Radioactive Seed Versus Wire-Guided Localization for Ductal Carcinoma in Situ of the Breast: Comparable Resection Margins.
Journal
Annals of surgical oncology
ISSN: 1534-4681
Titre abrégé: Ann Surg Oncol
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 9420840
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Dec 2020
Dec 2020
Historique:
received:
03
04
2020
pubmed:
25
6
2020
medline:
28
4
2021
entrez:
25
6
2020
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
There are currently two widely used methods for preoperative localization of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) of the breast: wire-guided localization (WGL) and radioactive seed localization (RSL). Several studies compared these localization techniques in small cohorts. The aim of this study was to compare the surgical resection margin status between RSL and WGL in a large national cohort of patients with DCIS. We included patients from the Dutch Pathology Registry who underwent breast-conserving surgery for DCIS by either RSL (n = 1851) or WGL (n = 2187) between 2009 and 2019. Several clinicopathological characteristics were compared between these two groups, including resection margin status and number of re-excisions. Patients undergoing RSL were younger (p = 0.014) and were more often diagnosed with a large DCIS (p = 0.013), high grade DCIS (p < 0.001) and comedonecrosis (p < 0.001) compared with patients undergoing WGL. There was no significant difference in resection margin status between both groups (p = 0.089) and the number of re-excisions (p = 0.429). However, in case of re-excision, patients in the RSL group were more often treated with breast-conserving surgery (p = 0.029). In this large national cohort study of patients with DCIS, we demonstrated that there was no difference in resection margin status between both procedures, or in the number of re-excisions, but patients in the RSL group were more often treated with breast-conserving therapy in case of a re-excision.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
There are currently two widely used methods for preoperative localization of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) of the breast: wire-guided localization (WGL) and radioactive seed localization (RSL). Several studies compared these localization techniques in small cohorts.
OBJECTIVE
OBJECTIVE
The aim of this study was to compare the surgical resection margin status between RSL and WGL in a large national cohort of patients with DCIS.
PATIENTS AND METHODS
METHODS
We included patients from the Dutch Pathology Registry who underwent breast-conserving surgery for DCIS by either RSL (n = 1851) or WGL (n = 2187) between 2009 and 2019. Several clinicopathological characteristics were compared between these two groups, including resection margin status and number of re-excisions.
RESULTS
RESULTS
Patients undergoing RSL were younger (p = 0.014) and were more often diagnosed with a large DCIS (p = 0.013), high grade DCIS (p < 0.001) and comedonecrosis (p < 0.001) compared with patients undergoing WGL. There was no significant difference in resection margin status between both groups (p = 0.089) and the number of re-excisions (p = 0.429). However, in case of re-excision, patients in the RSL group were more often treated with breast-conserving surgery (p = 0.029).
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
In this large national cohort study of patients with DCIS, we demonstrated that there was no difference in resection margin status between both procedures, or in the number of re-excisions, but patients in the RSL group were more often treated with breast-conserving therapy in case of a re-excision.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32578065
doi: 10.1245/s10434-020-08744-8
pii: 10.1245/s10434-020-08744-8
pmc: PMC7669767
doi:
Substances chimiques
Iodine Radioisotopes
0
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
5296-5302Références
Bleyer A, Welch G. Effect of three decades of screening mammography on breast-cancer incidence. N Engl J Med. 2012;367(21):1998–2005. 10.1056/NEJMoa1206809.
doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1206809
pubmed: 23171096
Barnes NLP, Ooi JL, Yarnold JR, Bundred NJ. Ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast. How does DCIS develop? BMJ. 2012;344:e797. 10.1136/bmj.e797.
doi: 10.1136/bmj.e797
van Seijen M, Lips EH, Thompson AM, et al. Ductal carcinoma in situ: to treat or not to treat, that is the question. Br J Cancer. 2019;121(4):285–292. 10.1038/s41416-019-0478-6.
doi: 10.1038/s41416-019-0478-6
pubmed: 31285590
pmcid: 6697179
Collins LC, Laronga C, FACS, Wong JA. Ductal carcinoma in situ: treatment and prognosis—UpToDate. 2017. Available at: https://www.uptodate.com/contents/ductal-carcinoma-in-situ-treatment-and-prognosis?source = see_link. Accessed 27 Feb 2017.
Bijker N, Donker M, Wesseling J, Den Heeten GJ, Rutgers EJT. Is DCIS breast cancer, and how do i treat it? Curr Treat Options Oncol. 2013;14(1):75–87. 10.1007/s11864-012-0217-1.
doi: 10.1007/s11864-012-0217-1
pubmed: 23239193
Toss MS, Pinder SE, Green AR, et al. Breast conservation in ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS): what defines optimal margins? Histopathology. 2017;70(5):681–692. 10.1111/his.13116.
doi: 10.1111/his.13116
pubmed: 28000325
Pilewskie M, Morrow M. Margins in breast cancer: How much is enough? Cancer. 2018;124(7):1335–1341. 10.1002/cncr.31221.
doi: 10.1002/cncr.31221
pubmed: 29338088
pmcid: 5894883
Senkus E, Kyriakides S, Ohno S, Penault-Llorca F, Poortmans P, Rutgers E. Primary breast cancer: ESMO Clinical Practice clinical practice guidelines. Ann Oncol. 2015;26 Suppl 5:v8–30. 10.1093/annonc/mdv298.
doi: 10.1093/annonc/mdv298
pubmed: 26314782
Morrow M, Van Zee KJ, Solin LJ, et al. Society of Surgical Oncology–American Society for Radiation Oncology–American Society of Clinical Oncology Consensus Guideline on Margins for Breast-Conserving Surgery with Whole-Breast Irradiation in Ductal Carcinoma In Situ. Ann Surg Oncol. 2016;23(12):3801–3810. 10.1245/s10434-016-5449-z.
doi: 10.1245/s10434-016-5449-z
pubmed: 27527714
pmcid: 5047939
Vos EL, Gaal J, Verhoef C, Brouwer K, van Deurzen CHM, Koppert LB. Focally positive margins in breast conserving surgery: Predictors, residual disease, and local recurrence. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2017;43(10):1846–1854. 10.1016/j.ejso.2017.06.007.
doi: 10.1016/j.ejso.2017.06.007
pubmed: 28688723
NABON. Breast Cancer Dutch Guideline 2012, Version 2.0.; 2012. Available at: https://oncoline.nl/uploaded/docs/mammacarcinoom/Dutch Breast Cancer Guideline 2012.pdf. Accessed 12 Sep 2018.
Vos EL, Jager A, Verhoef C, Voogd AC, Koppert LB. Overall survival in patients with a re-excision following breast conserving surgery compared to those without in a large population-based cohort. Eur J Cancer. 2015;51(3):282–291. 10.1016/j.ejca.2014.12.003.
doi: 10.1016/j.ejca.2014.12.003
pubmed: 25549530
NABON. Borstkanker: Landelijke Richtlijn, Versie 1.0. 2018.
Milligan R, Pieri A, Critchley A, et al. Radioactive seed localization compared with wireguided localization of non-palpable breast carcinoma in breast conservation surgery: the first experience in the United Kingdom. Br J Radiol. 2018;91(1081):20170268. 10.1259/bjr.20170268.
doi: 10.1259/bjr.20170268
pubmed: 29076748
Goudreau SH, Joseph JP, Seiler SJ. Preoperative radioactive seed localization for nonpalpable breast lesions: Technique, pitfalls, and solutions. Radiographics. 2015;35(5):1319–1334. 10.1148/rg.2015140293.
doi: 10.1148/rg.2015140293
pubmed: 26274097
Langhans L, Tvedskov TF, Klausen TL, et al. Radioactive Seed Localization or Wire-guided Localization of Nonpalpable Invasive and in Situ Breast Cancer: A Randomized, Multicenter, Open-label Trial. Ann Surg. 2017;266(1):29–35. 10.1097/SLA.0000000000002101.
doi: 10.1097/SLA.0000000000002101
pubmed: 28257326
Xu XJ, Li JJ, Ji WB. An updated meta-analysis of radioactive seed localization versus wire-guided localization in the treatment of nonpalpable breast lesions. Breast J. 2018;24(4):673–675. 10.1111/tbj.13023.
doi: 10.1111/tbj.13023
pubmed: 29498450
Luiten JD, Beek MA, Voogd AC, Gobardhan PD, Luiten EJT. Iodine seed- versus wire-guided localization in breast-conserving surgery for non-palpable ductal carcinoma in situ. Br J Surg. 2015;102(13):1665–1669. 10.1002/bjs.9946.
doi: 10.1002/bjs.9946
pubmed: 26492349
Casparie M, Tiebosch ATMG, Burger G, et al. Pathology databanking and biobanking in The Netherlands, a central role for PALGA, the nationwide histopathology and cytopathology data network and archive. Cell Oncol. 2007;29(1):19–24. 10.1155/2007/971816.
doi: 10.1155/2007/971816
pubmed: 17429138
pmcid: 4618410
Janssen NNY, van la Parra RFD, Loo CE, et al. Breast conserving surgery for extensive DCIS using multiple radioactive seeds. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2018;44(1):67–73. 10.1016/j.ejso.2017.11.002.
doi: 10.1016/j.ejso.2017.11.002
pubmed: 29239733