Inflammatory breast cancer(IBC)is a rare but highly aggressive subtype of breast cancer characterized by rapid clinical progression and poor prognosis.Although it accounts for only 2%-4%of all breast cancer cases,it is responsible for 8%-10%of breast cancer-related mortality.The etiology of IBC is multifactorial,involving genetic,hormonal,environmental,and socioeconomic factors.Pathologically,IBC is marked by the presence of dermal lymphatic tumor emboli,and molecular subtypes are predominantly HER2-positive and triple-negative,indicating high tumor invasiveness.Diagnosis relies on characteristic clinical manifestations and histopathological confirmation,while imaging techniques such as MRI and PET/CT play important roles in evaluating disease extent and metastasis.Given that IBC is often diagnosed at a locally advanced or metastatic stage,there is currently no specific treatment protocol.Instead,management generally follows the treatment paradigm of non-IBC,emphasizing systemic therapy within a multidisciplinary framework.HER2-positive IBC benefits from chemotherapy combined with dual-targeted anti-HER2 therapy;triple-negative IBC may respond to immune checkpoint inhibitors;and CDK4/6 inhibitors show potential efficacy in hormone receptor-positive subtypes.Despite advancements,the prognosis remains poor,with a high risk of early recurrence and distant metastasis.Prognostic factors include lymph node involvement,molecular subtype,and response to neoadjuvant therapy.As research into the tumor microenvironment and molecular mechanisms deepens,targeted and individualized therapies hold promise for improving outcomes.This review summarizes the epidemiology,pathology,diagnostic criteria,treatment strategies,and prognostic factors of IBC,aiming to inform clinical practice and future research.

Background and Aims:Centrally located breast cancer(CLBC),due to its proximity to the nipple-areolar complex,has long been treated primarily with mastectomy,while the oncologic safety of breast-conserving surgery(BCS)remains controversial.This study,based on a large-scale database combined with a real-world cohort,compared the survival outcomes of BCS and mastectomy to evaluate the feasibility and oncologic safety of BCS in CLBC patients.Methods:Data of 10 325 female CLBC patients diagnosed between 2010 and 2015 were extracted from the SEER database,including 5 601 patients who underwent BCS and 4 724 who underwent mastectomy.Propensity score matching(PSM)yielded 1 951 matched pairs,and disease-specific survival(DSS)and overall survival(OS)were compared between groups.Cox regression analyses were performed to identify prognostic factors,and subgroup analyses were conducted.Additionally,an independent validation cohort from Xiangya Hospital,Central South University(2015-2016)included 221 BCS and 636 mastectomy patients,with OS and progression-free survival(PFS)assessed.Results:After PSM,baseline characteristics between groups were well balanced.Kaplan-Meier analysis demonstrated no significant differences in DSS or OS between BCS and mastectomy,and 5-,7-,and 10-year OS rates were comparable(all P＞0.05).Subgroup analyses revealed equivalent outcomes for BCS and mastectomy in patients with T1/T2 disease,different HER2 statuses,and those receiving chemotherapy,while in patients receiving radiotherapy,BCS showed significantly better DSS and OS than mastectomy(both P＜0.05).Multivariate Cox regression identified T,N,and M stage,histologic grade,molecular subtype,ER/PR status,and chemotherapy as independent prognostic factors(all P＜0.05),whereas surgical type was not(P＞0.05).The validation cohort confirmed the SEER findings,with no significant differences in OS or PFS between the two groups(both P＞0.05).Conclusions:BCS provides DSS and OS comparable to mastectomy in CLBC patients and may confer additional survival benefits when combined with radiotherapy.These findings suggest that CLBC should not be considered a contraindication to BCS,supporting BCS as a feasible and safe surgical strategy that offers valuable evidence for individualized clinical decision-making and may help improve patients' quality of life.

Inflammatory breast cancer(IBC)is a rare but highly aggressive subtype of breast cancer characterized by rapid clinical progression and poor prognosis.Although it accounts for only 2%-4%of all breast cancer cases,it is responsible for 8%-10%of breast cancer-related mortality.The etiology of IBC is multifactorial,involving genetic,hormonal,environmental,and socioeconomic factors.Pathologically,IBC is marked by the presence of dermal lymphatic tumor emboli,and molecular subtypes are predominantly HER2-positive and triple-negative,indicating high tumor invasiveness.Diagnosis relies on characteristic clinical manifestations and histopathological confirmation,while imaging techniques such as MRI and PET/CT play important roles in evaluating disease extent and metastasis.Given that IBC is often diagnosed at a locally advanced or metastatic stage,there is currently no specific treatment protocol.Instead,management generally follows the treatment paradigm of non-IBC,emphasizing systemic therapy within a multidisciplinary framework.HER2-positive IBC benefits from chemotherapy combined with dual-targeted anti-HER2 therapy;triple-negative IBC may respond to immune checkpoint inhibitors;and CDK4/6 inhibitors show potential efficacy in hormone receptor-positive subtypes.Despite advancements,the prognosis remains poor,with a high risk of early recurrence and distant metastasis.Prognostic factors include lymph node involvement,molecular subtype,and response to neoadjuvant therapy.As research into the tumor microenvironment and molecular mechanisms deepens,targeted and individualized therapies hold promise for improving outcomes.This review summarizes the epidemiology,pathology,diagnostic criteria,treatment strategies,and prognostic factors of IBC,aiming to inform clinical practice and future research.

Background and Aims:Centrally located breast cancer(CLBC),due to its proximity to the nipple-areolar complex,has long been treated primarily with mastectomy,while the oncologic safety of breast-conserving surgery(BCS)remains controversial.This study,based on a large-scale database combined with a real-world cohort,compared the survival outcomes of BCS and mastectomy to evaluate the feasibility and oncologic safety of BCS in CLBC patients.Methods:Data of 10 325 female CLBC patients diagnosed between 2010 and 2015 were extracted from the SEER database,including 5 601 patients who underwent BCS and 4 724 who underwent mastectomy.Propensity score matching(PSM)yielded 1 951 matched pairs,and disease-specific survival(DSS)and overall survival(OS)were compared between groups.Cox regression analyses were performed to identify prognostic factors,and subgroup analyses were conducted.Additionally,an independent validation cohort from Xiangya Hospital,Central South University(2015-2016)included 221 BCS and 636 mastectomy patients,with OS and progression-free survival(PFS)assessed.Results:After PSM,baseline characteristics between groups were well balanced.Kaplan-Meier analysis demonstrated no significant differences in DSS or OS between BCS and mastectomy,and 5-,7-,and 10-year OS rates were comparable(all P＞0.05).Subgroup analyses revealed equivalent outcomes for BCS and mastectomy in patients with T1/T2 disease,different HER2 statuses,and those receiving chemotherapy,while in patients receiving radiotherapy,BCS showed significantly better DSS and OS than mastectomy(both P＜0.05).Multivariate Cox regression identified T,N,and M stage,histologic grade,molecular subtype,ER/PR status,and chemotherapy as independent prognostic factors(all P＜0.05),whereas surgical type was not(P＞0.05).The validation cohort confirmed the SEER findings,with no significant differences in OS or PFS between the two groups(both P＞0.05).Conclusions:BCS provides DSS and OS comparable to mastectomy in CLBC patients and may confer additional survival benefits when combined with radiotherapy.These findings suggest that CLBC should not be considered a contraindication to BCS,supporting BCS as a feasible and safe surgical strategy that offers valuable evidence for individualized clinical decision-making and may help improve patients' quality of life.

Objective:To examine the effect of adjuvant radiotherapy on postoperative complications of immediate deep inferior epigastric artery perforator (DIEP) flap breast reconstruction.Methods:Data was collected from 185 patients underwent immediate DIEP reconstruction during November 2006 to March 2020 Department of Breast Surgery, Fudan University Shanghai Cancer Center. All the patients were female, aging (43.0±7.8) years (range: 29 to 61 years). The series included with a total of 187 flaps (2 bilateral, 183 unilateral). Included patients were divided into 2 groups: immediate DIEP reconstruction requring or not requring post-mastectomy radiation therapy (71 cases (71 flaps) in PMRT group, 114 cases (116 flaps) in control group). The aesthetic outcome were measured by Kroll score system and compared between the groups by t test. The complications included partial flap loss, minor necrosis were analyzed between the groups by χ 2 test, while the influence of the other correlation factors on complication occurrence was analyzed by Logistic analysis. Results:The controll groups showed better aesthetic results (2.21±0.55 vs. 2.47±0.82, t=-2.593, P=0.010). Complication rate in PMRT group was higher than that in control group (19.7% (15/71) vs. 4.2% (4/116), χ2=15.079, P<0.01). The complication rate was not correlated with age, body mass index, perforator number, neoadjuvant chemotherapy and adjuvant chemotherapy. Conclusions:Correlation was observed between adjuvant radiotherapy and post-operative complication of the DIEP flap. However, the complication occurrence and aesthetic results remain in the acceptable range. The other factors such as age, body mass index, perforator number, neoadjuvant chemotherapy and adjuvant chemotherapy should not be considered as prognosis factor of post-operative complication of the DIEP flap.

Objective:To examine the effect of adjuvant radiotherapy on postoperative complications of immediate deep inferior epigastric artery perforator (DIEP) flap breast reconstruction.Methods:Data was collected from 185 patients underwent immediate DIEP reconstruction during November 2006 to March 2020 Department of Breast Surgery, Fudan University Shanghai Cancer Center. All the patients were female, aging (43.0±7.8) years (range: 29 to 61 years). The series included with a total of 187 flaps (2 bilateral, 183 unilateral). Included patients were divided into 2 groups: immediate DIEP reconstruction requring or not requring post-mastectomy radiation therapy (71 cases (71 flaps) in PMRT group, 114 cases (116 flaps) in control group). The aesthetic outcome were measured by Kroll score system and compared between the groups by t test. The complications included partial flap loss, minor necrosis were analyzed between the groups by χ 2 test, while the influence of the other correlation factors on complication occurrence was analyzed by Logistic analysis. Results:The controll groups showed better aesthetic results (2.21±0.55 vs. 2.47±0.82, t=-2.593, P=0.010). Complication rate in PMRT group was higher than that in control group (19.7% (15/71) vs. 4.2% (4/116), χ2=15.079, P<0.01). The complication rate was not correlated with age, body mass index, perforator number, neoadjuvant chemotherapy and adjuvant chemotherapy. Conclusions:Correlation was observed between adjuvant radiotherapy and post-operative complication of the DIEP flap. However, the complication occurrence and aesthetic results remain in the acceptable range. The other factors such as age, body mass index, perforator number, neoadjuvant chemotherapy and adjuvant chemotherapy should not be considered as prognosis factor of post-operative complication of the DIEP flap.

Objective:To investigate the current trend of breast cancer neoadjuvant therapy and provide reference for the improvement of breast cancer clinical guideline in the future.Methods:Questionnaires of cross-sectional survey were sent to 110 hospitals (breast cancer surgery quantity surpassing 200) between July 2018 and September 2018. The stages and subtypes, therapeutic regimen, treatment assession, operation choice and preforming of patients underwent neoadjuvant therapy were recorded.Results:Neoadjuvant treatment has been performed in all of the 110 hospitals. The total number of breast patients underwent neoadjuvant therapy was about 14 550 (17.0% in surgical patients) in 2017. For all of the neoadjuvant patients, the proportion of stageⅡ patients was less than 30% in 81 hospitals, and the proportion of stage Ⅲ was more than 50% in 84 hospitals. The numbers of estrogen receptor (ER) (+ )/human epidermal growth factor receptor-2 (HER-2) (-), ER (-)/HER-2 (+ ) and triple negative subtype breast cancer patients were 3 550 (24.4%), 6 024 (41.4%) and 4 991 (34.3%), respectively. Patient′s scruples of relatively delayed operation and weak will of breast conservation after neoadjuvant therapy were the majority reasons for neoadjuvant therapy restriction. Anthracycline followed by taxane was the most usual neoadjuvant therapeutic regimens in 53.6% hospitals, and anthracycline plus taxane was the first choice in 42.7% hospitals. Chemotherapy with targeting therapy was recommended to HER-2 positive neoadjuvant patients in 80.9% hospitals. To assess treatment outcome of neoadjuvant treatment, 42.7% hospitals used MRI in more than 50% patients while the usage rate of MRI was less than 20% in 37.3% hospitals. The proportions of hospital using repeat-marking, tattoo and metal clip as the first method to identify the primary tumor region and lymph nodes were 60.0%, 29.1% and 10.9%, respectively. Breast-conservation rate after neoadjuvant therapy was less than 20% in 87.3% hospitals.Conclusions:Neoadjuvant therapy for breast cancer is widely performed in most hospitals in China, while the proportion of neoadjuvant treatment in patients with operable breast cancer is still low. Meanwhile, the idea of achieving de-escalation operation through neoadjuvant treatment is not promoted and the therapeutic evaluation method of neoadjuvant treatment needs further studies to improve.

Objective:To investigate the current trend of breast cancer neoadjuvant therapy and provide reference for the improvement of breast cancer clinical guideline in the future.Methods:Questionnaires of cross-sectional survey were sent to 110 hospitals (breast cancer surgery quantity surpassing 200) between July 2018 and September 2018. The stages and subtypes, therapeutic regimen, treatment assession, operation choice and preforming of patients underwent neoadjuvant therapy were recorded.Results:Neoadjuvant treatment has been performed in all of the 110 hospitals. The total number of breast patients underwent neoadjuvant therapy was about 14 550 (17.0% in surgical patients) in 2017. For all of the neoadjuvant patients, the proportion of stageⅡ patients was less than 30% in 81 hospitals, and the proportion of stage Ⅲ was more than 50% in 84 hospitals. The numbers of estrogen receptor (ER) (+ )/human epidermal growth factor receptor-2 (HER-2) (-), ER (-)/HER-2 (+ ) and triple negative subtype breast cancer patients were 3 550 (24.4%), 6 024 (41.4%) and 4 991 (34.3%), respectively. Patient′s scruples of relatively delayed operation and weak will of breast conservation after neoadjuvant therapy were the majority reasons for neoadjuvant therapy restriction. Anthracycline followed by taxane was the most usual neoadjuvant therapeutic regimens in 53.6% hospitals, and anthracycline plus taxane was the first choice in 42.7% hospitals. Chemotherapy with targeting therapy was recommended to HER-2 positive neoadjuvant patients in 80.9% hospitals. To assess treatment outcome of neoadjuvant treatment, 42.7% hospitals used MRI in more than 50% patients while the usage rate of MRI was less than 20% in 37.3% hospitals. The proportions of hospital using repeat-marking, tattoo and metal clip as the first method to identify the primary tumor region and lymph nodes were 60.0%, 29.1% and 10.9%, respectively. Breast-conservation rate after neoadjuvant therapy was less than 20% in 87.3% hospitals.Conclusions:Neoadjuvant therapy for breast cancer is widely performed in most hospitals in China, while the proportion of neoadjuvant treatment in patients with operable breast cancer is still low. Meanwhile, the idea of achieving de-escalation operation through neoadjuvant treatment is not promoted and the therapeutic evaluation method of neoadjuvant treatment needs further studies to improve.

Objective: To investigate the current trends of breast reconstruction(BR) after mastectomy in China. Methods: A list of hospitals with more than 200 cases of breast cancer surgery per year nationwide was obtained, and 110 institutions were selected according to the geographical distribution. The research was conducted in the form of a questionnaire survey, and 92.3% (169/183) of the questions were single-choice questions. Information such as demographics of surgeons and hospitals, number of mastectomy and BR, type and timing of BR was included in the survey. Survey formal notification letter was issued by the China Anti-Cancer Association Breast Cancer Committee and Chinese College of Surgeons, Committee of Mammary Surgeons. Questionnaires were sent to the respondents of each center by email. The survey time range was from January 1, 2017 to December 31, 2017. All data were completely collected before September 7, 2018. Results: A total of 110 units participated in the survey. In total, 87.3% (96/110) of the hospitals have conducted BR surgery. The BR after mastectomy was 10.7% (6 534/61 099), among this, implant BR accounted for 65.7%(4 296/6 534), autologous BR accounted for 20.1% (1 312/6 534), and autologous combined implant BR accounted for 14.2% (927/6 534). Immediate reconstruction accounted for 67.6% (4 417/6 534) of BR, while delayed BR accounted for 32.4% (2 097/6 534). In 2017, 77.8% (35/45) of the plastic surgery departments cooperated with general surgery departments. General BR could be conducted after mastectomy accounted for 83.6% (92/110). The proportion of reconstruction was positively correlated with the gross domestic product (GDP) per capita (r=0.311, P=0.002). The one-step implant-based BR(IBBR) was the most preferred type in immediate BR. Two-step IBBR was the most preferred method in delayed BR. Hospitals that routinely evaluated aesthetics after BR accounted for 64.6% (62/96), while only 16.7% (16/96) of hospitals used patient-reported outcome measure (PROM). The most commonly used PROM tool was BREAST-Q. Conclusions The overall BR in China is on upward trend, but gap between China and the developed countries still exists. Breast surgery departments should strengthen further cooperation with plastic surgery departments. Simultaneously, the aesthetics evaluation and PROM after BR should be put a high premium.

Objective: To explore the current clinical practice of implant-based breast reconstruction (IBBR) in China. Methods: The current survey was sponsored by Chinese Anti-Cancer Association, Committee of Breast Cancer Society and Chinese Society of Breast Surgeons. A survey was mailed to 110 hospitals in China, which have more than 200 breast cancer operations performed in 2017. The survey mainly included questions on the clinical practice of IBBR, sociodemographic and geographical factors associated with IBBR practice, reasons and concerns for selecting IBBR, type and timing of breast reconstruction, and the complications of IBBR. Data were analyzed using χ² test, Fisher′s exact test or Kruskal-Wallis rank sum test. Results: IBBR was available in 86.4% (95/110) included hospitals. It was predominantly performed breast reconstruction surgery, the proportion of IBBR in all the breast reconstruction was 65.75% (4 296/6 534). However, the rate of IBBR in all the patients received mastectomy was only 7.06% (4 296/60 877). Among all the included hospitals, the number of implant reconstructions performed in 2017 was 24 (57.5) cases (M(Q_R), range: 2-565 cases). Factors associated with the performance of IBBR including regional per capita gross domestic product (H=10.47, P=0.005) and annual surgery volume (H=8.30, P=0.016). The main reasons for choosing IBBR were relatively simple surgical procedure, short learning curve and short operation time. The effects of adjuvant radiotherapy on prosthesis, postoperative complications and patient satisfaction were the main concerns for implant reconstruction. Compared with delay reconstruction, a higher proportion of IBBR was observed in immediate reconstruction (83.1% vs. 62.0%, χ²=12.522, P=0.000). In all, 10.5% (10/95) hospitals reported more than 10% grade Ⅲ to Ⅳ capsular contracture. The incidence of infections need surgical intervention was reported between 10% and 20% by 4.2% (4/95) hospitals. Hospitals with 6% to 10% implant rupture and 6% to 15% implant removal were 1.1% (1/95) and 4.2% (4/95) respectively. Conclusions IBBR was the most common used surgery in breast reconstruction after mastectomy. However, the proportion of IBBR in patients after mastectomy was still low. Reginal economy, surgery volume of hospitals, lack of specialty training program and the concern about complications and patient′s satisfaction were the factors affecting the development of IBBR.