Contralateral prophylactic mastectomy in a rural population: A single-institution experience

Background

The incidence of contralateral prophylactic mastectomy (CPM) for unilateral breast cancer (UBC) has continued to increase, despite an absent survival benefit except in populations at highest risk for developing contralateral breast cancer (CBC). CPM rates may be higher in rural populations but causes remain unclear. A study performed at our institution previously found that 21.8 % of patients with UBC underwent CPM from 2000 to 2009. This study aimed to evaluate the CPM trend at a single institution serving a rural population and identify the CPM rate in average-risk patients.

Methods

Retrospective review of patients who underwent mastectomies for UBC at our institution from 2017 to 2021 was performed. Analysis utilized frequencies and percentages, descriptive statistics, chi-square, and independent sample t-tests.

Results

A total of 438 patients were included, of whom 64.4 % underwent bilateral mastectomy for UBC (CPM). Patients who underwent CPM were significantly younger, underwent genetic testing, had germline pathogenic variants, had a family history of breast cancer, had smaller tumors, underwent reconstruction, and had more wound infections. Of CPM patients, 50.4 % had no identifiable factors for increased risk of developing CBC.

Conclusions

The rate of CPM in a rural population at a single institution increased from 21.8 % to 64.4 % over two decades, with an average-risk CPM rate of 50.4 %. Those that undergo CPM are more likely to undergo reconstruction and have more wound infections. Identifying characteristics of patients undergoing CPM in a rural population and the increased associated risks allows for a better understanding of this trend to guide conversations with patients.

Key message

This study demonstrates that the rate of contralateral prophylactic mastectomy for unilateral breast cancers performed at a single institution serving a largely rural population has nearly tripled over the last two decades, with half of these patients having no factors that increase the risk for developing contralateral breast cancers. Contralateral prophylactic mastectomy was significantly associated with smaller tumors, younger age, genetic testing, germline pathogenic variants, family history of breast cancer, breast reconstruction, and increased wound infections.

Enhanced Surgical Decision-Making Tools in Breast Cancer: Predicting 2-Year Postoperative Physical, Sexual, and Psychosocial Well-Being following Mastectomy and Breast Reconstruction (INSPiRED 004)

BACKGROUND

We sought to predict clinically meaningful changes in physical, sexual, and psychosocial well-being for women undergoing cancer-related mastectomy and breast reconstruction 2 years after surgery using machine learning (ML) algorithms trained on clinical and patient-reported outcomes data.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We used data from women undergoing mastectomy and reconstruction at 11 study sites in North America to develop three distinct ML models. We used data of ten sites to predict clinically meaningful improvement or worsening by comparing pre-surgical scores with 2 year follow-up data measured by validated Breast-Q domains. We employed ten-fold cross-validation to train and test the algorithms, and then externally validated them using the 11th site's data. We considered area-under-the-receiver-operating-characteristics-curve (AUC) as the primary metric to evaluate performance.

RESULTS

Overall, between 1454 and 1538 patients completed 2 year follow-up with data for physical, sexual, and psychosocial well-being. In the hold-out validation set, our ML algorithms were able to predict clinically significant changes in physical well-being (chest and upper body) (worsened: AUC range 0.69-0.70; improved: AUC range 0.81-0.82), sexual well-being (worsened: AUC range 0.76-0.77; improved: AUC range 0.74-0.76), and psychosocial well-being (worsened: AUC range 0.64-0.66; improved: AUC range 0.66-0.66). Baseline patient-reported outcome (PRO) variables showed the largest influence on model predictions.

CONCLUSIONS

Machine learning can predict long-term individual PROs of patients undergoing postmastectomy breast reconstruction with acceptable accuracy. This may better help patients and clinicians make informed decisions regarding expected long-term effect of treatment, facilitate patient-centered care, and ultimately improve postoperative health-related quality of life.

Reconstructive types effect the prognosis of patients with tumors in the central and nipple portion of breast cancer? An analysis based on SEER database

Introduction

The impact of different types of reconstruction, including tissue reconstruction, implant reconstruction and combined reconstruction, on patient survival were not illustrated completely. We tried to investigate the impact of patient survival between different types of reconstruction.

Methods

We enrolled 6271 patients with tumors in the central and nipple portion of breast cancer from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database. Factors associated with survival were identified by Cox regression analyses. The mortality rates per 1,000 person-years were calculated and compared. Survival curves were produced by Kaplan-Meier analyses using log-rank tests and cox proportional hazards regression quantified the risk of survival.

Results

Reconstructive types, region, insurance, race, marial status, grade, stage, ER status, PR status, HER-2 status and chemotherapy were significant prognostic factors associated with breast cancer-specific survival. The breast cancer mortality rates per 1,000 person-years for patients with tissue, implant and combined group were 26.01,21.54 and 19.83 which showed a downward trend. The HR of implant and combined reconstruction adjusted for demographic, pathological, and therapeutic data was 0.82 (95% CI: 0.67-1.00, p=0.052) and 0.73(95% CI:0.55-0.97, p=0.03) compared with tissue reconstruction.

Conclusion

Breast cancer-related mortality between implant reconstruction and autologous tissue reconstruction showed no significantly different, but the risk of BCSS of compound reconstruction was lower than tissue reconstruction.

Risk‐reducing mastectomy decisions among women with mutations in high‐ and moderate‐ penetrance breast cancer susceptibility genes

Background

Women harboring mutations in breast cancer susceptibility genes are at increased lifetime risk of developing breast cancer and are faced with decisions about risk management, including whether to undergo high‐risk screening or risk‐reducing mastectomy (RRM). National guidelines recommend BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation carriers consider RRM, but that carriers of moderate penetrance mutations (e.g., ATM or CHEK2) should be managed based on family history. We aimed to investigate determinants of decision for RRM, and hypothesized that mutation status, age, family history, partner status, and breast cancer would impact RRM decision making.

Methods

We performed a retrospective study assessing RRM decisions for 279 women.

Results

Women with BRCA and moderate penetrance gene mutations, a personal history of breast cancer, or a first degree relative with a history of breast cancer were more likely to undergo RRM. Breast cancer status and age showed an interaction effect such that women with breast cancer were less likely to undergo RRM with increasing age.

Conclusion

Although national guidelines do not recommend RRM for moderate penetrance carriers, the rates of RRM for this population approached those for BRCA mutation carriers. Further insights are needed to better support RRM decision‐making in this population.

The association of socioeconomic status on treatment strategy in patients with stage I and II breast cancer in the Netherlands

Background

Previous studies have shown that socioeconomic status (SES) influences breast cancer therapy. However, these studies were performed in countries with unequal access to healthcare. Therefore, the aim of this study is to investigate whether SES also contributes to the likelihood of receiving a certain therapy in the Netherlands, a country with supposedly equal access to healthcare.

Materials and methods

From the Netherlands Cancer Registry, 105,287 patients with newly diagnosed stage I or II breast cancer diagnosed between 2011 and 2018 were selected for analysis. SES was calculated from the average incomes of each postal code, which were divided into 10 deciles. Primary outcome was the effect of SES on the likelihood of undergoing surgery and secondary outcome was the effect of SES on the likelihood of the type of surgery. Both outcomes were corrected for patient, tumor, and hospital characteristics and were expressed as odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence interval (CI).

Results

SES did not affect the likelihood of a breast cancer patient to undergo surgery (OR 1.00 per 10% stratum). In contrast, increased age and higher tumor stage were the most important factors determining whether patients underwent surgery.

Patients with higher SES were less likely to undergo mastectomy (OR 0.98). Additionally, more recently diagnosed patients were less likely to undergo mastectomy (OR 0.93 per year) while patients with higher tumor stage were more likely to undergo mastectomy (OR 3.42).

Conclusion

SES does not affect whether a patient undergoes surgery; however, higher SES increased the likelihood of BCT.

Infant feeding among women with a history of breast cancer

PURPOSE

Health professional organizations recommend exclusive breastfeeding for 6 months, but there are mothers, such as those with a history of breast cancer, who are unable to exclusively provide their milk for their infants. Minimal research has been published on mothers' experience with lactation, breastfeeding, and bottle-feeding after breast cancer. This study explored mothers' perspectives of infant feeding after a history of breast cancer.

METHODS

Qualitative interviews were completed with 20 mothers who had experience with infant feeding after breast cancer, including exclusive breastfeeding, partial provision of human milk with formula supplementation, and exclusive formula feeding.

RESULTS

Mothers shared their perceptions, barriers, and experiences of infant feeding. Four themes were identified: miracle of motherhood after breast cancer, medical misinformation or no available information contributing to the exacerbation of mothers' worries, post-breast-cancer feeding challenges, and desire for infant-feeding support rather than pressure.

CONCLUSIONS

Mothers who have had breast cancer and have since given birth face specific challenges to infant feeding which are compounded by limited resources and knowledge among healthcare providers. Findings of the study highlight the importance of healthcare professionals becoming more educated to provide adequate support and evidence-based information on lactation and infant feeding for women with a history of breast cancer.

IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS

Understanding the experiences of women who have given birth after breast cancer can help women in similar situations know that they are not alone, identify resources, access peer support, and seek evidence-based infant feeding advice from healthcare providers involved in their care.

Contralateral Prophylactic Mastectomy in Women with Unilateral Breast Cancer Who Are Genetic Carriers, Have a Strong Family History or Are just Young at Presentation

The uptake of contralateral prophylactic mastectomy is rising with increasing trends that are possibly highest in the USA. Whilst its role is generally accepted in carriers of recognized high-risk predisposition genes such as BRCA1 and BRCA2 when the affected individual is premenopausal, controversy surrounds the benefit in less understood risk-profile clinical scenarios. This comprehensive review explores the current evidence underpinning the role of contralateral prophylactic mastectomy and its impact on contralateral breast cancer risk and survival in three distinct at-risk groups affected by unilateral breast cancer: known genetic carriers, those with strong familial risk but no demonstrable genetic mutation and women who are of young age at presentation. The review supports the role of contralateral prophylactic mastectomy in “high risk” groups where the evidence suggests a reduction in contralateral breast cancer risk. However, this benefit is less evident in women who are just young at presentation or those who have strong family history but no demonstrable genetic mutation. A multidisciplinary and personalized approach to support individuals in a shared-decision making process is recommended.

Long-term Patient-Reported Outcomes in Postmastectomy Breast Reconstruction

Importance

Previous outcome studies comparing implant and autologous breast reconstruction techniques have been limited by short-term follow-up, single-center design, and a lack of rigorous patient-reported outcome data. An understanding of the expected satisfaction and breast-related quality of life associated with each type of procedure is central to the decision-making process.

Objective

To determine outcomes reported by patients undergoing postmastectomy breast reconstruction using implant or autologous techniques 2 years after surgery.

Design, Setting, and Participants

Patients were recruited from 11 centers (57 plastic surgeons) across North America for the Mastectomy Reconstruction Outcomes Consortium study, a prospective, multicenter trial, from February 1, 2012, to July 31, 2015. Women undergoing immediate breast reconstruction using implant or autologous tissue reconstruction after mastectomy for cancer treatment or prophylaxis were eligible. Overall, 2013 women (1490 implant and 523 autologous tissue reconstruction) met the inclusion criteria. All patients included in this analysis had 2 years of follow-up.

Exposures

Procedure type (ie, implant vs autologous tissue reconstruction).

Main Outcomes and Measures

The primary outcomes of interest were scores on the BREAST-Q, a validated, condition-specific, patient-reported outcome instrument, which were collected prior to and at 2 years after surgery. The following 4 domains of the BREAST-Q reconstruction module were evaluated: satisfaction with breasts, psychosocial well-being, physical well-being, and sexual well-being. Responses from each scale were summed and transformed on a 0 to 100 scale, with higher numbers representing greater satisfaction or quality of life.

Results

Of the 2013 women in the study (mean [SD] age, 48.1 [10.5] years for the group that underwent implant-based reconstruction and 51.6 [8.7] years for the group that underwent autologous reconstruction), 1217 (60.5%) completed questionnaires at 2 years after reconstruction. After controlling for baseline patient characteristics, patients who underwent autologous reconstruction had greater satisfaction with their breasts (difference, 7.94; 95% CI, 5.68-10.20; P < .001), psychosocial well-being (difference, 3.27; 95% CI, 1.25-5.29; P = .002), and sexual well-being (difference, 5.53; 95% CI, 2.95-8.11; P < .001) at 2 years compared with patients who underwent implant reconstruction.

Conclusions and Relevance

At 2 years, patients who underwent autologous reconstruction were more satisfied with their breasts and had greater psychosocial well-being and sexual well-being than did those who underwent implant reconstruction. These findings can inform patients and their clinicians about expected satisfaction and quality of life outcomes of autologous vs implant-based procedures and further support the adoption of shared decision making in clinical practice.

Long-Term Effects of Breast Cancer Surgery, Treatment, and Survivor Care

Women are increasingly surviving breast cancer, but up to 90% experience unexpected long-term sequelae as a result of treatment. Symptoms may include physical, functional, emotional, and psychosocial changes that can dramatically alter the quality of life for breast cancer survivors. Primary care clinicians, including midwives, are likely to care for these women and should be familiar with common symptoms, treatment, and best practices to avoid permanent dysfunction. A holistic approach to assessment, treatment, and referral as needed is the most effective strategy. Although women experience significant changes after breast cancer treatment, many fail to receive thorough assessment of their symptoms, education about interventions, and treatment options to optimize health promoting strategies. Disparities exist in treatment availability, options, and survivorship. Long-term physical changes include anatomic changes, chronic pain, phantom breast pain, axillary web syndrome, and lymphedema. In addition, women may have decreased strength, aerobic capacity, mobility, fatigue, and cognitive dysfunction. Emotional and psychosocial changes include depression, anxiety, fatigue, concerns about body image, and issues with sexuality. Treatment should be multifactorial based on thorough assessment of symptoms and can include medication, exercise, counseling, physical and occupational therapy, and alternative and complementary therapies. Primary care and gynecologic clinicians are well positioned to provide thorough evaluation, education, treatment, and referral for the most common sequelae of mastectomy and breast cancer treatments.

Nationwide population-based study of trends and regional variation in breast-conserving treatment for breast cancer

Background

Landmark trials have shown breast-conserving surgery (BCS) combined with radiotherapy to be as safe as mastectomy in breast cancer treatment. This population-based study aimed to evaluate trends in BCS from 1989 to 2015 in nine geographical regions in the Netherlands.

Methods

All women diagnosed between 1989 and 2015 with primary T1–2 N0–1 breast cancer, treated with BCS or mastectomy, were identified from the Netherlands Cancer Registry. Crude and case mix-adjusted rates of BCS were evaluated and compared between nine Dutch regions for two time intervals: 1989–2002 and 2003–2015. The annual percentage change in BCS per region over time was assessed by means of Joinpoint regression analyses. Explanatory variables associated with the choice of initial surgery were evaluated using multivariable logistic regression.

Results

A total of 202 934 patients were included, 82 200 treated in 1989–2002 and 120 734 in 2003–2015. During 1989–2002, the mean rate of BCS was 50·6 per cent, varying significantly from 39·0 to 71·7 per cent between the nine regions. For most regions, a marked rise in BCS was observed between 2002 and 2003. During 2003–2015, the mean rate of BCS increased to 67·4 per cent, but still varied significantly between regions from 58·5 to 75·5 per cent. A significant variation remained after case-mix correction.

Conclusion

This large nationwide study showed that the use of BCS increased from 1989 to 2015 in the Netherlands. After adjustment for explanatory variables, a large variation still existed between the nine regions. This regional variation underlines the need for implementation of a uniform treatment and decision-making strategy.

How to optimize aesthetic outcomes in implant-based breast reconstruction

The evolution of breast reconstructive surgery keeps pace with the evolution of breast oncologic surgery. The reconstructive choice should always balance the optimal local control of disease and the best cosmetic result, reflecting an informed decision that is shared with the patient, who is always at the center of the decision-making process. Implant-based breast reconstruction following mastectomy represents a complex choice. In order to obtain optimal results, the following considerations are mandatory: thorough preoperative planning, a complete knowledge of the devices that are used, accurately performed surgery, and appropriate follow-up.