Thyroid Hormone Activation Regulates the Crosstalk between Breast Cancer and Mesenchymal Stem Cells

BACKGROUND

Thyroid Hormones (THs) critically impact human cancer. Although endowed with both tumor-promoting and inhibiting effects in different cancer types, excess of THs has been linked to enhanced tumor growth and progression. Breast cancer depends on the interaction between bulk tumor cells and the surrounding microenvironment in which mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) exert powerful pro-tumorigenic activities.

METHODS

Primary human MSCs from healthy female donors were co-cultured with DIO2 knock out (D2KO) and wild type (WT) MCF7 breast cancer cells to assess cell growth, migration, invasion and the expression of known epithelial-mesenchymal transition (EMT)- and inflammation-related markers. Furthermore, a surgery-free intraductal delivery model, i.e., the Mouse-INtraDuctal (MIND) injection method, was used as a tool for in vivo characterization of breast tumor formation and progression.

RESULTS

In this study, we uncovered a novel role of THs in regulating the tumor-stroma crosstalk. MCF7 cells enhanced the intracellular activation of THs through the TH-activating enzyme, D2, fostering their EMT properties and the dialogue with MSCs. D2 inactivation reduced the invasiveness of MCF7 cells and their responsiveness to the pro-tumorigenic induction via MSCs, both in vivo and in vitro.

CONCLUSIONS

Thus, we argue that intracellular activation of THs via D2 is a critical requirement for invasive and metastatic conversion of breast cancer cells, advising the blocking of D2 as a potential therapeutic tool for cancer therapy.

Cleft-Related Revision Procedures: Surgeon Perspectives on Shared Decision-Making and a Decision Aid Prototype

OBJECTIVE

Decision-making for elective cleft lip and nose revisions varies widely, from patient-led decisions to more paternalistic approaches. As these procedures incur additional scarring that may impact future interventions, patients should be equipped to participate in these surgical decisions. We thus developed a decision aid based on international standards, and to ensure methodologic rigor, we sought feedback from other surgeons regarding shared decision-making and potential barriers to adopting the decision aid.

DESIGN

The decision aid was developed based on qualitative patient data, expert opinion, and International Patient Decision Aid Standards (IPDAS). It was first piloted using a "think aloud" approach and subsequently revised. In the present study, this version was presented to a diverse focus group of surgeons. The conversation was audio-recorded and transcribed. The transcription was coded independently by 2 authors, and codes were categorized for theme development.

SETTING

American Cleft Palate-Craniofacial Association meeting, April 2024.

PARTICIPANTS

Focus group of 8 board-certified craniofacial surgeons.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Surgeon feedback regarding appeal, usefulness, and generalizability of the decision aid.

RESULT(S)

Eight surgeons participated. Mean age was 43 years (SD 5.7), and mean number of years in practice was 9.3 (SD 6.0). Four were female, and 4 were male. Three themes emerged: (1) Appeal to the consumer, (2) Acknowledge the parents, and (3) Consider logistics of decision aid delivery.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on surgeon feedback, the decision aid will be web-based, explicitly recognize the importance of parents, and maximize the likelihood that patients viewing the decision aid are surgical candidates.

Shared Decision-making in Breast Cancer Reconstructive Surgery: Experience in a Leading Hospital

Background

The paradigm of healthcare has evolved toward patient-centered approaches, where shared decision-making (SDM) plays a pivotal role. This study aimed to explore the implementation of SDM during breast cancer reconstruction consultations and assess its impact on patient satisfaction and the decision-making process as a whole.

Methods

A total of 102 female patients undergoing breast reconstruction were included in a multidisciplinary breast pathology unit. A streamlined SDM model involving choice introduction, option description, and preference exploration was implemented. A validated Spanish version of the nine-item Shared Decision Making Questionnaire was used alongside a complementary questionnaire. Data analysis was carried out using electronic data capture software.

Results

The nine-item Shared Decision Making Questionnaire results indicate strong agreement in presenting various options and explaining their advantages and disadvantages. Patients were less confident about their participation in decision-making. The Complementary Shared Decision Making Questionnaire highlighted high satisfaction with interview times and language clarity but areas for improvement in consultation space and therapeutic choice participation.

Conclusions

Integrating SDM into breast reconstruction consultations empowers patients in the decision-making process and enhances satisfaction. Decision aids prove effective in this context, facilitating patients' comprehension and reducing decisional conflict. There are areas for improvement within the SDM strategy, and they are detectable through scales. Although challenges in information transmission and patient involvement persist, adopting an SDM model has potential benefits that warrant further investigation.

Making decisions about amputation for chronic limb threatening ischaemia

INTRODUCTION

Chronic limb threatening ischaemia causes pain, loss of function and complex wounds, necessitating urgent interventions. While growing options for minimally invasive revascularisation make operating on frail and older persons safer, the challenge is knowing when to stop this option and offer amputation. Decisions about amputation are difficult for the person, or for the family who act as substitute decision-makers. Timely treatment decisions are important to optimise clinical outcomes but do not always align with outcomes that are acceptable to patients.

AIM

To provide a philosophically-based understanding of patient/family experiences of making decisions for chronic limb threatening ischaemia.

METHODS

Longitudinal qualitative study using Heideggerian phenomenology. Patient and family participants were recruited from three sites. Semi-structured interviews occurred at two time points: soon after advice to consider major amputation, and for those who experienced amputation, six-months post-operatively. The COnsolidated criteria for REporting Qualitative studies (COREQ) checklist guided this report.

FINDINGS

Variable timelines, disease progression, and interventions were encountered prior to confronting the possibility of amputation. Decision-making was interpreted as an initial irresoluteness (neglecting or renouncing decisions). For most, this was eventually followed by a resoluteness where participants either turned away or towards amputation, according to one's preferred mode of suffering, and thus owning the decision to turn. Those who opted for amputation often experienced better-than-anticipated outcomes.

CONCLUSION

Patients and families had difficulty making decisions about amputation. Clinicians may have been complicit in the neglecting and renouncing of decisions and have an important role in sharing decision-making through their authentic discourse.

IMPLICATIONS

Chronic limb threatening ischaemia requires complex discussions to support decisions and shared decision-making requires clinician presence and engagement in discourse. Patients and family members benefit from more time to experience and process the phenomenon as they move towards owning their decision about amputation.

Did Medicaid Expansion Mitigate Disparities in Post-mastectomy Reconstruction Rates?

Background

Patient and socioeconomic factors both contribute to disparities in post-mastectomy reconstruction (PMR) rates. We sought to explore PMR patterns across the US and to determine if PMR rates were associated with Medicaid expansion.

Methods

The NCDB was used to identify women who underwent PMR between 2004-2016. The data was stratified by race, state Medicaid expansion status, and region. A multivariate model was fit to determine the association between Medicaid expansion and receipt of PMR.

Results

In comparison to Caucasian women receiving PMR in Medicaid expansion states, African American (AA) women in Medicaid expansion states were less likely to receive PMR (OR .96 [.92-1.00] P < .001). Patients in the Northeast (NE) had better PMR rates vs any other region in the US, for both Caucasian and AA women (Caucasian NE ref, Caucasian-South .80 [.77-.83] vs AA NE 1.11 [1.04-1.19], AA-South (.60 [.58-.63], P < .001). Interestingly, AA patients residing in the NE had the highest receipt of PMR 1.11 (1.04-1.19), even higher than their Caucasian counterparts residing in the same region (ref). Rural AA women had the lowest rates of PMR vs rural Caucasian women (.40 [.28-.58] vs .79 [.73-.85], P < .001].

Discussion

Racial disparities in PMR rates persisted despite Medicaid expansion. When stratified by region, however, AA patients in the NE had higher rates of PMR than AA women in other regions. The largest disparities were seen in AA women in the rural US. Breast cancer disparities continue to be a complex problem that was not entirely mitigated by improved insurance coverage.

Magnetic resonance imaging before breast cancer surgery: results of an observational multicenter international prospective analysis (MIPA)

OBJECTIVES

Preoperative breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) can inform surgical planning but might cause overtreatment by increasing the mastectomy rate. The Multicenter International Prospective Analysis (MIPA) study investigated this controversial issue.

METHODS

This observational study enrolled women aged 18-80 years with biopsy-proven breast cancer, who underwent MRI in addition to conventional imaging (mammography and/or breast ultrasonography) or conventional imaging alone before surgery as routine practice at 27 centers. Exclusion criteria included planned neoadjuvant therapy, pregnancy, personal history of any cancer, and distant metastases.

RESULTS

Of 5896 analyzed patients, 2763 (46.9%) had conventional imaging only (noMRI group), and 3133 (53.1%) underwent MRI that was performed for diagnosis, screening, or unknown purposes in 692/3133 women (22.1%), with preoperative intent in 2441/3133 women (77.9%, MRI group). Patients in the MRI group were younger, had denser breasts, more cancers ≥ 20 mm, and a higher rate of invasive lobular histology than patients who underwent conventional imaging alone (p < 0.001 for all comparisons). Mastectomy was planned based on conventional imaging in 22.4% (MRI group) versus 14.4% (noMRI group) (p < 0.001). The additional planned mastectomy rate in the MRI group was 11.3%. The overall performed first- plus second-line mastectomy rate was 36.3% (MRI group) versus 18.0% (noMRI group) (p < 0.001). In women receiving conserving surgery, MRI group had a significantly lower reoperation rate (8.5% versus 11.7%, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Clinicians requested breast MRI for women with a higher a priori probability of receiving mastectomy. MRI was associated with 11.3% more mastectomies, and with 3.2% fewer reoperations in the breast conservation subgroup.

KEY POINTS

• In 19% of patients of the MIPA study, breast MRI was performed for screening or diagnostic purposes. • The current patient selection to preoperative breast MRI implies an 11% increase in mastectomies, counterbalanced by a 3% reduction of the reoperation rate. • Data from the MIPA study can support discussion in tumor boards when preoperative MRI is under consideration and should be shared with patients to achieve informed decision-making.

Relationship Between Financial Toxicity and Surgical Treatment for Early-Stage Breast Cancer: A Propensity Score-Matched Comparison of Breast-Conserving Therapy and Mastectomy

BACKGROUND

Financial toxicity (FT) can lead to decreased quality of life and poor treatment outcomes. However, there is limited published data on the extent to which the various surgical treatment approaches for early-stage breast cancer are determinants for FT.

STUDY DESIGN

We performed a single-institution cross-sectional survey of adult female patients with stage 0 to II breast cancer undergoing unilateral breast-conserving therapy or unilateral mastectomy. FT was measured using the Comprehensive Score for Financial Toxicity (COST) survey. Propensity matching was performed to optimize comparability of study groups. A multivariate regression model was used to identify factors associated with worsening FT as a robustness check. Our secondary end point was prevalence of coping strategies associated with cost of cancer care.

RESULTS

Among 294 patients who met inclusion criteria, 203 underwent breast-conserving therapy and 91 received mastectomy. We generated 72 total matched pairs and noted no differences in demographic and socioeconomic characteristics. Of these, 55 pairs had complete COST information, which was comparable on adjusted analysis (26.6 vs 24.7; p = 0.481). High annual income (β = 4.83; p < 0.001) and supplemental insurance (β = 5.37; p < 0.001) were significantly associated with higher COST scores, while change in employment status (β = -4.81; p < 0.001) correlated significantly with lower COST scores. No significant differences were observed in coping strategies.

CONCLUSIONS

Choice of BCT or mastectomy was not associated with a differential risk for FT in early-stage cancer. Decisions on ablative approach should be made based on patient preferences and disease-specific criteria. Transparent counseling on FT for high-risk populations promotes patient-centricity.

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

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

•

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

•

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

•

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

•

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

The Influence of Patient Exposure to Breast Reconstruction Approaches and Education on Patient Choices in Breast Cancer Treatment

BACKGROUND

The landscape of surgical and medical management and patient choices for breast cancer treatment changes as breast reconstruction and oncoplastic approaches improve and diversify. Increased access to breast reconstruction, in addition to patient education, influences the breast cancer patient. Therefore, the examination of the possible impact of reconstructive surgery on all stages of the breast cancer management per se seemed timely.

METHODS

Plastic surgery consults were arranged for 520 new patients diagnosed with breast cancer (2012-2016) including patients with noninvasive breast cancer but at high risk of further cancer development. To test the plastic surgery impact on patient choices regarding the management of the cancer, a subset of 90 patients was identified to test the plastic surgery impact on patient choices. These patients were referred to plastic surgery, following the first round of consultations by surgical and medical oncologists with only the preliminary oncological management plan defined. After a plastic surgery consultation, but prior to finalization of the overall oncological management plan, they were surveyed on the subject of modification of their personal choices and requests pertaining to their cancer management.

RESULTS

In this subset of 90 patients 40 (44%) returned to their surgical or medical oncologist considering changes of the primary management plan after their plastic surgery consultation. Twenty-six (28%) ultimately altered their plan, and the following patient-driven changes were made: mastectomy as opposed to lumpectomy (18 patients [20%]), contralateral prophylactic mastectomy (11 patients [12%]), nipple/areola removal as opposed to nipple/areola sparing suggested by the oncologists (5 patients [6%]), oncoplastic breast reduction as part of lumpectomy (5 patients [6%]), and other modifications (3 patients [3%]).

CONCLUSIONS

Decisions for altering the preliminary oncologic plan or choosing a specific alternative (eg, lumpectomy plus radiation vs mastectomy) resulted from patient education on (1) reconstructive options, (2) aesthetic pitfalls and results. and (3) their interfacing with the oncological outcomes. Ultimately, plastic surgeons influence the multispecialty breast cancer management and patient decision-making process. Therefore, oncological literacy for plastic surgeons is essential to provide state-of-the-art breast cancer care and avoidance of suboptimal patient decisions.

Breast cancer

Breast cancer is the most frequent malignancy in women worldwide and is curable in ~70-80% of patients with early-stage, non-metastatic disease. Advanced breast cancer with distant organ metastases is considered incurable with currently available therapies. On the molecular level, breast cancer is a heterogeneous disease; molecular features include activation of human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2, encoded by ERBB2), activation of hormone receptors (oestrogen receptor and progesterone receptor) and/or BRCA mutations. Treatment strategies differ according to molecular subtype. Management of breast cancer is multidisciplinary; it includes locoregional (surgery and radiation therapy) and systemic therapy approaches. Systemic therapies include endocrine therapy for hormone receptor-positive disease, chemotherapy, anti-HER2 therapy for HER2-positive disease, bone stabilizing agents, poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitors for BRCA mutation carriers and, quite recently, immunotherapy. Future therapeutic concepts in breast cancer aim at individualization of therapy as well as at treatment de-escalation and escalation based on tumour biology and early therapy response. Next to further treatment innovations, equal worldwide access to therapeutic advances remains the global challenge in breast cancer care for the future.

Decision-Making in Cleft-Related Surgery: A Qualitative Analysis of Patients and Caregivers

OBJECTIVE

Preference-sensitive surgical decisions merit shared decision-making, as decision engagement can reduce decisional conflict and regret. Elective cleft-related procedures are often preference sensitive, and therefore, we sought to better understand decision-making in this population.

DESIGN

Semistructured interviews were conducted to elicit qualitative data. A hierarchical codebook was developed through an iterative process in preparation for thematic analysis. Thematic analysis was performed to examine differences between patients and caregivers.

SETTING

Multidisciplinary cleft clinic at a tertiary care center.

PARTICIPANTS

Patients with cleft lip aged 8 and older (n = 31) and their caregivers (n = 31) were purposively sampled. Inability to converse in English, intellectual disability, or syndromic diagnoses resulted in exclusion.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Preferences surrounding surgical decision-making identified during thematic analysis.

RESULTS

Mean patient age was 12.7 (standard deviation: 3.1). Most had unilateral cleft lip and palate (43.8%). Three themes emerged: Insufficient Understanding of Facial Difference and Treatment, Diversity of Surgical Indications, and Barriers to Patient Autonomy. Almost half of caregivers believed their children understood their clefts, but most of these children failed to provide information about their cleft. Although many patients and caregivers acknowledged that surgery addressed function and/or appearance, patients and caregivers exhibited differences regarding the necessity of surgery. Furthermore, a large proportion of patients believed their opinions mattered in decisions, but less than half of caregivers agreed.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with clefts desire to participate in surgical decisions but have limited understanding of their facial difference and surgical indications. Cleft surgeons must educate patients and facilitate shared decision-making.

Impact of Timing on Measurement of Decision Quality and Shared Decision Making: Longitudinal Cohort Study of Breast Cancer Patients

Purpose.The objective of this study was to examine whether scores of shared decision-making measures differ when collected shortly after (1 month) or long after (1 year) breast cancer surgical treatment decisions. Methods. Longitudinal, multisite survey of breast cancer (BC) patients, with measurements at 1 month and 1 year after surgery at 4 cancer centers. Patients completed the BC Surgery Decision Quality Instrument (used to generate a knowledge score, ratings of goals, and concordance with treatment preferences) and Shared Decision Making (SDM) Process survey at both time points. We tested several hypotheses related to the scores over time, including whether the scores discriminated between sites that did and did not offer formal decision support services. Exploratory analyses examined factors associated with large increases and decreases in scores over time. Results. Across the 4 sites, 229 patients completed both assessments. The mean total knowledge scores (69.2% [SD 16.6%] at 1 month and 69.4% [SD 17.7%] at 1 year, P = 0.86), SDM Process scores (2.7 [SD 1.1] 1 month v. 2.7 [SD 1.2] 1 year, P = 0.68), and the percentage of patients receiving their preferred treatment (92% at 1 month and 92% at 1 year, P = 1.0) were not significantly different over time. The site using formal decision support had significantly higher knowledge and SDM Process scores at 1 month, and only the SDM Process scores remained significantly higher at 1 year. A significant percentage of patients had large changes in their individual knowledge and SDM Process scores, with increases balancing out decreases. Conclusion. For population-level assessments, it is reasonable to survey BC patients up to a year after the decision, greatly increasing feasibility of measurement. For those evaluating decision support interventions, shorter follow-up is more likely to detect an impact on knowledge scores.

Evaluation of guidelines regarding surgical treatment of breast cancer using the AGREE Instrument: a systematic review

OBJECTIVES

Many clinical practice guidelines and consensus statements (CPGs/consensus statements) have been developed for the surgical treatments for breast cancer. This study aims to evaluate the quality of these CPGs/consensus statements.

METHODS

We systematically searched the PubMed and EMBASE databases, as well as four guideline repositories, to identify CPGs and consensus statements regarding surgical treatments for breast cancer between January 2009 and December 2016. We used the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE) instrument to assess the quality of the CPGs and consensus statements included. The overall assessment scores from the AGREE instrument and radar maps were used to evaluate the overall quality. We also evaluated some factors that may affect the quality of CPGs and consensus statements using the Mann-Whitney U test or Kruskal-Wallis H test. All analyses were performed using SPSS V.19.0. This systematic review was conducted according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines.

RESULTS

A total of 19 CPGs and four consensus statements were included. In general, the included CPGs/consensus statements (n=23) performed well in the 'Scope and Purpose' and 'Clarity and Presentation' domains, but performed poorly in the 'Applicability' domain. The American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO), National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE), Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN), New Zealand Guidelines Group (NZGG) and Belgium Health Care Knowledge Centre (KCE) guidelines had the highest overall quality, whereas the Saskatchewan Cancer Agency, Spanish Society of Medical Oncology (SEOM), Japanese Breast Cancer Society (JBCS) guidelines and the D.A.C.H and European School of Oncology (ESO) consensus statements had the lowest overall quality. The updating frequency of CPGs/consensus statements varied, with the quality of consensus statements generally lower than that of CPGs. A total of six, eight and five CPGs were developed in the North American, European and Asian/Pacific regions, respectively. However, geographic region was not associated with overall quality.

CONCLUSIONS

The ASCO, NICE, SIGN, NZGG and KCE guidelines had the best overall quality, and the quality of consensus statements was generally lower than that of CPGs. More efforts are needed to identify barriers and facilitators for CPGs/consensus statement implementation and to improve their applicability.

Online, Interactive Option Grid Patient Decision Aids and their Effect on User Preferences

Background. Randomized trials have shown that patient decision aids can modify users’ preferred healthcare options, but research has yet to identify the attributes embedded in these tools that cause preferences to shift. Objectives. The aim of this study was to investigate people’s preferences as they used decision aids for 5 health decisions and, for each of the following: 1) determine if using the interactive Option Grid led to a pre–post shift in preferences; 2) determine which frequently asked questions (FAQs) led to preference shifts; 3) determine the FAQs that were rated as the most important as users compared options. Methods. Interactive Option Grid decision aids enable users to view attributes of available treatment or screening options, rate their importance, and specify their preferred options before and after decision aid use. The McNemar–Bowker paired test was used to compare stated pre–post preferences. Multinomial logistic regressions were conducted to investigate possible associations between covariates and preference shifts. Results. Overall, 626 users completed the 5 most-used tools: 1) Amniocentesis test: yes or no? ( n = 73); 2) Angina: treatment options ( n = 88); 3) Breast cancer: surgical options ( n = 265); 4) Prostate Specific Antigen (PSA) test: yes or no? ( n = 82); 5) Statins for heart disease risk: yes or no? ( n = 118). The breast cancer, PSA, and statins Option Grid decision aids generated significant preference shifts. Generally, users shifted their preference when presented with the description of the available treatment options, and the risk associated with each option. Conclusion. The use of decision aids for some, but not all health decisions, was accompanied by a shift in user preferences. Users typically valued information associated with risks, and chose more risk averse options after completing the interactive tool.

State Variation in the Receipt of a Contralateral Prophylactic Mastectomy Among Women Who Received a Diagnosis of Invasive Unilateral Early-Stage Breast Cancer in the United States, 2004-2012

Importance

The use of contralateral prophylactic mastectomies (CPMs) among patients with invasive unilateral breast cancer has increased substantially during the past decade in the United States despite the lack of evidence for survival benefit. However, whether this trend varies by state or whether it is correlated with changes in proportions of reconstructive surgery among these patients is unclear.

Objective

To determine state variation in the temporal trend and in the proportion of CPMs among women with early-stage unilateral breast cancer treated with surgery.

Design, Setting, and Participants

A retrospective cohort study of 1.2 million women 20 years of age or older diagnosed with invasive unilateral early-stage breast cancer and treated with surgery from January 1, 2004, through December 31, 2012, in 45 states and the District of Columbia as compiled by the North American Association of Central Cancer Registries. Data analysis was performed from August 1, 2015, to August 31, 2016.

Exposure

Contralateral prophylactic mastectomy.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Temporal changes in the proportion of CPMs among women with early-stage unilateral breast cancer treated with surgery by age and state, overall and in relation to changes in the proportions of those who underwent reconstructive surgery.

Results

Among the 1 224 947 women with early-stage breast cancer treated with surgery, the proportion who underwent a CPM nationally increased between 2004 and 2012 from 3.6% (4013 of 113 001) to 10.4% (12 890 of 124 231) for those 45 years or older and from 10.5% (1879 of 17 862) to 33.3% (5237 of 15 745) for those aged 20 to 44 years. The increase was evident in all states, although the magnitude of the increase varied substantially across states. For example, among women 20 to 44 years of age, the proportion who underwent a CPM from 2004-2006 to 2010-2012 increased from 14.9% (317 of 2121) to 24.8% (436 of 1755) (prevalence ratio [PR], 1.66; 95% CI, 1.46-1.89) in New Jersey compared with an increase from 9.8% (162 of 1657) to 32.2% (495 of 1538) (PR, 3.29; 95% CI, 2.80-3.88) in Virginia. In this age group, CPM proportions for the period from 2010 to 2012 were over 42% in the contiguous states of Nebraska, Missouri, Colorado, Iowa, and South Dakota. From 2004 to 2012, the proportion of reconstructive surgical procedures among women aged 20 to 44 years who were diagnosed with early-stage breast cancer and received a CPM increased in many states; however, it did not correlate with the proportion of women who received a CPM.

Conclusions and Relevance

The increase in the proportion of CPMs among women with early-stage unilateral breast cancer treated with surgery varied substantially across states. Notably, in 5 contiguous Midwest states, nearly half of young women with invasive early-stage breast cancer underwent a CPM from 2010 to 2012. Future studies should examine the reasons for the geographic variation and increasing trend in the use of CPMs.

Commentary on the Consensus Statement of the American Society of Breast Surgeons on Contralateral Prophylactic Mastectomy

The increasing rate of contralateral prophylactic mastectomy (CPM) led the American Society of Breast Surgeons (ASBrS) to issue an evidence-based consensus statement on CPM, as well as a discussion guide that health care providers can use to facilitate shared decision making with patients considering CPM for unilateral breast cancer. This article suggests several ways to improve the discussion guide by eliciting patient values and preferences and by providing more current, detailed, and balanced information about the potential risks and benefits of CPM.