A population-based audit of surgical practice and outcomes of oncoplastic breast conservations in Scotland – An analysis of 589 patients

Survival after standard or oncoplastic breast-conserving surgery versus mastectomy for breast cancer

BACKGROUND

Recent evidence suggests a survival advantage after breast-conserving surgery compared with mastectomy. Previous studies have compared survival outcomes after standard breast-conserving surgery, but no studies have compared survival outcomes after oncoplastic breast-conserving surgery. The aim of this study was to compare survival outcomes after breast-conserving surgery + radiotherapy (and an oncoplastic breast-conserving surgery + radiotherapy subgroup) with those after mastectomy ± radiotherapy.

METHODS

Patients diagnosed with primary invasive breast cancer between 1 January 2010 and 31 December 2019 were identified from a prospectively maintained National Cancer Registry. Overall survival and breast cancer-specific survival outcomes were analysed using Kaplan-Meier analysis and Cox regression analysis adjusting for patient demographics, tumour characteristics, and treatment adjuncts.

RESULTS

A total of 14 182 patients were eligible (8537 patients underwent standard breast-conserving surgery + radiotherapy, 360 patients underwent oncoplastic breast-conserving surgery + radiotherapy, 2953 patients underwent mastectomy + radiotherapy, and 2332 patients underwent mastectomy - radiotherapy). The median follow-up was 7.27 (range 0.2-13.6) years. Superior 10-year survival was observed after breast-conserving surgery + radiotherapy (overall survival: 81.2%; breast cancer-specific survival: 93.3%) compared with mastectomy + radiotherapy (overall survival: 63.4%; breast cancer-specific survival: 75.9%) and mastectomy - radiotherapy (overall survival: 63.1%; breast cancer-specific survival: 87.5%). Ten-year overall survival and breast cancer-specific survival after oncoplastic breast-conserving surgery + radiotherapy were 86.1% and 90.2% respectively. After adjusted analysis, breast-conserving surgery + radiotherapy was associated with superior survival outcomes compared with mastectomy + radiotherapy (overall survival: HR 1.34 (95% c.i. 1.20 to 1.51); breast cancer-specific survival: HR 1.62 (95% c.i. 1.38 to 1.90)) and mastectomy - radiotherapy (overall survival: HR 1.57 (95% c.i. 1.41 to 1.75); breast cancer-specific survival: HR 1.70 (95% c.i. 1.41 to 2.05)). Similar survival outcomes were observed amongst patients treated with oncoplastic breast-conserving surgery + radiotherapy compared with mastectomy + radiotherapy (overall survival: HR 1.72 (95% c.i. 1.62 to 2.55); breast cancer-specific survival: HR 1.74 (95% c.i. 1.06 to 2.86)) and mastectomy - radiotherapy (overall survival: HR 2.21 (95% c.i. 1.49 to 3.27); breast cancer-specific survival: HR 1.89 (95% c.i. 1.13 to 3.14)).

CONCLUSION

Breast-conserving surgery + radiotherapy and oncoplastic breast-conserving surgery + radiotherapy are associated with superior overall survival and breast cancer-specific survival compared with mastectomy ± radiotherapy. The findings should inform discussion of surgical treatment options for patients with breast cancer.

A Clinical Analysis of Prognosis and Patient-Reported Outcomes of Oncoplastic Breast-Conserving Surgery for Early Breast Cancer: A Retrospective Cohort Study

PURPOSE

Approximately 25-30% of patients suffer from breast deformity and/or asymmetry after conventional breast-conserving surgery (CBCS). Generally, it is thought that oncoplastic breast-conserving surgery (OBCS) results in an improved cosmetic result; however, studies comparing the prognosis and aesthetic outcomes of CBCS and OBCS in early breast cancer (EBC) are inadequate.

METHODS

A total of 143 patients were included in this retrospective cohort study; 53 underwent OBCS and 90 underwent CBCS. The resected weight, complications, esthetic results, patient satisfaction, and recurrence rate were compared between the groups. Patient-reported outcomes (PRO) were assessed by the BREAST-Q questionnaire.

RESULTS

The mean age of the patients in OBCS group was 43.8 years. This was younger than that in CBCS group (49.1 years, p < 0.001). Postoperative complications (11.3% vs. 8.9%, p = 0.64) and re-excision (5.7% vs. 6.7%, p > 0.99) rates were similar. The OBCS group had higher breast satisfaction and psychosocial well-being than the CBCS group (75 vs. 63, p < 0.001 and 84 vs. 77, p = 0.05); however, sexual well-being (56 vs. 66, p = 0.05) and physical well-being (65 vs. 76, p < 0.001) were worse in OBCS. After 42.3 (range: 12.6-69.2)-month median follow-up, no difference in event-free survival (EFS) was demonstrated between the groups (p = 0.13).

CONCLUSION

Although OBCS has the better aesthetic outcomes and identical oncological safety in comparison with CBCS, the sexual and physical well-being in OBCS are not improved for Asian patients. Hence, choosing an appropriate procedure may be more important for the typically small to moderate-sized breasts characteristic of Asian females unlike Westerners.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE IV

This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266 .

Impact of Oncoplastic Surgery on Oncologic Outcomes in Patients with Breast Cancer

Background

For patients with breast cancer, oncoplastic surgery (OPS) serves as a valuable technique that allows for immediate reconstruction at the time of resection. While the aim of OPS is to improve breast cosmesis, it is critical to ensure OPS does not negatively impact appropriate cancer treatment.

Methods

Based on current literature, this study provides a broad overview on the potential oncologic advantages of OPS for patients diagnosed with breast cancer.

Results

OPS has been shown to be a safe and reliable approach with oncologic advantages. More specifically, OPS broadens the indications for breast conservation therapy (BCT); allows for a more generous margin of resection, thus decreasing rates of re-excision; and provides the opportunity to sample additional breast tissue, which may detect occult disease. Reduction mammaplasty may also decrease the risk for developing breast cancer. Importantly, in the era of multimodality therapy, long-term oncologic outcomes and postoperative surveillance algorithms appear to be similar when comparing patients who undergo OPS and BCT.

Conclusions

For patients with breast cancer, oncoplastic surgery has emerged as a valuable technique to improve breast cosmesis while achieving optimal oncologic outcomes. As the landscape of breast oncology continues to evolve, it is critical for a multidisciplinary team to be involved to guide management and reconstructive strategies.

Patient-Reported Outcome Measures of Breast Cancer Surgery: Evidence Review and Tool Adaptation

The objective of this scoping review was to review survey instruments for Patient-Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) and provide recommendations to construct a tool for PROMs specifically for breast cancer patients who have undergone surgery, to overcome the limitations of existing validated tools. A total of 924 articles were screened. Nine articles were selected based on the eligibility criteria. We found that PROMs' data collection along with advancements in the treatment of breast cancer and the resultant improved clinical outcomes, there is a growing appreciation and focus on improving patients' quality of life (QoL). Previous studies have shown that the assessment of PROMs is linked to a positive effect on patients' symptoms of distress, quality of life, acceptance, and satisfaction. Several PROMs tools have been validated for use in cancer survivors. However, it is unclear whether existing tools are appropriate for use in breast cancer patients who have undergone surgical treatment. Hence, we conducted a scoping review. Following a review of the current PROM related to breast cancer and the necessity to build specialized PROMs related to the outcomes of breast cancer surgery, we provide recommendations for the development of a comprehensive tool to overcome the limitations of existing PROMs tools.

Triple-negative breast cancer: current treatment strategies and factors of negative prognosis

Breast cancer is the most common cancer in women and the most common cause of death in working-age women. According to the results of immunohistochemical studies, 10-20% of cases revealed a triple-negative type of breast cancer. This subtype is characterized by significant proliferative activity and growth rate, aggressive clinical course, and early metastasis. This leads to a suspicious prognosis and, accordingly, encourages an increase of surgical treatment radicalism and aggressive systemic treatment. This review briefly analyzes existing treatment strategies for triple-negative breast cancer with a focus on surgical treatment. Surgical treatment is an integral part of complex therapy. Currently, the attention of researchers is focused not only on the radicalism of the operation, ensuring long-term survival, but also on achieving a good cosmetic result that determines the quality of life of patients. In this aspect, organ-preserving and prosthetic methods of operations are promising, the feasibility and effectiveness of which are being discussed. The relevance of choosing the optimal method of operation is evidenced by the lack of generally accepted approaches based on informative markers for the prognosis of the course of the disease. Therefore, the choice of the optimal method of surgical treatment taking into account the individual characteristics of the patient and the tumor, indications for chemotherapy, and radiation therapy remains an unresolved issue and requires further research.

Outcome reporting in therapeutic mammaplasty: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Therapeutic mammaplasty (TM) is an oncological procedure which combines tumour resection with breast reduction and mastopexy techniques. Previous systematic reviews have demonstrated the oncological safety of TM but reporting of critically important outcomes, such as quality of life, aesthetic and functional outcomes, are limited, piecemeal or inconsistent. This systematic review aimed to identify all outcomes reported in clinical studies of TM to facilitate development of a core outcome set.

METHODS

Medline, EMBASE, CINAHL and Web of Science were searched from inception to 5 August 2020. Included studies reported clinical outcomes following TM for adult women. Two authors screened articles independently for eligibility. Data were extracted regarding the outcome definition and classification type (for example, oncological, quality of life, etc.), time of outcome reporting and measurement tools.

RESULTS

Of 5709 de-duplicated records, 148 were included in the narrative synthesis. The majority of studies (n = 102, 68.9 per cent) reported measures of survival and/or recurrence; approximately three-quarters (n = 75, 73.5 per cent) had less than 5 years follow-up. Aesthetic outcome was reported in half of studies (n = 75, 50.7 per cent) using mainly subjective, non-validated measurement tools. The time point at which aesthetic assessment was conducted was highly variable, and only defined in 48 (64.0 per cent) studies and none included a preoperative baseline for comparison. Few studies reported quality of life (n = 30, 20.3 per cent), functional outcomes (n = 5, 3.4 per cent) or resource use (n = 28, 18.9 per cent).

CONCLUSION

Given the oncological equivalence of TM and mastectomy, treatment decisions are often driven by aesthetic and functional outcomes, which are infrequently and inconsistently reported with non-validated measurement tools.

Impact of neoadjuvant chemotherapy on surgical complications in breast cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The increased use of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) facilitates an increase in breast-conserving surgery and immediate breast reconstruction. While NACT is considered to have the same oncological safety as adjuvant chemotherapy, evidence on the impact of NACT on surgical outcomes following breast surgery is unclear and varies across studies. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to assess the impact of NACT on surgical complications in breast cancer patients undergoing any kind of breast surgery.

METHODS

Database searches were conducted (March 26, 2021) to identify studies assessing the impact of NACT on postoperative complications. Studies were included if they compared a group of patients treated with NACT to a control group that was not, and if they reported at least one of our defined outcomes. Primary effect measures were odds ratios (ORs) and mean difference with a 95% confidence interval. Study quality was assessed by the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale.

RESULTS

Twenty-six studies comprising 134,191 patients were included. NACT was not associated with an increased complication rate for overall complications (OR: 1.13, 95% CI: 0.86 to 1.47, p = 0.38), individual postoperative complications, nor surgery duration. There was a non-significant trend towards NACT increasing the risk of seroma, wound complications, skin or nipple necrosis, flap ischemia or loss, and implant loss. A significant difference in blood loss was found, favouring NACT (MD = -75.85, 95% CI: -107.47 to -44.23, p < 0.00001). Heterogeneity was significant between the studies (I²>50%).

CONCLUSION

Compared to a control group, NACT was not found to affect the surgical complications adversely.

Validated prediction model for positive resection margins in breast-conserving surgery based exclusively on preoperative data

Background

Positive margins after breast-conserving surgery (BCS) and subsequent second surgery are associated with increased costs and patient discomfort. The aim of this study was to develop a prediction model for positive margins based on risk factors available before surgery.

Methods

Patients undergoing BCS for in situ or invasive cancer between 2015 and 2016 at site A formed a development cohort; those operated during 2017 in site A and B formed two validation cohorts. MRI was not used routinely. Preoperative radiographic and tumour characteristics and method of operation were collected from patient charts. Multivariable logistic regression was used to develop a prediction model for positive margins including variables with discriminatory capacity identified in a univariable model. The discrimination and calibration of the prediction model was assessed in the validation cohorts, and a nomogram developed.

Results

There were 432 patients in the development cohort, and 190 and 157 in site A and B validation cohorts respectively. Positive margins were identified in 77 patients (17.8 per cent) in the development cohort. A non-linear transformation of mammographic tumour size and six variables (visible on mammography, ductal carcinoma in situ, lobular invasive cancer, distance from nipple–areola complex, calcification, and type of surgery) were included in the final prediction model, which had an area under the curve of 0.80 (95 per cent c.i. 0.75 to 0.85). The discrimination and calibration of the prediction model was assessed in the validation cohorts, and a nomogram developed.

Conclusion

The prediction model showed good ability to predict positive margins after BCS and might, after further validation, be used before surgery in centres without the routine use of preoperative MRI.

Presented in part to the San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium, San Antonio, Texas, USA, December 2018 and the Swedish Surgical Society Annual Meeting, Helsingborg, Sweden, August 2018.

Extreme Oncoplasty: Breast Conservation in Patients with Large, Multifocal, and Multicentric Breast Cancer

INTRODUCTION

Extreme Oncoplastic Breast Conservation Surgery (EOBCS) is offered in selected patients with multifocal or multicentric breast cancer (MFMC). Recent evidence has suggested that EOBCS may be a valuable resource for patients with MFMC who may avoid the risk associated with mastectomy in favour of the benefits of breast conservation without risking their oncological outcomes. Our study examined the practice of EOBCS in two regional breast units in Glasgow, United Kingdom.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A prospectively collected database of 50 patients treated with EOBC in two breast units in Glasgow between 2007 and 2018 were evaluated, and clinical outcomes were observed.

RESULTS

Fifty patients (median age 55) underwent EOBCS, of which 43 (86%) had invasive disease. Median tumour size was 55mm (50-90) and multifocal disease was identified in 22 (44%) patients. Nine patients (18%) were found to have positive margins and underwent a second procedure, with 6 (12%) proceeding to mastectomy. Five-year disease free survival rate was 91.5%, while cancer-specific survival was 95.7%.

CONCLUSION

EOBCS is oncologically safe in short-term follow-up. Large scale studies are required to confirm these preliminary results, in order to offer EOBCS as a valid option to patients with advanced or multifocal breast cancer.

Systematic review of partial breast reconstruction with pedicled perforator artery flaps: Clinical, oncological and cosmetic outcomes

The use of chest wall perforator flaps (CWPFs) following breast conservation surgery for breast cancer has become a useful tool in the armamentarium of the oncoplastic breast surgeon, however robust evidence for the technique is lacking. The aim of this study was to conduct a systematic review appraising the current evidence for the use of CWPFs, evaluating clinical, oncological and cosmetic outcomes. A PRISMA-compliant systematic review, with PROSPERO published protocol a priori and search of all relevant database and trial registries between 1990 to July 2020. Eleven studies amounting to 432 cases were reviewed and considered to be at high risk of bias due to small sample size, selective outcome reporting and selection bias. Heterogeneity due to lack of consensus of outcome measures prevented meaningful analysis. Fifty-two (12.3%) clinical complications were recorded: seroma (n = 9; 2.1%), fat necrosis (n = 9; 2.4%), haematoma (n = 8; 1.9%), infection (n = 9; 2.1%), and flap necrosis (n = 9; 2.1%). Thirty-four (10.8%) patients had an involved positive margin, 29 patients underwent re-excision (9.3%) and four underwent completion mastectomy (1.3%). One local recurrence and six distant recurrences were observed during a mean follow up of 21 months (1-49). A pooled patient cosmetic satisfaction descriptor of good or excellent was described in 93% of cases. CWPFs are a safe method of partial breast reconstruction following BCS. They are associated with a low complication rate, acceptable short-term oncological outcomes and satisfactory cosmetic outcome. There is a relative paucity in quality of data in this field and larger prospective studies are needed to investigate outcomes further.

A prospective cohort study of the safety of breast cancer surgery during COVID-19 pandemic in the West of Scotland

INTRODUCTION

In order to minimise the risk of breast cancer patients for COVID-19 infection related morbidity and mortality prioritisation of care has utmost importance since the onset of the pandemic. However, COVID-19 related risk in patients undergoing breast cancer surgery has not been studied yet. We evaluated the safety of breast cancer surgery during COVID-19 pandemic in the West of Scotland region.

METHODS

A prospective cohort study of patients having breast cancer surgery was carried out in a geographical region during the first eight weeks of the hospital lockdown and outcomes were compared to the regional cancer registry data of pre-COVID-19 patients of the same units (n = 1415).

RESULTS

188 operations were carried out in 179 patients. Tumour size was significantly larger in patients undergoing surgery during hospital lockdown than before (cT3-4: 16.8% vs. 7.4%; p < 0.001; pT2 - pT4: 45.5% vs. 35.6%; p = 0.002). ER negative and HER-2 positive rate was significantly higher during lockdown (ER negative: 41.3% vs. 17%, p < 0.001; HER-2 positive: 23.4% vs. 14.8%; p = 0.004). While breast conservation rate was lower during lockdown (58.6% vs. 65%; p < 0.001), level II oncoplastic conservation was significantly higher in order to reduce mastectomy rate (22.8% vs. 5.6%; p < 0.001). No immediate reconstruction was offered during lockdown. 51.2% had co-morbidity, and 7.8% developed postoperative complications in lockdown. There was no peri-operative COVID-19 infection related morbidity or mortality.

CONCLUSION

breast cancer can be safely provided during COVID-19 pandemic in selected patients.

Factors influencing decisions on contralateral symmetrisation procedure among patients with breast cancer

INTRODUCTION

Oncoplastic breast conserving surgery (OBCS) can cause breast asymmetry. Although contralateral breast surgery to achieve symmetry was offered to these patients, the uptake of symmetrisation was variable. We aimed to determine the factors that deter patients with breast cancer undergoing OBCS from taking up symmetrisation.

METHODS

All patients with breast cancer who underwent OBCS of displacement type but no symmetrisation were prospectively surveyed to explore social, economic, psychological and physical reasons against symmetrisation.

RESULTS

28 patients participated in a survey administered at a mean 21.6 (range 2-47) months after OBCS. A combination of factors, such as worry and desire to treat breast cancer first (67.9%), not being overly concerned about breast cosmesis (57.1%) and fear of pain from additional operation (28.6%) deterred patients from immediate symmetrisation. Worry and desire to treat breast cancer first was the most important single factor for 50% of patients. Reasons for no delayed symmetrisation included not being overly concerned about breast cosmesis (70.4%), fear of breast cancer recurrence (48.1%) and being happy with current breast cosmesis (33.3%), with the former two reasons equally cited as the single most important deterrent by 30% of patients each.

CONCLUSION

A combination of factors may deter patients from symmetrisation. The most significant factors deterring OBCS among patients were worry and desire to treat breast cancer first for immediate symmetrisation, and not being overly concerned about breast cosmesis and fear of breast cancer recurrence for delayed symmetrisation. Reassurance of these patients may increase their uptake of symmetrisation, thereby improving patient cosmesis and satisfaction.

Optimal assessment tools in assessing breast surgery: patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) vs. objective measures

Improving the health-related quality of life (HRQoL) of patients is the fundamental aim of aesthetic breast surgery and its importance is increasingly recognised in breast cancer-related surgery. There has been growing acceptance of the value of assessing physical, psychological and social well-being through patient reported outcome measures (PROMs). It is important to consider the role of PROMs in relation to objective measures to ensure that the optimal assessment tools are selected when assessing outcomes in breast surgery. A narrative review was conducted of published articles identified on Ovid Medline by searching the terms: patient reported outcome measures, quality of life (QoL), functional outcomes, aesthetic outcomes, complications and breast surgery. Reference lists were also examined to find relevant articles not detected through the search. Survival and mortality are outcomes of immense importance in breast surgery that are not suitable for assessment through PROMs and should be measured objectively. Post-operative complication rates and markers of their severity are most appropriately assessed using objective measures, however, patients may provide valuable insights into the impact complications have on their QoL. All current assessment tools for assessing aesthetic outcome have inherent limitations, and thus it is likely that both subjective and objective measures are required to comprehensively assess aesthetic outcomes in breast surgery. Physical dysfunction can be assessed objectively, however, PROMs may better evaluate physical well-being, reflecting the real-life implications of a change in function. Psychological and social well-being is irrefutably personal in nature and best assessed through PROMs. There is no one optimal assessment tool for assessing breast surgery outcomes. Utilising a combination of PROMs and objective measures is necessary to accurately and comprehensively evaluate the impact and effectiveness of surgical breast interventions.

Pyridoxine 5'-phosphate oxidase is correlated with human breast invasive ductal carcinoma development

Pyridoxine 5'-phosphate oxidase (PNPO) is a converting enzyme for an active form of vitamin B6. This study aims to evaluate the biological function and the regulatory mechanism of PNPO in human breast invasive ductal carcinoma (IDC). We unveiled for the first time that PNPO was upregulated in patients with IDC and was correlated with the overall survival of patients with metastasis at the later stages. Suppression of PNPO inhibited breast cancer cell proliferation, migration, invasion and colony formation, arrested cell cycle at the G2/M phase and induced cell apoptosis. PNPO was positively correlated with lncRNA MALAT1 which was negatively correlated with miR-216b-5p. PNPO was down-regulated and up-regulated by miR-216b-5p mimics and inhibitors, respectively, in breast cancer cells. A microRNA response element was found in both PNPO and MALAT1 transcripts for miR-216b-5p and the dual-luciferase reporter assay confirmed the binding of these transcripts. Knockdown of MALAT1 resulted in an increase of miR-216b-5p and a decrease of PNPO mRNA, indicating a regulatory mechanism of competing endogenous RNAs. Taken together, these results reveal the biological function and a regulatory mechanism of PNPO, in which the MALAT1/miR-216b-5p/PNPO axis may be important in IDC development. Targeting this axis may have therapeutic potential for breast cancer.

Positive or close margins: reoperation rate and second conservative resection or total mastectomy?

Introduction

Reoperation after breast-conserving surgery (BCS) could be proposed for positive or close margins. Reoperation type, re-excision or mastectomy, depends on several factors in relation to patient's and tumor's characteristics. We have analyzed our breast cancer (BC) database in order to determine second and third attempts for BCS and mastectomy rates, as well as associated factors for type of surgery.

Methods

All patients with BCS between 1995 and 2017 were included. Patient's characteristics, pathologic results, and treatments were analyzed. Reoperation rate, type of reoperation, second reoperation, and associated factors of reoperation, mastectomy, and third intervention were determined. Three periods were determined: P1-P3.

Results

We analyzed 10,761 patients: 1,161 with ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) and 9,600 with invasive BC. The reoperation rate was 41.4% for DCIS and 28.0% for invasive BC. Using multivariate analysis, we identified tumor size >20 mm as being a risk factor for reoperation, whereas age >50 years, P2-3, and some localization decreased reoperation rates. For invasive BC, age >40 years, triple-negative tumors, neoadjuvant chemotherapy, and noncentral tumors decreased reoperation rates and lobular tumor, multifocal tumors, lymphovascular invasion, DCIS component, and Her2-positive tumors increased reoperation rates. For patients requiring reoperation, re-excision was performed in 48.1% (1,523/3,168) and mastectomy was required after first re-excision in 13.46% (205/1,523). For DCIS, mastectomy rates were higher for grade 2 and tumor ≥20 mm. For invasive BC, mastectomy rates were higher for lobular, multifocal, ≥20 mm, Her2-positive tumors and diffuse positive margins and lower for age >50 years and during the last period. Even if interval time between surgery and adjuvant treatments was higher for patients with reoperation, survival rates were not different between patients with and without reoperation.

Conclusion

A decrease in reoperation and mastectomy rates had been reported with several associated factors. A third intervention with mastectomy was required in 13.5% of patients. This information should be done in case of reoperation.

Resection margins and local recurrences in breast cancer: Comparison between conventional and oncoplastic breast conserving surgery

BACKGROUND

This retrospective cohort study aims to compare surgical margins, reoperations and local recurrences after conventional or oncoplastic breast conservation surgery (BCS). Furthermore, we aim to investigate differences between various oncoplastic techniques.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

We reviewed 1800 consecutive patients with primary invasive breast cancer (N = 1707) or ductal carcinoma in situ (N = 93) who underwent BCS at Helsinki University Hospital between 2010 and 2012.

RESULTS

Conventional BCS was performed in 1189 (66.1%) patients, oncoplastic BCS in 611 (33.9%). Various oncoplastic techniques were used. Patients with oncoplastic BCS had more often multifocal (p < 0.001), larger (p < 0.001), palpable tumours (p < 0.001) with larger resection specimens (p < 0.001). The amount of resected tissue varied substantially depending on the oncoplastic technique. Patients treated with oncoplastic BCS were younger (p < 0.001) and their tumours were more aggressive according to histological grade (p < 0.001), T-stage (p < 0.001), Ki-67 (p < 0.001) and lymph node status (p < 0.001). There was no difference, however, in surgical margins (p = 0.578) or reoperation rates (p = 0.430) between the groups. A total of 152 (8.4%) patients were reoperated because of insufficient margins, 96 (8.1%) in the conventional, 56 (9.2%) in the oncoplastic BCS group. The median follow-up time was 75 (2-94) months. There was no difference in local recurrence-free survival between the conventional and oncoplastic BCS groups (log-rank test, p = 0.172).

CONCLUSIONS

Oncoplastic BCS was used for larger, multifocal and more aggressive tumours. Nevertheless, no difference in reoperation rate or local recurrences were found. Oncoplastic BCS is as safe as conventional BCS enabling breast conserving for patients who otherwise were candidates for mastectomy.