Association between initiation of adjuvant chemotherapy beyond 30 days after surgery and overall survival among patients with triple-negative breast cancer

Contralateral prophylactic mastectomy: Weighing the risks of delayed chemotherapy, radiotherapy, and hormonal therapy

BACKGROUND

Many patients with unilateral breast cancer opt for contralateral prophylactic mastectomy (CPM) at the time of therapeutic mastectomy (immediate CPM) or following completion of adjuvant therapy. Studies show that immediate CPM increases the risk of surgical complications related to unilateral mastectomy (UM) alone, which may lead to delays in adjuvant therapy initiation. However, it is unclear if these complications cause clinically significant delays in initiating adjuvant chemotherapy, radiotherapy, or hormonal therapy.

METHODS

A retrospective chart review was conducted on patients with breast cancer who underwent immediate CPM versus UM alone at Columbia University Medical Center from January 2000 to December 2020. Patient demographic and oncologic characteristics; complications; and timing of adjuvant chemotherapy, radiotherapy, and/or hormonal therapy relative to therapeutic mastectomy were collected.

RESULTS

In this study, 239 UM alone patients were propensity score matched to 239 immediate CPM patients. No significant difference in complication rates was found between the index and contralateral breasts in CPM patients. A similar percentage of CPM and UM patients experienced postoperative complications (19% vs. 17%, p = 0.64). No significant difference in time to adjuvant chemotherapy, radiotherapy, or hormonal therapy was found between CPM patients with complications and all CPM patients or all UM patients.

CONCLUSIONS

There is a lack of clear guidance for clinical decision-making regarding timing of CPM relative to adjuvant therapy. Our study suggests that immediate CPM does not significantly increase the risks of postoperative complications or complication-related delays in the initiation of adjuvant chemotherapy, radiotherapy, or hormonal therapy. This information may help patients and providers to plan, select, and schedule breast cancer treatment options.

Oncoplastic Breast Reduction: A Systematic Review of Postoperative Complications

Background

Breast-conserving therapy with oncoplastic reduction is a useful strategy for partial mastectomy defect reconstruction. The most recently published systematic review of oncoplastic breast reduction outcomes from 2015 showed wound dehiscence in 4.3%, hematoma in 0.9%, infection in 2.8%, and nipple necrosis in 0.9% of patients. We performed a systematic review of oncoplastic breast reduction literature, comparing outcomes and complication rates reported over the past 8 years.

Methods

Studies describing the use of oncoplastic breast reduction and discussion of postoperative complications were included. The primary outcome assessed was the postoperative complication rate; secondary outcomes analyzed were rates of margin expansion, completion mastectomy, and delays in adjuvant therapy due to complications.

Results

Nine articles met inclusion criteria, resulting in 1715 oncoplastic breast reduction patients. The mean rate of hematoma was 3%, nipple necrosis was 2%, dehiscence was 4%, infection was 3%, and seroma was 2%. The need for re-excision of margins occurred in 8% of patients, and completion mastectomy in 2%. Finally, delay in adjuvant treatment due to a postoperative complication occurred in 4% of patients.

Conclusions

Oncoplastic breast reduction is an excellent option for many patients undergoing breast-conserving therapy; however, postoperative complications can delay adjuvant radiation therapy. Results of this systematic literature review over the past 8 years showed a slight increase in complication rate compared to the most recent systematic review from 2015. With increased popularity and surgeon familiarity, oncoplastic breast reduction remains a viable option for reconstruction of partial mastectomy defects despite a slight increase in complication rate.

Delays in Initiating Anti-Cancer Therapy for Early-Stage Breast Cancer-How Slow Can We Go?

Breast cancer is the most commonly diagnosed cancer among women worldwide, and is a leading cause of cancer-related deaths. When diagnosed at an early stage, appropriate and timely treatment results in a high cure rate and better quality of life. Delays in initiating anti-cancer therapy, including surgical resection, adjuvant/neoadjuvant chemotherapy and radiation therapy are commonly encountered, even in developed health care systems. Existing comorbidities that mandate referral to other services, genetic counseling and testing that may dictate the extent and type of anti-cancer therapy and insurance coverage, are among the most commonly cited factors. However, delays can be unavoidable; for over three years, health care systems across the globe were busy dealing with the unprecedented COVID-19 pandemic. War across hot zones around the globe resulted in millions of refugees; most of them have no access to cancer care, and when/where available, there may be significant delays. Thus, cancer patients across the globe will probably continue to suffer from significant delays in diagnosis and appropriate treatment. Many retrospective reports showed significant negative impacts on different aspects of treatment outcomes and on patients' psychosocial wellbeing and productivity. In this paper, we review the available data on the impact of delays in initiating appropriate treatment on the outcomes of patients with early-stage breast cancer.

Does Immediate Breast Reconstruction Lead to a Delay in Adjuvant Chemotherapy for Breast Cancer? A Meta-Analysis and Systematic Review

Timely delivery of adjuvant chemotherapy is crucial. With an increasing frequency of immediate breast reconstructions (IBR) following mastectomy (MAS), concerns have arisen regarding its complication rates and effects on time to chemotherapy. The aim was to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to determine if there is a prolonged time to chemotherapy (TTC) after IBR and MAS. Electronic databases, reference lists and relevant articles were searched systematically. Eligibility criteria included women receiving adjuvant chemotherapy who underwent either MAS only or MAS and IBR. Random-effects models were used in the analysis. A total of 29 studies were included in qualitative analysis, comprising of 156,000 patients (IBR: 57,159; MAS: 98,841). But 23 studies had sufficient data to be included in the meta-analysis. Sixteen papers concluded there was no difference in TTC compared to MAS. There was a difference of 3.50 days between TTC in IBR versus MAS (95% CI [0.42, 6.57], P value = .0256; IBR = 43.56 days, MAS = 40.38 days). The rate of patients being delayed past 90 days was not significantly higher in IBR (OR = 1.34, 95% CI [0.76, 2.38], P = .310). IBR patients were more likely to have complications compared to the MAS group (OR = 2.04, 95% CI [1.04-4.01], P < .01). We concluded that there is a statistically significant longer time to chemotherapy following IBR of 3.50 days, yet there is no difference in delays past 90 days. Therefore, the longer TTC in IBR is unlikely to be of any clinical significance.

Outcomes of Immediate Breast Reconstruction in Triple Negative Breast Cancer: A Propensity Score-Matched Analysis

PURPOSE

Triple negative breast cancer (TNBC) patients have a significantly worse prognosis and survival compared to non-TNBC patients. Mastectomy and immediate breast reconstruction (MIBR) is associated with higher rates of complications overall, but whether MIBR significantly increases oncological risk in TNBC patients has not been fully elucidated. Our study aimed to evaluate the oncological safety of MIBR in patients with TNBC compared to non-TNBC.

METHODS

A 6-year prospectively maintained retrospective database at The Ottawa Hospital was reviewed from January 1, 2013 to May 31, 2019. Propensity score-matching was performed using the nearest-neighbour method with a matching ratio of 2:1. Kaplan-Meier and log rank tests were performed to provide statistical comparison of disease-free interval (DFI). DFI was defined as time from MIBR to locoregional recurrence or disease-specific mortality. P-value < 0.05 indicated statistical significance.

RESULTS

Of 277 eligible patients, 153 patients were matched. The cohort consisted of 51(33%) TNBC patients and 102 (67%) non-TNBC patients after 2:1 propensity score-matching. The rates of delays to first radiochemotherapy [17 (33%) vs.14 (14%), p = 0.10], postoperative complications [13 (26%) vs. 34 (33%), p = 0.50], and locoregional recurrence [2 (1.96%) vs. 1 (1.96%), p = 1.0] were statistically similar in TNBC and non-TNBC, respectively. DFI was not significantly different in TNBC compared to non-TNBC patients (log-rank p = 1.0). There was no mortality in this cohort.

CONCLUSIONS

This 6-year retrospective 2:1 propensity score-matched cohort study demonstrated similar oncological safety for MIBR in patients with TNBC and non-TNBC.. Overall, these findings provide additional support for the oncological safety of MIBR in TNBC. . Therefore, MIBR remains a therapeutic option for patients with TNBC.