Therapeutic mammaplasty is a safe and effective alternative to mastectomy with or without immediate breast reconstruction

Protocol for the development of a core outcome set and reporting guidelines for locoregional treatment in neoadjuvant systemic breast cancer treatment trials: the PRECEDENT project

INTRODUCTION

Neoadjuvant systemic anticancer therapy (neoSACT) is increasingly used in the treatment of early breast cancer. Response to therapy is prognostic and allows locoregional and adjuvant systemic treatments to be tailored to minimise morbidity and optimise oncological outcomes and quality of life. Accurate information about locoregional treatments following neoSACT is vital to allow the translation of downstaging benefits into practice and facilitate meaningful interpretation of oncological outcomes, particularly locoregional recurrence. Reporting of locoregional treatments in neoSACT studies, however, is currently poor. The development of a core outcome set (COS) and reporting guidelines is one strategy by which this may be improved.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

A COS for reporting locoregional treatment (surgery and radiotherapy) in neoSACT trials will be developed in accordance with Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials (COMET) and Core Outcome Set-Standards for Development guidelines. Reporting guidance will be developed concurrently.The project will have three phases: (1) generation of a long list of relevant outcome domains and reporting items from a systematic review of published neoSACT studies and interviews with key stakeholders. Identified items and domains will be categorised and formatted into Delphi consensus questionnaire items. (2) At least two rounds of an international online Delphi survey in which at least 250 key stakeholders (surgeons/oncologists/radiologists/pathologists/trialists/methodologists) will score the importance of reporting each outcome. (3) A consensus meeting with key stakeholders to discuss and agree the final COS and reporting guidance.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethical approval for the consensus process will be obtained from the Queen's University Belfast Faculty Ethics Committee. The COS/reporting guidelines will be presented at international meetings and published in peer-reviewed journals. Dissemination materials will be produced in collaboration with our steering group and patient advocates so the results can be shared widely.

REGISTRATION

The study has been prospectively registered on the COMET website (https://www.comet-initiative.org/Studies/Details/2854).

Oncoplastic and reconstructive surgery in SENONETWORK Italian breast centers: lights and shadows

•Despite the significance of oncoplastic procedure, an italian database is lacking. •Senonetwork established a multidisciplinary survey to assess their safety and efficacy. •Reconstructive outcomes were positive across low and high-volume centers. •After mastectomy, implant-based techniques are common. DTI reconstruction is advantageuos. •This contributes to the global understanding of effective strategies against breast cancer.

Outcomes of complex oncoplastic breast surgery in older women. Analysis of data from the Age Gap cohort study

KEY WORDS

Breast cancer, mastectomy, breast conserving surgery, post-mastectomy reconstruction, older women, quality of life.

'PartBreCon' study. A UK multicentre retrospective cohort study to assess outcomes following PARTial BREast reCONstruction with chest wall perforator flaps

BACKGROUND

Partial breast reconstruction with a pedicled chest wall perforator flap (CWPF) enables breast conservation in a higher tumour: breast volume ratio scenario. Since there is limited evidence, this retrospective cohort study aimed to ascertain immediate (30-days) and medium-term (follow-up duration) surgical outcomes.

METHODS

STROBE-compliant protocol ascertained CWPF outcomes between March 2011-March 2021. UK centres known to perform CWPF were invited to participate if they performed at least 10 cases. Data were retrospectively collected, including patient demographics, tumour and treatment characteristics, and surgical and oncological outcomes. Statistical analysis (R™) included multivariable logistic regression and sensitivity analysis.

RESULTS

Across 15 centres, 507 patients with median age (54 years, IQR; 48-62), body mass index (25.4 kg/m2, IQR; 22.5-29), tumour size (26 mm, IQR; 18-35), and specimen weight (62 g, IQR; 40-92) had following flap types: LiCAP (54.1%, n = 273), MiCAP/AiCAP (19.6%, n = 99), LiCAP + LTAP (19.8%, n = 100) and TDAP (2.2%, n = 11). 30-days complication rates were in 12%: haematoma (4.3%, n = 22), wound infection (4.3%, n = 22), delayed wound healing (2.8%, n = 14) and flap loss (0.6%, n = 3; 1 full) leading to readmissions (2.6%, n = 13) and re-operations (2.6%, n = 13). Positive margins (n = 88, 17.7%) led to 15.9% (n = 79) re-excisions, including 7.5% (n = 37) at the planned 2nd of 2-stage surgery and 1.8% (n = 9) mastectomy. At median 23 months (IQR; 11-39) follow-up, there were 1.2% (n = 6) symmetrisations; recurrences: local (1%), regional/nodal (0.6%) and distant (3.2%).

CONCLUSIONS

This large multicentre cohort study demonstrates acceptable complication and margin re-excision rates. CWPF extends the range of breast conservation techniques. Further studies are required for long-term oncological outcomes.

Current practice and provision of oncoplastic breast-conserving surgery in the UK: results of the ANTHEM national practice questionnaire

PURPOSE

Oncoplastic breast-conserving surgery (OPBCS) may be a better option than mastectomy ± immediate breast reconstruction (IBR) for women with breast cancer but studies directly comparing the techniques are lacking. We surveyed UK breast units to determine the current practice of OPBCS to inform the design of a future comparative study.

METHODS

An electronic survey was developed to explore the current practice of OPBCS. This included the local availability of volume displacement and/or replacement techniques; number of cases performed; contraindications and approach to contralateral symmetrisation. Summary data for each survey item were calculated and overall provision of care examined.

RESULTS

58 UK centres completed the survey, including 43 (74%) stand-alone breast and 15 (26%) combined breast/plastics units. Over 40% of units (n = 24) treated more than 500 cancers/year. Most units offered volume displacement techniques (TMs) (97%). Over two-thirds (n = 39. 67%) of units offered local perforator flaps (LPF). Approximately a half of units (10/19) not performing LPF were planning to introduce them in the next 12-24 months. A third (n = 19, 33%) of units routinely performed simultaneous contralateral symmetrisation mostly with two-surgeon operating. There were limited oncological restrictions to OPBCS with no contraindications for multifocal cancers in most centres; 65% of units (36/55) offered OPBCS for multicentric disease. Extensive DCIS was a contraindication in a minority of units.

CONCLUSIONS

OPBCS is widely available in the UK but contraindications and approaches to contralateral symmetrisation were variable. Work is now needed to prospectively evaluate the outcomes of OPBCS vs mastectomy ± IBR to support informed decision-making.

Impact of Surgical Care Bundle on Surgical Site Infection after Non-Reconstructive Breast Cancer Surgery: A Single-Centre Retrospective Comparative Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

Surgical-site infections (SSIs) are the commonest cause of healthcare-related infections. Although a surgical care bundle (SCB), defined as a group of preventative measures, is effective in reducing SSIs, it has not been well documented in breast cancer surgery. We aimed to investigate the impact of SCB on SSI.

METHODS

A single-centre retrospective comparative cohort study between 2016 and 2020 was carried out. An SCB including eight different measures was implemented in October 2018 at Sahlgrenska University Hospital, Sweden. Patients who underwent non-reconstructive breast cancer surgery were included for analysis. The primary endpoint was SSI within 30 days after surgery.

RESULTS

Overall, 10.4% of patients (100/958) developed SSI. After SCB implementation, the overall SSI rate reduced from 11.8% to 8.9% (p = 0.15). The largest SSI rate reduction was seen in the subgroup that underwent breast conservation and sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB), from 18.8% to 9.8% (p = 0.01). In this multivariable analysis adjusting for patient and treatment factors, the implementation of SCB resulted in a statistically significant reduction in SSI risk (OR 0.63, 95% CI 0.40-0.99, p = 0.04).

CONCLUSIONS

The implementation of a SCB could reduce the incidence of SSI in breast cancer surgery.

Therapeutic mammoplasty: a "wise" oncoplastic choice-lessons from the largest single-center cohort from Asia

Introduction

The majority of breast cancer patients from India usually present with advanced disease, limiting the scope of breast conservation surgery. Therapeutic mammoplasty (TM), an oncoplastic technique that permits larger excisions, is quite promising in such a scenario and well suited to breast cancer in medium-to-large-sized breasts with ptosis and in some cases of large or multifocal/multicentric tumors. Here, we describe our TM cohort of 205 (194 malignant and 11 benign) patients from 2012 to 2019 treated at a single surgeon center in India, the largest Asian dataset for TM.

Methods

All patients underwent treatment after careful discussions by a multidisciplinary tumor board and patient counseling. We report the clinicopathological profiles and surgical, oncological, cosmetic, and patient-related outcomes with different TM procedures.

Results

The median age of breast cancer patients was 49 years; that of benign disease patients was 41 years. The breast cancer cohort underwent simple (n = 84), complex (n = 71), or extreme (n = 44) TM surgeries. All resection margins were analyzed through intra-operative frozen-section assessment with stringent rad-path analysis protocols. The margin positivity rate was found to be 1.4%. A majority of the cohort was observed to have pT1-pT2 tumors, and the median resection volume was 180 cc. Low post-operative complication rates and good-to-excellent cosmetic scores were observed. The median follow-up was 39 months. We observed 2.07% local and 5.7% distal recurrences, and disease-specific mortality was 3.1%. At median follow-up, the overall survival was observed to be 95.9%, and disease-free survival was found to be 92.2%. The patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) showed good-to-excellent scores for all types of TMs across BREAST-Q domains.

Conclusion

We conclude that in India, a country where women present with large and locally advanced tumors, TM safely expands the indications for breast conservation surgery. Our results show oncological and cosmetic outcomes at acceptable levels. Most importantly, PROM scores suggest improved overall wellbeing and better satisfaction with the quality of life. For patients with macromastia, this technique not only focuses on cancer but also improves self-image and reduces associated physical discomfort often overlooked by women in the Indian setting. The popularization of this procedure will enable Indian patients with breast cancer to receive the benefits of breast conservation.

Major surgical postoperative complications and survival in breast cancer: Swedish population-based register study in 57 152 women

BACKGROUND

Postoperative complications may activate prometastatic systemic pathways through tissue damage, wound healing, infection, and inflammation. Postoperative complications are associated with inferior survival in several types of cancer. The aim was to determine the association between postoperative complications and survival in breast cancer.

METHODS

This population-based cohort included women operated for T1-3 N0-3 M0 invasive breast cancer in Sweden from 2008 to 2017. Only major surgical postoperative complications leading to readmission and/or reoperation within 30 days were considered. Main outcomes were overall survival (OS) and breast cancer-specific survival (BCSS). Prospectively collected nationwide register data were used. Multivariable Cox models were adjusted for clinical and socioeconomic confounders and co-morbidity.

RESULTS

Among 57 152 women, major surgical postoperative complications were registered for 1854 patients. Median follow-up was 6.22 (0.09-11.70) years. Overall, 9163 patients died, and 3472 died from breast cancer. Major surgical postoperative complications were more common after mastectomy with or without immediate reconstruction (7.3 and 4.3 per cent respectively) than after breast-conserving surgery (2.3 per cent). Unadjusted 5-year OS and BCSS rates were 82.6 (95 per cent c.i. 80.8 to 84.5) and 92.1 (90.8 to 93.5) per cent respectively for women with a major surgical postoperative complication, and 88.8 (88.6 to 89.1) and 95.0 (94.8 to 95.2) per cent for those without a complication (P < 0.001). After adjustment, all-cause and breast cancer mortality rates remained higher after a major surgical postoperative complication (OS: HR 1.32, 95 per cent c.i. 1.15 to 1.51; BCSS: HR 1.31, 1.04 to 1.65). After stratification for type of breast surgery, this association remained significant only for women who had mastectomy without reconstruction (OS: HR 1.41, 1.20 to 1.66; BCSS: HR 1.36, 1.03 to 1.79).

CONCLUSION

Major surgical postoperative complications are associated with inferior survival, especially after mastectomy. These results underline the importance of surgical de-escalation.

[The Significance of Oncoplastic Breast Reconstruction After Tumorectomy in Surgical Breast Cancer Therapy]

Breast-conserving therapy (BCT), meaning tumorectomy in combination with systemic therapy and locoregional radiation therapy has become the preferred method to treat early-stage breast cancer. With excellent long-term recurrence-free and overall survival rates, breast surgeons today must deliver du- rable and aesthetically appealing results that guarantee a good quality of life to meet the high patient expectations. Oncoplas- tic breast surgery (OPBS) is an innovative approach to improve the overall results of BCT. Often carried out by a team of a plastic surgeon and an oncologic breast surgeon, OPBS can actively prevent breast deformities without compromising oncological safety. In the following, an overview of the principles and techniques of oncoplastic breast surgery will be given due to its ever-increasing significance and its advantages and dis- advantages will be discussed in the context of reconstructive breast surgery.

The challenge of equipoise: qualitative interviews exploring the views of health professionals and women with multiple ipsilateral breast cancer on recruitment to a surgical randomised controlled feasibility trial

Background

A multicentre feasibility trial (MIAMI), comparing outcomes and quality of life of women with multiple ipsilateral breast cancer randomised to therapeutic mammoplasty or mastectomy, was conducted from September 2018 to March 2020. The MIAMI surgical trial aimed to investigate recruitment of sufficient numbers of women. Multidisciplinary teams at 10 breast care centres in the UK identified 190 with MIBC diagnosis; 20 were eligible for trial participation but after being approached only four patients were recruited. A nested qualitative study sought to understand the reasons for this lack of recruitment.

Methods

Interviews were conducted from November 2019 to September 2020 with 17 staff from eight hospital-based breast care centres that recruited and attempted to recruit to MIAMI; and seven patients from four centres, comprising all patients who were recruited to the trial and some who declined to take part. Interviews were audio-recorded, anonymised and analysed using thematic methods of building codes into themes and sub-themes using the process of constant comparison.

Results

Overarching themes of (1) influences on equipoise and recruitment and (2) effects of a lack of equipoise were generated. Within these themes, health professional themes described the barriers to recruitment as ‘the treatment landscape has changed’, ‘staff preferences and beliefs’ which influenced equipoise and patient advice; and how different the treatments were for patients. Patient themes of ‘altruism and timing of trial approach’, ‘influences from consultants and others’ and ‘diagnostic journey doubts’ all played a part in whether patients agreed to take part in the trial.

Conclusions

Barriers to recruiting to breast cancer surgical trials can be significant, especially where there are substantial differences between the treatments being offered and a lack of equipoise communicated by healthcare professionals to patients. Patients can become overwhelmed by numerous requests for participation in research trials and inappropriate timing of trial discussions. Alternative study designs to the gold standard randomised control trial for surgical interventions may be required to provide the high-quality evidence on which to base practice.

Trial registration

ISRCTN (ISRCTN17987569) registered on April 20, 2018, and ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03514654).

Outcome reporting in therapeutic mammaplasty: a systematic review

Background

Therapeutic mammaplasty (TM) is an oncological procedure which combines tumour resection with breast reduction and mastopexy techniques. Previous systematic reviews have demonstrated the oncological safety of TM but reporting of critically important outcomes, such as quality of life, aesthetic and functional outcomes, are limited, piecemeal or inconsistent. This systematic review aimed to identify all outcomes reported in clinical studies of TM to facilitate development of a core outcome set.

Methods

Medline, EMBASE, CINAHL and Web of Science were searched from inception to 5 August 2020. Included studies reported clinical outcomes following TM for adult women. Two authors screened articles independently for eligibility. Data were extracted regarding the outcome definition and classification type (for example, oncological, quality of life, etc.), time of outcome reporting and measurement tools.

Results

Of 5709 de-duplicated records, 148 were included in the narrative synthesis. The majority of studies (n = 102, 68.9 per cent) reported measures of survival and/or recurrence; approximately three-quarters (n = 75, 73.5 per cent) had less than 5 years follow-up. Aesthetic outcome was reported in half of studies (n = 75, 50.7 per cent) using mainly subjective, non-validated measurement tools. The time point at which aesthetic assessment was conducted was highly variable, and only defined in 48 (64.0 per cent) studies and none included a preoperative baseline for comparison. Few studies reported quality of life (n = 30, 20.3 per cent), functional outcomes (n = 5, 3.4 per cent) or resource use (n = 28, 18.9 per cent).

Conclusion

Given the oncological equivalence of TM and mastectomy, treatment decisions are often driven by aesthetic and functional outcomes, which are infrequently and inconsistently reported with non-validated measurement tools.

Oncoplastic breast-conserving surgery for women with primary breast cancer

BACKGROUND

Oncoplastic breast-conserving surgery (O-BCS) involves removing the tumour in the breast and using plastic surgery techniques to reconstruct the breast. The adequacy of published evidence on the safety and efficacy of O-BCS for the treatment of breast cancer compared to other surgical options for breast cancer is still debatable. It is estimated that the local recurrence rate is similar to standard breast-conserving surgery (S-BCS) and also mastectomy, but the aesthetic and patient-reported outcomes may be improved with oncoplastic techniques.

OBJECTIVES

Our primary objective was to assess oncological control outcomes following O-BCS compared with other surgical options for women with breast cancer. Our secondary objective was to assess surgical complications, recall rates, need for further surgery to achieve adequate oncological resection, patient satisfaction through patient-reported outcomes, and cosmetic outcomes through objective measures or clinician-reported outcomes.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Breast Cancer Group's Specialized Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE (via OVID), Embase (via OVID), the World Health Organization's International Clinical Trials Registry Platform and ClinicalTrials.gov on 7 August 2020. We did not apply any language restrictions.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We selected randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and non-randomised comparative studies (cohort and case-control studies). Studies evaluated any O-BCS technique, including volume displacement techniques and partial breast volume replacement techniques compared to any other surgical treatment (partial resection or mastectomy) for the treatment of breast cancer.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Four review authors performed data extraction and resolved disagreements. We used ROBINS-I to assess the risk of bias by outcome. We performed descriptive data analysis and meta-analysis and evaluated the quality of the evidence using GRADE criteria. The outcomes included local recurrence, breast cancer-specific disease-free survival, re-excision rates, complications, recall rates, and patient-reported outcome measures.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 78 non-randomised cohort studies evaluating 178,813 women. Overall, we assessed the risk of bias per outcome as being at serious risk of bias due to confounding; where studies adjusted for confounding, we deemed these at moderate risk. Comparison 1: oncoplastic breast-conserving surgery (O-BCS) versus standard-BCS (S-BCS) The evidence in the review found that O-BCS when compared to S-BCS, may make little or no difference to local recurrence; either when measured as local recurrence-free survival (hazard ratio (HR) 0.90, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.61 to 1.34; 4 studies, 7600 participants; very low-certainty evidence) or local recurrence rate (HR 1.33, 95% CI 0.96 to 1.83; 4 studies, 2433 participants; low-certainty evidence), but the evidence is very uncertain due to most studies not controlling for confounding clinicopathological factors. O-BCS compared to S-BCS may make little to no difference to disease-free survival (HR 1.06, 95% CI 0.89 to 1.26; 7 studies, 5532 participants; low-certainty evidence). O-BCS may reduce the rate of re-excisions needed for oncological resection (risk ratio (RR) 0.76, 95% CI 0.69 to 0.85; 38 studies, 13,341 participants; very low-certainty evidence), but the evidence is very uncertain. O-BCS may increase the number of women who have at least one complication (RR 1.19, 95% CI 1.10 to 1.27; 20 studies, 118,005 participants; very low-certainty evidence) and increase the recall to biopsy rate (RR 2.39, 95% CI 1.67 to 3.42; 6 studies, 715 participants; low-certainty evidence). Meta-analysis was not possible when assessing patient-reported outcomes or cosmetic evaluation; in general, O-BCS reported a similar or more favourable result, however, the evidence is very uncertain due to risk of bias in the measurement methods. Comparison 2: oncoplastic breast-conserving surgery (O-BCS) versus mastectomy alone O-BCS may increase local recurrence-free survival compared to mastectomy but the evidence is very uncertain (HR 0.55, 95% CI 0.34 to 0.91; 2 studies, 4713 participants; very low-certainty evidence). The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of O-BCS on disease-free survival as there were only data from one study. O-BCS may reduce complications compared to mastectomy, but the evidence is very uncertain due to high risk of bias mainly resulting from confounding (RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.67 to 0.83; 4 studies, 4839 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Data on patient-reported outcome measures came from single studies; it was not possible to meta-analyse the data. Comparison 3: oncoplastic breast-conserving surgery (O-BCS) versus mastectomy with reconstruction O-BCS may make little or no difference to local recurrence-free survival (HR 1.37, 95% CI 0.72 to 2.62; 1 study, 3785 participants; very low-certainty evidence) or disease-free survival (HR 0.45, 95% CI 0.09 to 2.22; 1 study, 317 participants; very low-certainty evidence) when compared to mastectomy with reconstruction, but the evidence is very uncertain. O-BCS may reduce the complication rate compared to mastectomy with reconstruction (RR 0.49, 95% CI 0.45 to 0.54; 5 studies, 4973 participants; very low-certainty evidence) but the evidence is very uncertain due to high risk of bias from confounding and inconsistency of results. The evidence is very uncertain for patient-reported outcome measures and cosmetic evaluation.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The evidence is very uncertain regarding oncological outcomes following O-BCS compared to S-BCS, though O-BCS has not been shown to be inferior. O-BCS may result in less need for a second re-excision surgery but may result in more complications and a greater recall rate than S-BCS. It seems that O-BCS may give better patient satisfaction and surgeon rating for the look of the breast, but the evidence for this is of poor quality, and due to lack of numerical data, it was not possible to pool the results of different studies. It seems O-BCS results in fewer complications compared with surgeries involving mastectomy. Based on this review, no certain conclusions can be made to help inform policymakers. The surgical decision for what operation to proceed with should be made jointly between clinician and patient after an appropriate discussion about the risks and benefits of O-BCS personalised to the patient, taking into account clinicopathological factors. This review highlighted the deficiency of well-conducted studies to evaluate efficacy, safety and patient-reported outcomes following O-BCS.

Advanced breast conservation and partial breast reconstruction - a review of current available options for oncoplastic breast surgery

Breast cancer is the most common cancer affecting one in three women with new cancer diagnosis in England. Breast-conserving surgery is the primary surgical option in a vast majority of these patients. Use of oncoplastic techniques in breast conservation surgery has significantly improved the aesthetic outcomes without compromising the oncological safety of cancer resections. Oncoplastic breast-conserving surgery (OPBCS) has transformed the specialty with a paradigm shift in ideology and the recognition that aesthetic and oncological resections are synonymous when planning surgical intervention for patients with breast cancer. The two main options for OPBCS are therapeutic mammoplasty and partial beast reconstruction using pedicle-based flaps. This review aims to highlight key concepts in OPBCS demonstrating an overview of these surgical techniques, their safety, outcomes and the emergence of extreme oncoplastic breast surgery.

Can supine breast magnetic resonance imaging help hit the target in extreme oncoplastic surgery?

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the clinical value of supine magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for tumor localization in breast cancer patients with large or multifocal tumors detected by prone MRI, scheduled for oncoplastic breast conserving surgery (OBCS). Outcomes were compared with those of patients who underwent wide local excision (WLE) or OBCS without MRI guidance.

METHODS

Over a 2-year period, consecutive patients with large or multifocal disease scheduled for OBCS with MRI-only findings were invited to participate (Group-1). Supplementary supine MRI was performed, and tumor margins were marked in the surgical position. Consecutive patients with early, non-palpable breast cancer who underwent WLE (Group-2) or OBCS (Group-3) were included for comparisons. The primary outcome was reoperation due to an insufficient margin. Secondary outcomes included surgical complications and delayed adjuvant treatment.

RESULTS

Altogether, 102 breasts (98 patients) were analyzed. All preoperative demographic data were comparable among the three groups. Multifocality, tumor-to-breast volume ratio, and the volume of excised breast tissue were significantly greater in Group-1 than in Groups-2 and 3. Operation time was longer and the need for axillary clearance or surgery for both breasts was more common in Groups-1 and 3 than in Group-2. Adequate margins were achieved in all patients in Groups-1 and 2, and one patient underwent re-excision in Group-3.

CONCLUSIONS

Supine MRI in the surgical position is a new, promising method to localize multifocal, large tumors visible on MRI. Its short-term outcomes were comparable with those of conventional WLE and OBCS.

Innovations for the future of breast surgery

BACKGROUND

Future innovations in science and technology with an impact on multimodal breast cancer management from a surgical perspective are discussed in this narrative review. The work was undertaken in response to the Commission on the Future of Surgery project initiated by the Royal College of Surgeons of England.

METHODS

Expert opinion was sought around themes of surgical de-escalation, reduction in treatment morbidities, and improving the accuracy of breast-conserving surgery in terms of margin status. There was emphasis on how the primacy of surgical excision in an era of oncoplastic and reconstructive surgery is increasingly being challenged, with more effective systemic therapies that target residual disease burden, and permit response-adapted approaches to both breast and axillary surgery.

RESULTS

Technologies for intraoperative margin assessment can potentially half re-excision rates after breast-conserving surgery, and sentinel lymph node biopsy will become a therapeutic procedure for many patients with node-positive disease treated either with surgery or chemotherapy as the primary modality. Genomic profiling of tumours can aid in the selection of patients for neoadjuvant and adjuvant therapies as well as prevention strategies. Molecular subtypes are predictive of response to induction therapies and reductive approaches to surgery in the breast or axilla.

CONCLUSION

Treatments are increasingly being tailored and based on improved understanding of tumour biology and relevant biomarkers to determine absolute benefit and permit delivery of cost-effective healthcare. Patient involvement is crucial for breast cancer studies to ensure relevance and outcome measures that are objective, meaningful, and patient-centred.

Protocol for a mixed-method study to inform the feasibility of undertaking a large-scale multicentre study comparing the clinical and patient-reported outcomes of oncoplastic breast conservation as an alternative to mastectomy with or without immediate breast reconstruction in women unsuitable for standard breast-conserving surgery (the ANTHEM Feasibility Study)

INTRODUCTION

Approximately 40% of the 55 000 women diagnosed with breast cancer each year in the UK undergo mastectomy because they are considered unsuitable for standard breast-conserving surgery (BCS) due to tumour size or multiple tumour foci. Mastectomy can significantly impact women's quality of life, and only one in four women currently undergo immediate breast reconstruction (IBR).Level 2 oncoplastic breast-conserving surgery (OPBCS) combines removing the cancer with a range of plastic surgical volume replacement (eg, local perforator flaps) and volume displacement techniques (eg, therapeutic mammaplasty) that can extend the role of BCS and may allow some women not suitable for standard BCS to avoid mastectomy. High-quality research to determine whether OPBCS offers a safe and effective alternative to mastectomy±IBR is currently lacking. Preliminary work is needed to ensure a future large-scale study is feasible and well designed and addresses questions important to patients and the National Health Service.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

Mixed methods will be used to inform feasibility and design of a future large-scale study comparing the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of OPBCS and mastectomy±IBR. It will have four parts: (1) a National Practice Questionnaire to determine current practice and provision of oncoplastic breast and reconstructive surgery in the UK; (2) a pilot multicentre prospective cohort study to explore the proportion of patients choosing OPBCS versus mastectomy, the proportion in OPBCS is successful and clinical and patient-reported outcomes of different techniques at 3 and 12 months postsurgery; (3) a qualitative interview study to explore patients' attitudes to different procedures, rationale for decision-making and perceptions of outcomes; and (4) design of the future study.All centres offering OPBCS and mastectomy in the UK will be invited to participate. Recruitment is planned to commence winter 2020 and continue for 12 months.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The study has ethical approval from the Wales Research Ethics Committee 6 National Research Ethics Service (REC Ref 20/WA/0225). Results will be presented at national and international meetings and published in peer-reviewed journals. We will work with patients to develop lay summaries and share these through patient groups and breast cancer charities.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ISRCTN18238549.

Systematic review of partial breast reconstruction with pedicled perforator artery flaps: Clinical, oncological and cosmetic outcomes

The use of chest wall perforator flaps (CWPFs) following breast conservation surgery for breast cancer has become a useful tool in the armamentarium of the oncoplastic breast surgeon, however robust evidence for the technique is lacking. The aim of this study was to conduct a systematic review appraising the current evidence for the use of CWPFs, evaluating clinical, oncological and cosmetic outcomes. A PRISMA-compliant systematic review, with PROSPERO published protocol a priori and search of all relevant database and trial registries between 1990 to July 2020. Eleven studies amounting to 432 cases were reviewed and considered to be at high risk of bias due to small sample size, selective outcome reporting and selection bias. Heterogeneity due to lack of consensus of outcome measures prevented meaningful analysis. Fifty-two (12.3%) clinical complications were recorded: seroma (n = 9; 2.1%), fat necrosis (n = 9; 2.4%), haematoma (n = 8; 1.9%), infection (n = 9; 2.1%), and flap necrosis (n = 9; 2.1%). Thirty-four (10.8%) patients had an involved positive margin, 29 patients underwent re-excision (9.3%) and four underwent completion mastectomy (1.3%). One local recurrence and six distant recurrences were observed during a mean follow up of 21 months (1-49). A pooled patient cosmetic satisfaction descriptor of good or excellent was described in 93% of cases. CWPFs are a safe method of partial breast reconstruction following BCS. They are associated with a low complication rate, acceptable short-term oncological outcomes and satisfactory cosmetic outcome. There is a relative paucity in quality of data in this field and larger prospective studies are needed to investigate outcomes further.

A prospective cohort study of the safety of breast cancer surgery during COVID-19 pandemic in the West of Scotland

INTRODUCTION

In order to minimise the risk of breast cancer patients for COVID-19 infection related morbidity and mortality prioritisation of care has utmost importance since the onset of the pandemic. However, COVID-19 related risk in patients undergoing breast cancer surgery has not been studied yet. We evaluated the safety of breast cancer surgery during COVID-19 pandemic in the West of Scotland region.

METHODS

A prospective cohort study of patients having breast cancer surgery was carried out in a geographical region during the first eight weeks of the hospital lockdown and outcomes were compared to the regional cancer registry data of pre-COVID-19 patients of the same units (n = 1415).

RESULTS

188 operations were carried out in 179 patients. Tumour size was significantly larger in patients undergoing surgery during hospital lockdown than before (cT3-4: 16.8% vs. 7.4%; p < 0.001; pT2 - pT4: 45.5% vs. 35.6%; p = 0.002). ER negative and HER-2 positive rate was significantly higher during lockdown (ER negative: 41.3% vs. 17%, p < 0.001; HER-2 positive: 23.4% vs. 14.8%; p = 0.004). While breast conservation rate was lower during lockdown (58.6% vs. 65%; p < 0.001), level II oncoplastic conservation was significantly higher in order to reduce mastectomy rate (22.8% vs. 5.6%; p < 0.001). No immediate reconstruction was offered during lockdown. 51.2% had co-morbidity, and 7.8% developed postoperative complications in lockdown. There was no peri-operative COVID-19 infection related morbidity or mortality.

CONCLUSION

breast cancer can be safely provided during COVID-19 pandemic in selected patients.

Bifurcate inferior pedicle mammoplasty in large ptotic breast for tumor located at the upper outer quadrant with skin involvement-a novel technique allowing good cosmetic outcome: case report

Breast oncoplastic techniques followed by radiotherapy represent nowadays the standard of care for breast cancer treatment. For tumours located at the upper outer quadrant in patients with large and ptotic breasts, the use of level II breast reduction mammoplasty, allows large quadrantectomies without compromising the breast natural shape and reducing the breast volume to be irradiated. When the skin overlying the tumour in the upper outer quadrant is involved, the removal of the skin during mammoplasty could lead to an extreme reduction of the breast, resulting in a bad outcome. Different strategies have been adopted to avoid a poor cosmetic result including a Z plastic or latissimus dorsi (LD) mini flap. At our institution we developed a new technique utilizing an inferior bifurcated pedicle mammoplasty with the preservation of a skin island for a patient with a residual tumour following chemotherapy involving the skin in the upper outer quadrant of the right breast. The patient did show no complications, with no delay for adjuvant radiotherapy treatment. Our method is a novel technique to treat malignancies in this location for patients with large and ptotic breasts when skin removal is indicated and it may represent an effective strategy to prevent excessive gland reduction, thus avoiding poor cosmetic result.