Contralateral risk reducing mastectomy in patients with sporadic breast cancer. Benefits and hazards

Current Status of Contralateral Prophylactic Mastectomy: Investigating Structural Racial Disparity

BACKGROUND

Contralateral prophylactic mastectomy (CPM) remains a personal decision, influenced by psychosocial factors, including cosmesis and peace of mind. Although use of CPM is disproportionately low among Black patients, the degree to which these disparities are driven by patient- vs hospital-level factors remains unknown.

STUDY DESIGN

Patients undergoing mastectomy for nonmetastatic ductal or lobular breast cancer were tabulated using the National Cancer Database from 2004 to 2020. The primary endpoint was receipt of CPM. Multivariable logistic regression models were constructed with interaction terms between Black-serving hospital (BSH) status and patient race to evaluate associations with CPM. Cox proportional hazard models were used to evaluate long-term survival.

RESULTS

Of 597,845 women studied, 70,911 (11.9%) were Black. After multivariable adjustment, Black race (adjusted odds ratio 0.65, 95% CI 0.64 to 0.67) and treatment at BSH (adjusted odds ratio 0.84, 95% CI 0.83 to 0.85) were independently linked to lower odds of CPM. Although predicted probability of CPM was universally lower at higher BSH, Black patients faced a steeper reduction compared with White patients. Receipt of CPM was linked to improved survival (hazard ratio [HR] 0.84, 95% CI 0.83 to 0.86), whereas Black race was associated with a greater HR of 10-year mortality (HR 1.14, 95% CI 1.12 to 1.17).

CONCLUSIONS

Hospitals serving a greater proportion of Black patients are less likely to use CPM, suggestive of disparities in access to CPM at the institutional level. Further research and education are needed to characterize surgeon-specific and institutional practices in patient counseling and shared decision-making that shape disparities in access to CPM.

Measuring quality of care in autologous breast reconstruction: a Delphi consensus

Measuring and benchmarking quality of care in surgical oncology has been gaining popularity. In autologous breast reconstruction (ABR), a standardized set of indicators to assess quality of care is lacking. In this study, we defined a set of evidence-based quality indicators for autologous breast reconstruction. First, we performed a systematic review to identify factors related to quality of care in ABR. Variables were categorized depending on their function: indicators related to outcome, indicators related to process and case-mix variables. The review was followed by a 3-round Delphi Consensus to determine which indicators and case-mix-variables were considered relevant and feasible for inclusion in an ABR standard set of indicators. 932 unique articles were identified, of which 110 papers were included in the study. Indicators were categorized by function: outcome, process and case-mix variables. In total, 8 process indicators and 41 outcome indicators were extracted. 30 case-mix-variables were included. Following 3 rounds of questioning in the Delphi Consensus, all respondents agreed on type of ABR, oncological outcomes and patient satisfaction for the standard set. Indicators related to complications were consistently ranked highly. Most process indicators were not chosen after 3 rounds of questioning. 11 case-mix-variables were included in the final set. Following the Delphi Consensus, it was possible to identify 33 process and outcome indicators and 11 case-mix-variables for inclusion for a standard set of quality indicators. With the inclusion of both objective and patient-reported outcome measures, this set of indicators provides a multidimensional measurement tool for quality assessment for ABR.

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.

Timely cancer genetic counseling and testing for young women with breast cancer: impact on surgical decision-making for contralateral risk-reducing mastectomy

PURPOSE

Genetic testing (GT) can identify individuals with pathogenic/likely pathogenic variants (PV/LPVs) in breast cancer (BC) predisposition genes, who may consider contralateral risk-reducing mastectomy (CRRM). We report on CRRM rates in young women newly diagnosed with BC who received GT through a multidisciplinary clinic.

METHODS

Clinical data were reviewed for patients seen between November 2014 and June 2019. Patients with non-metastatic, unilateral BC diagnosed at age ≤ 45 and completed GT prior to surgery were included. Associations between surgical intervention and age, BC stage, family history, and GT results were evaluated.

RESULTS

Of the 194 patients, 30 (15.5%) had a PV/LPV in a BC predisposition gene (ATM, BRCA1, BRCA2, CHEK2, NBN, NF1), with 66.7% in BRCA1 or BRCA2. Of 164 (84.5%) uninformative results, 132 (68%) were negative and 32 (16.5%) were variants of uncertain significance (VUS). Overall, 67 (34.5%) had CRRM, including 25/30 (83.3%) PV/LPV carriers and 42/164 (25.6%) non-carriers. A positive test result (p < 0.01) and significant family history were associated with CRRM (p = 0.02). For the 164 with uninformative results, multivariate analysis showed that CRRM was not associated with age (p = 0.23), a VUS, (p = 0.08), family history (p = 0.10), or BC stage (p = 0.11).

CONCLUSION

In this cohort of young women with BC, the identification of a PV/LPV in a BC predisposition gene and a significant family history were associated with the decision to pursue CRRM. Thus, incorporation of genetic services in the initial evaluation of young patients with a new BC could contribute to the surgical decision-making process.

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.

Contralateral prophylactic mastectomy: A narrative review of the evidence and acceptability

The uptake of contralateral prophylactic mastectomy (CPM) has increased steadily over the last twenty years in women of all age groups and breast cancer stages. Since contralateral breast cancer is relatively rare and the breast cancer guidelines only recommend CPM in a small subset of patients with breast cancer, the drivers of this trend are unknown. This review aims to evaluate the evidence for and acceptability of CPM, data on patient rationales for choosing CPM, and some of the factors that might impact patient preferences. Based on the evidence, future recommendations will be provided. First, data on contralateral breast cancer risk and CPM rates and trends are addressed. After that, the evidence is structured around four main patient rationales for CPM formulated as questions that patients might ask their surgeon: Will CPM reduce mortality risk? Will CPM reduce the risk of contralateral breast cancer? Can I avoid future screening with CPM? Will I have better breast symmetry after CPM? Also, three different guidelines regarding CPM will be reviewed. Studies indicate a large gap between patient preferences for radical risk reduction with CPM and the current approaches recommended by important guidelines. We suggest a strategy including shared decision-making to enhance surgeons’ communication with patients about contralateral breast cancer and treatment options, to empower patients in order to optimize the use of CPM incorporating accurate risk assessment and individual patient preferences.

•

Contralateral prophylactic mastectomy rates have increased over the last 20 years.

•

Patients may want CPM to reduce risk of contralateral breast cancer and mortality.

•

Patients do not always have the tools available to make a well-informed decision.

•

Patient and surgeon’s shared decision-making could optimize the use of CPM.

Cosmetic reconstruction in breast cancer patients: Opportunities for nanocomposite materials

The most common malignancy in women, breast cancer remains a major medical challenge that affects the life of thousands of patients every year. With recognized benefits to body image and self-esteem, the use of synthetic mammary implants for elective cosmetic augmentation and post-mastectomy reconstruction continues to increase. Higher breast implant use leads to an increased occurrence of implant-related complications associated with implant leakage and rupture, capsular contracture, necrosis and infections, which include delayed healing, pain, poor aesthetic outcomes and the need for revision surgeries. Along with the health status of the implant recipient and the skill of the surgeon, the properties of the implant determine the likelihood of implant-related complications and, in doing so, specific patient outcomes. This paper will review the challenges associated with the use of silicone, saline and "gummy bear" implants in view of their application in patients recovering from breast cancer-related mastectomy, and investigate the opportunities presented by advanced functional nanomaterials in meeting these challenges and potentially opening new dimensions for breast reconstruction. STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE: Breast cancer is a significant cause of morbidity and mortality in women worldwide, which is difficult to prevent or predict, and its treatment carries long-term physiological and psychological consequences. Post-mastectomy breast reconstruction addresses the cosmetic aspect of cancer treatment. Yet, drawbacks of current implants contribute to the development of implant-associated complications, which may lead to prolonged patient care, pain and loss of function. Nanomaterials can help resolve the intrinsic biomechanical mismatch between implant and tissues, enhance mechanical properties of soft implantable materials, and provide an alternative avenue for controlled drug delivery. Here, we explore advances in the use of functionalized nanomaterials to enhance the properties of breast implants, with representative examples that highlight the utility of nanomaterials in addressing key challenges associated with breast reconstruction.