Canada follows the US in the rise of bilateral mastectomies for unilateral breast cancer: a 23-year population cohort study

Evaluating PREDICT and developing outcome prediction models in early-onset breast cancer using data from Alberta, Canada

INTRODUCTION

Outcome prediction research in early-onset breast cancer (EoBC) is limited. This study evaluated the predictive performance of NHS PREDICT v2.1 and developed two prediction models for 5-year and 10-year all-cause mortality in a cohort of EoBC patients in Alberta, Canada.

METHODS

Adults < 40 years diagnosed with invasive breast cancer in Alberta, Canada from 2004 to 2020 were included. Patient data were entered into PREDICT v2.1 and mortality estimates at 5 and 10 years were extracted. Two prediction models were developed for all-cause mortality: multivariable Cox regression with LASSO penalization (LASSO Cox) and random survival forests (RSF). Internal validation of the developed models was performed using nested tenfold cross-validation repeated 200 times. Model performance was assessed using receiver operator characteristic and calibration curves for mortality at 5 and 10 years.

RESULTS

In total, 1827 patients with EoBC were eligible for inclusion. At 5 years, PREDICT had an area under the curve of 0.78 (95%CI 0.74-0.82) and overestimated mortality by 2.4% (95%CI 0.70-4.33) in the overall cohort. No differences in observed and predicted mortality by PREDICT were observed at 10 years. The LASSO Cox model showed better discrimination at 5 and 10 years than the RSF model, but both had poor calibration and underestimated mortality.

CONCLUSION

PREDICT v2.1 tended to overestimate 5-year mortality in those with > 30% predicted risks and 10-year mortality in those with > 50% predicted risks for EoBC in Alberta, Canada. We did not identify additional models that would be clinically useful by applying machine learning. More follow-up data and emerging systemic treatment variables are required to study outcome prediction in modern cohorts.

Research progress on estrogen receptor-positive/progesterone receptor-negative breast cancer

Breast cancer, which arises from the epithelial tissue of the breast, is one of the most common cancers affecting women worldwide. Its incidence and mortality rates have been increasing in both developed and developing countries. As a hormone-dependent cancer, breast cancer is classified into several molecular subtypes based on the expression of key markers: Estrogen Receptor (ER), Progesterone Receptor (PR), Human Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor 2 (HER-2), and Ki67. PR loss is associated with endocrine resistance and a poorer prognosis in breast cancer. Despite this, the underlying mechanisms of ER-positive/PR-negative (ER+PR-) breast cancer remain poorly understood. This study aims to review recent advancements in research on ER+PR- breast cancer, analyze its clinical characteristics and molecular mechanisms, and provide recommendations for more targeted therapeutic approaches.

An Examination of Utilization Rates Over Time of Nerve and Tendon Transfers in Canada to Improve Upper Limb Function in Cervical Spinal Cord Injury

Introduction: Upper limb function loss in cervical spinal cord injury (SCI) contributes to substantial disability, and negatively impacts quality of life. Nerve transfer and tendon transfer surgery can provide improved upper limb function. This study assessed the utilization of nerve and tendon transfer surgery for individuals with tetraplegia in Canada. Methods: Data from the Canadian Institute for Health Information's Discharge Abstracts Database and the National Ambulatory Care Reporting System were used to identify the nerve and tendon transfer procedures performed in individuals with tetraplegia (2004-2020). Cases were identified using cervical SCI ICD-10-CA codes and Canadian Classification of Intervention codes for upper extremity nerve and tendon transfers. Data on sex, age at time of procedure, province, and hospital stay duration were recorded. Results: From 2004 to 2020, there were ≤80 nerve transfer procedures (81% male, mean age 38.3 years) and 61 tendon transfer procedures (78% male, mean age 45.0 years) performed (highest in Ontario and British Columbia). Using an estimate of 50% eligibility, an average of 1.3% of individuals underwent nerve transfer and 1.0% underwent tendon transfer. Nerve transfers increased over time (2004-2009, n = <5; 2010-2015, n = 27; 2016-2019, n = 49) and tendon transfers remained relatively constant. Both transfer types were performed as day-surgery or single night stay. Conclusions: Nerve and tendon transfer surgery to improve upper limb function in Canadians with tetraplegia remains low. This study highlights a substantial gap in care for this vulnerable population. Identification of barriers that prevent access to care is required to promote best practice for upper extremity care.

Trends of incidence and mortality in metaplastic breast cancer and the effect of contralateral prophylactic mastectomy: A population-based study

INTRODUCTION

Metaplastic breast cancer (MBC) is considered rare and aggressive. We examined the epidemiology of and prognostic factors for MBC and investigated the effect of contralateral prophylactic mastectomy (CPM), because neither had been thoroughly examined previously.

METHODS

We obtained data from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER)-18(2000-2018) for epidemiological and survival analysis.

RESULTS

The age-adjusted incidence per 100,000 persons of MBC increased significantly from 0.12 to 0.35 [annual percent change (APC):2.95%, 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.73-4.19]. The incidence-based mortality increased from 0.01 to 0.12 (APC: 5.01%, 95% CI: 2.50-7.58). The incidence of MBC patients who underwent CPM significantly increased from 0.003 to 0.039 with an APC of 10.96% (95%CI, 7.26-14.78). Older patients and those with higher T classification were less likely to receive CPM. The multivariate Cox model showed that CPM was not an independent predictor of good prognosis for both overall survival (OS) and breast cancer-specific survival (BCSS) (pre-propensity score matching (PSM): OS: P = 0.331; BCSS: P = 0.462. post-PSM: OS: P = 0.916; BCSS: P = 0.967). Subgroup analysis showed that CPM still did not provide a survival benefit to any risk groups.

CONCLUSION

In this study, we demonstrated that the incidence and incidence-based mortality of MBC have increased over the past decades. Although the number of MBC patients who underwent CPM has significantly increased recently, CPM did not confer a survival benefit compared with unilateral mastectomy, indicating that the decision to undergo CPM should be considered carefully.

Latissimus dorsi flap for breast reconstruction: a large single-institution evaluation of surgical outcome and complications

PURPOSE

The use of autologous tissues is considered gold standard for patients undergoing breast reconstruction and is the preferred method in the post-radiation setting. Although the latissimus dorsi flap (LDF) has been replaced by abdominal flaps as technique of choice, it remains a valuable option in several specific clinical situations and its use has been regaining popularity in recent years. In this work, we present an 18-year retrospective analysis of a single-institution single-surgeon experience with LDF-based reconstruction with focus on early complications and reconstructive failures.

METHODS

Hospital records of all patients undergoing breast surgery for any reason in the Certified Breast Cancer Center, Regio Klinikum Pinneberg, Germany between April, 1st 2005 and October, 31st 2022 were reviewed. 142 consecutive LDF-based reconstructive procedures were identified. Detailed information was gathered on patient characteristics, treatment-related factors, and complications.

RESULTS

One hundred forty patients (139 female, 1 male) received 142 LDF-based surgeries. The flap was used mainly for immediate breast reconstruction with or without implant (83% of patients), followed by defect coverage after removal of a large tumor (7%), implant-to-flap conversion with or without placement of a new implant (6%), and delayed post-mastectomy reconstruction (4%). The use of LDF decreased between 2005 and 2020 (2005: 17, 2006: 13, 2007: 14, 2008: 16, 2009: 5, 2010: 9, 2011: 8, 2012: 3, 2013: 10, 2014: 8, 2015: 8, 2016: 7, 2017: 7, 2018: 4, 2019: 4, 2020: 2, 2021: 6, 2022: 4). Surgery was performed for invasive breast cancer in 78%, ductal carcinoma in situ in 20% and other reasons such as genetic mutation in 1% of patients. Ipsilateral radiation therapy was received by 12% of patients prior to LDF surgery and by 37% after the surgery. 25% of patients were smokers. The median duration of surgery, including all procedures conducted simultaneously such as e.g., mastectomy, axillary surgery, or implant placement, was 117 min (range 56-205). Patients stayed in the hospital for a median of 7 days (range 2-23 days). The most common complication was seroma (26%), followed by wound dehiscence (8%), surgical site infection (7%), partial skin and/or nipple necrosis of any size (7%) and hematoma requiring surgical evacuation (2%). 19% of all patients required seroma aspiration or drainage, mostly at the donor site and performed under ultrasound guidance in the ambulatory setting. Flap loss due to necrosis occurred in 2% of patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Latissimus dorsi flap is a well-established surgical technique commonly used for immediate breast reconstruction as well as defect coverage in locally advanced breast cancer. To the best of our knowledge, this is one of the largest single-surgeon analyses of early complications in patients receiving LDF. As expected, seroma was the most common complication observed in nearly one third of patients and requiring a therapeutic intervention in every fifth patient. Serious adverse events occurred rarely, and flap loss rate was very low.

Explaining risks and benefits of loco-regional treatments to patients

Treatment for early-stage breast cancer is complex, requiring multidisciplinary care with a multitude of treatment options available for each patient. Coupled with the rising importance of shared decision-making, patient-physician conversations are progressively more complicated. These conversations require frank disclosure of risks and benefits of the different treatment modalities in a way that is individualized for each patient and simple to understand. In most patients, breast conserving therapy with radiation should be presented as the gold-standard local treatment given similar long-term and improved quality of life outcomes. De-escalation is currently at the forefront of research in loco-regional treatments, and further investigations are required to best determine the optimal patient populations for reduced sentinel lymph node sampling, omission of sentinel lymph node biopsy altogether and omission of radiation treatment. For future trials, better endpoints need to be established considering patient-centered outcomes as well as recurrence.

Capturing the True Cost of Breast Cancer Treatment: Molecular Subtype and Stage-Specific per-Case Activity-Based Costing

BACKGROUND

Breast cancer (BC) treatment is rapidly evolving with new and costly therapeutics. Existing costing models have a limited ability to capture current treatment costs. We used an Activity-Based Costing (ABC) method to determine a per-case cost for BC treatment by stage and molecular subtype.

METHODS

ABC was used to proportionally integrate multidisciplinary evidence-based patient and provider treatment options for BC, yielding a per-case cost for the total duration of treatment by stage and molecular subtype. Diagnostic imaging, pathology, surgery, radiation therapy, systemic therapy, inpatient, emergency, home care and palliative care costs were included.

RESULTS

BC treatment costs were higher than noted in previous studies and varied widely by molecular subtype. Cost increased exponentially with the stage of disease. The per-case cost for treatment (2023C$) for DCIS was C$ 14,505, and the mean costs for all subtypes were C$ 39,263, C$ 76,446, C$ 97,668 and C$ 370,398 for stage I, II, III and IV BC, respectively. Stage IV costs were as high as C$ 516,415 per case. When weighted by the proportion of molecular subtype in the population, case costs were C$ 31,749, C$ 66,758, C$ 111,368 and C$ 289,598 for stage I, II, III and IV BC, respectively. The magnitude of cost differential was up to 10.9 times for stage IV compared to stage I, 4.4 times for stage III compared to stage I and 35.6 times for stage IV compared to DCIS.

CONCLUSION

The cost of BC treatment is rapidly escalating with novel therapies and increasing survival, resulting in an exponential increase in treatment costs for later-stage disease. We provide real-time, case-based costing for BC treatment which will allow for the assessment of health system economic impacts and an accurate understanding of the cost-effectiveness of screening.

Survival Outcomes in Women with Unilateral, Triple-Negative, Breast Cancer Correlated with Contralateral Prophylactic Mastectomy

BACKGROUND

Despite increased utilization of contralateral prophylactic mastectomy (CPM), there is insufficient evidence that it improves survival in average-risk women with unilateral breast cancer. CPM may be of heightened interest to patients with triple negative breast cancer (TNBC) because these patients are more likely to have BRCA1 mutation-associated disease and are not candidates for the chemoprevention benefits of adjuvant endocrine therapy.

METHODS

Survival and recurrence outcomes were evaluated for all TNBC patients from a multi-institutional database (1999-2018) at two academic cancer programs in two metropolitan cities of the Northeast and Midwest. Median follow-up time was 3.7 years.

RESULTS

Seven hundred and nighty six TNBC patients were evaluated and 15.45% underwent CPM. Women undergoing CPM were more likely to be white (p < 0.001), younger (p < 0.001), and underwent genetic testing (p < 0.001). A borderline survival benefit was observed for TNBC patients undergoing CPM (5-year overall survival 95.1% vs. 85.0%; p = 0.05). There was no difference in survival when BRCA mutation carriers were excluded (5-year overall survival 94.1% vs. 85.2%; p = 0.12). For BRCA mutation carriers, a numeric trend was observed for improved survival for patients undergoing CPM (5-year overall survival 97.2% vs. 84.1%; p = 0.35). Among patients not undergoing CPM, the rate of developing a new primary breast cancer was 2.2% (15/673). Among these 15 patients, 20% (3/15) were known BRCA mutation carriers.

CONCLUSIONS

Our data demonstrate no survival benefit for TNBC patients without BRCA1/2 mutations undergoing CPM.

Real de-escalation or escalation in disguise?

The past two decades have seen an unprecedented trend towards de-escalation of surgical therapy in the setting of early BC, the most prominent examples being the reduction of re-excision rates for close surgical margins after breast-conserving surgery and replacing axillary lymph node dissection by less radical procedures such as sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB). Numerous studies confirmed that reducing the extent of surgery in the upfront surgery setting does not impact locoregional recurrences and overall outcome. In the setting of primary systemic treatment, there is an increased use of less invasive staging strategies reaching from SLNB and targeted lymph node biopsy (TLNB) to targeted axillary dissection (TAD). Omission of any axillary surgery in the presence of pathological complete response in the breast is currently being investigated in clinical trials. On the other hand, concerns have been raised that surgical de-escalation might induce an escalation of other treatment modalities such as radiation therapy. Since most trials on surgical de-escalation did not include standardized protocols for adjuvant radiotherapy, it remains unclear, whether the effect of surgical de-escalation was valid in itself or if radiotherapy compensated for the decreased surgical extent. Uncertainties in scientific evidence may therefore lead to escalation of radiotherapy in some settings of surgical de-escalation. Further, the increasing rate of mastectomies including contralateral procedures in patients without genetic risk is alarming. Future studies of locoregional treatment strategies need to include an interdisciplinary approach to integrate de-escalation approaches combining surgery and radiotherapy in a way that promotes optimal quality of life and shared decision-making.

EBCC-13 manifesto: Balancing pros and cons for contralateral prophylactic mastectomy

After a diagnosis of unilateral breast cancer, increasing numbers of patients are requesting contralateral prophylactic mastectomy (CPM), the surgical removal of the healthy breast after diagnosis of unilateral breast cancer. It is important for the community of breast cancer specialists to provide meaningful guidance to women considering CPM. This manifesto discusses the issues and challenges of CPM and provides recommendations to improve oncological, surgical, physical and psychological outcomes for women presenting with unilateral breast cancer: (1) Communicate best available risks in manageable timeframes to prioritise actions; better risk stratification and implementation of risk-assessment tools combining family history, genetic and genomic information, and treatment and prognosis of the first breast cancer are required; (2) Reserve CPM for specific situations; in women not at high risk of contralateral breast cancer (CBC), ipsilateral breast-conserving surgery is the recommended option; (3) Encourage patients at low or intermediate risk of CBC to delay decisions on CPM until treatment for the primary cancer is complete, to focus on treating the existing disease first; (4) Provide patients with personalised information about the risk:benefit balance of CPM in manageable timeframes; (5) Ensure patients have an informed understanding of the competing risks for CBC and that there is a realistic plan for the patient; (6) Ensure patients understand the short- and long-term physical effects of CPM; (7) In patients considering CPM, offer psychological and surgical counselling before surgery; anxiety alone is not an indication for CPM; (8) Eliminate inequality between countries in reimbursement strategies; CPM should be reimbursed if it is considered a reasonable option resulting from multidisciplinary tumour board assessment; (9) Treat breast cancer patients at specialist breast units providing the entire patient-centred pathway.

ESO-ESMO fifth international consensus guidelines for breast cancer in young women (BCY5)

We dedicate this manuscript in memory of a dear friend and colleague Bella Kaufman. The fifth International Consensus Symposium for Breast Cancer in Young Women (BCY5) took place virtually in October 2020, organized by the European School of Oncology (ESO) and the European Society of Medical Oncology (ESMO). Consensus recommendations for the management of breast cancer in young women were updated from BCY4 with incorporation of new evidence to inform the guidelines. Areas of research priorities as well as specificities in different geographic and minority populations were identified. This manuscript summarizes the ESO-ESMO international consensus recommendations, which are also endorsed by the European Society of Breast Specialists (EUSOMA).

Neighborhood socioeconomic status and low-value breast cancer care

BACKGROUND

The objective of this study is to examine the association between neighborhood socioeconomic status (nSES) and receipt of low-value breast cancer procedures.

METHODS

Patients with breast cancer diagnosed between 2010 and 2016 were identified in the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) Program. Low value procedures included: (1) axillary lymph node dissection (ALND) for patients with limited nodal disease receiving breast conservation therapy (BCT); (2) contralateral prophylactic mastectomies (CPM); and (3) sentinel lymph node biopsies (SLNB) in patients ≥70 years old with clinically node negative early-stage hormone-positive breast cancer. The cohort was divided by nSES. Univariable and multivariable logistic regression analysis compared the groups.

RESULTS

The study included 412 959 patients. Compared to patients in high nSES areas, residing in neighborhoods with low nSES (odd ratio [OR] 2.20, 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.0-2.42) and middle nSES (OR 1.42, 95% CI 1.20-1.56) was associated with a higher probability of undergoing low value ALND. Conversely, patients in low SES neighborhoods were less likely to receive low value SLNB (OR 0.89, 95% CI 0.85-0.94) or CPM than (low nSES OR 0.75, 95% CI 0.73-0.77); middle nSES OR 0.91 (0.89-0.92) those in high SES neighborhoods.

CONCLUSION

In the SEER Program, low nSES was associated with a lower probability of low value procedures except for ALND utilization.

De-Escalating Breast Cancer Surgery: Should We Apply Quality Indicators from Other Jurisdictions in Canada?

Quality Indicators (QIs), including the breast-conserving surgery (BCS) rate, were published by the European and American Breast Cancer Societies and this study assesses these in a Canadian population to look for opportunities to de-escalate surgery. A total of 2311 patients having surgery for unilateral, unifocal breast cancer between 2013 and 2017 were identified and BCS QIs calculated. Reasons for mastectomy had been prospectively collected with synoptic operative reporting. Our BCS rate for invasive cancer < 3 cm was 77.1%, invasive cancer < 2 cm was 84.1%, and DCIS < 2 cm was 84.9%. There was no statistically significant change in BCS rates over a five-year period, but there was a reduction in contralateral prophylactic mastectomies (CPM) from 28% in 2013 to 16% in 2017 (p < 0.001). Trend analysis looking at tumour size and medical need for mastectomy indicated that 80% of patients at our centre would be eligible for BCS with tumour cut off of 2.5 cm. Our institution met American but not European QI standards for BCS rates, potentially indicating a difference in patient demographics compared to Europe. Our results support the understanding that BCS rates are influenced by multiple factors and are challenging to compare across jurisdictions. CPM rates may offer a more actionable opportunity to de-escalate surgery for breast cancer.

Trend and survival benefit of contralateral prophylactic mastectomy among men with stage I-III unilateral breast cancer in the USA, 1998-2016

PURPOSE

Our study aimed to explore temporal trends and survival benefit of contralateral prophylactic mastectomy (CPM) in male breast cancer (MBC).

METHODS

Men with stage I-III unilateral breast cancer between 1998 and 2016 were identified from the surveillance, epidemiology, and end results (SEER). We compared CPM rate over the study period using the Cochrane-Armitage test for trend. Logistic regression model was used to test for factors predicting CPM. Survival analysis was conducted in patients who underwent CPM or unilateral mastectomy (UM) with a first diagnosis of unilateral breast cancer. Kaplan-Meier curve and univariate and multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression analyses were performed to compare overall survival (OS) and breast cancer-specific survival (BCSS) between CPM and UM groups. Propensity score matching was adopted to balance baseline characteristics.

RESULTS

5118 MBC cases were included in the present study, with 4.1% (n = 209) patients underwent CPM. The proportion of men undergoing CPM increased from 1.7 in 1998 to 6.3% in 2016 (P < 0.0001). Young age, recent years of diagnosis, higher tumor grade and lower T stage were significantly associated with CPM. A cohort of 3566 patients were enrolled in survival analysis with a median follow-up of 65 months. CPM was associated with better OS (HR 0.58, 95% CI 0.37-0.89, P = 0.022) rather than BCSS (HR 0.57, 95% CI 0.29-1.11, P = 0.153) compared with UM. In propensity score-matched model, CPM was not an independent prognostic factor for OS (HR 0.83, 95% CI 0.46-1.52, P = 0.553) and BCSS (HR 0.98, 95% CI 0.39-2.47, P = 0.970).

CONCLUSION

Our study revealed a dramatic increase in CPM utilization among MBC, especially in young patients. However, CPM provides no survival benefit for MBC compared with UM, indicating the decision of CPM should be fully discussed.

Improved Survival after Breast-Conserving Therapy Compared with Mastectomy in Stage I-IIA Breast Cancer

Simple Summary

The majority of patients with breast cancer are suitable for either breast-conserving therapy, consisting of breast-conserving surgery and radiation therapy, or mastectomy alone. In the present study, we compared survival outcomes in 1360 patients affected with early-stage breast cancer (stage I-IIA) according to the type of local treatment. We confirmed that patients treated with breast-conserving therapy had a lower rate of local, regional, and distant disease recurrences, and at least equivalent overall survival compared to those treated with mastectomy alone. Our results add to previous research showing a potential benefit of breast-conserving therapy when compared to mastectomy in patients suitable for both treatments at baseline.

Abstract

In the current study, we sought to compare survival outcomes after breast-conserving therapy (BCT) or mastectomy alone in patients with stage I-IIA breast cancer, whose tumors are typically suitable for both locoregional treatments. The study cohort consisted of 1360 patients with stage I-IIA (T1–2N0 or T0–1N1) breast cancer diagnosed between 2001 and 2013 and treated with either BCT (n = 1021, 75.1%) or mastectomy alone (n = 339, 24.9%). Median follow-ups for disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) were 6.9 years (range, 0.3–15.9) and 7.5 years (range, 0.2–25.9), respectively. Fifteen (1.1%), 14 (1.0%) and 48 (3.5%) patients experienced local, regional, and distant relapse, respectively. For the whole cohort of patients, the estimated 5-year DFS and OS were 96% and 97%, respectively. After stratification based on the type of local treatment, the estimated 5-year DFS for BCT was 97%, while it was 91% (p < 0.001) for mastectomy-only treatment. Inverse probability of treatment weighting matching based on confounding confirmed that mastectomy was associated with worse DFS (HR 2.839, 95% CI 1.760–4.579, p < 0.0001), but not with OS (HR 1.455, 95% CI 0.844–2.511, p = 0.177). In our study, BCT was shown to have improved disease-specific outcomes compared to mastectomy alone, emphasizing the important role of adjuvant treatments, including postoperative radiation therapy, in patients with early-stage breast cancer at diagnosis.

The risk of contralateral breast cancer: a SEER-based analysis

BACKGROUND

We sought to estimate the annual risk and 25-year cumulative risk of contralateral breast cancer among women with stage 0-III unilateral breast cancer.

METHODS

We identified 812,851 women with unilateral breast cancer diagnosed between 1990 and 2015 in the SEER database and followed them for contralateral breast cancer for up to 25 years. Women with a known bilateral mastectomy were excluded. We calculated the annual risk of contralateral breast cancer by age at diagnosis, by time since diagnosis and by current age. We compared risks by ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) versus invasive disease, by race and by oestrogen receptor (ER) status of the first cancer.

RESULTS

There were 25,958 cases of contralateral invasive breast cancer diagnosed (3.2% of all patients). The annual risk of contralateral breast cancer over the 25-year follow-up period was 0.37% and the 25-year actuarial risk of contralateral invasive breast cancer was 9.9%. The annual risk varied to a small degree by age of diagnosis, by time elapsed since diagnosis and by current age. The 25-year actuarial risk was similar for DCIS and invasive breast cancer patients (10.1 versus 9.9%). The 25-year actuarial risk was higher for black women (12.7%) than for white women (9.7%) and was lower for women with ER-positive breast cancer (9.5%) than for women with ER-negative breast cancer (11.2%).

CONCLUSIONS

Women with unilateral breast cancer experience an annual risk of contralateral breast cancer ~0.4% per year, which persists over the 25-year follow-up period.

Longitudinal Study of Psychosocial Outcomes Following Surgery in Women with Unilateral Nonhereditary Breast Cancer

INTRODUCTION

Rates of bilateral mastectomy are rising in women with unilateral, nonhereditary breast cancer. We aim to characterize how psychosocial outcomes evolve after breast cancer surgery.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We performed a prospective cohort study of women with unilateral, sporadic stage 0-III breast cancer at University Health Network in Toronto, Canada between 2014 and 2017. Women completed validated psychosocial questionnaires (BREAST-Q, Impact of Event Scale, Hospital Anxiety & Depression Scale) preoperatively, and at 6 and 12 months following surgery. Change in psychosocial scores was assessed between surgical groups using linear mixed models, controlling for age, stage, and adjuvant treatments. P < .05 were significant.

RESULTS

A total of 475 women underwent unilateral lumpectomy (42.5%), unilateral mastectomy (38.3%), and bilateral mastectomy (19.2%). There was a significant interaction (P < .0001) between procedure and time for breast satisfaction, psychosocial and physical well-being. Women having unilateral lumpectomy had higher breast satisfaction and psychosocial well-being scores at 6 and 12 months after surgery compared with either unilateral or bilateral mastectomy, with no difference between the latter two groups. Physical well-being declined in all groups over time; scores were not better in women having bilateral mastectomy. While sexual well-being scores remained stable in the unilateral lumpectomy group, scores declined similarly in both unilateral and bilateral mastectomy groups over time. Cancer-related distress, anxiety, and depression scores declined significantly after surgery, regardless of surgical procedure (P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

Psychosocial outcomes are not improved with contralateral prophylactic mastectomy in women with unilateral breast cancer. Our data may inform women considering contralateral prophylactic mastectomy.