Cargando…
Good practice: The experiences with the utilization of residual cancer burden—A single institution study
INTRODUCTION: The use of neoadjuvant therapy (NAT) has been showing an incraesing tendency in the treatment of locally advanced breast cancer. The evaluation of residual cancer could be performed by Residual Cancer Burden (RCB) calculator. The prognostic system takes the two largest diameters of the...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd
2023
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10101829/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36866777 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1759-7714.14826 |
_version_ | 1785025591162961920 |
---|---|
author | Sejben, Anita Hegedűs, Fanni Almási, Szintia Berta, Márton Oláh‐Németh, Orsolya Zombori, Tamás |
author_facet | Sejben, Anita Hegedűs, Fanni Almási, Szintia Berta, Márton Oláh‐Németh, Orsolya Zombori, Tamás |
author_sort | Sejben, Anita |
collection | PubMed |
description | INTRODUCTION: The use of neoadjuvant therapy (NAT) has been showing an incraesing tendency in the treatment of locally advanced breast cancer. The evaluation of residual cancer could be performed by Residual Cancer Burden (RCB) calculator. The prognostic system takes the two largest diameters of the tumor, the cellularity, the amount of in situ carcinoma, the number of metastatic lymph nodes, and the size of the largest metastatic deposit into account. The aim of our study was to examine the reproducibility of RCB in NAT treated patients. METHODS: Patients who were treated with NAT and had resection specimens between 2018 and 2021 were selected. Histological examination was performed by five pathologists. After assessment of the examined variables, RCB points and RCB classes were defined. For statistical analysis, interclass correlation was used (SPSS Statistics V.22.0 software). RESULTS: Altogether 100 patients were included in our retrospective, cohort study (average age: 57 years). In two‐thirds of the cases, third generation chemotherapy was used, and mastectomy was performed. Significant concordance was found in the two largest diameters of the tumor (coefficients, 0.984 and 0.973), the cellularity (coefficient, 0.970), and the largest metastatic deposit (coefficient, 0.998). Although the amount of in situ carcinoma proved to be the least reproducible factor, it resulted in almost 90% of agreement (coefficient, 0.873). Regarding RCB points and classes, similar results were observed (coefficients, 0.989 and 0.960). CONCLUSIONS: Significant agreement was observed between examiners based on almost all RCB parameters, points, and classes, reflecting the optimal reproducibility of RCB. Therefore, we recommend the use of the calculator in routine histopathological reports in NAT cases. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-10101829 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2023 |
publisher | John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-101018292023-04-15 Good practice: The experiences with the utilization of residual cancer burden—A single institution study Sejben, Anita Hegedűs, Fanni Almási, Szintia Berta, Márton Oláh‐Németh, Orsolya Zombori, Tamás Thorac Cancer Original Articles INTRODUCTION: The use of neoadjuvant therapy (NAT) has been showing an incraesing tendency in the treatment of locally advanced breast cancer. The evaluation of residual cancer could be performed by Residual Cancer Burden (RCB) calculator. The prognostic system takes the two largest diameters of the tumor, the cellularity, the amount of in situ carcinoma, the number of metastatic lymph nodes, and the size of the largest metastatic deposit into account. The aim of our study was to examine the reproducibility of RCB in NAT treated patients. METHODS: Patients who were treated with NAT and had resection specimens between 2018 and 2021 were selected. Histological examination was performed by five pathologists. After assessment of the examined variables, RCB points and RCB classes were defined. For statistical analysis, interclass correlation was used (SPSS Statistics V.22.0 software). RESULTS: Altogether 100 patients were included in our retrospective, cohort study (average age: 57 years). In two‐thirds of the cases, third generation chemotherapy was used, and mastectomy was performed. Significant concordance was found in the two largest diameters of the tumor (coefficients, 0.984 and 0.973), the cellularity (coefficient, 0.970), and the largest metastatic deposit (coefficient, 0.998). Although the amount of in situ carcinoma proved to be the least reproducible factor, it resulted in almost 90% of agreement (coefficient, 0.873). Regarding RCB points and classes, similar results were observed (coefficients, 0.989 and 0.960). CONCLUSIONS: Significant agreement was observed between examiners based on almost all RCB parameters, points, and classes, reflecting the optimal reproducibility of RCB. Therefore, we recommend the use of the calculator in routine histopathological reports in NAT cases. John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd 2023-03-03 /pmc/articles/PMC10101829/ /pubmed/36866777 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1759-7714.14826 Text en © 2023 The Authors. Thoracic Cancer published by China Lung Oncology Group and John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Original Articles Sejben, Anita Hegedűs, Fanni Almási, Szintia Berta, Márton Oláh‐Németh, Orsolya Zombori, Tamás Good practice: The experiences with the utilization of residual cancer burden—A single institution study |
title | Good practice: The experiences with the utilization of residual cancer burden—A single institution study |
title_full | Good practice: The experiences with the utilization of residual cancer burden—A single institution study |
title_fullStr | Good practice: The experiences with the utilization of residual cancer burden—A single institution study |
title_full_unstemmed | Good practice: The experiences with the utilization of residual cancer burden—A single institution study |
title_short | Good practice: The experiences with the utilization of residual cancer burden—A single institution study |
title_sort | good practice: the experiences with the utilization of residual cancer burden—a single institution study |
topic | Original Articles |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10101829/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36866777 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1759-7714.14826 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT sejbenanita goodpracticetheexperienceswiththeutilizationofresidualcancerburdenasingleinstitutionstudy AT hegedusfanni goodpracticetheexperienceswiththeutilizationofresidualcancerburdenasingleinstitutionstudy AT almasiszintia goodpracticetheexperienceswiththeutilizationofresidualcancerburdenasingleinstitutionstudy AT bertamarton goodpracticetheexperienceswiththeutilizationofresidualcancerburdenasingleinstitutionstudy AT olahnemethorsolya goodpracticetheexperienceswiththeutilizationofresidualcancerburdenasingleinstitutionstudy AT zomboritamas goodpracticetheexperienceswiththeutilizationofresidualcancerburdenasingleinstitutionstudy |