Abstract PS1-03: Active surveillance for DCIS: Clinical outcomes at 5.6 years mean follow-up

Abstract

Abstract Introduction: Standard treatment for ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) involves surgical excision with radiation and often endocrine therapy. However, not all DCIS progresses to invasive ductal carcinoma (IDC); thus, surgical intervention may constitute overtreatment for DCIS that has low risk for progressing to IDC. A period of active surveillance (AS) with magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) monitoring may offer the opportunity to stratify lesions with high and low risk for invasion and to avoid overtreatment of DCIS. The purpose of this study was to characterize the outcomes of a cohort of women who elected to go on AS to avoid surgical intervention and to identify whether clinical and imaging features would identify patients who should convert to operative management. Methods: The clinicopathologic variables and outcomes of patients with DCIS who prospectively enrolled in MRI monitoring studies between 2002 and 2019 were retrospectively analyzed with IRB approval. We included 64 cases among 63 women who declined standard operative management for DCIS and had at least two breast MRIs. Clinicopathologic data and physician recommendations regarding continuing surveillance versus converting to operative management were recorded from the medical record. Those who had surgical excision showing IDC were considered to have progressed; those with only DCIS at excision or no operative intervention were considered to have stable disease. Results: Women in the cohort were an average of 53.6 years (29.8 - 78.9) old, and nearly all cases of DCIS with estrogen receptor (ER) status were ER+ (98.3%). Of the 64 cases in the cohort, 57 received endocrine therapy (89.1%). Average length of time on AS was 2.7 years (.2 – 11.9) with a median of 3 (2 – 18) MRIs performed and mean follow-up time 5.6 years (0.9 – 15.3). A total of 31 cases (48.4%) eventually had surgical excision while 33 (51.6%) remained on AS. There were 17 cases with IDC at surgery (26.6%). The IDC was an average of 1.5 cm (0.1 – 9.0) and most commonly ER + (88.2%), HER2 + (53.3%), grade 2 (58.9%), and node negative (82.4%). Only 7 women did not take endocrine therapy, but 3 of those women had IDC (42.9%). In 15 of the 17 cases with IDC (88.2%), the physician noted concern for progression in their clinic note and recommended surgical excision. This occurred a mean of 1.9 years (0.2 – 6.5) from the start of AS, with 47%, 67%, and 87% of cases identified within 1, 2 and 3 years from the start of AS. Suspicion of progression was based on an increase in lesion size or prominence on MRI and/or increase in calcifications on mammography. Of those that were identified as good candidates to continue AS with no concern for progression (n = 49), 16 chose to undergo surgical excision (32.7%) and 2 had IDC (4.1%). Conclusion: After over a decade of following women who seek alternatives to surgery for DCIS, we have identified clinicopathologic and imaging features that discriminate good candidates for AS and endocrine risk reducing therapy from those best treated with surgical excision. In our cohort of mostly ER+ patients receiving endocrine therapy on AS, over half of the cohort (51.6%) avoided surgical intervention. Her2 status, Oncotype DCIS, and Mammaprint scores of IDC is in process and will be presented. Our data support the study of AS as a method to stratify the risk of IDC and avoid overtreatment. We will present a personalized AS algorithm (based on biology and imaging) that we intend to prospectively test in the ATHENA network and NCI funded MCL consortium. Table 1: Cohort CharacteristicsFull Cohort (n=64)No evidence of IDC (n=47)IDC at surgery (n=17)Age at Diagnosis (years)53.6 (29.8 - 78.9)52.9 (29.8 - 74.5)55.5 (41.9 - 78.9)Time on AS (years)2.7 (.2 - 11.9)2.8 (.2 - 11.9)2.2 (.3 -5.9)Follow-Up (years)5.6 (0.9 - 15.3)Menopausal StatusPremenopausal26 (40.6%)22 (46.8%)4 (23.5%)Postmenopausal35 (54.7%)24 (51.1%)11 (64.7%)Unknown3 (4.7%)1 (2.1%)2 (11.8%)Breast CompositionFatty4 (6.3%)3 (6.4%)1 (5.9%)Scattered14 (21.9%)9 (19.1%)5 (29.4%)Heterogeneous27 (42.2%)19 (40.4%)8 (47.1%)Extreme17 (26.5%)14 (29.8%)3 (17.6%)Unknown2 (3.1%)2 (4.3%)0 (0.0%)ER StatusPositive57 (89.1%)41 (87.2%)16 (94.1%)Negative1 (1.6%)0 (0.0%)1 (5.9%)Unknown6 (9.3%)6 (12.8%)0 (0.0%)PR StatusPositive50 (78.1%)36 (76.6%)14 (82.3%)Negative5 (7.8%)3 (6.4%)2 (11.8%)Unknown9 (14.1%)8 (17.0%)1 (5.9%)GradeHigh20 (31.3%)15 (31.8%)5 (29.4%)Intermediate32 (50.0%)21 (44.6%)11 (64.7%)Low10 (15.6%)9 (19.1%)1 (5.9%)Unknown2 (3.1%)2 (28.5%)0 (0.0%Hormone TherapyYes57 (89.1%)43 (91.5%)14 (82.4%)No7 (10.9%)4 (8.5%)3 (17.6%) Citation Format: Case Brabham, Rita Mukhtar, April Liang, Paul Kim, Gillian Hirst, Amrita Basu, Heather Greenwood, Rita Freimanis, Alexander Borowsky, Shelley Hwang, Rick Baehner, Gregor Krings, Nola Hylton, Laura Esserman. Active surveillance for DCIS: Clinical outcomes at 5.6 years mean follow-up [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2020 San Antonio Breast Cancer Virtual Symposium; 2020 Dec 8-11; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2021;81(4 Suppl):Abstract nr PS1-03.