Aesthetics in breast conserving therapy: do objectively measured results match patients' evaluations?

Does breast oncoplastic surgery improve quality of life?

Breast Oncoplastic Surgery (OS) has established itself as a safe procedure associated with the treatment of breast cancer, but the term is broad, encompassing procedures associated with breast-conserving surgeries (BCS), conservative mastectomies and fat grafting. Surgeons believe that OS is associated with an increase in quality of life (QOL), but the diversity of QOL questionnaires and therapeutic modalities makes it difficult to assess from the patient's perspective. To answer this question, we performed a search for systematic reviews on QOL associated with different COM procedures, and in their absence, we selected case-control studies, discussing the main results. We observed that: (1) Patients undergoing BCS or breast reconstruction have improved QoL compared to those undergoing mastectomy; (2) In patients undergoing BCS, OS has not yet shown an improvement in QOL, a fact possibly influenced by patient selection bias; (3) In patients undergoing mastectomy with reconstruction, the QoL results are superior when the reconstruction is performed with autologous flaps and when the areola is preserved; (4) Prepectoral implants improves QOL in relation to subpectoral implant-based breast reconstruction; (5) ADM do not improves QOL; (6) In patients undergoing prophylactic mastectomy, satisfaction is high with the indication, but the patient must be informed about the potential complications associated with the procedure; (7) Satisfaction is high after performing fat grafting. It is observed that, in general, OS increases QOL, and when evaluating the procedures, any preservation or repair, or the use of autologous tissues, increases QOL, justifying OS.

Dermoglandular advancement-rotation flap for conservative treatment of breast cancer - description of technique, objective and subjective assessments

Objective

to describe and evaluate the dermoglandular advancement-rotation flap with no contralateral surgery as a technique for the conservative treatment of breast cancer when skin or a large proportion of gland requires resection.

Patients/Methods

14 patients with breast tumors with a mean size of 4.2 cm and need for skin resection. The resection area is included within an isosceles triangle, with its apex located on the areola, which is the pivot for rotation of a dermoglandular flap released through a lateral extension along that triangle base. Symmetry before and after radiotherapy was objectively assessed by authors using the BCCT.core software, as well as subjectively by three experts and patients themselves using the Harvard scale.

Results

Experts considered the breast symmetry results to be excellent/good for 85.7% of patients in the early post-operative period and 78.6% in the late post-operative period. Excellent/good ratings provided by BCCT.core software amounted to 78.6% of cases in the early post-operative period and 92.9% in the late post-operative period. Symmetry was rated as excellent/good by 100% of patients.

Conclusion

Dermoglandular advancement-rotation flap technique with no contralateral surgery provides good symmetry when a large proportion of skin or gland requires resection on breast conservative cancer treatment.

'Breast Cosmesis After Breast-Conserving Therapy' Who is the Judge, Patient or Surgeon?

INTRODUCTION

More than 80% of newly diagnosed breast cancers are managed with breast-conserving therapy (BCT). Preservation of cosmetically acceptable breasts is an inherent aim of all breast-conserving efforts-this can, however, be difficult to assess objectively. Compounding this is the difference in perception of breast cosmesis between patients and surgeons. This study compares the concordance of a new subscale-based cosmetic score (TCS) with the patient's perception.

METHOD

Eastern Health Breast and Cancer Centre conducted this study on patients who had completed their BCT and radiotherapy. Participation was voluntary and involved permitting an assessor (breast surgery fellow or consultant) to grade cosmetic outcomes to generate a Total Cosmesis Score (TCS). The patients blinded to this assessment were then asked to complete the postoperative segment of the BCT module of the Breast-Q questionnaire. TCS from surgeon assessment was compared against patient assessment (questions BQ1i and BQ1k specifically). Cohen's kappa was calculated to define the strength of the inter-rater agreement.

RESULTS

One hundred twelve patients with a mean age of 59 (range 27-89) participated in the study. TCS was low in 26% and high in 74% of participants. 76% and 69% of participants were satisfied when answering Breast-Q questions 'How your lumpectomy breast looks?' and 'How you look in the mirror unclothed?' respectively (Cohen's k = 0.464, 95% CI 0.337-0.591, p < 0.01). The agreement between the TCS and the patient assessment was poor (Cohen's k = 0.172, 95% CI - 0.020-2.093, p = 0.067).

CONCLUSION

Cosmetic outcomes scored using TCS by surgeons do not match patient's own assessment of the cosmetic result.

Evaluation of breast cosmetic changes with a computer-software; the breast cancer conservative treatment cosmetic results (BCCT. core) in hypofractionated whole breast irradiation after breast-conserving surgery-supplementary analysis of multicenter single-arm confirmatory trial: JCOG0906

BACKGROUND

A good cosmetic outcome has been defined as an important endpoint in breast-conserving therapy (BCT). Various evaluation methods have been studied, but the optimal method has yet to be identified. The present supplementary analysis of JCOG0906 focused on comparing evaluation methods for breast cosmetic outcomes following hypofractionated whole breast irradiation (HFWBI) to examine whether a computer-software (the Breast Cancer Conservative Treatment cosmetic results [BCCT. core])-based program evaluation (CE) can be used for Asian women in clinical trials of BCT.

METHODS

Of 306 women, 292 underwent institutional evaluation (IE) for breast cosmetic outcomes before (pre) and 3 years after (post) HFWBI using a 4-point scale (excellent/good/fair/poor), and they were evaluated by CE and a central panel evaluation (PE) on the same scale using 292 pairs of pre/post-HFWBI photographs. PE was performed twice by consensus of the same two experts with a 3-year interval. CE was assessed individually by two radiation oncologists, an expert and a non-expert. Intra-observer variability and inter-observer variability were calculated using the kappa (k) and weighted kappa (wk) statistics.

RESULTS

The agreement between the first and second PE using pre/post-HFWBI photographs was moderate (k = 0.60, wk = 0.64. k = 0.53, wk = 0.60). The agreement between the expert and non-expert on CE was substantial (k = 0.72, wk = 0.76. k = 0.72, wk = 0.77). The inter-observer variability of CE was smaller than the intra-observer variability of PE.

CONCLUSION

CE with BCCT. core was considered a reproducible and an appropriate evaluation method for Asian women in clinical trials of BCT, when breast cosmetic changes were compared between pre/post therapy.

Methods of Esthetic Assessment after Adjuvant Whole-Breast Radiotherapy in Breast Cancer Patients: Evaluation of the BCCT.core Software and Patients' and Physicians' Assessment from the Randomized IMRT-MC2 Trial

Simple Summary

To validate the BCCT.core software, the present analysis compares the esthetics assessment by the software in relation to patients’ and physicians’ rating in breast cancer patients after surgery and adjuvant radiotherapy. Agreement rates of the different assessments and their correlation with breast asymmetry indices were evaluated. The assessments of the software and the physicians were significantly correlated with all asymmetry indices, while for patients’ self-assessment, this general correlation was first seen after 2 years. Only a slight agreement between the BCCT.core software and the physicians’ or patients’ assessment was seen, while a moderate and substantial agreement was detected between the physicians’ and the patients’ assessments. The BCCT.core software is a reliable tool to measure asymmetries, but may not sufficiently evaluate the esthetic outcome as perceived by patients. It may be more appropriate for a long-term follow-up, when symmetry seems to increase in importance.

Abstract

The present analysis compares the esthetics assessment by the BCCT.core software in relation to patients’ and physicians’ ratings, based on the IMRT-MC2 trial. Within this trial, breast cancer patients received breast-conserving surgery (BCS) and adjuvant radiotherapy. At the baseline, 6 weeks, and 2 years after radiotherapy, photos of the breasts were assessed by the software and patients’ and physicians’ assessments were performed. Agreement rates of the assessments and their correlation with breast asymmetry indices were evaluated. The assessments of the software and the physicians were significantly correlated with asymmetry indices. Before and 6 weeks after radiotherapy, the patients’ self-assessment was only correlated with the lower breast contour (LBC) and upward nipple retraction (UNR), while after 2 years, there was also a correlation with other indices. Only a slight agreement between the BCCT.core software and the physicians’ or patients’ assessment was seen, while a moderate and substantial agreement was detected between the physicians’ and the patients’ assessment after 6 weeks and 2 years, respectively. The BCCT.core software is a reliable tool to measure asymmetries, but may not sufficiently evaluate the esthetic outcome as perceived by patients. It may be more appropriate for a long-term follow-up, when symmetry appears to increase in importance.

A Novel Validated Breast Aesthetic Scale

BACKGROUND

Breast aesthetics impacts patients' quality of life after breast reconstruction, but patients and surgeons frequently disagree on the final aesthetic evaluation. The need for a comprehensive, validated tool to evaluate breast aesthetics independently from the patient motivated this study.

METHODS

The 13-item Validated Breast Aesthetic Scale was developed after several internal meetings, and worded to be understood by a nonspecialist. Three items are common for both breasts, with the remaining being side-specific. To test the internal consistency of the scale subitems, postoperative photographs after different breast reconstruction techniques were graded by a six-member panel. To test interrater and intrarater correlation across time, four physicians evaluated the results of abdominally based breast reconstructions following nipple-sparing mastectomies.

RESULTS

Graded aesthetic outcomes of 53 patients showed that the Cronbach alpha of the subitems of the scale was 0.926, with no single item that, if excluded, would increase it. Twenty-two patients underwent aesthetic outcomes grading at four different time points. The mean overall appearance was 3.71 ± 0.62. The mean grade for overall nipple appearance was 4.0 ± 0.57. The coefficient alpha of the panel overall aesthetic grade across different time points was 0.957; whereas intragrader reliability for graders 1 through 4 individually showed alpha coefficients of 0.894, 0.9, 0.898, and 0.688, respectively. Similar results were found for the other items of the scale.

CONCLUSIONS

The proposed aesthetic scale evaluates different aspects of the breast reconstruction aesthetic result with excellent internal consistency among its subitems. Grading by a gender-balanced, diverse four-member panel using postoperative photographs showed higher reliability and reproducibility compared to single graders.

Breast softness in patients randomised to postmastectomy breast reconstruction with an expander prosthesis or DIEP flap

Background

Objectively measured breast softness in reconstructed breasts and its relation to patients’ subjective satisfaction with breast softness has not yet been investigated. The aim of this study was to evaluate breast softness in patients 1 year following delayed breast reconstruction with an expander prosthesis (EP) or deep inferior epigastric perforator (DIEP) flap, using objective and subjective methods.

Methods

Seventy-three patients were randomised to breast reconstruction with an EP or DIEP flap between 2012 and 2018. Of these, 69 completed objective evaluation at a mean of 25 (standard deviation, SD 9.4) months following breast reconstruction. Objective evaluation included measurements of breast volume, jugulum-nipple distance, clavicular-submammary fold distance, ptosis and Baker scale grading. Breast softness was assessed with applanation tonometry. Subjective evaluation was performed using the BREAST-Q questionnaire.

Results

Objectively, DIEP flaps were significantly softer than EP breast reconstructions. Non-operated contralateral breasts were significantly softer compared with reconstructed breasts. In the subjective evaluation, the median score on the question (labelled 1.h) “How satisfied or dissatisfied have you been with the softness of your reconstructed breast (s)?” was higher in the DIEP flap group corresponding to greater satisfaction in this group. A fair correlation was found between the applanation tonometry and the patient-reported satisfaction with the reconstructed breast’s softness (rs = 0.37).

Conclusions

In terms of breast softness, breast reconstructions with DIEP flaps result in more satisfied patients. Concerning applanation tonometry as an objective tool for softness assessment, future studies on interobserver agreement are warranted.

Level of evidence: Level I, therapeutic study

Reliability of the BCCT.core software in evaluation of breast cosmesis - A systematic review

Breast cancer conservative treatment software (BCCT.core) has the potential to provide objective results using digital photographs, thus increasing the reliability, limiting the subjective interpretation and standardising the evaluation of breast cosmesis in patients. The aim of this systematic review was to summarise the empirical evidence regarding the agreement between the BCCT.core and other methods used by health professionals and patients to assess breast cosmesis. The Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO and Scopus databases were systematically searched for studies comparing the agreement between BCCT.core and other methods used to assess breast cosmesis. A total of 14 studies involving 2703 patients were included in the review. In studies where patients undertook self-assessment, the percentage agreement ranged from 69.2% to 74.8% and the kappa values ranged from slight (k = 0.12) to fair agreement. There was a low correlation between the BCCT.core and the Harvard scale when patients assessed cosmetic outcomes using photographs of their breasts (r = 0.165). A 75% and 42.8% agreement was reported in studies where clinicians assessed breast cosmesis by directly visualising the patients' breasts and photographs, respectively. Assessment of breast cosmesis by the expert panel using patient photographs reported a percentage agreement ranging from 25% to 83%. The results of this systematic review demonstrated an overall agreement of fair to moderate between the BCCT.core and the subjective scales used to assess breast cosmesis. However, clinician experience and patient values should be considered in clinical decision-making.

Development of an online research platform for use in a large-scale multicentre study

Background

Participation in research can be beneficial for patients and healthcare providers, but may prove demanding at patient, clinician and organizational levels. Patient representatives are supportive of online research to overcome these challenges. The aim of this pilot study was to develop an online recruitment platform and test its feasibility and acceptability while evaluating the accuracy of participant-reported data.

Methods

The online research platform was developed in a 1-day ‘hackathon’ with a digital design company. Women who underwent implant-based breast reconstruction in 2011–2016 were invited by letter containing the web address (URL) of the study site and their unique study number. Once online, participants learned about the study, consented, entered data on demographics, treatment received and patient-reported outcome measures (BREAST-Q™), and booked an appointment for a single hospital visit for three-dimensional surface imaging (3D-SI). Real-time process evaluation was performed. The primary endpoint was recruitment rate.

Results

The recruitment rate was 40 per cent. Of the 100 women, 50 logged on to the platform and 40 completed the process through to 3D-SI. The majority of discontinuations after logging on occurred between consenting and entering demographics (3 women, 6 per cent), and between completing the BREAST-Q and booking an appointment for 3D-SI using the online calendar (3 women, 6 per cent). All women completed the online BREAST-Q™ once started. Participants took a median of 23 minutes to complete the online process. Patient-reported clinical data were accurate in 12 of 13 domains compared with electronic records (95 per cent concordance). Process evaluation demonstrated acceptability.

Conclusion

The results of this pilot demonstrate the online platform to be acceptable, feasible, and accurate for this population from a single institution. The low-burden design may enable participation from centres with less research support and participants from hard-to-reach groups or dispersed geographical locations, but with online access.

3-Dimensional objective aesthetic evaluation to replace panel assessment after breast-conserving treatment

BACKGROUND

Two-thirds of patients with early breast cancer undergo breast-conserving treatment (BCT). Aesthetic outcome is important and has long term implications for psychosocial wellbeing. The aesthetic goal of BCT is symmetry for which there is no gold-standard measure. Panel scoring is the most widely adopted assessment but has well-described limitations. This paper describes a model to objectively report aesthetic outcome using measures derived from 3-dimensional surface images (3D-SI).

METHOD

Objective measures and panel assessment were undertaken independently for 3D-SI of women who underwent BCT 1-5 years previously. Univariate analysis was used to test for association between measures and panel score. A forward stepwise multiple linear regression model was fitted to identify 3D measurements that jointly predicted the mean panel score. The fitted model coefficients were used to predict mean panel scores for an independent validation set then compared to the mean observed panel score.

RESULTS

Very good intra-panel reliability was observed for the training and validation sets (wκ = 0.87, wκ = 0.84). Six 3D-measures were used in the multivariate model. There was a good correlation between the predicted and mean observed panel score in the training (n = 190) and validation (n = 100) sets (r = 0.68, r = 0.65). The 3D model tended to predict scores towards the median. The model was calibrated which improved the distribution of predicted scores.

CONCLUSION

A six-variable objective aesthetic outcome model for BCT has been described and validated. This can predict and could replace panel assessment, facilitating the independent and unbiased evaluation of aesthetic outcome to communicate and compare results, benchmark practice, and raise standards.

Quantitative 3-Dimensional Photographic Assessment of Breast Cosmesis After Whole Breast Irradiation for Early Stage Breast Cancer: A Secondary Analysis of a Randomized Clinical Trial

Purpose

Our purpose was to use 3-dimensional (3D) surface photography to quantitatively measure breast cosmesis within the framework of a randomized clinical trial of conventionally fractionated (CF) and hypofractionated (HF) whole breast irradiation (WBI); to identify how 3D measurements are associated with patient- and physician-reported cosmesis; and to determine whether objective measures of breast symmetry varied by WBI treatment arm or transforming growth factor β 1 (TGFβ1) status.

Methods and Materials

From 2011 to 2014, 287 women age ≥40 with ductal carcinoma in situ or early-stage invasive breast cancer were enrolled in a multicenter trial and randomized to HF-WBI or CF-WBI with a boost. Three-dimensional surface photography was performed at 3 years posttreatment. Patient-reported cosmetic outcomes were recorded with the Breast Cancer Treatment Outcome Scale. Physician-reported cosmetic outcomes were assessed by the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group scale. Volume ratios and 6 quantitative measures of breast symmetry, termed F1-6C, were calculated using the breast contour and fiducial points assessed on 3D surface images. Associations between all metrics, patient- and physician-reported cosmesis, treatment arm, and TGFβ1 genotype were performed using the Kruskal-Wallis test and multivariable logistic regression models.

Results

Among 77 (39 CF-WBI and 38 HF-WBI) evaluable patients, both patient- and physician-reported cosmetic outcomes were significantly associated with the F1C vertical symmetry measure (both P < .05). Higher dichotomized F1C and volumetric symmetry measures were associated with improved patient- and physician-reported cosmesis on multivariable logistic regression (both P ≤ .05). There were no statistically significant differences in vertical symmetry or volume measures between treatment arms. Increased F6C horizontal symmetry was observed in the CF-WBI arm (P = .05). Patients with the TGFβ1 C-509T variant allele had lower F2C vertical symmetry measures (P = .02).

Conclusions

Quantitative 3D image-derived measures revealed comparable cosmetic outcomes with HF-WBI compared with CF-WBI. Our findings suggest that 3D surface imaging may be a more sensitive method for measuring subtle cosmetic changes than global patient- or physician-reported assessments.

Aesthetic results following breast cancer surgery: A prospective study on 6515 cases from ten Italian Senonetwork breast centers

Breast cancer treatment has deeply changed in the last decades, since clinical and oncological cure cannot be achieved without patient's satisfaction in term of aesthetic outcomes. Several methods have been proposed to objectively assess these results. However, Italian breast centers have not yet agreed on measurable, reproducible and validated aesthetic outcome indicators to monitor their performance.

METHODS

The study was designed and conducted by Senonetwork, a not-for-profit association of Italian breast centers. Ten breast centers were selected based on specific eligibility criteria. This multicentre observational prospective study recruited 6515 patients with diagnosis of in situ or invasive breast cancer who underwent breast surgery in the years 2013-2016. Thirteen indicators of aesthetic results and of related quality of care were analyzed. Data collection and analysis were conducted using a common study database.

RESULTS

On average, seven out of ten centers were able to collect data on the proposed indicators with a proportion of missing values < 25%. By expert consensus based on study results, some seven indicators have been defined as "mandatory" while the remaining six have been defined as "recommended" because they require further refinement before they can be proposed for monitoring aesthetic outcomes or because there are doubts on the feasibility of data collection. The minimum standard is reached for 5 of 13 indicators. This finding and the wide range between centers reveal that there is ample room for improvement.

CONCLUSIONS

From the present study useful measurable aesthetic parameters have emerged, leading to the definition of target objectives that breast centers can use for benchmarking and improvement of quality of care.

A scoring system for 3D surface images of breast reconstruction developed using the Delphi consensus process

Introduction

Evaluation of aesthetics after breast reconstruction is challenging. In the absence of an objective measurement, panel assessment is widely adopted. Heterogeneity of scales and poor internal consistency make comparison difficult. Development and validation of an expert panel scale using a Delphi consensus process is described. It was designed specifically for use as the gold standard for development of an objective evaluation tool using 3-Dimensional Surface Imaging (3D-SI).

Materials and methods

20 items relating to aesthetic assessment were identified for consideration in the Delphi consensus process. Items were selected for inclusion in the definitive panel scale by iterative rounds of voting according to importance, consensus discussion, and a final vote. The Delphi-derived scale was tested on a clinical research series for intra- and inter-panellist, and intra-panel reliability, and correlation with Patient Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs).

Results

61 surgeons participated in the Delphi process. Oncoplastic and plastic surgeons were represented. The Delphi-derived scale included symmetry, volume, shape, position of breast mound, nipple position, and a global score. Intra-panellist reliability ranged from poor to almost perfect (wκ<0to0.86), inter-rater reliability was fair (ICC range 0.4–0.5) for individual items and good (ICC0.6) for the global score, intra-panel reliability was moderate to substantial (wκ0.4–0.7), and correlation with PROMs was moderate (r = 0.5p < 0.01).

Conclusions

The Delphi-derived panel evaluation is at least as good as other scales in the literature and has been developed specifically to provide expert evaluation of aesthetics after breast reconstruction. The logistical constraints of panel assessment remain, reinforcing the need to develop an objective evaluation method.

•

Aesthetic outcome has well described influence on long term quality of life

•

Many scoring systems exist, each with methodological flaws.

•

A Delphi consensus process was used to derive a contemporary panel scoring system for expert aesthetic evaluation

•

The scoring system was tested and performed well on a series of images of women who have undergone breast reconstruction

Optimal assessment tools in assessing breast surgery: patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) vs. objective measures

Improving the health-related quality of life (HRQoL) of patients is the fundamental aim of aesthetic breast surgery and its importance is increasingly recognised in breast cancer-related surgery. There has been growing acceptance of the value of assessing physical, psychological and social well-being through patient reported outcome measures (PROMs). It is important to consider the role of PROMs in relation to objective measures to ensure that the optimal assessment tools are selected when assessing outcomes in breast surgery. A narrative review was conducted of published articles identified on Ovid Medline by searching the terms: patient reported outcome measures, quality of life (QoL), functional outcomes, aesthetic outcomes, complications and breast surgery. Reference lists were also examined to find relevant articles not detected through the search. Survival and mortality are outcomes of immense importance in breast surgery that are not suitable for assessment through PROMs and should be measured objectively. Post-operative complication rates and markers of their severity are most appropriately assessed using objective measures, however, patients may provide valuable insights into the impact complications have on their QoL. All current assessment tools for assessing aesthetic outcome have inherent limitations, and thus it is likely that both subjective and objective measures are required to comprehensively assess aesthetic outcomes in breast surgery. Physical dysfunction can be assessed objectively, however, PROMs may better evaluate physical well-being, reflecting the real-life implications of a change in function. Psychological and social well-being is irrefutably personal in nature and best assessed through PROMs. There is no one optimal assessment tool for assessing breast surgery outcomes. Utilising a combination of PROMs and objective measures is necessary to accurately and comprehensively evaluate the impact and effectiveness of surgical breast interventions.

Translation and cultural adaptation of the Breast Cancer Treatment Outcome Scale (BCTOS) into Brazilian Portuguese

BACKGROUND

Breast conservative treatment (BCT) is safe when it is performed in association with radiotherapy. The number of referral for BCT has increased, and it has become an important treatment modality. Patients who undergo BCT present some characteristics that are associated with better quality of life compared with patients who undergo mastectomy without reconstruction. Instruments that measure the quality of life specifically used in cases of BCT are limited. One of these instruments is the Breast Cancer Treatment Outcome Scale (BCTOS), which has not yet been translated into Brazilian Portuguese. It contains 22 questions and four domains (functional, aesthetic, breast sensitivity and oedema).

METHODS

We performed the translation and cultural adaptation process using Beaton's and EORTC translations process. In summary, the translation process is based on Portuguese translation, translation summary, reverse translation into English, expert committee, pre-test (10 patients), questionnaire review and test of the final version (6 patients).

RESULTS

All 16 patients were submitted to quadrantectomy and mammary radiotherapy. Lymphedema was present in 4, altered strength in 5, and altered shoulder mobility in 6 patients. Considering the questionnaire, the reconciled version determined change in 2 items. Pre-test evaluation showed difficulties in 3 patients, but the questionnaire did not change. Test evaluation showed no problems.

CONCLUSION

The translation of BCTOS into Portuguese will help us to evaluate the quality of life in BCT patients evaluating treatment-related sequelae and may be useful for oncoplastic surgery evaluation.

Comprehensive Validation Study of Quality-of-Life Questionnaire Using Objective Clinical Measures: Breast Cancer Treatment Outcome Scale (BCTOS), Brazilian Portuguese Version

INTRODUCTION

When evaluating a quality-of-life questionnaire (QLQ), many validation studies do not correlate quality-of-life scores with objective measurements of complications associated with treatment.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We performed a cross-sectional observational study with 300 patients submitted to breast-conserving therapy. The patients answered the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QLQs C-30 and BR23, as well as the Brazilian Portuguese version of the Breast Cancer Treatment Outcome Scale (BCTOS) questionnaire. Retest, internal consistency, factorial analysis, convergent/divergent analysis, and Rasch evaluation were performed. All patients underwent physical evaluations to assess lymphedema, handgrip strength, shoulder range of motion, breast cosmesis, and breast pain, and these groups were compared on the basis of BCTOS scores. Receiver operating characteristic curve determined the predictive value of BCTOS scores associated with clinical practice.

RESULTS

The internal consistencies of the BCTOS domains ranged from 0.785 to 0.895. Factor analysis grouped according to the original questionnaire. Convergent validation showed differences in the sexual functioning and sexual enjoyment domains of the EORTC BR23. Analysis of known groups found that in most domains, the scores were higher in patients with lymphedema, strength deficit, shoulder range-of-motion alteration, poor breast cosmesis, breast pain, and axillary lymphadenectomy. Using a cutoff of 1.26, lymphedema was associated with the edema domain; using a cutoff of 1.33, Late Effects Normal Tissue Task Force/Subjective, Objective, Management, Analytic pain was associated with the pain domain; and using a cutoff of 2.37, the cosmetic domain was associated with subjective cosmesis.

CONCLUSION

The association of objective measurements in a validation study of quality of life qualified the study and allowed us to develop better parameters for comparisons of results of breast-conserving therapy between populations.

The value of 3D images in the aesthetic evaluation of breast cancer conservative treatment. Results from a prospective multicentric clinical trial

PURPOSE

BCCT.core (Breast Cancer Conservative Treatment. cosmetic results) is a software created for the objective evaluation of aesthetic result of breast cancer conservative treatment using a single patient frontal photography. The lack of volume information has been one criticism, as the use of 3D information might improve accuracy in aesthetic evaluation. In this study, we have evaluated the added value of 3D information to two methods of aesthetic evaluation: a panel of experts; and an augmented version of the computational model - BCCT.core3d.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Within the scope of EU Seventh Framework Programme Project PICTURE, 2D and 3D images from 106 patients from three clinical centres were evaluated by a panel of 17 experts and the BCCT.core. Agreement between all methods was calculated using the kappa (K) and weighted kappa (wK) statistics.

RESULTS

Subjective agreement between 2D and 3D individual evaluation was fair to moderate. The agreement between the expert classification and the BCCT.core software with both 2D and 3D features was also fair to moderate.

CONCLUSIONS

The inclusion of 3D images did not add significant information to the aesthetic evaluation either by the panel or the software. Evaluation of aesthetic outcome can be performed using of the BCCT.core software, with a single frontal image.

Cosmetic outcome as rated by patients, doctors, nurses and BCCT.core software assessed over 5 years in a subset of patients in the TARGIT-A Trial

Background

The purpose of this research was to assess agreement between four rating systems of cosmetic outcome measured in a subset of patients with early breast cancer participating in the randomised TARGIT-A trial. TARGIT-A compared risk-adapted single-dose intra-operative radiotherapy (TARGIT-IORT) to whole breast external beam radiotherapy (EBRT).

Methods

Patients, their Radiation Oncologist and Research Nurse completed a subjective cosmetic assessment questionnaire before radiotherapy and annually thereafter for five years. Objective data previously calculated by the validated BCCT.core software which utilizes digital photographs to score symmetry, colour and scar was also used. Agreement was assessed by the Kappa statistic and longitudinal changes were assessed by generalized estimating equations.

Results

Overall, an Excellent-Good (EG) cosmetic result was scored more often than a Fair-Poor (FP) result for both treatment groups across all time points, with patients who received TARGIT-IORT scoring EG more often than those who received EBRT however this was statistically significant at Year 5 only. There was modest agreement between the four rating systems with the highest Kappa score being moderate agreement which was between nurse and doctor scores at Year 1 with Kappa = 0.46 (p < 0.001), 95% CI (0.24, 0.68).

Conclusion

Despite similar overall findings between treatment groups and rating systems, the inter-rater agreement was only modest. This suggests that the four rating systems utilized may not necessarily be used interchangeably and it is arguable that for an outcome such as cosmetic appearance, the patient’s point of view is the most important.

Trial Registration

TARGIT-A ISRCTN34086741, Registered 21 July 2004, retrospectively registered.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s13014-018-0998-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Long-term cosmesis following a novel schedule of accelerated partial breast radiation in selected early stage breast cancer: result of a prospective clinical trial

PURPOSE

There is controversy regarding the cosmetic outcome after accelerated partial breast radiation (APBR). We report the cosmetic outcome from a single-arm prospective clinical trial of APBR delivered using intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) in elderly patients with stage I breast cancer (BC), using a novel fractionation schedule.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Forty-two patients aged ≥65, with Stage I BC who underwent breast-conserving surgery were enrolled in a phase I/II study evaluating a 2-week course of APBR. Thirty eligible patients received 40 Gy in 4 Gy daily fractions. Cosmetic outcome was assessed subjectively by physician/patient and objectively by using a computer program (BCCT.core) before APBR, during, and after completion of the treatment.

RESULTS

The median age was 72 years, the median tumor size was 0.8 cm, and the median follow-up was 50.5 months. The 5-year locoregional control in this cohort was 97% and overall survival 87%. At the last follow-up, patients and physicians rated cosmesis as 'excellent' or 'good' in 100% and 91 %, respectively. The BCCT.core program scored the cosmesis as 'excellent' or 'good' in 87% of the patients at baseline and 81% at the last follow-up. The median V50 (20 Gy) of the whole breast volume (WBV) was 37.2%, with the median WBV V100 (40 Gy) of 10.9%.

CONCLUSION

An excellent rate of tumor control was observed in this prospective trial. By using multiple assessment techniques, we are showing acceptable cosmesis, supporting the use of IMRT planned APBR with daily schedule in elderly patients with early stage BC.

Quantitative Assessment of Breast Cosmetic Outcome After Whole-Breast Irradiation

PURPOSE

To measure, by quantitative analysis of digital photographs, breast cosmetic outcome within the setting of a randomized trial of conventionally fractionated (CF) and hypofractionated (HF) whole-breast irradiation (WBI), to identify how quantitative cosmesis metrics were associated with patient- and physician-reported cosmesis and whether they differed by treatment arm.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

From 2011 to 2014, 287 women aged ≥40 with ductal carcinoma in situ or early invasive breast cancer were randomized to HF-WBI (42.56 Gy/16 fractions [fx] + 10-12.5 Gy/4-5 fx boost) or CF-WBI (50 Gy/25 fx + 10-14 Gy/5-7 fx). At 1 year after treatment we collected digital photographs, patient-reported cosmesis using the Breast Cancer Treatment and Outcomes Scale, and physician-reported cosmesis using the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group scale. Six quantitative measures of breast symmetry, labeled M1-M6, were calculated from anteroposterior digital photographs. For each measure, values closer to 1 imply greater symmetry, and values closer to 0 imply greater asymmetry. Associations between M1-M6 and patient- and physician-reported cosmesis and treatment arm were evaluated using the Kruskal-Wallis test.

RESULTS

Among 245 evaluable patients, patient-reported cosmesis was strongly associated with M1 (vertical symmetry measure) (P<.01). Physician-reported cosmesis was similarly correlated with M1 (P<.01) and also with M2 (vertical symmetry, P=.01) and M4 (horizontal symmetry, P=.03). At 1 year after treatment, HF-WBI resulted in better values of M2 (P=.02) and M3 (P<.01) than CF-WBI; treatment arm was not significantly associated with M1, M4, M5, or M6 (P≥.12).

CONCLUSIONS

Quantitative assessment of breast photographs reveals similar to improved cosmetic outcome with HF-WBI compared with CF-WBI 1 year after treatment. Assessing cosmetic outcome using these measures could be useful for future comparative effectiveness studies and outcome reporting.

Comparison of Aesthetic Outcomes Between Vertical and Horizontal Flap Insets in Breast Reconstruction with the TRAM or DIEP Flaps

BACKGROUND

Tissue transfer, such as use of the transverse rectus abdominis myocutaneous (TRAM) or deep inferior epigastric artery perforator (DIEP) free flaps, is considered a standard method. However, outcomes may vary among inset methods. Here we compared the aesthetic outcomes of breast reconstructions using vertical and horizontal flap inset methods.

METHODS

We, respectively, reviewed 274 patients who underwent unilateral post-mastectomy breast reconstruction using TRAM or DIEP free flaps between April 2006 and December 2013. Photographs (frontal and bilateral oblique views) obtained 6 months post-operatively were evaluated. Symmetry scores and regional volume discrepancy scores were compared between the vertical and horizontal inset groups. Symmetry scores were adjusted for 11 potential confounding factors on multivariate regression analysis.

RESULTS

The vertical inset method was associated with higher total symmetry scores, projection, and ptotic naturalness scores. On multivariate regression analysis, the inset method was an independent predictor of outcomes. Regional volume discrepancy score analysis showed a greater tendency for more symmetrical volumes in the upper, medial, and lateral poles with the vertical inset.

CONCLUSION

The flap inset method is one of the key determinants of aesthetic breast reconstruction outcomes. The vertical inset method was associated with superior aesthetic outcomes and enabled balanced distribution of flap volume to the four poles of the breast.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE III

This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266 .

Single dose IOERT versus whole breast irradiation : Cosmetic results in breast-conserving therapy

BACKGROUND

Scarce data are available about the cosmetic result of single dose intraoperative electron radiotherapy (IOERT) in breast-conserving radiotherapy.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

We included 71 breast cancer patients. Breast-conserving surgery and sentinel node procedure had started almost 3 years earlier. Subsequently, 26 patients were treated with IOERT and 45 patients received postoperative whole breast irradiation (WBI). For both groups we determined seven dimensionless asymmetry features. We compared the subjectively and the objectively derived cosmetic scores with each other.

RESULTS

For four asymmetry features we noted significantly smaller differences for patients treated with IOERT when compared to those treated with WBI: relative breast contour difference, relative breast area difference and relative breast overlap difference. After correcting for excision volume a significant difference was noticed also for relative lower breast contour. For the IOERT group the cosmetic scores "excellent or good" as determined by each patient and one physician were 88 and 96 %, respectively. When the overall cosmetic scores for patients treated with IOERT and WBI were compared to those of the objectively derived scores, there was a fair level of agreement.

CONCLUSION

For patients treated with IOERT we noted less asymmetry and high rates of "good or excellent" subjectively derived cosmetic scores. The level of agreement between the subjectively and the objectively derived cosmetic scores was limited. Due to the small sample size and the design of the study no definitive conclusions can be drawn.

The breast cancer conservative treatment. Cosmetic results - BCCT.core - Software for objective assessment of esthetic outcome in breast cancer conservative treatment: A narrative review

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Cosmetic outcome of breast cancer conservative treatment (BCCT) remains without a standard evaluation method. Subjective methods, in spite of their low reproducibility, continue to be the most frequently used. Objective methods, although more reproducible, seem unable to translate all the subtleties involved in cosmetic outcome. The breast cancer conservative treatment cosmetic results (BCCT.core) software was developed in 2007 to try to overcome these pitfalls. The software is a semi-automatic objective tool that evaluates asymmetry, color differences and scar visibility using patient's digital pictures. The purpose of this work is to review the use of the BCCT.core software since its availability in 2007 and to put forward future developments.

METHODS

All the online requests for BCCT.core use were registered from June 2007 to December 2014. For each request the department, city and country as well as user intention (clinical use/research or both) were questioned. A literature search was performed in Medline, Google Scholar and ISI Web of Knowledge for all publications using and citing "BCCT.core".

RESULTS

During this period 102 centers have requested the software essentially for clinical use. The BCCT.core software was used in 19 full published papers and in 29 conference abstracts.

CONCLUSIONS

The BCCT.core is a user friendly semi-automatic method for the objective evaluation of BCCT. The number of online requests and publications have been steadily increasing turning this computer program into the most frequently used tool for the objective cosmetic evaluation of BCCT.

Objective Measurement of Cosmetic Outcomes of Breast Conserving Therapy Using BCCT.core

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study is to evaluate objective cosmetic outcomes and factors related to breast-conserving therapy (BCT) using the BCCT.core software.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Fifty-one patients who received BCT with informed consent were evaluated using the BCCT.core software. Patients were divided into two groups based on the BCCT score: excellent or good (n=42) vs. fair or poor (n=9). Analysis of clinical factors was performed to determine factors affecting cosmetic outcomes.

RESULTS

The objective cosmetic outcome of BCT measured using the BCCT.core software was excellent in 10% of patients, good in 72%, and fair in 18%. None of the patients were classified as poor outcome. Tumor characteristics, systemic adjuvant therapy (chemotherapy and hormonal therapy), and radiation dose or energy of electron boost did not show correlation with the score measured by the BCCT.core program (p > 0.05). In univariate analysis, maximum dose within the breast (Dmax), width of tangential field, and excised tumor volume were smaller in patients with excellent or good by the BCCT.core compared to those with fair or poor (Dmax, 110.2 ± 1.5% vs. 111.6 ± 1.7%, p=0.019; width of tangential field, 8.0 ± 1.1 cm vs. 8.6 ± 0.7 cm, p=0.034; excised tumor volume, 64.0 ± 35.8 cm(3) vs. 95.3 ± 54.4 cm(3), p=0.067). In multivariate analysis, only Dmax was a significant factor for breast cosmetic outcome with a risk ratio of 1.697 (95% confidence interval, 1.006 to 2.863; p=0.047).

CONCLUSION

Objective measurement of cosmetic outcome of BCT using the BCCT.core software was feasible. The cosmetic outcome of BCT may be affected by the maximum dose within the breast.

Tumour-adapted Reduction Mammoplasty - a New (Old) Breast Conserving Strategy: Review

Today over 70 % of patients treated for primary breast carcinoma in certified breast centres are managed with breast conserving surgery. The classical semicircular incision directly above the tumour, though in many cases easily carried out and associated with good cosmetic results, does have limitations. Unsatisfactory aesthetic results often occur when tumour location is unfavourable or when there is unfavourable tumour size relative to breast size. Distortion of the nipple, changes to breast shape and retraction of skin overlying surgical defects can occur. Tumour-adapted reduction mammoplasty/mastopexy or the "modified B technique" offer excellent chances of combining the oncological demands of breast surgery with satisfactory symmetrical cosmetic results. This article reviews a traditional, old operative technique that has been re-embraced in various new forms.

Change of Patient-Reported Aesthetic Outcome Over Time and Identification of Factors Characterizing Poor Aesthetic Outcome After Breast-Conserving Therapy: Long-Term Results of a Prospective Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

We analyzed the change of aesthetic outcome (AO) over time and explored factors characterizing poor AO after breast-conserving surgery (BCS).

METHODS

This prospective single-center cohort study included 849 patients preoperatively planned for BCS between September 2007 and December 2011. Long-term follow-up was made once in 2013. AO was measured by the Aesthetic Status (AS) of the Breast Cancer Treatment Outcome Scale questionnaire. Clinical, surgical, and pathologic variables were evaluated to identify predictors of poor AO. We applied single factor variance analyses and univariable logistic regression analyses for outcome analysis.

RESULTS

The long-term follow-up rate in 2013 was 73 % (621 nonrecurrent with final BCS). A poor or fair AO was reported in 30 (4.8 %) and 98 (15.8 %) of these 621 patients, respectively. Single factor variance analysis showed a negative impact of higher specimen weight on AO (p < 0.001). Univariable logistic regression analysis revealed the following risk factors for poor AO: radial breast incision [odds ratio (OR) 1.97], periareolar incision (OR 1.85), fishmouth-shaped incision with resection of the nipple-areola complex (OR 8.12), impaired wound healing (OR 3.14), and seroma (OR 2.16). No patient rating her AO as fair or poor shortly after BCS improved in the long-term follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

The incidence of poor AO is relatively rare but increases in the long-term follow-up. Patients experiencing poor AO after BCS are likely to remain unsatisfied with the outcome over time. Factors predicting unfavorable AO can assist preoperative planning with regards to the choice between simple breast conserving techniques or more complex oncoplastic procedures.

Long-term objective esthetic outcome after breast-conserving therapy

The prediction of unfavorable long-term esthetic outcome (AO) is important for patient consultation. We aimed to analyze variables characterizing the improvement and impairment of AO over time after breast-conserving surgery. A subgroup of a prospective, monocenter cohort study was analyzed to evaluate the results of the BCCT.core software (Breast Cancer Conservative Treatment.cosmetic results) which was used to objectively assess the AO before (n = 356), shortly after (n = 294) and in median 3 years after surgery (n = 356). We analyzed potential influencing factors (such as body mass index, (y)pT-stage, weight of resected specimen, etc.) on the AO using logistic regression analyses (n = 256). Finally, we tried to characterize groups of patients with improving or impaired AO over time (n = 294). Predictors for an unfavorable AO were an axillary lymphadenectomy (OR = 4.05), a tumor in the 12 o'clock position (OR = 2.22), a tumor stage larger or equal to (y)pT2 stage (OR = 2.11), and a surgical specimen weight >75 g (OR = 2.71). Patients with lower specimen weight were more likely to improve in the long-term follow-up (p = 0.018), whereas patients with a higher (y)pT-stage tended to become impaired with time. Although overall AO decreased over time, nearly half of the patients with an unfavorable AO shortly after surgery improved in the long-term follow-up. Predictors of unfavorable AO can be used in patient consultation preoperatively to prepare them for the postsurgical period and/or to recommend surgical alternatives (e.g., more complex oncoplastic techniques). Knowledge of improvement and impairment may help patients and physicians in the postsurgical consultation setting.

Cosmetic evaluation methods adapted to asian patients after breast-conserving surgery and examination of the necessarily elements for cosmetic evaluation

Purpose

Although various strategies have been reported, there are no defined criteria for cosmetic evaluation methods after breast-conserving surgery (BCS). Since Asians tend to have smaller breasts, indistinct inframammary folds, and conspicuous scars, differences in the cosmetic results are expected. So we examined two subjective methods and one objective method to determine the differences, and elements necessary for a cosmetic evaluation after BCS.

Methods

Frontal photographs of 190 Japanese were evaluated using the Harris scale (Harris) and the evaluation method proposed by the Japanese Breast Cancer Society Sawai group (Sawai group) as the subjective methods, and the Breast Cancer Conservation Treatment cosmetic results (BCCT.core) as the objective method, respectively. In order to examine the necessary elements for developing a new ideal method, 100 out of 190 were selected and assessed separately by six raters using both the Harris and modified Sawai group methods in the observer assessment. The correlation between the two methods was examined using the Spearman rank-correlation coefficient.

Results

The results of the BCCT.core and the other two methods were clearly different. In the observer assessment, the consensuses of the six raters were evaluated as follows: 27, 27, 26, and 20 cases were evaluated as "excellent," "good," "fair," and "poor," respectively. For the Spearman rank-correlation coefficient, values higher than 0.7 indicated a strong correlation, as seen by the values of 0.909 for the breast shape and 0.345 for the scar. The breast shape accounted for the most significant part of the evaluation, and the scar had very little correlation.

Conclusion

In this study, we recognized a clear difference between the subjective and objective evaluation methods, and identified the necessary elements for cosmetic evaluation. We would like to continue developing an ideal cosmetic evaluation that is similar to subjective one and is independent from raters.

The use of real-time digital video in the assessment of post-operative outcomes of breast reconstruction

INTRODUCTION

Outcome measures of breast reconstruction have used panel assessment of photographs. This provides limited information to the assessor as these images are static.. The aim of this study was to assess whether the use of digital video was a valid assessment tool and to compare its use against photography.

METHODS

35 patients post-reconstruction underwent photography, digital video capture and completed Breast Cancer Treatment Outcomes Scale (BCTOS) questionnaires. The photographs/video clips were randomised and shown to a 21 member panel. Opinions on aesthetic aspects of the reconstruction were assessed using the BCTOS and Harris scale. Panel inter-rater agreement and patient-panel correlation was assessed using Kendall's Coefficient of Concordance and Spearman's rank correlation tests respectively.

RESULTS

There was a "moderate" degree of inter-rater agreement amongst panel members in all categories. Greater agreement occurred using video footage to assess overall cosmesis (0.548 vs 0.507) and shape (0.505 vs 0.486). Video showed a greater degree of correlation with patient self-assessment scores in comparison to photography (0.311 vs 0.281).

CONCLUSION

Video footage coupled with panel assessment is a valid method of assessing post-operative outcomes of breast reconstruction and appears superior to still photographs in terms of inter-rater agreement and correlation with patient self-assessment.

Long-term results of breast conservation and immediate volume replacement with myocutaneous latissimus dorsi flap

Background

Published long-term outcomes of oncoplastic breast-conserving surgery are scarce and, specifically, aesthetic outcomes assessed with an objective method have not previously been published.

Methods

A cohort of 41 patients treated with a quadrantectomny and immediate reconstruction using a myocutaneous latissimus dorsi flap were analyzed and their aesthetic outcomes were evaluated objectively by BCCT.core software.

Results

At the end of a 58-month follow-up from the date of initial diagnosis, one patient (2.4%) developed an ipsilateral recurrence, six patients developed distant metastases and three patients died (7.3%) without ipsilateral recurrence, one of them presenting hepatic metastases at the time of the initial diagnosis. We were able to evaluate aesthetic results in 23 patients, 3 assessed as excellent, 12 good and 8 fair.

Conclusion

This oncoplastic volume replacement technique obtained a good local control and satisfactory and stable aesthetic results which have maintained unchanged after a long period of time.

Do reexcisions impair aesthetic outcome in breast conservation surgery? Exploratory analysis of a prospective cohort study

PURPOSE

Reexcision is a clinically relevant aspect of oncological breast conservation surgery. The influence of reexcision on aesthetic outcome is described differently in the literature. Our aim was to analyze this question in a well-defined cohort with standardized study instruments.

METHODS

A total of 439 patients from a prospectively followed cohort were included in this analysis. Aesthetic results were assessed by the Breast Cancer Treatment Outcome Scale (BCTOS) aesthetic status. Dates of assessments were shortly after surgical interventions and before surgery. Group comparison was performed between patients with reexcisions (80 cases; 18%) and patients without reexcision (359 cases; 82%). We considered variables of differing distribution between the two groups that could hypothetically influence BCTOS aesthetic status in a nonparametric analysis of covariance (ANCOVA).

RESULTS

The aesthetic status of patients with reexcisions was found to be significantly worse than for patients with a single breast conservation surgery (P < 0.0001) when tested by a nonparametric ANCOVA model. Because patients with reexcisions had more noninvasive tumors (25% vs. 8%, P = 0.0001) and tumors were larger in patients with reexcision (P = 0.01), we included these variables as possible covariates in the multivariate model. The model was adjusted for the BCTOS aesthetic status before and shortly after the first surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings suggest that reexcision in breast conservation surgery impairs aesthetic outcome, at least when assessed shortly after surgery.