Non-surgical treatment of breast cancer: A comparison of outcomes between cryoablation with hormonal therapy versus cryoablation alone and hormonal therapy alone in patients not eligible for surgery
Author Block: F. Di Naro, S. E. Baldi Giorgi, F. Pugliese, D. De Benedetto, G. Migliaro, S. Vidali, C. Bellini, T. Amadori, J. Nori; Florence/IT
Purpose: To evaluate the most effective non-surgical treatment for breast cancer in surgery-ineligible patients, comparing ultrasound-guided Cryoablation combined with hormonal therapy (HT) versus Cryoablation and hormonal therapy alone.
Methods or Background: 111 patients (mean age 81.2 years) not-suitable for surgery due to comorbidities or advanced age was
enrolled, total of 125 biopsy-confirmed breast cancers. All the lesions were invasive ductal carcinomas (mean size 17.7 mm), hormone-positive and HER2-negative, with no ultrasound-visible lymph-node involvement. Of these, 41 treated with Cryoablation and HT, 36 with Cryoablation and 36 with HT . Locoregional staging was performed with contrast-enhanced-mammography (CEM), followed by CEM and ultrasound follow-up at 12 months post-treatment. Only patients completing follow-up were included. Lesion size was compared at baseline and 12 months after-treatment.
Results or Findings: Of the 125 lesions, 98 completed the 12-months follow-up; 39 in the Cryoablation+HT group, 23 in the Cryoablation-only group, and 36 in the HT-only group. Tumor size reduction was significantly different between the groups (P=0.0005), with greatest reduction in the Cryoablation-with-HT group (83.3%, mean reduction 13.6 mm), followed by Cryoablation-only (61.7%, mean reduction 8.2 mm), and HT-only (42.1%, mean reduction 7.4 mm).Tumors with no CEM-enhancement, suggesting no residual-disease, were most frequent in the Cryoablation-with-HT group (69.2%), followed by Cryoablation-only (60.9%),and HT-only (36.1%). Tumors with complete remission (CR, RECIST 1.1) were similar between the Cryoablation-with-HT and Cryoablation-only groups (74.4% and 78.3%, respectively), followed by the HT-only (36.1%). Pairwise comparisons revealed significant differences between Cryoablation-with- HT and HT-only groups for CEM-enhancement, size reduction, and CR, expressing the added value of Cryoablation (p=0.0041, P<0.0001 and P<0.0001,respectively).
Conclusion: Cryoablation with hormonal-therapy significantly reduces tumor size and residual disease more effectively than therapy alone, making it a promising option for patients not-eligible for surgery.
Limitations: Single-center-retrospective
No-long-term follow-up
Small-cohort
Funding for this study: None
Has your study been approved by an ethics committee? Yes
Ethics committee - additional information: Meyer hospital florence