Outcomes of Breast-Conserving Surgery Plus Radiation vs Mastectomy for All Subtypes of Early-Stage Breast Cancer: Analysis of More Than 200,000 Women

Why do women with early breast cancer in Northern Sri Lanka undergo mastectomy? Decision-making and ways forward

BACKGROUND

Despite robust evidence confirming equivalent survival rates and better cosmetic outcomes with breast-conserving surgery (BCS) and radiotherapy compared to mastectomy, the rates of mastectomy among women with early breast cancer have not declined significantly in Sri Lanka. This study explores views on the surgical treatment of breast cancer among Northern Sri Lankan women who were eligible for BCS but underwent mastectomy.

METHODS

An exploratory descriptive qualitative study was carried out among 15 women who underwent mastectomy for early breast cancer. Patients who were referred to the Tellippalai Trail Cancer Hospital for adjuvant therapy after mastectomy and matched the study criteria were recruited. Data were collected through in-depth semi-structured interviews, which were transcribed in Tamil, translated into English, coded using QDA Miner Lite software, and analysed thematically.

RESULTS

Nine out of 15 participants were either not aware of breast-conserving surgery (BCS) as a treatment option or their eligibility for BCS at the time of mastectomy. According to participant narratives, the treating team had recommended mastectomy to most participants. While many opted for mastectomy believing that it was associated with lower rates of recurrence and spread compared to BCS, these beliefs were frequently reinforced by the treating team. The pros and cons of the two approaches had not been discussed before surgery with most participants. In the absence of information, family and friends weighed in on the decision to opt for mastectomy, ultimately resulting in feelings of loss and regret in most instances.

CONCLUSION

Most participants were not aware that they were eligible for BCS. These information gaps need to be urgently addressed for women to make informed decisions about their health.

"Peace of Mind" After Mastectomy: A Scoping Review

BACKGROUND

Many women eligible for breast conservation therapy (BCT) elect unilateral mastectomy (UM) with or without contralateral prophylactic mastectomy (CPM) and cite a desire for "peace of mind." This study aimed to characterize how peace of mind is defined and measured and how it relates to surgical choice.

METHODS

Nine databases were searched for relevant articles through 8 October 2023, and data were extracted from articles meeting the inclusion criteria.

RESULTS

The inclusion criteria were met by 20 studies. Most were prospective cohort studies (65%, 13/20). In the majority of the studies (72%, 13/18), Non-Hispanic white/Caucasian women comprised 80 % or more of the study's sample. Almost half of the studies used the phrase "peace of mind" in their publication (45%, 9/20), and few directly defined the construct (15%, 3/20). Instead, words representing an absence of peace of mind were common, specifically, "anxiety" (85%, 17/20), "fear" (75%, 15/20), and "concern" (75%, 15/20). Most of the studies (90%, 18/20) measured peace of mind indirectly using questionnaires validated for anxiety, fear, worry, distress, or concern, which were administered at multiple postoperative time points (55%, 11/20). Most of the studies (95%, 18/19) reported at least one statistically significant result showing no difference in peace of mind between BCT, UM, and/or CPM at their latest time of assessment.

CONCLUSION

Peace of mind is largely framed around concepts that suggest its absence, namely, anxiety, fear, and concern. Existing literature suggests that peace of mind does not differ among average-risk women undergoing BCT, UM, or CPM. Shared surgical decisions should emphasize at least comparable emotional and/or psychosocial well-being between CPM and breast conservation.

Avoiding Locoregional Overtreatment in Older Adults With Early-Stage Breast Cancer

Advances in the treatment of older women with early-stage breast cancer, particularly opportunities for de-escalation of therapy, have afforded patients and providers opportunity to individualize care. As the majority of women ≥65 have estrogen receptor-positive, HER2-negative disease, locoregional therapy (surgery and/or radiation) may be tailored based on a patient's physiologic age to avoid either over- or undertreatment. To determine who would derive benefit from more or less intensive therapy, an accurate assessment of an older patient's physiologic age and incorporation of patient-specific values are paramount. While there now exist well-validated geriatric assessment tools whose use is encouraged by the American Society of Clinical Oncology when considering systemic therapy, these instruments have not been widely integrated into the locoregional breast cancer care model. This review aims to highlight the importance of assessing frailty and the concepts of and over- and undertreatment, in the context of trial data supporting opportunities for safe deescalation of locoregional therapy, when treating older women with early-stage breast cancer.

Overall survival after mastectomy versus breast-conserving surgery with adjuvant radiotherapy for early-stage breast cancer: meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Breast-conserving surgery with adjuvant radiotherapy and mastectomy are currently offered as equivalent surgical options for early-stage breast cancer based on RCTs from the 1970s and 1980s. However, the treatment of breast cancer has evolved and recent observational studies suggest a survival advantage for breast-conserving surgery with adjuvant radiotherapy. A systematic review and meta-analysis was undertaken to summarize the contemporary evidence regarding survival after breast-conserving surgery with adjuvant radiotherapy versus mastectomy for women with early-stage breast cancer.

METHODS

A systematic search of MEDLINE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), and Embase that identified studies published between 1 January 2000 and 18 December 2023 comparing overall survival after breast-conserving surgery with adjuvant radiotherapy versus mastectomy for patients with unilateral stage 1-3 breast cancer was undertaken. The main exclusion criteria were studies evaluating neoadjuvant chemotherapy, rare breast cancer subtypes, and specific breast cancer populations. The ROBINS-I tool was used to assess risk of bias, with the overall certainty of evidence assessed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) tool. Studies without critical risk of bias were included in a quantitative meta-analysis.

RESULTS

From 11 750 abstracts, 108 eligible articles were identified, with one article including two studies; 29 studies were excluded from the meta-analysis due to an overall critical risk of bias, 42 studies were excluded due to overlapping study populations, and three studies were excluded due to reporting incompatible results. A total of 35 observational studies reported survival outcomes for 909 077 patients (362 390 patients undergoing mastectomy and 546 687 patients undergoing breast-conserving surgery with adjuvant radiotherapy). The pooled HR was 0.72 (95% c.i. 0.68 to 0.75, P < 0.001), demonstrating improved overall survival for patients undergoing breast-conserving surgery with adjuvant radiotherapy. The overall certainty of the evidence was very low.

CONCLUSION

This meta-analysis provides evidence suggesting a survival advantage for women undergoing breast-conserving surgery with adjuvant radiotherapy for early-stage breast cancer compared with mastectomy. Although these results should be interpreted with caution, they should be shared with patients to support informed surgical decision-making.

Breast conserving surgery combined with radiation therapy offers improved survival over mastectomy in early-stage breast cancer

INTRODUCTION

Landmark trials established equivalent survival regardless of extent of breast surgery in early-stage breast cancer. However, recent studies suggest a survival advantage for breast conserving surgery (BCS) with radiotherapy (BCT). This study assesses the impact of type of surgery on overall survival (OS), breast cancer specific survival (BCSS) and local recurrence (LR) in a modern population-based cohort.

METHODS

Female patients aged ≥18, pT1-2pN0, who had surgery between 2006 and 2016 were identified from Breast Cancer Outcome Unit prospective database. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy patients were excluded. Multivariable Cox regression was used to assess the effect of surgical procedure on OS, BCSS, and LR on cohort with complete data.

RESULTS

BCT was performed in 8422 patients and TM in 4034 patients. The baseline characteristics differed between the groups. Mean follow up was 8.3 years. BCT was associated with increased OS HR 1.37, p < 0.001, BCSS survival HR 1.49, p < 0.001, and similar LR HR 1.00, p > 0.90.

CONCLUSION

This study supports that in early-stage breast cancer, BCT has improved BCSS compared to TM without an increased risk of LR.

21-gene recurrence score in predicting the outcome of postoperative radiotherapy in T1-2N1 luminal breast cancer after breast-conserving surgery

BACKGROUND

In those with one to three positive lymph nodes (N1) breast cancer (BC), the 21-gene recurrence score (RS) classification can be referred for decision-making on adjuvant chemotherapy. This study aimed to investigate the effect of RS in predicting the survival benefit of postoperative radiotherapy (PORT) in T1-2N1 BC with estrogen receptor-positive and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative disease after breast-conserving surgery (BCS).

METHODS

We included patients with BC and available RS data from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Oncotype DX database. The chi-square test, Kaplan-Meier method, propensity score matching (PSM) as well as multivariable Cox proportional hazard analyses were used for statistical analyses.

RESULTS

We included 6509 patients in the analysis. Of these patients, 5302 (85.5%) were treated with BCS + PORT, and 207 (15.5%) had BCS alone. There were 1419 (21.8%), 4319 (66.4%), and 771 (11.8%) patients being low-, intermediate-, and high-risk RS, respectively. After PSM, PORT was significantly associated with a 5-year overall survival (OS) advantage (95.1% vs. 90.5%, P < 0.001) compared to those without PORT, which similar breast cancer-specific survival (BCSS) was found between the treatment arms (P = 0.126). The sensitivity analyses showed that PORT was not associated with a better BCSS (P = 0.472) and OS (P = 0.650) than those without PORT in the low-risk RS cohort. However, PORT was associated with a better BCSS (P = 0.031) and OS (P < 0.001) compared to those without PORT in the intermediate/high-risk RS cohorts.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study highlights the possible role of the RS in predicting the outcome of PORT in T1-2N1 luminal BC patients undergoing BCS.

Breast-Conserving Therapy is Associated with Improved Survival Without an Increased Risk of Locoregional Recurrence Compared with Mastectomy in Both Clinically Node-Positive and Node-Negative Breast Cancer Patients

INTRODUCTION

Randomized trials demonstrated equivalent survival between breast-conserving surgery combined with radiotherapy (BCT) and mastectomy alone. Contemporary retrospective studies using pathological stage have reported improved survival with BCT. However, pathological information is unknown before surgery. To mimic real-world surgical decision-making, this study assesses oncological outcomes by using clinical nodal status.

METHODS

Female patients aged 18-69 years who were treated with upfront BCT or mastectomy between 2006 and 2016 for T1-3N0-3 breast cancer were identified by using prospective, provincial database. The patients were divided into clinically node-positive (cN+) and node-negative (cN0) strata. Multivariable logistic regression was used to assess the effect of local treatment type on overall survival (OS), breast cancer-specific survival (BCSS), and locoregional recurrence (LRR).

RESULTS

Of 13,914 patients, 8228 had BCT and 5686 had mastectomy. Mastectomy patients had higher-risk clinicopathological factors: pathologically positive axillary staging was 21% in BCT and 38% in mastectomy groups. Most patients received adjuvant systemic therapy. For cN0 patients, 7743 had BCT and 4794 had mastectomy. On multivariable analysis, BCT was associated with improved OS (hazard ratio [HR] 1.37, p < 0.001) and BCSS (HR 1.32, p < 0.001), whereas LRR was not different between the groups (HR 0.84, p = 0.1). For cN+ patients, 485 had BCT and 892 had mastectomy. On multivariable analysis, BCT was associated with improved OS (HR 1.46, p = 0.002) and BCSS (HR 1.44, p = 0.008), whereas LRR was not different between the groups (HR 0.89, p = 0.7).

CONCLUSIONS

In the era of contemporary systemic therapy, BCT was associated with better survival than mastectomy, without an increased risk of locoregional recurrence for both cN0 and cN+ presentations.

The Intercostal Artery Perforator Flap: Expanding Breast-Conserving Therapy With a Modified Oncoplastic Approach

BACKGROUND

Historically, breast-conserving surgery may not be pursued when the oncologic deformity is too significant and/or not tolerant of radiotherapy. Reconstruction using recruitment of upper abdominal wall tissue based on the intercostal artery perforating vessels can expand breast conservation therapy indications for cases that would otherwise require mastectomy. This report aims to describe the expanded use of the intercostal artery perforator (ICAP) as well as detail its ease of adoption.

METHODS

All patients who underwent ICAP flaps for reconstruction of partial mastectomy defects at a single institution were included. Demographic data, intraoperative data, and postoperative outcomes were recorded. Intercostal artery perforator flap outcomes are compared with standard alloplastic reconstruction after mastectomy.

RESULTS

Twenty-seven patients received ICAP flaps compared with 27 unilateral tissue expanders (TE). Six cases included nipple-areolar reconstruction, and 6 included skin resurfacing. The average defect size was 217.7 (30.3-557.9) cm 3 . Plastic-specific operative time was significantly longer in the ICAP cohort ( P < 0.01) with no difference in total operative time ( P > 0.05). Length of stay was significantly longer, and major postoperative complications were significantly more common in TE patients ( P < 0.01, P > 0.05). Seven TE patients required outpatient opiate refills (26%) versus 1 ICAP patient (4%) ( P = 0.02). One ICAP patient required additional surgery. Patients reported satisfaction with aesthetic outcomes. Average follow-up in the ICAP cohort was 7 months.

CONCLUSIONS

Lumpectomy reconstruction using ICAP flaps can effectively expand breast conservation therapy indications in resection of breast skin, nipple-areola, or large volume defects. This technique is adoptable and of limited complexity. Enhancing breast-conserving surgery may improve outcomes compared with mastectomy reconstruction. Intercostal artery perforator patients may require fewer opioids, shorter hospital stays, and lower operative burden.