Outcomes of ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence after breast conserving surgery: Repeat lumpectomy as an alternative to salvage mastectomy

Neoadjuvant Reirradiation for Radiation Therapy-Associated Angiosarcoma of the Breast

PURPOSE

Radiation-associated angiosarcoma of the breast (RAASB) is a rare side effect after breast radiation and has been associated with poor outcomes. At this time, there is no consensus regarding management of RAASB, and the role of reirradiation remains controversial. We present our modern institutional outcomes in managing RAASB with incorporation of neoadjuvant hyperfractionated reirradiation.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Patients identified were treated between 2016 and 2020 with inclusion of any histologically proven RAASB without metastatic disease at diagnosis, while excluding those with a history of radiation therapy outside of the breast/chest wall or other sarcoma histologies. Major wound complications were defined as requiring wound care and/or wound vacuum or return to the operating room for wound repair at any time after surgery.

RESULTS

Eight patients were identified, and the median follow-up was 34 months. Median time to RAASB development was 8 years from initial radiation therapy. With respect to RAASB management, all underwent surgery and neoadjuvant reirradiation therapy, and all but 1 patient received taxol-based chemotherapy. At last follow-up, 7 patients remained free of disease, and 1 patient died with distant disease. With respect to acute toxicity after reirradiation, all patients developed at least acute grade 2 toxicities. Five of the 8 patients developed a major wound complication.

CONCLUSIONS

Our institutional analysis suggests excellent local control and survival outcomes for RAASB treated with neoadjuvant hyperfractionated reirradiation, surgery, and taxol-based chemotherapy. However, major wound complications represent a major challenge with this approach. Future studies should consider how best to improve the therapeutic ratio while maintaining high rates of local control and survival.

SCOUT® Radar Localization at Time of Breast Biopsy

OBJECTIVE

Evaluate surgical utilization of SCOUT reflectors placed at breast biopsy.

METHODS

Consent was waived for this retrospective IRB-approved, HIPAA-compliant study. Breast biopsy examinations that reported the term "SCOUT" between January 2021 and June 2022 were identified using an institutional search engine. Cases were included if a SCOUT reflector was placed at time of breast biopsy and excluded if lesion pathology was already known. Analysis was performed at the lesion level. A multivariate-regression analysis evaluated 6 variables with potential impact on SCOUT utilization.

RESULTS

One hundred twenty-one lesions in 112 patients met inclusion criteria. Biopsy yielded 93% (113/121) malignant, 3% (4/121) elevated risk, 2% (2/121) benign-discordant, and 2% (2/121) benign-concordant results. Two cases lost to follow-up were excluded. SCOUT reflectors were utilized for lumpectomy (58%, 69/119 lesions) and excisional biopsy (6%, 7/119 lesions). SCOUTs were not utilized due to mastectomy (23%, 27/119), subsequent wire localization (2%, 2/119), and nonsurgical cases (12%, 14/119). Reflector placement utilization was 52% higher for findings less than 3.5 cm in size (P <.001), 33% higher in patients without prior treated breast cancer (P = .012), and 19% higher in patients with no suspicious ipsilateral lymph node (P = .048).

CONCLUSION

SCOUT reflector placement at time of biopsy was utilized for surgery 64% (76/119) of the time, although most (98%, 119/121) biopsies were malignant, elevated risk, or benign-discordant. Factors increasing reflector utilization include smaller lesion size, no suspicious ipsilateral lymph node, and no prior treated breast cancer.

A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis on the Role of Repeat Breast-Conserving Surgery for the Management of Ipsilateral Breast Cancer Recurrence

INTRODUCTION

The standard surgical management of ipsilateral breast cancer recurrence (IBCR) in patients previously treated with breast-conserving surgery (BCS) and radiotherapy (RT) is mastectomy. Recent international guidelines provide conflicting recommendations. The aim of this study was to perform a systematic literature review and meta-analysis of the oncological outcomes in patients with IBCR treated with repeat BCS (rBCS).

METHODS

The MEDLINE and EMBASE databases were searched for relevant English-language publications, with no date restrictions. All relevant studies providing sufficient data to assess oncological outcomes (second local recurrence [LR] and overall survival [OS]) of rBCS for the management of IBCR after previous BCS and RT were included (PROSPERO registration CRD42021286123).

RESULTS

Forty-two observational studies met the criteria and were included in the analysis. The pooled second LR rate after rBCS was 15.7% (95% confidence interval [CI] 12.1-19.7), and 10.3% (95% CI 6.9-14.3) after salvage mastectomy. On meta-analysis of comparative studies (n = 17), the risk ratio (RR) for second LR following rBCS compared with mastectomy was 2.103 (95% CI 1.535-2.883; p < 0.001, I² = 55.1%). Repeat RT had a protective effect (coefficient: - 0.317, 95% CI - 0.596 to - 0.038; p = 0.026, I² = 40.4%) for second LR. Pooled 5-year OS was 86.8% (95% CI 83.4-90.0) and 79.8% (95% CI 74.7-84.5) for rBCS and salvage mastectomy, respectively. Meta-analysis of comparative studies (n = 20) showed a small OS benefit in favor of rBCS (RR 1.040, 95% CI 1.003-1.079; p = 0.032, I² = 70.8%). Overall evidence certainty was very low.

CONCLUSIONS

This meta-analysis suggests rBCS could be considered as an option for the management of IBCR in patients previously treated with BCS and RT. Shared decision making, appropriate patient selection, and individualized approach are important for optimal outcomes.