A Retrospective Cohort Study Comparing Traditional Breast Conservation With Oncoplastic Surgery in Breast Cancer Patients After Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy

Breast surgery after neoadjuvant therapy

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The standard of care in breast surgery has changed, from mastectomy to breast conserving surgery whenever possible, and from axillary dissection to sentinel node biopsy. Neoadjuvant systemic approaches have broadened the indications for organ-conserving and less mutilating surgery, but also raise important questions of balancing locoregional treatment de-escalation and protecting excellent long-term outcomes.

RECENT FINDINGS

Recent studies have aimed at investigating the safety of de-escalating surgical approaches not only in the upfront breast surgery situation but also after neoadjuvant systemic therapy. This pertains to both the safety of breast conserving surgery - including more complex oncoplastic approaches - within the new (posttherapeutic) anatomical extent of the residual disease, but more controversially to de-escalating surgical treatment of the axilla. While sentinel node biopsy appears to be the standard of care for node-negative disease also after primary systemic therapy, the optimal procedure in situations of posttherapeutic node-positive disease remains highly controversial.

SUMMARY

Both breast and axillary surgery after neoadjuvant systemic therapy for women with breast cancer has undergone multiple paradigm changes in recent years. For the primary tumor in the breast, breast-conserving surgery constitutes the standard of care, and unnecessary mastectomies should be strongly discouraged. For axillary surgery, sentinel-node biopsy should be aimed at, and completion axillary dissections minimized for situations of extensive disease and or poor neoadjuvant treatment response. Additional techniques such as targeted axillary dissection are currently under evaluation in clinical trials.

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.

Comparison of Long-Term Oncological Outcomes in Oncoplastic Breast Surgery and Conventional Breast-Conserving Surgery for Breast Cancer: A Propensity Score-Matched Analysis

PURPOSE

The oncoplastic breast-conserving surgery (OPS) technique, combined with the principles of oncological safety and plastic surgery, results in complete tumor resection while preserving the natural appearance of the breast. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the long-term oncological results after OPS compared with conventional breast-conserving surgery (BCS) for early breast cancer.

METHODS

The medical records of patients who underwent breast cancer surgery and adjuvant radiation therapy at Seoul National University Hospital between 2011 and 2014 were reviewed. Ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence (IBTR)-free survival rate and recurrence-free survival (RFS) rates were compared between the OPS and BCS groups.

RESULTS

One-to-one propensity score matching was conducted, yielding 371 patients in each group. The mean tumor distance from the nipple was shorter, and the mean retrieved specimen size and pathologic tumor size, including ductal carcinoma in situ, were larger in the OPS group than in the conventional BCS group (p < 0.001). Surgical margin positivity was not significantly different between the two groups (p = 0.777). The surgical technique was not significantly associated with IBTR (OPS versus conventional BCS, 5-year survival rate, 96.9% vs. 98.6%; p = 0.355) and RFS (5-year survival rate, 92.9% vs. 94.5%; p = 0.357) on the log-rank test. Multivariate analysis revealed that OPS versus conventional BCS was not significantly associated with survival outcomes.

CONCLUSION

We observed no significant differences in long-term IBTR and RFS between the OPS and conventional BCS groups in this retrospective analysis. OPS can be an oncologically and surgically safe alternative option for conventional BCS for early breast cancer.