Abstract:Pregnancy-associated breast cancer (PABC), including breast cancer during pregnancy (BCP) and postpartum breast cancer (PBC), has become a critical issue for clinicians in consideration of both maternal and offspring safety during diagnosis and treatment. The recommendations in this guideline are mainly based on currently available high-quality prospective studies, retrospective cohort studies, meta-analyses, and guidelines and consensus documents published by internationally recognized or national societies or associations. Clinicians should carefully analyze the potential benefits and risks of each treatment before recommending whether to terminate the pregnancy or lactation, balance the advantages and disadvantages of the treatments, and respect the wishes of patients. Level of Evidence and Recommendation Strength Level of evidence standard[1]Recommendation strength standard[1]Recommendation strength review committee There were 77 members in the Voting Committee of this guideline, including 63 (81.8%) in breast surgery, one (1.3%) in obstetrics, three (3.9%) in oncology, four (5.2%) in medical imaging, two (2.6%) in pathology, two (2.6%) in radiotherapy, and two (2.6%) in epidemiology. Target Audience Clinicians specializing in breast diseases in China. Recommendations Recommendation 1: diagnostic methods The diagnostic method of PBC is same as that of non-pregnancy–associated breast cancer (non-PABC). - Dignostic methods Level of evidence Recommendation strength 1.1 Screening method for BCP 1.1.1 Breast ultrasound[2] I A 1.1.2 Core needle biopsy[3] I A 1.2 Distant site examination for BCP 1.2.1 Abdominal ultrasound[2,4–5] I A 1.2.2 Forbidden radionuclide scan[4] I A Recommendation 2: treatment principle The treatment principle of PBC is the same as that of non-PABC. - Treatment principle Level of evidence Recommendation strength 2.1 Treatment principle for BCP 2.1.1 Second and third trimester[3–5] I A 2.2 Surgical treatment for BCP 2.2.1 Modified radical mastectomy[4–6] I A 2.2.2 Breast-conserving therapy∗[6] II A 2.3 Other treatments for BCP 2.3.1 Endocrine therapy with tamoxifen is prohibited during pregnancy[3,5] I A 2.3.2 Anti-receptor 2 (HER-2) targeted therapy is prohibited during pregnancy[5] I A 2.3.3 Radiation therapy is prohibited during pregnancy[5] I A ∗Timing of radiotherapy should be fully considered. Recommendation 3: breastfeeding - Breast-feeding Level of evidence Recommendation strength 3.1 Breast-feeding during chemotherapy is not recommended[4] I A 3.2 Breast-feeding during endocrine therapy is not recommended[4] I A 3.3 Breast-feeding during targeted therapy is not recommended[4] I A Discussion Currently, most publications suggest that PABC refers to breast cancer diagnosed during pregnancy, that is, BCP, and breast cancer diagnosed within 1 year after delivery, that is, PBC.[3] In addition to breastfeeding, the diagnosis and treatment principles of PBC can refer to those of non-PABC. This guidance involves more principles of BCP. Most Chinese women have dense mammary glands, and tissue congestion and swelling of the gland during pregnancy leads to further increases of gland density. Therefore, the expert group recommends breast ultrasound to assess the breasts and axillary lymph nodes of pregnant women.[2] Because high-level evidence supporting the clinical value of breast X-ray during pregnancy is lacking, the expert group has not made specific recommendations. Gadolinium-based contrast agents for breast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) can penetrate the blood–placenta barrier and potentially cause teratogenicity,[7] and thus, breast-enhanced MRI is forbidden during pregnancy. NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology (2020) clearly indicated that computed tomography and radionuclide scanning are forbidden during pregnancy.[4] Based on the literature evidence, the expert group has proposed that patients with BCP can choose abdominal ultrasound and chest X-ray examination under abdominal shielding as screening modalities for distant metastasis.[2,4,5] However, clinicians must pay attention to the possibility of insufficient assessment of distant metastatic lesions because of the limited options for imaging examinations for pregnant women. Experts from the American College of Radiology believe that breast ultrasound is the first option for breast examination in lactating women, and breast X-ray or MRI can be used as a supplement.[8] For patients with breast imaging-reporting and data system (BI-RADS) 4 or 5 in breast imaging or those with BI-RADS 3 and risk factors, core needle biopsy (CNB) for histopathological assessment has been widely accepted.[3] The expert group recommends that pregnant or lactating women without contraindications should undergo CNB to obtain histopathological diagnosis. It must be emphasized that surgical stress response and anticancer drugs may affect the developing fetus. Studies demonstrated that in early pregnancy (gestational week ≤13 +6) breast cancer surgery increases the risk of abortion, and chemotherapy leads to a fetal malformation rate of 20%.[5] The expert group believes that the treatment plan for patients in early pregnancy requires special caution. Treatment plans should be devised in consideration of the clinical stage, biological characteristics of the tumor, and gestational period of the patients. Individualized management of patients via multidisciplinary treatment should be emphasized, and their wishes should be fully respected. It has been reported that the termination of pregnancy cannot improve the prognosis of BCP in the second and third trimesters, and breast cancer can be treated according to the condition.[3–5] Modified radical mastectomy for breast cancer is a standard surgical procedure for patients with BCP.[4–6] The survival rates of patients with stage I or II BCP after breast-conserving surgery and mastectomy are similar.[6] Owing to the clear risk of teratogenesis to the fetus induced by radiotherapy,[5] the expert group suggests that the timing of post-operative radiotherapy should be fully considered before breast-conserving surgery. Sulfur colloid labeled with the sentinel lymph node biopsy tracer 99mTc is relatively safe for the developing fetus,[9] but the level of evidence is not high.[10] Blue dye tracers may cause maternal allergic reactions and their safety in pregnant women is unclear.[4–5] Because of the change of the shape of the breast during pregnancy and increase of the duration of anesthesia, the expert group does not recommend primary breast reconstruction for patients with BCP. The principle of PBC surgery can refer to that of non-PABC, but clinicians should pay attention to the possibility of morphological changes in the breast during lactation and carefully choose breast-conserving surgery and primary reconstruction surgery. The expert group cited a lack of long-term follow-up data for patients receiving chemotherapy during pregnancy and neonatal outcomes, and the use of chemotherapy during pregnancy should be carefully considered. Studies illustrated that chemotherapy may lead to gestational hypertension, fetal intrauterine growth restriction, neonatal weight loss, and premature delivery.[6] Chemotherapy in early pregnancy can lead to premature delivery and malformation.[5] For patients with BCP who must receive chemotherapy, it is suggested to discuss their data with obstetricians, improve the screening of fetal malformations, and devise the chemotherapy plan after joint assessment. In principle, chemotherapy is recommended in the second and third trimesters of pregnancy.[4–6] After 35 weeks of gestation or within 3 weeks before planned delivery, chemotherapy should not be performed to avoid hematological complications during delivery.[3–5] Anthracycline-based chemotherapy can be carefully considered for patients with BCP.[5–6] Taxanes have been recognized by the European Society for Medical Oncology,[5] but the NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology (2020) indicated that there are insufficient safety data to support the recommendation of routine use of paclitaxel during pregnancy.[4] Tamoxifen endocrine therapy, anti-Her-2 targeted therapy and radiotherapy are not recommended in patients with BCP or in those with PBC during breastfeeding and breastfeeding is also not preferred during chemotherapy.[3–5] Patients with PABC are usually younger, and thus, the possibility of hereditary breast cancer should be considered to guide fertility and risk management related to hereditary breast cancer in the next generation. In addition to regular follow-up in the breast department, it is suggested to include follow-up in children's health care and other specialties and generate long-term follow-up data on the health status of infants receiving prenatal treatment to accumulate follow-up data for two generations. List of Compiling Committee Members (In Alphabetical Order by Surname) Zhong-Wei Cao, De-Dian Chen, Qing Chen, Yuan-Jia Cheng, Xuan-Ning Duan, Zhi-Min Fan, Pei-Fen Fu, Wei-Rong Gu, Jian Huang, Jun Jiang, Hong-Chuan Jiang, Feng Jin, Hua Kang, Rui Ling, Jin-Ping Liu, Ke Liu, Qian Liu, Yin-Hua Liu, Yun-Jiang Liu, Zhen-Zhen Liu, Yong-Hui Luo, Rong Ma, Da-Hua Mao, Jiang-Hua Ou, Yi-Ran Qiu, Xiang Qu, Guo-Sheng Ren, Ai-Lin Song, Er-Wei Song, Li-Li Tang, Xing-Song Tian, Chuan Wang, Fei Wang, Jian-Dong Wang, Shu Wang, Shui Wang, Xiang Wang, Jiong Wu, Ke-Jin Wu, Fei Xie, Ling Xin, Zhi-Gang Yu, Jian-Guo Zhang, Jin Zhang, Jing-Hua Zhang, Ming-Di Zhang, Yi Zhao, Zuo-Wei Zhao, Wei Zhu, Ang Zheng, and Qiang Zou. Conflicts of interest The expert committee for these guidelines declares no conflict of interest. These guidelines are a reference for breast disease specialists in clinical practice. However, the guidelines are not to be used as the basis for medical evaluation, and do not play an arbitrating role in the handling of any medical disputes. The guidelines are not a reference for patients or non-breast specialists. The Chinese Society of Breast Surgery assumes no responsibility for results involving the inappropriate application of these guidelines, and reserves the right to interpret and revise the guidelines. We state that the manuscript has been read and approved by all the authors, that the requirements for authorship as stated earlier in this document have been met, and that each author believes that the manuscript represents honest work.

Abstract:Breast-conserving surgery (BCS) with radiotherapy is the primarily agreed surgical choice for eligible patients with an early diagnosis of breast cancer. In 2019, the panel of Chinese experts assembled by the Chinese Society for Breast Surgery (CSBrS) developed a Chinese experts’ consensus on BCS for early-stage breast cancer (Version 2019) with the aim of standardizing BCS in China. Subsequently, the CSBrS conducted a review of published reports and discussions between experts to determine the key clinical questions for the Clinical Practice Guideline for BCS in Patients with Early-Stage Breast Cancer. The group evaluated the relevant evidence using the grading of recommendations assessment, development, and evaluation system, and developed a Clinical Practice Guideline for BCS in Patients with Early-Stage Breast Cancer (Version 2021), with the aim of providing guidance on clinical practice to breast surgeons in China. Level of Evidence and Recommendation Strength Level of evidence standard[1] Recommendation strength standard[1] Recommendation strength review committee The panel for this guideline is comprised of 85 experts, including 70 (82.3%) breast surgeons, four (4.7%) medical oncologists, four (4.7%) diagnostic radiologists, two (2.4%) pathologists, one (1.2%) obstetrician, two (2.4%) radiation oncologists, and two (2.4%) epidemiologists. Target Audience Clinicians specializing in breast diseases in China. Recommendations - Recommendation 1: Indications (all of the indications should be met). No. Indications Level of evidence Recommended strength 1.1 Patient wishes to preserve her breast I[2,3] A 1.2 Clinical Stage I, II, or ≤cT2 I[2–5] A 1.3 Able to achieve acceptable cosmetic outcomes after BCS I[2,3] A - Recommendation 2: Contraindications (any one of the indications is sufficient). No. Contraindications Level of evidence Recommended strength 2.1 Cannot receive radiotherapy after BCS I[4,6] A 2.2 Unable to achieve negative surgical margins I[2,3,7–9] A 2.3 Extensive microcalcification I[2,3,8] A 2.4 Inflammatory breast cancer I[2,3] A 2.5 Patient refusal to undergo BCS I[2,3] A - Recommendation 3: Surgery. No. Surgeries Level of evidence Recommended strength 3.1 Incorporation of oncoplastic techniques is able to improve the cosmetic outcomes after BCS II[9–11] A 3.2 It is recommended that inert metal clips (eg, titanium clips) be placed in the surgical bed after BCS as a localization marker for radiation boosting I[2,3] A - Recommendation 4: Pathology. No. Pathologies Level of evidence Recommended strength 4.1 Margin assessment after BCS is mandatory I[2,3,8] A 4.2 Intraoperative frozen section analysis for margin assessment is recommended I[2,3,12] A 4.3 Post-operative formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded tissue analysis is recommended for margin assessment I[2,3,8] A 4.4 Methods for margin assessment: Lumpectomy margin assessment (perpendicular inked method) I[2,4,13] A Lumpectomy margin assessment (tangential shaved method) II[2,14] A Cavity wall (tumor bed) sampling II[3,15–21] A - Recommendation 5: Radiotherapy. No. Radiotherapy Level of evidence Recommended strength 5.1 Whole-breast irradiation is recommended after BCS∗ I[2,4,6] A ∗Whole-breast irradiation can be waived in patients aged >65 years with Stage I breast cancer, hormone receptor-positive tumors, and negative surgical margins (CALGB9343 trial). Discussion A considerable amount of evidence from the scientific literature supports the safety and efficacy of combining BCS with radiotherapy in the early stages of breast cancer. In the National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project B-06 trial, a total of 1851 patients diagnosed with Stage I or II breast cancer were randomly allocated to three study arms, namely total mastectomy, BCS, and BCS with radiotherapy. According to results of the long-term follow-up that lasted 20 years, it was found that disease-free survival, metastasis-free survival, and overall survival did not differ significantly between the three arms.[4] During the same period, in the Milan I trial, seven hundred and one patients with T2 tumors, it is possible to administer neoadjuvant chemotherapy to downstage the tumor, and thus increase the chances of being eligible for BCS. The panel members considered that, in clinical practice, it is not always easy to accurately measure the degree of shrinkage of a tumor after neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Thus, there was a lack of consensus in the panel regarding the optimal extent of surgery in patients with breast cancer who have received neoadjuvant chemotherapy. However, there was agreement that achieving negative surgical margins is mandatory in this situation. The panel considered that the following factors are potential risk factors for local recurrence after BCS: breast cancer located in the central portion; bloody discharge from the nipple; large tumor (eg, >T2); multifocal breast cancer; multicentric breast cancer; young age (<35 years); and radiotherapy contraindicated (eg, active connective tissue disease). However, there is no high level evidence that the abovementioned factors are contraindications to BCS. Achieving negative surgical margins is mandatory for successful BCS. There is evidence that positive surgical margins are closely associated with local recurrence.[2,8,9,24] Intra-operative gross inspection,[25] imprint cytology,[26] intra-operative specimen imaging,[27] and novel devices[28,29] can also reportedly reduce the rates of positive margins. However, the panel does not recommend these approaches because of the lack of high-level evidence. Intra-operative frozen section analysis (FSA) is reportedly capable of reducing the rates of margin positivity and second surgeries.[30] The panel considers that FSA is widely used in clinical practice in China and supports its use for intra-operative margin assessment. The panel take a cautious attitude toward performing margin assessment only by post-operative formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded examination. Both lumpectomy margins and cavity margins are suitable for the margin assessment of BCS. Lumpectomy margins are assessed on the surface of the tumor-containing specimen. There are two techniques that can be used for margin assessment: the perpendicular inked and tangential shaved techniques.[2,14] Cavity margins are assessed by performing a biopsy (tissue sampling) of the residual cavity (or the wall of the tumor bed) after tumor removal. Well-designed studies suggesting that cavity margin assessment alone is capable of achieving excellent local control have been published.[15,19] A meta-analysis has demonstrated that the “no-ink on tumor” is significantly associated with a reduced local recurrence rate and that wider surgical margins do not further improve the local control rate.[31] Furthermore, the increased risk of local recurrence associated with positive surgical margins is not nullified by post-operative radiotherapy. There is no evidence that different margin widths should be considered for patients of different ages or with different molecular subtypes. A real-world study (CSBrS-005) conducted by the CSBrS in 2019 revealed that 88.2% (1530/1734) of patients who had undergone BCS had margin widths >5 mm.[32] Others have reached consensus on diagnosing negative surgical margins for infiltrating ductal carcinoma and ductal carcinoma in situ by “no-ink on tumor” and “≥2 mm,” respectively.[2,3,7] The panel considered these standards inappropriate for China and has not recommended them for routine use. The panel agreed that whole-breast irradiation (RT) is necessary after BCS. However, the CALGB9493 trial showed a small improvement of locoregional recurrence rate in BCS patients who received RT (RT: 2% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1% to 4%) vs. no-RT: 10% (95% CI: 7% to 15%) ), but no statistically significant differences in 10-year distant metastasis and overall survival between patients with low-risk BCS who did and did not undergo RT. [33] In contrast, the PRIME II trial showed that, in patients aged ≥65 years with early-stage and hormone receptor-positive disease who underwent BCS, the 5-year ipsilateral recurrence rates were 4.1% and 1.3% (P = 0.0002) in the no-RT and RT groups, respectively.[34] Although this difference is statistically significant, the benefit is not clinically important. The panel suggested that RT might be forgone after BCS in certain situations related to the patients’ preferences and comorbidities. The International Breast Cancer Study Group VI-VII trial[35] aimed to analyze how the timing of RT affects the local failure rate and disease-free survival (DFS) in breast cancer patients. Among pre/perimenopausal patients, the 15-year DFSs were 48.2% vs. 44.9% (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.12, 95% CI: 0.87–1.45) in patients allocated 3 and 6 months of initial chemotherapy (CT). Among post-menopausal patients, the 15-year DFS was 46.1% and 43.3% in the group that did not receive CT initially and the group allocated 3 months of CT, respectively (HR 1.11, 95% CI: 0.82–1.51). The results of this clinical trial suggest that delaying RT until after completion of CT is safe and reasonable. The panel recommended that whole-breast RT is indicated for eligible breast cancer patients after BCS and CT. The CO-HO-RT trial[36] revealed that the risk of developing grade ≥2 radiation-induced subcutaneous fibrosis is similar in patients who receive concurrent vs. sequential RT and endocrine therapy, suggesting that concurrent use of these treatment modalities is safe. According to the 3.7-year follow-up data of the N9831 trial,[37] concurrent use of RT and trastuzumab did not significantly increase cardiotoxicity, supporting the feasibility of the concurrent use of RT and anti-human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) treatments. The panel recommended the concurrent use of RT and endocrine therapy, as well as anti-HER2 therapy if indicated. Acknowledgements The authors thank Dr. Trish Reynolds, MBBS, FRACP, from Liwen Bianji, Edanz Group China (www.liwenbianji.cn/ac), for editing the English draft of this manuscript. The authors thank Jia-Fan Ma for revision of this manuscript. List of compiling committee members (In alphabetical order by surname): Zhong-Wei Cao, De-Dian Chen, Kai Chen, Yuan-Jia Cheng, Xue-Ning Duan, Zhi-Min Fan, Pei-Fen Fu, Jian Huang, Jun Jiang, Hong-Chuan Jiang, Feng Jin, Hua Kang, Rui Ling, Jin-Ping Liu, Jie-Qiong Liu, Ke Liu, Qian Liu, Yin-Hua Liu, Yun-Jiang Liu, Zhen-Zhen Liu, Yong-Hui Luo, Rong Ma, Da-Hua Mao, Jiang-Hua Ou, Xiang Qu, Guo-Sheng Ren, Ai-Lin Song, Er-Wei Song, Feng-Xi Su, Li-Li Tang, Xing-Song Tian, Chuan Wang, Fei Wang, Jian-Dong Wang, Shu Wang, Shui Wang, Xiang Wang, Jiong Wu, Ke-Jin Wu, Wei Wu, Fei Xie, Ling Xin, Zhi-Gang Yu, Jian-Guo Zhang, Jin Zhang, Jing-Hua Zhang, Yi Zhao, Zuo-Wei Zhao, Ang Zheng, Wei Zhu, Qiang Zou Conflicts of interest The expert committee for these guidelines declares no conflict of interest. These guidelines are a reference for breast disease specialists in clinical practice. However, the guidelines are not to be used as the basis for medical evaluation, and do not play an arbitrating role in the handling of any medical disputes. The guidelines are not a reference for patients or non-breast specialists. The Chinese Society of Breast Surgery assumes no responsibility for results involving the inappropriate application of these guidelines, and reserves the right to interpret and revise the guidelines.

Clinical Practice Guidelines for Pregnancy-Associated Breast Cancer: Chinese Society of Breast Surgery (csbrs) Practice Guidelines 2021

Taxanes in Combination with Platinum Derivatives for the Treatment of Ovarian Cancer During Pregnancy: A Literature Review

Breast cancer in pregnancy: concurrent cesarean section, nipple-sparing mastectomy, and immediate breast reconstruction—case report

Abstract PO4-02-08: Outcomes of patients treated with chemotherapy for breast cancer during pregnancy compared with non-pregnant breast cancer patients treated with systemic therapy

A Retrospective Clinical Study of Patients with Pregnancy-Associated Breast Cancer among Multiple Centers in China (Csbrs-008).

Breast cancer, pregnancy, and breastfeeding

[Retrospective Analysis of Diagnosis and Treatment of Breast Cancer in Pregnancy].

Outcomes of patients treated with chemotherapy for breast cancer during pregnancy compared with nonpregnant breast cancer patients treated with systemic therapy

Clinicopathologic characteristics, diagnosis and treatment of pregnancy-associated breast cancer: a retrospective analysis of 85 cases

Outcomes after treatment of breast cancer during pregnancy including taxanes and/or granulocyte colony-stimulating factor use: findings from a multi-institutional retrospective analysis

Abstract PS13-01: Worse Prognosis for Breast Cancer in the Second and Third Trimesters and Shortly Postpartum:An Update of the Dutch Pregnancy-Associated Breast Cancer Cohort

Multidisciplinary Management of Pregnancy-Associated Breast Cancer

Impact of Pregnancy on Breast Cancer Features and Prognosis

Clinical Features and Survival of Pregnancy-Associated Breast Cancer: A Retrospective Study of 203 Cases in China

Abstract PS13-03: Safety of taxane chemotherapy for the treatment of breast cancer during pregnancy: an international cohort study

Clinical Practice Guideline for Breast-Conserving Surgery in Patients with Early-Stage Breast Cancer: Chinese Society of Breast Surgery (csbrs) Practice Guidelines 2021

Pregnancy and Breast Cancer: A Challenge for the Multidisciplinary Team. A Single Center Experience and Narrative Review

Pregnancy-associated triple-negative breast cancer: A case report and literature review

Analysis of clinicopathological features and prognosis of pregnancy associated breast cancer:33 cases

Abstract PS13-02: Clinical Outcome and Patients' Characteristics of Breast Cancer Diagnosed During Pregnancy: A Retrospective Single Institutional Study

The diagnosis and treatment of breast cancer during pregnancy:3 cases report