Oncologic Safety of Immediate Breast Reconstruction in Breast Cancer Patients Who Underwent Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy: Short-Term Outcomes of a Matched Case-Control Study

Impact of neoadjuvant chemotherapy on the safety and long-term outcomes of patients undergoing immediate breast reconstruction after mastectomy

BACKGROUND

In breast cancer patients receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC), immediate breast reconstruction (IBR) as a breast cancer treatment option remains controversial. We assessed the impact of NAC on surgical and oncological outcomes of patients undergoing IBR.

METHODS

This was a retrospective multicenter study of 4726 breast cancer cases undergoing IBR. The rate of postoperative complications and survival data were compared between IBR patients who received NAC and those who did not receive NAC. Propensity score matching analysis was performed to mitigate selection bias for survival.

RESULTS

Of the total 4726 cases, 473 (10.0%) received NAC. Out of the cases with NAC, 96 (20.3%) experienced postoperative complications, while 744 cases (17.5%) without NAC had postoperative complications. NAC did not significant increase the risk of complications after IBR (Odds ratio, 0.96; 95%CI 0.74-1.25). At the median follow-up time of 76.5 months, 36 patients in the NAC group and 147 patients in the control group developed local recurrences. The 5-year local recurrence-free survival rate was 93.1% in the NAC group and 97.1% in the control group. (P < 0.001). After matching, there was no significant difference between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

IBR after NAC is a safe procedure with an acceptable postoperative complication profile.

The Japanese Breast Cancer Society Clinical Practice Guidelines for surgical treatment of breast cancer, 2022 edition

The 2022 revision of the Japanese Breast Cancer Society (JBCS) Clinical Practice Guidelines for surgical treatment of breast cancer was updated following a systematic review of the literature using the Medical Information Network Distribution Service (MINDS) procedure, which focuses on the balance of benefits and harms for various clinical questions (CQs). Experts in surgery designated by the JBCS addressed five areas: breast surgery, axillary surgery, breast reconstruction, surgical treatment for recurrent and metastatic breast cancer, and other related topics. The revision of the guidelines encompassed 4 CQs, 7 background questions (BQs), and 14 future research questions (FRQs). A significant revision in the 2022 edition pertained to axillary management after neoadjuvant chemotherapy in CQ2. The primary aim of the 2022 JBCS Clinical Practice Guidelines is to provide evidence-based recommendations to empower patients and healthcare professionals in making informed decisions regarding surgical treatment for breast cancer.

Oncological safety of nipple-sparing mastectomy after neoadjuvant chemotherapy: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

the use of nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM) in local advanced breast cancer after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NQT) is increasing, despite few studies on the subject. The aim of this systematic review was to determine the safety of NSM after neoadjuvant chemotherapy.

METHODS

for this systematic review we searched MEDLINE; Cochrane; Scientific Electronic Library Online (SciELO); Embase and Scopus. A literature search of all original studies including randomized controlled trials, cohort studies and case-control studies comparing women undergoing NSM after neoadjuvant chemotherapy for breast cancer was undertaken. Outcomes were locoregional recurrence (LRR), nipple recurrence and distant recurrence (DR). Data analysis was undertaken to explore the safety of NSM after NQT. The quality of the evidence was assessed with the Cochrane risk of bias tool. This study is registered on PROSPERO, number CRD42021276778.

FINDINGS

a total of 437 articles were identified. Four articles were included with 1466 patients all of which had a high to serious risk of overall bias. Local recurrence in the NSM after the NQT group ranged from zero to 9.8%. Nippleareolar complex (NAC) recurrence ranged from zero to 2.1%. The distant recurrence rate ranged from 6.5% to 16%. Due to the lack of pattern among the control groups, it was not possible to perform a meta-analysis.

INTERPRETATION

this review provides information for decision making in performing NSM after NQT. Despite the low rates of local recurrence and patients should be counseled about limited oncological information.

Survival Nomogram for Patients With Locally Advanced Breast Cancer Undergoing Immediate Breast Reconstruction: A SEER Population-Based Study

INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND

This study aimed to construct a nomogram to provide prognostic references for patients with locally advanced breast cancer (LABC) to receive immediate breast reconstruction (IBR).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

All data were obtained from the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) database. Univariate Cox regression, least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO) and best subset regression (BSR), separately followed by backward stepwise multivariable Cox, were used to construct the nomogram. Risk stratification was established after validation.

RESULTS

A total of 6,285 patients were enrolled to generate the training group (n = 3,466) and the test group (n = 2,819) by geographical split. Age, marital status, grade, T staging, N staging, radiotherapy, chemotherapy, estrogen receptor status (ER), progesterone receptor status (PR) and human epidermal growth factor receptor type 2 status (HER2) were used to fit the nomogram. The overall Harrell's concordance index (C-index) was 0.772 in the training group and 0.762 in the test group. The area under the receiver operator characteristic curves (AUC) at 3-year and 5-year were respectively 0.824 and 0.720 in the training group, 0.792 and 0.733 in the test group. The calibration curves showed great consistency in both groups. A dynamic nomogram (https://dcpanfromsh.shinyapps.io/NomforLABCafterIBR/) was developed.

CONCLUSION

A nomogram was developed and validated that predicts prognosis more accurately than the AJCC 7th stage and can be used as a reference for decision-making in LABC patients receiving IBR.

Resolution of Nonmass Enhancement Extension to the Nipple at Breast MRI after Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy: Pathologic Response and Feasibility for Nipple-sparing Mastectomy

Background Nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM) is usually contraindicated in patients with nonmass enhancement (NME) extension to the nipple at breast MRI. However, little is known about the feasibility of NSM when NME extension to the nipple resolves after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC). Purpose To evaluate whether NSM is an appropriate surgical procedure for patients in whom NME extension to the nipple resolves after NAC. Materials and Methods This retrospective study included 383 women with NME at baseline MRI who underwent NAC followed by mastectomy between January 2007 and March 2022 at a single institution. NME extension to the nipple was assessed using breast MRI before NAC (hereafter, pre-NAC) and after NAC (hereafter, post-NAC). In 326 women who underwent mastectomy with removal of the nipple-areolar complex, the rate of pathologic analysis-confirmed tumor invasion of the nipple compared with NME extension to the nipple at post-NAC breast MRI was evaluated. Tumor involvement of the nipple was also assessed in those with complete pathologic response at posttreatment MRI. Furthermore, the outcomes in 57 women undergoing NSM were investigated, particularly in patients with NME extension to the nipple at initial diagnosis. Results Of the 326 women who underwent mastectomy with removal of the nipple-areolar complex (mean age, 49 years ± 9.4 [SD]), 217 patients (67%) showed NME extension to the nipple on pre-NAC MRI scans. Among the 153 women (70%) in whom the NME extension to the nipple resolved after NAC, the rate of pathologic analysis-confirmed tumor invasion of the nipple was 2.6% (four of 153 women; 95% CI: 0, 6.5). No pathologic analysis-confirmed tumor invasion of the nipple was detected in 31 women with complete response at MRI. Of the 57 women who underwent NSM, 12 (21%) with resolution of NME extension to the nipple after NAC had no relapse during the median follow-up of 31 months (range, 11-80 months). Conclusion Pathologic analysis-confirmed tumor invasion of the nipple was rare in women with resolution of nonmass enhancement extension to the nipple after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC). Therefore, nipple-sparing mastectomy could be feasible in this population, especially in those with complete MRI response to NAC. © RSNA, 2023 Supplemental material is available for this article. See also the editorial by Lee in this issue.

Surgical options of the breast and clinical outcomes of breast cancer patients after neoadjuvant chemotherapy: A single-center retrospective study

BACKGROUND

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) has evolved significantly and has been widely accepted for downstaging disease in early-stage and locally advanced breast cancer patients. Since the optimal surgical intervention for patients receiving NAC remains controversial, we aim to investigate the survival outcome of patients treated with different surgical management.

METHODS

A retrospective, nested case-control study was conducted in patients with invasive breast cancer that underwent NAC at Fudan University Shanghai Cancer Center from January 2010 to June 2019. Based on surgical intervention, patients were divided into mastectomy and breast conservation groups. Patients were matched on age at diagnosis, menopausal status, the year of the surgery, post neoadjuvant therapy pathological tumor (ypT) stage, post neoadjuvant therapy pathological node (ypN) stage, molecular subtypes, and axillary surgery by propensity score matching.

RESULTS

A total of 2080 patients were enrolled in this study. Among them, 1819 (87.5%) patients were categorized as mastectomy group, and 261 (12.5%) patients were classed as breast conservation group. Over 9-years of research, the proportion of breast conservation steadily increased in patients after NAC. Data showed that younger (P<0.001) and pre-menopausal (P<0.001) patients with normal BMI (P=0.022) were more likely to receive breast conservation. Patients at advanced ypT stage (P<0.001), ypN stage (P<0.001), and clinical TNM stage (P<0.001) were more often to undergo mastectomy, while breast conservation rate was significantly higher in patients with triple-negative tumors (P=0.023). Compared with the mastectomy group, significant benefits in overall survival were observed in patients who received breast conservation (Hazard ratio 0.41, [95% confidence interval: 0.18-0.97]; p=0.049) in the matched cohort. There was no statistical difference between groups related to disease-free survival and locoregional recurrence.

CONCLUSIONS

Tumor biology can significantly impact the surgical decision in patients administrated with NAC. Breast conservation was a safe alternative for mastectomy in the NAC setting without compromising survival outcomes and locoregional control.

Immediate breast reconstruction has no impact on the oncologic outcomes of patients treated with post-mastectomy radiation therapy: a comparative analysis based on propensity score matching

PURPOSE

To investigate the impact of immediate breast reconstruction (iBR) on patients treated with post-mastectomy radiation therapy (PMRT) using propensity score matching (PSM).

METHODS

After a retrospective review of patients treated with PMRT between 2008 and 2017, we included 153 patients who underwent iBR and 872 patients who did not undergo iBR. Among the 153 patients who underwent iBR, 34 received one-stage iBR with autologous tissue and 119 received two-stage iBR. Conventional fractionated PMRT with a total dose of 50-50.4 Gy in 25-28 fractions was performed in all patients. Propensity scores were calculated via logistic regression.

RESULTS

Patients who underwent iBR were younger, had early stage disease, and had more frequent hormone receptor-positive tumor than those who did not undergo iBR. After PSM, 127 patients from each group with well-balanced characteristics were selected. With a median follow-up of 67.5 months, iBR led to better 6-year disease-free survival rates compared to no iBR before PSM (84.8% vs. 71.4%, p = 0.003); after PSM, there was no significant difference (84.8% vs. 75.5%, p = 0.130). On multivariable analysis in the matched cohort, iBR was not associated with inferior disease-free survival (hazard ratio, 0.67; p = 0.175). In the sensitivity analysis, iBR was not associated with a lower disease-free survival across all prognostic groups. The 5-year cumulative incidence of iBR failure was 15.0%.

CONCLUSION

In patients with adverse pathologic factors planning to receive PMRT, iBR did not compromise oncologic outcomes. In addition, iBR can be considered in patients treated with PMRT with several clinicopathologic risk factors.

Changes in Korean National Healthcare Insurance Policy and Breast Cancer Surgery Trend in Korea

BACKGROUND

Since April 2015, the Korean National Health Insurance (NHI) has reimbursed breast cancer patients, approximately 50% of the cost of the breast reconstruction (BR) procedure. We aimed to investigate NHI reimbursement policy influence on the rate of immediate BR (IBR) following total mastectomy (TM).

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed breast cancer data between April 2011 and June 2016. We divided patients who underwent IBR following TM for primary breast cancer into "uninsured" and "insured" groups using their NHI statuses at the time of surgery. Univariate analyses determined the insurance influence on the decision to undergo IBR.

RESULTS

Of 2,897 breast cancer patients, fewer uninsured patients (n = 625) underwent IBR compared with those insured (n = 325) (30.0% vs. 39.8%, P < 0.001). Uninsured patients were younger than those insured (median age [range], 43 [38-48] vs. 45 [40-50] years; P < 0.001). Pathologic breast cancer stage did not differ between the groups (P = 0.383). More insured patients underwent neoadjuvant chemotherapy (P = 0.011), adjuvant radiotherapy (P < 0.001), and IBR with tissue expander insertion (P = 0.005) compared with those uninsured.

CONCLUSION

IBR rate in patients undergoing TM increased after NHI reimbursement.

Outcomes and quality of life in immediate one-stage versus two-stage breast reconstructions without an acellular dermal matrix: 17- years of experience

BACKGROUND

Advantages of one-stage implant-based reconstructions include expedited surgery and recovery. This study aimed to investigate clinical and patient-reported outcomes in one-stage implant-based breast reconstructions without acellular dermal matrix (ADM).

METHODS

A prospectively collected database from 2002 to 2018 was retrospectively reviewed. One-stage and two-stage groups were compared for demographics, implant properties, early complications (hematoma, seroma, poor wound healing, implant removal), late complications (skin necrosis, capsular contracture, implant exposure, implant rupture), revision procedures, and Breast-Q questionnaire outcomes.

RESULTS

A total of 223 patients, 187 one-stage (84%) and 36 two-stage (16%) patients were recruited. At a mean follow-up of 124.9 and 92.5 months, respectively (p < .01), there were no differences in early (p = .85) or late (p = .23) complications or revision procedures (p = .12). Eighty patients (36%) returned the Breast-Q questionnaire (60 one-stage, 20 two-stage patients). There were no statistical differences in patient reported outcomes in breast well-being (p = .07), psychosocial well-being (p = .84), or sexual well-being (p = .78).

CONCLUSIONS

One-stage implant-based breast reconstruction without an ADM is a viable reconstruction providing comparable outcomes to two-stage procedures, with the benefit of minimal complications, a shorter reconstructive journey, and satisfactory quality of life.

Reconstructive outcome analysis of the impact of neoadjuvant chemotherapy on immediate breast reconstruction: a retrospective cross-sectional study

BACKGROUND

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) was initially applied to locally advanced breast cancer to convert advanced lesions to an operable status. Currently, its application has been expanded to enhance overall oncological results, especially in patients with triple-negative or HER-2-positive breast cancer. With more NACT being applied, the role and impact of this approach on breast reconstruction needs to be determined. This study aimed to perform a complete reconstructive outcome analysis of patients receiving NACT who underwent immediate breast reconstruction.

METHODS

A retrospective review of a single reconstructive surgeon's immediate breast reconstructions performed from July 2008 to December 2018 was undertaken. The results were stratified by the use of NACT. Patient demographics, delivery of NACT, adjuvant treatment, incidence of surgical complications, and postoperative photographs were analyzed.

RESULTS

A total of 269 patients were included. The mean follow-up was 46.3 months. Forty-six out of 269 patients received NACT and were included in the NACT group. The other patients were included in the non-NACT group. When implant-based reconstruction was planned, the NACT group had a higher rate of two-stage tissue expander-implant reconstruction than direct-to-implant reconstruction (p < 0.001). The requirement for postmastectomy radiotherapy was higher in the NACT group (p < 0.001). The surgical complication rates were similar between groups after adjusting for confounding factors. The objective aesthetic outcomes assessed by 6 plastic surgeons were also similar between groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Immediate breast reconstruction is a safe and reliable procedure, with an acceptable reconstructive complication rate and satisfactory aesthetic outcomes, for patients treated with NACT.

Reconstruction in Women with T4 Breast Cancer after Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy: When Is It Safe?

BACKGROUND

Despite limited evidence regarding its safety, immediate reconstruction (IR) is increasingly offered to women with T4 breast cancer. We compared outcomes after IR, delayed reconstruction (DR), and no reconstruction (NR) in patients treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) and postmastectomy radiation therapy (PMRT) for T4 disease.

STUDY DESIGN

We retrospectively identified consecutive women with T4 tumors treated with trimodality therapy from January 2007 through December 2019. Clinicopathologic characteristics, complications requiring reoperation, time to PMRT, and recurrence patterns were compared. The cumulative incidence of local recurrence (LR) was estimated using Kaplan-Meier methods.

RESULTS

Of the 269 women identified, the median (IQR) age was 52 (45-62) years; 164 women (61%) had T4d disease. Forty-five women (17%) had IR, 41 (15%) had DR, and 183 (68%) had NR. IR was independently associated with T4a-c disease (odds ratio [OR], 5.75; 95% CI, 2.57-12.87; p < 0.001) and younger age (OR 0.91; 95% CI, 0.86-0.94; p < 0.001). The risk of complications after IR was 22% overall and 46% in T4d patients (6/13), compared with 4.4% overall for NR and 7.3% for DR (p < 0.001). IR was associated with >8-week interval to PMRT (p < 0.001). At a median (range) follow-up of 4.2 (0.2-13) years, the median time to first recurrence was 18 months and was similar between groups (p = 0.13). The cumulative incidence of LR was 16% for T4d disease and 2.2% for T4a-c disease (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

After IR, women with T4 tumors, particularly T4d disease, experienced delayed initiation of adjuvant treatment and substantial morbidity, suggesting that an interval of >18 months between mastectomy and reconstruction is advisable.

A propensity score-matched comparison of recurrence outcomes after immediate implant vs autologous flap reconstruction in patients receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy for breast cancer

PURPOSE

We compared oncologic outcomes between breast cancer patients who underwent immediate implant-based breast reconstruction (IBBR) and those who underwent autologous flap reconstruction (AFR) after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT).

METHODS

The study group comprised 536 patients with primary breast cancer who underwent NACT followed by immediate IBBR or AFR. After propensity score matching, 138 patients in the IBBR group and 276 patients in the AFR group were selected for comparisons of locoregional recurrence-free survival (LRRFS), disease-free survival (DFS), distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS), and breast cancer-specific survival (BCSS).

RESULTS

No significant differences were observed between the matched groups in locoregional recurrence rates (IBBR vs. AFR: 12.3% vs. 12%; P = 0.915) and distant metastasis (13% vs. 17%; P = 0.293). There was also no significant difference between the groups in LRRFS (P = 0.956), DFS (P = 0.606), DMFS (P = 0.283), or BCSS (P = 0.121). The 5- and 10-year LRRFS rates were 87.6% and 85.9% in the IBBR group, and 87.7% and 86.1% in the AFR group; the 5- and 10-year DFS rates were 79% and 77.5% in the IBBR group, and 77% and 75% in the AFR group; the 5- and 10-year DMFS rates were 85.9% and 85.9% in the IBBR group, and 83.2% and 81.8% in the AFR group; and the 5- and 10-year BCSS rates were 97.8% and 91.3% in the IBBR group, and 91.8% and 86% in the AFR group, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

In this propensity score-matched analysis of oncologic outcomes in breast cancer patients who underwent immediate reconstruction after NACT, no significant differences were observed between the IBBR and AFR groups.

Long-term Oncologic Outcomes of Immediate Breast Reconstruction vs Conventional Mastectomy Alone for Breast Cancer in the Setting of Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy

Importance

An increasing number of patients with breast cancer receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) undergo immediate breast reconstruction (IBR) with nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM) or skin-sparing mastectomy (SSM) as surgical treatment. However, the oncologic efficacy and safety of this treatment sequencing strategy is unclear.

Objective

To compare the long-term oncologic outcomes of IBR with NSM/SSM and conventional mastectomy (CM) alone for breast cancer in the NACT setting.

Design, Setting, and Participants

A retrospective, propensity score-matched case-control study was conducted at Asan Medical Center, Seoul, Korea. A total of 1266 patients with breast cancer who underwent NACT followed by mastectomy with or without breast reconstruction between January 1, 2010, and November 30, 2016, were included. Data analysis was performed from July 1, 2019, to January 24, 2020. After propensity score matching, 323 patients who underwent IBR with NSM/SSM and 323 who underwent CM alone were selected for comparison of long-term oncologic outcomes.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The 5-year local recurrence-free survival, disease-free survival, distant metastasis-free survival, and overall survival rates were calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method and compared using log-rank tests. Hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% CIs were estimated using the Cox proportional hazards regression model.

Results

After matching, the median follow-up periods were 67 (range, 17-125) months for the IBR group and 68 (range, 17-126) months for the CM-alone group. Median age of the women in the IBR group was 42 (range, 23-72) years; median age of those in the CM-alone group was 46 (range, 30-75) years. No significant differences were observed between the IBR and CM-alone groups in local recurrence (3.7% vs 3.4%; P = .83), regional recurrence (7.1% vs 5.3%; P = .33), or distant metastasis (17.3% vs 18.6%; P = .68) rates. There was also no significant difference between the IBR and CM-alone groups in 5-year local recurrence-free survival (95.6% vs 96.7%; HR, 1.124; 95% CI, 0.495-2.549; P = .78), disease-free survival (76.5% vs 79.9%; HR, 1.089; 95% CI, 0.790-1.500; P = .60), distant metastasis-free survival (82.5% vs 82.5%; HR, 0.941; 95% CI, 0.654-1.355; P = .74), or overall survival (92.0% vs 89.3%; HR, 0.847; 95% CI, 0.530-1.353; P = .49) rates.

Conclusions and Relevance

The long-term oncologic outcomes of IBR with NSM/SSM for breast cancer in this study appeared to be comparable to those of CM alone after NACT, suggesting the feasibility of IBR with NSM/SSM in the NACT setting.

Does chemotherapy or radiotherapy affect the postoperative complication in breast cancer patients who underwent immediate breast reconstruction with tissue expander?

BACKGROUND

Immediate breast reconstruction with tissue expander in breast cancer patients who were expected to receive adjuvant therapy, such as chemotherapy or radiotherapy, has been a topic of debate. Postoperative complications from tissue expander procedures can delay the timing of adjuvant treatment and subsequently increase the probability of recurrence. The purpose of this study was to identify the impact of chemotherapy and radiotherapy on postoperative complications in patients who underwent immediate reconstruction (IR) using tissue expander.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective study of 1081 breast cancer patients who underwent mastectomy and IR using tissue expander insertion between 2012 and 2017 in Samsung Medical Center. The patients were divided into two groups based on complications (complication group vs. no complication group). Complication group was regarded to have surgical removal or conservative treatment based on clinical findings such as infection, capsular contracture, seroma, hematoma, rupture, malposition, tissue viability, or cosmetic problem. The complication group had 59 patients (5.5%) and the no complication group had 1022 patients (94.5%).

RESULTS

In univariate analysis, adjuvant radiotherapy and adjuvant chemotherapy were significantly associated with postoperative complications. In multivariate analysis, however, only higher pathologic N stage was significantly associated with postoperative complications (p < 0.001). Chemotherapy (p = 0.775) or radiotherapy (p = 0.825) were not risk factors for postoperative complications.

CONCLUSIONS

IR with tissue expander after mastectomy may be a treatment option even when the patients are expected to receive adjuvant chemotherapy or radiotherapy. These results will aid patients who are concerned about the complications of IR caused by chemotherapy or radiotherapy determine whether or not to have IR.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Patients were selected and registered retrospectively, and medical records were evaluated.

A Propensity Score-matched Analysis of Long-term Oncologic Outcomes After Nipple-sparing Versus Conventional Mastectomy for Locally Advanced Breast Cancer

OBJECTIVES

To compare the long-term oncologic outcomes of nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM) with those of conventional mastectomy (CM) in patients with locally advanced breast cancer (LABC) receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT).

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

NSM has been increasingly implemented in patients with breast cancer. However, oncologic efficacy of NSM in patients with LABC has not been sufficiently demonstrated.

METHODS

The study group comprised 850 patients with clinical stage IIB to IIIC breast cancer who underwent NACT followed by either NSM and immediate breast reconstruction or CM alone. After propensity score-matching, 418 patients were included in the analysis. Local recurrence-free survival, disease-free survival (DFS), distant metastasis-free survival, and overall survival (OS) rates were calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method and compared using log-rank tests between the NSM and CM groups.

RESULTS

After matching, the mean follow-up period was 70 ± 25 months for the NSM group and 74 ± 27 months for the CM group (P = 0.181). There were no significant differences between the groups in terms of 6-year local recurrence-free survival (91.6% vs. 95.8%; P = 0.239), DFS (70.5% vs. 73.4%; P = 0.583), distant metastasis-free survival (79.8% vs. 77.4%; P = 0.320), or OS (87.6% vs. 84.8%; P = 0.465) rates. Additionally, we identified 30 patients in the NSM group who initially presented with tumor extension in the subareolar area; the nipple-areola complex was successfully preserved after NACT, and no recurrence at the nipple was observed in these patients.

CONCLUSIONS

In this matched control study, we demonstrated comparable long-term oncologic outcomes between NSM with immediate reconstruction and CM alone after NACT for LABC. In patients who had tumors extending to the subareolar area before NACT, NSM can be tried if tumor involvement of the nipple-areola complex appears resolved on imaging studies after chemotherapy.

Oncologic Outcomes of Nipple-sparing Mastectomy and Immediate Reconstruction After Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy for Breast Cancer

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the oncologic outcomes and risk factors for locoregional recurrence (LRR) and nipple-areola complex recurrence (NR) in a large series of breast cancer patients who underwent nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM) and immediate reconstruction after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT).

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

The use of NSM and immediate reconstruction in breast cancer patients receiving NACT is increasing. However, the oncologic safety of this approach is unclear.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A total of 310 breast cancer patients (319 breasts) who underwent NACT and NSM between February 2010 and November 2016 were retrospectively analyzed. Clinical and pathologic factors associated with increased risks of LRR and NR were analyzed using univariate (Chi-square or Fisher exact test) and multivariate (Cox proportional hazard regression model) analyses.

RESULTS

During a mean follow-up of 63 ± 22 months, 38 cases had LRR as the first event, including 6 cases of NR as the first event. The 5-year cumulative LRR and NR rates were 11.0% and 1.9%, respectively. In univariate analysis, clinical T stage, pathologic nodal status, histologic grade, lymphovascular invasion, and post-NACT Ki67 status were associated with increased LRR risk, and post-NACT Ki67 status was the only significant risk factor for NR. In multivariate analysis, post-NACT Ki67 ≥10% (hazard ratio, 4.245; 95% confidence interval, 1.865-9.663; P = 0.001) was an independent risk factor for LRR.

CONCLUSIONS

NSM and immediate reconstruction seem to be oncologically safe with acceptable LRR and NR rates for appropriately selected breast cancer patients treated with NACT. Post-NACT Ki67 ≥10% was associated with increased risk of LRR or NR, and therefore, necessitates cautious follow-up.

Effectiveness and Safety of Implant-Based Breast Reconstruction in Locally Advanced Breast Carcinoma: A Matched Case-Control Study

Background

Immediate implant-based breast reconstruction (IBBR) is rarely performed in patients with locally advanced breast carcinoma (LABC). It has not been considered the best indication, and the literature is scarce about this subject.

Patients and Methods

A retrospective matched case-control study was performed in patients with LABC submitted to neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NCT). Forty-eight patients undergoing immediate IBBR were matched with 96 patients undergoing conventional mastectomy. Patients were matched according to 2 models based on prognostic characteristics prior to NCT and response to NCT. Local recurrence and disease-free survival were compared between the groups. In the IBBR group, local complications were evaluated.

Results

In all, 196 patients were evaluated. The mean tumour size of IBBR patients was 5.8 cm. 83.3% (180/196) of the patients had clinical stage III. At a mean follow-up of 74.7 months, the local recurrence rate was 6.2% (3/48), 15.6% (15/96) and 13.7% (13/95) in the IBBR, model 1 and model 2 groups, respectively (p > 0.05). Disease-free survival was higher in the IBBR group than in the model 1 group (mean 88.8 vs. 73.7 months; p = 0.05). In the group submitted to IBBR, 14.6% (7/48) of patients presented loss of prosthesis and 48.8% (20/41) developed capsular contracture.

Conclusion

Immediate IBBR may be a safe and effective surgical procedure in selected patients with LABC.

Immediate Breast Reconstruction Does Not Have a Clinically Significant Impact on Adjuvant Treatment Delay and Subsequent Survival Outcomes

Purpose

The use of immediate breast reconstruction (IBR) has been debated because it may be a causative factor in adjuvant treatment delay and may subsequently increase the probability of recurrence. We investigated whether IBR was related to adjuvant treatment delay and survival outcomes.

Methods

We retrospectively analyzed the duration from operation to adjuvant treatment administration and survival outcomes according to IBR status among patients with breast cancer who underwent mastectomy followed by adjuvant chemotherapy from January 2005 to December 2014. Propensity score matching was performed to balance the clinicopathologic baseline characteristics between patients who did and did not undergo IBR.

Results

Of 646 patients, 107 (16.6%) underwent IBR, and the median follow-up was 72 months. The median duration from surgery to adjuvant chemotherapy was significantly longer in patients who underwent IBR than in those who did not (14 vs. 12 days, respectively, p = 0.008). Based on propensity score matching, patients who underwent IBR received adjuvant therapy 3 days later than those who did not (14 vs. 11 days, respectively, p = 0.044). The duration from surgery to post-mastectomy radiation therapy (PMRT) did not significantly differ between the 2 groups. Local recurrence-free survival, regional recurrence-free survival, systemic recurrence-free survival, and overall survival were also not significantly different between the 2 groups (p = 0.427, p = 0.445, p = 0.269, and p = 0.250, respectively). In the case-matched cohort, survival outcomes did not change.

Conclusion

IBR was associated with a modest increase in the duration from surgery to chemotherapy that was statistically but not clinically significant. Moreover, IBR had no influence on PMRT delay or survival outcomes, suggesting that it is an acceptable option for patients with non-metastatic breast cancer undergoing mastectomy.