Tumor-to-nipple Distance Should Not Preclude Nipple-sparing Mastectomy in Breast Cancer Patients. Personal Experience and Literature Review

Spare the Nipple: A Systematic Review of Tumor Nipple-Distance and Oncologic Outcomes in Nipple-Sparing Mastectomy

BACKGROUND

Preserving the nipple-areolar complex (NAC) in breast cancer surgery improves patient satisfaction and quality of life. The oncologic safety of NSM in tumors < 2 cm from the nipple remains in question. We conducted a systematic review to determine whether TND < 2 cm was associated with increased risk of LRR in patients undergoing NSM.

METHODS

We included studies of invasive or in situ breast cancer < 2 cm from NAC undergoing NSM which reported LRR rates. LRR rates were stratified by TND and culminated across studies. Cohort study quality was assessed using Newcastle-Ottawa Criteria. Meta-analysis was not possible due to heterogeneity in reporting survival outcomes.

RESULTS

We identified seven retrospective cohort studies with 2295 patients and 18 case series with 3507 patients. Direct tumor involvement of NAC was considered an absolute contraindication to NSM in all studies. In cohort studies, median follow-up was 31-112 (range 14-204) months. Cohorts with TND < 2 cm did not have a significantly higher rate of LRR. Amongst case series, 275 patients had TND < 2 cm. Combined LRR in case series was 2.6%, with median follow-up 10.4-71 (range 0-158) months.

CONCLUSIONS

Our systematic review did not identify TND < 2 cm as a significant risk factor for LRR. NSM appears oncologically safe in select patients with TND < 2 cm. Given the improved quality of life associated with NSM compared to skin-sparing mastectomy, we suggest NSM as the procedure of choice in appropriately selected patients.

Intraoperative Examination of Retro-Areolar Margin is not Routinely Necessary During Nipple-Sparing Mastectomy for Cancer

BACKGROUND

Intraoperative examination of retro-areolar margin (IERM) often is used during nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM) for cancer, but there is no robust data regarding its real advantage.

METHODS

Consecutive patients undergoing NSM for cancer with omission of IERM according to institutional protocols from 2016 to 2021 were retrospectively analyzed. The decision to maintain or remove the Nipple-Areola Complex (NAC) after definitive pathology was taken at the multidisciplinary meeting.

RESULTS

Among 162 women operated in the study period, the presence of neoplastic cells within 2 mm from the inked retroareolar margin (RAM) was detected at permanent pathology in 17 cases (10.5%). Nipple-Areola-Complex (NAC) was removed postoperatively in five patients (3%) for margins <1 mm, the other 12 were observed, whereas postoperative NAC necrosis required surgical removal in additional five cases (3%). The NAC was thus preserved in 152 of 162 patients (94%). At multivariate analysis, RAM ≤2 mm was associated with radiological tumor-to-nipple distance less than or equal to 1 cm (p = 0.04) and Ki67 label index ≥ 20 (p = 0.04), whereas multifocality/multicentricity showed a trend towards significance (p = 0.07). At a median follow-up of 46 months, five locoregional relapses occurred (3%), only one of them involving the NAC (0, 6%). Locoregional relapse and overall survival for patients with RAM > or < 2 mm were not different.

CONCLUSIONS

IERM is not routinely necessary during NSM for cancer, because its omission is associated with a very low return to the operating room, it is oncologically safe, and associated pitfalls are avoided. Further studies are necessary to confirm these findings.

Oncological Outcomes of Nipple-Sparing Mastectomy in an Unselected Population Evaluated in a Single Center

OBJECTIVE

 Nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM) has been traditionally used in selected cases with tumor-to-nipple distance > 2 cm and negative frozen section of the base of the nipple. Recommending NSM in unselected populations remains controversial. The present study evaluated the oncological outcomes of patients submitted to NSM in an unselected population seen at a single center.

METHODS

 This retrospective cohort study included unselected patients with invasive carcinoma or ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) who underwent NSM in 2010 to 2020. The endpoints were locoregional recurrence, disease-free survival (DFS), and overall survival (OS), irrespective of tumor size or tumor-to-nipple distance.

RESULTS

 Seventy-six patients (mean age 46.1 years) (58 invasive carcinomas/18 DCIS) were included. The most invasive carcinomas were hormone-positive (60%) (HER2 overexpression: 24%; triple-negative: 16%), while 39% of DCIS were high-grade. Invasive carcinomas were T2 in 66% of cases, with axillary metastases in 38%. Surgical margins were all negative. All patients with invasive carcinoma received systemic treatment and 38% underwent radiotherapy. After a mean of 34.8 months, 3 patients with invasive carcinoma (5.1%) and 1 with DCIS (5.5%) had local recurrence. Two patients had distant metastasis and died during follow-up. The 5-year OS and DFS rates for invasive carcinoma were 98% and 83%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

 In unselected cases, the 5-year oncological outcomes following NSM were found to be acceptable and comparable to previous reports. Further studies are required.

Health-Related Quality of Life After Nipple-Sparing Mastectomy: Results From the INSPIRE Registry

INTRODUCTION

Nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM) with immediate breast reconstruction (IBR) is increasingly used for both breast cancer (TNSM) and risk reduction (RRNSM). The aim of the study is to report the results of the INSPIRE registry assessing health-related quality of life (HRQoL) comparing baseline and 1-year follow-up, regarding surgical indications and chemotherapy (CT) received.

METHODS

INSPIRE is a prospective database including women undergoing NSM and IBR from 18 countries. HRQoL was measured using EORTC QLQC30 and QLQ-BR23 before surgery and after 1 year.

RESULTS

A total of 677 women were included, of whom 537 (79.3%) underwent TNSM and 140 (21.6%) RRNSM: in total, 806 NSM (556 TNSM and 250 RRNSM). Nipple involvement was present in 7.73% of TNSM and incidental carcinoma in 1.2% of the RRNSM group. Out of the overall 537 patients with systemic treatment, 177 (32.96%) received neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NCT) and 118 (21.92%) adjuvant chemotherapy (CT). A total of 227 patients (28.16%) developed at least one complication postoperatively, 164 (29.5%) in the TNSM group and 63 (25.2%) in the RRNSM group. The TNSM group improved in global health status and emotional functioning after 1 year. No differences were found when comparing HRQoL at 1 year between patients who received NCT and those who received adjuvant CT. The RRNSM group showed improvement in HRQoL, with better emotional functioning and fatigue after 1 year.

CONCLUSIONS

This registry reports HRQoL findings after NSM. The impact of CT on worse HRQoL is independent from its timing. Patients with RRNSM showed an improved HRQoL at 1-year follow-up. Discussion of HRQoL outcomes with patients will facilitate the informed decision-making when considering NSM.

Immediate breast reconstruction is oncologically safe for node-positive patients: Comparison using propensity score matching

The oncological safety of immediate breast reconstruction (IBR) in lymph node-positive patients is unclear. In the present study, the impact of IBR on recurrence based on data of patients with axillary lymph node metastases only was examined.The subjects were 232 patients who underwent breast surgery. The patients were grouped into 2 cohorts: non-IBR patients who underwent mastectomy with axillary lymph node dissection; and IBR patients with tissue expander or flap transfer and axillary lymph node dissection. The Non-IBR group included 165 patients, and the IBR group included 67 patients. For the comparison of oncological outcomes between the 2 groups, propensity score matching was performed. The propensity scores were calculated by logistic regression analysis, including age, tumor staging, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 status, and estrogen receptor status. There was no difference in locoregional recurrence-free survival (LRRFS) between the non-IBR and IBR groups. The 5-year LRRFS rate was 78.9% in the non-IBR group and 85.1% in the IBR group. There was no difference in recurrence-free survival (RFS) between the non-IBR and IBR groups. The 5-year RFS rate was 75.6% in the non-IBR group and 78.8% in the IBR group. In all patients, the 5-year LRRFS rate was 77.3%, and the RFS rate was 70.5%. Multivariate Cox regression analysis to identify factors affecting RFS in all patients showed that estrogen receptor status and high nuclear grade were significant prognostic factors; IBR was irrelevant.This is the first report of an analysis using propensity score matching limited to node-positive breast cancer patients, and it showed that IBR is relatively safe in such patients.

Oncologic Safety of Nipple-Sparing Mastectomy in Patients with Breast Cancer and Tumor-to-Nipple Distance ≤ 1 cm: A Matched Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

A short tumor-to-nipple distance (TND) is reported as a strong predictor of nipple-areola complex (NAC) involvement. Eligibility for nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM) remains controversial, especially regarding TND. In this study, we compared long-term oncologic outcomes after NSM between patients with a TND ≤ 1 cm and those with a TND > 1 cm.

METHODS

Overall, 1369 patients with primary breast cancer who underwent NSM with immediate reconstruction from March 2003 to December 2015 were included for analysis. After propensity score matching, 495 patients with a TND ≤ 1 cm (group A) and 495 patients with a TND > 1 cm (group B) on imaging were selected to compare long-term oncologic outcomes.

RESULTS

After matching, the median follow-up periods for surviving patients were 109 months and 112 months for groups A and B, respectively. There were no significant differences between groups with respect to the 5-year cumulative local recurrence (8.1% vs. 6.3%; p = 0.268), NAC recurrence (5.1% vs. 2.8%; p = 0.072), regional recurrence (2.0% vs. 3.6%; p = 0.125), or distant recurrence (5.9% vs. 4.8%; p = 0.480) rates. Furthermore, no significant differences were observed between the groups with respect to the 10-year local recurrence-free survival (87.1% vs. 90.7%; p = 0.164) or disease-free survival (77.9% vs. 81.6%; p = 0.222) rates.

CONCLUSIONS

A preoperative TND ≤ 1 cm on imaging should not be contraindicated to NSM as long as there is no involvement of NAC clinically or on imaging and if retroareolar margins are confirmed to be negative for tumor cells.