Factors associated with decision to undergo contralateral prophylactic mastectomy versus unilateral mastectomy

Effect of rurality and travel distance on contralateral prophylactic mastectomy for unilateral breast cancer

PURPOSE

Despite lack of survival benefit, demand for contralateral prophylactic mastectomy (CPM) to treat unilateral breast cancer remains high. High uptake of CPM has been demonstrated in Midwestern rural women. Greater travel distance for surgical treatment is associated with CPM. Our objective was to examine the relationship between rurality and travel distance to surgery with CPM.

METHODS

Women diagnosed with stages I-III unilateral breast cancer between 2007 and 2017 were identified using the National Cancer Database. Logistic regression was used to model likelihood of CPM based on rurality, proximity to metropolitan centers, and travel distance. A multinomial logistic regression model compared factors associated with CPM with reconstruction versus other surgical options.

RESULTS

Both rurality (OR 1.10, 95% CI 1.06-1.15 for non-metro/rural vs. metro) and travel distance (OR 1.37, 95% CI 1.33-1.41 for those who traveled 50 + miles vs. < 30 miles) were independently associated with CPM. For women who traveled 30 + miles, odds of receiving CPM were highest for non-metro/rural women (OR 1.33 for 30-49 miles, OR 1.57 for 50 + miles; reference: metro women traveling < 30 miles). Non-metro/rural women who received reconstruction were more likely to undergo CPM regardless of travel distance (ORs 1.11-1.21). Both metro and metro-adjacent women who received reconstruction were more likely to undergo CPM only if they traveled 30 + miles (ORs 1.24-1.30).

CONCLUSION

The impact of travel distance on likelihood of CPM varies by patient rurality and receipt of reconstruction. Further research is needed to understand how patient residence, travel burden, and geographic access to comprehensive cancer care services, including reconstruction, influence patient decisions regarding surgery.

EBCC-13 manifesto: Balancing pros and cons for contralateral prophylactic mastectomy

After a diagnosis of unilateral breast cancer, increasing numbers of patients are requesting contralateral prophylactic mastectomy (CPM), the surgical removal of the healthy breast after diagnosis of unilateral breast cancer. It is important for the community of breast cancer specialists to provide meaningful guidance to women considering CPM. This manifesto discusses the issues and challenges of CPM and provides recommendations to improve oncological, surgical, physical and psychological outcomes for women presenting with unilateral breast cancer: (1) Communicate best available risks in manageable timeframes to prioritise actions; better risk stratification and implementation of risk-assessment tools combining family history, genetic and genomic information, and treatment and prognosis of the first breast cancer are required; (2) Reserve CPM for specific situations; in women not at high risk of contralateral breast cancer (CBC), ipsilateral breast-conserving surgery is the recommended option; (3) Encourage patients at low or intermediate risk of CBC to delay decisions on CPM until treatment for the primary cancer is complete, to focus on treating the existing disease first; (4) Provide patients with personalised information about the risk:benefit balance of CPM in manageable timeframes; (5) Ensure patients have an informed understanding of the competing risks for CBC and that there is a realistic plan for the patient; (6) Ensure patients understand the short- and long-term physical effects of CPM; (7) In patients considering CPM, offer psychological and surgical counselling before surgery; anxiety alone is not an indication for CPM; (8) Eliminate inequality between countries in reimbursement strategies; CPM should be reimbursed if it is considered a reasonable option resulting from multidisciplinary tumour board assessment; (9) Treat breast cancer patients at specialist breast units providing the entire patient-centred pathway.

Nationwide Trends in Contralateral Prophylactic Mastectomies: An Analysis of 55,060 Unilateral Breast Cancer Patients

Background:

The effects of recent initiatives to better educate unilateral breast cancer (UBC) patients about contralateral prophylactic mastectomy (CPM) have not been fully examined. The purpose of this study was to update and examine recent annual CPM trends by evaluating 2015–2020 data from a large administrative claims database. We also sought to determine if there were any variations in trends among different age groups and reconstructive modalities.

Methods:

Patients diagnosed with UBC between 2015 and 2019 were identified in Optum Clinformatics DataMart. Patients were then categorized by age group, whether they underwent CPM, whether they underwent breast reconstruction (BR), timing of any BR (immediate or delayed), and type of BR (implant-based or autologous).

Results:

Of 55,060 patients who were diagnosed with UBC, 2625 (4.8%) underwent CPM. After a slight decline from 2015 to 2016, the CPM rate among UBC patients increased significantly from 3.4% in 2016 to 6.8% in 2019. Although this upward trend remained consistent across all age groups examined, younger UBC patients represented a significantly higher and faster growing percentage of those undergoing CPM. BR rates among those who underwent CPM also increased between 2015 and 2019, with implant-based and immediate BR becoming more heavily favored over autologous and delayed BR.

Conclusions:

CPM rates continued to rise between 2016 and 2019 and younger women represented a substantially higher and faster growing percentage of UBC patients undergoing CPM than older women. In addition, implant-based and immediate BR are becoming more heavily favored over autologous and delayed BR.

A Comparison of Complications in Therapeutic versus Contralateral Prophylactic Mastectomy Reconstruction: A Paired Analysis

BACKGROUND

Although breast reconstruction after bilateral mastectomies including a contralateral prophylactic mastectomy is known to have a higher overall complication profile, whether reconstructive complication rates differ between the therapeutic mastectomy and contralateral prophylactic mastectomy sides remains unclear.

METHODS

Women undergoing bilateral mastectomies with autologous or implant-based breast reconstruction for a unilateral breast cancer at a single institution were identified (2009 to 2019). Postoperative complications were stratified by laterality (therapeutic mastectomy versus contralateral prophylactic mastectomy). Paired data were analyzed to compare the risks of complications between prophylactic and therapeutic reconstruction sides in the same patient.

RESULTS

A total of 130 patients (260 reconstructions) underwent bilateral autologous or implant-based reconstruction. Although most women underwent a simple mastectomy, a higher proportion of therapeutic mastectomies were modified radical mastectomies including axillary lymph node dissections compared to contralateral prophylactic mastectomies (15.4 percent versus 0 percent). Forty-four percent of women completed postmastectomy radiation therapy of the therapeutic side before definitive reconstruction. Overall, both therapeutic and prophylactic reconstructions had a similar incidence of reconstructive failure (p = 0.57), return to the operating room (p = 0.44), mastectomy skin flap necrosis (p = 0.32), seroma (p = 0.82), fat necrosis (p = 0.16), wound infection (p = 0.56), and cellulitis (p = 0.56). Nearly one-fifth of patients experienced complications limited to the prophylactic side [contralateral prophylactic mastectomy reconstruction complications, n = 26 (20.0 percent); therapeutic mastectomy reconstruction complications, n = 15 (11.5 percent)].

CONCLUSION

Despite a history of local radiation therapy and more extensive oncologic surgery on the therapeutic side, there are no significant differences in the incidence of postsurgical complications on the therapeutic mastectomy and contralateral prophylactic mastectomy sides after bilateral reconstruction.

CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Risk, II.

Surgical Decision-Making Surrounding Contralateral Prophylactic Mastectomy: Comparison of Treatment Goals, Preferences, and Psychosocial Outcomes from a Multicenter Survey of Breast Cancer Patients

BACKGROUND

Differences in patient characteristics and decision-making preferences have been described between those who elect breast-conserving surgery (BCS), unilateral mastectomy (UM), or contralateral prophylactic mastectomy (CPM) for breast cancer. However, it is not known whether preferred and actual decision-making roles differ across these surgery types, or whether surgery choice reflects a woman's goals or achieves desired outcomes.

METHODS

Women diagnosed with stage 0-III unilateral breast cancer across eight large medical centers responded to a mailed questionnaire regarding treatment decision-making goals, roles, and outcomes. These data were linked to electronic medical records. Differences were assessed using descriptive analyses and logistic regression.

RESULTS

There were 750 study participants: 60.1% BCS, 17.9% UM, and 22.0% CPM. On multivariate analysis, reducing worry about recurrence was a more important goal for surgery in the CPM group than the others. Although women's preferred role in the treatment decision did not differ by surgery, the CPM group was more likely to report taking a more-active-than-preferred role than the BCS group. On multivariate analysis that included receipt of additional surgery, posttreatment worry about both ipsilateral and contralateral recurrence was higher in the BCS group than the CPM group (both p < 0.001). The UM group was more worried than the CPM group about contralateral recurrence only (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Women with CPM were more likely to report being able to reduce worry about recurrence as a very important goal for surgery. They were also the least worried about ipsilateral breast recurrence and contralateral breast cancer almost two years postdiagnosis.

Contralateral risk-reducing local therapy in breast cancer patients with BRCA1/2 mutations: systemic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Unilateral breast cancer (UBC) patients with germline pathogenic BRCA1/2 variants have a higher risk of developing contralateral breast cancer (CBC) and need contralateral risk-reducing local treatments, including contralateral risk-reducing mastectomy (CRRM) and prophylactic irradiation (CPI). The aim of our study was to systematically explore the efficacy of CRRM and CPI in reducing CBC risk and increasing survival.

METHODS

A search was done, and eligible randomized trials and cohort studies should include and compare UBC patients with germline pathogenic BRCA1/2 variants who have and have not received contralateral risk-reducing local treatment. Random-effects meta-analysis was used in this study. Primary outcomes of the studies included overall survival (OS) and the incidence of contralateral breast cancer (CBC), and secondary outcomes included breast cancer-specific survival (BCSS).

RESULTS

A total of five studies with 1769 UBC patients with germline pathogenic BRCA1/2 variants were enrolled in our meta-analysis. CRRM was correlated with a lower risk of CBC in UBC patients with germline pathogenic BRCA1/2 variants (summary RR = 0.07; 95%CI 0.03-0.13, I2 = 3%), a significantly increased OS (summary RR, 1.15; 95%CI 1.04-1.26, I2 = 26%) and a significantly increased BCSS (summary RR, 1.18; 95%CI 1.07-1.31, I2 = 64%) compared with surveillance. CPI also decreased the risk of CBC (RR 0.02; 95%CI 0.05-0.88) but did not significantly improve OS (RR 0.97; 95%CI 0.90-1.05) and BCSS (RR 0.97; 95%CI 0.90-1.05) compared with surveillance.

CONCLUSIONS

CRRM reduces CBC risk and increases OS and BCSS in UBC patients with germline pathogenic BRCA1/2 variants, and could be offered as a risk-reducing local treatment. For those who oppose CRRM, CPI could be offered for CBC-risk reduction, while its survival benefit is still uncertain.

Contralateral prophylactic mastectomy in breast cancer: what to discuss with patients

Introduction: The contralateral prophylactic mastectomy (CPM) rate in the U.S. has been steadily increasing. This is of particular concern because many women who undergo this procedure are candidates for breast-conserving surgery.Areas covered: CPM's medical benefit is related to the risk of contralateral cancer development and whether CPM provides a survival benefit. Contralateral cancer rates have decreased, and CPM does not provide a survival benefit. Other potential benefits of the procedure may be improved quality of life; these data are reviewed. Research efforts have been undertaken to better understand the decision-making process of patients who consider, and ultimately undergo, this procedure.Expert opinion: Decisional traits, personal values, the desire for peace of mind, and the desire to obtain breast symmetry are important factors that drive a woman's decision to undergo CPM. Additionally, many patients lack the knowledge on how different types of breast surgery impact outcomes. To improve the shared decision-making process, a stepwise approach to address possible misconceptions, and clarify the real risks/benefits of this procedure should be utilized. A clear recommendation (for/against) should be made for every patient with newly diagnosed breast cancer who considers CPM. Communication tools to assist patients and surgeons in this process are sorely needed.

Assessing the additional surgical risk of contralateral prophylactic mastectomy and immediate breast implant reconstruction

INTRODUCTION

There has been a sharp rise in the rate of contralateral prophylactic mastectomy over the last decade, despite the low incidence of new primary cancers predicted for the contralateral breast. This study compares the postoperative complication rates between the diseased breast treated with mastectomy and the contralateral breast that underwent prophylactic mastectomy, followed by immediate bilateral breast implant reconstruction. We hypothesized that there will be no difference in postoperative outcomes between prophylactic and diseased groups, as the surgical approach would be comparable.

METHODS

After IRB approval, a retrospective chart review identified consecutive unilateral breast cancer patients who underwent bilateral mastectomy and immediate breast reconstruction between May 2008 and May 2018 at a tertiary academic medical center. A paired sample t-test and a penalized logic regression model were constructed to identify relationships between breast laterality and outcomes.

RESULTS

A total of 1117 patients with unilateral breast cancer who underwent bilateral mastectomy and immediate breast implant reconstruction were identified. Rates of capsular contracture and infection were significantly greater in the diseased breast, while rates of revision were significantly greater in the contralateral prophylactic breast. There were no statistically significant differences between breasts in rates of explant, skin flap necrosis or hematoma. When adjusted for confounding variables, a higher infection rate was observed in the diseased breast.

CONCLUSION

This study detected significant differences in postoperative complication rates between the diseased and prophylactic breasts following bilateral mastectomy and immediate breast implant reconstruction. Postoperative complications occurred more frequently in the diseased breast compared with low rates of complications in the contralateral prophylactic breast. This information is helpful for preoperative decision making, as surgeons and patients carefully weigh the additional risks of contralateral prophylactic procedure.

Physician Knowledge of Breast Cancer Recurrence and Contralateral Breast Cancer Risk is Associated with Increased Recommendations for Contralateral Prophylactic Mastectomy: a Survey of Physicians at NAPBC-Accredited Centers

BACKGROUND

Physician recommendation for contralateral prophylactic mastectomy (CPM) has been shown to influence whether a patient chooses CPM. Few studies have explored physician knowledge about contralateral breast cancer (CBC) and local recurrence (LR) risk and whether knowledge is associated with recommendation for CPM.

METHODS

We conducted a cross-sectional survey of physicians at National Accreditation Program for Breast Centers-accredited breast centers across the USA. Physician knowledge levels of CBC and LR were assessed and correlated with recommendations for CPM.

RESULTS

A total of 2412 physicians were surveyed with a 51% response rate (n = 1226). The results showed that 66% had correct knowledge about CBC risk and 57% had correct knowledge about LR. Moreover, 634 had high knowledge, viz. 176 (55.4%) breast surgeons, 171 (58.0%) medical oncologists, 196 (62.0%) radiation oncologists, and 72 (29.9%) plastic surgeons (p < 0.01). Compared with high knowledge, low knowledge was associated with favoring insurance coverage for patients at average CBC risk (53.8% vs. 39.8%, p < 0.01). Low knowledge was also associated with feeling that CPM was indicated in patients with high recurrence anxiety (39.2% vs. 28.9%), young patients with estrogen receptor (ER)-negative cancer (25.3% vs. 18.5%), and patients with two first-degree relatives with breast cancer (40.0% vs. 32.3%) (all p < 0.01). Multivariable analysis found physician type [odds ratio (OR) 3.76 for surgeons] and low knowledge (OR 1.46) to be significant independent predictors of favoring insurance coverage for CPM in patients at average risk.

CONCLUSIONS

Physician knowledge about CBC and LR could be improved. Lower knowledge is associated with favorable physician recommendations for CPM. It is not clear whether improving physician knowledge will change recommendations for CPM.