:321-329. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9225950.

674. Cristofanilli M, Gonzalez-Angulo AM, Buzdar AU, et al. Paclitaxel

improves the prognosis in estrogen receptor negative inflammatory

breast cancer: the M. D. Anderson Cancer Center experience. Clin

Breast Cancer 2004;4:415-419. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15023242.

NCCN Guidelines Inde

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Breast Cancer

675. Kim T, Lau J, Erban J. Lack of uniform diagnostic criteria for

inflammatory breast cancer limits interpretation of treatment outcomes:

a systematic review. Clin Breast Cancer 2006;7:386-395. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17239263.

676. Hennessy BT, Gonzalez-Angulo AM, Hortobagyi GN, et al.

Disease-free and overall survival after pathologic complete disease

remission of cytologically proven inflammatory breast carcinoma axillary

lymph node metastases after primary systemic chemotherapy. Cancer

2006;106:1000-1006. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16444747.

677. Dawood S, Broglio K, Gong Y, et al. Prognostic significance of

HER-2 status in women with inflammatory breast cancer. Cancer

2008;112:1905-1911. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18300243.

678. Gianni L, Eiermann W, Semiglazov V, et al. Neoadjuvant

chemotherapy with trastuzumab followed by adjuvant trastuzumab

versus neoadjuvant chemotherapy alone, in patients with HER2-positive

locally advanced breast cancer (the NOAH trial): a randomised

controlled superiority trial with a parallel HER2-negative cohort. The

Lancet 2010;375:377-384. Available at:

http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0140673609619644.

679. Hurley J, Doliny P, Reis I, et al. Docetaxel, cisplatin, and

trastuzumab as primary systemic therapy for human epidermal growth

factor receptor 2-positive locally advanced breast cancer. J Clin Oncol

2006;24:1831-1838. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16549824.

680. Burstein HJ, Harris LN, Gelman R, et al. Preoperative therapy with

trastuzumab and paclitaxel followed by sequential adjuvant

doxorubicin/cyclophosphamide for HER2 overexpressing stage II or III

breast cancer: a pilot study. J Clin Oncol 2003;21:46-53. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12506169.

681. Limentani SA, Brufsky AM, Erban JK, et al. Phase II study of

neoadjuvant docetaxel, vinorelbine, and trastuzumab followed by

surgery and adjuvant doxorubicin plus cyclophosphamide in women

with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-overexpressing locally

advanced breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 2007;25:1232-1238. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17296975.

682. Van Pelt AE, Mohsin S, Elledge RM, et al. Neoadjuvant

trastuzumab and docetaxel in breast cancer: preliminary results. Clin

Breast Cancer 2003;4:348-353. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14715110.

683. Boussen H, Cristofanilli M, Zaks T, et al. Phase II study to evaluate

the efficacy and safety of neoadjuvant lapatinib plus paclitaxel in

patients with inflammatory breast cancer. Journal of Clinical Oncology

2010;28:3248-3255. Available at:

http://jco.ascopubs.org/content/28/20/3248.abstract.

684. Kell MR, Morrow M. Surgical aspects of inflammatory breast

cancer. Breast Dis 2005;22:67-73. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16735788.

685. Stearns V, Ewing CA, Slack R, et al. Sentinel lymphadenectomy

after neoadjuvant chemotherapy for breast cancer may reliably

represent the axilla except for inflammatory breast cancer. Ann Surg

Oncol 2002;9:235-242. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11923129.

686. Motwani SB, Strom EA, Schechter NR, et al. The impact of

immediate breast reconstruction on the technical delivery of

postmastectomy radiotherapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2006;66:76-

82. Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16765534.

687. Blanchard DK, Shetty PB, Hilsenbeck SG, Elledge RM.

Association of surgery with improved survival in stage IV breast cancer

patients. Ann Surg 2008;247:732-738. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18438108.

NCCN Guidelines Inde

Breast Cancer Table of Contents

Discussion

NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2016

Breast Cancer

688. Olson JA, Morris EA, Van Zee KJ, et al. Magnetic resonance

imaging facilitates breast conservation for occult breast cancer. Ann

Surg Oncol 2000;7:411-415. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10894136.

689. Varadarajan R, Edge SB, Yu J, et al. Prognosis of occult breast

carcinoma presenting as isolated axillary nodal metastasis. Oncology

2006;71:456-459. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17690561.

690. Schelfout K, Kersschot E, Van Goethem M, et al. Breast MR

imaging in a patient with unilateral axillary lymphadenopathy and

unknown primary malignancy. Eur Radiol 2003;13:2128-2132. Available

at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12928964.

691. Bhatia SK, Saclarides TJ, Witt TR, et al. Hormone receptor studies

in axillary metastases from occult breast cancers. Cancer

1987;59:1170-1172. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/3815292.

692. Bleicher RJ, Morrow M. MRI and breast cancer: role in detection,

diagnosis, and staging. Oncology (Williston Park) 2007;21:1521-1528,

1530; discussion 1530, 1532-1523. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18077995.

693. Stomper PC, Waddell BE, Edge SB, Klippenstein DL. Breast MRI

in the Evaluation of Patients with Occult Primary Breast Carcinoma.

Breast J 1999;5:230-234. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11348292.

694. Buchanan CL, Morris EA, Dorn PL, et al. Utility of breast magnetic

resonance imaging in patients with occult primary breast cancer. Ann

Surg Oncol 2005;12:1045-1053. Available at:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16244803.

Breast

Breast breast breast manuals 92e6fb9859634b9ea4ec71deed4f31e2 development tpassets.devicebits.com 3:

Navigation menu

Versions of this User Manual:

Views

Navigation