From Breast Implant to Rough Implant Associated-Anaplastic Large Cell Lymphoma (RIA-ALCL)

Breast Implant-Associated Anaplastic Large Cell Lymphoma: Where Hematology and Plastic Surgery Meet

Breast implant insertion for breast reconstruction or breast augmentation is a developing procedure, with high demand worldwide-being the second most common plastic surgery in the US as of 2022. Breast-implant-associated anaplastic large cell lymphoma (BIA-ALCL) is T-cell, non-Hodgkin lymphoma, typically CD30+, ALK-, presenting with fluid collection in the inner aspect of the peri-implant capsule in most patients, with the onset exceeding 1-year after implantation. The mean time between breast implant insertion and BIA-ALCL development is 7-10 years. The main risk factor is the use of textured implants because of their susceptibility to triggering local inflammation and immune stimulation finally leading to lymphoproliferation. Genetic predispositions to hereditary breast cancer increase the risk of disease development as well. BIA-ALCL seems to be underestimated in many countries and the initial symptom-seroma might be overlooked and misdiagnosed. Despite its rarity, the awareness of the disease should be improved among patients and medical professionals. This paper summarizes epidemiology, etiopathogenesis, differential diagnosis, and treatment-both surgical and hematological approaches.

Breast Implants and the Risk of Squamous Cell Carcinoma of the Breast: A Systematic Literature Review and Epidemiologic Study

Squamous cell carcinoma may arise primarily from the breast parenchyma (PSCCB) or from the periprosthetic capsule in patients with breast implants (breast implant-associated squamous cell carcinoma [BIA-SCC]). A systematic literature review was performed to identify all PSCCB and BIA-SCC cases, and to estimate prevalence, incidence rate (IR), and risk. Studies up to November 2023 were searched on PubMed, Web of Science, Google Scholar, and Cochrane Library for predefined keywords. The numerator for PSCCB and BIA-SCC was the number of cases obtained from the literature; the denominator for PSCCB was the female population aged from 18 to 99, and the denominator for BIA-SCC was the population with breast implants. Overall, 219 papers were included, featuring 2250 PSCCB and 30 BIA-SCC cases. PSCCB prevalence was 2.0 per 100,000 (95% CI, 0.2:100,000 to 7.2:100,000) individuals, with a lifetime risk of 1:49,509 (95% CI, 0.2:10,000 to 5.6:10,000); and BIA-SCC prevalence was 0.61 per 100,000 (95% CI, 0.2:100,000 to 1.3:100,000), with a lifetime risk of 1:164,884 (95% CI, 0.2:100,000 to 5.6:100,000). The prevalence of BIA-SCC is 3.33 times lower than that of PSCCB, while the prevalence of breast implant-associated anaplastic large cell lymphoma (BIA-ALCL) is 3.84 times higher than that of primary breast ALCL. When comparing the BIA-SCC prevalence of 1:164,910 individuals with breast implants regardless of texture to the BIA-ALCL prevalence of 1:914 patients with textured implants, the BIA-SCC risk is 180 times lower than the BIA-ALCL risk. BIA-SCC occurs less frequently than PSCCB and considerably less than BIA-ALCL. The association between textured implants and BIA-SCC cases is relevant for patient education regarding uncommon and rare risks associated with breast implants, and ongoing vigilance, research, and strengthened reporting systems remain imperative.

Epidemiology of Breast Implant-Associated Anaplastic Large Cell Lymphoma in the United States: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Although textured implants represent fewer than 10% of implants used in the United States, the country reports the highest incidence of breast implant-associated anaplastic large cell lymphoma (BIA-ALCL).

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to perform a systematic literature review on US-based epidemiology to update knowledge on BIA-ALCL in the United States.

METHODS

Publications on US BIA-ALCL epidemiology were searched between September 2022 and March 2023 on MEDLINE (National Institutes of Health; Bethesda, MD), Embase (Elsevier, Amsterdam, the Netherlands), Web of Science (Clarivate, London, UK), and SCOPUS (Elsevier, Amsterdam, the Netherlands). The US numerator was obtained by averaging the FDA MAUDE database and the PSF PROFILE registry, while the denominator was estimated from chest X-rays, and included female transgender individuals. Prevalence and risk were assessed accordingly, but the incidence rate (IR) could not be updated due to the lack of available follow-up data.

RESULTS

Out of 987 identified manuscripts, 10 were included. The US prevalence of BIA-ALCL in the literature ranged from 1:300 to 1:500,000 and the IR from 4.5 per 10,000 to 31.1 per 100 million persons per year. A mean value of 453.5 BIA-ALCL cases was calculated. From a denominator of 4,264,618 individuals, which includes all breast implant surfaces, we calculated 414,521 individuals with textured implants, indicating a textured prevalence of 109.4 cases per 100,000 individuals and a risk of 1:913.

CONCLUSIONS

BIA-ALCL IR, prevalence, and risk has increased when calculated exclusively for patients with textured devices. Although US macrotextured implants were recalled by the FDA, these findings may influence the surveillance of existing patients and the use of macrotextured implants in other parts of the world where they remain widespread.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 4

BIA-ALCL Epidemiology in an Aesthetic Breast Surgery Cohort of 1501 Patients

BACKGROUND

Epidemiologic studies on breast implant-associated anaplastic large cell lymphoma (BIA-ALCL) currently estimate the risk between 1:300 and 1:30,000, assessed mainly in large breast reconstruction populations.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of the study was to assess BIA-ALCL epidemiology in a cohort of patients who have received textured implants for cosmetic indications.

METHODS

In a prospective cohort observational study, 1501 patients who received a cosmetic breast augmentation between 2006 and 2016 were monitored, recording any implant-related complications, including BIA-ALCL. Cross-checking of clinical, pathology, and external records data identified cases. Prevalence, implant-specific prevalence (I-SP), incidence rate (IR), event-free time (EFT), and the Kaplan-Meier survival estimate were calculated.

RESULTS

All but 2 patients received macrotextured or microtextured devices bilaterally. Mean follow-up was 3.2 years (1 months to 16.4 years). Five BIA-ALCL cases were investigated. Prevalence was 1:300 patients; I-SP was 6.9 cases/1000 individuals/Allergan BIOCELL devices and 1.3 cases/1000 individuals/Mentor Siltex devices; and IR was 1.07 cases/1000 females/year. Mean (SD) EFT was 9.2 years.

CONCLUSIONS

When using a denominator based on a cohort of cosmetic patients, BIA-ALCL occurrence is higher than previously reported, particularly with macrotextured devices. Given the similar IRs in reconstructive and cosmetic cohorts, their even distribution could be consequent to underreporting due to poorer follow-up and lower awareness in the latter group. The genetic predisposition in the oncologic cohort reasonably affects the early onset more than the IR. The importance of accurate follow-up is confirmed. Stratification risks analysis can guide surgeons during patient counseling regarding the decision for prophylactic explantation.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 4

BIA-ALCL Epidemiological Findings From a Retrospective Study of 248 Cases Extracted from Relevant Case Reports and Series: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

The epidemiologic picture of Breast Implant Associated-Anaplastic Large Cell Lymphoma (BIA-ALCL) is unclear, with no high-level evidence, as only case reports and series are available.

OBJECTIVES

We aimed at updating the BIA-ALCL epidemiology by using all available data through a systematic review of scientific literature.

METHODS

A search on PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science was conducted between October 2021 and April 2022. Out of the 2,799 available records, we selected 114 pertinent articles, featuring 248 BIA-ALCL cases which were retrospectively analyzed by means of descriptive statistics, incidence rate (IR), Kaplan-Meier survival curves and Pearson correlation coefficient.

RESULTS

United States, Netherlands, Italy, and Australia were the most reporting countries. Mean age at 1st implantation was 42y, and 53y at diagnosis. Aesthetic indication was 52% and reconstructive 48%, macrotextured surface was linked to 73.8% of cases and seroma to 83%. Total follow-up was 492 months, mean Event Free Time (EFT) to BIA-ALCL development was 129 months. IR was 96 new cases/1.000 women per year after first implantation, and directly correlated to number of replacements. EFT was directly correlated to number of replacements, implant rupture and capsule contracture, while inversely associated to patients' age at first implantation and to BRACA1/2 and TP53 mutations.

CONCLUSIONS

Macrotextured implants use in older patients and in BRCA1/2 and TP53 mutated should be reconsidered, being associated to earlier disease onset. Implant replacement of asymptomatic, risk-stratified patients, can be indicated due to its protective role against BIA-ALCL, reducing IR rate and risk, while increasing the EFT.

2022 Practice Recommendation Updates From the World Consensus Conference on BIA-ALCL

BACKGROUND

Laboratory and clinical research on breast implant-associated anaplastic large cell lymphoma (BIA-ALCL) is rapidly evolving. Changes in standard of care and insights into best practice were recently presented at the 3rd World Consensus Conference on BIA-ALCL.

OBJECTIVES

The authors sought to provide practice recommendations from a consensus of experts, supplemented with a literature review regarding epidemiology, etiology, pathogenesis, diagnosis, treatment, socio-psychological aspects, and international authority guidance.

METHODS

A literature search of all manuscripts between 1997 and August 2021 for the above areas of BIA-ALCL was conducted with the PubMed database. Manuscripts in different languages, on non-human subjects, and/or discussing conditions separate from BIA-ALCL were excluded. The study was conducted employing the Delphi process, gathering 18 experts panelists and utilizing email-based questionnaires to record the level of agreement with each statement by applying a 5-point Likert Scale. Median response, interquartile range, and comments were employed to accept, reject, or revise each statement.

RESULTS

The literature search initially yielded 764 manuscripts, of which 405 were discarded. From the remaining 359, only 218 were included in the review and utilized to prepare 36 statements subdivided into 5 sections. After 1 round, panelists agreed on all criteria.

CONCLUSIONS

BIA-ALCL is uncommon and still largely underreported. Mandatory implant registries and actions by regulatory authorities are needed to better understand disease epidemiology and address initial lymphomagenesis and progression. Deviation from current diagnosis and treatment protocols can lead to disease recurrence, and research on breast implant risk factors provide insight to etiology.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 4

HISTORY OF BREAST IMPLANTS: BACK TO THE FUTURE

Modern breast implants are a staple of plastic surgery, finding uses in esthetic and reconstructive procedures. Their history began in the 1960s, with the first generation of smooth devices with thick silicone elastomer, thick silicone gel, and Dacron patches on the back. They presented hard consistency, high capsular contracture rates and the patches increased the risk of rupture. In the same decade, polyurethane coating of implants was implemented. A second generation was introduced in the 1970s with a thinner shell, less viscous gel filler and no patches, but increased silicone bleed-through and rupture rates. The third generation, in the early 1980s, featured implants with a thicker multilayered elastomer shell reinforced with silica to reduce rupture risk and prevent silicone bleed-through. A fourth generation from the late 1980s combined thick outer elastomer shells, more cohesive gel filler, and implemented for the first-time outer shell texturing. In the early 1990s, the fifth generation of devices pioneered an anatomical shape with highly cohesive form-stable gel filler and a rough outer shell surface. Surface texturing was hampered by the discovery of Breast Implant Associated-Anaplastic Large Cell Lymphoma and its link with textured devices. From the 2010s, we have the era of the sixth generation of implants, featuring innovations regarding the surface, with biomimetic surfaces, more resistant shells and variations in gel consistency. The road to innovation comprises setbacks such as the FDA moratorium in 1992, the PIP scandal, the Silimed CE mark temporary suspension and the FDA-requested voluntary recall of the Allergan BIOCELL implants.