Predictors of Reexcision following Breast-Conserving Surgery for Ductal Carcinoma In Situ.
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:
Mar 2021
Mar 2021
Historique:
received:
15
06
2020
accepted:
15
08
2020
pubmed:
12
9
2020
medline:
21
4
2021
entrez:
11
9
2020
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Reexcision following breast-conserving surgery (BCS) in women with ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) results in adjuvant treatment delays, higher health care costs, and undesirable cosmetic outcomes. The purpose of this study is to determine patient, imaging, pathological, and surgical predictors of reexcision following BCS for DCIS. A retrospective review of women with DCIS who had BCS from 2007 to 2016 was conducted. Patient, imaging, pathological, and surgical features, in addition to surgical outcomes, were collected from medical records. Standard statistical tests were used to compare features between patients who did and did not undergo at least one reexcision. A multivariable logistic regression model was fit to assess features associated with reexcision. A total of 547 women (mean age 59 years; range 30-88 years) diagnosed with DCIS at core needle biopsy underwent BCS. Of all women, 31.6% (173/547) had at least one reexcision. With multivariable analysis, features associated with reexcision included younger patient age (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 0.98, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.97-1.0, p = 0.049), African-American race (aOR 2.66, 95% CI 1.13-6.26, p = 0.03), biopsy modality of ultrasound (aOR 2.35, 95% CI 1.22-4.53, p = 0.01), and earlier year of surgery (aOR 0.92, 95% CI 0.86-0.98, p = 0.01). No pathological features of DCIS were associated with reexcision risk. In our cohort of nearly 550 women with DCIS who underwent BCS, 31.6% had at least one reexcision. Features associated with reexcision include younger patient age, African-American race, biopsy modality of ultrasound, and earlier year of surgery.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Reexcision following breast-conserving surgery (BCS) in women with ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) results in adjuvant treatment delays, higher health care costs, and undesirable cosmetic outcomes. The purpose of this study is to determine patient, imaging, pathological, and surgical predictors of reexcision following BCS for DCIS.
PATIENTS AND METHODS
METHODS
A retrospective review of women with DCIS who had BCS from 2007 to 2016 was conducted. Patient, imaging, pathological, and surgical features, in addition to surgical outcomes, were collected from medical records. Standard statistical tests were used to compare features between patients who did and did not undergo at least one reexcision. A multivariable logistic regression model was fit to assess features associated with reexcision.
RESULTS
RESULTS
A total of 547 women (mean age 59 years; range 30-88 years) diagnosed with DCIS at core needle biopsy underwent BCS. Of all women, 31.6% (173/547) had at least one reexcision. With multivariable analysis, features associated with reexcision included younger patient age (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 0.98, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.97-1.0, p = 0.049), African-American race (aOR 2.66, 95% CI 1.13-6.26, p = 0.03), biopsy modality of ultrasound (aOR 2.35, 95% CI 1.22-4.53, p = 0.01), and earlier year of surgery (aOR 0.92, 95% CI 0.86-0.98, p = 0.01). No pathological features of DCIS were associated with reexcision risk.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
In our cohort of nearly 550 women with DCIS who underwent BCS, 31.6% had at least one reexcision. Features associated with reexcision include younger patient age, African-American race, biopsy modality of ultrasound, and earlier year of surgery.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32914389
doi: 10.1245/s10434-020-09101-5
pii: 10.1245/s10434-020-09101-5
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
1390-1397Subventions
Organisme : Agfa HealthCare/Radiological Society of North America (RSNA)
ID : Research Scholar Grant
Références
American Cancer Society. How common is breast cancer? https://www.cancer.org/cancer/breast-cancer/about/how-common-is-breast-cancer.html . Accessed 1 June 2020.
Shehata M, Grimm L, Ballantyne N, et al. Ductal carcinoma in situ: current concepts in biology, imaging, and treatment. J Breast Imaging 2019;1(3):166–176. https://doi.org/10.1093/jbi/wbz039
doi: 10.1093/jbi/wbz039
pubmed: 31538141
pmcid: 6735611
Chen PH, Ghosh ET, Slanetz PJ, Eisenberg RL. Segmental breast calcifications. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2012;199(5):W532–542. https://doi.org/10.2214/ajr.11.8198
doi: 10.2214/AJR.11.8198
pubmed: 23096196
Gradishar WJ, Anderson BO, Balassanian R, et al. Breast Cancer, Version 4.2017, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology. J Natl Compr Canc Netw 2018;16(3):310–320. https://doi.org/10.6004/jnccn.2018.0012
Solin LJ, Fourquet A, Vicini FA, et al. Mammographically detected ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast treated with breast-conserving surgery and definitive breast irradiation: long-term outcome and prognostic significance of patient age and margin status. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2001;50(4):991–1002. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0360-3016(01)01517-6
doi: 10.1016/s0360-3016(01)01517-6
pubmed: 11429227
Pilewskie M, Morrow M. Margins in breast cancer: How much is enough? Cancer 2018;124(7):1335–1341. https://doi.org/10.1002/cncr.31221
doi: 10.1002/cncr.31221
pubmed: 29338088
pmcid: 5894883
Decker MR, Trentham-Dietz A, Loconte NK, et al. The role of intraoperative pathologic assessment in the surgical management of ductal carcinoma in situ. Ann Surg Oncol 2016;23(9):2788–2794. https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-016-5192-5
doi: 10.1245/s10434-016-5192-5
pubmed: 27026436
pmcid: 4974137
Lange M, Reimer T, Hartmann S, Glass A, Stachs A. The role of specimen radiography in breast-conserving therapy of ductal carcinoma in situ. Breast 2016;26:73–79. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.breast.2015.12.014
doi: 10.1016/j.breast.2015.12.014
pubmed: 27017245
Heelan Gladden AA, Sams S, Gleisner A, et al. Re-excision rates after breast conserving surgery following the 2014 SSO-ASTRO guidelines. Am J Surg 2017;214(6):1104–1109. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjsurg.2017.08.023
doi: 10.1016/j.amjsurg.2017.08.023
pubmed: 28974314
Langhans L, Jensen MB, Talman MM, Vejborg I, Kroman N, Tvedskov TF. Reoperation rates in ductal carcinoma in situ vs invasive breast cancer after wire-guided breast-conserving surgery. JAMA Surg 2017;152(4):378–384. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamasurg.2016.4751
doi: 10.1001/jamasurg.2016.4751
pubmed: 28002557
pmcid: 5470426
Layfield DM, See H, Stahnke M, Hayward L, Cutress RI, Oeppen RS. Radiopathological features predictive of involved margins in ductal carcinoma in situ. Ann R Coll Surg Engl 2017;99(2):137–144. https://doi.org/10.1308/rcsann.2016.0299
doi: 10.1308/rcsann.2016.0299
pubmed: 27659365
pmcid: 5392827
Murphy BL, Boughey JC, Keeney MG, et al. Factors associated with positive margins in women undergoing breast conservation surgery. Mayo Clin Proc 2018;93(4):429–435. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mayocp.2017.11.023
doi: 10.1016/j.mayocp.2017.11.023
pubmed: 29439832
Philpott A, Wong J, Elder K, Gorelik A, Mann GB, Skandarajah A. Factors influencing reoperation following breast-conserving surgery. ANZ J Surg 2018;88(9):922–927. https://doi.org/10.1111/ans.14467
doi: 10.1111/ans.14467
pubmed: 29763991
Houvenaeghel G, Lambaudie E, Bannier M, et al. Positive or close margins: reoperation rate and second conservative resection or total mastectomy? Cancer Manag Res 2019;11:2507–2516. https://doi.org/10.2147/cmar.s190852
doi: 10.2147/CMAR.S190852
pubmed: 30992681
pmcid: 6445211
Jeevan R, Cromwell DA, Trivella M, et al. Reoperation rates after breast conserving surgery for breast cancer among women in England: retrospective study of hospital episode statistics. BMJ 2012;345:e4505. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.e4505
doi: 10.1136/bmj.e4505
pubmed: 22791786
pmcid: 3395735
Jung W, Kang E, Kim SM, et al. Factors associated with re-excision after breast-conserving surgery for early-stage breast cancer. J Breast Cancer 2012;15(4):412–419. https://doi.org/10.4048/jbc.2012.15.4.412
doi: 10.4048/jbc.2012.15.4.412
pubmed: 23346170
pmcid: 3542849
Wolf JH, Wen Y, Axelrod D, et al. Higher volume at time of breast conserving surgery reduces re-excision in DCIS. Int J Surg Oncol 2011;2011:785803. https://doi.org/10.1155/2011/785803
doi: 10.1155/2011/785803
pubmed: 22312524
pmcid: 3263677
Joste M, Mendes V, Tixier S, et al. Non-menopausal status, high nuclear grade, tumor size > 30 mm and positive resection margins are predictors of residual tumor after lumpectomy for ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast. Anticancer Res 2015;35(6):3471–3477.
pubmed: 26026112
So A, De La Cruz LM, Williams AD, et al. The impact of preoperative magnetic resonance imaging and lumpectomy cavity shavings on re-excision rate in pure ductal carcinoma in situ-A single institution’s experience. J Surg Oncol 2018;117(4):558–566. https://doi.org/10.1002/jso.24890
doi: 10.1002/jso.24890
pubmed: 29127721
Unzeitig A, Kobbermann A, Xie XJ, et al. Influence of surgical technique on mastectomy and reexcision rates in breast-conserving therapy for cancer. Int J Surg Oncol 2012;2012:725121. https://doi.org/10.1155/2012/725121
doi: 10.1155/2012/725121
pubmed: 22312542
pmcid: 3265214
Ballal H, Taylor DB, Bourke AG, Latham B, Saunders CM. Predictors of re-excision in wire-guided wide local excision for early breast cancer: a Western Australian multi-centre experience. ANZ J Surg 2015;85(7–8):540–545. https://doi.org/10.1111/ans.13067
doi: 10.1111/ans.13067
pubmed: 25879775
Rath MG, Uhlmann L, Heil J, et al. Predictors of residual tumor in breast-conserving therapy. Ann Surg Oncol 2015;22 Suppl 3:S451–458. https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-015-4736-4
doi: 10.1245/s10434-015-4736-4
pubmed: 26224405
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. J Clin Oncol 2016;34(33):4040–4046. https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.2016.68.3573
doi: 10.1200/JCO.2016.68.3573
pubmed: 27528719
pmcid: 5477830
American College of Radiology. Testing overview: breast MRI. https://accreditationsupport.acr.org/support/solutions/articles/11000068086-testing-overview-breast-mri-revised-12-12-19 -. Accessed 1 June 2020.
Sickles EA, D’Orsi CJ, Bassett LW, et al. ACR BI-RADS Mammography. In: ACR BI-RADS Atlas, Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System. Reston, VA: American College of Radiology; 2013.
Clough KB, Gouveia PF, Benyahi D, et al. Positive margins after oncoplastic surgery for breast cancer. Ann Surg Oncol 2015;22(13):4247–4253. https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-015-4514-3
doi: 10.1245/s10434-015-4514-3
pubmed: 25893409
DeSnyder SM, Hunt KK, Dong W, et al. American Society of Breast Surgeons’ practice patterns after publication of the SSO-ASTRO-ASCO DCIS consensus guideline on margins for breast-conserving surgery with whole-breast irradiation. Ann Surg Oncol 2018;25(10):2965–2974. https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-018-6580-9
doi: 10.1245/s10434-018-6580-9
pubmed: 29987598
Sabel MS, Rogers K, Griffith K, et al. Residual disease after re-excision lumpectomy for close margins. J Surg Oncol 2009;99(2):99–103. https://doi.org/10.1002/jso.21215
doi: 10.1002/jso.21215
pubmed: 19065638
Wang J, Kollias J, Boult M, et al. Patterns of surgical treatment for women with breast cancer in relation to age. Breast J 2010;16(1):60–65. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1524-4741.2009.00828.x
doi: 10.1111/j.1524-4741.2009.00828.x
pubmed: 19889171
Narod SA, Iqbal J, Giannakeas V, Sopik V, Sun P. Breast cancer mortality after a diagnosis of ductal carcinoma in situ. JAMA Oncol 2015;1(7):888–896. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamaoncol.2015.2510
doi: 10.1001/jamaoncol.2015.2510
pubmed: 26291673
Dillon MF, Mc Dermott EW, O’Doherty A, Quinn CM, Hill AD, O’Higgins N. Factors affecting successful breast conservation for ductal carcinoma in situ. Ann Surg Oncol 2007;14(5):1618–1628. https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-006-9246-y
doi: 10.1245/s10434-006-9246-y
pubmed: 17443388