All patients with early breast cancer should be classified by subgroup through testing estrogen receptor, progesterone receptor, and HER2 status, with or without Ki-67 proliferation percentage. Genomic expression profiling aids clinical decision-making in most patients, because most are estrogen receptor–positive. The commercially available classifiers are prognostic for distant recurrence in node-negative and also node-positive patients. Patients at genomically low risk have excellent 5-year outcomes with endocrine therapy alone. Some assays also predict for benefit from adjuvant endocrine therapy and chemotherapy in node-negative and node-positive patients, but with varying levels of evidence. Genomic classifiers are also prognostic of late relapse and may predict benefit from extended adjuvant endocrine therapy.
Lee S. Schwartzberg
Lee S. Schwartzberg and Sarah L. Blair
Older patients with breast cancer (aged ≥65 years) are often undertreated with both locoregional and systemic therapies and have been shown to have higher breast cancer–specific mortality. These patients are also excluded from most clinical trials; therefore, treatment recommendations are extrapolated from younger populations. The data that do exist, however, show that older patients usually tolerate and respond well to conventional treatments. When selecting treatments for breast cancer, age should not be the chief consideration; comorbidities and functional status are also important, as is life expectancy. For patients with an estimated survival of less than 5 years, aggressive treatment may be discouraged; however, if the estimated survival is 5 years or more, treatment according to recurrence risk is recommended. In the curative setting, undertreatment should be avoided.
Namratha Vontela, Vamsi Koduri, Lee S. Schwartzberg and Gregory A. Vidal
Androgen receptors (ARs) are highly coexpressed in estrogen receptor (ER)–positive breast cancers. Their role in breast tumorigenesis has been postulated, but the mechanism is not yet well-characterized. Steroidal androgens were previously used as an anticancer strategy but fell out of favor because of toxicity and the discovery of alternative therapies. Recent attempts to modulate androgen pathway signaling have focused on AR inhibitors. This report discusses a case using a well-tolerated selective AR modulator to treat a highly pretreated patient with ER-positive breast cancer, which resulted in a durable partial response.
Razelle Kurzrock, A. Dimitrios Colevas, Anthony Olszanski, Wallace Akerley, Carlos L. Arteaga, William E. Carson III, Jeffrey W. Clark, John F. DiPersio, David S. Ettinger, Robert J. Morgan Jr, Lee S. Schwartzberg, Alan P. Venook, Christopher D. Gocke, Jonathan Tait and F. Marc Stewart
Background: With advances such as next-generation sequencing (NGS) increasing understanding of the basis of cancer and its response to treatment, NCCN believes it is important to understand how molecular profiling/diagnostic testing is being performed and used at NCCN Member Institutions and their community affiliates. Methods: The NCCN Oncology Research Program's Investigator Steering Committee and the NCCN Best Practices Committee gathered baseline information on the use of cancer-related molecular testing at NCCN Member Institutions and community members of the NCCN Affiliate Research Consortium through 2 separate surveys distributed in December 2013 and September 2014, respectively. Results: A total of 24 NCCN Member Institutions and 8 affiliate sites provided quantitative and qualitative data. In the context of these surveys, “molecular profiling/diagnostics” was defined as a panel of at least 10 genes examined as a diagnostic DNA test in a Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments (CLIA)–certified laboratory. Conclusions: Results indicated that molecular profiling/diagnostics are used at 100% of survey respondents' institutions to make patient care decisions. However, challenges relating to reimbursement, lack of data regarding actionable targets and targeted therapies, and access to drugs on or off clinical trials were cited as barriers to integration of molecular profiling into patient care. Frameworks for using molecular diagnostic results based on levels of evidence, alongside continued research into the predictive value of biomarkers and targeted therapies, are recommended to advance understanding of the role of genomic biomarkers. Greater evidence and consensus regarding the clinical and cost-effectiveness of molecular profiling may lead to broader insurance coverage and increased integration into patient care.
Jeffrey Crawford, James Armitage, Lodovico Balducci, Pamela Sue Becker, Douglas W. Blayney, Spero R. Cataland, Mark L. Heaney, Susan Hudock, Dwight D. Kloth, David J. Kuter, Gary H. Lyman, Brandon McMahon, Hope S. Rugo, Ayman A. Saad, Lee S. Schwartzberg, Sepideh Shayani, David P. Steensma, Mahsa Talbott, Saroj Vadhan-Raj, Peter Westervelt, Michael Westmoreland, Mary Dwyer and Maria Ho
Febrile neutropenia, a common side effect of myelosuppressive chemotherapy in patients with cancer, can result in prolonged hospitalization and broad-spectrum antibiotic use, often prompting treatment delays or dose reductions of drug regimens. Prophylactic use of myeloid growth factors (mainly the colony-stimulating factors filgrastim and pegfilgrastim) in patients of heightened risk can reduce the severity and duration of febrile neutropenia. The NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology (NCCN Guidelines) for Myeloid Growth Factors provide recommendations on the use of these agents mainly in the oncology setting based on clinical evidence and expert consensus. This version includes revisions surrounding the issue of timing of pegfilgrastim administration. It also includes new sections on tbo-filgrastim, a recently approved agent that is biologically similar to filgrastim, and the role of myeloid growth factors in the hematopoietic cell transplant setting
Michael J. Berger, David S. Ettinger, Jonathan Aston, Sally Barbour, Jason Bergsbaken, Philip J. Bierman, Debra Brandt, Dawn E. Dolan, Georgiana Ellis, Eun Jeong Kim, Steve Kirkegaard, Dwight D. Kloth, Ruth Lagman, Dean Lim, Charles Loprinzi, Cynthia X. Ma, Victoria Maurer, Laura Boehnke Michaud, Lisle M. Nabell, Kim Noonan, Eric Roeland, Hope S. Rugo, Lee S. Schwartzberg, Bridget Scullion, John Timoney, Barbara Todaro, Susan G. Urba, Dorothy A. Shead and Miranda Hughes
The NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology (NCCN Guidelines) for Antiemesis address all aspects of management for chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting. These NCCN Guidelines Insights focus on recent updates to the NCCN Guidelines for Antiemesis, specifically those regarding carboplatin, granisetron, and olanzapine.
Jeffrey Crawford, Pamela Sue Becker, James O. Armitage, Douglas W. Blayney, Julio Chavez, Peter Curtin, Shira Dinner, Thomas Fynan, Ivana Gojo, Elizabeth A. Griffiths, Shannon Hough, Dwight D. Kloth, David J. Kuter, Gary H. Lyman, Mary Mably, Sudipto Mukherjee, Shiven Patel, Lia E. Perez, Adam Poust, Raajit Rampal, Vivek Roy, Hope S. Rugo, Ayman A. Saad, Lee S. Schwartzberg, Sepideh Shayani, Mahsa Talbott, Saroj Vadhan-Raj, Sumithira Vasu, Martha Wadleigh, Peter Westervelt, Jennifer L. Burns and Lenora Pluchino
Myeloid growth factors (MGFs) are given as supportive care to patients receiving myelosuppressive chemotherapy to reduce the incidence of neutropenia. This selection from the NCCN Guidelines for MGFs focuses on the evaluation of regimen- and patient-specific risk factors for the development of febrile neutropenia (FN), the prophylactic use of MGFs for the prevention of chemotherapy-induced FN, and assessing the risks and benefits of MGF use in clinical practice.
William J. Gradishar, Benjamin O. Anderson, Sarah L. Blair, Harold J. Burstein, Amy Cyr, Anthony D. Elias, William B. Farrar, Andres Forero, Sharon Hermes Giordano, Lori J. Goldstein, Daniel F. Hayes, Clifford A. Hudis, Steven J. Isakoff, Britt-Marie E. Ljung, P. Kelly Marcom, Ingrid A. Mayer, Beryl McCormick, Robert S. Miller, Mark Pegram, Lori J. Pierce, Elizabeth C. Reed, Kilian E. Salerno, Lee S. Schwartzberg, Mary Lou Smith, Hatem Soliman, George Somlo, John H. Ward, Antonio C. Wolff, Richard Zellars, Dorothy A. Shead and Rashmi Kumar
Breast cancer is the most common malignancy in women in the United States and is second only to lung cancer as a cause of cancer death. The overall management of breast cancer includes the treatment of local disease with surgery, radiation therapy, or both, and the treatment of systemic disease with cytotoxic chemotherapy, endocrine therapy, biologic therapy, or combinations of these. The NCCN Guidelines specific to management of large clinical stage II and III tumors are discussed in this article. These guidelines are the work of the members of the NCCN Breast Cancer Panel. Expert medical clinical judgment is required to apply these guidelines in the context of an individual patient to provide optimal care. Although not stated at every decision point of the guidelines, patient participation in prospective clinical trials is the preferred option of treatment for all stages of breast cancer.
William J. Gradishar, Benjamin O. Anderson, Ron Balassanian, Sarah L. Blair, Harold J. Burstein, Amy Cyr, Anthony D. Elias, William B. Farrar, Andres Forero, Sharon Hermes Giordano, Matthew P. Goetz, Lori J. Goldstein, Steven J. Isakoff, Janice Lyons, P. Kelly Marcom, Ingrid A. Mayer, Beryl McCormick, Meena S. Moran, Ruth M. O'Regan, Sameer A. Patel, Lori J. Pierce, Elizabeth C. Reed, Kilian E. Salerno, Lee S. Schwartzberg, Amy Sitapati, Karen Lisa Smith, Mary Lou Smith, Hatem Soliman, George Somlo, Melinda Telli, John H. Ward, Dorothy A. Shead and Rashmi Kumar
These NCCN Guidelines Insights highlight the important updates/changes to the surgical axillary staging, radiation therapy, and systemic therapy recommendations for hormone receptor–positive disease in the 1.2017 version of the NCCN Guidelines for Breast Cancer. This report summarizes these updates and discusses the rationale behind them. Updates on new drug approvals, not available at press time, can be found in the most recent version of these guidelines at NCCN.org.
William J. Gradishar, Benjamin O. Anderson, Ron Balassanian, Sarah L. Blair, Harold J. Burstein, Amy Cyr, Anthony D. Elias, William B. Farrar, Andres Forero, Sharon H. Giordano, Matthew P. Goetz, Lori J. Goldstein, Steven J. Isakoff, Janice Lyons, P. Kelly Marcom, Ingrid A. Mayer, Beryl McCormick, Meena S. Moran, Ruth M. O'Regan, Sameer A. Patel, Lori J. Pierce, Elizabeth C. Reed, Kilian E. Salerno, Lee S. Schwartzberg, Amy Sitapati, Karen Lisa Smith, Mary Lou Smith, Hatem Soliman, George Somlo, Melinda L. Telli, John H. Ward, Rashmi Kumar and Dorothy A. Shead
Ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) of the breast represents a heterogeneous group of neoplastic lesions in the breast ducts. The goal for management of DCIS is to prevent the development of invasive breast cancer. This manuscript focuses on the NCCN Guidelines Panel recommendations for the workup, primary treatment, risk reduction strategies, and surveillance specific to DCIS.