Improvement of survival in Korean breast cancer patients over a 14-year period: A large-scale single-center study

Surveillance for Distant Metastasis in Breast Cancer Patients Who Underwent Contemporary Management: A Report from the Korean Breast Cancer Society Survivor Research Group

BACKGROUND

Current guidelines recommend against the use of routine imaging tests to detect distant metastasis in asymptomatic breast cancer patients. However, recent advancements in effective therapeutics and diagnostic accuracy have raised the need to reassess the clinical efficacy of intensive metastasis surveillance. We report the results of a multicenter retrospective study to investigate the association between intensive imaging studies and survival outcomes.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed the data of 4130 patients who underwent surgery from 11 hospitals in Korea between January 2010 and December 2011. Patients were divided into two groups on the basis of the intensity of metastasis imaging studies during their disease-free period. The types and intervals of the imaging studies were based on each physician's decisions.

RESULTS

High-intensive screening showed a shorter distant metastasis-free survival [p < 0.001, hazard ratio (HR) 1.62; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.29-2.04], especially for patients in whom bone or lung was the first site of metastasis. With a median follow-up period of 110.0 months, the 5-year breast cancer-specific survival (BCSS) rate was 96.5%. The high-intensity screening group showed significantly poorer BCSS compared with the low-intensity screening group (p < 0.001, HR 3.13; 95% CI 2.32-4.21). However, both multivariable analysis and propensity score matching analysis showed no significant association between the screening intensity and BCSS.

CONCLUSIONS

Frequent imaging studies to detect distant metastasis were associated with earlier detection of distant metastasis, especially for lung and bone metastasis. However, intensive surveillance showed no apparent association with BCSS despite the use of currently available treatments.

Comparison of long-term oncological outcomes after central lumpectomy versus nipple-sparing breast-conserving surgery for centrally located breast cancer: a propensity score-matched study

PURPOSE

To compare the oncological safety of nipple-sparing breast-conserving surgery (BCS) versus central lumpectomy for centrally located breast cancer (CLBC).

METHODS

Patients who underwent BCS for CLBC at Asan Medical Center from 2007 to 2018 were reviewed retrospectively. The oncological outcomes of nipple-sparing BCS (NS-BCS) and central lumpectomy were compared using univariate and multivariate Cox regression analyses and compared again after 1:1 propensity score matching (PSM).

RESULTS

The study included 306 patients who underwent NS-BCS and 106 patients who underwent central lumpectomy (median follow-up: 111 months). On multivariate analysis, central lumpectomy had a lower risk of local recurrence compared to NS-BCS, albeit without statistical significance (HR 0.14, 95% CI 0.02-1.24; p = 0.077). There was no significant difference in the risk of death (HR 0.14, 95% CI 0.01-1.68, p = 0.12). After PSM, each group had 106 patients. The 5-year and 10-year local recurrence-free survival rates were 94.2% and 92.9% for NS-BCS, and 99.1% and 99.1% for central lumpectomy, respectively (p = 0.031). There were no significant differences in overall survival, regional recurrence-free survival, or distant recurrence-free survival. Fifteen patients (4.9%) who underwent NS-BCS had ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence (IBTR), of which 40% were in the nipple-areolar complex and previous surgical sites. One patient (0.9%) who underwent central lumpectomy experienced an IBTR in a different quadrant.

CONCLUSION

NS-BCS showed more local recurrence than central lumpectomy. When deciding whether to spare the nipple during BCS in CLBC, patients should be sufficiently informed about the risk of IBTR.

Sociodemographic disparities associated with advanced stages and distant metastatic breast cancers at diagnosis in Indonesia: a cross-sectional study

Background

The global health burden of breast cancer is increasing with 5-year survival rates being much shorter in low-income and middle-income countries. Sociodemographic and clinical disparities in early cancer detection affect long-term outcome.

Methods

The authors compared social, demographic, and pathological characteristics associated with metastatic and late stages of breast cancer diagnosis using data collected from a special registry developed by Perhimpunan Bedah Onkologi Indonesia (PERABOI) in 2015.

Results

Of 4959 patients recruited in this study, 995 women (20.1%) were diagnosed with metastatic breast cancer. Lower education status and living in rural areas were significantly associated with Stage IV at diagnosis [odds ratio (OR)=1.256, 95% CI=1.093-1.445, P=0.001; and OR=1.197, 95% CI=1.042-1.377, P=0.012; respectively). Main complaints other than lump (ulceration, breast pain, and discharge) and occupation as a housewife were also associated with the presentation of metastatic diseases (OR=2.598, 95% CI=2.538-3.448, P<0.001 and OR=1.264, 95% CI=1.056-1.567, P=0.030, respectively). Having lower education and living outside Java and Bali islands were associated with the diagnosis of late-stage breast cancers (OR=1.908, 95% CI=1.629-2.232, P<0.001 and OR=3.039, 95% CI=2.238-4.126, P<0.001; respectively). A higher proportion of breast cancer patients were relatively younger with bigger tumour size, positive axillary nodal involvement, and more frequent Human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 overexpression.

Conclusion

The authors identified sociodemographic disparities in the metastatic and late-stage diagnosis of breast cancers among Indonesian women. The subsequent action is required to reduce disparities faced by women with lower social and educational levels for early diagnosis and better healthcare access.