Comparison of Local Recurrence After Simple and Skin-Sparing Mastectomy Performed in Patients with Ductal Carcinoma In Situ

Comparison of locoregional recurrence risk among nipple-sparing mastectomy, skin-sparing mastectomy, and simple mastectomy in patients with ductal carcinoma in situ: a single-center study

BACKGROUND

In invasive breast cancer, there are no differences among the mid- and long-term oncological safety results of nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM), skin-sparing mastectomy (SSM), and simple mastectomy (SM). There are several reports comparing NSM and SSM with SM in the context of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS); however, the eligibility criteria vary among institutions, and there are no reports that compare all three surgical methods simultaneously within the same institution. This study aimed to compare the local recurrence and survival rates of the three techniques (NSM, SSM, and SM) in Japanese patients undergoing mastectomy for DCIS.

METHODS

Patients undergoing NSM, SSM, or SM at our institution between 2006 and 2015 were identified, and their outcomes were analyzed.

RESULTS

The mean follow-up period was 80.4 months (standard deviation [SD]: 37.1 months). NSM was performed in 152 cases, SSM in 49, and SM in 44. Five of 245 patients developed local recurrences. Four of these patients had invasive cancer. The primary endpoints of 5-year cumulative local recurrence were 2.4% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.0-5.0) for NSM, 2.2% (95% CI: 0.0-6.3) for SSM, and 0% (95% CI: 0.0-0.0) for SM. There were no significant differences among the 5-year local recurrence rates.

CONCLUSIONS

In this single-center, retrospective study, the oncological safety of SSM and NSM for DCIS was comparable to that of conventional SM.

Tools to Guide Radiation Oncologists in the Management of DCIS

Similar to invasive breast cancer, ductal carcinoma in situ is also going through a phase of changes not only from a technical but also a conceptual standpoint. From prescribing radiotherapy to everyone to personalized approaches, including radiotherapy omission, there is still a lack of a comprehensive framework to guide radiation oncologists in decision making. Many pieces of the puzzle are finding their place as high-quality data mature and are disseminated, but very often, the interpretation of risk factors and the perception of risk remain very highly subjective. Sharing the therapeutic choice with patients requires effective communication for an understanding of risks and benefits, facilitating an informed decision that does not increase anxiety and concerns about prognosis. The purpose of this narrative review is to summarize the current state of knowledge to highlight the tools available to radiation oncologists for managing DCIS, with an outlook on future developments.

Long-term follow-up of complex oncoplastic breast-conserving surgery, standard breast conservation and skin-sparing mastectomy in DCIS - a register-based study

BACKGROUND

Few studies evaluate oncological safety in complex oncoplastic breast-conserving surgery(C-OBCS) for DCIS. It still needs to be defined whether it is equivalent to standard breast conservation(S-BCS) or an alternative to skin-sparing mastectomy(SSM). This study compares local recurrence rates(LR), disease-free survival(DFS) and overall survival (OS) between the three surgical techniques.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective register-based study on LR, DFS and OS of patients operated with S-BCS(n=1388), C-OBCS (n=106) or skin-sparing mastectomy (n=218) for DCIS diagnosed 2007-2020. Data was extracted from the Norwegian Breast Cancer Registry.

RESULTS

In the S-BCS, C-OBCS and SSM groups, median age was 60, 58 and 51 years (p<0.001), median size 15, 25, and 40 mm (p<0.001) and median follow-up 55, 48 and 76 months. At ten years, the overall LR was 12.7%, 14.3% for S-BCS, 11.2% for C-OBCS and 6.8% for SSM. Overall DFS at ten years was 82.3%, 80.5% for S-BCS, 82.4% for C-OBCS and 90.4% for SSM. At ten years, the OS was 93.8%, 93.0% in S-BCS, 93.3% in C-OBCS and 96.6% in the SSM group. Weighted Kaplan Meier plots showed that SSM had a significantly higher DFS than S-BCS (p=0.003) and C-OBCS (p=0.029). DFS in C-OBCS versus S-BCS and the difference in OS was not significant (p=0.264).

CONCLUSION

SSM had a significantly higher DFS than S-BCS and C-OBCS. The difference in DFS between S-BCS and C-OBCS, and OS between the three groups was not statistically significant. Our study suggests that C-OBCS is a safe alternative to S-BCS and SSM.

Breast cancer local recurrence after mastectomy with immediate latissimus dorsi myocutaneous flap reconstruction: A case report

Even though most local recurrences after autologous breast reconstruction occur in superficial tissue, they also occur in deep tissue in the reconstructed breast. A 49-year-old woman presented with a bloody discharge from the right nipple. Ultrasonography revealed a hypoechoic area in her right breast, which was diagnosed as ductal carcinoma in situ on histopathology. We performed nipple-sparing mastectomy and immediate reconstruction of the breast with a latissimus dorsi myocutaneous flap. At 6 years postoperatively, the patient presented with a palpable mass. Ultrasonography revealed a solid mass lesion subcutaneously in the right breast. Computed tomography revealed multiple enhanced solid mass lesions in the subcutaneous and deep tissues of the reconstructed breast. The mass in the deep tissue of the reconstructed breast was diagnosed as an invasive micropapillary carcinoma by biopsy. For local recurrence, we performed wide excision of the reconstructed breast. The masses in the subcutaneous and deep tissues of the reconstructed breast were diagnosed as invasive micropapillary carcinoma. Superficial recurrence was first detected by physical examination, and deep recurrence was later detected with further imaging. We present a case of local recurrences that occurred in the deep tissue, in addition to superficial tissue of the reconstructed breast.

Ductal Carcinoma In Situ (DCIS) and Microinvasive DCIS: Role of Surgery in Early Diagnosis of Breast Cancer

Advances in treatments, screening, and awareness have led to continually decreasing breast cancer-related mortality rates in the past decades. This achievement is coupled with early breast cancer diagnosis. Ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) and microinvasive breast cancer have increasingly been diagnosed in the context of mammographic screening. Clinical management of DCIS is heterogenous, and the clinical significance of microinvasion in DCIS remains elusive, although microinvasive DCIS (DCIS-Mi) is distinct from "pure" DCIS. Upfront surgery has a fundamental role in the overall treatment of these breast diseases. The growing number of screen-detected DCIS diagnoses with clinicopathological features of low risk for local recurrence (LR) allows more conservative surgical options, followed by personalised adjuvant radiotherapy plans. Furthermore, studies are underway to evaluate the validity of surgery omission in selected low-risk categories. Nevertheless, the management, the priority of axillary surgical staging, and the prognosis of DCIS-Mi remain the subject of debate, demonstrating how the paucity of data still necessitates adequate studies to provide conclusive guidelines. The current scientific scenario for DCIS and DCIS-Mi surgical approach consists of highly controversial and diversified sources, which this narrative review will delineate and clarify.

Skin-sparing mastectomy for the treatment of breast cancer

BACKGROUND

Skin-sparing mastectomy (SSM) is a surgical technique that aims to maximize skin preservation, facilitate breast reconstruction, and improve cosmetic outcomes. Despite its use in clinical practice, the benefits and harms related to SSM are not well established.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness and safety of skin-sparing mastectomy for the treatment of breast cancer.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched Cochrane Breast Cancer's Specialized Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, LILACS, the World Health Organization's International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (WHO ICTRP), and ClinicalTrials.gov on 9 August 2019.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs), quasi-randomized or non-randomized studies (cohort and case-control) comparing SSM to conventional mastectomy for treating ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) or invasive breast cancer.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. The primary outcome was overall survival. Secondary outcomes were local recurrence free-survival, adverse events (including overall complications, breast reconstruction loss, skin necrosis, infection and hemorrhage), cosmetic results, and quality of life. We performed a descriptive analysis and meta-analysis of the data.

MAIN RESULTS

We found no RCTs or quasi-RCTs. We included two prospective cohort studies and twelve retrospective cohort studies. These studies included 12,211 participants involving 12,283 surgeries (3183 SSM and 9100 conventional mastectomies). It was not possible to perform a meta-analysis for overall survival and local recurrence free-survival due to clinical heterogeneity across studies and a lack of data to calculate hazard ratios (HR).  Based on one study, the evidence suggests that SSM may not reduce overall survival for participants with DCIS tumors (HR 0.41, 95% CI 0.17 to 1.02; P = 0.06; 399 participants; very low-certainty evidence) or for participants with invasive carcinoma (HR 0.81, 95% CI 0.48 to 1.38; P = 0.44; 907 participants; very low-certainty evidence). For local recurrence-free survival, meta-analysis was not possible, due to high risk of bias in nine of the ten studies that measured this outcome. Informal visual examination of effect sizes from nine studies suggested the size of the HR may be similar between groups. Based on one study that adjusted for confounders, SSM may not reduce local recurrence-free survival (HR 0.82, 95% CI 0.47 to 1.42; P = 0.48; 5690 participants; very low-certainty evidence).  The effect of SSM on overall complications is unclear (RR 1.55, 95% CI 0.97 to 2.46; P = 0.07, I2 = 88%; 4 studies, 677 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Skin-sparing mastectomy may not reduce the risk of breast reconstruction loss (RR 1.79, 95% CI 0.31 to 10.35; P = 0.52; 3 studies, 475 participants; very low-certainty evidence), skin necrosis (RR 1.15, 95% CI 0.62 to 2.12; P = 0.22, I2 = 33%; 4 studies, 677 participants; very low-certainty evidence), local infection (RR 2.04, 95% CI 0.03 to 142.71; P = 0.74, I2 = 88%; 2 studies, 371 participants; very low-certainty evidence), nor hemorrhage (RR 1.23, 95% CI 0.47 to 3.27; P = 0.67, I2 = 0%; 4 studies, 677 participants; very low-certainty evidence). We downgraded the certainty of the evidence due to the risk of bias, imprecision, and inconsistency among the studies. There were no data available on the following outcomes: systemic surgical complications, local complications, explantation of implant/expander, hematoma, seroma, rehospitalization, skin necrosis with revisional surgery, and capsular contracture of the implant. It was not possible to perform a meta-analysis for cosmetic and quality of life outcomes due to a lack of data. One study performed an evaluation of aesthetic outcome after SSM: 77.7% of participants with immediate breast reconstruction had an overall aesthetic result of excellent or good versus 87% of participants with delayed breast reconstruction.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Based on very low-certainty evidence from observational studies, it was not possible to draw definitive conclusions on the effectiveness and safety of SSM for breast cancer treatment. The decision for this technique of breast surgery for treatment of DCIS or invasive breast cancer must be individualized and shared between the physician and the patient while considering the potential risks and benefits of available surgical options.

Oncological outcomes after simple and skin-sparing mastectomy of ductal carcinoma in situ: A register-based cohort study of 576 Norwegian women

BACKGROUND

For Ductal Carcinoma in Situ (DCIS), recurrence is shown to be higher after skin-sparing (SSM) versus simple (SM) mastectomy. This study aimed to compare the two groups recurrence rates, disease-free survival (DFS), and overall (OS) survival.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective register-based cohort study of women operated with SSM (n = 338) or SM (n = 238) for DCIS between 2007 and 2017. Data from the Norwegian Breast Cancer Registry was used to estimate recurrences rates, DFS and OS.

RESULTS

Mean age was 51 and 61 years in the SSM and SM groups, respectively. Median follow-up time was 77 months for SSM (range: 21-152 months) vs 84 months for SM (range: 7-171 months). After five years of follow-up, the overall recurrence rate (OR) was 2.1%; 3.9% for SSM and 0.9% for SM. After ten years, the rates were 3.0%, 6.2% for SSM and still 0.9% for SM. DFS was after ten years 92.2%; 91.8% for SSM, and 92.4% for SM. OS was 95.0%; 97.5% for SSM and 93.3% for SM at ten years. For SSM, involved margins represented a significant risk for recurrence.

CONCLUSION

The recurrence rate was higher in the SSM versus the SM group. Whether the difference is due to the operating procedures or underlying risk factors remains unknown. When stratifying for the difference in age, there was no statistical difference in DFS or OS. Involved margins in the SSM group were associated with an increased risk of recurrence.

Oncological Safety of Skin-Sparing Mastectomy and Immediate Breast Reconstruction in Extensive Ductal Carcinoma In Situ

INTRODUCTION

Skin-sparing mastectomy (SSM) with immediate breast reconstruction is the ideal treatment for interested and suitable patients with extensive ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS). There is no guideline to indicate on how large DCIS the procedure can be performed safely. The primary target of this study was to define the oncological safety of SSM in extensive pure DCIS. The secondary target was to find predictive factors for DCIS upstaging to invasive disease.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A total of 71 consecutive patients with extensive pure DCIS and undergoing SSM with immediate latissimus dorsi (LD) breast reconstruction were retrospectively evaluated.

RESULTS

The median size of DCIS lesion in preoperative imaging was 60 mm, the median weight of mastectomy specimen was 350 g, and the median resection margin (RM) was 2.0 mm. A total of 20 patients (28%) had an RM less than 0.5 mm and nine patients (13%) had ink positive margins. Six patients having positive RM underwent reoperation. A total of 29 patients (41%) presented invasive cancer foci in final histopathological assessment and nine patients (13%) had an axillary metastasis. Adjuvant therapy was given to 23 patients presenting invasive cancer. There were no local recurrences or distant metastases (0%, 95% confidence interval 0-0.051) during the mean follow-up of 71 mo. None of the factors evaluated predicted upstaging to invasive disease.

CONCLUSIONS

SSM with immediate breast reconstruction in patients with extensive DCIS is oncologically safe even when the margins are close or positive. Additional invasive foci and solitary axillary lymph node metastases are frequent but do not worsen the outcome.

A Delphi study and International Consensus Recommendations: The use of bolus in the setting of postmastectomy radiation therapy for early breast cancer

Bolus serves as a tissue equivalent material that shifts the 95-100% isodose line towards the skin and subcutaneous tissue. The need for bolus for all breast cancer patients planned for postmastectomy radiation therapy (PMRT) has been questioned. The work was initiated by the faculty of the European SocieTy for Radiotherapy & Oncology (ESTRO) breast cancer courses and represents a multidisciplinary international breast cancer expert collaboration to optimize PMRT. Due to the lack of randomised trials evaluating the benefits of bolus, we designed a stepwise project to evaluate the existing evidence about the use of bolus in the setting of PMRT to achieve an international consensus for the indications of bolus in PMRT, based on the Delphi method.

Locoregional recurrence in skin-sparing and nipple-sparing mastectomies

BACKGROUND

Skin- and nipple-sparing mastectomies (SSMs/NSMs) present as an alternative for patients requiring mastectomy, with better aesthetic results. We aimed to evaluate the locoregional recurrence (LRR) rate and its predictive factors.

METHODS

Retrospective analysis of all consecutive cases of SSM and NSM for a primary diagnosis of in situ or invasive breast cancer, at a national cancer center, from January 1st, 2013 to May 31st, 2019. The primary outcome was LRR. Secondary outcomes included LRR predictive factors, overall survival (OS), and disease-free survival (DFS).

RESULTS

There were included 461 patients; 402 (87%) with invasive carcinoma. The median age was 46 (interquartile range [IQR]: 40-53) years. Ninety (20%) patients had locally advanced disease. LRR rate was 3.0%, with a median follow-up time of 39 (IQR: 21-59) months. The median time to recurrence was 22 (IQR: 10-45) months. Factors independently associated with LRR were high histological grade, negative estrogen receptor status, and high Ki67 (p < 0.05). OS was 94.8% and DFS was 92.8%. LRR was associated with decreased OS.

DISCUSSION

SSM and NSM present as a safe approach to breast cancer requiring mastectomy, including selected patients with a locally advanced tumor. The associated LRR rate is 3.0%, with risk factors being high grade, negative estrogen receptor status, and high Ki67.

Immediate breast reconstruction using latissimus dorsi muscular flap: A retrospective study of Chinese patients with breast cancer

Reconstruction of breast defects of patients who underwent mastectomy can be challenging. This study was designed to review a series of 43 breast cancer patients who underwent immediate breast reconstruction (IBR) using the latissimus dorsi myocutaneous flap with/without implants. The demographic characteristics, clinical application feasibility, and the satisfaction rates of the patients were retrospectively collected and evaluated.A total of 43 breast cancer patients who underwent mastectomy between August 2015 and February 2020 were included in the retrospective study. The included patients were subjected to IBR using latissimus dorsi muscular flap (LDMF) with/without implants. The clinical application feasibility and the satisfaction rates of the patients were evaluated.Among these patients, 35 patients underwent nipple-sparing mastectomy and 8 patients underwent skin-sparing mastectomy. Twenty-nine patients underwent IBR using LDMF with implants, and 14 patients underwent IBR using LDMF without implants. Among these patients, 2 patients had partial LDMF necrosis and atrophy, and showed significant shrink of the reconstructed breast. One patient developed seromas, and seromas were improved by active dressing change and sucking out the fluid via the skin using a syringe. Two patients had local skin flap necrosis on the chest, 1 patient had preserved areola and local necrosis of the nipple, and this was healed after dressing change. Based on the Harris method, 27, 9, 5, and 2 cases were evaluated as "excellent," "good," "fair," and "poor," respectively.In the present study, the reconstructed breast has natural shape, good symmetry, and hidden postoperative scars. The aesthetic effect is relatively good, and the use of LDMF may represent an acceptable and valid option for IBR. The success of this procedure depends on the design of the incision, the skill and proficiency of the operation, as well as the correct treatment after surgery.

Superficial margins in skin sparing and nipple sparing mastectomies for DCIS: A margin of potential concern

Skin-sparing and nipple-sparing mastectomies with immediate reconstruction for breast cancer are increasing. The superficial fascia is considered a natural border and the superficial margin may not be evaluated. We emphasize the need for reporting of the superficial margin status in these procedures to obtain valid information on its association with local recurrence risks.

Do surgical margins matter after mastectomy? A systematic review

BACKGROUND

No consensus exists regarding adequacy of margins after mastectomy. To determine if pathological margin proximity is associated with local (LR) or distant recurrence after mastectomy for early invasive breast cancer or ductal carcinoma in situ.

METHODS

A systematic review of literature published from 1980 to 2019 and meta-analysis was conducted. Unpublished data were sought from authors (PROSPERO (CRD42019127541)). Thirty-four studies comprising 34,833 breast cancer patients were included in the quantitative synthesis. Eligible studies reported on patients undergoing curative mastectomy for cancer allowing estimation of outcomes in relation to margin status/width. The association between pathological margin status and local (LR) and distant recurrence was considered using random effects modelling. PRISMA guidelines were followed.

RESULTS

Positive margins were associated with increased LR on multivariable analyses (HR, 2·64, (95%CI 2·01-3·46)) and LR was higher regardless of the distance of tumour from the margin defined as positive. After skin-sparing mastectomy, positive margins were associated with increased LR (HR 3·40, (95%CI 1·9-6·2)). In the 4 studies reporting distant recurrence, patients with involved margins had a higher risk (HR 1·53, (95%CI 1·03-2·25)).

CONCLUSIONS

Failure to achieve clear margins after mastectomy may increase the risks of local and distant recurrence. Adequate margin clearance should be recommended to minimize recurrence after mastectomy in National and International Guidelines.

The 2018 assisi think tank meeting on breast cancer: International expert panel white paper

We report on the second Assisi Think Tank Meeting (ATTM) on breast cancer which was held under the auspices of the European Society for RadioTherapy & Oncology (ESTRO). In discussing in-depth current evidence and practice it was designed to identify grey areas in diverse forms of the disease. It aimed at addressing uncertainties and proposing future trials to improve patient care. Before the meeting, three key topics were selected: 1) primary systemic therapy, mastectomy, breast reconstruction and post-mastectomy radiation therapy, 2) therapeutic options in ductal carcinoma in situ, and 3) therapy de-escalation in early stage breast cancer. Clinical practice in these areas was investigated by means of an online questionnaire. The time lapse period between the survey and the meeting was used to review the literature and on-going clinical trials. At the ATTM both were discussed in depth and research protocols were proposed.

Postmastectomy radiation therapy in early breast cancer: Utility or futility?

Postmastectomy radiation therapy (PMRT) has been shown to reduce the risk of locoregional recurrence (LRR), in patients with locally advanced breast cancer who are considered of high-risk because of large tumors (>5 cm) or presence of axillary lymph-node involvement, as well as to reduce breast cancer mortality. However, controversy still remains with respect to indication of PMRT in case of early-stages invasive tumors. This review aims to analyze the impact that PMRT has on final results in women with breast tumors in different scenarios that would otherwise be considered as early breast cancer, such as extensive DCIS, tumors without axillary lymph-node involvement or with minimal microscopic nodal-involvement. The existence of risk factors including young age, premenopausal status, and presence of lymphovascular invasion (LVI), high grade or tumor size >2 cm has been associated with an increased risk of LRR in these patients at early-stages and advises to consider PMRT in selected cases.

Recurrence Outcomes After Nipple-Sparing Mastectomy and Immediate Breast Reconstruction in Patients with Pure Ductal Carcinoma In Situ

BACKGROUND

Nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM) has become increasingly prevalent for patients with ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) requiring mastectomy. However, few data regarding recurrence outcomes after NSM are available for this patient population. This study evaluated the locoregional recurrence (LRR) rate for patients with pure DCIS who underwent NSM followed by immediate breast reconstruction without adjuvant radiotherapy and investigated potential risk factors for LRR and/or nipple-areola complex recurrence (NR).

METHODS

A retrospective chart review was performed for 199 consecutive patients with pure DCIS who underwent NSM and immediate breast reconstruction between March 2003 and December 2015. Risk factors for LRR and NR were analyzed using univariate (Chi square test) and multivariate (Cox model) methods.

RESULTS

The median follow-up duration after surgery was 97 months (range, 39-186 months). At 10 years, the LRR rate was 4.5%, and the NR rate was 3%. The univariate analysis showed that high nuclear grade, negative receptor status, positive human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) status, and negative hormone receptor/positive HER2 subtype were associated with increased risk for NR. The multivariate analysis demonstrated that negative progesterone receptor status was an independent risk factor for LRR. However, margin status and tumor-to-nipple distance (TND) were not associated with increased risk for either LRR or NR.

CONCLUSIONS

The study findings suggest that NSM can be a feasible surgical option even for DCIS with a TND of 1 cm or less if the retroareolar resection margin is negative for malignancy. Determining the molecular subtype of DCIS might be helpful in identifying patients at high risk for recurrence.

A single-center study on total mastectomy versus skin-sparing mastectomy in case of pure ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast

INTRODUCTION

Ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) accounts for 15% of all breast cancers and generally, the prognosis is good if treated optimally. The standard treatment includes breast conservative surgery along with adjuvant radiotherapy. Skin-sparing mastectomy (SSM) preserves the breast skin envelope but its oncological safety poses a few concerns. Moreover, no DCIS-specific studies have compared the local recurrence (LR) rate following total mastectomy (TM) or SSM. We evaluated the LR rate in DCIS patients who underwent either TM or SSM.

METHODS

This is a retrospective study on women who underwent mastectomy with or without immediate breast reconstruction or secondary reconstruction for pure DCIS of the breast. All patients treated at Institut Bergonié by mastectomy for DCIS from January 1990 to December 2010 were included. LR and overall survival (OS) rates were estimated.

RESULTS

The study population included 399 patients who were categorized into two groups, 207 in the TM group and 192 in the SSM group. At 10 years of follow-up, the LR rate was 0.97% in the TM group and 1.04% in the SSM group (p = NS). The OS of the entire population was 94.7% [95% CI; 91.6-96.7], 92.8% [95% CI, 87.9-95.8] for the TM group and 96.8% [95% CI, 91.6-98.8] for the SSM group.

CONCLUSIONS

In our study, the LR rate following mastectomy is low, regardless of the surgical technique used, with an excellent OS at 10 years.

The Assisi Think Tank Meeting Survey of post-mastectomy radiation therapy in ductal carcinoma in situ: Suggestions for routine practice

BACKGROUND

Risk factors for local recurrence after mastectomy in ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) emerged as a grey area during the second "Assisi Think Tank Meeting" (ATTM) on Breast Cancer.

AIM

To review practice patterns of post-mastectomy radiation therapy (PMRT) in DCIS, identify risk factors for recurrence and select suitable candidates for PMRT.

METHODS

A questionnaire concerning DCIS management, focusing on PMRT, was distributed online via SurveyMonkey.

RESULTS

142 responses were received from 15 countries. The majority worked in academic institutions, had 5-20 years work-experience and irradiated <5 DCIS patients/year. PMRT was more given if: surgical margins <1 mm, high-grade, multicentricity, young age, tumour size >5 cm, skin- or nipple- sparing mastectomy. Moderate hypofractionation was the most common schedule, except after immediate breast reconstruction (57% conventional fractionation).

CONCLUSIONS

The present survey highlighted risk factors for PMRT administration, which should be further evaluated.

Current Therapeutic Approaches to DCIS

Treatment for ductal carcinoma in-situ (DCIS) has historically been extrapolated from studies of invasive breast cancer. Accepted local therapy approaches range from small local excisions, with or without radiation, to bilateral mastectomies. Systemic treatment with endocrine therapy is often recommended for hormone positive patients. With improvements in imaging, pathologic review, and treatment techniques in the modern era, combined with new information regarding tumor biology, the management of DCIS is rapidly evolving. A multidisciplinary approach to treatment is now more important than ever, with a shift towards de-escalating therapy to reduce treatment related toxicity. This review focuses on nuances of clinical management of DCIS in the modern era, highlighting key differences between DCIS as compared to invasive breast cancer. The American Cancer Society (ACS) currently recommends beginning screening with annual mammograms for women age 45, with the option to start at age 40. As treatment of DCIS has not been shown to impact survival, the USPSTF has more conservative screening recommendations of biennial mammograms from age 50-74. Unlike invasive breast cancer, DCIS is almost exclusively diagnosed by mammographic detection, and lymph node evaluation is not recommended. Pathologic review of biopsy specimens should follow the guidelines of the College of American Pathologists. Surgical management options include breast conservation, mastectomy, or possibly nipple sparing mastectomy, with upfront sentinel lymph node evaluation in the case of mastectomy. Radiation therapy is generally recommended as a component of breast conserving therapy for patients with DCIS, though in some low risk patients, there is trial data to suggest that adjuvant radiation may be omitted. Techniques for minimizing radiation toxicity should always be emphasized. Endocrine therapy is offered to women with hormone positive DCIS who have undergone lumpectomy for risk reduction, and has the benefit of decreasing incidence of events in both the ipsilateral and contralateral breast. More recent studies have explored use of targeted treatments such as trastuzumab in DCIS for HER2 overexpression. Future directions include tailoring therapy based on patient characteristics and tumor biology. With so many different options for treatment, it is also critical to engage in a discussion with the patient to arrive at a treatment decision that balances patient preferences for disease control versus treatment toxicity, financial toxicity, cosmesis, and quality of life.

Ductal carcinoma in situ current trends, controversies, and review of literature

Ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) is a non-obligate precursor, non-invasive malignancy confined within the basement membrane of the breast ductal system. There is a wide variation in the natural history of DCIS with an estimated incidence of progression to invasive ductal carcinoma being at least 13%-50% over a range of 10 or more years after initial diagnosis. Regardless of the treatment strategy, long-term survival is excellent. The controversy surrounding DCIS relates to preventing under-treatment, while also avoiding unnecessary treatments. In this article, we review the incidence, presentation, management options and surveillance of DCIS. Furthermore, we address several current controversies related to the management of DCIS, including margin status, sentinel node biopsy, hormonal therapy, the role of radiation in breast conservation surgery, and various risk stratification schemes.

Breast cancer recurrence after reconstruction: know thine enemy

Breast reconstruction proceeding cancer treatment carries risk, regardless of the type of surgery. From fat grafting, to flap placement, to implants, there is no guarantee that reconstruction will not stimulate breast cancer recurrence. Research in this field is clearly divided into two parts: scientific interventional studies and clinical retrospective evidence. The reconstructive procedure offers hypoxia, a wound microenvironment, bacterial load, adipose derived stem cells; agents shown experimentally to cause increased cancer cell activity. This is compelling scientific evidence which serves to bring uncertainty and fear to the reconstructive procedure. In the absence of clinical evidence, this laboratory literature landscape is now informing surgical choices. Curiously, clinical studies have not shown a clear link between breast cancer recurrence and reconstructive surgery. Where does that leave us? This review aims to analyze the science and the surgery, thereby understanding the oncological fear which accompanies breast cancer reconstruction.

Modern Approaches to the Surgical Management of Malignant Breast Disease: The Role of Breast Conservation, Complete Mastectomy, Skin- and Nipple-Sparing Mastectomy

The armamentarium of the modern breast surgeon includes the time-tested procedures of modified radical mastectomy and lumpectomy with sentinel lymph node biopsy with postoperative radiation, but has evolved to include several options that produce excellent oncologic endpoints and improved cosmesis. These options include skin- and nipple-sparing mastectomies with immediate reconstruction as well as oncoplastic procedures that allow larger excisions and better postoperative breast shape. This article provides an overview of these modern surgical approaches for breast cancer treatment.

Whither surgical quality assurance of breast cancer surgery (surgical margins and local recurrence) after paterson

PURPOSE

The Kennedy report into the actions of the disgraced Breast Surgeon, Paterson focussed on issues of informed consent for mastectomy, management of surgical margins and raised concerns about local recurrence rates and the increasing emphasis on cosmesis after mastectomy for breast cancer. This article assesses whether Kennedy's recommendations apply to the UK as a whole and how to address these issues. New GMC advice on consent and newer nonevidenced innovations in immediate reconstruction have altered the level of informed consent required. Patients deserve a better understanding of the issues of oncological versus cosmetic outcomes on which to base their decisions. Involvement of the whole multidisciplinary team including Oncologists is necessary in surgical planning. Failure to obtain clear microscopic margins at mastectomy leads to an increased local recurrence, yet has received little attention in the UK. Whereas, other countries have used surgical quality assurance audits to reduce local recurrence; local recurrence rates are not available and the extent of variation across the UK in margin involvement after surgery, its management and relationship to local recurrence needs auditing prospectively to reduce unnecessary morbidity. To reassure public, patients and the NHS management, an accreditation system with more rigour than NHSBSP QA and peer review is now required. Resource and efforts to support its introduction will be necessary from the Royal College of Surgeons and the Association of Breast Surgeons. New innovations require careful evaluation before their backdoor introduction to the NHS. Private Hospitals need to have the same standards imposed.