Comparative study of surgical and oncological outcomes in oncoplastic versus non oncoplastic breast-conserving surgery for breast cancer treatment

Contemporary Review of the Management and Treatment of Young Breast Cancer Patients

Approximately 11% of all new breast cancer cases annually are diagnosed in young women, and this continues to be the leading cause of death in women age 20 to 49. Young, premenopausal breast cancer patients present with more advanced stages and with a higher proportion of aggressive subtypes such as triple negative and HER2-enriched tumors. Recently, the United States Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) lowered the age threshold to initiate screening mammograms to age 40 to aid in earlier detection. Young age at diagnosis increases the likelihood for a pathogenic mutation, and genetic testing is recommended for all patients age 50 and younger. This population is often underrepresented in landmark clinical trials, and data is extrapolated for the treatment of young women with breast cancer. Despite there being no survival benefit to more extensive surgical treatments, such as mastectomy or contralateral prophylactic mastectomy, many patients opt against breast conservation. Young patients with breast cancer face issues related to treatment toxicities, potential overtreatment of their disease, mental health, sexual health, and fertility preservation. This unique population requires a multidisciplinary care team of physicians, surgeons, genetic counselors, fertility specialists, mental health professionals, physical therapists, and dieticians to provide individualized, comprehensive care. Our aim is to (1) provide a narrative review of retrospective studies, relevant society guidelines, and clinical trials focused on the contemporary treatment and management of YBC patients and (2) discuss important nuances in their care as a guide for members of their multidisciplinary treatment team.

Postdiagnosis body fatness, weight change and breast cancer prognosis: Global Cancer Update Program (CUP global) systematic literature review and meta-analysis

Previous evidence on postdiagnosis body fatness and mortality after breast cancer was graded as limited-suggestive. To evaluate the evidence on body mass index (BMI), waist circumference, waist-hip-ratio and weight change in relation to breast cancer prognosis, an updated systematic review was conducted. PubMed and Embase were searched for relevant studies published up to 31 October, 2021. Random-effects meta-analyses were conducted to estimate summary relative risks (RRs). The evidence was judged by an independent Expert Panel using pre-defined grading criteria. One randomized controlled trial and 225 observational studies were reviewed (220 publications). There was strong evidence (likelihood of causality: probable) that higher postdiagnosis BMI was associated with increased all-cause mortality (64 studies, 32 507 deaths), breast cancer-specific mortality (39 studies, 14 106 deaths) and second primary breast cancer (11 studies, 5248 events). The respective summary RRs and 95% confidence intervals per 5 kg/m2 BMI were 1.07 (1.05-1.10), 1.10 (1.06-1.14) and 1.14 (1.04-1.26), with high between-study heterogeneity (I2  = 56%, 60%, 66%), but generally consistent positive associations. Positive associations were also observed for waist circumference, waist-hip-ratio and all-cause and breast cancer-specific mortality. There was limited-suggestive evidence that postdiagnosis BMI was associated with higher risk of recurrence, nonbreast cancer deaths and cardiovascular deaths. The evidence for postdiagnosis (unexplained) weight or BMI change and all outcomes was graded as limited-no conclusion. The RCT showed potential beneficial effect of intentional weight loss on disease-free-survival, but more intervention trials and well-designed observational studies in diverse populations are needed to elucidate the impact of body composition and their changes on breast cancer outcomes.

Does breast oncoplastic surgery improve quality of life?

Breast Oncoplastic Surgery (OS) has established itself as a safe procedure associated with the treatment of breast cancer, but the term is broad, encompassing procedures associated with breast-conserving surgeries (BCS), conservative mastectomies and fat grafting. Surgeons believe that OS is associated with an increase in quality of life (QOL), but the diversity of QOL questionnaires and therapeutic modalities makes it difficult to assess from the patient's perspective. To answer this question, we performed a search for systematic reviews on QOL associated with different COM procedures, and in their absence, we selected case-control studies, discussing the main results. We observed that: (1) Patients undergoing BCS or breast reconstruction have improved QoL compared to those undergoing mastectomy; (2) In patients undergoing BCS, OS has not yet shown an improvement in QOL, a fact possibly influenced by patient selection bias; (3) In patients undergoing mastectomy with reconstruction, the QoL results are superior when the reconstruction is performed with autologous flaps and when the areola is preserved; (4) Prepectoral implants improves QOL in relation to subpectoral implant-based breast reconstruction; (5) ADM do not improves QOL; (6) In patients undergoing prophylactic mastectomy, satisfaction is high with the indication, but the patient must be informed about the potential complications associated with the procedure; (7) Satisfaction is high after performing fat grafting. It is observed that, in general, OS increases QOL, and when evaluating the procedures, any preservation or repair, or the use of autologous tissues, increases QOL, justifying OS.