Optimise not compromise: The importance of a multidisciplinary breast cancer patient pathway in the era of oncoplastic and reconstructive surgery

Patterns of breast reconstruction and the influence of a surgical multidisciplinary clinic

BACKGROUND

Of the 40% of breast cancer patients who have a mastectomy as part of their surgical treatment, only approximately 29% have a breast reconstruction. In 2016, Alfred Health established a multidisciplinary surgical clinic with breast and plastic surgeons, aiming to improve interdisciplinary collaboration. This study aimed to assess the provision of breast reconstruction at an Australian tertiary public hospital and examine whether the multidisciplinary surgical clinic have improved our reconstructive service provision.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study of patients who underwent mastectomy at Alfred Health between October 2011 and September 2021 was conducted. Patients were divided into before and after groups, treated during the 5-year period before and after establishing the multidisciplinary clinic respectively. Demographic data, operative details, histopathology, and treatments were compared.

RESULTS

Over the 10-year period, 423 mastectomies were performed for 351 patients. Of those, 153 patients underwent breast reconstruction, providing an overall reconstruction rate of 43.6%. There was a statistically significant increase in the breast reconstruction rate from 36.5% before to 53.4% after the creation of the multidisciplinary surgical clinic. Patient factors such as age and tumour receptor status did not differ significantly between the groups.

CONCLUSION

The establishment of a surgical multidisciplinary clinic has led to a statistically significant increase in the rate of breast reconstruction from 36.5% to 53.4%, leading to improved healthcare provision for our patients. Factors identified to be associated with increased uptake in the reconstruction service include younger age and node negative disease.

Reconstructive types effect the prognosis of patients with tumors in the central and nipple portion of breast cancer? An analysis based on SEER database

Introduction

The impact of different types of reconstruction, including tissue reconstruction, implant reconstruction and combined reconstruction, on patient survival were not illustrated completely. We tried to investigate the impact of patient survival between different types of reconstruction.

Methods

We enrolled 6271 patients with tumors in the central and nipple portion of breast cancer from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database. Factors associated with survival were identified by Cox regression analyses. The mortality rates per 1,000 person-years were calculated and compared. Survival curves were produced by Kaplan-Meier analyses using log-rank tests and cox proportional hazards regression quantified the risk of survival.

Results

Reconstructive types, region, insurance, race, marial status, grade, stage, ER status, PR status, HER-2 status and chemotherapy were significant prognostic factors associated with breast cancer-specific survival. The breast cancer mortality rates per 1,000 person-years for patients with tissue, implant and combined group were 26.01,21.54 and 19.83 which showed a downward trend. The HR of implant and combined reconstruction adjusted for demographic, pathological, and therapeutic data was 0.82 (95% CI: 0.67-1.00, p=0.052) and 0.73(95% CI:0.55-0.97, p=0.03) compared with tissue reconstruction.

Conclusion

Breast cancer-related mortality between implant reconstruction and autologous tissue reconstruction showed no significantly different, but the risk of BCSS of compound reconstruction was lower than tissue reconstruction.

Breast Radiotherapy after Oncoplastic Surgery—A Multidisciplinary Approach

Simple Summary

This article aims to review and summarize the current evidence for the role of oncoplastic breast surgery and the implications this may have on other therapies, such as radiotherapy and chemotherapy.

Abstract

Oncoplastic breast surgery encompasses a range of techniques used to provide equitable oncological outcomes compared with standard breast surgery while, simultaneously, prioritizing aesthetic outcomes. While the outcomes of oncoplastic breast surgery are promising, it can add an extra complexity to the treatment paradigm of breast cancer and impact on decision-making surrounding adjuvant therapies, like chemotherapy and radiotherapy. As such, early discussions at the multidisciplinary team meeting with surgeons, medical oncologists, and radiation oncologists present, should be encouraged to facilitate best patient care.

Level II Oncoplastic Surgery as an Alternative Option to Mastectomy with Immediate Breast Reconstruction in the Neoadjuvant Setting: A Multidisciplinary Single Center Experience

Oncoplastic surgery level II techniques (OPSII) are used in patients with operable breast cancer. There is no evidence regarding their safety and efficacy after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC). The aim of this study was to compare the oncological and aesthetic outcomes of this technique compared with those observed in mastectomy with immediate breast reconstruction (MIBR), in post-NAC patients undergoing surgery between January 2016 and March 2021. Local disease-free survival (L-DFS), regional disease-free survival (R-DFS), distant disease-free survival (D-DFS), and overall survival (OS) were compared; the aesthetic results and quality of life (QoL) were evaluated using BREAST-Q. A total of 297 patients were included, 87 of whom underwent OPSII and 210 of whom underwent MIBR. After a median follow-up of 39.5 months, local recurrence had occurred in 3 patients in the OPSII group (3.4%), and in 13 patients in the MIBR group (6.1%) (p = 0.408). The three-year L-DFS rates were 95.1% for OPSII and 96.2% for MIBR (p = 0.286). The three-year R-DFS rates were 100% and 96.4%, respectively (p = 0.559). The three-year D-DFS rate were 90.7% and 89.7% (p = 0.849). The three-year OS rates were 95.7% and 95% (p = 0.394). BREAST-Q highlighted significant advantages in physical well-being for OPSII. No difference was shown for satisfaction with breasts (p = 0.656) or psychosocial well-being (p = 0.444). OPSII is safe and effective after NAC. It allows oncological and aesthetic outcomes with a high QoL, and is a safe alternative for locally advanced tumors which are partial responders to NAC.

Implications of Oncoplastic Breast Surgery on Radiation Boost Delivery in Localized Breast Cancer

Background

Oncoplastic partial mastectomy (OPM) is a technique utilized to improve aesthetic and survivorship outcomes in patients with localized breast cancer. This technique leads to breast tissue rearrangement, which can have an impact on target definition for boost radiotherapy (BRT). The aim of this study was to determine if the choice of surgical technique independently affected the decision to deliver a radiation boost.

Materials and methods

This was a retrospective study of patients treated between January 2017 and December 2018. We selected consecutive patients based on surgical procedure: 50 undergoing standard breast-conserving surgery and 50 having had an OPM. The primary outcome was average treatment effect (ATE) of surgery type on reception of BRT. Secondary outcomes included ATE of surgery type on the time to reception of radiotherapy and incidence of ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence (IBTR). The ratio of boost clinical target volume (CTV) to pathologic tumor size was also compared between the two groups. Treatment effects regression adjustment and inverse-probability weighted analysis was used to estimate ATEs for both primary and secondary outcomes.

Results

For the entire cohort, the median age was 64 years (range: 37-88 years). The median tumor size was 1.5 cm (range: 0.1-6.5 cm). The majority of patients were with ≤ stage IIA (78%), invasive ductal subtype (80%), negative lymphovascular space invasion (78%), negative margin (90%), and positive ER/PR (estrogen receptor/progesterone receptor) (69%). Overall, surgical technique was not associated with differences in the proportion of patients receiving BRT (ATE: 6.0% [95% CI: -4.5 to 16.0]). There were no differences in delays to radiation treatment between the two groups (ATE: 32.8 days [95% CI: -22.1 to 87.7]). With a median follow-up time of 419 days (range: 30-793 days), there were only five recurrences, with one case of IBTR in each group. There was no difference in the ratio of CTV volume to tumor size between the two groups (p=0.38).

Conclusions

OPM did not affect the decision to offer localized BRT following standard whole breast radiotherapy or significantly affect treatment times or radiation volumes. The decision to offer OPM should include a multi-disciplinary approach.

Improving Results in Oncoplastic Surgery

LEARNING OBJECTIVES

After studying this article, the participant should be able to: 1. Describe the risks, benefits, and safety profile of oncoplastic procedures for partial breast reconstruction, and how they compare to breast conservation-therapy alone. 2. Have a working knowledge of oncoplastic techniques and how they are addressed from the multidisciplinary perspective. 3. Understand the limitations of oncoplastic techniques and how to avoid unfavorable results.

SUMMARY

Oncoplastic surgical techniques have expanded indications for breast conservation and have improved both oncologic and reconstructive outcomes. This article will focus on some of the barriers to adoption and discuss ways to improve safety through streamlining the process, understanding the oncologic concerns, and evaluating unfavorable outcomes that might interfere with the appropriate delivery of breast cancer care.

The Role of Oncoplastic Surgery for Breast Cancer

OPINION STATEMENT

Oncoplastic surgery (OPS) expands the indications and possibilities of breast-conserving surgery (BCS) by allowing for a wider cancer resection than lumpectomy. Ongoing investigation and reporting of OPS outcomes along with improvements in comprehensive training in breast surgical oncology will impact on awareness and lead to increased adoption of these techniques. Indications for OPS include concern about clear margins, poor tumor location (upper inner pole and lower quadrant), multifocality, need for skin excision, and poor candidacy for mastectomy and reconstruction. OPS has been proven to be oncological safe with comparable rates of complications, positive margins, and re-excisions with BCS. Additionally, OPS has a positive impact on the quality of life and self-esteem when compared with those patients that underwent BCT.

The Assisi Think Tank Meeting Survey of post-mastectomy radiation therapy in ductal carcinoma in situ: Suggestions for routine practice

BACKGROUND

Risk factors for local recurrence after mastectomy in ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) emerged as a grey area during the second "Assisi Think Tank Meeting" (ATTM) on Breast Cancer.

AIM

To review practice patterns of post-mastectomy radiation therapy (PMRT) in DCIS, identify risk factors for recurrence and select suitable candidates for PMRT.

METHODS

A questionnaire concerning DCIS management, focusing on PMRT, was distributed online via SurveyMonkey.

RESULTS

142 responses were received from 15 countries. The majority worked in academic institutions, had 5-20 years work-experience and irradiated <5 DCIS patients/year. PMRT was more given if: surgical margins <1 mm, high-grade, multicentricity, young age, tumour size >5 cm, skin- or nipple- sparing mastectomy. Moderate hypofractionation was the most common schedule, except after immediate breast reconstruction (57% conventional fractionation).

CONCLUSIONS

The present survey highlighted risk factors for PMRT administration, which should be further evaluated.