Comparison of locoregional recurrence risk among nipple-sparing mastectomy, skin-sparing mastectomy, and simple mastectomy in patients with ductal carcinoma in situ: a single-center study.
Ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS)
Local recurrence
Nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM)
Simple mastectomy (SM)
Skin-sparing mastectomy (SSM)
Journal
Breast cancer (Tokyo, Japan)
ISSN: 1880-4233
Titre abrégé: Breast Cancer
Pays: Japan
ID NLM: 100888201
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
17 Jul 2024
17 Jul 2024
Historique:
received:
30
01
2024
accepted:
04
07
2024
medline:
17
7
2024
pubmed:
17
7
2024
entrez:
17
7
2024
Statut:
aheadofprint
Résumé
In invasive breast cancer, there are no differences among the mid- and long-term oncological safety results of nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM), skin-sparing mastectomy (SSM), and simple mastectomy (SM). There are several reports comparing NSM and SSM with SM in the context of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS); however, the eligibility criteria vary among institutions, and there are no reports that compare all three surgical methods simultaneously within the same institution. This study aimed to compare the local recurrence and survival rates of the three techniques (NSM, SSM, and SM) in Japanese patients undergoing mastectomy for DCIS. Patients undergoing NSM, SSM, or SM at our institution between 2006 and 2015 were identified, and their outcomes were analyzed. The mean follow-up period was 80.4 months (standard deviation [SD]: 37.1 months). NSM was performed in 152 cases, SSM in 49, and SM in 44. Five of 245 patients developed local recurrences. Four of these patients had invasive cancer. The primary endpoints of 5-year cumulative local recurrence were 2.4% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.0-5.0) for NSM, 2.2% (95% CI: 0.0-6.3) for SSM, and 0% (95% CI: 0.0-0.0) for SM. There were no significant differences among the 5-year local recurrence rates. In this single-center, retrospective study, the oncological safety of SSM and NSM for DCIS was comparable to that of conventional SM.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
In invasive breast cancer, there are no differences among the mid- and long-term oncological safety results of nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM), skin-sparing mastectomy (SSM), and simple mastectomy (SM). There are several reports comparing NSM and SSM with SM in the context of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS); however, the eligibility criteria vary among institutions, and there are no reports that compare all three surgical methods simultaneously within the same institution. This study aimed to compare the local recurrence and survival rates of the three techniques (NSM, SSM, and SM) in Japanese patients undergoing mastectomy for DCIS.
METHODS
METHODS
Patients undergoing NSM, SSM, or SM at our institution between 2006 and 2015 were identified, and their outcomes were analyzed.
RESULTS
RESULTS
The mean follow-up period was 80.4 months (standard deviation [SD]: 37.1 months). NSM was performed in 152 cases, SSM in 49, and SM in 44. Five of 245 patients developed local recurrences. Four of these patients had invasive cancer. The primary endpoints of 5-year cumulative local recurrence were 2.4% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.0-5.0) for NSM, 2.2% (95% CI: 0.0-6.3) for SSM, and 0% (95% CI: 0.0-0.0) for SM. There were no significant differences among the 5-year local recurrence rates.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
In this single-center, retrospective study, the oncological safety of SSM and NSM for DCIS was comparable to that of conventional SM.
Identifiants
pubmed: 39017823
doi: 10.1007/s12282-024-01613-2
pii: 10.1007/s12282-024-01613-2
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Informations de copyright
© 2024. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to The Japanese Breast Cancer Society.
Références
Ward EM, DeSantis CE, Lin CC, Kramer JL, Jemal A, Kohler B, et al. Cancer statistics: breast cancer in situ. CA Cancer J Clin. 2015;65:481–95. https://doi.org/10.3322/caac.21321 .
doi: 10.3322/caac.21321
pubmed: 26431342
Tada K, Kumamaru H, Miyata H, Asaga S, Iijima K, Ogo E, et al. Characteristics of female breast cancer in Japan: annual report of the National Clinical Database in 2018. Breast Cancer. 2023;30:157–66. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12282-022-01423-4 .
doi: 10.1007/s12282-022-01423-4
pubmed: 36547868
Kubo M, Kumamaru H, Isozumi U, Miyashita M, Nagahashi M, Kadoya T, et al. Annual report of the Japanese Breast Cancer Society registry for 2016. Breast Cancer. 2020;27:511–8. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12282-020-01081-4 .
doi: 10.1007/s12282-020-01081-4
pubmed: 32394414
Hayashi N, Kumamaru H, Isozumi U, Aogi K, Asaga S, Iijima K, et al. Annual report of the Japanese Breast Cancer Registry for 2017. Breast Cancer. 2020;27:803–9. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12282-020-01139-3 .
doi: 10.1007/s12282-020-01139-3
pubmed: 32710374
Kurebayashi J, Miyoshi Y, Ishikawa T, Saji S, Sugie T, Suzuki T, et al. Clinicopathological characteristics of breast cancer and trends in the management of breast cancer patients in Japan: based on the Breast Cancer Registry of the Japanese Breast Cancer Society between 2004 and 2011. Breast Cancer. 2015;22:235–44. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12282-015-0599-6 .
doi: 10.1007/s12282-015-0599-6
pubmed: 25758809
Badve SS, Gökmen-Polar Y. Ductal carcinoma in situ of breast: update 2019. Pathology. 2019;51:563–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pathol.2019.07.005 .
doi: 10.1016/j.pathol.2019.07.005
pubmed: 31472981
Cutuli B. Ductal carcinoma in situ in 2019: diagnosis, treatment, prognosis. Presse Med. 2019;48:1112–22. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lpm.2019.08.018 .
doi: 10.1016/j.lpm.2019.08.018
pubmed: 31653542
Missana MC, Laurent I, Germain M, Lucas S, Barreau L. Long-term oncological results after 400 skin-sparing mastectomies. J Visc Surg. 2013;150:313–20. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jviscsurg.2013.09.011 .
doi: 10.1016/j.jviscsurg.2013.09.011
pubmed: 24161900
Stanec Z, Žic R, Budi S, Stanec S, Milanović R, Vlajčić Z, et al. Skin and nipple-areola complex sparing mastectomy in breast cancer patients: 15-year experience. Ann Plast Surg. 2014;73:485–91. https://doi.org/10.1097/SAP.0b013e31827a30e6 .
doi: 10.1097/SAP.0b013e31827a30e6
pubmed: 24378808
Romics L, Chew BK, Weiler-Mithoff E, Doughty JC, Brown IM, Stallard S, et al. Ten-year follow-up of skin-sparing mastectomy followed by immediate breast reconstruction. Br J Surg. 2012;99:799–806. https://doi.org/10.1002/bjs.8704 .
doi: 10.1002/bjs.8704
pubmed: 22367773
De La Cruz L, Moody AM, Tappy EE, Blankenship SA, Hecht EM. Overall survival, disease-free survival, local recurrence, and nipple-areolar recurrence in the setting of nipple-sparing mastectomy: a meta-analysis and systematic review. Ann Surg Oncol. 2015;22:3241–9. https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-015-4739-1 .
doi: 10.1245/s10434-015-4739-1
pubmed: 26242363
Sakamoto N, Fukuma E, Teraoka K, Hoshi K. Local recurrence following treatment for breast cancer with an endoscopic nipple-sparing mastectomy. Breast Cancer. 2016;23:552–60. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12282-015-0600-4 .
doi: 10.1007/s12282-015-0600-4
pubmed: 25777554
Skjerven HK, Myklebust EM, Korvald C, Porojnicu AC, Kaaresen R, Hofvind S, et al. Oncological outcomes after simple and skin-sparing mastectomy of ductal carcinoma in situ: a register-based cohort study of 576 Norwegian women. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2023;49(3):575–82. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejso.2022.11.594 .
doi: 10.1016/j.ejso.2022.11.594
pubmed: 36509629
Elston CW, Ellis IO. Pathological prognostic factors in breast cancer. I. The value of histological grade in breast cancer: experience from a large study with long-term follow-up. Histopathology. 1991;19:403–10. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2559.1991.tb00229.x .
doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2559.1991.tb00229.x
pubmed: 1757079
Weber WP, Haug M, Kurzeder C, Bjelic-Radisic V, Koller R, Reitsamer R, et al. Oncoplastic breast consortium consensus conference on nipple-sparing mastectomy. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2018;172(3):523–37. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12282-020-01085-0 .
doi: 10.1007/s12282-020-01085-0
pubmed: 30182349
pmcid: 6245050
Lanitis S, Tekkis PP, Sgourakis G, Dimopoulos N, Al Mufti R, Hadjiminas DJ. Comparison of skin-sparing mastectomy versus non-skin-sparing mastectomy for breast cancer: a meta-analysis of observational studies. Ann Surg. 2010;251:632–9. https://doi.org/10.1097/SLA.0b013e3181d35bf8 .
doi: 10.1097/SLA.0b013e3181d35bf8
pubmed: 20224371
Shimo A, Tsugawa K, Tsuchiya S, Yoshie R, Tsuchiya K, Uejima T, et al. Oncologic outcomes and technical considerations of nipple-sparing mastectomies in breast cancer: experience of 425 cases from a single institution. Breast Cancer. 2016;23:851–60. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12282-015-0651-6 .
doi: 10.1007/s12282-015-0651-6
pubmed: 26464007
Sakurai T, Zhang N, Suzuma T, Umemura T, Yoshimura G, Sakurai T, et al. Long-term follow-up of nipple-sparing mastectomy without radiotherapy: a single center study at a Japanese institution. Med Oncol. 2013;30:481. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12032-013-0481-3 .
doi: 10.1007/s12032-013-0481-3
pubmed: 23377926
Lago V, Maisto V, Gimenez-Climent J, Vila J, Vazquez C, Estevan R. Nipple-sparing mastectomy as treatment for patients with ductal carcinoma in situ: a 10-year follow-up study. Breast J. 2018;24:298–303. https://doi.org/10.1111/tbj.12947 .
doi: 10.1111/tbj.12947
pubmed: 29139613
Galimberti V, Morigi C, Bagnardi V, Corso G, Vicini E, Kahler Ribeiro Fontana S, et al. Oncological outcomes of nipple-sparing mastectomy: a single-center experience of 1989 patients. Ann Surg Oncol. 2018;25(13):3849–57. https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-018-6759-0 .
doi: 10.1245/s10434-018-6759-0
pubmed: 30225833
Timbrell S, Al-Himdani S, Shaw O, Tan K, Morris J, Bundred N. Comparison of local recurrence after simple and skin-sparing mastectomy performed in patients with ductal carcinoma in situ. Ann Surg Oncol. 2017;24:1071–6. https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-016-5673-6 .
doi: 10.1245/s10434-016-5673-6
pubmed: 27837296
Fitzsullivan E, Lari SA, Smith B, Caudle AS, Krishnamurthy S, Lucci A, et al. Incidence and consequence of close margins in patients with ductal carcinoma-in situ treated with mastectomy: Is further therapy warranted? Ann Surg Oncol. 2013;20:4103–12. https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-013-3194-0 .
doi: 10.1245/s10434-013-3194-0
pubmed: 23975313
pmcid: 4337951
Wu ZY, Kim HJ, Lee J, Chung IY, Kim JS, Lee SB, et al. Recurrence outcomes after nipple-sparing mastectomy and immediate breast reconstruction in patients with pure ductal carcinoma in situ. Ann Surg Oncol. 2020;27:1627–35. https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-019-08184-z .
doi: 10.1245/s10434-019-08184-z
pubmed: 31912259
Carlson GW, Page A, Johnson E, Nicholson K, Styblo TM, Wood WC. Local recurrence of ductal carcinoma in situ after skin-sparing mastectomy. J Am Coll Surg. 2007;204:1074–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2007.01.063 . (discussion 1078–80).
doi: 10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2007.01.063
pubmed: 17481544
Mann RM, Kuhl CK, Kinkel K, Boetes C. Breast MRI: Guidelines from the European Society of Breast Imaging. Eur Radiol. 2008;18:1307–18. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-008-0863-7 .
doi: 10.1007/s00330-008-0863-7
pubmed: 18389253
pmcid: 2441490
Baur A, Bahrs SD, Speck S, Wietek BM, Krämer B, Vogel U, et al. Breast MRI of pure ductal carcinoma in situ: sensitivity of diagnosis and influence of lesion characteristics. Eur J Radiol. 2013;82:1731–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrad.2013.05.002 .
doi: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2013.05.002
pubmed: 23743052
Kuhl CK, Schrading S, Bieling HB, Wardelmann E, Leutner CC, Koenig R, et al. MRI for diagnosis of pure ductal carcinoma in situ: a prospective observational study. Lancet. 2007;370:485–92. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(07)61232-X .
doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(07)61232-X
pubmed: 17693177
Lee SC, Mendez-Broomberg K, Eacobacci K, Vincoff NS, Gupta E, McElligott SE. Nipple-sparing mastectomy: what the radiologist should know. Radiographics. 2022;42:321–39. https://doi.org/10.1148/rg.210136 .
doi: 10.1148/rg.210136
pubmed: 35179983
Galimberti V, Vicini E, Corso G, Morigi C, Fontana S, Sacchini V, et al. Nipple-sparing and skin-sparing mastectomy: review of aims, oncological safety and contraindications. Breast. 2017;34(Suppl 1):S82–4. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.breast.2017.06.034 .
doi: 10.1016/j.breast.2017.06.034
pubmed: 28673535
Leclère FM, Panet-Spallina J, Kolb F, Garbay JR, Mazouni C, Leduey A, et al. Nipple-sparing mastectomy and immediate reconstruction in ductal carcinoma in situ: a critical assessment with 41 patients. Aesthetic Plast Surg. 2014;38:338–43. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00266-013-0236-8 .
doi: 10.1007/s00266-013-0236-8
pubmed: 24477519
Gradishar WJ, Moran MS, Abraham J, et al. Breast cancer. version 3.2022, NCCN clinical practice guidelines in oncology. J Natl Compr Canc Netw. 2022;20:691–722.
doi: 10.6004/jnccn.2022.0030
pubmed: 35714673
Wu ZY, Kim HJ, Lee J, Chung IY, Kim J, Lee SB, et al. Oncologic safety of nipple-sparing mastectomy in patients with breast cancer and tumor-to-nipple distance ≤ 1 cm: a matched cohort study. Ann Surg Oncol. 2021;28:4284–91. https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-020-09427-0 .
doi: 10.1245/s10434-020-09427-0
pubmed: 33423119
Joo JH, Ki Y, Kim W, Nam J, Kim D, Park J, et al. Pattern of local recurrence after mastectomy and reconstruction in breast cancer patients: a systematic review. Gland Surg. 2021;10(6):2037–46. https://doi.org/10.21037/gs-21-15 .
doi: 10.21037/gs-21-15
pubmed: 34268088
pmcid: 8258883
Giannotti DG, Hanna SA, Cerri GG, Barbosa Bevilacqua JL. Analysis of skin flap thickness and residual breast tissue after mastectomy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2018;102:82–91. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrobp.2018.05.023 .
doi: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2018.05.023
pubmed: 30102208
Beer GM, Varga Z, Budi S, Seifert B, Meyer VE. Incidence of the superficial fascia and its relevance in skin-sparing mastectomy. Cancer. 2002;94:1619–25. https://doi.org/10.1002/cncr.10429 .
doi: 10.1002/cncr.10429
pubmed: 11920520
Sheikh F, Rebecca A, Pockaj B, Wasif N, McCullough AE, Casey W, et al. Inadequate margins of excision when undergoing mastectomy for breast cancer: which patients are at risk? Ann Surg Oncol. 2011;18:952–6. https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-010-1406-4 .
doi: 10.1245/s10434-010-1406-4
pubmed: 21080087
Pawloski KR, Tadros AB, Sevilimedu V, Newman A, Gentile L, Zabor EC, et al. Patterns of invasive recurrence among patients originally treated for ductal carcinoma in situ by breast-conserving surgery versus mastectomy. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2021;186:617–24. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10549-021-06129-3 .
doi: 10.1007/s10549-021-06129-3
pubmed: 33675490
pmcid: 8019411