Physician Knowledge of Breast Cancer Recurrence and Contralateral Breast Cancer Risk is Associated with Increased Recommendations for Contralateral Prophylactic Mastectomy: a Survey of Physicians at NAPBC-Accredited Centers

Decision-making experiences of breast cancer patients related to contralateral prophylactic mastectomy-a systematic meta-synthesis of qualitative studies

PURPOSE

Currently, the choice of contralateral prophylactic mastectomy (CPM) for breast cancer patients is variable and controversial. Breast cancer patients must make complex and rapid decisions based on the benefits and risks of CPM. Although there are many qualitative studies on the decision-making experiences of breast cancer patients, there is a lack of synthesis of these qualitative studies. Our study goals were to conduct a meta-synthesis of qualitative studies on the decision-making experiences, real-life experiences, psychological feelings and needs of breast cancer patients in CPM decision-making, with the aim of providing information to support the development of CPM practice decisions.

METHODS

Using a meta-ethnographic approach, qualitative research studies were analysed and synthesised using the method of "reciprocal translational analysis", and themes related to the decision-making experiences of breast cancer patients with respect to CPM were identified.

RESULTS

Five hundred ninety-three documents were retrieved. This meta-synthesis ultimately collected 8 studies. Four themes were identified: (1) decision motivations for survival and body intention; (2) negative and vacillating decision emotions; (3) diverse but weak decision support; (4) short-term satisfaction but long-term unknown and differentiated decision effects.

CONCLUSIONS

We found that although patients had different feelings about the effects of CPM in detail, most patients were satisfied with the short-term effects of CPM, but the long-term effects of CPM were still unknown. The study protocol was registered with PROSPERO (International prospective register of systematic reviews) in May 2022 (Registration number: CRD42022334260).

EBCC-13 manifesto: Balancing pros and cons for contralateral prophylactic mastectomy

After a diagnosis of unilateral breast cancer, increasing numbers of patients are requesting contralateral prophylactic mastectomy (CPM), the surgical removal of the healthy breast after diagnosis of unilateral breast cancer. It is important for the community of breast cancer specialists to provide meaningful guidance to women considering CPM. This manifesto discusses the issues and challenges of CPM and provides recommendations to improve oncological, surgical, physical and psychological outcomes for women presenting with unilateral breast cancer: (1) Communicate best available risks in manageable timeframes to prioritise actions; better risk stratification and implementation of risk-assessment tools combining family history, genetic and genomic information, and treatment and prognosis of the first breast cancer are required; (2) Reserve CPM for specific situations; in women not at high risk of contralateral breast cancer (CBC), ipsilateral breast-conserving surgery is the recommended option; (3) Encourage patients at low or intermediate risk of CBC to delay decisions on CPM until treatment for the primary cancer is complete, to focus on treating the existing disease first; (4) Provide patients with personalised information about the risk:benefit balance of CPM in manageable timeframes; (5) Ensure patients have an informed understanding of the competing risks for CBC and that there is a realistic plan for the patient; (6) Ensure patients understand the short- and long-term physical effects of CPM; (7) In patients considering CPM, offer psychological and surgical counselling before surgery; anxiety alone is not an indication for CPM; (8) Eliminate inequality between countries in reimbursement strategies; CPM should be reimbursed if it is considered a reasonable option resulting from multidisciplinary tumour board assessment; (9) Treat breast cancer patients at specialist breast units providing the entire patient-centred pathway.

The underused potential of breast conserving therapy after neoadjuvant system treatment - Causes and solutions

Breast conserving therapy (BCT), consisting of breast conserving surgery and subsequent radiotherapy, is an equivalent option to mastectomy for women with early breast cancer. Although BCT after neoadjuvant systemic treatment (NAST) has been routinely recommend by international guidelines since many years, the rate of BCT worldwide varies largely and its potential is still underused. While the rate of BCT in western countries has increased over the past decades to currently about 70%, the rate of BCT is as low as 10% in other countries. In this review, we will evaluate the underused potential of breast conservation after NAST, identify causes, and discuss possible solutions. We identified clinical and non-clinical causes for the underuse of BCT after NAST including uncertainties within the community regarding oncologic outcomes, the correct tumor localization after NAST, the management of multifocal and multicentric tumors, margin assessment, disparities of socio-economic aspects on a patient and national level, and psychological biases affecting the shared decision-making process between patients and clinicians. Possible solutions to mitigate the underuse of BCT after NAST include interdisciplinary teams that keep the whole patient pathway in mind, optimized treatment counseling and shared decision-making, and targeted financial support to alleviate disparities.

Trends of Contralateral prophylactic mastectomy at the time of ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence

BACKGROUND

Contralateral prophylactic mastectomy rates have substantially increased. The study aimed to examine contralateral prophylactic mastectomy (CPM) at the time of ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence (IBTR) and evaluate factors contributing to CPM decision making process.

METHOD

Patients who developed IBTR after BCS from 2011 to 2019 were reviewed. Patient and tumor characteristics, genetic testing and reconstruction details were analyzed.

RESULTS

Ninety-six patients had IBTR after BCS and were treated with mastectomy, with 30% electing for a CPM. Patients who underwent CPM were younger, had higher BMI and less comorbidities. A genetic mutation was identified in 19% of patients who underwent testing at the time of IBTR. Tumor characteristics and performing surgeon were not predictors for CPM, however, patients were more likely to undergo CPM if they received reconstruction of the ipsilateral breast with IBTR.

CONCLUSION

This study shows that age, BMI, genetic testing and breast reconstruction are factors contributing to CPM decision at the time of IBTR.

Bilateral Mastectomy in Women With Unilateral Breast Cancer: A Review

Importance

Rates of bilateral mastectomy continue to increase in average-risk women with unilateral in situ and invasive breast cancer. Contralateral prophylactic mastectomy rates increased from 5% to 12% of all operations for breast cancer in the US from 2004 to 2012. Among women having mastectomy, rates of contralateral prophylactic mastectomy have increased from less than 2% in 1998 to 30% in 2012.

Observations

The increased use of breast magnetic resonance imaging and genetic testing has marginally increased the number of candidates for bilateral mastectomy. Most bilateral mastectomies are performed on women who are at no special risk for contralateral cancer. The true risk of contralateral breast cancer is not associated with the decision for contralateral prophylactic mastectomy; rather, the clinical factors associated with the probability of distant recurrence are associated with bilateral mastectomy. Several changes in society and health care delivery appear to act concurrently and synergistically. First, the anxiety engendered by a fear of cancer recurrence is focused on the contralateral cancer because this is most easily conceptualized and provides a ready target that can be acted upon. Second, the modern woman with breast cancer is supported by the surgeon and the social community of breast cancer survivors. Surgeons want to respect patient autonomy, despite guidelines discouraging bilateral mastectomy, and most women have their expenses covered by a third-party payer. Satisfaction with the results is high, but the association with improved psychosocial well-being remains to be fully understood.

Conclusions and Relevance

Reducing the use of medically unnecessary contralateral prophylactic mastectomy in women with nonhereditary, unilateral breast cancer requires a social change that addresses patient-, physician-, cultural-, and systems-level enabling factors. Such a transformation begins with educating clinicians and patients. The concerns of women who want preventive contralateral mastectomy must be explored, and women need to be informed of the anticipated benefits (or lack thereof) and risks. Areas requiring further study are considered.

Contralateral prophylactic mastectomy: A narrative review of the evidence and acceptability

The uptake of contralateral prophylactic mastectomy (CPM) has increased steadily over the last twenty years in women of all age groups and breast cancer stages. Since contralateral breast cancer is relatively rare and the breast cancer guidelines only recommend CPM in a small subset of patients with breast cancer, the drivers of this trend are unknown. This review aims to evaluate the evidence for and acceptability of CPM, data on patient rationales for choosing CPM, and some of the factors that might impact patient preferences. Based on the evidence, future recommendations will be provided. First, data on contralateral breast cancer risk and CPM rates and trends are addressed. After that, the evidence is structured around four main patient rationales for CPM formulated as questions that patients might ask their surgeon: Will CPM reduce mortality risk? Will CPM reduce the risk of contralateral breast cancer? Can I avoid future screening with CPM? Will I have better breast symmetry after CPM? Also, three different guidelines regarding CPM will be reviewed. Studies indicate a large gap between patient preferences for radical risk reduction with CPM and the current approaches recommended by important guidelines. We suggest a strategy including shared decision-making to enhance surgeons’ communication with patients about contralateral breast cancer and treatment options, to empower patients in order to optimize the use of CPM incorporating accurate risk assessment and individual patient preferences.

•

Contralateral prophylactic mastectomy rates have increased over the last 20 years.

•

Patients may want CPM to reduce risk of contralateral breast cancer and mortality.

•

Patients do not always have the tools available to make a well-informed decision.

•

Patient and surgeon’s shared decision-making could optimize the use of CPM.

Breast cancer in the young patient: review of therapy and treatment considerations

In 2019, 13,050 young women were diagnosed with pre-invasive or invasive breast cancer in the USA and 1070 women died of their disease. Young women are underrepresented in clinical trials, and treatment for these women less than 40 years old is extrapolated from studies of older women. Young women face unique challenges such as decreased fertility, psychosocial issues and an extended survivorship period that impacts quality of life. Herein, we review breast cancer treatment options in the young patient (women <40 years old). We explore the biologic differences between breast cancer in young versus older patients, review surgical and systemic therapy options and highlight special considerations that are unique in these young patients.

Contralateral prophylactic mastectomy in breast cancer: what to discuss with patients

Introduction: The contralateral prophylactic mastectomy (CPM) rate in the U.S. has been steadily increasing. This is of particular concern because many women who undergo this procedure are candidates for breast-conserving surgery.Areas covered: CPM's medical benefit is related to the risk of contralateral cancer development and whether CPM provides a survival benefit. Contralateral cancer rates have decreased, and CPM does not provide a survival benefit. Other potential benefits of the procedure may be improved quality of life; these data are reviewed. Research efforts have been undertaken to better understand the decision-making process of patients who consider, and ultimately undergo, this procedure.Expert opinion: Decisional traits, personal values, the desire for peace of mind, and the desire to obtain breast symmetry are important factors that drive a woman's decision to undergo CPM. Additionally, many patients lack the knowledge on how different types of breast surgery impact outcomes. To improve the shared decision-making process, a stepwise approach to address possible misconceptions, and clarify the real risks/benefits of this procedure should be utilized. A clear recommendation (for/against) should be made for every patient with newly diagnosed breast cancer who considers CPM. Communication tools to assist patients and surgeons in this process are sorely needed.