Breast Cancer Research and Treatment

, Volume 165, Issue 3, pp 779–781 | Cite as

In response to “outcomes of patients with inflammatory breast cancer treated by breast conserving surgery”: the argument against breast conservation and sentinel lymph node biopsy in IBC

  • Kelly J. Rosso
  • Naoto T. Ueno
  • Wendy A. Woodward
  • Anthony LucciEmail author
Letter to the Editor

In October 2016, Brzezinska et al. advocated for the use of breast conservation therapy (BCT) in select patients with inflammatory breast cancer (IBC) [1]. Thirty-five patients who were diagnosed with IBC from 1999 to 2013 and treated with BCT were reviewed from a prospectively collected database. All patients had a localized solid tumor component in the breast and were treated with trimodality therapy: neoadjuvant therapy, surgery, and adjuvant radiation. They were selected to undergo breast-conserving surgery at the discretion of the multidisciplinary treatment team if the erythema and characteristic peau d’orange resolved following neoadjuvant therapy. Surgical management consisted of segmental mastectomy with axillary staging in most of the cases. Management of the axilla included axillary lymph node dissection in 20 patients, sentinel lymph node dissection (SLND) in 14 patients (resulting in completion ALND in four patients), and axillary radiation alone in one patient. SLN...


Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.


  1. 1.
    Brzezinska M, Williams LJ, Thomas J et al (2016) Outcomes of patients with inflammatory breast cancer treated by breast-conserving surgery. Breast Cancer Res Treat 160(3):387–391 Epub 2016 Oct 18 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Goldner B, Behrendt CE, Schoellhammer HF et al (2014) Incidence of inflammatory breast cancer in women, 1992-2009, United States. Ann Surg Oncol. 21(4):1267–1270. doi: 10.1245/s10434-013-3439-y CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Dawood S, Merajver SD, Viens P et al (2011) International expert panel on inflammatory breast cancer: consensus statement for standardized diagnosis and treatment. Ann Oncol 22(3):515–523. doi: 10.1093/annonc/mdq345 Epub 2010 Jul 5 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Cardoso F, Costa A, Norton L et al (2014) ESO-ESMO 2nd international consensus guidelines for advanced breast cancer (ABC2)dagger. Ann Oncol 25(10):1871–1888. doi: 10.1093/annonc/mdu385 Epub 2014 Sep 18 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Rea D, Francis A, Hanby AM et al (2015) Inflammatory breast cancer: time to standardise diagnosis assessment and management, and for the joining of forces to facilitate effective research. Br J Cancer 112(9):1613–1615. doi: 10.1038/bjc.2015.115 Epub 2015 Mar 31 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Fisher B, Brown A, Mamounas E et al (1997) Effect of preoperative chemotherapy on local-regional disease in women with operable breast cancer: findings from National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project B-18. J Clin Oncol 15(7):2483–2493CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Shen J, Valero V, Buchholz TA et al (2004) Effective local control and long-term survival in patients with T4 locally advanced breast cancer treated with breast conservation therapy. Ann Surg Oncol 11(9):854–860 Epub 2004 Aug 16 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Anscher MS, Jones P, Prosnitz LR et al (1993) Local failure and margin status in early-stage breast carcinoma treated with conservation surgery and radiation therapy. Ann Surg 218(1):22–28CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Huang EH, Tucker SL, Strom EA et al (2005) Predictors of locoregional recurrence in patients with locally advanced breast cancer treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy, mastectomy, and radiotherapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 62(2):351–357CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Mamounas EP, Anderson SJ, Dignam JJ et al (2012) Predictors of locoregional recurrence after neoadjuvant chemotherapy: results from combined analysis of National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project B-18 and B-27. J Clin Oncol 30(32):3960–3966. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2011.40.8369 Epub 2012 Oct 1 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Jaffre F, Lavoue V, Mesbah H et al (2009) Prognosis for isolated skin recurrence after breast cancer treated by mastectomy. Anticancer Res 29(5):1697–1701PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Boughey JC, Suman VJ, Mittendorf EA et al (2013) Sentinel lymph node surgery after neoadjuvant chemotherapy in patients with node-positive breast cancer: the ACOSOG Z1071 (Alliance) clinical trial. JAMA 310(14):1455–1461. doi: 10.1001/jama.2013.278932 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Stearns V, Ewing CA, Slack R et al (2002) Sentinel lymphadenectomy after neoadjuvant chemotherapy for breast cancer may reliably represent the axilla except for inflammatory breast cancer. Ann Surg Oncol 9(3):235–242CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Hidar S, Bibi M, Gharbi O et al (2009) Sentinel lymph node biopsy after neoadjuvant chemotherapy in inflammatory breast cancer. Int J Surg 7(3):272–275. doi: 10.1016/j.ijsu.2009.04.012 Epub 2009 May 3 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    National Comprehensive Cancer Network Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology (version 2.2017). Accessed 15 Jan 2017
  16. 16.
    Boussen H, Cristofanilli M, Zaks T et al (2010) Phase II study to evaluate the efficacy and safety of neoadjuvant lapatinib plus paclitaxel in patients with inflammatory breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 28(20):3248–3255. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2009.21.8594 Epub 2010 Jun 7 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Cristofanilli M, Gonzalez-Angulo AM, Buzdar AU et al (2004) Paclitaxel improves the prognosis in estrogen receptor negative inflammatory breast cancer: the M. D. Anderson Cancer Center experience. Clin Breast Cancer 4(6):415–419CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Gianni L, Eiermann W, Semiglazov V et al (2014) Neoadjuvant and adjuvant trastuzumab in patients with HER2-positive locally advanced breast cancer (NOAH): follow-up of a randomised controlled superiority trial with a parallel HER2-negative cohort. Lancet Oncol 15(6):640–647. doi: 10.1016/S1470-2045(14)70080-4 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Kelly J. Rosso
    • 1
  • Naoto T. Ueno
    • 2
    • 4
  • Wendy A. Woodward
    • 3
    • 4
  • Anthony Lucci
    • 1
    • 4
    • 5
    Email author
  1. 1.Department of Breast Surgical OncologyUniversity of Texas MD Anderson Cancer CenterHoustonUSA
  2. 2.Medical OncologyUniversity of Texas MD Anderson Cancer CenterHoustonUSA
  3. 3.Radiation OncologyUniversity of Texas MD Anderson Cancer CenterHoustonUSA
  4. 4.Morgan Welch Inflammatory Breast Cancer Research Program and ClinicUniversity of Texas MD Anderson Cancer CenterHoustonUSA
  5. 5.Department of Surgical OncologyUniversity of Texas MD Anderson Cancer CenterHoustonUSA

Personalised recommendations