4.5 Review

The 2016 Assisi Think Tank Meeting on breast cancer: white paper

Journal

BREAST CANCER RESEARCH AND TREATMENT
Volume 160, Issue 2, Pages 211-221

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10549-016-3998-2

Keywords

Breast cancer; Radiation therapy; Regional lymph node treatment; Post-mastectomy radiation therapy; Breast reconstruction; Primary systemic therapy

Categories

Funding

  1. Cambridge National Institute of Health Research Biomedical Research Centre
  2. The Danish Cancer Society [R90-A5856] Funding Source: researchfish

Ask authors/readers for more resources

To identify weak points in daily routine use of radiation therapy (RT) for non-metastatic breast cancer patients, particularly when data are lacking or equivocal, a think tank of experts met in Assisi. Before the meeting, controversial issues on non-metastatic breast cancer were identified and reviewed, and clinical practice investigated by means of an online questionnaire. During the 3-day meeting, topics were discussed in-depth with attendees and potential sponsors that are involved in breast cancer treatment. Three issues were identified as needing further investigation: (1) Regional lymph node treatment in early-stage breast cancer; (2) Combined post-mastectomy RT and breast reconstruction; (3) RT in patients treated with primary systemic therapy. Future research proposals included the following: (1) Participating in appropriately selected on-going clinical trials; (2) Designing new randomized controlled clinical trials and prospective population cohort studies; (3) Setting-up large database(s) to generate predictive response models and detect biomarkers for tailored loco-regional treatments. It is hoped that the ATTM findings, as described in the present white paper, will stimulate a new generation of radiation oncologists to focus on research in these areas, and that the white paper will become a tool for multidisciplinary groups to help them design research proposals and strategies.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available