Skip to main content

Breast-Conserving Therapy for Breast Cancer: Targets for Investigation to Improve Results

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Computational Surgery and Dual Training
  • 549 Accesses

Abstract

Molecular characteristics of breast tumors are linked to their clinical behavior, with estrogen and progesterone receptor (ER/PR) expressing tumors, showing a less aggressive pattern of growth and metastasis, while ER/PR negative tumors behave in a more aggressive biologic fashion [1]. Expression of the EGF receptor-like moiety HER2-neu is also associated with adverse clinical behavior. The definition of tumor molecular signatures and clinical phenotype is undergoing redefinition with the description of luminal and basal-like categories [2]. Characteristic clinical behaviors and responsiveness to hormonal and chemotherapeutic definitions is predictable based on these features and continued definition of molecular targets for therapy is an important ongoing area of investigation. As the molecular pathways that govern tumor initiation, growth and metastasis are defined, it is certain that new effective targeted therapies will be developed to fundamentally direct our methods for treating breast cancer.

At the present time, the management of breast cancer is based on the coordinated therapeutic modalities of surgery, anti-tumor medications, and radiation therapy. The goals of each modality are based on the current biological hypothesis of breast cancer as a systemic disease. This hypothesis states that breast cancer is a systemic disease at the time of tumor initiation. It is presumed that circulating tumor cells are shed by the primary tumor, modulated by specific molecular characteristics of the malignancy, from the time when the tumor first develops [3]. Initially cleared by immunologic mechanisms, occult systemic metastases develop by entrapment and implantation of circulating tumor cells in remote organs. Cellular features of the tumor, including high cytological grade and rapid proliferative rate, are predictive of greater risk for metastasis, but the most reliable predictor of metastatic disease is the amount of tumor that has spread to the primary regional lymph node basin of the breast, the axillary nodal basin [4]. Breast cancer is graded by stage based on the American Joint Commission on Cancer staging system (AJCC) [5]. The disease of each patient with breast cancer is graded according to the tumor size (T), the presence and degree of node metastasis (N), and the presence or absence of detectable metastases (M). The TNM grades are then summated to establish a Stage for each patient with breast cancer. Stage I and II are considered early stage breast cancers, with 5-year survival rates of 98 and 85% respectively, while Stage III disease carries a 5-year survival rate of 55–65%. Stage IV is characterized by the presence of metastatic disease and survival rates are 20–30% at 5 years. Hence early detection and effective treatment of early stage breast cancer offers excellent opportunities for long-term survival and “cure.”

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Miyoshi Y, Murase K, Oh K (2008) Basal-like subtype and BRCA1 dysfunction in breast cancers. Int J Clin Oncol 13:395–400

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Huang E, Cheng S, Dressman H, et al (2003) Gene expression predictors of breast cancer outcomes. Lancet 361:1590–1596

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Querci della Riovere G, Benson J (2002) Ipsilateral local recurrence of breast cancer: determinant or indicator of poor prognosis? Lancet Oncol 3:183–187

    Google Scholar 

  4. Veronesi U, Cascinelli N, Mariani L, et al (2002) Twenty-year follow-up of a randomized study comparing breast-conserving surgery with radical mastectomy for early breast cancer. N Engl J Med 347:1227–1232

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. American Joint Commission on Cancer USA (2005) AJCC staging manual, 7th edn. Am Joint Commission on Cancer USA

    Google Scholar 

  6. Benson J, Jatoi I, Keisch M, Esteva F, Makris A, Jordan M (2009) Early breast cancer. Lancet 373:1463–1479

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Early Breast Cancer Trialists Collaborative Group (1998) tamoxifen for early breast cancer: an overview of the randomized trials. Lancet 351:1451–1461

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Fisher B, Anderson S, Bryant J, et al (2002) 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 347:1233–1241

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Early Breast Cancer Trialists Collaborative Group (2005) 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 randomized trials. Lancet 366:2087–2106

    Google Scholar 

  10. Morrow M, Harris J (2007) Practice guidelines for breast conserving therapy in the management of invasive breast cancer. J Am Coll Surg 205:362–376

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Hata T, Takahashi H, Watanabe K, et al (2004) Magnetic resonance imaging for preoperative evaluation of breast cancer: a comparative study with mammography and Ultrasonography. J Am Coll Surg 198:190–197

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Bajaj A, Kon P, Oberg K, Miles D (2004) Aesthetic outcomes in patients undergoing breast conservation therapy for the treatment of localized breast cancer. Plast Reconstr Surg 114(6):1442–1449

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Munshi A, Kakkar S, Bhutani R, Jalali R, Budrukkar A, Dinshaw K (2009) Factors influencing cosmetic outcome in breast conservation. Clin Oncol 21:285–293

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Cochrane R, Valasiadou P, Wilson A, et al (2003) Cosmesis and satisfaction after breast conserving surgery correlates with percentage of breast volume excised. Br J Surg 90:1505–1509

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Taylor M, Perez C, Halverson K, et al (1995) Factors influencing cosmetic results after conservation therapy for breast cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 31:753–764

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Behranwala K, Dua R, Ross G, et al (2006) The influence of radiotherapy on capsule formation and aesthetic outcome after immediate breast reconstruction using biodimensional anatomical expander implants. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 59:1043–1051

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Vicini F, Beitch P, Quiet C, et al (2008) Three-year analysis of treatment efficacy, cosmesis, and toxicity by the American Society of Breast Surgeons MammoSite Breast Brachytherapy Registry Trial in patients treated with accelerated partial breast irradiation (ABPI). Cancer 112:758–766

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Keisch M, Vicini F, Kuske R, et al (2003) Initial clinical experience with the MammoSite breast brachytherapy applicator in women with early-stage breast cancer treated with breast-conserving therapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 55:289–293

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Veronesi U, Orrechia R, Luini A, et al (2001) A preliminary report of intraoperative radiotherapy (IORT) in limited-stage breast cancers that are conservatively treated. Eur J Cancer 37:2178–2183

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Vaidya J, Baum M, Tobias J, et al (2001) Targeted intra-operative radiotherapy (Targit): an innovative Methodist of treatment for early breast cancer. Ann Oncol 12:1075–1080

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Kestin L, Sharpe M, Frazier R, et al (2000) Intensity modulation to improve dose uniformity with tangential breast radiotherapy: initial clinical experience. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 48:1559–1568

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Budrukkar A, Sarin R, Shrivastava S, Deshpande D, Dinshaw K (2007) Cosmesis, late sequelae and local control after breast-conserving therapy: influence of type of tumour bed boost and adjuvant chemotherapy. Clin Oncol 19:596–603

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Pleijhuis RG, Graafland M, de Vries J, Bart J, de Jong JS, van Dam GM (2009) Obtaining adequate surgical margins in breast-conserving therapy for patients with early-stage breast cancer: current modalities and future directions. Ann Surg Oncol 16:2717–30

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Jacobs L (2008) Positive margins: the challenge continues for breast surgeons. Ann Surg Oncol 15:1271–1272

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Schiller D, Le L, Cho B, Youngson B, McCready D (2007) Factors associated with negative margins of lumpectomy specimen: potential use in selecting patients for intraoperative radiotherapy. Ann Surg Oncol 15(3):833–842

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Enderling H, Vaidya JS (2008) Mathematical modelling of breast carcinogenesis, treatment with surgery and radiotherapy, and local recurrence, selected topics in cancer modeling. Birkhauser Boston, Cambridge, MA, pp 1–25

    Google Scholar 

  27. Ribba R, Colin T, Schnell S (2006) A Multiscale mathematical model of cancer and its use in analyzing irradiation therapies. Theor Biol Med Model 3:7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Marchionni I, Wilson R, Wolff A, et al (2008) Systematic review: gene expression profiling assays in early stage breast cancer. Ann Intern Med 148:358–369

    Google Scholar 

  29. Hwang E, Kinkel K, Esserman L, et al (2003) Magnetic resonance imaging in patients diagnosed with ductal carcinoma-in-situ: value in the diagnosis of residual disease, occult invasion, and multicentricity. Ann Surg Oncol 10:381–388

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Bickford LR, Agollah G, Drezek R, Yu TK (2009 May 6) Silica-gold nanoshells as potential intraoperative molecular probes for HER2-overexpression in ex vivo breast tissue using near-infrared reflectance confocal microscopy. Breast Cancer Res Treat [Epub ahead of print])

    Google Scholar 

  31. Haka A, Volynskaya Z, Gardecki J, Nazemi J, Lyons J, Hicks D, Fitzmaurice M, Dasari R, Crowe J, Feld M (2006) In vivo margin assessment during partial mastecotmy breast surgery using Raman spectroscopy. Cancer Res 66(6):3317–3322

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Barbara Lee Bass .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2010 Springer Science+Business Media, LLC

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Bass, B.L., Garbey, M. (2010). Breast-Conserving Therapy for Breast Cancer: Targets for Investigation to Improve Results. In: Garbey, M., Bass, B., Collet, C., Mathelin, M., Tran-Son-Tay, R. (eds) Computational Surgery and Dual Training. Springer, Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-1123-0_1

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-1123-0_1

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Boston, MA

  • Print ISBN: 978-1-4419-1122-3

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-4419-1123-0

  • eBook Packages: EngineeringEngineering (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics