Resource implications of risk-reducing mastectomy and reconstruction

A Scoping Review of Primary Breast Cancer Risk Reduction Strategies in East and Southeast Asia

Breast cancer (BC) screening enables early detection and timely treatment of cancer. Improving the effectiveness of BC screening can be accomplished by personalizing screening schedules according to each woman's specific risk level. However, when informing women about their risk classification, especially those at high risk, it is important to give clear recommendations on how to lower their risk. BC risk reduction comprises lifestyle modifications, preventive surgery, and chemoprevention, with the latter two being particularly applicable to high-risk individuals. Public health guidance on risk-reducing interventions is heterogeneous and context-dependent. We conducted a scoping review on BC surgical interventions and chemoprevention in East and Southeast Asia in publications between 2010 and 2024. We searched two databases and identified 23 publications relevant for inclusion. The highest number of publications came from South Korea (n = 9). More publications discussed surgical interventions compared to pharmacological interventions. The studies were largely observational and utilized data from medical records. Most studies defined high-risk individuals as BRCA carriers, many of whom previously had cancer. The field would benefit from randomized studies of BC prevention strategies focusing on Asian populations. Future research could explore women's sentiments towards chemoprevention compared to prophylactic surgery and could extend the definition of high-risk individuals beyond BRCA carriers.

Analysis of Secondary Surgeries after Immediate Breast Reconstruction for Cancer Compared with Risk Reduction

Background:

This study sets out to compare reconstructive practice between patients undergoing immediate breast reconstruction (IBR) for cancer and those who opted for risk reduction (RR), with an emphasis on examining patterns of secondary surgery.

Methods:

Data collection was performed for patients undergoing mastectomy and IBR at a teaching hospital breast unit (2013–2016).

Results:

In total, 299 patients underwent IBR (76% cancer versus 24% RR). Implant-based IBR rate was similar in both groups (58% cancer versus 63% RR). Reconstruction loss (5.3% cancer versus 4.2% RR) and complication (16% cancer versus 12.9% RR) rates were similar. Cancer patients were more likely to undergo secondary surgery (68.4% versus 56.3%; P = 0.025), including contralateral symmetrization (22.8% versus 0%) and conversion to autologous reconstruction (5.7% versus 1.4%). Secondary surgeries were mostly planned for cancer patients (72% planned versus 28% unplanned), with rates unaffected by adjuvant therapies. This distribution was different in RR patients (51.3% planned versus 48.7% unplanned). The commonest secondary procedure was lipomodeling (19.7% cancer versus 23.9% RR). For cancer patients, complications resulted in a significantly higher unplanned secondary surgery rate (82.5% versus 38.8%; P = 0.001) than patients without complications. This was not evident in the RR patients, where complications did not lead to a significantly higher unplanned surgery rate (58.9% versus 35.2%; P = 0.086).

Conclusions:

Most of the secondary surgeries were planned for cancer patients. However, complications led to a significantly higher rate of unplanned secondary surgery. Approximately 1 in 4 RR patients received unplanned secondary surgery, which may be driven by the desire to achieve an optimal aesthetic outcome.

Cost effectiveness of bilateral risk-reducing mastectomy and salpingo-oophorectomy

Background

Growing demand for risk-reducing surgery in individuals with inherited susceptibility to cancer leads to the question whether these procedures are cost effective for the executing hospitals. This study compared the clinical costs for bilateral risk-reducing mastectomy (BRRM) with and without different types of reconstruction, risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy (RRSO), and their combinations with corresponding reimbursements in the statutory health-care system in Germany.

Patients and methods

Real total costs of care for BRRM with and without reconstruction, RRSO, and their combinations were calculated as the sum of all personnel and technical costs. These costs calculated in a German University hospital were compared with the sum of all reimbursements in the German DRG-based health-care system.

Results

While sole RRSO, BRRM without reconstruction, and BRRM with secondary DIEP (deep inferior epigastric perforator)—reconstruction still result in a small benefit, we even found shortfalls for the hospital with all other prophylactic operations under consideration. The calculated deficits were especially high for BRRM with implant-based breast reconstruction and for combined operations when the risk reduction is achieved with a minimum of separate operations.

Conclusions

Risk-reducing surgery in BRCA-mutation carriers is frequently not cost-covering for the executing hospitals in the German health-care system. Thus, appropriate concepts are required to ensure a nationwide care.

Chemoprevention in BRCA1 mutation carriers (CIBRAC): protocol for an open allocation crossover feasibility trial assessing mechanisms of chemoprevention with goserelin and anastrozole versus tamoxifen and acceptability of treatment

INTRODUCTION

BRCA1 mutation carriers have a significant lifetime risk of breast cancer, with their primary risk-reduction option being bilateral mastectomy. Preclinical work from our laboratory demonstrated that in BRCA1-deficient breast cells, oestrogen and its metabolites are capable of driving DNA damage and subsequent genomic instability, which are well-defined early events in BRCA1-related cancers. Based on this, we hypothesise that a chemopreventive approach which reduces circulating oestrogen levels may reduce DNA damage and genomic instability, thereby providing an alternative to risk-reducing surgery.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

12 premenopausal women with pathogenic BRCA1 mutations and no previous risk-reducing surgery will be recruited from family history clinics. Participants will be allocated 1:1 to two arms. All will undergo baseline breast biopsies, blood and urine sampling, and quality of life questionnaires. Group A will receive goserelin 3.6 mg/28 days by subcutaneous injection, plus oral anastrozole 1 mg/day, for 12 weeks. Group B will receive oral tamoxifen 20 mg/day for 12 weeks. Following treatment, both groups will provide repeat biopsies, blood and urine samples, and questionnaires. Following a 1-month washout period, the groups will cross over, group A receiving tamoxifen and group B goserelin and anastrozole for a further 12 weeks. After treatment, biopsies, blood and urine samples, and questionnaires will be repeated. DNA damage will be assessed in core biopsies, while blood and urine samples will be used to measure oestrogen metabolite and DNA adduct levels.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

This study has ethical approval from the Office for Research Ethics Committees Northern Ireland (16/NI/0055) and the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) (reference: 32485/0032/001-0001). The investigational medicinal products used in this trial are licensed and in common use, with well-documented safety information. Dissemination of results will be via high-impact journals and relevant national/international conferences. A copy of the results will be offered to the participants and be made available to patient support groups.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

EudraCT: 2016-001087-11; Pre-results.

The financial impact and drivers of hospital charges in contralateral prophylactic mastectomy and reconstruction: a Nationwide Inpatient Sample hospital analysis

PURPOSE

Rates of contralateral prophylactic mastectomy (CPM) have increased over the last decade; it is important for surgeons and hospital systems to understand the economic drivers of increased costs in these patients. This study aims to identify factors affecting charges in those undergoing CPM and reconstruction.

METHODS

Analysis of the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project National Inpatient Sample was undertaken (2009-2012), identifying women aged ≥18 with unilateral breast cancer undergoing unilateral mastectomy with CPM and immediate breast reconstruction (IBR) (CPM group), in addition to unilateral mastectomy and IBR alone (UM group). Generalized linear modeling with gamma regression and a log-link function provided mean marginal hospital charge (MMHC) estimates associated with the presence or absence of patient, hospital and operative characteristics, postoperative complications, and length of stay (LOS).

RESULTS

Overall, 70,695 women underwent mastectomy and reconstruction for unilateral breast cancer; 36,691 (51.9%) in the CPM group, incurring additional MMHCs of $20,775 compared to those in the UM group (p < 0.001). In the CPM group, MMHCs were reduced in those aged >60 years (p < 0.001), while African American or Hispanic origin increased MMHCs (p < 0.001). Diabetes, depression, and obesity increased MMHCs (p < 0.001). MMHCs increased with larger (p < 0.001) hospitals, Western location (p < 0.001), greater household income (p < 0.001), complications (p < 0.001), and increasing LOS (p < 0.001). MMHCs decreased in urban teaching hospitals and Midwest or Southern regions (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

There are many patient and hospital factors affecting charges; this study provides surgeons and hospital systems with transparent, quantitative charge data in patients undergoing contralateral prophylactic mastectomy and immediate breast reconstruction.