Comparative effectiveness study of breast-conserving surgery and mastectomy in the general population: A NCDB analysis. Oncotarget. 2015;6:40127-40140. [PMID: 26517676 PMCID: PMC4741884 DOI: 10.18632/oncotarget.5394]

Breast-conserving surgery versus modified radical mastectomy in T1-2N3M0 stage breast cancer: a propensity score matching analysis

PURPOSE

Breast-conserving surgery (BCS) plus radiotherapy and mastectomy exhibit highly comparable prognoses for early-stage breast cancer; however, the safety of BCS for T1-2N3M0 breast cancer remains unclear. This study compared long-term survival for BCS versus (vs.) modified radical mastectomy (MRM) among patients with T1-2N3M0 breast cancer.

METHODS

Data of patients with T1-2N3M0 breast cancer were extracted from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database. Eligible patients were divided into 2 groups, BCS and MRM; Pearson's chi-squared test was used to estimate differences in clinicopathological features. Propensity score matching (PSM) was used to balance baseline characteristics. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to investigate the effects of surgical methods and other factors on breast cancer-specific survival (BCSS) and overall survival (OS).

RESULTS

In total, 2124 patients were included; after PSM, 596 patients were allocated to each group. BCS exhibited the same 5-year BCSS (77.9% vs. 77.7%; P = 0.814) and OS (76.1% vs. 74.6%; P = 0.862) as MRM in the matched cohorts. Multivariate survival analysis revealed that BCS had the same BCSS and OS as MRM (hazard ratios [HR] 0.899 [95% confidence intervals (CI) 0.697-1.160], P = 0.413 and HR 0.858 [95% CI 0.675-1.089], P = 0.208, respectively); this was also seen in most subgroups. BCS demonstrated better BCSS (HR 0.558 [95% CI 0.335-0.929]; P = 0.025) and OS (HR 0.605 [95% CI 0.377-0.972]; P = 0.038) than MRM in those with the triple-negative subtype.

CONCLUSIONS

BCS has the same long-term survival as MRM in T1-2N3M0 breast cancer and may be a better choice for triple-negative breast cancer.

"Peace of Mind" After Mastectomy: A Scoping Review

BACKGROUND

Many women eligible for breast conservation therapy (BCT) elect unilateral mastectomy (UM) with or without contralateral prophylactic mastectomy (CPM) and cite a desire for "peace of mind." This study aimed to characterize how peace of mind is defined and measured and how it relates to surgical choice.

METHODS

Nine databases were searched for relevant articles through 8 October 2023, and data were extracted from articles meeting the inclusion criteria.

RESULTS

The inclusion criteria were met by 20 studies. Most were prospective cohort studies (65%, 13/20). In the majority of the studies (72%, 13/18), Non-Hispanic white/Caucasian women comprised 80 % or more of the study's sample. Almost half of the studies used the phrase "peace of mind" in their publication (45%, 9/20), and few directly defined the construct (15%, 3/20). Instead, words representing an absence of peace of mind were common, specifically, "anxiety" (85%, 17/20), "fear" (75%, 15/20), and "concern" (75%, 15/20). Most of the studies (90%, 18/20) measured peace of mind indirectly using questionnaires validated for anxiety, fear, worry, distress, or concern, which were administered at multiple postoperative time points (55%, 11/20). Most of the studies (95%, 18/19) reported at least one statistically significant result showing no difference in peace of mind between BCT, UM, and/or CPM at their latest time of assessment.

CONCLUSION

Peace of mind is largely framed around concepts that suggest its absence, namely, anxiety, fear, and concern. Existing literature suggests that peace of mind does not differ among average-risk women undergoing BCT, UM, or CPM. Shared surgical decisions should emphasize at least comparable emotional and/or psychosocial well-being between CPM and breast conservation.

The Challenges of Lobular Carcinomas from a Surgeon's Point of View

Invasive lobular breast cancer (ILC) presents unique challenges and considerations in the realm of surgical management. Characterized by its distinct histological features, including the loss of E-cadherin expression and dys-cohesive growth pattern, ILC often poses diagnostic and therapeutic dilemmas for clinicians. This abstract explores the surgical landscape of ILC, focusing on its epidemiology, clinical presentation, diagnostic modalities, and surgical interventions. Emphasizing the importance of individualized treatment strategies, this narrative delves into the nuances of surgical decision-making, including the role of breast-conserving surgery versus mastectomy, axillary staging, and the significance of margin status. Additionally, advancements in surgical techniques, such as oncoplastic approaches and sentinel lymph node biopsy, are examined in the context of optimizing oncologic outcomes and preserving cosmesis. Through a comprehensive review of current literature and clinical guidelines, this overview aims to provide a nuanced understanding of the surgical considerations inherent to the management of invasive lobular breast cancer.

Overall survival after mastectomy versus breast-conserving surgery with adjuvant radiotherapy for early-stage breast cancer: meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Breast-conserving surgery with adjuvant radiotherapy and mastectomy are currently offered as equivalent surgical options for early-stage breast cancer based on RCTs from the 1970s and 1980s. However, the treatment of breast cancer has evolved and recent observational studies suggest a survival advantage for breast-conserving surgery with adjuvant radiotherapy. A systematic review and meta-analysis was undertaken to summarize the contemporary evidence regarding survival after breast-conserving surgery with adjuvant radiotherapy versus mastectomy for women with early-stage breast cancer.

METHODS

A systematic search of MEDLINE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), and Embase that identified studies published between 1 January 2000 and 18 December 2023 comparing overall survival after breast-conserving surgery with adjuvant radiotherapy versus mastectomy for patients with unilateral stage 1-3 breast cancer was undertaken. The main exclusion criteria were studies evaluating neoadjuvant chemotherapy, rare breast cancer subtypes, and specific breast cancer populations. The ROBINS-I tool was used to assess risk of bias, with the overall certainty of evidence assessed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) tool. Studies without critical risk of bias were included in a quantitative meta-analysis.

RESULTS

From 11 750 abstracts, 108 eligible articles were identified, with one article including two studies; 29 studies were excluded from the meta-analysis due to an overall critical risk of bias, 42 studies were excluded due to overlapping study populations, and three studies were excluded due to reporting incompatible results. A total of 35 observational studies reported survival outcomes for 909 077 patients (362 390 patients undergoing mastectomy and 546 687 patients undergoing breast-conserving surgery with adjuvant radiotherapy). The pooled HR was 0.72 (95% c.i. 0.68 to 0.75, P < 0.001), demonstrating improved overall survival for patients undergoing breast-conserving surgery with adjuvant radiotherapy. The overall certainty of the evidence was very low.

CONCLUSION

This meta-analysis provides evidence suggesting a survival advantage for women undergoing breast-conserving surgery with adjuvant radiotherapy for early-stage breast cancer compared with mastectomy. Although these results should be interpreted with caution, they should be shared with patients to support informed surgical decision-making.

Should the Breast Cancer Staging System be Revised?

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to determine whether breast cancer patients at stage T2N0 with tumor size ≥4 cm and <4 cm.

METHOD

Patients with T2N0 stage breast cancer diagnosed between 2010 and 2019 were analyzed in 2 groups as <4 cm (T2a) and ≥4 cm (T2b) in the study using the SEER 17 Research Plus database. The patients' clinicopathological characteristics and oncological outcomes were included. Group comparisons of prognostic factors, overall survival (OS), and cancer-specific survival (CSS) were made.

RESULTS

In this study, which involved 70971 patients, the T2a group had higher 5-year OS rate (87.2 ± .2 vs 80.8 ± .5%) and 5-year CSS rate (93.7 ± .1% vs 89.4 ± .4%) than the T2b group (P < .001). Univariate analysis revealed that the overall risk of death was 1.5 times higher in T2b than T2a (HR: 1.533 [95% CI: 1.450-1.622], P < .001), whereas multivariate analysis demonstrated the risk was 1.4 times higher (HR: 1.384 [95% CI: 1.307-1.466], P < .001). The risk of cancer-specific death was 1.7 times higher in univariate analysis (HR: 1.691 [95% CI: 1.561-1.832], P < .001) and 1.4 times higher in multivariate analysis (HR: 1.420 [95% CI: 1.309-1.541], P < .001).

CONCLUSION

Overall survival and BCSS rates in stage T2b breast cancer patients are significantly lower than in T2a patients. Tumor size ≥4 cm in breast cancer is a negative predictor of prognosis.

Unlocking the Power of the Homing Phenomenon: Why Breast Conserving Surgery Outshines Mastectomy in Overall Survival

Breast cancer stands as the most frequently diagnosed malignancy in women, holding a prominent position among the leading causes of cancer-related fatalities on a global scale. Despite significant advances in treatment modalities, approximately 20% of patients experience relapses after the first 5 years of postdiagnosis surveillance. While initial investigations from the 1970s indicated comparable survival rates between breast-conserving surgery (BCS) coupled with radiation therapy and mastectomy, recent research suggests that, within the context of modern systemic and radiation therapy, BCS followed by radiation may offer an improved overall survival benefit. Nevertheless, extended follow-up studies have unveiled a notable increase in the risk of locoregional recurrence associated with breast conserving therapy in contrast to mastectomy. This article introduces a novel hypothesis rooted in the biological phenomenon of homing to elucidate this intriguing clinical observation. We postulate that a breast homing mechanism of reactivated circulating and disseminated tumor cells mediated by chemotaxis involving at least the CXCR4-SDF-1 axis may provide a biological rationale for this clinical phenomenon.

Clinical Breast Cancer Registry of IR. Iran (CBCR-IR): Study Protocol and First Results

BACKGROUND

Breast cancer (BC), as a significant global health problem, is the most common cancer in women. Despite the importance of clinical cancer registries in improving the quality of cancer care and cancer research, there are few reports on them from low- and middle-income countries. We established a multicenter clinical breast cancer registry in Iran (CBCR-IR) to collect data on BC cases, the pattern of care, and the quality-of-care indicators in different hospitals across the country.

METHODS

We established a clinical cancer registry in 12 provinces of Iran. We defined the organizational structure, developed minimal data sets and data dictionaries, verified data sources and registration processes, and developed the necessary registry software. During this registry, we studied the clinical characteristics and outcomes of patients with cancer who were admitted from 2014 onwards.

RESULTS

We registered 13086 BC cases (7874 eligible cases) between 1.1.2014 and 1.1.2022. Core needle biopsy from the tumor (61.25%) and diagnostic mammography (68.78%) were the two most commonly used diagnostic methods. Stage distribution was 2.03% carcinoma in situ, 12% stage I, 44.65% stage II, 21.32% stage III, and 4.61% stage IV; stage information was missing in 1532 patients (19.46%). Surgery (95.01%) and chemotherapy (79.65%) were the most common treatments for all patients.

CONCLUSION

The information provided by this registry can be used to evaluate and improve the quality of care for BC patients. It will be scaled up to the national level as an important resource for measuring quality of care and conducting clinical cancer research in Iran.

A propensity score-matched analysis of breast-conserving surgery plus whole-breast irradiation versus mastectomy in breast cancer

PURPOSE

Recent observations regarding long-term outcomes among patients with early-stage breast cancer (BC) who underwent breast-conserving surgery (BCS) plus whole-breast irradiation (WBI) or mastectomy are from a small number of registry-based studies. Therefore, these findings may overestimate differences in survival between the two groups, compared with randomized controlled trials conducted in the 1980s. The aim of this study is to compare long-term outcomes and clinicopathologic characteristics between patients treated with BCS + WBI or mastectomy for BC.

METHODS

We performed a propensity score-matched analysis in a cohort of 9710 patients aged < 70 years who underwent BCS + WBI or mastectomy without external radiotherapy for a first primary BC (pT1-2, N0-3a) at the European Institute of Oncology between 2000 and 2008. Patients were matched by propensity score.

RESULTS

Median follow-up was 8.4 years (interquartile range 6.5-10.2). The cumulative incidence of axillary lymph node recurrence at 10 years was lower in the BCS + WBI group [2.4% (95% CI, 1.7-3.3%)] than in the mastectomy group [4.4% (95% CI, 3.5-5.5%)] (P = .0005), and the cumulative incidence of contralateral BC was higher in the BCS + WBI group [3.9% (95% CI, 2.8-5.1%)] than in the mastectomy group [2.5% (95% CI, 1.7-3.4%)] (P = .01). Among the 366 patients with HER2 subtype BC, BCS + WBI was associated with a fivefold higher risk [hazard ratio 4.97 (95% CI, 2.28-10.8)] of  ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence (IBTR), compared with mastectomy (P < .0001); however, among patients with other BC subtypes, the rates of IBTR were not statistically significantly different.

CONCLUSION

Patients with HER2 subtype BC (T1-2, N0-3) who underwent BCS + WBI had a statistically significantly higher risk of IBTR than patients who underwent mastectomy. Survival was not statistically significantly different between the groups.

Is Survival with Conservative Breast Therapy Becoming Superior to That with Modified Radical Mastectomy Alone for the Treatment of Early Breast Cancer in This Era?

This study aims to assess survival rates in early breast cancer patients treated by conservative breast therapy (CBT), including radiotherapy, compared with those treated by modified radical mastectomy (MRM) alone. The South Egypt Cancer Institute and the Assiut University Oncology Department patients' records, from January 2010 to December 2017, were searched for T1-2N0-1M0 breast cancer patients treated by CBT or MRM. Patients who did not receive chemotherapy were excluded to reduce the treatment variation. The 5-year locoregional disease-free survival (LRDFS) was 97.3% for the CBT patients was and 98.0% for the MRM patients (P = .675). The 5-year distant disease-free survival (DDFS) was 93.6% for CBS and 85.7% for MRM (P = 0.033). The DFS was 91.9% for the BCT patients and 85.3% for the MRM patients (P = 0.045). The 5-year OS was 98.2% for the CBT patients and 94.3% for the MRM patients, (P = 0.02). By Cox regression analysis, the CBT resulted in significantly better OS, (P = 0.018) and the HR = 0.350, 95% CI 0.146-0.837. The adjusted OS, estimated by the propensity score-based weights, remained superior in CBT than in MRM patients (P < 0.001). CBT resulted in better DDFS, DFS, and OS than MRM. Future randomized trials are needed to confirm these findings and determine the cause.

Superior survival for breast-conserving therapy over mastectomy in patients with breast cancer: A population-based SEER database analysis across 30 years

Introduction

It has been believed that breast-conserving therapy (lumpectomy plus adjuvant radiation, Lum + RT) and mastectomy without radiation (Mast + NoRT) have equivalent survival outcomes. However, there is a need to re-evaluate the role of lumpectomy plus adjuvant radiation due to changed breast cancer management over time. This study aimed to conduct a population-based study that compare long-term oncologic survival outcomes after Lum + RT vs Mast + NoRT.

Methods

The Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results database was used to identify female breast cancer patients with a primary localized breast cancer diagnosis from 1988 to 2018. The standardized incidence/mortality ratio (SIR/SMR) for breast cancer recurrence (BCR) and breast cancer-specific death (BSD) was estimated by the SEER*Stat program. Cumulative incidences of BCR and BSD were assessed using Gray's method. We evaluated the effects of Lum + RT vs. Mast + NoRT on breast cancer recurrence-free survival (BRFS) and breast cancer-specific survival (BCSS). Fine-Gray competing risk model analyses, propensity score-adjusted Kaplan-Meier analyses and Cox proportional hazards model analyses were applied.

Results

A total of 205,788 women were included in the study. Patients who underwent Lum + RT had higher SIR of BCR (4.14 [95% confidence interval, CI: 3.94-4.34] vs. 1.11 [95% CI: 1.07-1.14]) and lower SMR (9.89 [95% CI: 9.71-10.08] vs. 17.07 [95% CI: 16.82-17.33]) than patients who underwent Mast + NoRT. Lum + RT was associated with higher competing risk of BCR (adjusted hazard ratio [HR]: 1.996, 95% CI: 1.925-2.069, p < 0.001) and lower competing risk of BSD when compared to Mast + RT (adjusted HR: 0.584, 95% CI: 0.572-0.597, p < 0.001). Multivariate Cox regression analysis revealed similar results (adjusted HR after PSW for BRFS: 1.792, 95% CI 1.716-1.871, p < 0.001; adjusted HR after PSW for BCSS: 0.706, 95% CI 0.688-0.725, p < 0.001). These findings persisted in the sensitivity and subgroup analyses.

Discussion

The present study further confirmed superior long-term survival with lumpectomy plus adjuvant radiation over mastectomy independent of patient characteristics including age, race, time period, historic subtype, tumor size, historic grade and stage, indicating that this benefit may result from the treatment itself.

Survival After Breast-Conserving Surgery Compared with that After Mastectomy in Breast Cancer Patients Receiving Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy

BACKGROUND

Breast-conserving surgery (BCS) plus radiotherapy (BCS + RT) has been shown to improve survival compared with mastectomy in patients with early breast cancer; however, whether this superiority is maintained in breast cancer patients receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NCT) is unclear. We evaluated and compared the survival outcomes after BCS + RT and mastectomy in Korean women with breast cancer treated with NCT.

METHODS

We evaluated 1641 patients who received NCT before surgery (BCS or mastectomy). We performed propensity score matching to minimize potential bias due to factors other than the surgical method and compared the 5-year, disease-free survival (DFS), distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS), and overall survival (OS) rates before and after exact matching.

RESULTS

Among the 1641 patients, 839 (51.1%) underwent BCS + RT and 802 (48.9%) underwent mastectomy. Patients who underwent mastectomy had larger tumors and more frequently had positive nodes. For BCS+RT and mastectomy, the unadjusted 5-year DFS, 5-year DMFS, and 5-year OS rates were 87.0% and 73.1%, 89.5% and 77.0%, and 91.8% and 81.0%, respectively (all p < 0.05 = 0.000). After PSM, 5-year DFS, 5-year DMFS, and 5-year OS rates for BCS + RT and mastectomy were 87.6% and 69.1%, 89.7% and 76.0%, and 89.1% and 75.7%, respectively (all p < 0.05). In both unadjusted and adjusted analyses accounting for various confounding factors, BCS + RT was significantly associated with improved DFS (p < 0.05), DMFS (p < 0.05), and OS (p < 0.05) rates compared with mastectomy.

CONCLUSIONS

BCS + RT does not impair DFS and OS in patients treated with NCT. Tumor biology and treatment response are significant prognostic indicators. Our results suggest that BCS + RT may be preferred in most breast cancer patients when both BCS and mastectomy are suitable.

Breast-Conserving Surgery or Mastectomy?: Impact on Survival

The early randomized controlled trials revealed no differences in survival between breast-conserving surgery (BCS) and mastectomy. However, breast cancer treatment has undergone changes, and the results of recent population-based registry studies suggest superior long-term survival after BCS. To explore the current evidence, a systematic review and meta-ana lysis of population-based observational studies from 2010 and onward was conducted.

Methods

A literature search was conducted in the PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases to identify relevant literature. Keywords included "mastectomy," "breast conserving surgery," and "survival." The identified studies were narratively reviewed and effect sizes (hazard ratios [HRs]) for overall (OS) and breast cancer-specific survival (BCSS) were combined with random-effects models.

Results

A total of 30 reports were included in the review, and results from 25 studies were included in the meta-analyses. Compared with mastectomy, BCS was associated with better OS (HR = 1.34 [1.20-1.51]; N = 1,311,600) and BCSS (HR = 1.38 [1.29-1.47]; N = 494,267). Selected subgroups of patients, based on lymph node status, age (<50 years/≥50 years), and radiation therapy after mastectomy (±), all showed better overall survival after BCS. The number (range 4-12) and type of prognostic variables adjusted for in the survival analyses of the studies did not statistically significantly moderate the differences in survival between BCS and mastectomy.

Conclusions

The combined findings from large population-based studies indicate that BCS is associated with survival benefit compared with mastectomy, suggesting that BCS be the recommended treatment of early breast cancer (T1-2N0-1M0) if a radical lumpectomy can be performed.

A Statewide Approach to Reducing Re-excision Rates for Women With Breast-conserving Surgery

OBJECTIVE

Test the effectiveness of benchmarked performance reports based on existing discharge data paired with a statewide intervention to implement evidence-based strategies on breast re-excision rates.

BACKGROUND

Breast-conserving surgery (BCS) is a common breast cancer surgery performed in a range of hospital settings. Studies have demonstrated variations in post-BCS re-excision rates, identifying it as a high-value improvement target.

METHODS

Wisconsin Hospital Association discharge data (2017-2019) were used to compare 60-day re-excision rates following BCS for breast cancer. The analysis estimated the difference in the average change preintervention to postintervention between Surgical Collaborative of Wisconsin (SCW) and nonparticipating hospitals using a logistic mixed-effects model with repeated measures, adjusting for age, payer, and hospital volume, including hospitals as random effects. The intervention included 5 collaborative meetings in 2018 to 2019 where surgeon champions shared guideline updates, best practices/challenges, and facilitated action planning. Confidential benchmarked performance reports were provided.

RESULTS

In 2017, there were 3692 breast procedures in SCW and 1279 in nonparticipating hospitals; hospital-level re-excision rates ranged from 5% to >50%. There was no statistically significant baseline difference in re-excision rates between SCW and nonparticipating hospitals (16.1% vs. 17.1%, P =0.47). Re-excision significantly decreased for SCW but not for nonparticipating hospitals (odds ratio=0.69, 95% confidence interval=0.52-0.91).

CONCLUSIONS

Benchmarked performance reports and collaborative quality improvement can decrease post-BCS re-excisions, increase quality, and decrease costs. Our study demonstrates the effective use of administrative data as a platform for statewide quality collaboratives. Using existing data requires fewer resources and offers a new paradigm that promotes participation across practice settings.

Does Breast-Conserving Surgery with Radiotherapy have a Better Survival than Mastectomy? A Meta-Analysis of More than 1,500,000 Patients

BACKGROUND

There have been conflicting studies reporting on survival advantages between breast-conserving surgery with radiotherapy (BCS) in comparison with mastectomy. Our aim was to compare the efficacy of BCS and mastectomy in terms of overall survival (OS) comparing all past published studies.

METHODS

We performed a comprehensive review of literature through October 2021 in PubMed, Scopus, and EMBASE. The studies included were randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and cohorts that compare BCS versus mastectomy. We excluded studies that included male sex, stage 0, distant metastasis at diagnosis, bilateral synchronous cancer, neoadjuvant radiation/chemotherapy, and articles with incomplete data. We performed a meta-analysis following the random-effect model with the inverse variance method.

RESULTS

From 18,997 publications, a total of 30 studies were included in the final analysis: 6 studies were randomized trials, and 24 were retrospective cohorts. A total of 1,802,128 patients with a follow-up ranging from 4 to 20 years were included, and 1,075,563 and 744,565 underwent BCS and mastectomy, respectively. Among the population, BCS is associated with improved OS compared with mastectomy [relative risk (RR) 0.64, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.55-0.74]. This effect was similar when analysis was performed in cohorts and multi-institutional databases (RR 0.57, 95% CI 0.49-0.67). Furthermore, the benefit of BCS was stronger in patients who had less than 10 years of follow-up (RR 0.54, 95% CI 0.46-0.64).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients who underwent BCS had better OS compared with mastectomy. Such results depicting survival advantage, especially using such a large sample of patients, may need to be included in the shared surgical decision making when discussing breast cancer treatment with patients.

Insurance Status and Travel Distance to Single Treatment Facility Predictive of Mastectomy

BACKGROUND

We evaluated the impact of insurance status and travel distance on the receipt of total mastectomy without reconstruction (TM) compared to breast conserving surgery with radiation (BCT) for early-stage breast cancer (BC) patients who received care at a single facility. We hypothesized that, lack of insurance and increased travel distance would be predictive of TM over BCT and disparities would vary by different races and/or ethnicities.

METHODS

Using the National Cancer Database from 2010-2017, we examined surgical patients with stage I or II BC, who received care at one facility. Chi-square tests examined subgroup differences by BCT or TM. Multivariable logistic regressions evaluated patient, facility, and pathologic factors associated with the receipt of TM over BCT for the entire cohort and by races and/or ethnicities.

RESULTS

Of the 284,202 patients, 70.1% received BCT while 29.9% received TM. After adjustment travel distance > 60 miles to a treatment facility, and non-insured patients were more likely to receive TM over BCT, when compared to travel distance < 20 miles and private insurance (all P < 0.05). Compared to other races and/or ethnicities, African Americans traveling > 60 miles were 65.4% more likely to receive TM over BCT compared to those traveling < 20 miles (P < .0001). Across all races and/or ethnicities after adjustment, lack of insurance was predictive for receipt of TM over BCT (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Despite treatment at one facility, increased travel distance and insurance status are independently predictive of the receipt of TM over BCT in patients with early-stage BC. While travel distance is particularly impactful for African Americans, the impact of not having insurance on surgical treatments is universal across all races and/or ethnicities.

Impact of preoperative breast MRI on 10-year survival of patients included in the Swedish randomized multicentre POMB trial

Background

The value of preoperative breast MRI as an adjunct technique regarding its effect on re-excision rates has been a subject of discussion. No survival data regarding preoperative breast MRI are available from randomized studies.

Methods

Ten-year follow-up of the POMB randomized multicentre study was analysed, evaluating MRI and its effect on disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS). Patients with newly diagnosed breast cancer were randomized to either preoperative MRI or conventional imaging. Kaplan–Meier plots were used to analyse DFS and OS, and Cox regression to estimate hazard ratios (HRs).

Results

A total of 440 patients, aged 56 years or less, with newly diagnosed breast cancer were randomized to either preoperative MRI (220) or conventional imaging (220; control). Median follow-up for each group was 10 years. DFS rates were 85.5 and 80.0 per cent for the MRI and control groups respectively (P = 0.099). The risk of relapse or death was 46 per cent higher in the control group (HR 1.46, 95 per cent c.i. 0.93 to 2.29). OS rates after 10 years were 90.9 and 88.6 per cent in the MRI and control groups respectively (P = 0.427). The risk of death was 27 per cent higher in the control group (HR 1.27, 0.71 to 2.29). Locoregional, distant, and contralateral recurrence outcomes combined were increased in the control group (P = 0.048). A subgroup analysis of patients with breast cancer stages I–III showed that preoperative MRI improved DFS compared with conventional imaging, but this did not reach statistical significance (P = 0.057).

Conclusion

After 10 years of follow-up, preoperative breast MRI as an adjunct to conventional imaging resulted in slightly, but non-significantly, improved DFS and OS. Registration number: NCT01859936 (http://www.clinicaltrials.gov).

Evolving Trends in Surgical Management of Breast Cancer: An Analysis of 30 Years of Practice Changing Papers

The management of breast cancer has evolved into a multidisciplinary evidence-based surgical speciality, with emphasis on conservative surgery. A number of landmark trials have established lumpectomy followed by radiation as the standard of care for many patients. The aim of this study is to construct a narrative review of recent developments in the surgical management of breast cancer and how such developments have impacted surgical practice. A comprehensive literature search of Pubmed was conducted. The latest search was performed on October 31^st, 2020. Search terms “breast cancer” were used in combinations with specific key words and Boolean operators relating to surgical management. The reference lists of retrieved articles were comprehensively screened for additional eligible publications. Articles were selected and reviewed based on relevance. We selected publications in the past 10 years but did not exclude commonly referenced and highly regarded previous publications. Review articles and book chapters were also cited to provide reference on details not discussed in the academic literature. This article reviews the current evidence in surgical management of early-stage breast cancer, discusses recent trends in surgical practice for therapeutic and prophylactic procedures and provides commentary on implications and factors associated with these trends.

Associated Factors and Survival Outcomes for Breast Conserving Surgery versus Mastectomy among New Zealand Women with Early-Stage Breast Cancer

This study aimed to investigate type of loco-regional treatment received, associated treatment factors and mortality outcomes in New Zealand women with early-stage breast cancer who were eligible for breast conserving surgery (BCS). This is a retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data from the Auckland and Waikato Breast Cancer Registers and involves 6972 women who were diagnosed with early-stage primary breast cancer (I-IIIa) between 1 January 2000 and 31 July 2015, were eligible for BCS and had received one of four loco-regional treatments: breast conserving surgery (BCS), BCS followed by radiotherapy (BCS + RT), mastectomy (MTX) or MTX followed by radiotherapy (MTX + RT), as their primary cancer treatment. About 66.1% of women received BCS + RT, 8.4% received BCS only, 21.6% received MTX alone and 3.9% received MTX + RT. Logistic regression analysis was used to identify demographic and clinical factors associated with the receipt of the BCS + RT (standard treatment). Differences in the uptake of BCS + RT were present across patient demographic and clinical factors. BCS + RT was less likely amongst patients who were older (75+ years old), were of Asian ethnicity, resided in impoverished areas or areas within the Auckland region and were treated in a public healthcare facility. Additionally, BCS + RT was less likely among patients diagnosed symptomatically, diagnosed during 2000–2004, had an unknown tumour grade, negative/unknown oestrogen and progesterone receptor status or tumour sizes ≥ 20 mm, ≤50 mm and had nodal involvement. Competing risk regression analysis was undertaken to estimate the breast cancer-specific mortality associated with each of the four loco-regional treatments received. Over a median follow-up of 8.8 years, women who received MTX alone had a higher risk of breast cancer-specific mortality (adjusted hazard ratio: 1.38, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.05–1.82) compared to women who received BCS + RT. MTX + RT and BCS alone did not have any statistically different risk of mortality when compared to BCS + RT. Further inquiry is needed as to any advantages BCS + RT may have over MTX alternatives.

Radiotherapy plays an important role in improving the survival outcome in patients with T1-2N1M0 breast cancer - a joint analysis of 4262 real world cases from two institutions

Background

To compare the survival outcomes between breast-conserving surgery (BCS) and modified radical mastectomy (MRM), and to investigate the role of radiotherapy (RT) in patients with pT1–2N1M0 breast cancer.

Methods

A total of 4262 women with T1–2N1M0 breast cancer treated at two institutions were retrospectively reviewed. A total of 3858 patients underwent MRM, and 832 (21.6%) of them received postoperative RT (MRM + RT). A total of 404 patients received BCS plus postoperative RT (BCS + RT). All patients received axillary lymph node dissection, while 3.8% of them had upfront sentinel node biopsy. The association of survival outcomes with different surgical modalities (BCS vs. MRM) and the role of RT were evaluated using multivariable proportional hazards regression and confirmed by the propensity score-matching (PSM) method.

Results

At a median follow-up of 71 months (range of 6–230 months), the 5-year overall survival (OS) rates of the BCS and MRM groups were 96.5 and 92.7%, respectively (P = .001), and the corresponding 5-year disease-free-survival (DFS) and locoregional recurrence (LRR) rates were 92.9 and 84.0%, and 2.0 and 7.0% (P = .001), respectively (P < .001). Multivariate analysis revealed that RT was an independent prognostic factor for improved OS (P = .001) and DFS (P = .009), and decreased LRR (P < .001). However, surgery procedure was not independently associated with either OS (P = .495), DFS (P = .204), or LRR (P = .996), which was confirmed by PSM analysis.

Conclusion

Postoperative radiotherapy rather than the surgery procedures was associated with superior survival outcomes in patients with T1–2N1M0 breast cancer.

Adaptive radiation therapy of breast cancer by repeated imaging during irradiation

Breast cancer is the most frequent cancer among females and also a leading cause of cancer related mortality worldwide. A multimodality treatment approach may be utilized for optimal management of patients with combinations of surgery, radiation therapy (RT) and systemic treatment. RT composes an integral part of breast conserving treatment, and is typically used after breast conserving surgery to improve local control. Recent years have witnessed significant improvements in the discipline of radiation oncology which allow for more focused and precise treatment delivery. Adaptive radiation therapy (ART) is among the most important RT techniques which may be utilized for redesigning of treatment plans to account for dynamic changes in tumor size and anatomy during the course of irradiation. In the context of breast cancer, ART may serve as an excellent tool for patients receiving breast irradiation followed by a sequential boost to the tumor bed. Primary benefits of ART include more precise boost localization and potential for improved normal tissue sparing with adapted boost target volumes particularly in the setting of seroma reduction during the course of irradiation. Herein, we provide a concise review of ART for breast cancer in light of the literature.

Technology for Intraoperative Margin Assessment in Breast Cancer

BACKGROUND

As breast-conserving surgery (BCS) has become standard for treatment of breast cancer, the need for new technology to improve intraoperative margin assessment (IMA) has become clear. Close or positive margins during BCS lead to additional surgeries, treatment delay, additional stress for patients, and healthcare cost. Academia and industry have developed a diverse field of new technologies to allow surgeons to assess margins in the operating room. These technologies aim to reduce current rates of positive margins on final pathology.

METHODS

We selected recently developed IMA technologies, some of which have undergone large clinical trials and others that are still in early stage development. Technologies were categorized based on underlying methodology to differentiate malignant and normal tissue: spectroscopy, electrical properties, optical imaging and molecular imaging. Additionally, this review details clinical investigations, relevant statistical analysis as well as strengths and weaknesses of the various technologies.

CONCLUSION

Numerous technical innovations are being implemented to diminish rates of positive margins at breast tumor resection. Close collaboration among cross-disciplinary teams to further develop many of these technologies as well as completion of larger scale clinical studies are required to define an optimal approach. Development with an eye toward prioritizing sensitivity/specificity as well as healthcare cost containment has the potential to make a significant impact on this ongoing clinical need in breast cancer surgery.

Clinical outcomes and surgical preferences for breast-conserving surgery and mastectomy: a propensity score-matched analysis

Background

While numerous randomized controlled trials have demonstrated long-term survival rates for patients with early-stage breast cancer treated with breast-conserving surgery (BCS) comparable to mastectomy, the latter remains the most prevalent surgical option to treat early-stage breast cancer in Thailand.

Objectives

To investigate the potential determinants affecting the decision on selecting BCS or mastectomy for the treatment of early-stage breast cancer and to compare the disease-free survival and overall survival between the treatments using a propensity score-matched analysis.

Methods

Patients diagnosed nonmetastatic breast cancer at the Queen Sirikit Breast Cancer Center from January 2006 to December 2015, were retrospectively identified and grouped intro patients who received BCS or mastectomy. After propensity score matching, 356 BCS and 209 mastectomy patients were identified, and statistical analysis was conducted to determine treatment selection factors and compare disease-free and overall survival.

Results

Disease-free survival and overall survival in months comparing BCS and mastectomy were not statistically different with P values of 0.11 and 0.77, respectively. Determinants of treatment selection found that younger age, surgeon preference, smaller tumor size, and lower tumor grade were statistically significant factors in the selection of BCS over mastectomy. The majority of surgeons had a preference for one treatment over the other (P < 0.001).

Conclusion

The outcome of BCS is comparable to mastectomy in early-stage breast cancer patients. Key determinants affecting the selection of treatment were identified to be patient age, characteristics of the tumor, and surgeon’s preference.

Breast reconstruction in France, observational study of 140,904 cases of mastectomy for breast cancer

OBJECTIVES

In France, there are few up-to-date epidemiological data on breast reconstruction after mastectomy for breast cancer. The objective of the present study was to measure immediate and delayed breast reconstruction (IBR and DBR, respectively) rates and thus the proportion of patients not benefiting from any reconstruction.

METHODS

We performed an observational study by assessing data from the French nationwide discharge summary database (Programme de Médicalisation des Systèmes d'Information) for the period 2008-2014. All women having undergone a total mastectomy for breast cancer during this period were included. We then searched for reconstructive surgery during the initial or subsequent hospital stays, and recorded the time interval between mastectomy and reconstruction.

RESULTS

Among the 140,904 mastectomies included, the IBR rate was 16.1% on average, and increased over the study period. The time interval between mastectomy and DBR was≤3 years in 92% of cases. For patients included in 2008 and 2009, the DBR rate was 17.8%, and the non-reconstruction rate was 66.4%.

CONCLUSION

The high proportion of women not undergoing breast reconstruction after mastectomy suggests that access to this procedure should be improved.

Comparison of Breast Conserving Surgery Followed by Radiation Therapy with Mastectomy Alone for Pathologic N1 Breast Cancer Patients in the Era of Anthracycline Plus Taxane-Based Chemotherapy: A Multicenter Retrospective Study (KROG 1418)

PURPOSE

We compared the oncologic outcomes of breast-conserving surgery plus radiation therapy (BCS+RT) and modified radical mastectomy (MRM) under anthracycline plus taxane-based (AT) regimens and investigated the role of adjuvant radiation therapy (RT) in patients with pathologic N1 (pN1) breast cancer treated by mastectomy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of 2,011 patients with pN1 breast cancer who underwent BCS+RT or MRM alone at 12 institutions between January 2006 and December 2010. Two-to-one propensity score matching was performed for balances in variables between the groups.

RESULTS

The median follow-up duration for the total cohort was 69 months (range, 1 to 114 months). After propensity score matching, 1,074 patients (676 in the BCS+RT group and 398 in the MRM-alone group) were analyzed finally. The overall survival, disease-free survival, locoregional failure-free survival, and regional failure-free survival (RFFS) curves of the BCS+RT group vs. MRM-alone group were not significantly different. The subgroup analysis revealed that in the group with both lymphovascular invasion (LVI) and histologic grade (HG) III, the BCS+RT showed significantly superior RFFS (p=0.008). Lymphedema (p=0.007) and radiation pneumonitis (p=0.031) occurred more frequently in the BCS+RT group than in the MRM-alone group, significantly.

CONCLUSION

There are no differences in oncologic outcomes between BCS+RT and MRM-alone groups under the AT chemotherapy regimens for pN1 breast cancer. However, BCS+RT group showed superior RFFS to MRM-alone group in the patients with LVI and HG III. Adjuvant RT might be considerable for pN1 breast cancer patients with LVI and HG III.

Different statistical techniques dealing with confounding in observational research: measuring the effect of breast-conserving therapy and mastectomy on survival

PURPOSE

Propensity trimming, hierarchical modelling and instrumental variable (IV) analysis are statistical techniques dealing with confounding, cluster-related variation or confounding by severity. This study aimed to explain (dis)advantages of these techniques in estimating the effect of breast-conserving therapy (BCT) and mastectomy on 10-year distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS).

METHODS

All women diagnosed in 2005 with primary T1-2N0-1 breast cancer treated with BCT or mastectomy were selected from the Netherlands Cancer Registry. We used multivariable Cox regression to correct for confounding. Propensity trimming was used to create a more homogeneous population for which the treatment choice was not self-evident. Hospital of surgery was used as hierarchical level to handle hospital-related variation, and as IV to deal with unmeasured confounding.

RESULTS

Multivariable Cox regression showed higher 10-year DMFS for BCT than mastectomy [HR 0.70 (95% CI 0.60-82)]. Propensity trimming on the 10-90th and the 20-80th percentile of the propensity score distribution and hierarchical modelling showed similar HRs. IV analysis showed no significant difference between BCT and mastectomy.

CONCLUSION

Unmeasured confounding is very difficult to eliminate in observational research. We cannot conclude that BCT or mastectomy has a causal relationship with 10-year DMFS. It is crucial to critically evaluate all model's assumptions, and to be careful in drawing firm conclusions.

Noninferior Outcome After Breast-Conserving Treatment Compared to Mastectomy in Breast Cancer Patients With Four or More Positive Lymph Nodes

Introduction: We conducted a non-inferiority analysis using real-world data to compare the survival outcomes of stage T1-2N2-3 (tumor size ≤5 cm and four or more node metastases) breast cancer after breast-conserving surgery (BCS) and mastectomy (MAST). Methods: The study included patients with stage T1-2N2-3 invasive breast carcinoma from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results program, who underwent BCS or MAST between 2004 and 2012, along with both radiotherapy and chemotherapy. The statistical analyses used included the chi-squared test, multivariate Cox proportional hazards models, and propensity score matching (PSM). Results: The study population comprised 13,263 patients, including 4,787 (36.1%) and 8,476 (63.9%) patients who were treated with BCS and MAST, respectively. Patients with younger age and advanced stage were more likely to have received MAST. The probability of receiving MAST increased over the years, while the probability of BCS decreased (p < 0.001). The 5-year breast cancer-specific survival (BCSS) was 86.1% in the BCS cohort compared to 83.1% in the MAST cohort (p < 0.001). Surgical procedure was an independent prognostic factor for BCSS. Patients who received MAST had worse BCSS than those treated with BCS (hazard ratio = 1.179, 95% confidence interval = 1.087-1.278, p < 0.001). These results remained significant after stratification by age, tumor grade, T stage, N stage as well as marital status. Similar results were obtained after PSM. Conclusions: BCS resulted in noninferior outcome than MAST in patients with T1-2/N2-3 invasive breast carcinoma. BCS may therefore be an optimal treatment option when both treatment options are feasible and appropriate.

Using clinical cancer registry data for estimation of quality indicators: Results from the Norwegian breast cancer registry

INTRODUCTION

Increased focus on quality indicators and the use of clinical registries for breast cancer for real world studies have shown higher compliance to recommended therapy and better survival. In 2010, the European Society of Breast Cancer Specialist (EUSOMA) proposed quality indicators (QI) covering diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. To become a EUSOMA certified Breast Cancer Unit, 14 specified quality indicators, in addition to other requirements, need to be met. To evaluate the compliance and results of recommended treatment in breast cancer care in Norway and to improve the quality of epidemiological data, the Cancer Registry of Norway (CRN) in cooperation with the Norwegian Breast Cancer Group (NBCG) developed the Norwegian Breast Cancer Registry (NBCR). The objective of this study is to assess the feasibility of using the NBCR for estimating the EUSOMA QI individually for all hospitals diagnosing and treating breast cancer in Norway.

METHODS

To provide researchers with high quality cancer data as well as for the purpose of national cancer statistics, the CRN employs a cancer registry system to 1) longitudinal capture data from all patients from all medical entities that diagnose and/or treat cancer patients (e.g., pathology, radiology and clinical departments) in Norway; 2) curate data, i.e. validate the correctness of collected data, and assemble the validated cancer data as cancer cases; 3) provide data for analytics and presentation. Estimates for 10 EUSOMA QI were calculated at national and hospital level. To compare hospitals, a summary score of QIs was defined for each hospital.

RESULTS

All hospitals currently treating breast cancer patients have the technical ability to submit data to the NBCR for estimation of QIs defined by EUSOMA. Data from pathology and surgery are of high quality. However, data from oncological and radiological departments are incomplete, but improving. This currently hinders three QIs from being calculated. QI on benign to malign diagnosis needs to be calculated at the individual Breast Centre. Over time the adherence to guidelines have improved and the hospital variation for the respective QI have decreased. Two hospitals met all minimum standard on ten QIs in year 2016 and one hospital did not meet one minimum standard, but met all other targets.

CONCLUSION

The NBCR has since 2012 published annual reports on breast cancer care and for the year 2016 measured 10 of 14 QI defined by EUSOMA. Increased compliance of recommended treatment in Norway has been observed during the years the registry has been active.

Mastectomy or Breast-Conserving Therapy for Early Breast Cancer in Real-Life Clinical Practice: Outcome Comparison of 7565 Cases

Although the organ preservation strategy by breast-conserving surgery (BCS) followed by radiation therapy (BCT) has revolutionized the treatment approach of early stage breast cancer (BC), the choice between treatment options in this setting can still vary according to patient preferences. The aim of the present study was to compare the oncological outcome of mastectomy versus breast-conserving therapy in patients treated in a modern clinical setting outside of clinical trials. 7565 women diagnosed with early invasive BC (pT1/2pN0/1) between 1998 and 2014 were included in this study (median follow-up: 95.2 months). In order to reduce selection bias and confounding, a subgroup analysis of a matched 1:1 case-control cohort consisting of 1802 patients was performed (median follow-up 109.4 months). After adjusting for age, tumor characteristics and therapies, multivariable analysis for local recurrence-free survival identified BCT as an independent predictor for improved local control (hazard ratio [HR]:1.517; 95%confidence interval:1.092–2.108, p = 0.013) as compared to mastectomy alone in the matched cohort. Ten-year cumulative incidence (CI) of lymph node recurrences was 2.0% following BCT, compared to 5.8% in patients receiving mastectomy (p < 0.001). Similarly, 10-year distant-metastasis-free survival (89.4% vs. 85.5%, p = 0.013) was impaired in patients undergoing mastectomy alone. This translated into improved survival in patients treated with BCT (10-year overall survival (OS) estimates 85.3% vs. 79.3%, p < 0.001), which was also significant on multivariable analysis (p = 0.011). In conclusion, the present study showed that patients treated with BCS followed by radiotherapy had an improved outcome compared to radical mastectomy alone. Specifically, local control, distant control, and overall survival were significantly better using the conservative approach. Thus, as a result of the present study, physicians should encourage patients to receive BCS with radiotherapy rather than mastectomy, whenever it is medically feasible and appropriate.

Comorbidity Assessment in the National Cancer Database for Patients With Surgically Resected Breast, Colorectal, or Lung Cancer (AFT-01, -02, -03)

PURPOSE

Accurate comorbidity measurement is critical for cancer research. We evaluated comorbidity assessment in the National Cancer Database (NCDB), which uses a code-based Charlson-Deyo Comorbidity Index (CCI), and compared its prognostic performance with a chart-based CCI and individual comorbidities in a national sample of patients with breast, colorectal, or lung cancer.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Through an NCDB Special Study, cancer registrars re-abstracted perioperative comorbidities for 11,243 patients with stage II to III breast cancer, 10,880 with stage I to III colorectal cancer, and 9,640 with stage I to III lung cancer treated with definitive surgical resection in 2006-2007. For each cancer type, we compared the prognostic performance of the NCDB code-based CCI (categorical: 0 or missing data, 1, 2+), Special Study chart-based CCI (continuous), and 18 individual comorbidities in three separate Cox proportional hazards models for postoperative 5-year overall survival.

RESULTS

Comorbidity was highest among patients with lung cancer (13.2% NCDB CCI 2+) and lowest among patients with breast cancer (2.8% NCDB CCI 2+). Agreement between the NCDB and Special Study CCI was highest for breast cancer (rank correlation, 0.50) and lowest for lung cancer (rank correlation, 0.40). The NCDB CCI underestimated comorbidity for 19.1%, 29.3%, and 36.2% of patients with breast, colorectal, and lung cancer, respectively. Within each cancer type, the prognostic performance of the NCDB CCI, Special Study CCI, and individual comorbidities to predict postoperative 5-year overall survival was similar.

CONCLUSION

The NCDB underestimated comorbidity in patients with surgically resected breast, colorectal, or lung cancer, partly because the NCDB codes missing data as CCI 0. However, despite underestimation of comorbidity, the NCDB CCI was similar to the more complete measures of comorbidity in the Special Study in predicting overall survival.

Re-excision and survival following breast conserving surgery in early stage breast cancer patients: a population-based study

Background

Increasing population-based evidence suggests that patients who receive breast conserving surgery (BCS) plus radiotherapy have superior survival than those who receive mastectomy. It is unclear, however, how BCS followed by re-excision is associated with all-cause and breast cancer-specific mortality, and whether the BCS survival advantage is maintained if re-excision is needed. The aim of this study was to investigate the clinical, patient, provider and geographic variation associated with receipt of re-excision surgery, and to examine the relationship between re-excision and all-cause and breast cancer-specific mortality.

Methods

All women diagnosed with stage I-III breast cancer in Alberta, Canada from 2002 to 2009 were identified from the Alberta Cancer Registry, of which 11,626 were eligible for study inclusion. Type of first breast cancer surgery after diagnosis, subsequent re-excisions within 1 year, surgeon (anonymized), and hospital were obtained from provincial physician claims data. Multilevel logistic regression with surgeons and hospitals as crossed random effects was used to estimate the adjusted odds ratios of re-excision by the factors of interest. Poisson regression models were fitted to compare all-cause and breast cancer-specific mortality by surgical pattern.

Results

Re-excision surgery was received by 19% (N = 5659) of patients who initially received BCS. The adjusted odds of re-excision varied significantly by geography of surgery, and by individual surgeon among stage I and II patients beyond the variation explained by the factors investigated (Stage I OR standard deviation (SD) = 0.43; stage II OR SD = 0.39). Patients who were treated with BCS plus re-excision surgery with either mastectomy or further BCS had similar all-cause and breast cancer-specific mortality as those treated with BCS without re-excision.

Conclusion

These results suggest that breast cancer patients who are treated with BCS plus re-excision surgery by either mastectomy or further BCS have similar survival as those treated with BCS without re-excision. The significant variation in the likelihood of re-excision by geography and by individual surgeon is concerning, especially given the costs to the patient associated with additional surgery and the financial costs to the health system.

Breast conserving surgery versus mastectomy: overall and relative survival-a population based study by the Danish Breast Cancer Cooperative Group (DBCG)

BACKGROUND

Observational studies have pointed at a better survival after breast conserving surgery (BCS) compared with mastectomy. The aim of the present study was to evaluate whether this remains true when more extensive tumor characteristics and treatment data were included.

METHODS

The cohort included patients registered after primary surgery for early invasive breast cancer in the database of the Danish Breast Cancer Cooperative Group, in the period 1995-2012. The cohort was divided into three groups: (i) patients who primarily had a mastectomy, (ii) patients treated by BCS, and (iii) patients who primarily had BCS and then mastectomy [intention to treat (ITT) by BCS]. The association between overall mortality and standard mortality ratio (SMR) and risk factors was analyzed in univariate and multivariate Poisson regression models.

RESULTS

A total of 58,331 patients were included: 27,143 in the mastectomy group, 26,958 in the BCS group, and 4230 in the BCS-ITT group. After adjusting for patient and treatment characteristics, the relative risk (RR) was 1.20 (95% CI: 1.15-1.25) after mastectomy and 1.08 (95% CI: 1.01-1.15) after BCS first and then mastectomy, as compared to BCS. Statistically significant interactions were not observed for age, period of treatment, and nodal status, but patients with Charlson's Comorbidity Index (CCI) score 2+ had no increased mortality after mastectomy, as opposed to patients with CCI 0-1. Loco-regional radiation therapy (RT) in node positive patients did not reduce the increased risk associated with mastectomy [RR = 1.28 (95% CI 1.19-1.38)].

CONCLUSION

Patients assigned to BCS have a better survival than patients assigned to mastectomy. Residual confounding after adjustment for registered characteristics presumably explained the different outcomes, thus consistent with selection bias. Diversities in RT did not appear to explain the observed difference in survival after BCS and mastectomy.

Understanding the effects of socioeconomic status along the breast cancer continuum in Australian women: a systematic review of evidence

Background

Globally, the provision of equitable outcomes for women with breast cancer is a priority for governments. However, there is growing evidence that a socioeconomic status (SES) gradient exists in outcomes across the breast cancer continuum – namely incidence, diagnosis, treatment, survival and mortality. This systematic review describes this evidence and, because of the importance of place in defining SES, findings are limited to the Australian experience.

Methods

An on-line search of PubMed and the Web of Science identified 44 studies published since 1995 which examined the influence of SES along the continuum. The critique of studies included the study design, the types and scales of SES variable measured, and the results in terms of direction and significance of the relationships found. To aid in the interpretation of results, the findings were discussed in the context of a systems dynamic feedback diagram.

Results

We found 67 findings which reported 107 relationships between SES within outcomes along the continuum. Results suggest no differences in the participation in screening by SES. Higher incidence was reported in women with higher SES whereas a negative association was reported between SES and diagnosis. Associations with treatment choice were specific to the treatment choice undertaken. Some evidence was found towards greater survival for women with higher SES, however, the evidence for a SES relationship with mortality was less conclusive.

Conclusions

In a universal health system such as that in Australia, evidence of an SES gradient exists, however, the strength and direction of this relationship varies along the continuum. This is a complex relationship and the heterogeneity in study design, the SES indicator selected and its representative scale further complicates our understanding of its influence. More complex multilevel studies are needed to better understand these relationships, the interactions between predictors and to reduce biases introduced by methodological issues.

Changes of breast cancer staging when AJCC prognostic staging manual is used: a retrospective analysis of a Chinese cohort

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to investigate staging changes for Chinese breast cancer patients assessed by the 7^th (anatomic) and 8^th (prognostic) editions of the AJCC staging manual, and to explore the predictive factors for these changes.

METHODS

Data of patients who received curative surgery for stage I-III breast cancer at Ningbo Medical Center Lihuili Eastern Hospital were retrospectively reviewed. The assessment of staging was according to the criteria of the 7^th and 8^th editions of the AJCC staging manual. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were performed to analyze the associations between staging changes and clinicopathological characteristics.

RESULTS

Staging changes were found in 59.37% of patients and were more likely to be seen in stage IIIA (96.10%) and IIA (85.94%), then IIB (70.33%), IB (68.75%), followed by IA (36.17%) and IIIC (30.08%). In univariate analysis, staging changes were associated with tumor location, clinical tumor size, clinical axillary lymph node status and Ki67 index. However, multivariate analysis found that staging changes were significantly associated with tumor size >2 cm (odds ratio [OR] = 3.263, 95% confidence interval [95% CI], 2.638-4.036), lymph node involvement (OR = 2.261, 95% CI, 1.830-2.794) and high Ki-67 index (OR = 1.661, 95% CI 1.343-2.054).

CONCLUSIONS

Our study demonstrated that there were marked staging changes when 2 different editions of the AJCC staging manual were used. Since prognostic biomarkers are available in routine clinical practice, the more recent staging manual should be followed to select better systemic therapy and give better outcomes for Chinese breast cancer patients.

Nipple sparing mastectomy in breast cancer patients and long-term survival outcomes: An analysis of the SEER database

Purpose

To determine the prevalence of nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM) and its long-term survival outcomes in breast cancer patients.

Method

We used the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database and identified 2,440 breast cancer patients who received NSM during 1998–2013. We used chi-square and binary logistic regression to identify factors associated with the use of radiotherapy after NSM. We used Kaplan-Meier analysis to estimate cancer-specific survival (CSS) and overall survival (OS). We used the log-rank test and Cox regression to identify factors associated with CSS and OS.

Results

The median age of the population was 50 years. There were 725 (29.7%), 1064 (43.6%) and 651 (26.7%) patients who had Tis, T1 and T2-3 disease and 1943 (79.6%), 401 (16.4%) and 96 (3.9%) patients who had N0, N1 and N2-3 disease, respectively. The rates of RT use were 61.4%, 39.6% and 10.9% in patients with N2-3 disease, N1 or T3/N0 disease and Tis/T1-2N0 disease, respectively. Elderly age, African American race, and higher T-stage and N-stage were associated with receiving radiotherapy. For patients diagnosed between 1998–2010 (N = 763), the median follow-up was 69 months. The 5- and 10-yr CSS were 96.9% and 94.9%, respectively. The 5- and 10-yr OS were 94.1% and 88.0%, respectively. Ethnicity, T-stage and N-stage were factors independently associated with CSS, and age and T-stage were factors independently associated with OS.

Conclusions

The use of NSM has increased, and it is oncologically safe for breast cancer patients.

Better survival after breast-conserving therapy compared to mastectomy when axillary node status is positive in early-stage breast cancer: a registry-based follow-up study of 6387 Norwegian women participating in screening, primarily operated between 1998 and 2009

Background

Recent registry studies on early-stage breast cancer have shown better survival rates when women underwent breast-conserving therapy (BCT) compared with mastectomy (MTX). The aim of this study is to investigate women participating in screening, in all four stages of early breast cancer (T1N0M0, T2N0M0, T1N1M0, and T2N1M0), as to whether there is a survival benefit when women undergo BCT compared to MTX.

Method

A cohort of 6387 women aged 50–69, with primary-operated breast cancer from January 1998 to December 2009, participating in screening and followed-up until the end of 2010. Life tables were calculated by stages (pT1N0M0, pT2N0M0, pT1N1M0, and pT2N1M0), surgery groups (BCT and MTX), and screening detection (first screening, later screening, or interval cancer). Cox regression was used to calculate hazard ratios (HR) between BCT and MTX in crude and adjusted analyses.

Results

In stage T1N1M0, women who underwent MTX had an HR of 2.91 (95% CI 1.30–6.48) for breast cancer death compared to women who underwent BCT, after adjusting for screening detection, years of diagnosis, age at diagnosis, histology, grade, and hormone receptor status. For all other TNM categories of early breast cancer, there was no difference in survival.

10-year breast cancer-specific survival (BCSS) in T1N0M0 was 98% for women undergoing BCT and 96% for women undergoing MTX. 10-year BCSS in T1N1M0 was 97% for women undergoing BCT and 89% for women undergoing MTX.

Conclusions

For women participating in screening, there is a benefit of BCT over MTX in stage T1N1M0. No such effects were observed in the other early stages of breast cancer.

Achieving clear margins. Directed shaving using MarginProbe, as compared to a full cavity shave approach

BACKGROUND

Following lumpectomy, full cavity shaving approach is used to reduce positive margin rates, among other issues previously studied by others, at an expense of increase in tissue volume removed. We present our experience after switching from full cavity shaving to a targeted shaving approach using MarginProbe, an intra-operative margin assessment device.

METHODS

Specimen excision was performed according to standard of care. Additional shavings were taken based on device readings on the lumpectomy specimen. Intra-operative imaging was used, as required.

RESULTS

We compared 137 MarginProbe cases to 199 full cavity shave cases. The re-excision rate was reduced by 57% (P = 0.026), from 15.1% to 6.6%. The overall tissue volume removed was reduced by 32% (P = 0.0023), from 115 cc to 78 cc.

CONCLUSIONS

MarginProbe enabled a change in the lumpectomy technique from full cavity shavings to directed shavings guided by the device. There was a significant reduction in re-excisions and in the overall tissue volume removed.The lower amount of shavings also contributed to a reduction in pathology work.

10 year survival after breast-conserving surgery plus radiotherapy compared with mastectomy in early breast cancer in the Netherlands: a population-based study

BACKGROUND

Investigators of registry-based studies report improved survival for breast-conserving surgery plus radiotherapy compared with mastectomy in early breast cancer. As these studies did not present long-term overall and breast cancer-specific survival, the effect of breast-conserving surgery plus radiotherapy might be overestimated. In this study, we aimed to evaluate 10 year overall and breast cancer-specific survival after breast-conserving surgery plus radiotherapy compared with mastectomy in Dutch women with early breast cancer.

METHODS

In this population-based study, we selected all women from the Netherlands Cancer Registry diagnosed with primary, invasive, stage T1-2, N0-1, M0 breast cancer between Jan 1, 2000, and Dec 31, 2004, given either breast-conserving surgery plus radiotherapy or mastectomy, irrespective of axillary staging or dissection or use of adjuvant systemic therapy. Primary outcomes were 10 year overall survival in the entire cohort and breast cancer-specific survival in a representative subcohort of patients diagnosed in 2003 with characteristics similar to the entire cohort. We estimated breast cancer-specific survival by calculating distant metastasis-free and relative survival for every tumour and nodal category. We did multivariable Cox proportional hazard analysis to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) for overall and distant metastasis-free survival. We estimated relative survival by calculating excess mortality ratios using life tables of the general population. We did multiple imputation to account for missing data.

FINDINGS

Of the 37 207 patients included in this study, 21 734 (58%) received breast-conserving surgery plus radiotherapy and 15 473 (42%) received mastectomy. The 2003 representative subcohort consisted of 7552 (20%) patients, of whom 4647 (62%) received breast-conserving surgery plus radiotherapy and 2905 (38%) received mastectomy. For both unadjusted and adjusted analysis accounting for various confounding factors, breast-conserving surgery plus radiotherapy was significantly associated with improved 10 year overall survival in the whole cohort overall compared with mastectomy (HR 0·51 [95% CI 0·49-0·53]; p<0·0001; adjusted HR 0·81 [0·78-0·85]; p<0·0001), and this improvement remained significant for all subgroups of different T and N stages of breast cancer. After adjustment for confounding variables, breast-conserving surgery plus radiotherapy did not significantly improve 10 year distant metastasis-free survival in the 2003 cohort overall compared with mastectomy (adjusted HR 0·88 [0·77-1·01]; p=0·07), but did in the T1N0 subgroup (adjusted 0·74 [0·58-0·94]; p=0·014). Breast-conserving surgery plus radiotherapy did significantly improve 10 year relative survival in the 2003 cohort overall (adjusted 0·76 [0·64-0·91]; p=0·003) and in the T1N0 subgroup (adjusted 0·60 [0·42-0·85]; p=0·004) compared with mastectomy.

INTERPRETATION

Adjusting for confounding variables, breast-conserving surgery plus radiotherapy showed improved 10 year overall and relative survival compared with mastectomy in early breast cancer, but 10 year distant metastasis-free survival was improved with breast-conserving surgery plus radiotherapy compared with mastectomy in the T1N0 subgroup only, indicating a possible role of confounding by severity. These results suggest that breast-conserving surgery plus radiotherapy is at least equivalent to mastectomy with respect to overall survival and may influence treatment decision making for patients with early breast cancer.

FUNDING

None.