Risk factors for positive margins in conservative surgery for breast cancer after neoadjuvant chemotherapy

Pushing the envelope in breast conserving surgery - is multiple-wire localization (3 or more wires) associated with increased risk of compromised margins and long-term recurrence?

INTRODUCTION

In the last two decades there has been a paradigm shift with breast conserving surgery (BCS) being applied to larger and more extensive breast malignancies. The aim of this study is to examine the success of BCS being performed in patients with extensive breast malignancies requiring at least 3 wires for localization, and to assess possible risk factors for failure.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We performed a retrospective single center review of 232 patients who underwent BCS between 2010 and 2020 requiring at least 3 wires for localization, thus comprising the multi-wire group (MWG). The cohort included a control group of 232 single-wire BCS patients (SWG) chronologically matched with the MWG. Patients with either invasive malignancy or ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) were included in the study. Clinical, radiological, and pathological data was collected. Proportions of positive surgical margins, re-lumpectomies and conversion to mastectomy were calculated. Survival analysis for locoregional and distant recurrence was performed.

RESULTS

Women in the MWG were younger (mean age 57 vs. 63.1, P < 0.001), had larger tumor size (mean size 5.1 cm vs. 1.3 cm, p < 0.001), a higher prevalence of calcifications on mammograms (72 % vs. 17 %, P < 0.001), a higher proportion of positive lymph nodes (75 % vs. 45 %, P = 0.019), and an elevated incidence of a ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) component (72 % vs. 38 %, P < 0.001). Positive surgical margins were higher in the MWG (13 % vs 7 %, P = 0.03), which lead to higher proportions of re-lumpectomies or conversion to mastectomies (7 % vs 4 %, P = 0.17). On multivariate analysis of the entire cohort, patients with positive margins were more likely to have a DCIS component (77 % vs 53 %, P = 0.001), an infiltrating lobular carcinoma (ILC) component (15 % vs 9 %, P = 0.013), and positive ER hormonal status (94 % vs 85 %, p = 0.05). The number of wires was not an independent predictor of positive margins. On long-term analysis, the locoregional disease-free survival was similar between the SWG and MWG (P = 0.1). However, the MWG showed higher rates of distant metastasis (12 % vs 4 %, P = 0.006).

CONCLUSIONS

BCS requiring 3 or more wires is associated with a slightly higher proportion of positive margins. The increased risk of positive margins appears to be related to the type of tumor (DCIS component, ILC component and ER status) rather than to the number of wires. The number of wires does not significantly impact locoregional disease-free survival.

Margin Assessment and Re-excision Rates for Patients Who Have Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy and Breast-Conserving Surgery

BACKGROUND

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) has enabled more patients to be eligible for breast-conservation surgery (BCS). Achieving negative lumpectomy margins, however, is challenging due to changes in tissue composition and potentially scattered residual carcinoma in the tumor bed. Data regarding BCS after NAC have shown variable re-excision rates. MarginProbe (Dilon Technologies, Newport News, VA, USA) has been shown to identify positive resection margins intraoperatively and to reduce the number of re-excisions in primary BCS, but has not been studied in NAC+BCS cases. This study aimed to investigate the clinicopathologic characteristics, margin status, and re-excision rates for NAC+BCS patients with and without the use of MarginProbe.

METHODS

The Institutional Breast Cancer Database was queried for patients who received NAC and had BCS from 2010 to 2019. The variables of interest were demographics, tumor characteristics, pathologic complete response (pCR), MarginProbe use, and re-excision rates.

RESULTS

The study population consisted of 214 patients who had NAC, 61 (28.5 %) of whom had NAC+BCS. The median age of the patients was 53.5 years. A pCR was achieved for 19 of the patients (31.1 %). Of the remaining 42 patients, 9 (21 %) had close or positive margins that required re-excision. Re-excision was associated with a larger residual tumor size (p = 0.025) and estrogen receptor (ER)-positive disease before NAC (p = 0.041). MarginProbe use was associated with a lower re-excision rate for the patients who had NAC+BCS (6 % vs. 31 %, respectively).

CONCLUSION

The patients with a larger residual tumor burden and ER-positive disease had a greater risk for inadequate margins at surgery. MarginProbe use was associated with a lower re-excision rate. Techniques to reduce the need for re-excision will support the use of BCS after NAC.

The Impact of Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy on Margin Re-excision in Breast-Conserving Surgery

BACKGROUND

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) can improve cosmesis by reducing resection volume. Breast-conserving surgery (BCS) aims to achieve clear excision margins while optimizing cosmesis. However, the influence of NAC on margin re-excision after BCS is unclear. This study examines the rate and determinants of margin re-excision in patients undergoing BCS following NAC in our institution.

METHODS

From 2011-2015, all patients treated with NAC prior to BCS were identified from a prospectively maintained database. Mann-Whitney and Fisher's exact test tests were used to compare variables in patients who did and did not require re-excision. Patients undergoing primary surgical treatment in 2015 comprised an unmatched comparison group.

RESULTS

Of 211 patients treated with NAC, 69 initially underwent BCS. The re-excision rate was 32% (n = 22) compared to 17% in the primary operable group (38 of 221, p = 0.02). Re-excision rates were lowest in triple-negative and HER2+ tumors (0% and 10%, respectively). Lobular carcinoma and ER+ tumors had a significantly higher rate of re-excision (100% and 42%, respectively). Of 22 patients undergoing re-excision, 9 had further BCS and 13 had a mastectomy.

CONCLUSION

The re-excision rate following NAC is almost twice that of patients who underwent primary operative management. Her2+ and triple-negative tumors have lower re-excision rates and may represent a selected cohort most suitable for BCS. Patients with invasive lobular carcinoma or ER+ disease have significantly higher rates of margin positivity, and these patients should be considered for a cavity shave during primary surgery to reduce the rates of re-excision.

MRI guided ROLL/SNOLL in breast cancer patients treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy

PURPOSE

To describe the results of MRI (magnetic resonance image) guided ROLL (radioguided occult lesion localization) and SNOLL (sentinel node occult lesion localization) in the localization of residual disease after neoadjuvant chemotherapy for breast cancer, as well as assessing the surgical results obtained and disease free survival.

METHODS

Prospective observational analysis of 132 patients with 136 tumors, treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy at our hospital between 2011-2017. Residual disease was located presurgically with MRI guided ROLL/SNOLL technique. We analyzed technical aspects of localization, and variables corresponding to surgical procedures and events occurred during follow-up.

RESULTS

The median tumor size was of 20.5mm (interquartilic range [IQR]: 14-28). The majority (96.3%) were invasive ductal carcinomas. Sentinel lymph node detection rate was 98.9%. Complete pathological response (CPR) in the breast was achieved in 58.1% of cases. The rate of affected margins in 89 cases operated by conservative surgery was 2.2%. With a median follow-up of 50 months (IQR: 37-61) we found a 7.4% rate of relapses. Of these, seven were loco-regional and three at distant sites. The estimated mean of disease-free survival time was 83.2 months (Confidence Interval [CI] 95%: 79.6-86.6).

CONCLUSIONS

MRI guided ROLL/SNOLL is a great tool for breast cancer residual disease localization following neoadjuvant chemotherapy. In addition, this technique attains good loco-regional control of the diseases and has excellent surgical results.

Tumor Resection Margin Definitions in Breast-Conserving Surgery: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of the Current Literature

Worldwide, various guidelines recommend what constitutes an adequate margin of excision for invasive breast cancer or for ductal carcinoma-in-situ (DCIS). We evaluated the use of different tumor resection margin guidelines and investigated their impact on positive margin rates (PMR) and reoperation rates (RR). Thirteen guidelines reporting on the extent of a positive margin were reviewed along with 31 studies, published between 2011 and 2016, reporting on a well-defined PMR. Studies were categorized according to the margin definition. Pooled PMR and RR were determined with random-effect models. For invasive breast cancer, most guidelines recommend a positive margin of tumor on ink. However, definitions of reported positive margins in the clinic vary from more than focally positive to the presence of tumor cells within 3 to 5 mm from the resection surface. Within the studies analyzed (59,979 patients), pooled PMRs for invasive breast cancer ranged from 9% to 36% and pooled RRs from 77% to 99%. For DCIS, guidelines vary between no DCIS on the resection surface to DCIS cells found within a distance of 2 mm from the resection edge. Pooled PMRs for DCIS varied from 4% to 23% (840 patients). Given the differences in tumor margin definition between countries worldwide, quality control data expressed as PMR or RR should be interpreted with caution. Furthermore, the overall definition for positive resection margins for both invasive disease and DCIS seems to have become more liberal.