Survival in stage I-III breast cancer patients by surgical treatment in a publicly funded health care system

Actuarial Analysis of Survival after Breast Cancer Diagnosis among Lithuanian Females

Breast cancer is the most common cause of mortality due to cancer for women both in Lithuania and worldwide. The chances of survival after diagnosis differ significantly depending on the stage of disease at the time of diagnosis and other factors. One way to estimate survival is to construct a Kaplan-Meier estimate for each factor value separately. However, in cases when it is impossible to observe a large number of patients (for example, in the case of countries with lower numbers of inhabitants), dividing the data into subsets, say, by stage at diagnosis, may lead to results where some subsets contain too few data, thus causing the results of a Kaplan-Meier (or any other) method to become statistically incredible. The problem may become even more acute if researchers want to use more risk factors, such as stage at diagnosis, sex, place of living, treatment method, etc. Alternatively, Cox models can be used to analyse survival data with covariates, and they do not require the data to be divided into subsets according to chosen risks factors (hazards). We estimate the chances of survival for up to 5 years after a breast cancer diagnosis for Lithuanian females during the period of 1995-2016. Firstly, we construct Kaplan-Meier estimates for each stage separately; then, we apply a (stratified) Cox model using stage, circumstance of diagnosis, and year of diagnosis as (potential) hazards. Some directions of further research are provided in the last section of the paper.

Will Absolute Risk Estimation for Time to Next Screen Work for an Asian Mammography Screening Population?

Personalized breast cancer risk profiling has the potential to promote shared decision-making and improve compliance with routine screening. We assessed the Gail model's performance in predicting the short-term (2- and 5-year) and the long-term (10- and 15-year) absolute risks in 28,234 asymptomatic Asian women. Absolute risks were calculated using different relative risk estimates and Breast cancer incidence and mortality rates (White, Asian-American, or the Singapore Asian population). Using linear models, we tested the association of absolute risk and age at breast cancer occurrence. Model discrimination was moderate (AUC range: 0.580-0.628). Calibration was better for longer-term prediction horizons (E/O_{long-term ranges}: 0.86-1.71; E/O_{short-term ranges}:1.24-3.36). Subgroup analyses show that the model underestimates risk in women with breast cancer family history, positive recall status, and prior breast biopsy, and overestimates risk in underweight women. The Gail model absolute risk does not predict the age of breast cancer occurrence. Breast cancer risk prediction tools performed better with population-specific parameters. Two-year absolute risk estimation is attractive for breast cancer screening programs, but the models tested are not suitable for identifying Asian women at increased risk within this short interval.

Is Survival with Conservative Breast Therapy Becoming Superior to That with Modified Radical Mastectomy Alone for the Treatment of Early Breast Cancer in This Era?

This study aims to assess survival rates in early breast cancer patients treated by conservative breast therapy (CBT), including radiotherapy, compared with those treated by modified radical mastectomy (MRM) alone. The South Egypt Cancer Institute and the Assiut University Oncology Department patients' records, from January 2010 to December 2017, were searched for T1-2N0-1M0 breast cancer patients treated by CBT or MRM. Patients who did not receive chemotherapy were excluded to reduce the treatment variation. The 5-year locoregional disease-free survival (LRDFS) was 97.3% for the CBT patients was and 98.0% for the MRM patients (P = .675). The 5-year distant disease-free survival (DDFS) was 93.6% for CBS and 85.7% for MRM (P = 0.033). The DFS was 91.9% for the BCT patients and 85.3% for the MRM patients (P = 0.045). The 5-year OS was 98.2% for the CBT patients and 94.3% for the MRM patients, (P = 0.02). By Cox regression analysis, the CBT resulted in significantly better OS, (P = 0.018) and the HR = 0.350, 95% CI 0.146-0.837. The adjusted OS, estimated by the propensity score-based weights, remained superior in CBT than in MRM patients (P < 0.001). CBT resulted in better DDFS, DFS, and OS than MRM. Future randomized trials are needed to confirm these findings and determine the cause.

Superior survival for breast-conserving therapy over mastectomy in patients with breast cancer: A population-based SEER database analysis across 30 years

Introduction

It has been believed that breast-conserving therapy (lumpectomy plus adjuvant radiation, Lum + RT) and mastectomy without radiation (Mast + NoRT) have equivalent survival outcomes. However, there is a need to re-evaluate the role of lumpectomy plus adjuvant radiation due to changed breast cancer management over time. This study aimed to conduct a population-based study that compare long-term oncologic survival outcomes after Lum + RT vs Mast + NoRT.

Methods

The Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results database was used to identify female breast cancer patients with a primary localized breast cancer diagnosis from 1988 to 2018. The standardized incidence/mortality ratio (SIR/SMR) for breast cancer recurrence (BCR) and breast cancer-specific death (BSD) was estimated by the SEER*Stat program. Cumulative incidences of BCR and BSD were assessed using Gray's method. We evaluated the effects of Lum + RT vs. Mast + NoRT on breast cancer recurrence-free survival (BRFS) and breast cancer-specific survival (BCSS). Fine-Gray competing risk model analyses, propensity score-adjusted Kaplan-Meier analyses and Cox proportional hazards model analyses were applied.

Results

A total of 205,788 women were included in the study. Patients who underwent Lum + RT had higher SIR of BCR (4.14 [95% confidence interval, CI: 3.94-4.34] vs. 1.11 [95% CI: 1.07-1.14]) and lower SMR (9.89 [95% CI: 9.71-10.08] vs. 17.07 [95% CI: 16.82-17.33]) than patients who underwent Mast + NoRT. Lum + RT was associated with higher competing risk of BCR (adjusted hazard ratio [HR]: 1.996, 95% CI: 1.925-2.069, p < 0.001) and lower competing risk of BSD when compared to Mast + RT (adjusted HR: 0.584, 95% CI: 0.572-0.597, p < 0.001). Multivariate Cox regression analysis revealed similar results (adjusted HR after PSW for BRFS: 1.792, 95% CI 1.716-1.871, p < 0.001; adjusted HR after PSW for BCSS: 0.706, 95% CI 0.688-0.725, p < 0.001). These findings persisted in the sensitivity and subgroup analyses.

Discussion

The present study further confirmed superior long-term survival with lumpectomy plus adjuvant radiation over mastectomy independent of patient characteristics including age, race, time period, historic subtype, tumor size, historic grade and stage, indicating that this benefit may result from the treatment itself.

Survival After Breast-Conserving Surgery Compared with that After Mastectomy in Breast Cancer Patients Receiving Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy

BACKGROUND

Breast-conserving surgery (BCS) plus radiotherapy (BCS + RT) has been shown to improve survival compared with mastectomy in patients with early breast cancer; however, whether this superiority is maintained in breast cancer patients receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NCT) is unclear. We evaluated and compared the survival outcomes after BCS + RT and mastectomy in Korean women with breast cancer treated with NCT.

METHODS

We evaluated 1641 patients who received NCT before surgery (BCS or mastectomy). We performed propensity score matching to minimize potential bias due to factors other than the surgical method and compared the 5-year, disease-free survival (DFS), distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS), and overall survival (OS) rates before and after exact matching.

RESULTS

Among the 1641 patients, 839 (51.1%) underwent BCS + RT and 802 (48.9%) underwent mastectomy. Patients who underwent mastectomy had larger tumors and more frequently had positive nodes. For BCS+RT and mastectomy, the unadjusted 5-year DFS, 5-year DMFS, and 5-year OS rates were 87.0% and 73.1%, 89.5% and 77.0%, and 91.8% and 81.0%, respectively (all p < 0.05 = 0.000). After PSM, 5-year DFS, 5-year DMFS, and 5-year OS rates for BCS + RT and mastectomy were 87.6% and 69.1%, 89.7% and 76.0%, and 89.1% and 75.7%, respectively (all p < 0.05). In both unadjusted and adjusted analyses accounting for various confounding factors, BCS + RT was significantly associated with improved DFS (p < 0.05), DMFS (p < 0.05), and OS (p < 0.05) rates compared with mastectomy.

CONCLUSIONS

BCS + RT does not impair DFS and OS in patients treated with NCT. Tumor biology and treatment response are significant prognostic indicators. Our results suggest that BCS + RT may be preferred in most breast cancer patients when both BCS and mastectomy are suitable.

Breast-Conserving Surgery or Mastectomy?: Impact on Survival

The early randomized controlled trials revealed no differences in survival between breast-conserving surgery (BCS) and mastectomy. However, breast cancer treatment has undergone changes, and the results of recent population-based registry studies suggest superior long-term survival after BCS. To explore the current evidence, a systematic review and meta-ana lysis of population-based observational studies from 2010 and onward was conducted.

Methods

A literature search was conducted in the PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases to identify relevant literature. Keywords included "mastectomy," "breast conserving surgery," and "survival." The identified studies were narratively reviewed and effect sizes (hazard ratios [HRs]) for overall (OS) and breast cancer-specific survival (BCSS) were combined with random-effects models.

Results

A total of 30 reports were included in the review, and results from 25 studies were included in the meta-analyses. Compared with mastectomy, BCS was associated with better OS (HR = 1.34 [1.20-1.51]; N = 1,311,600) and BCSS (HR = 1.38 [1.29-1.47]; N = 494,267). Selected subgroups of patients, based on lymph node status, age (<50 years/≥50 years), and radiation therapy after mastectomy (±), all showed better overall survival after BCS. The number (range 4-12) and type of prognostic variables adjusted for in the survival analyses of the studies did not statistically significantly moderate the differences in survival between BCS and mastectomy.

Conclusions

The combined findings from large population-based studies indicate that BCS is associated with survival benefit compared with mastectomy, suggesting that BCS be the recommended treatment of early breast cancer (T1-2N0-1M0) if a radical lumpectomy can be performed.

Comparison of the Nottingham Prognostic Index and OncotypeDX© recurrence score in predicting outcome in estrogen receptor positive breast cancer

INTRODUCTION

Traditionally, Nottingham prognostic index (NPI) informed prognosis in patients with estrogen receptor positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor-2 negative, node negative (ER+/HER2-/LN-) breast cancer. At present, OncotypeDX© Recurrence Score (RS) predicts prognosis and response to adjuvant chemotherapy (AC).

AIMS

To compare NPI and RS for estimating prognosis in ER + breast cancer.

METHODS

Consecutive patients with ER+/HER2-/LN- disease were included. Disease-free (DFS) and overall survival (OS) were determined using Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression analyses.

RESULTS

1471 patients met inclusion criteria. The mean follow-up was 110.7months. NPI was calculable for 1382 patients: 19.8% had NPI≤2.4 (291/1471), 33.0% had NPI 2.41-3.4 (486/1471), 30.0% had NPI 3.41-4.4 (441/1471), 10.9% had NPI 4.41-5.4 (160/1471), and 0.3% had NPI>5.4 (4/1471). In total, 329 patients underwent RS (mean RS: 18.7) and 82.1% had RS < 25 (270/329) and 17.9% had RS ≥ 25 (59/329). Using multivariable Cox regression analyses (n = 1382), NPI independently predicted DFS (Hazard ratio (HR): 1.357, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.140-1.616, P < 0.001) and OS (HR: 1.003, 95% CI: 1.001-1.006, P = 0.024). When performing a focused analysis of those who underwent both NPI and RS (n = 329), neither biomarker predicted DFS or OS. Using Kaplan Meier analyses, NPI category predicted DFS (P = 0.008) and (P = 0.026) OS. Conversely, 21-gene RS group failed to predict DFS (P = 0.187) and OS (P = 0.296).

CONCLUSION

In our focused analysis, neither NPI nor RS predicted survival outcomes. However, in the entire series, NPI independently predicted both DFS and OS. On the 40th anniversary since its derivation, NPI continues to provide accurate prognostication in breast cancer, outperforming RS in the current study.

Risk of ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence and contralateral breast cancer in patients with and without TP53 variant in a large series of breast cancer patients

Background

The association between breast cancer patients with a TP53 pathogenic variant and risk of local recurrence and contralateral breast cancer remains largely unknown.

Methods

The study population of 11093 patients was derived from two cohorts at the Breast Center of Peking University Cancer Hospital in China from November 2003, to March 2018. TP53 germline variants were determined for all patients.

Results

In the study, forty-one (0.37%) carried a TP53 germline pathogenic variant, and 11052 were non-carriers (99.63%). Nineteen TP53 carriers (46.3%) and 4173 non-carriers (37.8%) were treated with breast-conserving therapy (BCT), while the remaining were treated with mastectomy. After a median follow-up of 6.7 years, the rate of ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence (IBTR) in TP53 carriers was significantly higher than that in non-carriers when treated with BCT (21.1% vs 3.8%, P = 0.006). No difference in the rate of IBTR was found between TP53 carriers and non-carriers when treated with mastectomy (0.0% vs 2.6%, P = 1.0). Furthermore, the rate of IBTR in TP53 carriers treated with BCT was significantly higher than that in those treated with mastectomy (21.1% vs 0.0%, P = 0.038). The 10-year cumulative risk of contralateral breast cancer in TP53 carriers was significantly higher than that in non-carriers (17.9% vs 3.6%, hazard ratio (HR) = 7.0, 95% CI: 3.3–14.9, P < 0.001).

Conclusions

Patients with TP53 variants have a high risk of IBTR when treated with BCT, and exhibit a very high risk of contralateral breast cancer. TP53 carriers may not be suitable for BCT and prophylactic contralateral mastectomy might be considered.

•

Patients with a TP53 variant have a high risk of IBTR when treated with BCT.

•

TP53 carriers exhibit a very high risk of contralateral breast cancer.

•

TP53 carriers may not be suitable for BCT.

•

Prophylactic contralateral mastectomy may be considered for TP53 carriers.

Survival Comparisons between Breast Conservation Surgery and Mastectomy Followed by Postoperative Radiotherapy in Stage I-III Breast Cancer Patients: Analysis of the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (Seer) Program Database

Background: This study aims to evaluate the overall and breast cancer-specific survival (BCSS) after breast-conserving surgery (BCS) plus radiotherapy (RT) compared with mastectomy plus RT in resectable breast cancer. Moreover, the aim is to also identify the subgroups who benefit from BCS plus RT and establish a predictive nomogram for stage II patients. Methods: Stage I−III breast cancer patients were identified from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database between 1990 and 2016. Patients with available clinical information were split into two groups: BCS plus RT and mastectomy plus RT. Kaplan−Meier survival analysis, univariate and multivariate regression analysis, and propensity score matching were used in the study. Hazard ratio (HR) was calculated based on stratified Cox univariate regression analyses. A prognostic nomogram by multivariable Cox regression model was developed for stage II patients, and consistency index (C-index) and calibration curve were used to evaluate the accuracy of the nomogram in the training and validation set. Results: A total of 24,590 eligible patients were enrolled. The difference in overall survival (OS) and BCSS remained significant in stage II patients both before and after PSM (after PSM: OS: HR = 0.8536, p = 0.0115; BCSS: HR = 0.7803, p = 0.0013). In stage II patients, the survival advantage effect of BCS plus RT on OS and BCSS was observed in the following subgroups: any age, smaller tumor size (<1 cm), stage IIA (T2N0, T0−1N1), ER (+), and any PR status. Secondly, the C-indexes for BCSS prediction was 0.714 (95% CI 0.694−0.734). The calibration curves showed perfect agreement in both the training and validation sets. Conclusions: BCS plus RT significantly improved the survival rates for patients of stage IIA (T2N0, T0−1N1), ER (+). For stage II patients, the nomogram was a good predictor of 5-, 10-, and 15-year BCSS. Our study may help guide treatment decisions and prolong the survival of stage II breast cancer patients.

Survival Outcomes After Breast-Conserving Therapy Compared With Mastectomy for Patients With Early-Stage Invasive Micropapillary Carcinoma of the Breast: A SEER Population-Based Study

Background

Invasive micropapillary breast carcinoma (IMPC) is a relatively rare pathological type of invasive breast cancer. Little is currently known on the efficacy and safety of breast-conserving treatment (BCT, lumpectomy plus postsurgical radiation) compared with mastectomy in women diagnosed with early-stage IMPC. Accordingly, we sought to investigate the long-term prognostic differences between BCT and mastectomy in patients with T1-3N0-3M0 invasive micropapillary breast carcinoma using data from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database.

Materials and Methods

We retrospectively analyzed 1,203 female patients diagnosed with early-stage IMPC between 2004 and 2015 from the SEER database. The impact of different surgical approaches on patient prognosis was assessed by the Kaplan-Meier method and Cox proportional risk models.

Results

A total of 609 and 594 patients underwent mastectomy and BCT, respectively. Compared with patients who underwent a mastectomy, patients in the BCT group were older and had lower tumor diameters, lower rates of lymph nodes metastasis, and higher rates of ER receptor positivity and PR receptor positivity (p < 0.05). Kaplan-Meier plots showed that the overall survival (OS) and breast cancer-specific survival (BCSS) were higher in the BCT group than in the mastectomy group. In subgroup analysis, patients with T2 stage in the BCT group had better OS than the mastectomy group. Multivariate analysis showed no statistical difference in OS and BCSS for patients in the mastectomy group compared with the BCT group (hazard ratio (HR) = 0.727; 95% confidence interval (95% CI) 0.369–1.432, p = 0.357; HR = 0.762; 95% CI 0.302–1.923, p = 0.565; respectively). During the multivariate analysis and stratifying for the T stage, a better OS was found for patients with T2 stage in the BCT group than the mastectomy group (HR = 0.333, 95% CI: 0.149–0.741, p = 0.007). There was no significant difference in OS for patients with T1 and T3 stages between the BCT and mastectomy groups (p > 0.05).

Conclusion

In women with early-stage IMPC, BCT was at least equivalent to mastectomy in terms of survival outcomes. When both procedures are feasible, BCT should be recommended as the standard surgical treatment, especially for patients with T2 disease.

Insurance Status and Travel Distance to Single Treatment Facility Predictive of Mastectomy

BACKGROUND

We evaluated the impact of insurance status and travel distance on the receipt of total mastectomy without reconstruction (TM) compared to breast conserving surgery with radiation (BCT) for early-stage breast cancer (BC) patients who received care at a single facility. We hypothesized that, lack of insurance and increased travel distance would be predictive of TM over BCT and disparities would vary by different races and/or ethnicities.

METHODS

Using the National Cancer Database from 2010-2017, we examined surgical patients with stage I or II BC, who received care at one facility. Chi-square tests examined subgroup differences by BCT or TM. Multivariable logistic regressions evaluated patient, facility, and pathologic factors associated with the receipt of TM over BCT for the entire cohort and by races and/or ethnicities.

RESULTS

Of the 284,202 patients, 70.1% received BCT while 29.9% received TM. After adjustment travel distance > 60 miles to a treatment facility, and non-insured patients were more likely to receive TM over BCT, when compared to travel distance < 20 miles and private insurance (all P < 0.05). Compared to other races and/or ethnicities, African Americans traveling > 60 miles were 65.4% more likely to receive TM over BCT compared to those traveling < 20 miles (P < .0001). Across all races and/or ethnicities after adjustment, lack of insurance was predictive for receipt of TM over BCT (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Despite treatment at one facility, increased travel distance and insurance status are independently predictive of the receipt of TM over BCT in patients with early-stage BC. While travel distance is particularly impactful for African Americans, the impact of not having insurance on surgical treatments is universal across all races and/or ethnicities.

Impact of preoperative breast MRI on 10-year survival of patients included in the Swedish randomized multicentre POMB trial

Background

The value of preoperative breast MRI as an adjunct technique regarding its effect on re-excision rates has been a subject of discussion. No survival data regarding preoperative breast MRI are available from randomized studies.

Methods

Ten-year follow-up of the POMB randomized multicentre study was analysed, evaluating MRI and its effect on disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS). Patients with newly diagnosed breast cancer were randomized to either preoperative MRI or conventional imaging. Kaplan–Meier plots were used to analyse DFS and OS, and Cox regression to estimate hazard ratios (HRs).

Results

A total of 440 patients, aged 56 years or less, with newly diagnosed breast cancer were randomized to either preoperative MRI (220) or conventional imaging (220; control). Median follow-up for each group was 10 years. DFS rates were 85.5 and 80.0 per cent for the MRI and control groups respectively (P = 0.099). The risk of relapse or death was 46 per cent higher in the control group (HR 1.46, 95 per cent c.i. 0.93 to 2.29). OS rates after 10 years were 90.9 and 88.6 per cent in the MRI and control groups respectively (P = 0.427). The risk of death was 27 per cent higher in the control group (HR 1.27, 0.71 to 2.29). Locoregional, distant, and contralateral recurrence outcomes combined were increased in the control group (P = 0.048). A subgroup analysis of patients with breast cancer stages I–III showed that preoperative MRI improved DFS compared with conventional imaging, but this did not reach statistical significance (P = 0.057).

Conclusion

After 10 years of follow-up, preoperative breast MRI as an adjunct to conventional imaging resulted in slightly, but non-significantly, improved DFS and OS. Registration number: NCT01859936 (http://www.clinicaltrials.gov).

Evolving Trends in Surgical Management of Breast Cancer: An Analysis of 30 Years of Practice Changing Papers

The management of breast cancer has evolved into a multidisciplinary evidence-based surgical speciality, with emphasis on conservative surgery. A number of landmark trials have established lumpectomy followed by radiation as the standard of care for many patients. The aim of this study is to construct a narrative review of recent developments in the surgical management of breast cancer and how such developments have impacted surgical practice. A comprehensive literature search of Pubmed was conducted. The latest search was performed on October 31^st, 2020. Search terms “breast cancer” were used in combinations with specific key words and Boolean operators relating to surgical management. The reference lists of retrieved articles were comprehensively screened for additional eligible publications. Articles were selected and reviewed based on relevance. We selected publications in the past 10 years but did not exclude commonly referenced and highly regarded previous publications. Review articles and book chapters were also cited to provide reference on details not discussed in the academic literature. This article reviews the current evidence in surgical management of early-stage breast cancer, discusses recent trends in surgical practice for therapeutic and prophylactic procedures and provides commentary on implications and factors associated with these trends.

Survival outcomes after breast-conserving therapy compared with mastectomy for patients with early-stage metaplastic breast cancer: a population-based study of 2412 patients

BACKGROUND

Previous studies revealed that patients with early-stage metaplastic breast cancer (MBC) underwent mastectomy more often than breast-conserving therapy (BCT) mainly due to the larger tumor size. This study was performed to compare the survival outcomes following BCT versus mastectomy for patients with early-stage MBC.

METHODS

Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database was used to identify women diagnosed with early-stage MBC (T1-3N0-3M0) between 2001 and 2016, who were treated with either BCT or mastectomy. We assessed overall survival (OS) and breast cancer-specific survival (BCSS) using the Kaplan-Meier method and hazard ratios using Cox proportional hazards models.

RESULTS

A total of 2412 MBC patients were identified, 881 (36.5%) of whom underwent BCT and 1531(63.5%) underwent mastectomy. The median follow-up time was 73 months. Most of patients had older age (≥50 years old), larger tumor size, higher American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) stage and hormone receptor negativity. After adjustment for confounding variables, patients who underwent BCT had significantly improved OS (5-year OS: 84.3% vs 62.5%; 10-year OS: 73.0% vs 52.1%; adjusted HR = 0.76, 95%CI: 0.59-0.97, p = 0.028) and BCSS (5-year BCSS: 89.1% vs 70.8%; 10-year BCSS: 83.9% vs 67.5%; adjusted HR = 0.72, 95%CI: 0.53-0.96, p = 0.026) than those who underwent mastectomy, and this improvement remained significant for all T and N stages of MBC except for N2-3 stage.

CONCLUSION

BCT conferred improved OS and BCSS compared with mastectomy for patients with early-stage MBC, and the improvement persisted in almost all of the subgroups of different T and N stages.

Investigation of miR-93-5p and its effect on the radiosensitivity of breast cancer

Accumulating evidence suggests that intrinsic resistance to radiotherapy reduces the survival of patients with cancer. The present study investigated whether miR-93-5p affects proliferation, migration, apoptosis, and radiosensitivity of breast cancer (BC) cells. MDA-MB-468, MCF-7, and MDA-MB-231 BC cells were incubated with hsa-miR-93-5p mimics, hsa-miR-93-5p inhibitor, and negative control RNA with or without exposure to ionizing radiation to determine cell proliferation, migration, and apoptosis using the Cell Counting Kit-8 assay, wound healing assay and apoptotic assay, respectively. Overexpression of miR-93-5p inhibited the migratory abilities (P = 0.001) and decreased the cell proliferation (P = 0.049) of MCF-7 cells. In MCF-7 cells, a significant increase in apoptosis was detected after treatment with miR-93-5p compared with the negative control (P = 0.001) and miR-93-5p inhibitor (P = 0.004). In MDA-MB-468 cells, the proportion of apoptotic cells increased following exposure to ionizing radiation (P = 0.001). The percentage of apoptotic MDA-MB-231 cells in the miR-93-5p group was significantly increase compared with that determined in the negative control (P = 0.044) and hsa-miR-93-5p inhibitor (P = 0.046) groups. In conclusion, our findings showed that miR-93-5p reduces BC cell proliferation and migratory capacity, and increases the ratio of apoptotic cells. Overexpression of miR-93-5p could increase radiosensitivity in BC cells by increasing apoptosis. This evidence provides new insight into the treatment of BC and identifies miR-93-5p as a potential therapeutic target.

Actuarial Analysis of Survival among Breast Cancer Patients in Lithuania

Breast cancer is the most common cause of mortality due to cancer for women both in Lithuania and worldwide. Chances of survival after diagnosis differ significantly depending on the stage of disease at the time of diagnosis. Extended term periods are required to estimate survival of, e.g., 15–20 years. Moreover, since mortality of the average population changes with time, estimates of survival of cancer patients derived after a long period of observation can become outdated and can be no longer used to estimate survival of patients who were diagnosed later. Therefore, it can be useful to construct analytic functions that describe survival probabilities. Shorter periods of observation can be enough for such construction. We used the data collected by the Lithuanian Cancer Registry for our analysis. We estimated the chances of survival for up to 5 years after patients were diagnosed with breast cancer in Lithuania. Then we found analytic survival functions which best fit the observed data. At the end of this paper, we provided some examples for applications and directions for further research. We used mainly the Kaplan–Meier method for our study.

Comparison of Survival After Breast-Conserving Therapy vs Mastectomy Among Patients With or Without the BRCA1/2 Variant in a Large Series of Unselected Chinese Patients With Breast Cancer

IMPORTANCE

Whether patients with breast cancer who carry a BRCA1/2 variant can safely undergo breast-conserving therapy (BCT) remains controversial.

OBJECTIVE

To compare survival rates after BCT vs mastectomy in BRCA1/2 variant carriers and noncarriers in a large series of unselected patients with breast cancer.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

In this cohort study, a large consecutive series of 8396 unselected patients with primary breast cancer underwent either BCT, mastectomy with radiotherapy, or mastectomy alone from October 1, 2003, to May 31, 2015, at the Breast Center of Peking University Cancer Hospital in China. All patients were assessed for BRCA1/2 germline variant status. Statistical analysis was performed from May 1 to September 30, 2020.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The primary outcomes were breast cancer-specific survival (BCSS) and overall survival (OS); secondary outcomes included recurrence-free survival, distant recurrence-free survival, and ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence.

RESULTS

Of these 8396 Chinese patients (8378 women [99.8% women]; mean [SD] age, 50.8 [11.4] years; 187 BRCA1 carriers, 304 BRCA2 carriers, and 7905 noncarriers), 3135 (37.3%) received BCT, 1511 (18.0%) received mastectomy with radiotherapy, and 3750 (44.7%) received mastectomy alone. After a median follow-up of 7.5 years (range, 0.3-16.6 years), both BRCA1 and BRCA2 variant carriers treated with BCT had similar rates of survival compared with those treated with mastectomy with radiotherapy (BCSS: hazard ratio [HR] for BRCA1, 0.58 [95% CI, 0.16-2.10]; P = .41; HR for BRCA2, 0.46 [95% CI, 0.15-1.41]; P = .17; OS: HR for BRCA1, 0.61 [95% CI, 0.18-2.12]; P = .44; HR for BRCA2, 0.72 [95% CI, 0.26-1.96]; P = .52) or mastectomy alone (BCSS: HR for BRCA1, 0.70 [95% CI, 0.22-2.20]; P = .54; HR for BRCA2, 0.59 [95% CI, 0.18-1.93]; P = .39; OS: HR for BRCA1, 0.77 [95% CI, 0.27-2.21]; P = .63; HR for BRCA2, 0.62 [95% CI, 0.22-1.73]; P = .37) after adjusting for clinicopathologic factors and adjuvant therapy. For noncarriers, patients receiving BCT had significantly better survival than those receiving mastectomy with radiotherapy (BCSS: HR, 0.45 [95% CI, 0.36-0.57]; P < .001; OS: HR, 0.46 [95% CI, 0.37-0.58]; P < .001) or mastectomy alone (BCSS: HR, 0.71 [95% CI, 0.57-0.89]; P = .003; OS: HR, 0.71 [95% CI, 0.58-0.87]; P < .001) in multivariable analyses.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

This study suggests that BRCA1/2 variant carriers treated with BCT have survival rates at least comparable to those treated with mastectomy with radiotherapy or mastectomy alone and that BCT could be an option for BRCA1/2 variant carriers when the tumor is clinically appropriate for BCT.

Cost-effectiveness of different surgical treatment approaches for early breast cancer: a retrospective matched cohort study from China

Background

Both breast-conserving surgery and breast reconstruction surgery are less popular in China, although they can improve patients’ quality of life. The main reason comes from the economy. There is currently no economic evaluation of different surgical treatment options for early breast cancer. Our study aims to assess the economic impact and long-term cost-effectiveness of different surgical treatments for early breast cancer. The surgical approaches are including mastectomy (MAST), breast-conserving therapy (BCT), and mastectomy with reconstruction (MAST+RECON).

Methods

Based on demographic data, disease-related information and other treatments, we applied propensity score matching (PSM) to perform 1: 1 matching among patients who underwent these three types of surgery in the tertiary academic medical center from 2011 to 2017 to obtain a balanced sample of covariates between groups. A Markov model was established. Clinical data and cost data were obtained from the medical records. Health utility values were derived from clinical investigations. Strategies were compared using an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER).

Results

After PSM, there were 205 cases in each group. In the matched data set, the distribution of covariates was fully balanced. The total cost of MAST, MAST+RECON and BCT was $37,392.84, $70,556.03 and $82,330.97, respectively. The quality-adjusted life year (QALYs) were 17.11, 18.40 and 20.20, respectively. Compared with MAST, MAST+RECON and BCT have an ICER of $25,707.90/QALY and $14,543.08/QALY, respectively. The ICER of BCT vs. MAST was less than the threshold of $27,931.04. The reliability and stability of the results were confirmed by Monte Carlo simulation and sensitivity analysis.

Conclusions

We believe that in the context of the limited resources in China, after comparing the three surgical approaches, BCT is the more cost-effective and preferred solution.

Comparison of the ductal carcinoma in situ between White Americans and Chinese Americans

Currently, the wide-spread use of screening mammography has led to dramatic increases in ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS). However, DCIS of Chinese Americans, the largest Asian subgroup in American, has rarely been comprehensively studied over the past decade. This work compared the DCIS characteristics and prognosis of Chinese American patients with White Americans in the USA to determine the characteristics and prognosis of DCIS patients of Chinese Americans.The data were obtained using the National Cancer Institute's Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) data. The diagnosis and treatment variables between the two groups were compared by means of Chi-square tests. Survival was determined with the use of the Kaplan-Meier method and the multivariable Cox proportional hazard regression model.From 1975 to 2016, 81,745 White Americans and 2069 Chinese Americans were diagnosed with ductal carcinoma in situ. Compared with the white patients, the Chinese Americans were younger (P < .001) with smaller tumors (P < .001) and higher family income (P < .001). DCIS patients of Chinese American group accounted for a higher percentage of all breast cancers than the whites (P < .001). In the multivariable Cox proportional hazard regression analysis, Chinese American was an independent favorable prognostic factor in terms of overall survival (OS) (HR, 0.684; 95% CI, 0.593-0.789; P < .001) compared with the white group.In conclusion, DCIS characteristics of the Chinese group, which exhibited a higher proportion of younger age, a higher DCIS ratio, and a better prognosis, were distinct from those of the White Americans.

Socioeconomic inequalities in metastasis, recurrence, stage and grade of breast cancer: a hospital-based retrospective cohort study

Introduction

This study aims to estimate the Socio-Economic Status (SES) inequality on the metastasis, recurrence, stage and grade in Breast Cancer (BC).

Methods

This retrospective cohort study conducted on 411 BC patients in Arak, Iran. Asset-based questionnaire used to estimate the household SES. For calculate of SES inequality was used from Concentration Index (C). Moreover for investigate the association between recurrence and metastasis with other variables were used from multilevel logistic regression and analysis of variance were used to investigate the relationship between SES and other variables. The data were analyzed with Stata (v.13) software.

Results

Results of analysis of variance showed statistical significant relationship between SES with, insurance, surgery, grade, stage, recurrence and metastasis (p-value < 0.05). Moreover the Odds Ratio (OR) were significant of recurrence with age, academic level of education, supplementary insurance history of BC in first-degree relatives, stage and grade, also, metastasis with age of > 80 years, insurance, supplementary insurance, history of BC in first-degree relatives, chemotherapy, radiotherapy, stage and grade four. The total C index obtained 0.015 (0.002, 0.026), 0.011 (0.003, 0.031), – 0.014 (– 0.034, – 0.001) and – 0.042 (– 0.061, – 0.002) for metastasis, recurrence, stage and grade of BC respectively.

Conclusions

Our results showed evidence of inequality in the metastasis, recurrence, stage and grade in BC patients.

Comparison of long-term results between radiotherapy after breast-conserving surgery and postmastectomy radiotherapy in stage T1-2N1M0 breast cancer

Purpose

Postoperative radiotherapy (RT) can improve survival for T1-2N1 breast cancer. However, there exists a concern whether BCS plus RT has the same or a superior therapeutic effect as that of mastectomy. In this study, we aimed to compare the long-term results between RT after BCS and postmastectomy RT in stage T1-2N1M0 breast cancer.

Patients and Methods

Totally 1816 pathological stage T1-2N1M0 breast cancer patients were analyzed. The propensity score matching (PSM) method was used to select 196 pairs of patients between BCS and mastectomy receiving postoperative RT. Five-year locoregional relapse (LRR), locoregional relapse-free survival (LRFS), distant metastasis (DM), distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS), disease-free survival (DFS), breast cancer-specific survival (BCSS) were analyzed as endpoints.

Results

In the whole group, significant differences were observed in all endpoints (P<0.05) between the no-RT and RT groups. For patients receiving mastectomy, DM, DMFS, DFS and BCSS rates had no differences between the two groups. For patients without RT in the multivariable analysis, the molecular subtype was associated with each endpoint (P<0.05). Age, primary tumor site, tumor size, and LVI status were significantly associated with DM. The analysis of 196 pairs of patients selected by PSM showed that BCS plus RT resulted in a significantly lower 5-year DM rate (P=0.015) and superior survival in terms of the 5-year DMFS (P=0.046), DFS (P=0.049) and BCSS (P=0.024) compared with mastectomy.

Conclusions

Postoperative radiotherapy remarkably improved survival in T1-2N1M0 breast cancer but not in the mastectomy subgroup, except for LRR and LRFS. Patients with BCS plus RT had better survival compared with those with postmastectomy radiation in terms of DM, DMFS, DFS and BCSS.

The effects of time valuation in cancer optimal therapies: a study of chronic myeloid leukemia

BACKGROUND

The mathematical design of optimal therapies to fight cancer is an important research field in today's Biomathematics and Biomedicine given its relevance to formulate patient-specific treatments. Until now, however, cancer optimal therapies have considered that malignancy exclusively depends on the drug concentration and the number of cancer cells, ignoring that the faster the cancer grows the worse the cancer is, and that early drug doses are more prejudicial. Here, we analyze how optimal therapies are affected when the time evolution of treated cancer is envisaged as an additional element determining malignancy, analyzing in detail the implications for imatinib-treated Chronic Myeloid Leukemia.

METHODS

Taking as reference a mathematical model describing Chronic Myeloid Leukemia dynamics, we design an optimal therapy problem by modifying the usual malignancy objective function, unaware of any temporal dimension of cancer malignance. In particular, we introduce a time valuation factor capturing the increase of malignancy associated to the quick development of the disease and the persistent negative effects of initial drug doses. After assigning values to the parameters involved, we solve and simulate the model with and without the new time valuation factor, comparing the results for the drug doses and the evolution of the disease.

RESULTS

Our computational simulations unequivocally show that the consideration of a time valuation factor capturing the higher malignancy associated with early growth of cancer and drug administration allows more efficient therapies to be designed. More specifically, when this time valuation factor is incorporated into the objective function, the optimal drug doses are lower, and do not involve medically relevant increases in the number of cancer cells or in the disease duration.

CONCLUSIONS

In the light of our simulations and as biomedical evidence strongly suggests, the existence of a time valuation factor affecting malignancy in treated cancer cannot be ignored when designing cancer optimal therapies. Indeed, the consideration of a time valuation factor modulating malignancy results in significant gains of efficiency in the optimal therapy with relevant implications from the biomedical perspective, specially when designing patient-specific treatments.

Different statistical techniques dealing with confounding in observational research: measuring the effect of breast-conserving therapy and mastectomy on survival

PURPOSE

Propensity trimming, hierarchical modelling and instrumental variable (IV) analysis are statistical techniques dealing with confounding, cluster-related variation or confounding by severity. This study aimed to explain (dis)advantages of these techniques in estimating the effect of breast-conserving therapy (BCT) and mastectomy on 10-year distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS).

METHODS

All women diagnosed in 2005 with primary T1-2N0-1 breast cancer treated with BCT or mastectomy were selected from the Netherlands Cancer Registry. We used multivariable Cox regression to correct for confounding. Propensity trimming was used to create a more homogeneous population for which the treatment choice was not self-evident. Hospital of surgery was used as hierarchical level to handle hospital-related variation, and as IV to deal with unmeasured confounding.

RESULTS

Multivariable Cox regression showed higher 10-year DMFS for BCT than mastectomy [HR 0.70 (95% CI 0.60-82)]. Propensity trimming on the 10-90th and the 20-80th percentile of the propensity score distribution and hierarchical modelling showed similar HRs. IV analysis showed no significant difference between BCT and mastectomy.

CONCLUSION

Unmeasured confounding is very difficult to eliminate in observational research. We cannot conclude that BCT or mastectomy has a causal relationship with 10-year DMFS. It is crucial to critically evaluate all model's assumptions, and to be careful in drawing firm conclusions.

Noninferior Outcome After Breast-Conserving Treatment Compared to Mastectomy in Breast Cancer Patients With Four or More Positive Lymph Nodes

Introduction: We conducted a non-inferiority analysis using real-world data to compare the survival outcomes of stage T1-2N2-3 (tumor size ≤5 cm and four or more node metastases) breast cancer after breast-conserving surgery (BCS) and mastectomy (MAST). Methods: The study included patients with stage T1-2N2-3 invasive breast carcinoma from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results program, who underwent BCS or MAST between 2004 and 2012, along with both radiotherapy and chemotherapy. The statistical analyses used included the chi-squared test, multivariate Cox proportional hazards models, and propensity score matching (PSM). Results: The study population comprised 13,263 patients, including 4,787 (36.1%) and 8,476 (63.9%) patients who were treated with BCS and MAST, respectively. Patients with younger age and advanced stage were more likely to have received MAST. The probability of receiving MAST increased over the years, while the probability of BCS decreased (p < 0.001). The 5-year breast cancer-specific survival (BCSS) was 86.1% in the BCS cohort compared to 83.1% in the MAST cohort (p < 0.001). Surgical procedure was an independent prognostic factor for BCSS. Patients who received MAST had worse BCSS than those treated with BCS (hazard ratio = 1.179, 95% confidence interval = 1.087-1.278, p < 0.001). These results remained significant after stratification by age, tumor grade, T stage, N stage as well as marital status. Similar results were obtained after PSM. Conclusions: BCS resulted in noninferior outcome than MAST in patients with T1-2/N2-3 invasive breast carcinoma. BCS may therefore be an optimal treatment option when both treatment options are feasible and appropriate.

Mastectomy or Breast-Conserving Therapy for Early Breast Cancer in Real-Life Clinical Practice: Outcome Comparison of 7565 Cases

Although the organ preservation strategy by breast-conserving surgery (BCS) followed by radiation therapy (BCT) has revolutionized the treatment approach of early stage breast cancer (BC), the choice between treatment options in this setting can still vary according to patient preferences. The aim of the present study was to compare the oncological outcome of mastectomy versus breast-conserving therapy in patients treated in a modern clinical setting outside of clinical trials. 7565 women diagnosed with early invasive BC (pT1/2pN0/1) between 1998 and 2014 were included in this study (median follow-up: 95.2 months). In order to reduce selection bias and confounding, a subgroup analysis of a matched 1:1 case-control cohort consisting of 1802 patients was performed (median follow-up 109.4 months). After adjusting for age, tumor characteristics and therapies, multivariable analysis for local recurrence-free survival identified BCT as an independent predictor for improved local control (hazard ratio [HR]:1.517; 95%confidence interval:1.092–2.108, p = 0.013) as compared to mastectomy alone in the matched cohort. Ten-year cumulative incidence (CI) of lymph node recurrences was 2.0% following BCT, compared to 5.8% in patients receiving mastectomy (p < 0.001). Similarly, 10-year distant-metastasis-free survival (89.4% vs. 85.5%, p = 0.013) was impaired in patients undergoing mastectomy alone. This translated into improved survival in patients treated with BCT (10-year overall survival (OS) estimates 85.3% vs. 79.3%, p < 0.001), which was also significant on multivariable analysis (p = 0.011). In conclusion, the present study showed that patients treated with BCS followed by radiotherapy had an improved outcome compared to radical mastectomy alone. Specifically, local control, distant control, and overall survival were significantly better using the conservative approach. Thus, as a result of the present study, physicians should encourage patients to receive BCS with radiotherapy rather than mastectomy, whenever it is medically feasible and appropriate.

Survival following breast-conserving therapy is equal to that following mastectomy in young women with early-stage invasive lobular carcinoma

BACKGROUND

Previous observational studies reported the superior survival of patients with early-stage breast cancer who underwent breast-conserving therapy (BCT, lumpectomy plus postsurgical radiation) compared to that of those who underwent mastectomy. Invasive lobular carcinoma (ILC) is not the same disease as invasive ductal carcinoma (IDC) as it has distinct biologic features and thus requires unique consideration and research.

METHODS

We selected women (≤50 years of age) from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database diagnosed with stage T1-2, N0-1, M0 primary breast cancer with invasive lobular features between 1998 and 2011, that were treated with either BCT or mastectomy with and without radiation. We assessed survival proportions using the Kaplan-Meier method and hazard ratios using Cox proportional hazards models. Breast cancer-specific survival (BCSS) served as the primary endpoint.

RESULTS

A total of 3393 eligible young ILC patients were identified, 1391 (41%) of which underwent lumpectomy followed by radiation. The 10-year BCSS rates for patients who received BCT, mastectomy alone and mastectomy with radiation were 95.7%, 94.2% and 89.3%, respectively. Multivariate analysis showed that BCSS was not improved in patients assigned to mastectomy alone group (HR = 0.86; 95% CI 0.57-1.28) or mastectomy with postsurgical radiation group (HR = 0.97; 95% CI 0.58-1.62) compared to that in those who underwent BCT. The results did not changed when evaluating the 1998-2004 and 2005-2011 time periods separately.

CONCLUSION

None of the treatment demonstrated an absolute superiority in young women with early-stage ILC. Future studies with more detailed analyses of the confounding factors are worthwhile.

Re-excision and survival following breast conserving surgery in early stage breast cancer patients: a population-based study

Background

Increasing population-based evidence suggests that patients who receive breast conserving surgery (BCS) plus radiotherapy have superior survival than those who receive mastectomy. It is unclear, however, how BCS followed by re-excision is associated with all-cause and breast cancer-specific mortality, and whether the BCS survival advantage is maintained if re-excision is needed. The aim of this study was to investigate the clinical, patient, provider and geographic variation associated with receipt of re-excision surgery, and to examine the relationship between re-excision and all-cause and breast cancer-specific mortality.

Methods

All women diagnosed with stage I-III breast cancer in Alberta, Canada from 2002 to 2009 were identified from the Alberta Cancer Registry, of which 11,626 were eligible for study inclusion. Type of first breast cancer surgery after diagnosis, subsequent re-excisions within 1 year, surgeon (anonymized), and hospital were obtained from provincial physician claims data. Multilevel logistic regression with surgeons and hospitals as crossed random effects was used to estimate the adjusted odds ratios of re-excision by the factors of interest. Poisson regression models were fitted to compare all-cause and breast cancer-specific mortality by surgical pattern.

Results

Re-excision surgery was received by 19% (N = 5659) of patients who initially received BCS. The adjusted odds of re-excision varied significantly by geography of surgery, and by individual surgeon among stage I and II patients beyond the variation explained by the factors investigated (Stage I OR standard deviation (SD) = 0.43; stage II OR SD = 0.39). Patients who were treated with BCS plus re-excision surgery with either mastectomy or further BCS had similar all-cause and breast cancer-specific mortality as those treated with BCS without re-excision.

Conclusion

These results suggest that breast cancer patients who are treated with BCS plus re-excision surgery by either mastectomy or further BCS have similar survival as those treated with BCS without re-excision. The significant variation in the likelihood of re-excision by geography and by individual surgeon is concerning, especially given the costs to the patient associated with additional surgery and the financial costs to the health system.

Breast conserving surgery versus mastectomy: overall and relative survival-a population based study by the Danish Breast Cancer Cooperative Group (DBCG)

BACKGROUND

Observational studies have pointed at a better survival after breast conserving surgery (BCS) compared with mastectomy. The aim of the present study was to evaluate whether this remains true when more extensive tumor characteristics and treatment data were included.

METHODS

The cohort included patients registered after primary surgery for early invasive breast cancer in the database of the Danish Breast Cancer Cooperative Group, in the period 1995-2012. The cohort was divided into three groups: (i) patients who primarily had a mastectomy, (ii) patients treated by BCS, and (iii) patients who primarily had BCS and then mastectomy [intention to treat (ITT) by BCS]. The association between overall mortality and standard mortality ratio (SMR) and risk factors was analyzed in univariate and multivariate Poisson regression models.

RESULTS

A total of 58,331 patients were included: 27,143 in the mastectomy group, 26,958 in the BCS group, and 4230 in the BCS-ITT group. After adjusting for patient and treatment characteristics, the relative risk (RR) was 1.20 (95% CI: 1.15-1.25) after mastectomy and 1.08 (95% CI: 1.01-1.15) after BCS first and then mastectomy, as compared to BCS. Statistically significant interactions were not observed for age, period of treatment, and nodal status, but patients with Charlson's Comorbidity Index (CCI) score 2+ had no increased mortality after mastectomy, as opposed to patients with CCI 0-1. Loco-regional radiation therapy (RT) in node positive patients did not reduce the increased risk associated with mastectomy [RR = 1.28 (95% CI 1.19-1.38)].

CONCLUSION

Patients assigned to BCS have a better survival than patients assigned to mastectomy. Residual confounding after adjustment for registered characteristics presumably explained the different outcomes, thus consistent with selection bias. Diversities in RT did not appear to explain the observed difference in survival after BCS and mastectomy.

Decreased Survival With Mastectomy Vis-à-Vis Breast-Conserving Surgery in Stage II and III Breast Cancers: A Comparative Treatment Effectiveness Study

Purpose

The primary purpose of hospital-based cancer registries is assessing patient care. Clinical stage–based survival and treatment-based survival are some of the key parameters for such assessment. Because of the challenges in obtaining follow-up parameters, a separate study on patterns of care and survival was undertaken by the Indian National Cancer Registry Program. The results for cancer of the female breast are presented here.

Patients and Methods

Data abstracted in a standardized patient information form were transmitted online to a central repository. Treatment patterns were assessed for 9,903 patients diagnosed between January 1, 2006, and December 31, 2008, from 13 institutions. Survival analysis was restricted to 7,609 patients from nine institutions wherein follow-up details (as of December 31, 2012) were available for at least 60% of patients.

Results

The overall 5-year survival rates with breast-conserving surgery (BCS) and mastectomy (MS) were 94.0% and 85.8%, respectively, for stage II disease (adjusted hazard ratio, 2.40; 95% CI, 1.8 to 3.2) and 87.1% and 69.0%, respectively, for stage III disease (hazard ratio, 2.82; 95% CI, 2.2 to 3.7). Patients who had MS did better with systemic therapy (chemotherapy and/or hormone therapy), whereas patients with BCS required just local radiation therapy to achieve best survival.

Conclusion

This observational study in the natural setting of care of patients with cancer in India showed significantly decreased survival with MS when compared with BCS. The reasons for lower survival with MS and the biologic or scientific rationale of the necessity of systemic therapy to achieve optimal survival in patients undergoing MS but not in those with BCS need further investigation.

Comparative effectiveness study of breast-conserving surgery and mastectomy in the general population: A NCDB analysis

Purpose

Recent studies have revealed that breast-conserving surgery (BCS) with radiotherapy (RT) led to better survival than mastectomy in some populations. We compared the efficacy of BCS+RT and mastectomy using the National Cancer Database (NCDB, USA).

Methods

Non-metastatic breast cancers in the NCDB from 2004–2011 were identified. The Kaplan-Meier method, Coxregression and propensity score analysis were used to compare the overall survival (OS) among patients with BCS+RT, mastectomy alone and mastectomy+RT.

Results

A total of 160,880 patients with a median follow-up of 43.4 months were included. The respective 8-year OS values were 86.5%, 72.3% and 70.4% in the BCS+RT, mastectomy alone and mastectomy+RT group, respectively (P < 0.001). After exclusion of patients with comorbidities, mastectomy (alone or with RT) remained associated with a lower OS in N0 and N1 patients. However, the OS of mastectomy+RT was equivalent to BCS+RT in N2–3 patients. Among patients aged 50 or younger, the OS benefit of BCS+RT over mastectomy alone was statistically significant (HR1.42, 95% CI 1.16–1.74), but not clinically significant (<5%) in N0 patients, whereas in N2–3 patients, the OS of BCS+RT was equivalent to mastectomy+RT (85.2% vs. 84.8%). The results of the propensity analysis were similar.

Conclusions

BCS+RT resulted in improved OS compared with mastectomy ± RT in N0 and N1 patients. In N2–3 patients, BCS+RT has an OS similar to mastectomy+RT when patients with comorbidities were excluded. Among patients aged 50 or younger, the OS of BCS+RT is equivalent to mastectomy ± RT.

The Alberta Moving Beyond Breast Cancer (AMBER) Cohort Study: Recruitment, Baseline Assessment, and Description of the First 500 Participants

BACKGROUND

To our knowledge, the Alberta Moving Beyond Breast Cancer (AMBER) Study is the first and only prospective cohort study of breast cancer survivors that includes objectively-measured physical activity (PA), sedentary behavior, health-related fitness (HRF), and biologic mechanisms focused on understanding breast cancer outcomes. The purpose of the present study was to report on the feasibility of recruitment, baseline measurement completion, and the representativeness of the first 500 participants.

METHODS

AMBER is enrolling newly diagnosed stage I (≥T1c) to IIIc breast cancer survivors in Alberta, Canada. Baseline assessments are completed soon after diagnosis and include cardiorespiratory fitness, musculoskeletal fitness, body composition, objective and self-reported PA and sedentary behavior, lymphedema, and blood collection.

RESULTS

Between July 2012 and November 2014, AMBER recruited its first 500 participants from a pool of 1,447 (35 %) eligible breast cancer survivors. Baseline HRF assessments were completed on ≥85 % of participants with the exception of upper body strength. Collection of ≥4 days/week of monitoring for the Actigraph GT3X® and ActivPAL® were obtained from 90 % of participants. Completion rates were also high for blood (99 %), lymphedema (98 %), and questionnaires (95 %) including patient-reported outcomes and correlates of exercise. The first 500 participants in AMBER are an average age of 56 years, 60 % are overweight or obese, and 58 % have disease stage II or III.

CONCLUSION

Despite the modest recruitment rate and younger age, AMBER has demonstrated that many newly diagnosed breast cancer survivors are willing and able to complete a wide array of sophisticated and physically demanding HRF and PA assessments soon after diagnosis. AMBER is a unique breast cancer survivor cohort that may inform future randomized controlled trials on lifestyle and breast cancer outcomes as well as PA behavior change in breast cancer survivors. Moreover, AMBER may also inform guidelines on PA, sedentary behavior, and HRF for improving breast cancer outcomes and survivorship.

10 year survival after breast-conserving surgery plus radiotherapy compared with mastectomy in early breast cancer in the Netherlands: a population-based study

BACKGROUND

Investigators of registry-based studies report improved survival for breast-conserving surgery plus radiotherapy compared with mastectomy in early breast cancer. As these studies did not present long-term overall and breast cancer-specific survival, the effect of breast-conserving surgery plus radiotherapy might be overestimated. In this study, we aimed to evaluate 10 year overall and breast cancer-specific survival after breast-conserving surgery plus radiotherapy compared with mastectomy in Dutch women with early breast cancer.

METHODS

In this population-based study, we selected all women from the Netherlands Cancer Registry diagnosed with primary, invasive, stage T1-2, N0-1, M0 breast cancer between Jan 1, 2000, and Dec 31, 2004, given either breast-conserving surgery plus radiotherapy or mastectomy, irrespective of axillary staging or dissection or use of adjuvant systemic therapy. Primary outcomes were 10 year overall survival in the entire cohort and breast cancer-specific survival in a representative subcohort of patients diagnosed in 2003 with characteristics similar to the entire cohort. We estimated breast cancer-specific survival by calculating distant metastasis-free and relative survival for every tumour and nodal category. We did multivariable Cox proportional hazard analysis to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) for overall and distant metastasis-free survival. We estimated relative survival by calculating excess mortality ratios using life tables of the general population. We did multiple imputation to account for missing data.

FINDINGS

Of the 37 207 patients included in this study, 21 734 (58%) received breast-conserving surgery plus radiotherapy and 15 473 (42%) received mastectomy. The 2003 representative subcohort consisted of 7552 (20%) patients, of whom 4647 (62%) received breast-conserving surgery plus radiotherapy and 2905 (38%) received mastectomy. For both unadjusted and adjusted analysis accounting for various confounding factors, breast-conserving surgery plus radiotherapy was significantly associated with improved 10 year overall survival in the whole cohort overall compared with mastectomy (HR 0·51 [95% CI 0·49-0·53]; p<0·0001; adjusted HR 0·81 [0·78-0·85]; p<0·0001), and this improvement remained significant for all subgroups of different T and N stages of breast cancer. After adjustment for confounding variables, breast-conserving surgery plus radiotherapy did not significantly improve 10 year distant metastasis-free survival in the 2003 cohort overall compared with mastectomy (adjusted HR 0·88 [0·77-1·01]; p=0·07), but did in the T1N0 subgroup (adjusted 0·74 [0·58-0·94]; p=0·014). Breast-conserving surgery plus radiotherapy did significantly improve 10 year relative survival in the 2003 cohort overall (adjusted 0·76 [0·64-0·91]; p=0·003) and in the T1N0 subgroup (adjusted 0·60 [0·42-0·85]; p=0·004) compared with mastectomy.

INTERPRETATION

Adjusting for confounding variables, breast-conserving surgery plus radiotherapy showed improved 10 year overall and relative survival compared with mastectomy in early breast cancer, but 10 year distant metastasis-free survival was improved with breast-conserving surgery plus radiotherapy compared with mastectomy in the T1N0 subgroup only, indicating a possible role of confounding by severity. These results suggest that breast-conserving surgery plus radiotherapy is at least equivalent to mastectomy with respect to overall survival and may influence treatment decision making for patients with early breast cancer.

FUNDING

None.

The prognostic value of age for invasive lobular breast cancer depending on estrogen receptor and progesterone receptor-defined subtypes: A NCDB analysis

PURPOSE

We aimed to assess the effect of age on survival according to estrogen receptor (ER) and progesterone receptor (PR)-defined lobular breast cancer subtype in a wide age range.

METHODS

43,230 invasive lobular breast cancer women without comorbidities diagnosed between 2004 and 2011 in the National Cancer Database (NCDB) were analyzed. The effects of age on overall survival (OS) among different age groups were evaluated by log-rank test and Cox proportional model.

RESULTS

Multivariate analysis showed that patients diagnosed at both young (< 35 years) and old (≥ 70 years) ages had worse prognosis compared with those in the middle ages. We further analyzed the interaction between age and molecular subtype for predicting OS: in ER+PR+ subtype, the HR of OS declined with age from 1.55 (95% CI, 1.08-2.22; P = 0.019) in the group younger than 35 years to 1.38 (1.02-1.86; P = 0.036) in the 35-39 group, but increased with age to 10.1 (8.49-11.94; P < 0.001) in the group older than 79. While in ER+PR- and ER-PR- subtypes, the HRs showed no statistical differences among women diagnosed before 60 (P > 0.1); and in ER-PR+ subgroup, the HRs were similar in patients younger than 70 (P > 0.1); thus, the plots of HRs in these three subtypes remained steady until the age of 60 or 70.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings identified that the effect of age on OS in lobular breast cancer varied with ER/PR-defined subtypes. Personalized treatment strategies should be developed to improve outcomes of breast cancer patients with different ages and ER/PR statuses.