Diagnostic accuracy of intraoperative methods for margin assessment in breast cancer surgery: A systematic review & meta-analysis

PURPOSE

There are a wide variety of intraoperative techniques available in breast surgery to achieve low rates for positive margins of excision. The objective of this systematic review was to determine the pooled diagnostic accuracy of intraoperative breast margin assessment techniques that have been evaluated in clinical practice.

METHODS

This study was performed in accordance with PRISMA guidelines. A systematic search of the literature was conducted to identify studies assessing the diagnostic accuracy of intraoperative margin assessment techniques. Only clinical studies with raw diagnostic accuracy data as compared with final permanent section histopathology were included in the meta-analysis. A bivariate model for diagnostic meta-analysis was used to determine overall pooled sensitivity and specificity.

RESULTS

Sixty-one studies were eligible for inclusion in this systematic review and meta-analysis. Cytology demonstrated the best diagnostic accuracy, with pooled sensitivity of 0.92 (95 % CI 0.77-0.98) and a pooled specificity of 0.95 (95 % CI 0.90-0.97). The findings also indicate good diagnostic accuracy for optical spectroscopy, with a pooled sensitivity of 0.86 (95 % CI 0.76-0.93) and a pooled specificity of 0.92 (95 % CI 0.82-0.97).

CONCLUSION

Pooled data indicate that optical spectroscopy, cytology and frozen section have the greatest diagnostic accuracy of currently available intraoperative margin assessment techniques. However, long turnaround time for results and their resource intensive nature has prevented widespread adoption of these methods. The aim of emerging technologies is to compete with the diagnostic accuracy of these established techniques, while improving speed and usability.

Comparing the diagnostic efficacy of optical coherence tomography and frozen section for margin assessment in breast-conserving surgery: a meta-analysis

AIMS

This meta-analysis assessed the relative diagnostic accuracy of optical coherence tomography (OCT) versus frozen section (FS) in evaluating surgical margins during breast-conserving procedures.

METHODS

PubMed and Embase were searched for relevant studies published up to October 2023. The inclusion criteria encompassed studies evaluating the diagnostic accuracy of OCT or FS in patients undergoing breast-conserving surgery. Sensitivity and specificity were analysed using the DerSimonian and Laird method and subsequently transformed through the Freeman-Tukey double inverse sine method.

RESULTS

The meta-analysis encompassed 36 articles, comprising 16 studies on OCT and 20 on FS, involving 10 289 specimens from 8058 patients. The overall sensitivity of OCT was 0.93 (95% CI: 0.90 to 0.96), surpassing that of FS, which was 0.82 (95% CI: 0.71 to 0.92), indicating a significantly higher sensitivity for OCT (p=0.04). Conversely, the overall specificity of OCT was 0.89 (95% CI: 0.83 to 0.94), while FS exhibited a higher specificity at 0.97 (95% CI: 0.95 to 0.99), suggesting a superior specificity for FS (p＜0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

Our meta-analysis reveals that OCT offers superior sensitivity but inferior specificity compared with FS in assessing surgical margins in breast-conserving surgery patients. Further larger well-designed prospective studies are needed, especially those employing a head-to-head comparison design.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42023483751.

A Randomized Controlled Trial for Doing vs. Omitting Intraoperative Frozen Section Biopsy for Resection Margin Status in Selected Patients Undergoing Breast-Conserving Surgery (OFF-MAP Trial)

Purpose

Intraoperative frozen section biopsy is used to reduce the margin positive rate and re-excision rate and has been reported to have high diagnostic accuracy. A majority of breast surgeons in the Republic of Korea routinely perform frozen section biopsy to assess margins intraoperatively, despite its long turnaround time and high resource requirements. This study aims to determine whether omitting frozen section biopsy for intraoperative margin evaluation in selected patients is non-inferior to performing frozen section biopsy in terms of resection margin positivity rate.

Methods

This study is a phase III, randomized controlled, parallel-group, multicenter non-inferiority clinical trial. Patients meeting the inclusion criteria and providing written informed consent will be randomized to the “frozen section biopsy” or “frozen section biopsy omission” group after lumpectomy. Patients with clinical stage T1–T3 disease who are diagnosed with invasive breast cancer by core-needle biopsy and plan to undergo breast-conserving surgery will be included in this study. If a daughter nodule, non-mass enhancement, or microcalcification is identified on preoperative imaging, these features must be within 1 cm of the main mass for inclusion in the trial. The target sample size is 646 patients per arm. The primary endpoint will be the resection margin positive rate, and the secondary endpoints include the reoperation rate, operating time, residual cancer after reoperation, residual cancer after re-excision according to the frozen section biopsy result, resection volume, patient quality of life, and cost-effectiveness.

Discussion

This is the first randomized clinical trial utilizing frozen section biopsy for intraoperative margin evaluation and aims to determine the non-inferiority of omitting frozen section biopsy in selected patients compared to performing frozen section biopsy. We expect that this trial will help surgeons perform the procedure more efficiently while ensuring patient safety.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03975179; Clinical Research Information Service Identifier: KCT0004606

Diagnostic Value of Intraoperative Frozen Section in Breast-Conserving Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Context: According to previous studies, using the frozen section procedure during breast surgery reduces the rate of error and the need for re-surgery. We aimed at performing a comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis to provide reliable evidence on the diagnostic value of frozen section procedures in breast-conserving surgery (BCS). Data Sources: A thorough search was performed in PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science databases for human diagnostic studies that used the frozen section in BCS. Meta-analyses were done to find the sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), positive likelihood ratio (PLR), and negative likelihood ratio (NLR). Study Selection: Human diagnostic studies used the frozen section in breast-conserving surgery and studies that reported the sensitivity and specificity of the frozen section in BCS or contained data that could be calculated the desired parameters were selected for this meta-analysis. Data Extraction: Assessment of studies quality was done and data was extracted from included papers. Then, the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (QUADAS-2) tool was used to assess the quality of included papers. Results: Thirty-five papers were entered into our study. The meta-analysis indicated the high sensitivity (83.47, 95%CI 79.61 - 87.32) and specificity (99.29, 95%CI 98.89 - 99.68) for the frozen section in BCS, which resulted in an accuracy of 93.77 (95%CI 92.45 - 95.10). We also found a significant PPV (93.26, 95%CI 91.25 - 95.27), NPV (92.17, 95%CI 90.22 - 94.11), PLR (7.99, 95%CI 6.01 - 9.96), and NLR (0.18, 95%CI 0.14 - 0.23). Conclusions: The findings showed that intraoperative frozen section analysis has high sensitivity and specificity for evaluating lumpectomy margins in patients with early-stage breast cancer and significantly reduces the need for re-operation. Accordingly, re-operation costs are not imposed on the patient and reduce the anxiety of the patients.

Accuracy of frozen section in intraoperative margin assessment for breast-conserving surgery: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

It is well established that tumor-free margin is an important factor for reducing local recurrence and reoperation rates. This systematic review with meta-analysis of frozen section intraoperative margin assessment aims to evaluate the accuracy, and reoperation and survival rates, and to establish its importance in breast-conserving surgery.

METHODS

A thorough review was conducted in all online publication-databases for the related literature up to March 2020. MeSH terms used: "Breast Cancer", "Segmental Mastectomy" and "Frozen Section". We included the studies that evaluated accuracy of frozen section, reoperation and survival rates. To ensure quality of the included articles, the QUADAS-2 tool (adapted) was employed. The assessment of publication bias by graphical and statistical methods was performed using the funnel plot and the Egger's test. The review protocol was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42019125682).

RESULTS

Nineteen studies were deemed suitable, with a total of 6,769 cases. The reoperation rate on average was 5.9%. Sensitivity was 0.81, with a Confidence Interval of 0.79-0.83, p = 0.0000, I2 = 95.1%, and specificity was 0.97, with a Confidence Interval of 0.97-0.98, p = 0.0000, I-2 = 90.8%, for 17 studies and 5,615 cases. Accuracy was 0.98. Twelve studies described local recurrence and the highest cumulative recurrence rate in 3 years was 7.5%. The quality of the included studies based on the QUADAS-2 tool showed a low risk of bias. There is no publication bias (p = 0.32) and the funnel plot showed symmetry.

CONCLUSION

Frozen section is a reliable procedure with high accuracy, sensitivity and specificity in intraoperative margin assessment of breast-conserving surgery. Therefore, this modality of margin assessment could be useful in reducing reoperation rates.

Factors Associated With Positive Margins in Women Undergoing Breast Conservation Surgery

OBJECTIVE

To identify factors predicting positive margins at lumpectomy prompting intraoperative reexcision in patients with breast cancer treated at a large referral center.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We reviewed all breast cancer lumpectomy cases managed at our institution from January 1, 2012, through December 31, 2013. Associations between rates of positive margin and patient and tumor factors were assessed using χ² tests and univariate and adjusted multivariate logistic regression, stratified by ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) or invasive cancer.

RESULTS

We identified 382 patients who underwent lumpectomy for definitive surgical resection of breast cancer, 102 for DCIS and 280 for invasive cancer. Overall, 234 patients (61.3%) required intraoperative reexcision for positive margins. The reexcision rate was higher in patients with DCIS than in those with invasive disease (78.4% [80 of 102] vs 56.4% [158 of 280]; univariate odds ratio, 2.80; 95% CI, 1.66-4.76; P<.001). Positive margin rates did not vary by patient age, surgeon, estrogen receptor, progesterone receptor, or ERBB2 status of the tumor. Among the 280 cases of invasive breast cancer, the only factor independently associated with lower odds of margin positivity was seed localization vs no localization (P=.03).

CONCLUSION

Ductal carcinoma in situ was associated with a higher rate of positive margins at lumpectomy than invasive breast cancer on univariate analysis. Within invasive disease, seed localization was associated with lower rates of margin positivity.