A prospective cohort study to analyze the interaction of tumor-to-breast volume in breast conservation therapy versus mastectomy with reconstruction

Patient Reported Outcomes in Breast Cancer: A Plea for the Silent and Forgotten

BACKGROUND

There are an increasing number of reports addressing patient reported outcomes (PRO's) following breast conserving surgery (BCS) and mastectomy with reconstruction (MR), but few addressing mastectomy alone (MA). Patients' choice of procedure is often preference-based, making PRO's essential to inform decision making. The current research aims to evaluate PRO's associated with all three surgical procedures, along with patient participation rates.

METHODS

Patients with unilateral, nonrecurrent breast cancer were prospectively enrolled in the study (June 2020 to September 2023). Participants received the BREAST-Q (BQ) survey preoperatively (Q1), 2 to 6 weeks (Q2) and 1 year (Q3) postoperatively. Forced multiple regression analyses were performed to compare postoperative BQ scores.

RESULTS

199 patients were eligible, with 73.4% (146/199) participating in the study. While MA had lower satisfaction with breast scores than BCS (B = -11.6), they were equivalent to those of MR (B = -16.5), with similar pathologic and treatment related factors. Physical well being was similar between all three procedures, while psychosocial well being scores were lower following MR (B = -15.5), but not MA. Patient age, BMI, and tumor size variably impacted BQ scores, but preoperative BQ scores independently correlated with postoperative scores across all domains.

CONCLUSION

Patient response rates are consistent with the literature, but require improvement to ensure meaningful conclusions, generalizability of results, and comparisons between studies. Patients undergoing BCS reported the highest satisfaction and quality of life, with MA being noninferior to MR. Efforts to increase patient participation in PRO's are required, especially in those undergoing MA.

Aesthetic results were more satisfactory after oncoplastic surgery than after total breast reconstruction according to patients and surgeons

INTRODUCTION

Patient satisfaction after breast cancer surgery has an impact on body image, sexual function, self-esteem, and quality of life and may differ from the perception of the attending physician. This study aimed to compare the aesthetic outcomes and satisfaction with conservative oncoplastic surgeries, mastectomies, and total breast reconstruction.

METHODS

We included 760 women diagnosed with invasive breast carcinoma or phyllodes tumors who returned at least 6 months after surgery or radiotherapy at two public hospitals and a private clinic between 2014 and 2022. Data was collected prospectively from patients and retrospectively from their medical records using a specific form after obtaining their informed consent. Aesthetic outcomes and quality of life were assessed using the BREAST-Q©, Harris Scale, and BCCT.core software. Data were evaluated using the SPSS statistical software. Statistical significance was set at p < 0.05. This study was approved by the hospital ethics committees.

RESULTS

A total of 405 (53.29%) partial and 355 (46.71%) total reconstructions were included. Patients who underwent partial reconstruction were older and had higher body mass index. Patients who underwent total reconstruction had larger tumors with advanced clinical and pathological stages. Clinical and surgical complications occurred more frequently in the total reconstruction group. A greater number of reparative surgeries and lipofilling procedures were required for total reconstruction. According to the BREAST-Q, the partial reconstruction group showed significantly higher levels of women's satisfaction with their breasts, the surgical outcomes, psychosocial and sexual well-being, provision of information, and the reconstructive surgeon. Only physical well-being was slightly higher in the total reconstruction group. In most cases, the results were rated good or excellent. Physicians considered partial reconstructions to have better results than total reconstructions, although this difference was not perceived by the BCCT.core software.

CONCLUSION

Women who underwent partial breast reconstruction had higher levels of satisfaction in several domains, lower frequency of complications, and required fewer surgeries to complete their reconstruction than women who underwent total reconstruction. Physicians were also more satisfied with the results of partial reconstructions.

Long-Term Patient Satisfaction and Quality of Life After Breast-Conserving Therapy: A Prospective Study Using the BREAST-Q

Background

Poor patient-reported satisfaction after breast-conserving therapy (BCT) has been associated with impaired health-related quality of life (HRQOL) and subsequent depression in retrospective analysis. This prospective cohort study aimed to assess the HRQOL of patients who have undergone BCT using the BREAST-Q, and to identify clinical risk factors for lower patient satisfaction.

Methods

Patients with primary breast cancer undergoing BCT were asked to complete the BREAST-Q preoperatively (T1) for baseline evaluation, then 3 to 4 weeks postoperatively (T2), and finally 1 year after surgery (T3). Clinicopathologic data were extracted from the patients’ charts. Repeated measures analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used to determine significant differences in mean satisfaction and well-being levels among the test intervals. Multiple linear regression was used to evaluate risk factors for lower satisfaction.

Results

The study enrolled 250 patients. The lowest baseline BREAST-Q score was reported for “satisfaction with breast” (mean, 61 ± 19), but this increased postoperatively (mean, 66 ± 18) and was maintained at the 1 year follow-up evaluation (mean, 67 ± 21). “Physical well-being” decreased from T1 (mean, 82 ± 17) to T2 (mean, 28 ± 13) and did not recover much by T3 (mean, 33 ± 13), being the lowest BREAST-Q score postoperatively and in the 1-year follow-up evaluation. In multiple regression, baseline psychosocial well-being, body mass index (BMI), and type of incision were risk factors for lower “satisfaction with breasts.”

Conclusion

Both the aesthetic/surgery-related and psychological aspects are equally important with regard to “satisfaction with breasts” after BCT. The data could serve as the benchmark for future studies.

MRI-Derived Tumour-to-Breast Volume Is Associated with the Extent of Breast Surgery

The tumour-to-breast volume ratio (TBVR) is a metric that may help surgical decision making. In this retrospective Ethics-Committee–approved study, we assessed the correlation between magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-derived TBVR and the performed surgery. The TBVR was obtained using a fully manual method for the segmentation of the tumour volume (TV) and a growing region semiautomatic method for the segmentation of the whole breast volume (WBV). Two specifically-trained residents (R1 and R2) independently segmented T1-weighted datasets of 51 cancer cases in 51 patients (median age 57 years). The intraobserver and interobserver TBVR reproducibility were calculated. Mann-Whitney U, Spearman correlations, and Bland-Altman statistics were used. Breast-conserving surgery (BCS) was performed in 31/51 cases (61%); mastectomy was performed in 20/51 cases (39%). The median TBVR was 2.08‰ (interquartile range 0.70–9.13‰) for Reader 1, and 2.28‰ (interquartile range 0.71–9.61‰) for Reader 2, with an 84% inter-reader reproducibility. The median segmentation times were 54 s for the WBV and 141 s for the TV. Significantly-lower TBVR values were observed in the breast-conserving surgery group (median 1.14‰, interquartile range 0.49–2.55‰) than in the mastectomy group (median 10.52‰, interquartile range 2.42–14.73‰) for both readers (p < 0.001). Large scale prospective studies are needed in order to validate MRI-derived TBVR as a predictor of the type of breast surgery.

[Diagnosis of breast diseases in a certified breast center]

The beginning of the 21st century has seen immense improvements in the quality of diagnosis and treatment of breast cancer due to several, simultaneous developments. In particular, the introduction of a certification program from the German Cancer Society based on level III guidelines has enhanced the transparency and quality of treatment of breast diseases for all actors. As a result, patients have benefited from intensified cooperation especially between core disciplines in breast disease, gynecology, pathology, and radiology. The standardized and synoptic reading of multiple diagnostic modalities has enabled precise sampling of histologic specimen, which has improved prognosis and the successful individualization of therapy. In this article the benefits of breast cancer diagnosis and therapy in a certified breast center are illustrated using four case examples.