Rache M Simmons1, Karla V Ballman2, Charles Cox3, Ned Carp4, Jennifer Sabol4, Rosa F Hwang5, Deanna Attai6, Michael Sabel7, David Nathanson8, Andrew Kenler9, Linsey Gold10, Cary Kaufman11, Linda Han12, Aaron Bleznak13, J Stanley Smith14, Dennis Holmes15, Bruno Fornage16, Carisa Le-Petross16, Syed Hoda17, Linda McCall18, Kelly K Hunt5. 1. Department of Surgery, Iris Cantor Women's Health Center, The New York Presbyterian Hospital, Joan and Sanford Weill Medical College of Cornell University, New York, NY, USA. rms2002@med.cornell.edu. 2. Alliance Statistics and Data Center, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA. 3. Department of Surgery, University of South Florida, Tampa, FL, USA. 4. Department of Surgery, Lankenau Medical Center, Wynnewood, PA, USA. 5. Department of Breast Surgical Oncology, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA. 6. Department of Surgery, Providence Saint Joseph Medical Center, Burbank, CA, USA. 7. Department of Surgery, University of Michigan Hospital, Ann Arbor, MI, USA. 8. Department of Surgery, Henry Ford Hospital, Detroit, MI, USA. 9. Department of Surgery, Bridgeport Hospital, Bridgeport, CT, USA. 10. Department of Surgery, Genesys Regional Medical Center, Grand Blanc, MI, USA. 11. Department of Surgery, Bellingham Breast Center, Bellingham, WA, USA. 12. Department of Surgery, Indiana University Hospital, Indianapolis, IN, USA. 13. Department of Surgery, Lehigh Valley Hospital, Allentown, PA, USA. 14. Department of Surgery, Penn State Milton S. Hershey Medical Center, Hershey, PA, USA. 15. Department of Surgery, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA. 16. Department of Diagnostic Radiology, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA. 17. Department of Pathology, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY, USA. 18. Alliance Statistics and Data Center, Duke University, Durham, NC, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Cryoablation is a well-established technique to treat fibroadenomas. Pilot studies suggest this could be an effective non-surgical treatment for breast cancer. American College of Surgeons Oncology Group Z1072 is a phase II trial exploring the effectiveness of cryoablation in the treatment of breast cancers. METHODS: The primary endpoint of Z1072 was the rate of complete tumor ablation, defined as no remaining invasive breast cancer (IBC) or ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) on pathologic examination of the targeted lesion. A secondary objective was to evaluate the negative predictive value of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) to determine residual IBC or DCIS. Eligible patients included those with unifocal invasive ductal breast cancer ≤2 cm, with <25 % intraductal component and tumor enhancement on MRI. A total of 19 centers contributed 99 patients, of which 86 patients (87 breast cancers) were evaluable for data analysis. RESULTS: Final pathology results, regardless of whether residual IBC/DCIS was in the targeted ablation zone or elsewhere in the breast, showed successful ablation in 66/87 (75.9 %) cancers. The 90 % confidence interval for the estimate of successful cryoablation was 67.1-83.2, with the one-sided lower-sided 90 % CI of 69.0. The negative predictive value of MRI was 81.2 % (90 % CI 71.4-88.8). When multifocal disease outside of the targeted cryoablation zone was not defined as an ablation failure, 80/87 (92 %) of the treated cancers had a successful cryoablation. CONCLUSION: Further studies with modifications on the Z1072 protocol could be considered to evaluate the role for cryoablation as a non-surgical treatment of early-stage breast cancer.
BACKGROUND: Cryoablation is a well-established technique to treat fibroadenomas. Pilot studies suggest this could be an effective non-surgical treatment for breast cancer. American College of Surgeons Oncology Group Z1072 is a phase II trial exploring the effectiveness of cryoablation in the treatment of breast cancers. METHODS: The primary endpoint of Z1072 was the rate of complete tumor ablation, defined as no remaining invasive breast cancer (IBC) or ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) on pathologic examination of the targeted lesion. A secondary objective was to evaluate the negative predictive value of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) to determine residual IBC or DCIS. Eligible patients included those with unifocal invasive ductal breast cancer ≤2 cm, with <25 % intraductal component and tumor enhancement on MRI. A total of 19 centers contributed 99 patients, of which 86 patients (87 breast cancers) were evaluable for data analysis. RESULTS: Final pathology results, regardless of whether residual IBC/DCIS was in the targeted ablation zone or elsewhere in the breast, showed successful ablation in 66/87 (75.9 %) cancers. The 90 % confidence interval for the estimate of successful cryoablation was 67.1-83.2, with the one-sided lower-sided 90 % CI of 69.0. The negative predictive value of MRI was 81.2 % (90 % CI 71.4-88.8). When multifocal disease outside of the targeted cryoablation zone was not defined as an ablation failure, 80/87 (92 %) of the treated cancers had a successful cryoablation. CONCLUSION: Further studies with modifications on the Z1072 protocol could be considered to evaluate the role for cryoablation as a non-surgical treatment of early-stage breast cancer.
Authors: F Izzo; R Thomas; P Delrio; M Rinaldo; P Vallone; A DeChiara; G Botti; G D'Aiuto; P Cortino; S A Curley Journal: Cancer Date: 2001-10-15 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: P E Huber; J W Jenne; R Rastert; I Simiantonakis; H P Sinn; H J Strittmatter; D von Fournier; M F Wannenmacher; J Debus Journal: Cancer Res Date: 2001-12-01 Impact factor: 12.701
Authors: Robert A Gardner; Hernan I Vargas; Jerome B Block; Charles L Vogel; Alan J Fenn; Gary V Kuehl; Mariana Doval Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2002-05 Impact factor: 5.344
Authors: S J Schnitt; J L Connolly; U Khettry; G Mazoujian; M Brenner; B Silver; A Recht; G Beadle; J R Harris Journal: Cancer Date: 1987-02-15 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: S Eva Singletary; Bruno D Fornage; Nour Sneige; Merrick I Ross; Rache Simmons; Armando Giuliano; Nora Hansen; Henr M Kuerer; Lisa A Newman; Frederick C Ames; Gildy Babiera; Funda Meric; Kelly K Hunt; Beth Edeiken; Attiqa N Mirza Journal: Cancer J Date: 2002 Mar-Apr Impact factor: 3.360
Authors: Allen H Hayashi; Stuart F Silver; Nicholas G van der Westhuizen; James C Donald; Cathy Parker; Sharon Fraser; Alison C Ross; Ivo A Olivotto Journal: Am J Surg Date: 2003-05 Impact factor: 2.565
Authors: William E Burak; Doreen M Agnese; Stephen P Povoski; Tamara L Yanssens; Kenneth J Bloom; Paul E Wakely; Dimitrios G Spigos Journal: Cancer Date: 2003-10-01 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Roberto Luigi Cazzato; Julien Garnon; Nitin Ramamurthy; Guillaume Koch; Georgia Tsoumakidou; Jean Caudrelier; Francesco Arrigoni; Luigi Zugaro; Antonio Barile; Carlo Masciocchi; Afshin Gangi Journal: Med Oncol Date: 2016-11-11 Impact factor: 3.064
Authors: F Edward Boas; Govindarajan Srimathveeravalli; Jeremy C Durack; Elena A Kaye; Joseph P Erinjeri; Etay Ziv; Majid Maybody; Hooman Yarmohammadi; Stephen B Solomon Journal: Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol Date: 2017-01-03 Impact factor: 2.740
Authors: Richard E Fine; Richard C Gilmore; Jill R Dietz; Susan K Boolbol; Michael P Berry; Linda K Han; Andrew S Kenler; Michael Sabel; Kenneth R Tomkovich; Noam A VanderWalde; Margaret Chen; Karen S Columbus; Lisa D Curcio; Sheldon M Feldman; Linsey Gold; Lydia Hernandez; Eric R Manahan; Susan A Seedman; Rashmi P Vaidya; Alexander B Sevrukov; Hussein D Aoun; Randy D Hicks; Rache M Simmons Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2021-08-15 Impact factor: 5.344