# 13 - 84 Breast Cancer

### 84 Breast Cancer

TABLE 83-14  Staging Thymic Tumors
MASAOKA STAGE
DEFINITION
I
Grossly and microscopically encapsulated
IIA
Microscopic transcapsular invasion
IIB
Macroscopic invasion into surrounding tissue excluding 
pericardium, lung, and great vessels
III
Macroscopic invasion into neighboring organs of the lower 
neck or upper chest
IVA
Pleural or pericardial dissemination
IVB
Hematogenous or lymphatic dissemination to distal organs
WHO
A
Tumor with few lymphocytes
AB
Tumor with features of type A and foci rich in lymphocytes
B1
Tumor with features of normal epithelial cells with 
vesicular nuclei and distinct nucleoli and an abundant 
population of lymphocytes. Also known as cortical 
thymoma, lymphocyte-rich thymoma
B2
Thymoma with no or mild atypia with round or polygonalshaped cells with small component of lymphocytes
B3
Well-differentiated thymic carcinoma with mild atypia
C
Thymic carcinoma with high atypia
PART 4
Oncology and Hematology
determine if the mass is resectable based on relationship to surround­
ing structures. An MRI with contrast may be performed if clinically 
indicated. A PET scan may be useful in the evaluation of a patient 
with thymic tumors, although it may be less useful in the staging of 
thymoma compared to thymic carcinoma. A core needle biopsy is 
considered standard of care for obtaining a histologic diagnosis of an 
anterior mediastinal tumor. This may be obtained via CT or ultrasound 
imaging. However, in some circumstances, a mediastinoscopy or open 
biopsy may be required.
Thymomas are commonly staged using the Masaoka system or the 
WHO staging system, as described in Table 83-14. WHO types A, AB, 
and B1 tend to be more well-differentiated, types B2 and B3 are mod­
erately differentiated, and type C is poorly differentiated.
■
■TREATMENT
Surgical resection is the mainstay of treatment for patients with Masa­
oka type I and II thymic tumors. In patients with type III and IV who 
have potentially resectable thymic tumors, neoadjuvant chemotherapy 
may be given to decrease the tumor size and allow for a resection with 
negative margins. Surgery remains controversial and provides a limited 
role in the treatment of stage III and IV disease. No additional therapy 
may be required in patients with type I who have a resection with nega­
tive margins. Postoperative radiation therapy may be recommended 
based on extracapsular extension and the presence of positive margins 
in patients with type II or III thymic tumors or histologic evaluation 
WHO B3 and C. Radiation therapy may be beneficial in patients with 
locally advanced disease (type III or IV) or in patients with symptoms 
secondary to compression of surrounding structures. Chemotherapy 
with cisplatin, doxorubicin, and cyclophosphamide (CAP) remains 
the mainstay of therapy in the neoadjuvant and adjuvant setting as 
well as first-line therapy in patients with metastatic thymoma, whereas 
carboplatin and paclitaxel are often employed in patients with thymic 
carcinoma. Limited additional agents are recommended based on 
small phase 2 trials as second-line therapy and beyond.
SUMMARY
The management of SCLC and NSCLC has undergone major change in 
the past decade, resulting in a reduction in lung cancer mortality. For 
patients with early-stage disease, advances in radiotherapy and surgical 
procedures as well as new systemic therapies in the neoadjuvant and 
perioperative settings have greatly improved prognosis in all diseases. 
For patients with advanced lung cancer, major progress in understand­
ing tumor genetics and tumor immunology has led to the development 
of rational targets and specific inhibitors, which have documented 

efficacy in specific subsets of NSCLC. Furthermore, increased under­
standing of how to activate the immune system to drive antitumor 
immunity has proven to be a successful therapeutic strategy for a 
subset of patients with advanced lung cancer. However, only a small 
subset of patients responds to immune checkpoint inhibitors, and the 
majority of patients treated with targeted therapies or chemotherapy 
eventually develop resistance, which provides strong motivation for 
further research and enrollment of patients onto clinical trials in this 
rapidly evolving area.
Acknowledgment
David Johnson, Leora Horn, and Wade Iams contributed to this chapter 
in the prior edition and material from that chapter has been retained here.
■
■FURTHER READING
Cascone T et al: Perioperative nivolumab in resectable lung cancer. N 
Engl J Med 390:1756, 2024.
Ettinger D et al: NCCN Guidelines® Insights: Non-Small Cell Lung 
Cancer, Version 2.2023. J Natl Compr Canc Netw 21:340, 2023.
Hsu M et al: Lung cancer survivorship: Physical, social, emotional, 
and medical needs of NSCLC survivors. J Natl Compr Canc Netw 
22:e237072, 2024.
Owen D et al: Therapy for stage IV non-small-cell lung cancer with 
driver alterations: ASCO Living Guideline, Version 2023.2. J Clin 
Oncol 41:e63, 2023.
Rudin C et al: Small-cell lung cancer. Nature Rev Dis Primers 7:3, 2021.
Wakelee H: Chemotherapy and immunotherapy in early-stage 
NSCLC: Neoadjuvant vs adjuvant therapy. Clin Adv Hematol Oncol 
21:648, 2023.
Nancy E. Davidson

Breast Cancer
Breast cancer is the most common nonskin cancer diagnosed in 
women in the world. In 2024, it is estimated that in the United States 
310,000 women will be diagnosed with invasive breast cancer, >56,000 
women will receive a diagnosis of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS), 
and about 42,250 women will die from breast cancer. Although largely 
a disease of women, about 2800 men will be diagnosed with and 530 
men will die from breast cancer in 2024 in the United States. Thanks 
to advances in understanding of breast cancer biology, screening, diag­
nosis, treatment, and decreased use of hormone replacement therapy, 
5-year relative survival in the United States is currently 91%. These 
advances have also made it possible to conceptualize the evolution of 
breast cancer and how available interventions can be applied across the 
continuum of changes to improve outcomes (Fig. 84-1).
EPIDEMIOLOGY AND RISK FACTORS
■
■NONGENETIC RISK FACTORS
Female gender and increasing age are the most common risk factors for 
breast cancer. About 70% of breast cancer in the United States is diag­
nosed in women 55 years and older, and median age of diagnosis is 63. 
Incidence is highest in non-Hispanic whites followed by non-Hispanic 
blacks and is lower in Hispanic, Asian/Pacific Islander, and American 
Indian/Alaska Native women; in contrast, mortality is highest in nonHispanic blacks followed by non-Hispanic whites and individuals of 
other race/ethnicity. Both incidence and mortality vary considerable 
around the globe, but studies of immigrant populations show that pop­
ulations who migrate from low-incidence regions to high-incidence 
regions will attain the breast cancer risk of the higher incidence region 
within one or two generations.

Breast cancer continuum
High risk
In situ
Invasive
Micro-metastases
Detectable
metastases
Mortality
Normal
Ductal
carcinoma
in situ
Normal
duct
Intraductal
hyperplasia
Atypical
ductal
hyperplasia
Risk assessment
Risk reduction/chemoprevention
Screening
Primary Rx (surgery/radiation)
FIGURE 84-1  Breast cancer continuum conceptual model. Most breast cancers begin in epithelial cells within the lobules or ducts. They proceed through a continuum of 
atypia and hyperplasia to in situ malignancy to invasion into surrounding normal tissues followed by intravasation into lymph and blood channels to local lymph nodes and 
distant organs, culminating in distant metastases. This is a conceptual model. Not all metastatic breast cancers have progressed through these stages, and many lesions 
do not progress to the next.
Breast cancer is predominantly a disease resulting from prolonged 
exposure of the breast to estrogen. Thus, early menarche, late meno­
pause, and late first pregnancy are known risk factors. Likewise, pro­
longed exposure to hormone replacement therapy (but paradoxically 
not estrogen replacement therapy) is associated with increased risk as 
is current use of oral contraceptives. Postmenopausal obesity (but not 
premenopausal obesity) is also a risk factor, likely because of increased 
estrogen exposure. Studies of diet and breast cancer risk have not been 
conclusive, but alcohol consumption is a risk factor.
The best documented exogenous risk factor for breast cancer is 
exposure to ionizing radiation during adolescence. Studies of other 
environmental factors such as pesticide or other chemical exposures 
have not been convincing.
Women diagnosed with some types of benign breast pathology 
also have a higher risk of subsequent invasive breast cancer diagnosis. 
In particular, the diagnosis of atypical ductal or lobular hyperplasia 
increases risk about four- to fivefold, whereas a diagnosis of lobular 
carcinoma in situ (LCIS) increases risk 7- to 12-fold. Recent studies 
also suggest that women with high breast density on mammography 
may be at increased risk of breast cancer.
■
■GENETIC RISK FACTORS
Family history is a critical risk factor, although only 20% of 
women diagnosed with breast cancer have a family history. Diag­
nosis of breast cancer in a first-degree relative (parent, sibling, or 
daughter) doubles breast cancer risk. A personal diagnosis of previous 
invasive breast cancer also increases the risk of developing a new breast 
cancer in the ipsilateral or contralateral breast.
Prevention, diagnosis, and management of breast cancer have been 
revolutionized by the identification of a family of hereditary breast 
cancer susceptibility genes that account for 5–10% of breast cancers. 
These genes play a role in DNA damage repair, and inherited muta­
tions, which are transmitted in an autosomal dominant fashion, 

Regional
lymph node
Lymph
or blood
vessels
Invasive
ductal
cancer
Distant organs
Distant organs
CHAPTER 84
Adjuvant Systemic Rx
Breast Cancer
Survivorship
Palliative treatment
generally lead to protein truncation and loss of function of DNA repair 
proteins. The most common mutations are in the BRCA1 (located on 
chromosome 17q21) or BRCA2 (located on chromosome 13q12) genes, 
and they impart a 50–80% risk of developing invasive breast cancer 
by age 80 years as well as a 30% risk of developing ovarian cancer. 
Germline mutations in other genes also lead to a higher risk of breast 
cancer including TP53 (Li-Fraumeni syndrome), PALB2, ATM, STK11 
(Peutz-Jeghers syndrome), and PTEN (Cowden syndrome). Certain 
populations have a higher incidence of BRCA mutations, especially 
Ashkenazi Jews. Commercially available assays for germline, breast 
cancer susceptibility mutations have expanded from just the two 
originally discovered genes (BRCA1/2) to panels including these 
and the genes listed above to panels that include these and 20 or more 
additional genes. Two major concerns have arisen over time regarding 
the relative lack of clinical correlations inherent in these panels and 
the unknown association with risk, which have led to some confusion 
and discomfort among patients: (1) variants of unknown significance 
(VUS) in the genes known to be associated with increased risk; and 
(2) genes included in the panels about which little is known regarding 
clinical risk. Efforts to develop polygenic risk scores that evaluate single 
nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in other genes are under study but 
are not yet ready for clinical application.
Testing for germline mutations is readily done using panel testing on 
DNA obtained from peripheral blood or saliva after appropriate coun­
seling. It is not recommended for the general population. Evidencebased guidelines from the American Society of Clinical Oncology and 
Society of Surgical Oncology recommend consideration of testing for 
high-penetrance breast cancer susceptibility genes in individuals with 
a personal history of breast cancer with specific features including 
diagnosis ≤65 years. Older patients should be offered testing for clini­
cal features such as Ashkenazi Jewish ancestry; multiple breast cancers; 
certain types of breast cancer, including breast cancer lacking expres­
sion of the estrogen and progesterone receptors and HER2 proteins

(triple-negative breast cancer [TNBC]) and lobular breast cancer with 
personal or family history of diffuse gastric cancer; or close blood rela­
tive with early-onset or male breast cancer, ovarian cancer, pancreatic 
cancer, or metastatic prostate cancer. Testing for individuals without a 
cancer diagnosis should be considered for those with a family member 
who tests positive or those with a family history as outlined above or 
those with higher risk based on existing risk assessment tools such as 
Tyrer-Cuzick score, BRCAPro, or CanRisk.

PREVENTION
Current strategies to prevent breast cancer include surgery, chemo­
prevention, and lifestyle modification; their use and impact will vary 
depending on the underlying risk of developing breast cancer.
■
■PROPHYLACTIC SURGERY
Prophylactic mastectomy reduces risk of developing breast cancer 
by about 90% including in individuals who carry a germline breast 
cancer susceptibility gene mutation. Women who opt for prophylactic 
mastectomy in this setting should be counseled that breast cancer may 
develop in residual breast tissue. However, preventive mastectomy is 
not likely to improve outcomes in women with low or only modest risk 
and should be discouraged. Though the primary role for prophylactic 
oophorectomy is for ovarian cancer prevention in germline mutation 
carriers, it can also reduce breast cancer incidence in premenopausal 
women by about 50% because of reduction in estrogen exposure.
PART 4
Oncology and Hematology
■
■CHEMOPREVENTION
Ample evidence exists for the use of chemoprevention approaches that 
target estrogen signaling pathways in high-risk women. Tamoxifen 
reduces risk of invasive breast cancer in women at higher risk (≥60 years, 
diagnosis of LCIS, or younger women with risk of developing invasive 
breast cancer ≥1.67% over 5 years based on current risk assessment 
tools). Newer data suggest that low-dose tamoxifen for 3 years may be 
effective and well tolerated. Side effects include postmenopausal symp­
toms and increased risk for endometrial cancer and thromboembolic 
events, especially in women over 50. Raloxifene may be an alternative 
for postmenopausal women. Though less effective in reducing breast 
cancer risk than tamoxifen, it is associated with fewer uterine cancers. 
The aromatase inhibitors, exemestane or anastrozole, also reduce 
breast cancer incidence by about 50% in postmenopausal women 
who are at moderate-high risk for breast cancer. The U.S. Preventive 
Services Task Force recommends that clinicians offer risk-reducing 
medications like tamoxifen, raloxifene, or aromatase inhibitors to 
women who are at increased risk for breast cancer and at low risk for 
medication side effects. Uptake is low despite the substantial evidence 
that demonstrates a huge benefit.
■
■LIFESTYLE MODIFICATION
Potential lifestyle modifications to reduce breast cancer risk include 
maintenance of a normal body mass index, avoidance of alcohol, and 
minimizing use of hormone replacement therapy. Regular exercise, 
especially during adolescence, may be associated with reduced risk. 
Long-term follow-up from the dietary substudy of the Women’s Health 
Initiative showed that a low-fat diet in postmenopausal women who 
were cancer-free at the time of study enrollment resulted in a nonsig­
nificant reduction in breast cancer incidence but appeared to reduce 
risk of death from breast cancer. The role of newer GLP-1 agents has 
not been studied.
SCREENING
Breast cancer screening has been an area of active investigation and 
controversy for decades. Issues include lack of consensus around the 
goal of screening, the target population (e.g., age, risk), and the type 
and frequency of screening. Multiple guidelines exist and continue to 
evolve. Initial trials focused on three modalities: breast self-exam, clini­
cal breast exam (CBE), and mammography. Though widely promoted 
in the past, emphasis on breast self-exam has waned, in part because 
of two randomized clinical trials in China and Russia that showed no 
benefit. In contrast, a randomized trial in India of CBE every 2 years in 

women aged 35–64 years with no history of breast cancer indicated that 
CBE led to a significant reduction in the proportion of women diag­
nosed with stage III or IV disease and a nonsignificant 15% reduction 
in breast cancer mortality, largely in women ≥50 years.
Nine randomized trials have studied screening mammography. In 
aggregate, they demonstrated that screening mammography reduced 
breast cancer mortality by about 20–25% in women ≥50 years without 
an impact on overall mortality. The UK Age trial suggested a simi­
lar benefit for women who began screening at 40 years. Screening 
frequency has varied from 1–2 years across trials. Mammography 
techniques have evolved over the years, and a current U.S. trial is 
evaluating the role of tomosynthesis as a means of improving ben­
efit from mammography. Multiple guidelines exist and continue to 
evolve. Most recommend that women aged 50–70 years have mam­
mography every 1–3 years, and many recommend screening for 
women aged 40–50 years as well. When to stop is not known, but 
it is generally accepted that benefits are limited to women with a 
predicted life expectancy of at least 10 years.
The role of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) as a screening 
modality is less well studied. MRI is more sensitive, less specific, and 
more complex to perform. Some guidelines suggest that it be used for 
women who have a lifetime predicted risk of ≥20%, which includes 
those with germline pathogenic mutations in the BRCA genes. Its use 
has also been suggested for those with very dense breasts on mam­
mography, but clear evidence of benefit is lacking. Screening ultra­
sound has also been studied, but evidence supporting its routine use 
is lacking.
There is considerable interest in the use of multicancer early detec­
tion (MCED) tests using circulating DNA as a screening test for dis­
eases like breast cancer. Initial studies have not shown that these tests 
can substitute for or augment conventional mammographic screening, 
and women who do have MCED assays performed should still undergo 
mammographic screening, even if the MCED test is negative.
DIAGNOSIS AND STAGING
Clinical signs and symptoms suggestive of breast cancer may include 
a breast lump or skin or nipple changes or palpable regional nodes. 
Thanks to mammographic screening, many patients present with 
abnormal mammographic findings including a mass, distortion, and/
or suspicious microcalcifications without any symptoms or physi­
cal exam findings. Figure 84-2 shows an algorithm for diagnostic 
evaluation of breast abnormalities noted on physical exam or imaging. 
Final diagnosis rests on pathologic confirmation, which is generally 
carried out by image-guided core biopsy to confirm diagnosis, assess 
tumor grade and morphology, and carry out biomarker evaluation for 
expression of estrogen receptor (ER) and progesterone receptor (PR) 
and HER2 proteins and potentially HER2 gene amplification. Suspi­
cious axillary lymph nodes should also be biopsied via image-guided 
techniques. It is important to image both breasts because up to 3% of 
women with newly diagnosed breast cancer have unsuspected con­
tralateral disease. Evaluation of the breasts with MRI after a biopsyproven diagnosis is controversial. On the one hand, MRI is more 
sensitive than radiologic mammography and will commonly detect 
previously unidentified disease. On the other hand, this observation 
may lead to additional surgery, including mastectomy, without obvious 
improvements in outcomes.
Staging is a cornerstone for breast cancer management because 
it provides information about natural history and informs decisions 
about therapy. The traditional TNM (tumor-node-metastasis) staging 
system has evolved to consider molecular testing including biomarkers 
as above and certain genomic tests such as the Oncotype 21 gene assay. 
Staging may take place at time of diagnosis (c or clinical staging) or 
after surgery (p or pathologic staging) or after preoperative systemic 
therapy followed by surgery (designated with a “y” prefix). For most 
asymptomatic individuals presenting with early breast cancer, a careful 
history and physical exam will be sufficient, and testing can be limited 
to breast imaging and any testing needed to ensure a safe surgical 
procedure. Individuals who present with symptoms suggestive of meta­
static disease or physical findings of more advanced disease (e.g., large

Diagnostic Evaluation of the Breast
Suspicious clinical breast finding
Suspicious breast finding
Diagnostic breast imaging
mammography
ultrasonography
MRI (if indicated)
Negative/benign
Ductal carcinoma in situ
with microcalcifications
Follow-up exam
Uncertain or clinical
suspicion persists
Resolved
Refer to experienced
breast diagnostician
Routine follow-up
screening
mammogram as
indicated
FIGURE 84-2  Evaluation and workup of breast lesions. For more extensive details, see https://www.nccn.org/professionals/physician_gls/pdf/breast-screening.pdf. 
(Mammographic images courtesy of Drs. Mark Helvie and Colleen Neal, Department of Radiology, Michigan Medicine. Photomicrographs courtesy of Dr. Celina Kleer, 
Department of Pathology, Michigan Medicine.)
tumor, skin changes, extensive regional adenopathy) should undergo 
radiologic imaging with computed tomography and radionuclide 
scanning to look for overt metastatic disease. Suspicious lesions should 
be biopsied whenever possible to confirm a diagnosis of metastatic 
breast cancer because of the implications for prognosis and selection 
of therapy. Less than 10% of patients present with de novo metastatic 
breast cancer.
Breast cancer staging is currently carried out according to the guide­
lines of the American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) eighth edi­
tion. Conceptually, stages I and II represent early-stage disease, which 
is confined to breast and ipsilateral nodes, whereas stage III comprises 
locally advanced breast cancer and stage IV denotes de novo meta­
static breast cancer, designated as M1 in the current staging system. 
Common sites for breast cancer metastasis include soft tissues, lung, 
bone, liver, and brain. One study suggested that M1 disease can be 
further divided into at least four subgroups with substantially different 
prognoses, based on sites and burden of disease as well as biological 
features. However, these findings have not yet been incorporated into 
the formal AJCC staging system. Outcomes are directly related to stage 
at presentation and vary by race and ethnicity in the United States, as 
shown in Table 84-1.

Screening breast imaging
No suspicious breast finding
Suspicious
mass
Suspicious
microcalcifications
Routine follow-up
screening mammogram
as indicated
CHAPTER 84
Confirmed suspicious finding
Invasive ductal carcinoma
Biopsy
Breast Cancer
Progesterone
receptor (PR)
positive
HER2 negative
Estrogen receptor
(ER) positive
CURRENT UNDERSTANDING OF BREAST 
CANCER BIOLOGY AND CLINICAL 
IMPLICATIONS
It is now accepted that invasive breast cancer is in fact a disease with 
diverse subtypes, both histologic and molecular. Two decades of 
molecular analyses have documented multiple transcriptional, epi­
genetic, and genetic changes that characterize invasive breast cancer. 
TABLE 84-1  Five-Year Breast Cancer Relative Survival Rate (%) by 
Stage at Diagnosis and Race/Ethnicity in United States from 2012–2018a
STAGE
ALL
WHITE
BLACK
AIAN
HISPANIC
API
I
>99
>99
>99
>99
>99
>99
II

III

IV

aRace is exclusive of Hispanic origin.
Abbreviations: AIAN American Indian/Alaska Native; API Asian/Pacific Islander.
Source: Adapted from AN Giaquinto et al: Breast cancer statistics, 2022. CA Cancer 
J Clin 72:524, 2022.

This has led to the division of invasive breast cancer into at least four 
major molecular subtypes. Luminal A and B subtypes both express 
ER and are viewed as generally likely to be responsive to antiestrogen 
strategies (also called hormonal or endocrine therapies). However, 
luminal B tumors are characterized by other findings such as reduced 
PR expression or increased proliferation, usually measured by expres­
sion of Ki67, and are associated with a poorer outcome than luminal 
A tumors. The HER2 subtype expresses HER2 protein at high levels 
and is more likely to benefit from the use of HER2-targeted therapies. 
Basal tumors tend to lack expression of ER, PR, and HER2 proteins 
(TNBC). TNBCs carry a poorer prognosis and are generally managed 
with chemotherapy and immunotherapy. TNBC can be further divided 
into at least six subtypes, which may also have therapeutic implications, 
especially in the metastatic setting.

Pathologic evaluation of a breast cancer specimen begins with an 
assessment of morphology. Most invasive breast cancers are ductal, 
but about 10–15% are lobular histologies. Lobular cancers are usually 
ER positive and HER2 negative. They are distinguished by absence of 
E-cadherin staining or function, and they have a different natural his­
tory, with a propensity to spread to serosal surfaces, including omen­
tum, pleura, and meninges or to various parenchyma, such as ovaries 
and upper and lower gastrointestinal tracts. This curious site for meta­
static recurrence may result in unusual clinical presentations that may 
delay diagnosis if metastatic disease is not considered. Other special 
subtypes are also recognized such as mucinous, medullary, papillary, 
and metaplastic histologies. Mucinous and pure medullary cancers 
(distinguished by high levels of lymphocytic invasion surrounding the 
tumor) are associated with very favorable prognoses with local therapy 
only. Metaplastic cancers may present as very poorly differentiated 
tumors or even as squamous or sarcomatoid differentiations. They 
are generally approached as ductal cancers but may be treated in a 
manner consistent with their relative subtypes, such as squamous or 
sarcoma-like differentiation. Tumor grade is also assessed using stan­
dard approaches such as Nottingham grade, ranging from grade 1 to 3; 
higher grade is generally associated with poorer prognosis.
PART 4
Oncology and Hematology
Further profiling of the primary tumor specimens may follow 
depending on the clinical circumstances. Early-stage ER-positive 
breast cancers are often evaluated by genomic transcriptional profiling 
assays to identify patients with such a favorable prognosis that adjuvant 
chemotherapy in addition to endocrine therapy is not needed; five of 
these are recommended by the American Society of Clinical Oncol­
ogy: Oncotype Dx (21 genes), MammaPrint (70 genes), ProSigna (50 
genes), EndoPredict (12 genes), and Breast Cancer Index (two genes 
plus a proliferation signature). Although any one of these appears to 
be relatively accurate in terms of prognosis, they do not measure the 
same thing and they have not been compared head-to-head. Therefore, 
ordering more than one assay for a single case is discouraged. At pres­
ent, more detailed molecular analysis is usually restricted to metastatic 
tumor specimens to identify molecular alterations that are associated 
with response to specific targeted therapies, as discussed in the section 
on treatment of metastatic breast cancer.
TREATMENT
Breast Cancer 
MANAGEMENT OF IN SITU BREAST CANCER 
Ductal Carcinoma In Situ (DCIS)  Routine use of screening mam­
mography has led to a marked increase in the diagnosis of DCIS 
and LCIS. Untreated DCIS (which is confined to the duct without 
evidence of invasion through the basement membrane into sur­
rounding interstitial tissue) is associated with a 30% risk of devel­
oping a subsequent invasive cancer in the same breast. Therapy is 
generally focused on excision of the lesion to negative margins and 
to confirm absence of invasion; evaluation of axillary lymph nodes 
is not generally undertaken. Excision may be followed by radiother­
apy to the ipsilateral breast and consideration of endocrine therapy 
if the DCIS expresses ER protein to reduce risk of breast recurrence 

or contralateral primary. Patients with extensive DCIS may require 
mastectomy, whereas those with a small disease burden may opt for 
excision alone with regular mammographic surveillance. Molecular 
assays that can predict lack of benefit from radiotherapy after exci­
sion are sometimes used. 
Lobular Carcinoma In Situ (LCIS)  LCIS is often an incidental find­
ing on a breast biopsy done for abnormalities on physical exam or 
mammography. It is viewed as a marker for increased risk of devel­
oping invasive breast cancer as about 25–30% of women with LCIS 
subsequently develop invasive disease in either breast. The primary 
management is continued breast cancer screening and consider­
ation of chemoprevention with tamoxifen or aromatase inhibitor to 
decrease risk of invasive disease. Bilateral prophylactic mastectomy 
is sometimes considered but should be generally limited to those 
who have other risk factors or concerns. 
TREATMENT OF EARLY-STAGE BREAST CANCER
Multidisciplinary care is a cornerstone for optimal treatment of 
early breast cancer. The current approach to treatment of earlystage breast cancer reflects evolution from the initial concept of 
breast cancer as an orderly disease that spreads from breast to 
axillary nodes to systemic disease to our current understanding of 
breast cancer as a potentially systemic disease almost from onset. 
Therefore, treatment approaches incorporate surgery and radiation 
to treat local disease and systemic therapy to eliminate or suppress 
any microscopic distant disease. The goal of these treatments in 
early-stage disease is reduction of subsequent distant recurrence 
and mortality. They are given in a manner to optimize efficacy 
while minimizing toxicity and avoiding overtreatment. 
Surgery  Six randomized trials have demonstrated equivalent sur­
vival with the use of breast-conservation therapy (lumpectomy and, 
usually, radiotherapy to the remaining breast) or modified radical 
mastectomy for individuals with early-stage breast cancer. Contra­
indications to breast conservation include patient preference, poor 
cosmesis, multifocal disease, previous chest radiation, and ongoing 
pregnancy that prevents timely administration of radiotherapy. 
Though not an absolute contraindication, germline mutation in a 
member of the BRCA gene family can drive a decision for bilat­
eral mastectomy because of the high risk of subsequent disease in 
either breast. Patients who require or choose mastectomy should be 
informed about availability of immediate or delayed reconstruction 
options using autologous tissue or implants as clinically appropri­
ate. It is clear, though, that most women with early breast cancer 
are well served by a lumpectomy to negative margins with axillary 
management, followed by radiation as appropriate.
Management of the ipsilateral axilla continues to evolve as well. 
For patients with small tumors and clinically negative axillary 
nodes, sentinel node localization is used to identify clinically rel­
evant nodes for removal and pathologic assessment to finalize stag­
ing and inform decisions about extent of radiotherapy and selection 
of adjuvant systemic therapy. Use of axillary dissection (removal of 
level 1 and 2 lymph nodes) is restricted to individuals with palpable 
lymph nodes or those with substantial pathologic involvement of 
sentinel lymph nodes. Randomized trials have shown excellent 
outcomes with omission of any sentinel node evaluation for older 
women with small biologically favorable tumors and clinically 
negative axilla who will take adjuvant endocrine therapy as well as 
omission of axillary dissection for women with low tumor burden 
in sentinel nodes who will receive radiation. 
Radiation  As with surgery, the use of postoperative radiotherapy 
to minimize breast recurrence and nodal recurrence has also 
changed as a result of data accumulated from serial clinical trials. 
Current treatment strategies are tailored to the individual based 
on age, tumor size, and nodal status. Options for external-beam 
radiotherapy include a standard scheme of daily whole breast 
radiotherapy (WBR) for 4–6 weeks, hypofractionated schedules 
lasting 5 days to 3 weeks, or partial breast radiation, usually given in

a hypofractionated regimen. Clinical trials of the latter have failed 
to demonstrate its benefit over WBR. Extension of the radiotherapy 
port to include regional and axillary nodes is also considered based 
on pathology and type of surgery. The safety of omitting radio­
therapy for women older than 65 with low-risk ER-positive tumors 
who will take endocrine therapy has been demonstrated. Brachy­
therapy to apply a radiation source directly to the tumor bed is also 
employed in some cases as a way of shortening duration of therapy.
Patients who undergo mastectomy may also benefit from chest 
wall radiotherapy to reduce risk of both local and distant recur­
rence, thus improving survival. Potential candidates include those 
with large tumors or positive axillary lymph nodes, especially 
those with four or more involved nodes, while those with one to 
three positive nodes or close/minimally involved margins are also 
considered. 
Systemic Therapy  It has been recognized that breast cancer is 
often a systemic disease at time of diagnosis. Enhanced understand­
ing of breast cancer biology, including the concept that resistant 
clones evolve as a function of random mutations over time, and 
the identification of multiple targets of therapy have greatly refined 
our understanding of the role of systemic therapy in early breast 
cancer. Such therapy may be given preoperatively (neoadjuvant) 
or postoperatively (adjuvant) and may take the form of cytotoxic 
chemotherapy, endocrine therapy directed toward ER, and other 
targeted therapies such anti-HER2, poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase 
(PARP) inhibitors in cancers with BRCA1/2 mutations, and/or 
immunotherapy directed toward immune checkpoints. Treatment 
algorithms are constantly evolving based on results from clinical 
trials, and current evidence-based guidelines are available through 
groups like the National Comprehensive Cancer Network, 
American Society of Clinical Oncology, or European Society of 
Medical Oncology. 
SELECTION OF NEOADJUVANT VERSUS ADJUVANT 
SYSTEMIC THERAPY
The primary goal of neoadjuvant therapy (also designated “pre­
operative” adjuvant therapy) compared to classic postoperative 
adjuvant therapy is to downsize tumor to make it more amenable 
to surgery. A second goal is to provide an in vivo assessment of 
tumor response to the selected systemic therapy and perhaps direct 
subsequent adjuvant therapy. Data suggest that individual patients 
who attain a complete pathologic response (pCR) to neoadjuvant 
therapy have a better outcome than those who do not, although 
randomized trials of adjuvant versus neoadjuvant therapy have not 
shown a difference in survival. At least one trial has demonstrated 
that patients who fail to experience a pCR to standard combination 
chemotherapy containing an anthracycline, an alkylating agent, 
and a taxane, especially those with TNBC, appear to benefit from 
subsequent capecitabine. Currently, neoadjuvant therapy with che­
motherapy and anti-HER2 agents is considered for individuals 
with HER2-positive tumors that are ≥2 cm or node-positive dis­
ease, while neoadjuvant therapy with chemotherapy and possibly 
the checkpoint inhibitor pembrolizumab are considered for indi­
viduals with TNBC ≥2 cm or node-positive disease. Neoadjuvant 
endocrine therapy can be used for postmenopausal women with 
ER- or PR-positive breast cancer to reduce extent of surgery or per­
haps avoid surgery for older women with multiple comorbidities. 
Women with small tumors of any subtype are often better served 
by initial surgery to establish pathologic stage followed by tailored 
selection of systemic therapy. 
Types of Systemic Therapy for Early Breast Cancer  Endocrine 
therapy is a mainstay for management of ER- and/or PR-positive 
invasive breast cancer; positive tumors are commonly defined as 
those with ≥1% staining by immunohistochemistry. Because of their 
mechanisms of action as blockers of interaction between estrogen 
ligand and ER, the selective ER modulators tamoxifen and toremi­
fene can be used in women with any menopausal status. In contrast, 
estrogen deprivation approaches depend on menopausal status. 

The use of aromatase inhibitors, such as anastrozole, letrozole, 
and exemestane, as monotherapy is restricted to postmenopausal 
women. Ovarian suppression by gonadotropin hormone–releasing 
hormone (GnRH), such as the luteinizing hormone–releasing 
hormone (LHRH) agonists goserelin or leuprolide, or alternatively 
surgical oophorectomy, can be used to reduce circulating estradiol 
levels in premenopausal women to postmenopausal levels. These 
women can then also be treated either with tamoxifen or an AI. 
The CDK4/6 inhibitors abemaciclib and ribociclib may be used in 
combination with endocrine therapy for high-risk, early-stage, ERpositive breast cancer.

Multiple cytotoxic agents have shown efficacy for treatment of 
metastatic breast cancer and are now used in treatment of early-stage 
disease. The most common regimens include cyclophosphamide, 
doxorubicin, paclitaxel, docetaxel, 5-fluorouracil, methotrexate, and/
or one of the platin salt compounds (cisplatin or carboplatin).
Several anti-HER2 therapies are also available. Two monoclonal 
antibodies, trastuzumab and pertuzumab, and two tyrosine kinase 
inhibitors, neratinib and lapatinib, are approved for use in earlystage breast cancer; multiple other agents are available for meta­
static disease, as discussed below, and are undergoing testing for use 
in earlier stages of disease.
CHAPTER 84
The role of immunotherapy with the checkpoint inhibitors is 
also under evaluation. At present, pembrolizumab for patients with 
TNBC is the only U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-
approved agent for early-stage breast cancer, but others are under 
investigation.
A targeted agent, olaparib, an oral PARP inhibitor, is also used 
as an adjunct to chemotherapy for women with high-risk, germline 
BRCA-mutated, HER2-negative breast cancer who have completed 
(neo)adjuvant chemotherapy. It is particularly active in cancers with 
DNA repair pathway defects. 
Breast Cancer
GENERAL GUIDELINES FOR (NEO)ADJUVANT SYSTEMIC 
THERAPY FOR EARLY BREAST CANCER 
Approach to ER- and/or PR-Positive Breast Cancer  Endocrine 
therapy is the foundation for adjuvant therapy for women with ER- 
and/or PR-positive breast cancer. Selection is based on menopausal 
status and consideration of side effect profiles. For premenopausal 
women with low-risk breast cancer, tamoxifen for 5–10 years is 
the standard. Premenopausal women with higher risk tumors are 
candidates for combined endocrine therapy with an LHRH agonist 
plus tamoxifen or aromatase inhibitor for 5 years. Multiple random­
ized trials have shown that aromatase inhibitors for 5 years provide 
modest but statistically significant superior outcome compared 
with tamoxifen for postmenopausal women. Women with ERpositive breast cancers are at risk for distant recurrence long after 
their original diagnosis, from 10–20 or more years. Some trials 
suggest that up to 10 years of endocrine therapy may be indicated 
for healthy postmenopausal women with higher risk tumors and 
good tolerance.
Given the chronic nature of adjuvant endocrine therapy, careful 
attention to side effects is warranted. Tamoxifen is associated with 
postmenopausal symptoms and a small chance of thromboembolic 
events or uterine cancer, especially in women over 50 years. Aro­
matase inhibitors are associated with postmenopausal symptoms, 
arthralgias, and bone loss, while LHRH agonists are associated 
with postmenopausal symptoms and bone loss. Although the three 
aromatase inhibitors appear to be equally effective, tolerance may 
vary; patients who are intolerant of one aromatase inhibitor may 
benefit from change to another member of the family or tamoxifen.
A critical decision in this setting is the value of chemotherapy in 
addition to endocrine therapy. Its absolute (as opposed to relative or 
proportional) benefit varies by menopausal status and nodal status. 
Genomic multigene expression testing of the tumor with assays 
like Oncotype, MammaPrint, ProSigna, EndoPredict, or Breast 
Cancer Index will identify a substantial portion of patients with 
zero to three positive nodes who would not benefit from adjuvant 
chemotherapy.

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy should be administered to healthy 
individuals with a large tumor burden or more than three positive 
nodes, especially premenopausal patients with a primary goal of 
reducing tumor size. However, in ER-positive disease, the likeli­
hood of a pCR is low. Regardless, adjuvant chemotherapy (neoad­
juvant or standard) is considered for healthy individuals with four 
or more positive lymph nodes as well as for those with lesser nodal 
burden who have high genomic signature score. Established chemo­
therapy regimens are outpatient based and use multiple agents for 
3–6 months with appropriate supportive care including antiemet­
ics and colony-stimulating factors as appropriate to reduce risk of 
febrile neutropenia. Long-term side effects can include premature 
menopause in premenopausal women and a small risk of doxorubicinrelated cardiomyopathy, taxane-related peripheral neuropathy, or 
secondary leukemia, and possible cognitive dysfunction.

Women with node-positive or high-risk node-negative, ER- and/
or PR-positive, HER2-negative breast cancer who have completed 
adjuvant chemotherapy should consider use of a CDK4/6 inhibi­
tor in conjunction with endocrine therapy. Current information 
supports the use of abemaciclib for 2 years or ribociclib for 3 years; 
addition of palbociclib for 2 years did not improve outcomes. Those 
with HER2-negative germline BRCA-mutated breast cancer who 
have received (neo)adjuvant chemotherapy should consider a year 
of oral olaparib. When used in conjunction with chemotherapy or 
anti-HER2 therapy, endocrine therapy is generally delayed until 
completion of adjuvant chemotherapy to minimize toxicity. 
PART 4
Oncology and Hematology
Approach to HER2-Positive Breast Cancer  Healthy individuals 
with tumor ≥3 cm or positive lymph nodes are candidates for neo­
adjuvant therapy with multiagent chemotherapy and trastuzumab 
with or without pertuzumab for 4–5 months. Those who achieve 
a pCR should receive further trastuzumab with or without pertu­
zumab therapy to complete a year. By contrast, those with residual 
invasive disease at surgery should switch to complete a year of the 
antibody-drug conjugate (ADC) trastuzumab emtansine (TDM-1). 
High-risk individuals who have completed a year of anti-HER2 
therapy can also consider addition of oral neratinib for another 
year, although the benefits are incremental.
Toxicity of trastuzumab is relatively uncommon. Few patients 
have any side effects during treatment. However, the greatest risk 
is reduction of cardiac ejection fraction. Therefore, baseline cardiac 
evaluation with an echocardiogram should be obtained, and trastu­
zumab should not be given to those with low ejection fraction, or 
they should be evaluated by an experienced cardiologist if therapy is 
felt to be critical. Serial echocardiograms should be obtained during 
adjuvant trastuzumab therapy but are not indicated once therapy 
is discontinued if the patient has not had any evidence of cardiac 
dysfunction.
Pertuzumab is commonly associated with loose stools or diar­
rhea. This can be managed with conservative loperamide treatment. 
However, the added benefit of adjuvant pertuzumab to trastuzumab 
is modest, and if diarrhea is not easily controlled, trastuzumab 
should be continued alone.
Individuals who present with smaller tumors with clinically neg­
ative nodes should be considered for upfront surgery to establish 
pathologic stage. This is because women with pathologically nodenegative tumors <3 cm have excellent outcomes with a regimen of 
single-agent weekly paclitaxel for 12 weeks in conjunction with a 
year of trastuzumab with or without pertuzumab.
Patients with HER2-positive tumors that are ER and/or PR posi­
tive should receive endocrine therapy as described above. Endocrine 
therapy is generally initiated after completion of any chemotherapy 
and can be given concurrent with anti-HER2 therapy. Neither 
CDK4/6 inhibitors nor PARP inhibitors have been tested as an adju­
vant therapy in early-stage HER2-positive breast cancer. 
Triple-Negative Breast Cancer (TNBC)  Healthy patients with 
early-stage TNBC are frequently candidates for (neo)adjuvant che­
motherapy. Those with tumors >2 cm or tumors >1 cm and positive 
axillary nodes should be considered for neoadjuvant multiagent 

chemotherapy, perhaps in conjunction with the checkpoint inhibi­
tor pembrolizumab. If chemoimmunotherapy is utilized, then pem­
brolizumab is continued postoperatively to complete a year. Those 
who achieve a pCR receive pembrolizumab alone. Those patients 
who do not have a pCR may also consider further chemotherapy 
with capecitabine. In contrast, those with smaller tumors that are 
clinically node negative are best served by initial surgery to estab­
lish pathologic stage, which might permit a refinement of choice of 
chemotherapy regimen. 
Follow-Up of Survivors of Early-Stage Breast Cancer  Asymp­
tomatic survivors of early-stage breast cancer should be followed 
regularly with history and physical examination to look for any 
evidence of recurrent disease and to assess for toxicities of prior or 
ongoing treatments. These exams are conducted every 3–6 months 
for the first 3 years and diminish in frequency over time. As noted, 
serial echocardiograms beyond 12 months of trastuzumab therapy 
are not needed. Annual breast imaging to look for ipsilateral or 
contralateral disease is the only routine testing needed. In the 
absence of symptoms or physical exam findings, routine imaging of 
other types or blood studies have not been shown to enhance wellbeing or outcome from breast cancer. Current research is focused 
on use of blood-based assays for circulating tumor cells (CTCs) or 
circulating free tumor DNA (ctDNA) as markers for early detection 
of recurrent disease, but these are investigational approaches at 
present. As many patients have long survival, routine follow-up by 
a primary care provider and adherence to age-appropriate general 
health guidelines are key.
Symptom management is a key aspect of follow-up, especially 
for those on adjuvant endocrine therapy as adherence is a crucial 
determinant of outcome. Hot flashes may be ameliorated by use of 
antidepressants like venlafaxine or gabapentin, while vaginal dry­
ness should be addressed through topical agents or, if unsuccessful, 
vaginal estrogen. Avoidance of hormone replacement therapy is 
preferred. Aromatase inhibitor–associated musculoskeletal symp­
toms may be treated by switching from one aromatase inhibitor 
to another after a 4- to 6-week washout period, or they can be 
addressed by exercise, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory agents, acu­
puncture, or the antidepressant duloxetine. Persistent taxane-related 
peripheral neuropathy is sometimes responsive to gabapentin. 
Special Considerations in Management of Individuals with Early 
Breast Cancer   
Use of Bisphosphonates 
Bone health can be compromised by 
breast cancer therapy, especially the estrogen-deprivation agents, 
aromatase inhibitors and LHRH agonists. Patients who receive 
these therapies may benefit from use of a bisphosphonate, zoledro­
nate every 6 months for 3 years, or oral clodronate or ibandronate 
as a bone-strengthening agent. In addition, a meta-analysis suggests 
that this therapy is associated with decreased breast cancer recur­
rence, especially in bone. Data on denosumab are less compelling 
at present. 
Pregnancy, Fertility, and Childbearing in Premenopausal 
Women 
The diagnosis of breast cancer during pregnancy can 
be difficult because of the evolving changes in the pregnant breast. 
Suspicious lumps or skin or nipple changes should be evaluated as 
above though imaging modalities of choice including ultrasound or 
MRI. If breast cancer is diagnosed and pregnancy is continued, the 
goal is to administer appropriate multimodality therapy to optimize 
maternal outcome from breast cancer and minimize toxicity to the 
fetus. Breast surgery can be safely undertaken during the second 
and third trimesters, but any therapeutic radiation must be delayed 
until after delivery. If indicated, certain chemotherapy agents such 
as doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide can be administered during 
the second and third trimesters, whereas others such as methotrex­
ate and 5-fluorouracil should be avoided. In general, endocrine 
and targeted therapies should not be used until after delivery. Comanagement by experienced multidisciplinary breast cancer and 
high-risk obstetrical teams is preferred.

Diagnosis of breast cancer in all premenopausal women neces­
sitates discussion about fertility preservation and pregnancy with 
those women who desire later pregnancy. Premature menopause 
is a known consequence of adjuvant chemotherapy, and likeli­
hood is related to type and duration of chemotherapy and age of 
patient. It is seen in <50% of women <40 years old but is common 
in those who are over 40. Patients are asked to avoid pregnancy 
while on adjuvant endocrine therapy. Thus, counseling about and 
implementation of fertility-preservation techniques are a priority in 
newly diagnosed premenopausal women if further childbearing is 
planned. A meta-analysis suggests that concurrent administration 
of an LHRH agonist to suppress ovarian function during adjuvant 
chemotherapy may help to preserve subsequent ovarian func­
tion without adverse breast cancer outcomes. Avoidance of oral 
contraceptives or hormone-based intrauterine devices is recom­
mended for premenopausal breast cancer survivors who require 
contraception.
Though data are not extensive, pregnancy after early stage 
breast cancer diagnosis appears to be safe. There is no evidence of 
increased rate of recurrence compared to matched patients who did 
not become pregnant, nor is there evidence of increased fetal anom­
alies. A recent study has documented the safety and pregnancy 
success rate for women with treated early ER-positive breast cancer 
who stop adjuvant tamoxifen after 18–24 months of therapy and 
then resume after pregnancy to complete their prescribed course. 
Male Breast Cancer 
Men with breast cancer usually present 
with a breast lump or other physical abnormality. Principles about 
diagnosis, staging, and local therapy are like those for women, 
although most men undergo mastectomy for primary management 
for anatomic reasons. Men with breast cancer should undergo 
genetic testing as germline BRCA mutation is seen in up to 14% of 
men with breast cancer. About 90% of male breast cancers express 
ER, and adjuvant endocrine therapy is standard. Tamoxifen is the 
drug of choice; if an aromatase inhibitor is indicated (as for example 
in an individual who has a history of thromboembolic disease), 
concomitant administration of an LHRH agonist is required. 
Guidelines for use of adjuvant chemotherapy are like those for 
postmenopausal women. 
LOCALLY ADVANCED BREAST CANCER
In the United States, about 10% of patients present with locally 
advanced or stage III breast cancers, although this presentation 
is more common in less-resourced countries. These tumors are 
characterized by a large primary tumor, involvement of skin or 
chest wall, or fixed tumors or axillary lymph nodes, findings that 
make primary surgical resection difficult or impossible. Inflam­
matory tumors that present with rapid onset of erythema, swelling, 
and tenderness of the breast are a subset of locally advanced breast 
cancer and are sometimes confused with mastitis or other infection. 
Breast or skin biopsy is critical in the setting of breast inflammation 
that fails to resolve after antibiotics. Skin biopsy showing dermal 
lymphatic invasion with tumor cells is often associated with the 
diagnosis of inflammatory breast cancer. Because up to one-third 
of these patients have detectable metastasis at time of diagnosis, an 
evaluation for metastatic disease is recommended even in asymp­
tomatic patients.
Combined-modality therapy begins with neoadjuvant systemic 
therapy, whose selection is guided by biomarker status as outlined 
above, to downstage tumor to permit resection. Mastectomy with 
axillary dissection is often required in the case of inflammatory or 
other T4 lesions because breast-conserving therapy has been associ­
ated with an unacceptably high incidence of locoregional recurrence. 
Postoperative radiotherapy is the norm in conjunction with systemic 
therapy with chemotherapy and/or anti-HER2 therapy and/or endo­
crine therapy tailored to the biological qualities of the tumor. 
METASTATIC BREAST CANCER 
Presentation and Evaluation  About 20–25% of patients who are 
treated for early breast cancer subsequently develop metastatic 

disease, presumably because of micrometastatic disease at time 
of diagnosis that was or becomes resistant to adjuvant systemic 
therapy. Metastatic disease can be detected years to decades after 
primary diagnosis, especially in the setting of ER-positive disease, 
whereas it is most likely to be diagnosed within 3–7 years after 
treatment for TNBC or ER-negative/HER2-positive breast cancer. 
Only about 5% of patients present with de novo metastatic or stage 
IV breast cancer in the United States.

Patients may present with abnormal physical exam or symptoms 
suggestive of metastases. As shown in Fig. 84-3, careful evaluation 
of extent of disease with computed tomography and radionuclide 
imaging, routine blood studies, and measurement of tumor mark­
ers such as carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) and either CA27/29 
or CA15-3 should be undertaken. Wherever possible, it is critical 
to biopsy a suspicious lesion to confirm the diagnosis of metastatic 
breast cancer and assay tumor markers including ER, PR, and 
HER2 because they may have changed from the initial biopsy under 
the pressure of time or therapy. In addition, PD-L1 staining and 
tumor mutational burden should be assessed in tumor, and assays 
for PIKC3A and ESR1 mutations should be performed in blood or 
tumor to delineate options for treatment. Next-generation sequenc­
ing of tumor may also be considered to simultaneously survey for 
any other targetable changes to guide selection of therapy or eligi­
bility for a clinical trial. 
CHAPTER 84
Goals of Care and General Management  Metastatic breast cancer 
is rarely curable, and the goals of therapy, which is chronic—to 
palliate or prevent symptoms without undue toxicity—should be 
explicitly discussed with the patient at the time of diagnosis of 
metastatic disease. Median survival is <3 years, although the range 
is wide. Some patients with favorable characteristics such as ERpositive disease, nonvisceral disease, long disease-free interval, 
and good performance status may survive using serial therapies for 
many years, whereas those with TNBC are more likely to progress 
sooner and succumb to their disease. Advances in our understand­
ing of biology of ER- and HER2-positive and genetically mutated 
(e.g., BRCA1/2, PIK3CA) breast cancer and development of a 
myriad of targeted treatments have led to improved outcome for 
these subtypes in recent years.
Breast Cancer
Unlike in early breast cancer, the primary intervention in meta­
static breast cancer is systemic therapy. Surgery is generally limited 
to excision of isolated local recurrence or a solitary brain metastasis 
or stabilization of a bone metastasis. Randomized trials suggest that 
patients who present with de novo metastatic breast cancer do not 
have improved outcomes with surgical treatment for the primary 
breast cancer in addition to systemic therapy and the focus should be 
on systemic therapy. Radiotherapy may be used at any time to palli­
ate symptomatic localized disease such as bony or brain metastases.
All patients with metastatic breast cancer should have access to 
palliative therapy approaches in addition to antineoplastic therapy 
to maximize symptom control and quality of life. In addition, those 
with metastatic bone disease should be considered for regular 
administration of bisphosphonate or denosumab in addition to 
antineoplastic therapy to reduce the chance of skeletal morbidity 
including pain, fracture, and need for radiotherapy.
Patients with metastatic breast cancer require regular followup with history and physical exam to gauge response to therapy. 
Patient well-being and relief of symptoms are paramount, and use 
of imaging and blood studies should be personalized to the patient 
and therapy to adjust dose or schedule and to assist in decisions 
about efficacy and toxicity of therapy. Current algorithms suggest 
changes in therapy only if the patient has clear signs of disease 
progression or unacceptable toxicity. Studies to evaluate the role 
of serial liquid biopsies to track CTC or ctDNA as an indicator to 
switch therapy, and even to switch to a targeted therapy suggested 
by the mutational profile of the ctDNA, in the absence of clinical or 
radiologic evidence of disease progression are in progress. 
Management of ER-Positive Metastatic Breast Cancer  Whenever 
possible, serial use of endocrine therapy is the preferred approach

Clinical symptom
History, physical exam
Suspicious history or
clinical finding
Diagnostic workup
Imaging as indicated
(direct image of suspicious site;
anatomic imaging: CT or MRI; scintigraphic imaging:
bone or PET scan)
blood tests as indicated
(CBC, liver function tests,
circulating tumor biomarkers: CA15-3 or 27.29; CEA)
Confirmed suspicious finding
Nondiagnostic
Follow-up
evaluation
Biospy if possible
PART 4
Oncology and Hematology
Resolved
Uncertain
or persists
Routine
follow-up
Routine
follow-up
Continue follow-up rule out noncancer
etiology repeat diagnostic workup if indicated
FIGURE 84-3  Evaluation of new signs or symptoms in a patient with prior history of early-stage breast cancer. See text for details. CBC, complete blood count; CEA, 
carcinoembryonic antigen; ER, estrogen receptor; NGS, next-generation sequencing; PET, positron emission tomography; PgR, progesterone receptor.
to patients whose recurrent tumor is ER and/or PR positive and 
whose clinical presentation is not dire. Use of chemotherapy can 
be reserved for those with life-threatening visceral disease like 
lymphangitic lung metastases or impending liver failure. However, 
a prospective trial has suggested that overall survival was the same 
in patients with apparent rapidly growing visceral disease ran­
domly assigned to either chemotherapy or endocrine therapy and 
a CDK4/6 inhibitor. There is no value for concurrent endocrine 
therapy and chemotherapy for management of metastatic breast 
cancer. Selection of type of endocrine therapy will depend on 
menopausal status and previous adjuvant endocrine therapy. It may 
be paired with targeted therapy depending on the molecular profile 
of the cancer and clinical scenario.
For the uncommon patient who presents with untreated ER-posi­
tive metastatic breast cancer, therapy generally begins with aromatase 
inhibitor plus CDK4/6 inhibitor for postmenopausal women and 
LHRH agonist plus aromatase inhibitor plus CDK4/6 inhibitor for 
premenopausal women; median progression-free survival is about 
2 years, and median overall survival is >3 years with this approach.
More commonly, patients present with recurrent disease diag­
nosed while on or after completing adjuvant endocrine therapy. For 
those who have received aromatase inhibitor, up to one-half will have 
evidence of ESR1 mutation and may be candidates for the oral selec­
tive estrogen receptor degrading (SERD) agent elacestrant if they 
have also received a CDK4/6 inhibitor. Those without evidence of 
ESR1 mutation are often treated with an alternate SERD, fulvestrant, 
which is administered monthly by intramuscular injection; this may 
be coupled with a CDK4/6 inhibitor if the patient has not previously 
received such an agent. The value of continuing or switching to 
another CDK4/6 inhibitor for those who have previously received 
adjuvant CDK4/6 inhibitor is not clearly defined in this setting.
For postmenopausal patients previously treated with endocrine 
therapy who are found to have a PIKC3A mutation by liquid or 
tissue biopsy, the use of alpelisib (a selective inhibitor of PI3Kα) 
with fulvestrant can be considered. Postmenopausal patients with 

Other cancer
or condition
Positive for
metastases
Benign
Further
evaluation
and
treatment as
indicated
Re-evaluate tumor
biomarker status ER,
PgR, HER2, PIK3CA
mutation, PD-L1, NGS
(tissue or circulating)
PIK3CA/AKT1/PTEN alterations who have received one endocrine 
therapy for metastatic disease or recur within 12 months of complet­
ing adjuvant therapy can receive capivasertib (a pan-AKT inhibitor) 
with fulvestrant. The use of aromatase inhibitor plus everolimus, an 
mTOR inhibitor, can be considered for patients without targetable 
mutations as it, too, has been shown to increase progression-free 
survival over endocrine therapy alone. Each of these targeted agents 
carries a unique set of toxicities, and careful monitoring of clinical 
status and blood studies is needed for safe administration.
Other approaches, especially for patients who have demonstrated 
repeated and lengthy responses to serial hormone therapies, can 
include switch to another aromatase inhibitor or tamoxifen or 
administration of additive hormone therapies such as progestins, 
androgens, and estrogens. The latter category of agents is seldom 
used at present because of concerns about toxicity and the advent 
of newer more targeted therapies.
At some point, it will become apparent that a patient has tumor 
that is unresponsive to endocrine therapy, which necessitates a 
transition to other types of systemic therapy. The timing of this 
decision may be informed in part by the observation that likelihood 
of disease control and the duration of benefit are decreased by about 
one-half with each successive switch in endocrine therapy. 
Management of Endocrine-Unresponsive ER-Positive, HER2-Negative 
Breast Cancer or TNBC  Chemotherapy is the backbone of sys­
temic therapy for individuals with metastatic HER2-negative breast 
cancer that is not responsive to endocrine therapy. Unlike in the 
setting of early breast cancer where multiagent chemotherapy is the 
norm, use of combination chemotherapy in metastatic breast cancer 
should be reserved for the uncommon situation of visceral crisis 
where a rapid reduction in tumor burden is desirable. For most 
patients, serial use of single-agent chemotherapy is associated with 
an acceptable likelihood of disease palliation without excess toxic­
ity; combination chemotherapy does not improve overall survival 
over sequential monotherapy.